The Dark Knight

Another comic book movie for 2008? Not this one. To label TDK as a comic book movie is true, but not fair….it is a crime drama. The likes of which could be easily compared to contemporary crime dramas such as Heat, The Departed, and in some cases, Silence of the Lambs. This movie breaks out of the “Super-hero” movie mold thanks to the stage that was set by Batman Begins. TDK is based in even more of a real-word than Begins was. In fact, if Christian bale wasn’t wearing the cape and cowl, you may not recognize it as a Batman movie. Gotham looks and feels like a real city and not as if it were stuck in a fantastical story book. The cinematography and special FX are smooth and real, both effectively adding to the drama and the building tension throughout the film.

The overall theme of this movie is that of escalation. Batman’s presence in Gotham city not only has had positive effects, but some very negative ones as well….many of which Bruce Wayne never expected. Along side of this, the movie builds tension and chaos that grows and grows towards the end. Another theme examined in more detail this time around is that the Batman is not just a man, but a symbol, a symbol that many want destroyed. The citizens of Gotham, do not understand Batman’s motives, all they understand is that he symbolizes justice and hope. And its this hope that Batman wants to shift to a “real person” when he meats Harvey Dent. Its this symbol of hope that jeopardizes the criminal underworld. Ande that’s where the Joker comes in.

This is not the silly, random-motivated Joker we have seen in the past. This Joker wants to throw Gotham into chaos and test the limits of all of those who believe in just about anything. The Joker, unlike Raj-al-ghul, has no soaring ideals that motivate him, he is essentially the polar opposite of Batman, With Harvey dent positioned right in the middle.

Everybody is going crazy about Heath Ledger as the Joker. I mentioned before that I thought Jack Nicholson was the perfect Joker….He was, for the comic-book fantasy interpretation of the Batman universe. But Heath Leger’s version is much more grounded in reality. He has achieved a level of terror and insanity that rivals the best of movie villans. I can think of no other than Hannibal Lector to compare him to. I also loved how the character really has no origin story…he is just there. There is a moment where you think you are getting an explanation of his existence when he explains where his scars came from, but he tells the two more times, each time totally different. Heath Ledger will forever be remembered for this role….and yes, it is Oscar worthy….and no, he wont win. Come on people! Its a Batman movie! Don't forget, the same rumblings went on for Jack Nicholson back in 1989.

By the end of this film, you are left dumbfounded. It is not a happy ending, but a dark, heroic one, which aptly is reflected in the title. This is definitely the best Batman movie to date (how will they top this?....they probably won't). It leaves all other comic-book movies in the dust….that’s right….The Dark Knight, in my opinion, is the all-time best movie based on a comic book character. If you want to argue it….well, I’ll just have to show you a magic trick…let me get my pencil.

10 out of 10.

Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

What’s the deal with all these old action heroes these days? Does it mean that our current heroes suck? Or is it just a cash grab capitalizing us 30-something's heroes of the past? Maybe it’s a bit of both…Rocky, Rambo, and John Maclean have all recently shown their geriatric faces with relative success, but none could compare to the anticipation of the return of Indiana Jones, the most charismatic figure in popular movie culture, who sits in a very special place in many peoples hearts as the ultimate action hero. I guess that’s why I was most sceptical about this one. If Rocky or Rambo bombs, big deal…but Indy just couldn’t. This movie could kill a beloved icon. Plus, was Harrison Ford really capable of playing this character again? I was frightened, so I never let myself get overly excited (at least I pretended not to be). First of all, I need to qualify that I love ALL of the Indiana Jones movies. Raiders is obviously takes the crown as the best, but it really doesn’t matter. Will/can Crystal Skull really live up to Raiders? No, Raiders was in a league of its own. But luckily, the latest Indy adventure is completely on par with the sequels and I would rank it in-between The Last Crusade and Temple of Doom.

I love the fact that this movie doesn’t focus on the aged hero as much as the other resurrected film franchises have. Time has passed, America has changed, and Indy has evolved accordingly. There are some quick comments regarding his age, but its not focussed on, and cliché’d to death. This is still truly Indiana Jones.

One of the more interesting aspects of this movie is how it addresses the interests of the times: Communism, Atom Bombs, and Aliens. All of these elements combine to make a great adventure set in 1957. An adventure that numerous high points and only a few low-points.

On to the high points. First and foremost Harrison Ford has come back from the land of the dead! Of any of my worries, he was my biggest. I wasn’t convinced he could capture the charisma of Indiana Jones…but he did, and it seemed effortless. I guess he was born to be this character. From the wise-cracking to the whip-cracking Indy was back! The supporting cast was also very strong and the return of Marion Ravenwood was a welcome one.

The other major high point was the story. I loved this story. All of the Indiana Jones movies have a theme that the story is built around. Raiders was about faith/believing, Temple of Doom was about retribution, and The Last Crusade was about pursuit of dreams and the ability to eventually let them go. Crystal skull is about the give/take that is experienced as time goes on. Indy is left alone, his father has died, his best friend has died, and the government is beginning to turn on their former war-hero. But amidst all of the crazy action of this story, Indy learns that even though many things have been taken away from him over the years, he is still being given quite a lot.

There weren't many low points to this movie, and my complaints are relatively miniscule. One was the music. I loved the individuality that the Indiana Jones scores had from one another. They were all very recognizable and memorable. Crystal Skull seemed to reuse some themes from the previous movies, and didn’t appear to have a unique score of its own. Maybe upon a second viewing, this will be different. My other complaint is that Cate Blanchet’s character just didn’t have the presence that the villains normally have in these films. The villain is hugely important in a film like this, and she just didn’t come through. Her acting was top notch, but she seemed more silly (Indy even thought of her so) than menacing.

Overall, Indiana Jones is back and I couldn’t be happier to see him again.

8.5 out of 10

Why not 9? Mutt’s Tarzan scene in the jungle………what the hell?
Why not 10? If I gave it a 10 it would be Raiders of the Lost Ark!

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles

Say that 10 times as fast as you can. I guess its better than the supposed name of Terminator 4 – Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins…….ok?..

Admittedly, I was quite sceptical about this show before it aired. How could you make a show based on movies that had HUGE budgets, without cutting major corners and making it look cheep. Well, you cant, but you can try pretty hard. And this show did a good job even though it took a while to get going.

The pilot episode, spent most of its time trying to be a terminator movie on a smaller scale. The terminator “Cameron” was excellent. Summer Glau portrayed the terminator in a very believable way, even more so than the terminatrix in T3. That being said, the portrayal of Cameron, significantly changed in subsequent episodes. She became very awkward, and robot like with her interactions with other people, compared to the ease she seemed to have in the pilot. I found this to be an irritating inconsistency, especially when they have insinuated that Cameron is a different type of terminator than the 800 series.

There were some times in the early stages of the show, where I contemplated that I would stop watching it. I found the early episodes doing things that the producers of the show insisted they wouldn’t do – like the “terminator of the week” scentario. It seemed that we were constantly being introduced to yet another terminator that had travelled across time and needed to be stopped. The episode where John finds the terminator who had turned himself off is a prime example. It also seemed as though these terminators were VERY easily stopped. Does anybody remember how difficult these things are to stop????? But this show grew on me as I watched it. The Cromartie terminator was a very cool character, and the ability to rebuild himself into the creepy Deadwood guy was an example of the new places this show could go.

As the series continued, I became more interested in the stories and more interested in the characters. The show certainly causes me to geek-out when it references key scenes from T1 ,T2 or T3. It is very effective in doing this (and it happens a lot), but in my opinion is somewhat of a cheep trick. Having someone reminisce about the scene where Arnold saves Sarah from the mental institute, immediately ties the show to a memory of a classic movie scene. Does triggering the memory of an amazing movie make a TV show amazing? Not really. But this show looks like it is going places, even with David Silver tagging along. Let’s just hope it gets the budget that Battlestar Galactica seems to have.

7.0 out of 10

Why not 8? Terminator with an identity crisis
Why not 9? Why the hell did they change the endoskeleton design??
Why not 10? Sarah needs to harden up a bit

Transformers

“One Shall Stand…One Shall Fall”. I was a big fan of the Transformer television series back in the early 80s and had a few of the toys. I had Perceptor – he was terrible…transformed into a microscope. What use is that in a battle? “Look out! The Decepticons are coming!...Quick! Perceptor! transform into a microscope and look at something magnified!”. But despite my history with Perceptor, I loved the Transformers and was more than excited when I heard that a live-action movie was being made. There is sooooo much that they could do with a movie franchise like this and the first instalment (assuming there will be more) is heavy on effects, light on plot, but is damn enjoyable. There is a HUGE fanboy uprising about the minute details of this movie. Flames on Optimus, lips on Optimus, the look of Megatron etc. But guaranteed, each of those fanboys are producing just a little bit of extra B.O. over this movie.

The transformations were very well done (a bit complicated at times) and the use of the classic transformation noise “cho ch chi chi cht” was ultimate. In addition, the blending of CGI and practical effects was fantastic. There was not one time during the entire movie where you can identify which is which.

As for the plot, the Transformers story line has always been relatively thin….Giant alien robots that transform into everyday objects fighting one another over energon cubes, the matrix of leadership, or the Allspark. I have read a number of reviews for this movie and a big criticism is that the plot is thin…..big observation people! In my opinion, this movie is an extremely accurate translation of what the transformers are all about minus one thing…..the Decepticons! First of all, they got Optimus Prime perfect – the fact that they used the same voice actor as the cartoon was fantastic. He was the no-nonsence, selfless, hero, fighting for the rights of all sentient beings. The remaining autobots were also well characterized. However, the Decepticons were only lightly touched on other than they were there to fight. I liked the story line behind Megatron, however I was REALLY hoping for some interaction between the decepticons that portrayed things like – the loyalty of Barricade, the deception of Starscream etc. I think the movie was really lacking in that department. It seemed as if the only reason there was dececpticons was to have cool robot fighting scenes….which of course were what dreams are made of.

Micheal Bay was the perfect choice to make this movie. He is a man of slick camera work (with no idea when to use them) and car chases – perfectly matched to the transformers, despite the fact that he admittedly had no idea about what they were before directing this movie. Micheal Bay is kind of hit and miss, maybe more miss. Miss Bay has made some enjoyable movies though, despite the over-use of slow-motion and cheesy characters. Sometimes it works (Armageddon, The Island), sometimes it doesn’t (Pearl Harbour, Bad Boys II). Well, this time it worked. Miss Bay was born to make a movie like this, even if he didn’t know it. No body else could pull a car chase off where trucks smash into one another, transform into crazy robots, punch, kick, sword fight, and transform back into trucks. Miss Bay…..”You’ve got the touch”…..

8 out of 10
Why not 9? John Tutoro as Sector Seven’s “Man in Black”…..Terrible.
Why not 10? More decepticon interaction was desperately needed

Pan’s Labyrinth

It’s no mystery that I am a Guillermo del Toro fan. He reeks of talent, and by the look of him, he likely reeks of some other things to.

Pan’s Labyrinth is probably one of Del Toro’s best films to date, both in the writing and in its amazing visuals. The pacing was perfect, which has been a problem in some of his past movies. The story of Ofelia is told in a very unique location and situation. The fantasy aspects of this film rarely come in contact with the real world, and one can argue that the fantasy world is only a part of Ofelia’s imagination. You want to believe the fantasy, because the real world sucks, but in the end I felt that the fantasy was only just that. Oh the drama!

The creatures in this movie were pure Del Toro, from Pan’s amazing make-up to the Pale Man’s extreme creepiness and incredibly unnatural walking style. These guys were definitely not taken out of children’s fairy tales. Del Toro’s fantasy world is phenomenal and surpasses anything that I have seen from Tim Burton. It’s crazy, but still has a sense of realism.

This is also a very harsh film. In fact, it kind of took me by surprise. Sure, I know that del Toro loves blood and horror, but I feel like it was taken too far in this movie. I generally don’t have problems with violence in movies, but this time it felt somewhat gratuitous. This was always associated with Captain Vidal. I can accept this level of violence when it is in the context of “the brutality of war” (Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down), but I didn’t feel like this movie was taking that stand. In fact, every time someone was shot, I was expecting another shot at point blank range to the face – it started to border on the ridiculous at times. I don’t know, it just felt out of place and detracted from a truly wonderful movie.

8.0 out of 10

Why not 9? Over the top violence that didn’t quite fit
Why not 10? Pale Man gave me a scary nightmare

APOCALYPTO

So, Mad-Max isn’t the most popular guy these days. But, hey, the guy makes some pretty darn good movies! A lot of people boycotted this movie because of Mel’s antics of late, but if you are able to judge this film on its own merits, you will be very pleased.

This isn’t that deep of a movie – it’s a chase movie. Its very simple, which is actually what makes this movie more enjoyable. A man trying to survive long enough to re-unite with his family to ensure their safety. There is an awesome moment where Jaguar-Paw decides to stop running and open up a can of whoop-ass on his Myan pursuers…..gave me the chills big time!

The movie is somewhat reminiscent of The Last of the Mohicans, but is much more primal. Mel Gibson has created a film that is realized in amazingly vivid colours and scenery. There were a few “Gibson-isms” throughout the film such as slow motion pans across faces in the crowds, as well as the patented human-torture sequence.

One thing that was quite surprising was a scene in the final moments where Spanish explorers approach the mainland. This was interesting, after all the insane violence displayed by the Myans, you feel as if these Europeans have arrived to make some order out of the mayhem. This is where the movie ends, of course, if you are up on your history, you will know that the arrival of the Spaniards was the beginning of the Myan genocide. So maybe this scene was meant to portray the inevitable dread yet to come.

8.5 out of 10

Why not 9? The REAL Jaguar was cool, the STUFFED Jaguar was not!
Why not 10? The whole cave filling with water bothered me. If it filled with water, wouldn’t they be brought up to the top?

Children of Men

The only movies I can remotely compare Children of Men to would be Blade Runner except without the cool flying cars and Black Hawk Down except without the cool crashing helicopters.

Mexican director, Alfonso Cuaron has created a very dark and dismal world where terrorism and fear are all that seems to be left in England (the only country left on earth that is remotely inhabitable). Graffiti on the wall in one scene says: “The future is a thing of the past”, which is an accurate example of how hopeless the world has become.

The action sequences were meticulous with similarities to the intensiveness of those normally created by Ridley Scott. The camera follows Theo closely as he runs through mud, gunfire, and explosions. Most of the film consists of very long shots, in which the action must be intricately choreographed. One of the most interesting sequences is when a jeep is attacked – the scene is shot entirely from the inside of the jeep, with all of the action shown from inside the car……insane.

There is a lot of symbolism here – many of whichcould be argued as biblical. But, I’ve never been very good at the whole symbolism thing...can somebody PLEASE tell me what the unicorn origami means in Bladerunner…???

Children of men is a solid science-fiction film, one that I believe will become a genre classic. And is likely one of the better movies I have seen in the past year……gotta love them Mexicans!

9 out of 10
Why not 10? Because I feel like giving it a 9!

300

“Spartans!!!, Tonight We Dine In HELL!!!”.

I think I have been waiting to see this movie since the beginning of time. 300 had a lot of hype associated with it, so I was a bit worried that it wouldn’t live up to my expectations. It did.

300 combines sort of an old-school mythical story-line with an ultramodern filming technique. Directed by Zack Snyder (who basically came out of no where), he has created a stylized world, which is in the same vein as Sky Captain, and Sin City, but very much stands on its own. Zack Snyder has shows some serious skill here. Given that the film was completely filmed on green-screen; one must realize that he must have had every shot and camera angle imagined before he began filming.

The world he created is almost dream-like, from it’s sepia coloured skies and painterly images to the extended shots of the Spartans laying waste to the Persians as the camera speeds, zooms, and shifts focus to track the battle. Some people may have a problem with a historical epic that is so stylized, but this IS based on a comic book version of that particular historical battle.

Gerard Butler who plays King Leonidas is about as much of a hardcore-man as you can possibly get. This guy would eat Maximus for breakfast – or at least steel his lunch money. His character was both driven by his ideals, but was also sensitive to his people and his family.

The plot of 300 is absolutely straightforward, and has A LOT of cool one-liners. In fact, at times, I felt like this movie was constantly trying to have cool shot after cool shot and cool line after cool line, which it probably was. But in the end, I didn’t mind, as I was totally blown away by the imagery of this film. I think that 300 takes the whole green-screen/digital filming to a whole new level. It is a logical extension from Sin City, but is an amazing example of how much control this technology can give to a gifted filmmaker.

9 out of 10.

Why not 10? CG rhino and elephants were kinda crappy.

ROME

After Ridley Scott’s GLADIATOR, the Roman-sandal epics looked like they may have a new start since the days of Ben-Hur and Spartacus. But this didnt really happen. Alexander, despite the mad scramblings of Oliver Stone and his 75 000 different director’s cuts, was just plain crap (I still don’t understand how Angelina Jolie can pass as Colin Farrell’s Mommy). And then there was Troy which was just plain tiresome.

But now come’s HBO’s ROME. Taking Place in 52 BC., Rome follows the story of General Gaius Julius Caesar, and how he rises to power. There is a large cast, all of which are historically based, but the main story is told through the perspective of two Roman soldiers – Lucius Vorenus and Titus Pullo. Interestingly these were the only two common soldiers Caesar ever mentioned by name in his records of his war with Gaul. Vorenus and Pullo are slightly cliche in that they define the old "odd coupple" thing, but it works well.

Rome follows a specific line of historical events; however, there is far more complexity and subtlety that makes it such an engrossing experience. The pacing of the series was excellent and the acting was top notch as expected from most HBO features. Attention to detail in terms of sets, costumes, and locations resulted in the series looking very authentic.

At first I questioned how this series would continue after the innevitable assassination of Ceasar. The season finale (probably the best finale I have seen in a long time) leaves a couple of ideas on where it could go. If you look to the history books, the assasisination of Caesar began a civil war in which Mark Antony and Octavian fought the Roman Senate for revenge and power. Even more interesting, Octavian will later be known as Augustus Caesar – the first Emperor of Rome.

9 out of 10

Why not 9? More fight scenes!!!!!
Why not 10? After a huge build up to the Ceasar / Pompei battle, all we get is 10 seconds of blurry images of some dude swinging a sword!!!!......Gay.

Hellboy

Ok, so back in 1944, a troop of American soldiers and a paranormal researcher named Dr. Broom find some Nazis hanging out with Rasputin trying to open up a portal to another dimension. Out comes a small tiny red creature with horns, a tail, and a big-ass right hand, who Dr. Broom adopts, names him Hellboy, and raises him up to be a monster-fighting super-hero. This movie is weird.

Hellboy is directed by longtime fan-boy Guillermo del Toro, now famous from his latest independent film, Pan’s Labyrinth. He’s been around for a while and is known for directing Blade 2. Hellboy is the played by Ron Perlman, character-actor extraordinaire, who is absolutely perfect as the wisecracking blue-collar good-guy demon. I love how Hellboy files his horns down to look more normal, despite that fact that he ends up looking like he’s got two dixie cups on his head! Hellboy likes cats, smokes cigars, drinks beer, stuffs himself with pancakes, and stays undercover until monsters walk the earth. Then he is called on to kick ass.

The supporting characters are both interesting and unique. Abe sapien, was interesting in that his character’s origin was stated, but never really explained. The other characters just accept who he is and so does the viewer. A nice touch was the water tanks he wears around his gills when he is on dry land – very smart. Another cool character was Kroenen – the sweet action Nazi assassin who wears creepy-ass gas masks. Kroenen was essentially the Darth Maul of this film. I still don’t quite understand why he is made up of sand, or how his little clock thingy keeps him going, but like many aspects of the film, you can’t dwell on it.

The main monster in the film – "Sammy" as Hellboy calls him – is interesting at first, but gets a bit tiresome as the movie goes on. The whole Rasputin thing was also hard to take, even in the director’s cut. One thing is clear though, de Toro, who also wrote the screenplay, weaves together interesting character relationships, science-fiction-fantasy-superhero action and laughs into this visionary tale.

8 out of 10

Why not 9? – I accepted Abe, but come on! I need a little more explanation on lets see....every character in the film! Why not 10? – Effects were a bit CG-ish

Casino Royale

I like James Bond. James Bond is cool.

Many actors have portrayed him with varied results:

Sean Connery – I was too young to fully appreciate him, but he’s (or at least was) cool.

George Lazenby – only played James bond once – poor bastard, not that cool either

Roger Moore – The James Bond of my youth – campy, cheesy, but cool as ice ice baby!

Timothy Dalton – dark and serious Bond – coolio

Pierce Brosnan – Mr. “I think and act like I am cool, but unfortunately I am not.”

Many people hated the fact that Daniel Craig was cast as James Bond for this film. This was after many internet rumors of Clive Owen taking on the role. Despite that many people thought that Clive Owen would be a perfect match, Daniel Craig was cast and caused controversy amongst Bond Purists. Some even went so far as to set up a website that’s sole purpose was to bash Craig. This site is just damn weird. It has a gravestone on it with the name James bond on the headstone. Now that the movie is out, they are frantically trying to get people to go to other movies…..but secretly if they are THAT hardcore of a James Bond fan, they probably saw the movie on opening night and have gone to see it 10 times already…kinda like secret agents…oooooooh.

Casino Royale is the last Bond movie to be based on one of Ian Flemings books. In fact, this was the first James Bond novel ever written. The film is a great action movie about an individual being cultivated into a special agent and the toll that it takes on him in the process. Daniel Craig or “James Blond” as some like to call him, is by far the best Bond yet. Craig’s 007 is much more believable as someone who could pull off his mission with success. Gone are the days (I hope) of the James Bond who is desperately trying to look sexy, calm, and cool while giving the Judo-Chop to evil henchmen at the same time. This version of bond is more interesting and masculine, allowing the viewer to easily relate to the story while authenticating the character of James Bond. You get to see his transformation and by the end, he has become the cold secret agent that the British government wants him to be. This Bond has “testicular fortitude” (pun intended) that the James Bond movie franchise has desperiately needed for a long time. Let’s hope his jublies can hold up in future installments.

8.5 out of 10

Why not 9? Vesper’s role in the defibrillation situation – she must have one of those at home I guess?
Why not 10? It took 21 film attempts to come up with a believable James Bond.

The Lord of The Rings

So I have finally decided to review my favorite movie of all time – The Lord of the Rings. In my opinion, no other movie remotely compares to this. Yes, that is a big statement, but very true. I am no way able to write about every little thing that makes this film my favorite, but I will try and touch on the main points.

I had read J.R.R Tolkien’s “The Hobbit” and “Lord of the Rings” back in 1999. I had never had much interest in the story before that. I had seen the Ralph Bakshi film and subsequent animated installments and was never overly impressed. But I felt compelled to read the book that had been awarded the Book of the Century award before it became a movie. Once I began to read these books, I couldn’t put them down. The hobbit was great, but it was The Lord of the Rings that I became totally immersed. I would skip a day at work just to sit on the couch and read. Lord of the Rings amazed me in its scope and complexity, but it also convinced me that it could never be made into a movie. Many people in Hollywood agreed. Supposedly George Lucas wanted to make these films back in the days before Starwars. Meessa Thinks thatsa not a goody good ideasa! So when I heard that Peter Jackson, who I only knew from The Frighteners and Meet the Feebles, was directing I was quite perplexed. The guy who made a Muppet porno is going to direct Lord of the Rings???? I figured the only one who could pull this movie off would be someone like Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, or James Cameron. And then I saw that first internet preview……….

In my opinion, Lord of the Rings is one movie. One big mother of a movie (almost 12 hours if your are talking about the extended cuts – and I am). Each movie is a distinct act of the overall story, and I don’t consider the Two Towers or Return of the King as sequels. This is reinforced by the fact that all three movies were filmed at the same time. But for ease of this review, I will review each of the 3 “Books” separately.

Book 1: The Fellowship of the Ring

So, there are differences from the book, and if you are one of those who harp on the changes that were made, well….you are trying way too hard to be a geek. It is truly impossible to completely translate the entire content of the Lord of the Rings into a coherent screenplay. Especially with Fellowship of the Ring, since it was one of the least coherent books and didn’t seem to follow any standard story arc to start off with. The changes that were made in the film are completely sensible and don’t harm the overall story in any way. Sure, we don’t have Tom Bombadil, but he would have totally shifted the concept of the ring. Tom was able to carry the ring without any consequence. And sure, Arwen’s role has been greatly expanded with some input from the appendices, but I think her additions made for a much more enjoyable movie.

Peter Jackson and Co. were able to produce an extremely strong script, and his directing is totally top notch. But in the end, the movie will ultimately live and die with the cast. Millions of people have read these books and have an idea of what these characters look and act like. The actors had to be cast perfectly……and they were. The characters were played seriously, bringing humanity to the story and legitimized the fantasy genre which has come across as somewhat silly in the past (Willow, Legend, etc). I won’t comment on the individual cast members, with one exception…Ian McKellen completely becomes Gandalf the Grey.

The special effects were very well done and only seemed to be used when required (Hint Hint George Lucas!). A few shots looked a bit CG-ish, but overall they were fantastic.

This is an epic film that only scratches the surface of what is to come. You feel the camaraderie of the Fellowship, but know that it is doomed, and that Frodo has the weight of the world on his shoulders. We all know the story, but I found myself thinking, how could they possibly get through what is to come.

Fellowship finishes with the death of Boromir (originally in the beginning of the Two Towers book, but definitely fits better at the end of this film), and the breaking of the Fellowship. There is an overshadowing sense of dread as Frodo and Sam look onto Mordor, but this is nicely balanced by the hope of Aragorn as he races off with Gimli and Legolas to find Merry and Pippin.

Book 2: The Two Towers

Of the three parts of the Lord of the Rings, the Two Towers is arguably the most difficult story to translate into film. The book is split into two very distinct stories – Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli pursuing the orcs into Rohan and the battle of Helm’s deep, and Frodo’s journey with Sam and Gollum into Mordor. Peter Jackson has effectively taken both of these parts and intertwined the stories into a logical progression that can be easily followed – not an easy task.

The movie begins with an amazing sequence replaying the fall of Ganalf in Moria; however we now get to watch Gandalf and the Balrog plunge into the Foundations of Stone. Some people complained the Two Towers didn’t have a beginning and went straight into this scene with no intro. A message to those people: If you need a beginning - watch The Fellowship of the Ring!

This movie adds some new characters, most notably Gollum. With the combination of Andy Serkis' “acting” and the work of WETA Digital, in my opinion, Gollum is the single greatest achievement in visual effects since ILM created the Dinosaurs Jurassic Park. Gollum is completely interactive with his real-life co-stars and I never once thought of him as animated. Despite the amazing animation of many Starwars characters, I was always aware that they were CG.

The older characters continue to grow and Frodo becomes more and more burdened by the ring. There is also some amazing dialog in this film. For example, when Gandalf returns and is told that he was mistaken for Saruman, he replies: “I am Saruman, rather what Saruman should have been”.

This movie has some big moments. The Warg attack (which brings a whole new element to cavalry battles) and the battle at Helm’s Deep were interesting and never lost my attention. The were paced very well and never became generic as many epic battles have become these days.

And then it came…the most amazing moment I have ever seen in cinema. Gandalf the White riding over the hill at Helms Deep with 5000 Riders of Rohan. This is truly an incredible moment. The imagery and music are insanely powerful and it serves as a major uplifting moment in the middle of a dark story. It gives a sense that victory against the powers of evil is a possibility.

The Two Towers is the middle portion of a 12 hour film. Where the ending of the Fellowship of the Ring had you looking forward to what was ahead in the character’s journeys, by the end of The Two Towers you realize that the end is near.

Book 3: The Return of the King

“Every path you have trod, through wilderness, through war, has led to this road….the end has come”

How did they do this? After watching The Fellowship of the Ring, I thought…”I wonder if they will even attempt the Battle of the Pelennor Fields”. Well they certainly did! I spoke earlier of generic epic battles of recent years – but this is just insane: Thousands of orcs using giant warfare instruments against a massive city carved out of the side of a mountain, while thousands of horsemen face off against an army of Giant Eliphants (Oliphaunts). And if it doesn’t get more bizerk than that – Flying Nazgul led by the Witch King wreaking havoc all over the place. Damn!

This movie had a lot to do and did it all wonderfully. The film is HUGE, but still, you have quiet moments interspersed which make the movie all the better. Like Pippin’s discussion with Gandalf about their impending death, or Sam’s speech about the life he would live if he survived.

And speaking about Sam... Clearly my personal favorite of these films is Gandalf, but the in this film, the real star is Samwise Gamgee. Sean Astin has perfectly portrayed the heart of Sam. Tolkien once wrote “His will was set, and only death would break it”, and that is so true of Sam in this movie.

Many people complained about the “multiple endings” of the movie, but for a movie of such size and depth – it certainly can’t finish after the ring is destroyed. There is a lot to wrap up, and Peter Jackson does it very well. Of most interest is Frodo’s character. Throughout these films the power of the ring has had such a massive negative impact on Frodo. His character transformed from the once naive and happy hobbit to a sickened and tormented individual just clinging on to life. Even after the ring is destroyed and years have passed, Frodo still feels the pain of the ring. Until the moment at the Grey Havens, where he steps onto the ship and turns back to the fellowship with a smile that shows he is finally at peace.

The Lord of the Rings is a film unlike any other, and it is hard to believe that another series of films will ever come close to how amazing these are. Peter Jackson brought Tolkien’s world to life in meticulous detail and it resulted in one of the greatest film achievements of all time.

"Well, here at last, dear friends, on the shores of the Sea comes the end of our fellowship in Midde-earth. Go in peace! I will not say; do not weep; for not all tears are an evil" - Gandalf

10 out of 10.

District B13

The plot of District B13 is a bit convoluted and a bit clichéd- - but who cares?! District B13 is not about plot, its about action!

The fact that B13 doesn’t use computer effects, wires, or stunt doubles makes it all the more enjoyable. It has that similar sense of the Jackie Chan movies, where as a viewer you appreciate what is happening way more since you know the things you are watching are real. But where it surpasses the Chan movies is the lack of goofiness. B13 certainly has its comedic scenes, but they play second fiddle to the action.

The movie has a very fast pace and takes no time getting into the action. The beginning sequence of the film has the character Leito, leaping across rooftops, staircases, railings, windows to evade the enemy. Supposedly this style of “fighting” was developed by the actor himself and is called Parkour (action based on the total mobility of an urban landscape).

When Leito teams up with Damien, they make a great team with very different styles. Leito is all about trickery and evasion, while Damien is all about hand-to-hand combat. With guys like this making movies, its hard to imagine why so many movies involve stars pretending to be able to do this stuff, when there are people who can do it for real!

8.5/10

Why not 9? Subtitles were a bit to fast for my grade 7 level reading ability
Why not 10? Plot

Kill Bill

I’m going to review both Vol 1 and 2. I know that Tarantino is coming out with a full length film where both are combined….but I think they are distinctly different.

Kill Bill was Tarantino’s “official” 4th movie and was advertised as such. Kind of a weird way of marketing a movie if you ask me. What is my response to that statement supposed to be? “oooooooh, the fourth movie…..ahhhh that means its going to be amazing!” Well, I guess we are lucky that it was.

I have no desire to mention all of the homages, tributes, and cameos that are riddled throughout these films – there are tonnes. If you can identify them – you are a super-nerd, put together from pieces of lesser nerds. All I will say is that Vol 1. is very much in the tradition of 1970s kung-fu films, and Vol 2. is more along the lines of the spaghetti westerns (sort of).

To me, Kill Bill is an extremely entertaining movie that shows off Tarantino’s ability to create awesome action sequences, while maintaining a strong story-telling element. Many people were disappointed with Vol1. since it was so different from his other films. To me, that’s the reason I like it. It is very apparent that he is absolutely loving the scenes he is putting together and the energy that comes through is amazing. The focus on the importance placed on the samurai swords is so high that the Hitori Hanzo sword is almost a main character of the film.

The fight scenes in Vol. 1 are very different than those in Vol 2. The exaggerated, almost comic-book aspect of these fight scenes seem to make them a bit ridiculous (but ridiculously cool). However, deep down, Vol 1. isn’t ridiculous. It is a story that is rooted in revenge and vengeance. Vol 2. played more into this theme, with its fight scenes a bit more visceral.

Uma Thurman was amazing in this movie. She has officially joined the club of kick-ass females along side Sigourney Weaver and Linda Hamilton. She was believable as “the Bride” and had some pretty awesome acting moments – like when she was waking up from the coma. In fact, everyone in the movie fit their roles very well – with one exception – Bill. Bill bored me. I enjoyed all of the lead up to his character– but the scenes in Vol 2, where he is the main focus, are a bit over the top. David Carradine’s delivery of the lines seem a bit forced. On top of that, the writing started to feel a bit much during the “Superman” monologue at the end of Vol 2. The comments made by Bill about Superman were written to sound very profound, but if you know anything about Superman, you know the point he is trying to make about 1 sentence into a 7 minute blab.

There are many elements to like in Kill Bill. From the fight sequences to the anime. Tarantino continues to show his skill of well-placed music, camerawork, and editing. Overall, Tarantino has weaved an incredibly badass revenge epic that will knock your socks off. While it has its faults, the end result is one of the greatest action films of all time.

8.5/10

Why not 9? David Carridine
Why not 10? David Carridine

War of the Worlds

I never saw this movie in the theatre...something I will never forgive myself for. A science fiction movie based on a classic novel, directed by Steven Speilberg - What was I thinking!!!? I must have had Batman on the brain. Damn Batbrain!

Anyway as a science fiction movie fan I feel compelled to review this movie....a movie the likes of which you will not find a comparison in the history of science fiction. Some may compare it to movies like Independance Day or the TV show V, but those people are fools and need to be vapourized!

This isn’t the Spielberg of E.T., or Close Encounters – This is DUEL Spielberg. War of the Worlds just as unrelenting, if not more. Through out War of the Worlds, there is a huge sense of immediacy, urgency and visceral power that Spielberg has only shown once before in Saving Private Ryan. This film is without question, one of Spielberg’s best and it’s surprising that he made it in such a short period of time.

In terms of the cast – well, there’s this guy. I think his name is Tom Cruise. He’s not a very popular actor, I know I’ve seen him in something before, I just can’t remember. Cruise plays his character perfectly. He uses his gun on others, he thinks the worst of others, and that gives him the drive to do what he will to ensure his survival and that of his kids. This is nicely juxtaposed against the drive of the Aliens to eliminate all human life. The rest of the cast was also excellent. Dakota Fanning was great – she acted her age and she was nothing more than believable. The look she gives her father when sitting in the tripod basket is just fantastic.

As for the Tripods, absolute bad-asses! From the incredible sound design to the visual effects – they are a true nightmare. From their first appearance on the street to the attack on the ferry, they are totally haunting. Guaranteed, your heart will be pounding watching these things!

The film follows the main story elements of the source material and keeps the original ending. So many people didn’t like the ending. In my opinion, the ending couldn’t be better (save the family reunion sequence). Throughout the movie you accept that humans can’t defeat these things. In fact, Will Smith is nowhere to be seen. The fact that bacteria, something that mankind has constantly worked to destroy, was what ended up destroying the aliens is completely fitting to the story. But, some people really wanted a big dramatic battle sequence to show the U.S. defeating the aliens. Those people please re-direct yourself to the vaporization comment above.

Overall, this is among the very best Steven Spielberg films ever made. I say that with total confidence. This is a film with hardcore sci-fi imagery, but is put in a very believable context.

9.5/10
Why not 10? Family reunion: What the hell was his wife doing that whole time??!! Having a spot of tea??!!!

Superman Returns

"ON THE DOOMED PLANET KRYTON, A WISE SCIENTIST PLACED HIS INFANT SON INTO A SPACECRAFT AND LAUNCHED HIM TO EARTH. RAISED BY A KIND FARMER AND HIS WIFE, THE BOY GREW UP TO BECOME OUR GREATEST PROTECTOR... SUPERMAN. BUT WHEN ASTRONOMERS DISCOVERED THE DISTANT REMAINS OF HIS HOME WORLD, SUPERMAN DISAPPEARED." That’s the opening to Superman Returns. One of the best, if not THE best movie to come out since Lord of The Rings.

Superman Returns is more than just a sequel and its more than just a homage to Superman I and II, it is an amazing movie. The fact that it pays tribute to the previous movies is awesome, but it only adds to the greatness of this movie. I was a bit skeptical of this movie at first. I am a huge fan of the Superman movies, especially I and II, and parts of III (Bad Superman vs Clark Kent). So when I heard that a new superman movie was going to be made I was a bit worried – especially with all the incantations this movie went through during early development. The Kevin Smith script was terrible….if you get the chance download it and you will be ever thankful that they never made that one! Tim Burton’s version starring Nicholas Cage could have been a nightmare both before and after Christmas! Tim Burton is cool – but not a good match for Superman. Then, in more recent years, McG (director of the Charlie’s Angels Movies) was tied to the movie….retarded. So when Bryan Singer left Xmen III to do Superman I was intrigued, but still a concerned. Could this guy actually make a good Superman movie? The first 2 X-men movies were good – but they lacked the flare and spectacle that would be needed in a superman movie. But Singer is a self confessed Superman fan – especially of the first 2 films and when he said that this would be a film that continued on from the originals – my excitement level increased 10 fold!

I loved the connection to the earlier films which is most felt through the opening credits and music. Right from the beginning you feel like you are watching Superman!. So first I’ll comment on the cast and then the story.

Cast:

At first, I was a bit disappointed that Tom Welling wouldn’t be cast as Superman. But then again, that would have made the movie a “Smallville Movie”. In the end, Brandon Routh IS Superman! Routh embodied the character of Superman perfectly and emulated Christopher Reeve amazingly. This is different in comparison to Ewan MacGregor sounding like Alec Guiness. Routh had very similar mannerisms to Reeve, maybe its acting, maybe its natural…..who cares – he was great! As Clark Kent, he was a bit different than Reeve. Reeve played the bumbling fool perfectly, bumping into people, spilling things, getting his coat caught in the women’s washroom door etc. Whereas Routh looked like he was trying this…but never quite got it the same. Then again, this movie is definitely more serious than the other films and most of the Clark Kent scenes involve some pretty heavy moments, where you know that he is having issues with being back and learning that so much has changed.

Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor was also wonderfully cast…..and I hate Kevin Spacey. I know that everybody thinks he is ultimate but I don’t….I think he is crap…..but I admit he was an awesome Luthor. He seemed to have the quirkiness of the Gene Hackman Luthor, but also the deep vengeance of the Smallville Luthor. What I really liked was when he had Superman defeated, he didn’t beat around the bush with some huge monologue….he just kicked his ass. Very well done.

Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. I liked her and I didn’t. I liked her in this movie because her character fit the story arc very well. I didn’t like her because she never really felt like what I think Lois should be. If this movie is following the originals, then Lois needs to at least be a stronger character. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want Margot Kidder back, but I just felt like Bosworth was a bit too much of a damsel in distress, not a stubborn, risk taker who is always getting herself into trouble.

Story:

This is one of the best superhero stories of all time. This movie did for the superman movies what Batman Begins did for the batman movies……it made you understand the character’s motives. Superman is more than just a guy who saves people because he is a good guy. This movie had so many elements that were incredible – and not only the special effects – which were mind-blowing. When Superman saves the plane from crashing and puts it down on the baseball field and you hear John Williams famous score…its hard not to get the chills of excitement go down your forearm. The robbery stop was also very cool. The runaway car sequence was interesting, especially with the Action comics #1 ending. Towards the end when Superman left Lois and her family, shot to the air and recharged himself with the sun and flew down to deal with the Kryponite continent – you just knew that this was going to be Superman at his best. The following near death sequence was gripping and actually had you believing that this was it for Superman.

Without going into detail on every story element, I think the most important was that Superman was searching the universe for something like him, when all along he had a son growing back on Earth. For Superman to quote Jor-el’s speech that was given to him as a baby was perfect. “The son becomes the father…and the father the son”. Superman was “raised as a human being” and so will his son, but he will be there for what comes in the future.

Superman Returns perfectly delivers what Superman is all about and adds more to his character. Brian Singer did it right. Part of me wants to see more Superman movies, but given that they did it so well this time and that the Story comes around full circle to the beginning of the original film, it will be hard to capture the same feeling in another sequel.

9.5 out of 10.

Why not 10? Cutting out the Krypton scenes.....(what is with that?)

Xmen III: The Last Stand

Well, it finally arrived. After watching X2 I was so insanely excited for X3 I ran around with my pants on fire claiming I was the pheonix....well, maybe not. Well X3 is now here and it is supposedly "the last stand"......well, maybe not.

X3 picks up right after X2, with Jean Grey supposedly dead and Cyclops all pooped out because of it. But all us X-nerds know about the Pheonix! This movie wasn't that bad. It was incredibly predictible, but it had some fantastic moments. My main gripe is that it just could have been so much better. Jean Grey was the characater that all the plots circled around throughout the film, but for the most part she stood there staring into space like something out of a Zombie movie. Very little time is spent following through on most of the new characters. Warren "Angel" Worthington is completely wasted in my opinion. He gets a few scenes in the beginning that get you interested in him and then he's pretty much ignored for the rest of the film. In addition, the majority of the new X-villans were poorly developed. When it came down to "the last stand" I actually could care less what happens to anybody except maybe Wolverine and Jean. Just look at the Xmen team: The Beast (ok, kinda cool - but where the hell is Night crawler??), Shadowcat (cheap Rogue replacement - what the hell is with that anyway?), Iceman (come on, lets start looking and acting like iceman!!), Colususs (More like "Wolverine Catapult System") Storm (Go away Halle!), and Wolverine (What's with the hair?). Wolverine was still a major character in the film, but he seemed to have lost his edge. Jean Grey put it perfectly when she said that Xavier had "tamed him".

All in all, I really liked the Pheonix. It just could have been such a better story. It had promise, especially after Xavier's death sequence, but it never seemed to get there. It just seemed to go through the motions. Not bad for a superhero movie, actually reminded me of the X-men comics more than the first two films.

6.5 out of 10.

Why not 7? The Juggernaut's line "I'm the Juggernaut Bitch!"
Why not 8? Crappy Xmen team
Why not 9? Crappy X-villan team
Why not 10? The not-so-dark Pheonix story line

V for Vendetta

First off, this movie is not the Matrix. All of the hype (which was long and intense) suggested that this film would be the next big movie from the Wachowski Brothers and the trailers showcased some pretty flashy slow motion fight scenes reminiscent of Neo. Internet rumors started to circulate that the Wachowski Brothers maintained a large amount of creative control (a la George Lucas) over director, James McTeigue. After watching V, I don't think this is true. Yes, there is a Matrixy feel to certain elements, but the Vision of the movie is distinctly different. This is a dark and brooding film that pays close attention to its characters. Despite the involvement of other supporting characters, you find yourself only caring about V and Evey, which were portrayed very strongly by both Hugo Weaving and Natalie Portman. This may be Portman's best work yet, and is a big leap from Padme of the Starwars universe. That being said, V doesn't provide a lot of new ideas that haven't been seen before; however, it does a great job bringing them together into a strong story which questions the justification for terrorism. V is not an action movie in the way The Matrix was. The action sequences are few and far between. This is not a big deal (I actually liked it that way), but the movie was certainly marketed as a high action film. Given this, many may find the movie a bit slow moving when expecting more fast paced action. I think the lack of "over-action" makes this movie way more effective. The movie is heavy on character development and heavy on plot - so when the movie reaches its climactic end fight sequence with V, it has a much greater impact. All in all, this was a strong movie with a strong cast and great visuals. 8.5 out of 10.

King Kong

King Kong is one big monkey. And King Kong is one big movie.
My first admision is that unlike the majority of people who have reviewed this movie, I had very little interest in the original. Yes I understand that it was ahead of its time and was a classic, but when I saw it years ago my reaction was pretty luke warm. So when I heard that Peter Jackson's next project was King Kong I was not overly excited. Don't get me wrong, I love a good monkey movie, but I have been let down so many times. Of all the monkey movies out there only Tarzan the Legend of Greystoke struck a cord with my inner silverback. To name just a few crappy monkey movies: The Mighty Joe Young (I'm sorry, but that is a terrible name for a monkey); and lets not forget Congo ("Amy want green-drop drink! Tickle Amy!"). I also wasn't too keen to see more dinosaurs. Jurrasic Park kinda did that to the fullest. But my absolute love for Lord of the Rings and my amazement of Peter Jackson's talent convinced me that I should give Kong a try.

King Kong in summary, is a 100% adventure movie and can only be compared to movies like Indiana Jones etc. Sure King Kong is long, and yes it is over the top, but it is pure entertainment. Peter Jackson develops all the characters very well, even if it isn't required. The main highlight of the movie though, is the interaction between Kong and Anne. Only Anne understands why Kong is doing what he is doing and she feels a true sympathy for him - and so does the viewer. The final scene with Kong atop the empire state building is just fantastic.

In the end, Kong is a lengthy, over the top, special effect heavy, heart-felt, epic that only Peter Jackson could pull off. 9 out of 10. Why not 10 out of 10? The dinosaur stampede was a bit too rediculous for me.

Batman

Here is the movie that started it all; well at least before it more recently began in begins....what?

Batman hit the screens in 1989. With Mr. Mom dawning the cape and cowl for the first time since Adam West. Directed by the ever-bizarre Tim Burton, this was one of the only super hero movies (with the exception of Superman) that actually depicted how the character appeared in the comics. With storyline elements inspired by Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns", Burton's image of Batman was just that - The Dark Knight. I don't need to go into lots of detail here due to the recent release of the DVD, but this movie had a huge impact on later movies (obviously not subsequent Batman movies) like The Crow, Blade, and yes...Daredevil. Here's a dare: Don't make another Daredevil movie!

Batman was portrayed well in this film, despite the lack of character development. He was dark, brooding, and one bad-ass Mo Fo.

Burton was at the top of his game on this film. He was bizarre, but not over the top like he has been on other films like Batman Returns. Everything seemed to fit quite well....Especially the Joker.

Jack Nicholson as the Joker was a perfect match. He was disturbing and out of control - just as he should be. I am not much of a Nicholson fan , but in my opinion he BECAME the joker...and its a joy to watch.

This movie was truly the movie that sparked my major interest in movies. Sure I loved movies like Starwars and Indiana Jones, but this movie just seemed to burn a spot in my brain at the age of 16. It was the first time that I had watched a movie and caught myself thinking "man, what a cool shot" or "I love how the camera moved during that sequence".

So it only makes sense that this should be my first entry into this blog.

Batman is a classic superhero film which ranks at the top. I give it a 9.5/10.

Why not 10? Vikki Vale's scream (enough said)