Top 10 Movies of 2008
1) The Dark Knight
2) Kung Fu Panda
3) The Reader
4) Iron Man
5) Indiana Jones and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
6) Changeling
7) Frost/Nixon
8) Forgetting Sarah Marshall
9) Hancock
10) Role Models
(Keep in mind this is a list of movies I actually saw--obviously there were better ones out there I didn't. Also, "2008" as with other years I've posted, is one Oscar awards to another as opposed to a calendar year).
Taken. Stop me if you've heard this one before: a man's daughter is kidnapped and he has to take matters into his own hands to get justice. It's been done about a million times before and I think Steven Segal pretty much made a career out of it... despite that, Taken is a decent action flick (co-written by Luc Besson of The Fifth Element and Leon, Le Professional fame). It delivers what it promises--two hours of action as Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) kicks ass on a bunch of human smugglers who have kidnapped his dear young daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace) so they can sell her into prostitution on the black market. Bryan is a former spy of some sort who knows Europe all too well and has little trouble finding the traffickers and making everyone involved pay with their miserable lives. One slightly annoying element of the movie is his love for his daughter is a bit overplayed in the first part. Yes, he loves her (as any parent would love their child) and yes, he's overprotective--but they overdo it a tad bit. No one is that overprotective of their kid (I would hope) and then, naturally, his fears turn out to be justified. The film co-stars Famke Janssen (which is Norwegian for "hot babe", I believe) as his ex-wife. All in all, a good straight forward action flick. Don't expect more then that--just put your brain in neutral and enjoy the ride. Mildly recommended. (Feb. 3/09).
Inkheart. A movie about a man who can make stories literally come to life when he reads aloud from them. An intriguing idea for a fantasy film (based off a book trilogy apparently). Unfortunately, while being an interesting idea, the movie itself doesn't quite work. It seemed a bit rushed as far as the writing went--like it needed to stew a while longer before someone took it out and filmed it. Among other problems, the movie has a logic problem run through about half of it (namely, when they get the book why don't they read from it and set things straight instead of waiting until the end and the exact right opportunity for the plot to resolve itself?) Also, the main character Mo's (played by Brendan Frasier) daughter Meggie is also a "Silvertongue" (person who can bring stuff out of books) which marginalizes his role in the story more then it should. The characters are all shallow and not really expanded upon beyond stereotypes. A story where you can bring elements of other books into your own should prove a great opportunity to have some real fun with the idea, right? Not this movie. Some ideas are mentioned--like the gator from Peter Pan or Rapunzel, but nothing much is used in any meaningful way... of course, the movie runs about ninety minutes so who had the time to do anything like that? Mediocre. (Feb.2/09).
Frost/Nixon. A movie dramatization of the David Frost and Richard Nixon interviews from 1977. Well written and well acted, this movie really does a good job of examining Richard Nixon's political mistakes as well as exploring his character traits and having the effect of portraying him as a human being. Directed by Ron Howard with a minimalist approach, allowing the material to speak for itself. Frank Langella does an amazing job of playing Nixon--his performance is a highlight of the movie and his Oscar nomination for the role is well deserved. Michael Sheen does a good job of playing David Frost as well. The deeper world of this movie isn't really fleshed out but it's not the highlight of the story anyway. The interviews and Nixon's hopeful confession is and it comes across very well. Highly Recommended. (Jan. 27/09).
Chandni Chowk To China. The first Bollywood movie I've ever watched (all the way through, anyway). The first Indian movie to filmed on location in China, apparently. Honestly, I can't compare it with other Indian movies so I'm just going to offer my opinions on it instead. The story follows an idiot cook named Sidhu from a place called Chandni Chowk (in India) as he is mistaken for the reincarnation of a legendary Chinese warrior. He is taken back to China where he must deal with a Chinese mobster called Hojo. At first, he doesn't have a clue why he's really there and when he learns the truth, is quickly revealed as the loser he is. From here on in, he must learn to become a man and gain his revenge. The story is best described as a "dramedy" with most of the comedy being in the first half to three quarters of the movie and the last part being more serious in tone. As with any Indian movie, there's plenty of song and dance numbers to go around. If I have one complaint, it's that the movie is a bit long at two and a half hours and could stand to lose about twenty minutes. There's a few too many false starts in the last part where we think Sidhu will find redemption but doesn't and it seems to take forever to finally get to it. Still, it's an entertaining romp all around... Recommended. (The movie is in Hindi and Chinese with subtitles incidentally). (Jan. 18/09.)
The Reader. A movie about a teenaged boy named Michael Berg that has a chance encounter with an older woman named Hanna in 1958 Germany. He is sick on his way to/from school one day and she helps him get home. After he recovers from scarlet fever, he seeks her out and gives her some flowers to thank her. It isn't long before he gets involved with her romantically in a secret affair (he's fifteen and she's thirty five). She seems to enjoy it when he reads books to her (hence the title). One day, she just abruptly disappears... eight years later, he is a law student and finds her again--at a trial of some Nazi guards! It turns out she is one of several guards from a prison where executing Jews was routine procedure... but is she as guilty as she seems? Michael finds he knows a secret that can affect her fate. What he does with that knowledge will affect both of their lives forever more... The movie is well acted, directed and written. Kate Winslet plays Hanna while Ralph Fiennes plays older Michael and David Kross is his younger counterpart. The story brings up many interesting questions about guilt, about pride and about being human. There are many grey areas here and nothing is cut and dried black and white. A thought provoking story and definitely worth checking out. Highly Recommended. (Jan. 16/09).
The Spirit. Frank Miller's first solo directing effort and his take on Will Eisner's classic comic book character (which I admit I have never explored). This is clearly an exaggerated Miller take on the character as opposed to a 100% faithful adaptation. I'd heard terrible things about this movie before viewing it myself and went in with low expectations. To my pleasant surprise, the movie is fairly coherent and better then expected. It's kind of like taking the 60s Batman and crossing it with Sin City (for want of a better description). The characters are all exaggerated and ridiculous but not without their charms either. The Spirit is beyond noble; the Octopus is loud and large and mad; the women are gorgeous vamps. Women love the Spirit--and he loves them. The story is full of noir-ish speeches about how his city is his mother and his lover--and he is it's spirit. Nothing is overly subtle yet it works rather well for this story. The hyper comic style works well in the movie but isn't quite as followed through on as in Sin City before it (towards the end the movie gets less artsy and more practical). There are also several in-jokes about previous Miller projects--a mention of Robin (from Batman, one of his great projects) and also the Elektra Syndrome (reference to Elektra, his female assassin from Daredevil years ago). The truck one character drives is marked "Ditko Deliveries" (or something). A clear reference to the legendary comic artist Steve Ditko. This is far from the greatest comic book adaption ever done but it's crazy and entertaining in it's own way. Something that has to be seen to be believed. Mildly Recommended. (Jan. 11/09).
Yes Man. Jim Carrey's latest effort is a story about a man named Carl Allen (Carrey), that's in a rut. He has no girlfriend, has been avoiding his closest friends and generally closing himself off from his life. At work, he's passed over for promotion and things seem to be stagnant. When an old acquaintance meets him and tells him to go to a life changing seminar hosted by the charismatic Terrence Bundley (Terence Stamp), he is reluctant. But he takes a chance and is convinced to make a covenant with himself to say "yes" to every opportunity that comes his way, no matter what. And off we go, with Carl getting into zany situations and also improving his life in some ways... I'd read one review about this movie where the author didn't care for it. I actually found myself enjoying it much more then expected. Carrey doesn't overact too much and his new life and new love are fun to follow along. Zooey Deschanel plays Allison, his love interest--I always enjoy watching her in anything (she made The Happening slightly more watchable--and that movie sucked). All in all, an enjoyable romp. Recommended. (Dec. 28/08).
The Day The Earth Stood Still. A remake of the classic sci-fi film originally directed by Robert Wise. This new version boasts top notch special effects, very good acting and, sadly, a mediocre script. The alien this time is played appropriately by Keanu Reeves ("wooden actor for the role? Check.") while the human element is made up by Jennifer Connelly with some help from Jayden Smith (Will's little boy) playing her step-son. The movie's story has much potential but much of it doesn't get realized... we get instead a story where Helen Benson (Connelly) helps Klaatu (Reeves) out for some reason or the other (to be nice?) and her son Jacob (Smith) tags along to try as he hard as he can to get Klaatu killed first then later wants to use him to resurrect the dead. Somehow, her love for annoying brat son is what makes the big bad alien see the humanity has potential and should not be destroyed. How? I don't know--and that's kind of the problem with the movie. After all he's done, some tears from two humans shouldn't cut if for Klaatu. He should say "see ya", get on his ship and fly away while Earth is cleansed of humanity. The story should've tried harder in the middle to show him that people can be good--can be reasonable--and can be adaptable in the face of imminent destruction. I didn't feel that here and that's why this movie is only mediocre when it could've been great. Also, why is humanity almost always shown in these movies as shoot first and ask questions later? Surely one of the government officials or military men should have a little bit of brains. I've never been in the military but there must be smart soldiers and dumb ones like there are people in any other aspect of society. Otherwise, the special effects are mostly excellent although GORT does seem a little too shiny to be real (especially in his first scenes). Mildly recommended/Mediocre. (Dec.22/08).
Twilight. The movie of the best selling novel by Stephenie Meyer. I haven't read Twilight per se but did read the partially written Midnight Sun (Edward's pov on those same events) so I'm somewhat familiar with the story. The movie is true to the spirit of the story if greatly abbreviated. Without the addition of what the characters are thinking, the story comes across a bit flat in many places which is too bad. I also got the impression the movie didn't have a very high budget--or perhaps it was simply the meek demands of the story that lead me to that conclusion. The romantic scenes border on corny--people thought Attack of the Clones was bad for that? Try watching Twilight! Gah! Additionally, Bella (the main character) comes across as disinterested in much of anything (even her beloved Edward). Her character was more interesting in the book but here she seems just...bored or something. She has few scenes in which to truly shine. Edward, her vampire boyfriend, comes across as weird and aloof earlier in the movie and then domineering once she knows his secret. They're supposed to be passionately in love but it just doesn't translate well to film--I think the screenwriter is largely to blame for this. I think she was more concerned with taking scenes verbatim out of the novel and then shortening stuff to fit a two hour movie that she missed a lot of what made the story decent in the first place. One serious story gaff--in the original book(s), Bella is saved from a errant van by Edward and she hits her head accidentally when he shoves her out of the way. He later tells her he didn't speed to her side with superhuman speed--she'd just hit her head and remembered wrong. Fine. In the movie, he just shows up and saves her--no head bump--and then they have to take the time to backtrack in the next scene and explain why she remembers wrong (which makes no sense). Edward's vampire "father" is too young looking to be believable. I know he's undead but he looks like he's got five years on Edward--tops. Anyone who thought about it would be scratching their heads at why they were trying to pass off being father and son. Bella's casting is fine but Edward himself looks like they picked him out of a Calvin Klein underwear ad or something. He's perfect looking (like all vampires) but he's one of those guys with so much mousse in his hair it sticks about two inches off his head which, in itself, looks stupid and unnatural. A lot of Bella's friends come off more shallow and pointless then in the novel--like one guy who's obsessing over her at first in the book is reduced to acting like a doofus (my impression in the book was that the guy was more of a wolf then a hyena, but...) One more criticism... I think Meyer should've held off publishing her story and done it all from both characters perspective to begin with. From either Bella or Edward's perspective, the story feels like it's missing big chunks. There's times when it simply goes flat and either character is sitting there wondering about the other character, etc. If she'd done it from both of their perspectives, she could've rounded it all out more... the surprise Edward is a vampire would've been gone, true, but we would've had a much more interesting story overall. As it is, the movie really reveals these flaws as you're watching it.Pass. (Dec. 3/08).
Quantum of Solace. The latest James Bond movie is a rip roaring action fest with both excellent camera work (a scene where Bond and his prey fall through a glass roof is awesome looking) and some weird editing (a casual scene of him walking out of a building near the end of the movie felt wrong). The stunts and action are top notch as is the budget. This movie takes place not long after the events of the last one and Bond is still brooding over the death of his beloved girlfriend. Death appears to follow Bond wherever he goes, affecting whomever he gets too close to. Despite this, he comes across as distant and wooden in many cases (of course, Bond is best as a cold fish. If he breaks down and starts bawling, he's no longer an uber superman). I had trouble connecting with this movie emotionally. It's a good action flick but it's hard to really care about the characters. Of course Bond will survive it all and the villain will get theirs, so there's nothing there. And Bond is cool and suave--but it's hard to feel much for someone like that.Mildly recommended. (Nov. 25/08).
Changeling. The latest film from director Clint Eastwood and the debut feature film script by TV veteran writer, J. Michael Straczynski, recounts the 1928 Wineville Chicken Coop Murders in California. Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie) is a single mother working at the phone company and raising her nine year old son as best she can. One day, she goes into work to cover for a sick co-worker and when she returns home, her son is gone. The film follows her efforts to get her son back.. one day, the police find a boy and bring him back, claiming it is her son. It is not but further attempts by the woman to convince the police to keep the search up result in claims she's delusional so the police throw her in a mental hospital. Incidentally, the boy they bring home pretends to be her son and won't recant and tell the truth. Meanwhile, a radio preacher (Rev. Gustav Briegleb, played by John Malkovich) who has been working on exposing all the police's corruption takes up Collins plight. The story is told very well and quite interesting--it's actually unbelievable how some of the events depicted occurred, yet they are all true. In the end, justice prevails, of course. But it is a good journey to get there and easily one of JMS more compelling scripts in recent history. Incidentally, he uses the same "My father always told me: never start a fight, but always finish it" line from Babylon 5 (it is appropriate here as well). Worth checking out... Recommended. (Nov. 10/08).
Role Models. Danny and Wheeler are two guys that work as sales people for an energy drink company. Danny gives the speeches to the children while Wheeler is the mascot that jumps around on stage. Outside work, Danny is 35, has been doing the same job for ten years and living with the same woman for the past seven years. He's hit a rut and wonders if there's anything more to life out there. Wheeler, on the other hand, is a free loving womanizer and the type that takes things as they come. When he gets hyped on the juice, one day, Danny screws up and gets the two of them in trouble. His now ex-girlfriend lawyer gets them 150 hours of community service at a Big Brothers type of organization working with troubled youth. One is a D&D style nerd while the other kid is a black sassy brat. And the fun begins... it sounds on paper like a stupid idea but the movie is actually pretty good. It's somewhat raunchy but not overtly so. The characters are funny and the story is good. Wheeler is played by Sean William Scott (aka Stiffler from American Pie) playing the same type of character he always plays--not that I'm complaining. He does that character well so why not? It's certainly not high art but it's an enjoyable romp, which is what it sets out to accomplish. Recommended. (Nov.8/08).
Body of Lies. Ridley Scott's latest movie is about CIA agent Roger Ferris (Leonardo DiCaprio) as he undertakes a mission to flush out a terrorist cell's leader and put them down for good. His handler, Ed Hoffman (Russell Crowe) makes his life more difficult by using his authority to undermine Ferris' control of the situation. The story is long and complicated--to be honest, I felt they could've cut a little bit out of the movie and maybe streamlined the story a little bit more. It tends to meander just a bit before coming to a resolution. Still, there's a point there about the difference between the people who make the calls on foreign policy in the U.S. and the ground people that actually have to carry it out. A decent movie, if not a great one.
Mildly recommended. (Oct. 17/08).
Death Race. A remake of the 1970s b-movie, Death Race 2000. Written and directed by the man of mediocrity, Paul W.S. Anderson (Mortal Kombat, Resident Evil, Aliens vs. Predator) this film was a surprise: it was actually good. Don't get me wrong--it's not high art and it doesn't blaze a trail of new ground. It's a dumb action movie and it knows it. Unlike his previous efforts, this movie seemed to be a bit higher budget and--get ready for a surprise--it actually has a real ending! None of this "to be continued...?" style crap Anderson has become infamous for in literally all of his other movies to-date. Jason Statham plays his usual tough-but-kind-of-a-teddy-bear at heart tough guy while fighting the likes of Machine Gun Joe (Tyrese "I'm in everything nowadays" Gibson) and the evil Pachenko (Max "who the hell am I" Ryan). Joan Allen plays the sinister Warden Hennessey--the main villain behind the plan to make Jensen Ames race at any cost. The opening sequence could've been redone as a flashback since a lot of it was unnecessary (that is, the part establishing Ames work and family life). On the other hand, it's only a 90 minute movie so maybe they needed that stuff to pad it out more? Despite my comments, this is a pretty good action movie. Park your brain and your expectations at the door and just enjoy the thrill ride for an hour and a half. Recommended. (Aug. 23/08).
Star Wars: The Clone Wars. The latest SW movie and the first one to take the form of an animated film chronicles some of the events of the Clone Wars, set between Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. The animated battle scenes are amazing looking while the character interaction scene aren't quite as good by comparison (although not terrible either. Just not on par with the other scenes). The story is not the most exciting one, following the abduction on Jabba the Hutt's son. The story is adequate but not fantastic--it's tone feeling as if it were aimed at a younger audience (as opposed to a general one). Even at 90 minutes, I was getting tired by the end of it*, as if they felt the need to pad it out some (I found Padme's presence in the story to be a contrivance at best). It was cool that Samuel Jackson, Christopher Lee and Anthony Daniels returned to voice their characters though. An adequate EU story but not essential SW viewing at all--skip it unless you're a die-hard fan (they should've just left it as a TV movie to intro the TV series instead of suckering people out of money at the theater). Mildly Recommended.
*- I was tired anyway, though. I'd had a really long day.
The Happening. From director M. Night Shyamalan comes his latest effort. An attempt at a B-movie style horror story (I read in an interview with the director that he was going for a b-movie). In it, nature begins to fight back, wiping out people on the east coast indiscriminately for their crimes against it... So, how is it? I hate to say it, but laughably bad. I've enjoyed all of this director's work in some form or the other since he first came on the scene with 1999's The Sixth Sense (despite some negative reviews of his more recent works such as The Village or Lady in the Water). Yet, this movie just doesn't work... the scenes of characters killing themselves when infected by an enzyme sent out by the plant life are illogical and just goofy looking (instead of terrifying). A lot of the dialogue is really bad as is the acting... and yet, those are things a b-movie should have. But by the end, we get a more serious ending--as if Shyamalan wasn't certain what sort of film he was doing. Or, as I put it to my friend I saw this with, it's like Shyamalan wanted to do a b-movie but his good film making sensibilities got in the way. Instead of the "realistic" ending, why not go more for camp? Why not a plant branch trying to get into the house? Why not have the protagonist find a convenient flame thrower and use it to destroy the "evil" nature (it's funny because it's ironic). But, no... The one bright spot in this piece of crap was the presence of Zooey Deschanel (last seen in the Hitchiker's Guide)--and that's only because I think she's cute so I like to watch her in anything. :) Otherwise, forget about it. Easily the worst movie I've seen this year. Pass. (July 29/08).
Hellboy II: The Golden Army. The sequel to Guillermo del Toro's 2004 movie, all of the cast is back for this outing. We find Hell Boy and Liz having relationship troubles while Abe Sapien may have found himself love. Meanwhile, the world has learned of Hell Boy's existence--but will they embrace him as the hero he is or fear him? And an ancient pact between mankind and the Elves is about to come to an end as the rogue Prince Nuada seeks to bring the ancient Golden Army to life and use it to destroy humanity once and for all. So, how does it rate compared to the first one? In production and story terms, it's equal if not better (I liked the story more for this one). Del Toro was clearly milking his success with Pan's Labyrinth here, using similar bizarre and mythological character designs. Generally, it's a good popcorn flick and works fine on that level... the only area it's lacking a bit in is personal relevance to the characters. There are attempts to make Hell Boy and his nemesis plights relate--how both may become hated by humanity despite their potential to help and a sub plot where Hell Boy and Liz are having relationship problems. Still, though, we don't really care all that much about it and I think it might hurt the movie--at least in terms of having a lasting effect on the audience. A day or two later, you've pretty much forgotten the movie (compared with something deeper, like The Dark Knight, which stays with you for a while). A good popcorn flick, though. Recommended. (July 26/08).
The Dark Knight. I'm pleased to say the highly anticipated sequel to Batman Begins does not disappoint. The story picks up about a year after the events of the first movie and follows the efforts of Batman, Jim Gordon and District Attorney Harvey Dent to clean up the corrupt streets of Gotham City. Complicating things is the arrival of a new villian, the Joker, who teams up with the remaining mafia in an attempt to destroy Batman. This new take on the Joker (played by the late Heath Ledger) is a reinvention of the character. He's still a psychopath and still funny but this Joker is unpredictable, likes to play with knives and dedicated to causing chaos. His character is one of the high points of this film and has to be seen to be believed. As one familiar with the Bat mythos knows, Harvey Dent will become the villain, Two Face. Unlike that villain's previous outing in Batman Forever, this version of Two Face is scary looking and more true to the character--he's mad and dangerous, leaving others fates to the simple toss of a coin. What makes him truly impressive is that we see him as he was before: noble and courageous, the public face of a new, just Gotham City--but the Joker's efforts will push him too far and transform him into a irredeemable monster. All of the first movie's cast is back (with the exception of Katie Holmes who was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal). The movie is long, at two and a half hours and the plot is complicated. However despite juggling a lot of things all at once, the film manages to keep it's focus and wrap it all up nicely by the end. This film is darker then the first one but it suits the story (although I don't mind the odd happy ending either). Like the first one, it also has some sub-text peppered throughout it (which is awesome in a superhero movie). All in all, this movie joins Batman Begins as a film that truly raises the bar for what a superhero movie should be. It's not just another by the numbers superhero movie but rather rises above that moniker to be a truly good movie in its own right (Marvel take notes!) Highly Recommended! (July 21/08).
Hancock. The story of a drunken mess of a superhero and his journey to try and redeem himself. An interesting and well done story with good acting and special effects. The story also had it's little humorous moments which helped endear the character to the audience... the story held some surprises later on but they worked pretty well in context with the rest of it. A very good movie. Recommended. (July 3/08).
You Don't Mess With The Zohan. This movie opens with a depiction of modern living in Israel. Apparently, all they do there is stay on the beach and par-tee it up with beautiful women. Finally, a realistic look at life there! ;-) Adam Sandler is an Israeli super counter terrorist agent that is an unstoppable force against his enemies. Women swoon for him, men adore his manliness... yet all is not well for Zohan. He dreams of simpler things--like becoming a hair dresser and making the hair a "silky smooth". He goes to America finally and tries to pursue his dreams... only to crash headlong into the problems he thought he'd left behind. Not Sandler's worst movie but not his best either. This movie really does have it's funny moments and it's obnoxious ones too, but we're left with more funny ones. Sandler and his co-stars all are funny and the story is good fun... if I have a criticism though, it's that the movie is too long. I felt like they could've cut 10-15 minutes out of this film. Many jokes are made and then made again later, as if to emphasize the fact that it's funny--and that's unneeded. The result is a movie that's too long and toward the end, one wants it to hurry up and end already. Some simple editing would fix that... All in all, a decent movie. Mildly recommended. June 28/08).
Wall-E. The latest PIXAR movie follows the adventures of a old clean-up robot on a ruined Earth. All of his brethren have long since seized up but he continues his solitary mission of compacting trash as usual (and collecting the odd trinket of interest). His only companion is a solitary cockroach... that is, until one day when a spaceship arrives and dispenses a futuristic "Mac" style robot, named Eva. She is there to find a vegetation sample and return with it to the Axiom--a space craft some distance away with humanity's survivors on it. Before she does though, she begins to bond with the lonely robot... eventually, the two go back to the Axiom--Eva, because her mission is finished and Wall-E to try and save his new friend. This latest movie deviates a little from the PIXAR formula, but stays close enough to ensure that people will still like it. The visuals are impressive in many places, with some being photo-realistic. The story forgets the annoying pop culture references for once (yay!) and is generally sweet in tone. Generally, I liked it although I wouldn't say it really spoke to me on any level. The environmentalism theme was mostly incidental to the story and the characters personalities were a little harder to latch on to because of the story's presentation. Still, fun and worth checking out. Recommended. (June 27/08).
The Incredible Hulk. A definite improvement on Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk movie, which went off in some weird directions and maybe tried a little too hard to be relevant. This latest outing sees Edward Norton as Bruce Banner in a new story that reboots the franchise (I suspect the script started out as a sequel but somewhere along the line was rewritten to ignore the first movie). He starts out in Brazil, where he tries to use the solitude to discover a cure to his condition. It isn't long, though, before General Ross and his men find out his location and go to try and recover him. The men provoke him, turning him into the Hulk, who smashes them all resoundly and forces them to retreat before he himself escapes into the wilderness. Eventually, Bruce returns to the United States and continues to try to locate a cure to his Hulk problem. Meanwhile, one of Ross' men volunteers to undergo a process to give him more physical strength and dexterity in order to better fight the Hulk....but will it be enough to suite him? Or will he demand more and more power along the way to his inevitable clash with his enemy? The movie is well acted and makes sense, the special effects are pretty good too. While 2003's Hulk was very in-depth and talky, this movie is it's anti-thesis. It's fast and action packed, only slowing down enough to more or less explain what's going on. I heard a lot of it was cut--more exposition that Norton had written into the script but Marvel decided might bore the audience. Honestly, I think a little more character and reflection might've helped elevate this movie. It's not bad as it is, but we don't really care all that much about the characters and a happy ending is inevitable. A little more about Betty and her father, General Ross and their motivations could've helped a lot (I think we likely got enough to do for Bruce Banner). Maybe they'll do a Director/Producer's Cut at some point? Otherwise, I liked the Bill Bixby cameo (the old 70s TV Bruce Banner) in Brazil (old TV show with him--he's dead now so he couldn't appear in-person) and also how they used Lou Ferrigno (old 70s TV Hulk) as both a security guard (like in 2003's Hulk) and also as the voice of the Hulk monster in this movie. The final scene with Tony Stark showing up to suggest the upcoming Avengers movie seemed like a pointless tack-on to me (the movie would've been fine without it). All in all, a decent movie. Not fantastic (Batman Begins) but not terrible (Elektra) either. Recommended. (June 21/08).
Kung Fu Panda. The latest animated work from the Dreamworks Studio (creators of such films as Shrek and Ice Age). This film follows the story of Po, a young panda that works in his father's noodle house, serving food while dreaming of kung fu adventures with his heroes, the Furious Five (coincidentally, animals that represent the styles of kung fu). Events conspire that see him get a chance to finally follow his dreams. Often modern cartoons follows a standard formula, which includes the appropriate pop culture references. I'm pleased to say this movie has none (thankfully). The plot also avoids a few other things--like the token romance sub-plot and overdoing the villain's scheming (he's pretty straight forward in his motivation). The movie also has a message about accepting who you are and just believing in yourself, which I feel worked very well. The animation is also very good (although it's gotten to the point where most shows are now, anyway). Highly Recommended. (June 19/08).
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The fourth Indy adventure and the first new one in nineteen years... how does it rate? Can Harrison Ford still cut it as our favorite archaeologist? Hey, is the sky blue? This latest adventure skips us ahead to the fifties, some twenty years after the last movie. Indy has to tussle with Commies now and their attempt to retrieve some kind of object from Area 51 (yes, the same warehouse with the Covenant of the Ark). The results see him suspended from his University and questioning his future. Who is he without his work? What will he do now? Fortunately, Shia LaBeouf's Mutt shows up and gives him an answer to these pressing questions. We eventually learn Mutt is Indy's son ("Indiana" was Henry's beloved dog. And now his son goes by "Mutt". Get it?) We also meet his mother--a woman from Indy's past (Marion Ravenwood from Raiders). All in all, this is a well written movie with lots of humor, action and excitement. It's a popcorn movie like only Steven Spielberg can make (that is, a very good one that is satisfying). It's also the first Indy movie to feature cgi in it (mostly in small doses that compliment the story--not crazy extreme like George Lucas prefers). Shia LaBeouf is a welcome addition to the cast as is Kate Blanchett (I could watch her all day--even with that silly wig on). How does it compare to the first three? Hard to say... my memories of those movies see Last Crusade as the best (and first one I saw, incidentally). I recall Raiders being good and Temple of Doom being awful (but I've only seen it once, really, so I don't know that it's fair for me to say). I would say Crystal Skull ranks with the better two--I think Last Crusade is still slightly better (if nothing else, because it has that great scene with Hitler in it) but this movie is by no means any sort of disappointment. Really, it's best not to compare them--just sit back and enjoy the ride. Highly Recommended. (May 24/08).
The Forbidden Kingdom. Take one part cool martial arts movie, combine with one part cheese and you end up with The Forbidden Kingdom. It follows a young American man, Jason, who is a big kung fu fan. He is transported to the past (or a magical fantasy world. I'm not sure) where he must return the staff he has to the legendary Monkey King. He is joined by a drunken warrior and a young woman bent on revenge. Together, they journey to confront the Jade Emperor and free the Monkey King. The story is cobbled together from Chinese mythology with some fantasy fiction elements thrown in. The action scenes are great and the special effects are mostly good (there's a few matte shots that don't look quite 100% real. Close but not perfect). The story is pretty good overall, if nothing astoundingly original. The acting is also fairly decent... Chan gets most of the comedy while Li is more stoic (their respective strong suits). The movie does have some cheesy elements--the whole white guy-karate kid thing going on as well as the resolution of the sub-plot with Golden Sparrow (who didn't see that one coming?) Still, a decent movie all in all and a good popcorn flick. Recommended. (May 9/08).
Iron Man. The latest in a long line of superhero movies (and the first from Marvel Studios proper) does not disappoint. Robert Downey Jr. does an excellent job of being Tony Stark (in fact, I can't really think of another actor who could pull it off successfully). The story is a bit truncated from the original comics--the entire arc with Obadiah Stane was, literally, the best Iron Man story I've ever read (but it would've been impossible to tell in two hours). Still, what we get is a good story. We get Tony's creation of the Iron Man persona, a bit of his personal life and good set up for a conflict within the movie's framework. It's not the greatest super hero movie ever (compared to Spiderman or Batman Begins--which are the cream of the crop, imo. Still, it's not crap like Elektra or the 2003 Hulk movie either...) but somewhere in the upper middle. In summary, this movie is well acted, well written and has excellent special effects. Recommended. (May 4/08).
Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Another movie from the producers of films like Knocked Up and The 40 Year Old Virgin. This film follows the adventures of a guy named Peter after his famous actress girlfriend, Sarah Marshall, dumps him for a rock star. He tries dating other women but nothing works so he heads to Hawaii to get away from it all and forget about her. Little does he know she's also gone to the same hotel with her new boyfriend... and the hijinks ensue! Despite sounding like the set up for a bad sitcom, this movie actually pulls off a funny and charming story without resorting to a cliche-fest. We sympathize with Peter's plight and a lot of what happens to him flows naturally from his encounters with the other wacky characters around him. Will Peter find true love again? Will Sarah come back to him or are they truly through? It's well acted, funny and an entertaining romp. If you like comedies, I recommend checking this movie out. Recommended. (April 27/08.)
