showgirl626

Dreamworks Animation astounds yet again. Unfortunately for me, the title was a turn off for more than a year after it was released. I thought it was going to be something more suited to the kiddies, with little to engage the adults. I could NOT have been more wrong.

This is hands down, no ifs ands or buts about it, can ya gimme hallelujah my FAVORITE animated feature film of all time. It was magnificently designed, the characters were wonderful, but Toothless was a beautiful and sublime revelation. He was a pretty significant departure from the book's description of him, but just wonderful to look at. The subtle scales, the detail of the irises, his expressions, the bunching muscles as he launched into flight, the moment he and Hiccup first connected... ahhhh, such heady, wonderful stuff.

The dragons were all wonderful (especially the big baddie at the end). Just incredible. The detail in the human clothing and hair...I could go on and on and on. Eek. This review is giving me withdrawals for the film. I must go watch it again. Anyway, carrying on...

The setting was also extraordinary. The sky, the towering rock formations, the trees...and the fire? Wow wow wow wow. But what REALLY affected me was the WATER. I've been waiting for an animation studio to get the water right for decades, and Dreamworks did. I felt I could walk up to my screen and get splashed. They nailed the color of the sea in all her moods. The waves, the crests, it was just amazing. Hold on to your seat when Hiccup and Toothless go for their first major spin. You may want a sling for your jaw, or it might fall off.

Wonderful acting all around. Craig Ferguson gets a special mention for being so lively. Jay Baruchel? Never heard of him, and didn't have high hopes for his acting style when the movie first started, but he knocked my socks off within about 2 minutes, and kept on knocking. Gerard Butler was good right from the gate, and the actors playing Hiccup's peers all did a fine job as well.

Some issues I had? Slightly wooden human character movements, and the difference in accent between kids and adults was a bit of a head-scratcher. The storyline was of course predictable, but I don't consider that much of an issue. Perhaps the fact that I was able to stop watching it on HBO 3 times a day after only a few months? Hmm. Nope. Not an issue. I still love it, I bought the DVD the same day I saw it for the first time, and I'm going to go watch it again when I'm finished ranting about it.

Another legendary animated film. Toothless has knocked Smaug (from the '77 full-length animated take on the Hobbit) from his pedestal, and I think he even knocked the Balrog from Peter Jackson's LOTR/FOTR from his, and THAT, my friends, is a mean feat. Both of those other beasts still (and always will) take my breath away, but Toothless is more than just a beast. He has ascended to that rare place where you also love him.

I was mesmerized from the first second to the last. My minor quibbles with the film did not detract from my joy of it. 10/10 stars, 2 enthusiastic thumbs up, and when you're ready to watch it, let me know. I may just shove you over to make space on the couch so I can watch it with you. No salt on the popcorn, please.

Thanks for reading. Enjoy the film!

*** SPOILER ALERT *** Game of Thrones is lush, beautiful, gritty, harsh, bloody, and incredible. I love every character, bad or good, but Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister is superb (and deserves every accolade he received for the role), and Sean Bean was transcendent as Lord Eddard Stark - rough, weary, stoic and quietly noble. I was heartbroken when Ned was killed.

All the 'bad' Lannisters are deliciously so, and I've enjoyed watching the evolution of Daenerys Targaryen from a meek little pawn of her brother's into a rising leader. I like Iain Glen's character as the exile who protects Daenerys and keeps her(and the viewer) up to speed on the ins and outs of Dothraki society. I liked the boozing, womanizing King Robert, though I would have liked to kick him in the knee for being so obnoxious, and I even like that little jerk, Little Finger.

The Stark children with significant roles are also excellent, especially Arya. Now that the killing of potential Robert Baratheon heirs has begun, and the one we were introduced to last season being on the path to the Watch with Arya, their relationship will be interesting to watch.

Game of Thrones has one of the strongest ensemble casts of any size I've ever seen in a program. Though it took watching the episodes a few times before I could start keeping all the intrigues straight, it was well worth it.

Though I'm still smarting over Ned Stark's execution (but I'm biased because I'm a fan of SB's work going back several years), it was enough of a surprise to be refreshing in this age of done-to-death plot twists, and as the story evolves it seems clear that there's no more room in the game for a Ned Stark.

Thank you, HBO, for delivering yet another truly outstanding original series into our homes on Sunday nights. I bought season 1 on DVD, and I've bought the first book in the "Song of Fire & Ice" series. Rarely does a television show have such an effect on me.

9/10 stars. A bit heavy on the gratuitous sex, and all the F-bombs seem out of place in that world, but if I can be hooked in spite of those things, and willing to keep watching even after my favorite character is knocked off, by god it must be a damn good show.

Skip to the last few paragraphs if you want my latest take without all the tedious nit-picking that came before...

......................................................

Not a fan of Ashley Judd. Never have been, likely never will be (though I'll grudgingly confess to liking "Kiss the Girls," but only because of Morgan Freeman and Cary Elwes). I started watching because I heard Sean Bean was attached to it. The first episode was horrible. Jarring, nausea-inducing shots, really far-fetched action scenes where a flower shop owner kicks every butt in sight, and some pretty bad lines. The other two episodes I've seen haven't been much better, and if it wasn't for the fact that Bean's character is supposed to resurface, I wouldn't have bothered watching past the first.

The show is insipid, vapid, contrived, and kind of ridiculous. It's also in the same time slot as 'Big Bang Theory' and '30 Rock.' Hmm. Its producers must have a death wish.

Pretty locations? Sure, but I can go stare at a tree if that's all I care about. At the time I'm writing this, IMDb actor info has Bean in 5 episodes (in flashbacks), but the only way I see them making sense is if the husband isn't dead after all. Hurry up and bring him back already. There's only so much of this offal I'm willing to watch before I look elsewhere for satisfaction. Game of Thrones, anyone?

4 stars only out of hope that Sean Bean will return as a soft-spoken super villain (which he does REALLY well). 2 stars as is.

4/5/12 addendum WITH MORE SPOILERS: The husband has resurfaced. Though there are still some pretty dumb things (the CIA folks check only 1 room of a mansion, and announce that it's 'clear?!?') and the dialogue in Judd's scenes is so predictable I can almost always guess what will be said before it is, the story in general has just become much more interesting. I now care about seeing where it's going. Increasing rating from 4 to 5 stars.

4/20/12 addendum 2 WITH MORE SPOILERS: Still trying to decide whether to forgive the rotten dialogue that heartily embraces every tired stereotype, but the action is definitely moving along at a better pace. Definitely not HBO, but hey it's network TV so there only so much you can get away with. That said, I'm now hooked (Thank you, Sean Bean), and committed to seeing it through to the end. Not upping the rating because I don't like Ashley Judd's character, and I'm starting to think Cliff Curtis' character is a complete idiot. As well, I still maintain the first few episodes were simply painful to watch. If you like seeing Bean play action hero baddies, this is a good series to do it. Definitely not Game of Thrones (and I'm just not a fan of Bean's 'American' accent), but it's highly preferable to afternoon soaps.

Cautiously feeling optimistic that this is actually worth seeing to conclusion. 4 episodes left this season. They have a lot to tie up. I'll be watching.

..................Latest Rant Starts Here..................

4/27/12 update (WITH SPOILERS): I'm recanting the 'hooked' statement. I think it's now more accurate to say I'm staying in a bad relationship merely because I've invested too much to just walk away. Sigh.

Hopes dashed. Most recent episode was a train wreck. Where are the writers getting their dialogue? It's AWFUL. And a kid whose parents had the forethought to train him in hand to hand combat being overwrought about taking a life to save his own? And Ashley Judd just keeps kicking a** after a** after a** (sometimes big beefy Russian bodyguards 3 times her size!)?!? This just isn't a believable show.

So why do I keep watching? Good bloody question. I tell myself it's because I keep hoping Bean will be given a chance to really sink his teeth into a role that seems to have a great deal of potential, but who am I kidding? This is uptight American network television, which I generally don't watch, and - oh yeah - now I remember why.

I say get rid of Ashley Judd, Cliff Curtis and the really uppity woman playing his supervisor, throw a cliffhanger at the end of this season where Sean Bean is revealed to be an Interpol or British secret service agent (so he can PLEASE ditch the sad attempt at an American accent), and move him and the Italian guy into the lead roles. And for god's sake somebody give Michael some backbone, or put him and insipid Russian girl out of my misery. Reducing rating from 5 stars 3.

***********************

5/13/12 - with spoilers

Just saw the official news that ABC is canceling the show. With such predictable plot 'twists' and dreadful dialogue, I'm not surprised. It didn't help that it was up against The Big Bang Theory and 30 Rock.

I have to admit I'm a little disappointed. I think the show had potential - especially now that Dax has shown some backbone, and Paul has enough screen time for second billing. The last 2 episodes had me rolling my eyes in many spots, but they were better than some of the previous ones. Too little too late, but I'm upping my rating to a 5. Still not a big fan, but it's the first time in years I've made time to watch every episode of a series on regular network television, so it must be better than most. Or else it was Sean Bean. Probably the latter.

Sad to see it getting the axe, in spite of my ranting. Bean is a marvelous actor in the right part, and his part in Missing could have been one of them. There are also much worse programs on TV that have been wasting air time for YEARS. Oh well. I guess it's back to the movie channels for me.

This movie was really cute. Perhaps that's a strange thing to say about a zombie flick, but it was. The script was good, the direction was good, Eisenberg's character's Rules were a hoot, and I don't think I've enjoyed a Woody Harrelson role more since Cheers. He was so bleepity-bleeping funny as he stalked through most of the movie trying to be the baddest bleepity bleeper left on earth, and his unwavering search for something very specific was a delightful little quirk that endeared.

Bill Murray's surprise appearance - playing himself - just about knocked me off my chair. Though I knew someone big was going to make an appearance as soon as I knew they were headed for Hollywood, I don't think it gets much better than Bill Murray (though I was cheering out loud for either Brad Pitt or Gwyneth Paltrow before Murray showed up...THAT would have been classic). Murray's screen time was perfect for being brief, and his departure was a side-splitting scream.

Though I didn't think Emma Stone or the normally charming Abagail Breslin contributed anything substantive to their roles, there were a few great moments between them and the boys, and there had to be girls for advancement of the plot. Amber Heard's very brief role in the film is worthy of an honorable mention for being completely over the top, utterly predictable, and funny, funny stuff.

Each role was contrived to take itself way too seriously, which was one of the things that makes this movie so fun. There were many, MANY horror movie clichés in the film, but that didn't detract from the plot one bit. There were a few ridiculous asides in the film, some pointless scenes, and some pretty campy dialogue, but it all added to my overall enjoyment. Though not necessarily for the squeamish, this wasn't supposed to scare. This was a clever film, all the more clever for making fun of itself at every turn, and I enthusiastically recommend it.

Thanks for reading.

I was foaming at the mouth when I learned that two of my favorite actors - Johnny Depp and Christian Bale - would be sharing the big screen, but when I finally got the chance to catch it recently, I was really disappointed. I mean, REALLY. The first time I tried watching it, I made it through about an hour before I realized there wasn't going to be a plot, and switched over to watch the far more compelling Law Abiding Citizen instead. But I was determined to watch this movie I'd been longing to see for so long, and I finally managed to choke it down in its entirety via episodic viewing after a couple of weeks, and I really think it was a clunker.

Johnny Depp brought NOTHING to his portrayal of John Dillinger. Booooring. Bale was worse than boring as Melvin Purvis, and this movie left me questioning their golden child reputations, as well as that of Marion Cotillard. She brought less than nothing to her role. None of the other acting was even worthy of mention. Not even the blazing gun battles were engaging.

Trying to maintain a little of my faith in Depp and Bale as actors, I'll tell myself they did the best they could with the script and direction they were given, but this movie is passable, and forgettable. Don't waste your time.

Thanks for reading.

I just discovered this movie the other day for the first time. I was flipping through the menu on my TV, saw the description and decided to look in. I missed the first few minutes, but what I saw kept me watching.

While I can see what the detractors of this film saw, I also think the criticism is a bit harsh. I did a lot of smiling, and laughed out loud many times.

While the movie was packed to the rafters with British heavyweights, few brought their reputations to the roles, and the characters could have easily been played by someone with less star power. However, the Hugh Laurie / Joely Richardson combination worked for me, and Tom Hollander was over-the-top hilarious, even more so for me only previously knowing him in roles where he plays an uptight starchy elitist.

Sure the dialogue was a little stilted and artificial in places, some of the jokes juvenile, and I can definitely see where some reviewers thought it sounded like they were reading pages of text verbatim, but I didn't walk away from the movie regretting having watched it. I liked how it poked fun at the British, the BBC, babymaking in general, and I respect that it dared to poke fun at the sacred cows of pregnancy problems and infertility.

It was a little indelicate a times, downright ridiculous more than once, but overall the movie was strong enough to hold my attention, and I was entertained. Though I wasn't entirely satisfied with the end, I think it was better than taking the easy way out and having Laurie and Richardson walking off into the sunset pushing a pram.

Better than average? Absolutely. Funny? You bet. Pompous? Yeah, a little of that too, but not a clunker by any stretch of the imagination. I liked it. Call me crazy, but I'd watch it again.

Thanks for reading.

I've been seeing previews for Spartacus: Blood and Sand for a long time. I have to admit, it looked intriguing, and I gave more than a moment's thought to subscribing to Starz to check it out. I was in luck a few weeks ago when there was a free preview, and I had a chance to catch 2 episodes. I only watched 1. I was appalled. There was little more than gratuitous sex and violence that added absolutely nothing to the plot...not that there was much of a plot.

It was visually stunning, but that's the best that can be said for it. The acting was wooden, and the cursing was both inappropriate and overused. Perhaps they took a page from HBO's Deadwood by dropping profanities all over the place, but in both situations, it didn't seem in keeping with the era. Though I'm not an expert on either time period, I just can't get my mind around the idea that ancient Romans would use that kind of language, especially since the etymology of the words as they were used don't suggest the terminology was in use that far back in history. (Yes, I did a little homework before writing this review.) I'm all for meaningful cursing, but it was excessive in Spartacus: Blood and Sand, and completely unnecessary. The movie "Gladiator" with Russell Crowe was superior in every way to this made-for-TV tripe, and all the more captivating for the lack of swearing.

Another thing I had trouble getting my mind around (through no fault of his) was the choice to cast John Hannah as Batiatus. John Hannah is a fine actor, but after seeing him as Rachel Weisz's goofy brother in The Mummy movies, seeing him as a calculating Roman aristocrat didn't work for me.

Not a single cast member stood out as being exceptional. Maybe my opinion was colored by the fact that this series was so incredibly over-hyped, but it was really a letdown, and I wasted an hour of my life watching the 1st episode. I was so turned off that I didn't care to bother with the 2nd episode. I think the program caters to the lowest common denominator with shocking violence, needlessly graphic sex and cussing that would be far more appropriate in a modern day sports locker room than ancient Rome. Beautifully filmed, but not even the soundtrack was good. Bad taste all around, best left to the teenage boys it seems to be trying to attract, and not worth a second glance as far as I'm concerned.

This movie was a scream. Hugo Weaving was great, though it was a little disconcerting to see the same guy who played the Elf lord in LOTR, and Agent Smith in the Matrix playing a rather scary looking cross-dressing stage performer. I must say, though, that he cuts a lovely figure in a dress.

Terence Stamp was grand as Bernadette, but Guy Pearce was darling. I've seen several of his films, and though I think he's a good actor, the only other one I like is L.A. Confidential (which is one of my favorites in general). Seeing that, then seeing Pearce in this, was probably the best way to go. Had I seen this first, I don't think I could have believed him playing a strait-laced detective. But he was grand, and he makes a gorgeous woman. He also lip-syncs really well. The scenes of him sitting in a giant shoe on top of the bus singing opera were great. How striking to see the long bolts of material streaming along behind the bus.

The bus itself - the title character - was a great prop around which the film was crafted. It was pink, temperamental, and instrumental in introducing Bernadette to Bob, played with understated class by Bill Hunter. His flaky wife was nuts, and luckily not in the movie for long, but her character was hilarious.

This film won a richly deserved Oscar for costume design. The cinematography was wonderful, the script beyond reproach, and full of little vignettes about life as a drag queen, and the unfair treatment that results when people see boys wearing girls' clothes. That was another reason I liked Bob...he didn't bat an eyelash, helped his friends without reservation (except for one momentary pause that showed he's just as human as the rest of us), and he and Bernadette got along like a house on fire.

I'll repeat that Terence Stamp was wonderful, and Guy Pearce was wonderful plus 10. I loved this movie. A unique, wild, campy ride, and I recommend it whole-heartedly. 8/10. Enjoy.

Gene Kelly is a marvelous actor, and an even better dancer. This film was as delightful as it could be, considering I don't generally go in for musicals. But the dancing was divine (I especially liked the interlude with the lovely Cyd Charisse). What really made this flick for me was Donald O'Connor. He was amazing. His goofy expressions, his lightning fast quips, and his own impressive dancing skills were marvelous. Debbie Reynolds was okay, but Jean Hagen's Lina Lamont was a splendid scream. The movie had me laughing out loud often, and I was held rapt by the dancing. The songs were delightful (I know I'm saying that word too much, but it fits), and it was great fun all around to watch. It's a little overly sweet, but it's supposed to be. Very charming, 9/10. Thanks for reading.

I've said it many times, but now I risk putting it in writing: Clint Eastwood has been playing the same character for more than 40 years. He's not the best actor, but he's simply marvelous at picking movies where his lack of depth works. Unforgiven was divine, Million Dollar Baby was a masterpiece, but I'm still trying to make up my mind about Gran Torino. I spent much of the film appalled by the wooden acting of everyone (except Sue and Thao's very animated mother and grandmother, a couple of the gang members, and the black kids during one brief interlude), but the end made me forgive almost everything.

The movie was a great lesson in tolerance, understanding, forgiveness and the power of redemption. I thought some of it was ridiculous (such as the over-the-top insults between Mr. Eastwood's character, his barber, and his friend the builder), but all in all it progressed well and satisfied. I'll say again that the acting was pretty dreadful overall, and I'll repeat that the end made it worth watching. I could have been spared the reading of the will at the very end, and (*cringe*) Clint Eastwood singing over the closing credits was just wrong.

The plot was good, but the acting took a great deal away from it for me. Sorry. I know this was a well-received film, but I think some acting lessons for just about everyone would have prompted me to give it a higher rating. Watch it anyway. There's still much to redeem it. Thanks for reading.

This movie was WONDERFUL. Very twisted, a little gory, quite surreal in spots, but marvelous nonetheless. Brendan Gleeson's quiet nobility (as a hit-man!) was sublime. Gleeson was a great foil, and it was also great to see Ralph Fiennes play a mush-mouthed hood. I'm used to seeing him in films like The Constant Gardener or The English Patient. This departure from those roles had me grinning from ear to ear as I watched.

Colin Farrell, though, was truly magnificent. He played his role to the hilt. His childish affectations and facial expressions were such a treat. Regardless of how dark this film was, I laughed out loud many times.

The supporting cast were all excellent, and the city of Bruges was a beautiful backdrop. I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars, and two enthusiastic thumbs up. Watch this film. It's delightful.

Let me start out by saying that I'm ONLY giving this 4 stars because of Shia and the CGI (but there was way WAY too much CGI). If you don't want the spoilers, skip to the last paragraph...

Good LORD am I disappointed that I wasted my money on this movie. What happened, Michael Bay? Why did you have to abandon your success and go back to your signature style of style without substance? (And not even a particularly good style either.) And Mr. Spielberg, you should be ashamed of yourself.

I must say that I think Shia is following in Will Smith's footsteps; he's going to be unstoppable as he gets a few more years of acting under his belt. As expected, he did a good job, and the special effects were amazing...for about two minutes. Trouble is, they were so over the top - and they went on for such a long time - that it was hard to tell if there was a plot. There wasn't.

The movie went nowhere, and there were too many things that went beyond my ability to suspend my disbelief. I accepted the robots, but there were some serious holes that pulled me right out of the movie. Enough for me to write a novel about it, but I'll just give you a few of the highlights that I haven't blocked out:

The little scrap of the cube that Shia discovered he still had? The robots would have known about it. And the out-of-nowhere introduction of the contraption inside the pyramid? I'm guessing someone would have found it a bit sooner, with little more than a metal detector. The other bits and pieces being protected by the military? The robots were onto it in the first flick, but couldn't even track the kid with a piece of it in the sequel? Stupid, stupid, stupid. The compulsory-but-unnecessary Hot Chick being able to control one of the robots with a simple human-constructed length of chain? Good GOD, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

The biggest problem I think I had involved the electromagnetic pulse that knocked out all troop communications in Egypt. If an EMP knocked everything out, then the defibrillator "used" to revive one of the main characters would not have worked. Also, I find it strange that a soldier on the ground knew immediately that they had fallen victim to an EMP, but the general couldn't figure out why he could not communicate with his men. And why didn't the robots just knock out the entire Earth with an EMP? If they had the capability, why were they not intelligent enough to use it? Oh...right...it would have made SENSE.

It just didn't fit that the robots knew some things and not others. Details that seemed critical (and integral to either the characters or settings) were left out of some scenes, and these omissions were a large part of the movie's overall failing.

I also find it unpalatable when a movie calls for the destruction of major well-known cities and landmarks. Good luck integrating these major global changes into the next script.

The movie ground to a halt several times for a character monologue to explain pointless things. Worse yet, too many things were introduced in the sequel that were never referenced in the first - things the robots would have known because of the traits written into the script in the first place.

There were so many things in the movie that were completely unnecessary to the plot - put in just for a cheap laugh. The pot brownies? - give me a break. The Jar Jar Binks version of this film that started out as the ice cream truck? - sheesh.

The dialogue was trite and predictable. I think every single action movie cliché was used. The script was simply awful, ripped off from the most predictable portions of Star Wars, James Bond and Indiana Jones, among others. And I think the producers of The Matrix should sue for copyright infringement.

Finally, this movie was sophisticated only by way of the computing power necessary to create the CGI. I could go on and on (yes, even more than I already have...trust me). Do NOT waste your time and money. Thanks for reading my review.

Sure, okay, the good guys finish first. Sure, okay, you knew that going in. But - WOW! - what a fantastic action flick. The athleticism of the actors in this movie was astounding, and you find that out bare minutes into the movie. It probably wouldn't have held my attention otherwise. But when Leito started struttin' his stuff, I knew I was in until the bitter end. The choreography of the fights and pursuits was wonderful.

Considering the trite plot and predictable ending, the movie had a desperate, edge-of-your-seat feeling, and that's pretty impressive. I could have watched the first 10 minutes and said, "Yeah, okay, here's what's going on, here's what's going to happen next, here's how it ends, and there's a bunch of buff guys with incredible athletic skills in it. Yawn." I didn't yawn once. VERY watchable. Brainless fun for 90 minutes.

I have to say again...WOW, about the athleticism and choreography. Tres bien! Tres chic! Je l'aime.

Merci.

I fell in love with this movie. Edward Norton, Paul Giametti, Rufus Sewell, even Jessica Biel (imagine my surprise on the latter)...all did wonderful jobs.

It moves along so eloquently, elegantly, beautifully, this movie just drags you right into it. The sets were gorgeous, but a little sparse with people. I think a bit more bustle in the streets of Vienna would have added just a bit to this movie, but it didn't take anything away either. I felt like I was part of each audience watching the magic acts, I could smell the forest as the Duchess tracked down Eisenheim, I could feel the chill of the river as Eisenheim plunged in, and I felt it was a very clever movie. No assuming its viewers are stupid on this one, though there are some similarities between this and The Prestige.

I don't want to give the plot away. There are some good twists. See it for yourself. I bought the DVD even before I watched it for the first time (because I knew Edward Norton would not disappoint), and I've enjoyed it twice now.

Highly recommended! Thanks.

MAJOR SPOILERS...READ AT YOUR OWN RISK...

Shia, congrats on proving that you can carry not just any flick, but a take-off of a Hitchcock masterpiece.

This movie was great. The kids were great, Carrie-Anne Moss was great, David Morse was GREAT (man, he plays a spine-tingling baddie in this one), and the inside of his secret torture chamber was CHILLING. Kudos to the set designers. The fact that it was clean was somehow worse than if there had been carnage splattered everywhere.

I enjoyed it a lot. Yes, overall it was predictable, but the path to the end was strewn with surprises. I recommend this film to all suspense/thriller fans with a sense of humor.

Enjoy, and thanks for reading my review.

Though I truly believe that Sean Bean plays a GREAT psycho (most of the time), I knew this movie was going to be a flop. The incredible tension and chemistry that Rutger Hauer and C. Thomas Howell shared in the original is completely absent from this version. There's just no heart and soul in this version (perhaps because the heart and soul took the high road and made a run for it). Yeah, okay, they throw Sophia Bush in for flavor (which I think was the first mistake with this flick), but this movie is BAD. The acting is appalling (Sean Bean did his best, but I think his struggle to keep up the American accent hurt him), like that head honcho cop dude...could he be any stiffer? Sheesh, he was a corpse before he was actually a corpse. I saw him as SCI-FI's Tin Man too, and he was just as lame in that.

Sad though it is to admit, being a Sean Bean fan, I could NOT watch this turkey in one sitting. I yawned my way through the first half the first time, and a few days later yawned my way through the 2nd half...ONLY because I wanted to be qualified to comment on this clunker on IMDb.

I give it a three because the special effects during the pivotal scene with the helicopter are pretty cool, and Sean Bean made an effort. The truck nearly crushing them was unexpected, but it also didn't make sense. Other than that, don't waste your time. See the original instead. It's so simple and uncluttered, and terrifying. It's a movie that will ACTUALLY have you on the edge of your seat.

Thank you for reading my rant. Now I'm going to go watch the Fellowship of the Ring to redeem my faith in Sean Bean.

This movie is amazing! Emma Thompson's screen writing skills are beyond reproach! Angela Lansbury was a scream, Colin Firth the perfect bumbler, Simon and the other kids were all wonderful in their respective roles, and each was integral to the plot. In fact, everybody was great, every THING was fabulous - the incidental music, the lighting...I could go on and on...but Emma T. was a joy to behold as Nanny McPhee. Yeah, okay, it's a kid's movie, but this film transcends age. Anybody from 3 to 103 could get something from this movie.

The tiniest details - from Nanny's gentle bow in the general direction of a certain chair, her compelling yet gentle gaze at Simon while he sits in the tree house with his siblings pondering the agonizing decision they have to make, Cook's wonderful twitchiness, Evangeline, Mrs. Quickly...it was all mesmerizing. I just bought it on DVD and barely had it out of the box before I watched it again. And again. And again.

It's about respect. It's about living with the consequences of your actions. It's about sacrifice. It's about not just love, but the power of love. It's a treasure trove of lessons wrapped with a dash of magic to share with your family. It's a clever, wonderful treat. Far and away one of the best live-action family films that I think I've ever seen. Let's give it an 11 out of 10.

A GREAT film! Enthusiastically recommended! Enjoy!

The film's major opening scene is Master Chu preparing Sunday dinner for his three distracted daughters. Watching the meal being prepared is something I can do over and over and over, and I have. It's not just a meal - it's a culinary masterpiece...a mouthwatering work of art. Every meal he prepares throughout the film is the same. He pours his whole being into feeding his girls; I think it's the most effective tool he has for telling him that he loves them, when he doesn't seem to know how to do it any other way.

I loved every little moment of this film. The character development is quietly effective, the interplay of the actors is beautiful, even little Shan-Shan is wonderful.

This is another film that I've added to my personal collection. I love trying to pick up Chinese words and phrases, and I'm getting better and better every time I see the film. I've probably seen it 10 times at the time I'm writing this.

It's a very engaging slice of Chinese life. And in my limited understanding of the Chinese language and culture, the title of the film seems perfect. Eat Drink Man Woman. Yes, exactly.

Give it a try. I think you'll be glad you did.

Thanks for reading my review, and ENJOY!

This film initially captivated me, and I immediately fell head over heels for Solomon and his family. Djimon Hounsou always gives a phenomenal, passionate performance, whether he's in Amistad, Beauty Shop, or as a guest on ER. Whether he's a lead or a footnote, he's simply marvelous in the roles he chooses. In Blood Diamond, the other family members were also compelling in their roles, however brief.

DiCaprio really is a gifted actor. His accent in this film was very convincing. However, he played his role SO well that I had trouble believing in - or having any empathy for - his character until his last moments in the film. I fault the writing for this, not Dicaprio, for making it so difficult to care for a pivotal character that the viewer is supposed to care for. He ran the gamut of facades, but he proved again and again that his motives were exclusively self-serving. I was never able to trust Danny Archer until he knew he was dying. At that point it was too late to care for him.

And Jennifer Connelly? Though I love a couple of the movies she's been in (Labyrinth, House of Sand and Fog), I've never seen her in anything where her character does any more than superficially interact with other characters in the films. She's not engaging at all, and even DiCaprio couldn't pick up the slack for her to save their scenes in Blood Diamond. What her character accomplished in the end was the only thing that endeared her, otherwise I felt nothing.

The action of the film was fantastic, the cinematography beautiful, the fundamental story haunting and heartbreaking. I've never been a big fan of diamonds because they're too expensive and they look gaudy, but since seeing this film, I like diamonds even less.

Djimon Hounsou made this film the incredible experience that it was. The character of Danny Archer and Jennifer Connelly's lack of acting skill prevented it from being more for me. It is definitely worth watching; I'd even say it's worth buying on DVD, but lower your expectations a little or you'll feel a bit let down.

Recommended. Thanks for reading my comment.

This movie was another fortuitous discovery for me. One day I was flipping through channels, looking for something interesting, and I found Tsotsi. I chose it initially ONLY because I have developed in intense interest in foreign films in the last year or so because it's a good way to expose myself to other languages, and brush up on the ones with which I'm already somewhat familiar. I've not had any real exposure to Bantu languages or Afrikaans, so I decided to give it a try.

I loved it. I truly loved this film. Though it was a wee predictable, the stark beauty of your journey to the conclusion, the richness of the heartbreak you find along with way, and your love (yes, LOVE) for the title character (aka David) will make you loath to leave his side for even a moment as he has some heart-wrenching decisions to make. You've fallen for him, you see, and you don't want him to be alone with his choices.

Such a seemingly irredeemable disaster of a human being is what Tsotsi is at the beginning. Circumstances have turned him into a rotten excuse for a person, in an environment that offers him little opportunity to act any differently. Then his life takes an interesting turn, and he softens. He doesn't become all perfect and angelic - that would have cheapened this film. He merely softened. His heart opened (against his will) and let another in. Two people if you count the wise young lady who helped him immensely.

The young man who played Tsotsi did a job beyond marvelous. He was transcendent. That such an inexperienced actor could so effectively portray the worst dregs of society in his culture, yet make him a character that you not only feel empathy for, but end up caring deeply about...that's a talented young man. The tears he sheds at the end aren't because of the trouble he's in, but his own emotions running away with him because of his new understanding of himself, and the painful loss he endures because he chooses (of his own free will) to do what's right.

The man and woman playing John and Pumla were fantastic too. Especially Pumla. Her facial expressions at the end as she understood Tsotsi's pain, and perhaps chose to forgive, were divine.

Nothing about this movie struck me as too fantastic to be beyond the realm of possible (though it wasn't based on a true story to my knowledge). It's dark, it's violent, and it's spellbinding. Any who understand empathy, pain, tragedy, unselfish love and repentance will get a lot out of this film. It's a gift, and I'm a better person for watching it.

Absolutely magical. Worth a look. Make sure you have your tissues handy.

I highly recommended this film. I give it a total of 8.5/10 stars.

Enjoy.

Christian Bale plays a MARVELOUS psycho. In this movie his American accent is nearly flawless (if overdone a bit in spots); the tics, the facial expressions, everything - outstanding! You could really believe that he is Patrick Bateman, crazed killer.

However...

He was the only thing that held this movie together. There wasn't a single other character that stood out. Everybody else could have been played by ANY-body else.

The movie really started to fall apart for me when the shooting spree began. It just went nowhere, and fizzled out in a damp corner. I was left unsatisfied.

I will say that I liked the chainsaw interlude, I liked that Jean gets out alive, and I will say again that Christian Bale was fantastic in his loony rage - bubbling, bubbling, bubbling, spewing sometimes but only an implied threat at other times. He did well.

Suggestions I would have made? - I think Luis should have had a special torturous death waiting for him, detective Kimball should have almost-but-not-quite bought it at the end, and Patrick should have died a gloriously gore-ific death.

This movie is definitely worth seeing, but only because Bale did such a good job. The directing was interesting (up until things went kerflooey...almost like an intern took over the script and directing when the shoot-out began), but I was basically struggling to see what so many others have seen before they sung the praises of this movie.

8 out of 10 because of Bale, -2 because the movie fell apart.

I'm not a big fan of "war" movies (though this technically is NOT one of those), and I never saw the virtue of getting excited about a bunch of crew-cuts running around yelling inside a big can. HOWEVER, I will watch anything with Denzel because he is one of the best actors out there. This movie was a never-able-to-completely-catch-your-breath, heart-doing-jumping-jacks-in-your-chest, chew-your-nails-down-to-the-knuckles thrill ride that brilliantly pitted Mr. Washington against a most excellent Gene Hackman. I've watched it many times (more than a woman of my cinematic tastes would, I should think), and I just think it's a classic. Of special interest are: a scene at the beginning discussing the philosophy of war; the scene that ends with Denzel saying (**********************SPOILERS TO FOLLOW*******************), "If I'm wrong, Sir, God help us all"....and the scene where the captain orders the crew to disarm the missiles. You want to cheer right along with the crew (and - who knows? - maybe you will!).

A few things that bugged me (more spoilers): a heavy-set crewman dying because (as the captain put it) he weighed 300 pounds. That's a bit of a paraphrase to you Crimson Tide purists out there. But there were a couple of other guys on that sub that probably weighed around that, and didn't look very fit. That didn't make sense to me. They kill off one big guy because he's big, but they leave the others alone? And are they even allowed to be in the military if they're so hefty without looking fit? Bit of a head scratcher, that.

The thing that bugged me the most? James Gandolfini's contrived facial expressions. Mentally challenged rabid poodles are brought to mind. Eek. Give me a break. The only thing missing to complete his look? The Snidely Whiplash mustache twirl. He doesn't impress me all that much.

One thing I can't make up my mind about is Viggo Mortensen's character's tormented soul. He handled it really well (you could almost smell his sweat a couple of times), but the set-up was too obvious.

The movie was a little predictable, but movies of this type generally are. That's okay. I loved it anyway. All in all, I give it 4 out of 5 stars. Highly recommended. Enjoy!

I saw this movie for the first time on a premium channel, and bought the DVD shortly after. I also can't pass it up any time it's repeated on cable. I'll look forward the whole day to watching some program or another, but if I see that this movie is on, I'll forsake almost any other other program for it.

Though I've seen many cinematic interpretations of her work, I must confess that I've never read any Jane Austen. I generally have trouble plodding through the language from books published from the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I just tend not to have the patience for it. Anyway, I've finally, after watching this version of Pride & Prejudice for perhaps the 15th time in less than 3 months, felt compelled to share with you my tremendous love for the story, and I think - when I'm done here - that I'll go to my favorite bookstore's website and buy some of Ms. Austen's work. (Actually, I couldn't wait that long...I just paused from writing this to place an order for the literary Pride & Prejudice.)

The cinematography of this movie is fantastic, the locations very stirring, and the script brilliant - really lending itself to the actors' abilities to realistically interpret it with incredible depth and color. But the director, Joe Wright, deserves extra special commendation for getting such WONDERFUL work from the actors, especially Keira Knightley. Yeah, sure, she was great in Bend it Like Beckham and the Pirates trilogy, but I really didn't think she had it in her to lead a cast...much less a cast with Donald Sutherland and the mighty Dame Judy. But she really did prove me wrong. Much like Rachel Weisz did in the Constant Gardener. Keira did a fantastic job. Mind-numbingly so. Kind of scary that this is the same young lady that did Domino.

Matthew MacFadyen stormed into my world with a delicate grace that suggested a deep abiding talent with which I should further acquaint myself (I hadn't been aware of him before I saw this movie). The way he and Keira traded their characters' individual pride and prejudice (they both suffered from large measures of both) was a magic dance. I can't say with any certainty right now that I've seen a portrayal of two such lovers done better.

What MacFadyen REALLY did for me with Darcy was the sublime nuance of his expression. Though his face really didn't change much at all - whether he was stuffy, indignant or angry - when I first saw that dazed look and tentative smile of devout worship on his face when Elizabeth was about to have that profound, private audience with her father toward the end of the movie, it was wonderful. I could really FEEL Darcy losing himself in his love for Elizabeth, and I could feel almost as strongly his relief at not having to fight it anymore. The stoic, starchy, intimidating Darcy has been reduced to a fumbling child. I thought it was the truly naked face of the character madly hinted at, but so well hidden before just then. Bewitching.

Every well-fleshed portrayal in this movie was done really well (it will be the actors from THIS movie that I picture when I read and re-read the book), but I must make a point of saying that Tom Hollander's Mr. Collins is brilliantly pathetic, Mr. Bennett was TRULY one of Donald Sutherland's greatest roles, and it was a great thrill to see the Dame Judy's Lady Catherine put in her place when she made that late night visit to see Elizabeth.

I now understand that the story of Darcy and Elizabeth is one of the greatest love stories of all time, and it's one of those grand love stories that retains its delicacy without being smarmy or ridiculous. I treasure the privilege of being allowed access to this interpretation of Pride & Prejudice, and I'll recommend it to anybody. It's destined to become a legend.

Watch this movie. You'll be glad you did.

I'd forgotten how much I LOVE this movie. I probably watched it 100 times the first 2 years it was out on DVD (I'm not kidding...I could quote large portions of it verbatim), hadn't seen it in a while, and just finished watching it again for the first time in probably more than a year.

I was fortunate enough to see all three movies on the big screen, and this one grabbed me so utterly and completely from the first moment, pulled me body and soul into that world and hasn't let go since. No other fantasy has done that before or since.

As you watch the movie, you're also a part of it...you're there feeling every little nuance of Elijah Wood's expression, you're left breathless by the beauty of the land, you fall in love with Aragorn and Sam for everything they both do to protect Frodo, you echo Frodo's screams with your own when Gandalf falls into darkness with the Balrog (I've never seen a mythical creature brought to life more amazingly on the big screen!), and you can believe totally Boromir's pain as the arrows pierce his body (by the way, attention, Entertainment Weekly - I nominate Boromir's final 7 minutes in this film as the Best Death Scene Ever in a Movie!). There are so many other things I could list, but I'd rather leave them for you to discover.

Though I love all three movies, neither the Two Towers nor the Return of the King will ever usurp the sheer wonderment of the first in the trilogy for me. Peter Jackson took Tolkien's amazing imagination and intelligence and brought both to the big screen in a way I wouldn't have believed possible. The music sung in Elvish, the lighting, the CGI, the ACTING! - all of it...utterly spellbinding. I'll watch this movie again and again and again, and possibly love it more every time I do.

If you haven't seen this movie, I suggest you run out and buy it (I can't imagine you won't want to own it after your first viewing), come home, turn down the lights, turn your phone off, and give yourself over completely to the spell this film will cast.

Enjoy!

This is a milestone for me. I don't think I've ever seen two movies in a YEAR that I thought were utterly perfect, and here I am writing a review about my second in a month.

This is one of the greatest movies I've ever seen, and I'm SO glad I experienced it on the big screen. It was a compelling story, beautifully scripted and filmed, brilliantly acted by Jackman, Bale and Caine (I like that Bale's name was Alfred this time, like Caine's was in Batman Begins). Bowie was really restrained as Nikola Tesla, and I even liked Scarlet Johannsen (that lucky, lucky, LUCKY lady...getting to cozy up to both Jackman AND Bale? Sigh). However, her role, Alfred's wife, and Andy Serkis's character could have been played by anybody. I'm not sure any of them are worthy of special mention. And regarding Serkis, all I could think of was "my preciousssssssssssssss." This is a movie about misdirection, and I was surprised often by the twists and turns...a rare feat for a film. I kept trying to guess where it was going and I was either partially or completely wrong almost every time. There were only 2 parts where I guessed what was coming, and I LOVED that. It was really a clever movie.

After a first viewing, there are only a couple of things about this film that I didn't find utterly satisfying. One is the fact that the last fifteen minutes or so played out as though the people associated with the creation of it suddenly assumed that the viewer's brain had stopped functioning. The rest of the movie dances along just out of your full reach, begging you to keep up, waving and sticking its tongue out if you don't, then screeches to a grinding halt while two characters suddenly start explaining away every minute of the previous two hours.

I didn't mark the movie down because of this. The concepts were too intriguing, the intellectual and cinematic pace of the movie moving too precisely...there are fundamentally no dead spots in this film.

I wouldn't have answered ALL the questions at the end, were it my decision. I would have left at least a few questions unanswered.

**************BIG SPOILER HERE***************

My only other problem with this film is the question of "which knot." That could have been easily ascertained when the ropes were untied and removed from the body.

*****************OKAY DONE WITH SPOILERS*******************

However, those things said, I still can't recommend this movie highly enough. If it isn't nominated for at least a few Oscars, I'll be seriously questioning the sanity of the Academy Members. This film was very cerebral (a rarity when coupled with "mainstream" and big budget"), and I hope it gets the industry recognition that it surely deserves. It's a quality film, and that is a sublime understatement.

I highly recommend this film. Enjoy.