Reviews

Man, this movie completely sucked balls. I can't think of a worse movie I've ever seen. Easily the most predictable movie ever. Will Smith gets badly shot 10 minutes into the movie...is he gonna make it through?!?! Aw, man, no way...he made it! You don't say! Martin Lawrence..."No, no no, I'm not helping you any more Mike Lowery...I made a promise to God...No, no, no...I'm retired" - I looked over at my buddy at one point and I said "Uh...I think he's gonna help". It was really that pathetically predictable.

And, wow, Martin Lawrence...at one point on set, the crew thought they were going to have call the paramedics because Lawrence was having trouble inhaling -- a pizza! He's so fat now, he jumped in the air for an action scene and got stuck! I'm serious...on the running/action scenes, you won't see Lawrence for more than 5 seconds straight, most likely due to being out of breath. I think he took the Cypress Hill lyric "Fat boy on diet, don't try it" to extremes! At one point when Lawrence was walking away on a wooden floor, It sounded like an orchestra of squeaky nails and groaning floorboards playing him out of the room!

Back to the "plot"...Lawrence whines throughout the movie about a promise he made to God. It seemed unlikely than a rather non-religious, non-churchgoer like Lawrence would be risking losing his friendship (and his friend's life because he was in danger) based on some mumbling he did while that buddy was in the hospital. Of course, Lawrence broke his promise to God at the end anyway because he did the Mr. Miyagi ("No fighting, no fighting, no fighting...ok, go ahead and fight") and predictably went back into action again. So dumb.

Rewind to the start of the "movie", Smith and Lawrence are driving like lunatics, being chased by cops, driving backwards through red lights and heavy traffic...they're trying to make you think the boys are in a dangerous situation...just to find out that Smith was driving Lawrence to the hospital to see his newly born Grandson. What?! They were driving full speed on a public beach for crying out loud! Risked many lives, including the lives of cops and women and children, just to hold a frickin' baby?! If it was so important, why wasn't Lawrence at the hospital when the mother was first admitted?!

Then, a few minutes later, someone who turns out to be Mike Lowery's, well, um, no-black whatsoever Mexican son (yes) is doing some sort of criminal deal and he gets guns pulled out on him. Guy standing right in front of him with a gun, another guy standing off to the side. You'd think these guys with the guns would be pretty jumpy/trigger-happy at this point. But what happens? Well, he pulls out a knife from his belt and with hypersonic speed, stabs the guy in front of him with the gun and then stabs the guy to the side who had a gun on him. Who in the hell is so slow with a trigger that they're not going to be able to fire on someone who's pulling out a knife and taking time stabbing your friend?! Even the guy in front of him...really bro, you can't get off a shot before someone reaches to their belt and swings at you with a knife?! If not...Was Will Smith's son a superhero or something?! How could he move in fast-forward speed like that?!

My favorite part is when the police team is gathered and is strategizing and they need the employee work schedule of 3 different bars. The computer guy is asked to break into their networks. He says "Boy, Joey's bar really needs to upgrade their network", he clicks about 3 keys on the keyboard, and voila...not only Joey's schedule comes up, but all 3 bars! How did he hack into 3 different networks at once?! He did he hack into ANY business network with just a few keystrokes?! How did he bring up the 3 work schedules from 3 different companies on 3 different monitors in a matter of seconds and with just a few keystrokes?! And if Joey's network was so bad...what does it say about the other 2 business networks...he got into those quicker than Joey's!!

The movie is filled with one-liners that don't land, crying and religion from Lawrence, and numerous "I'm gonna kill you after I say this one thing..." then that person gets shot from behind type of thing. If Smith's and Lawrence's enemies had simply cut the chit-chat, the pair would have been dead at many points.

At the very very end...Smith decides his no-black-in-him-whatsoever-son deserves a 2nd chance (after killing a half dozen FBI agents, one being one his best friends, and other cops with a sniper rifle) and the pair hug and make up. Ugh, I wanted to barf so bad. Then we find out the black Smith was, get this, on an undercover team infiltrating a Mexican gang...what?! They couldn't tell he wasn't Mexican?! How in the world did he pull that off???

This movie stunk like rotten cabbage. Cliches galore. "Hip" cops even though they're over 50 years old a piece. Predictable. Bad acting. It's little wonder they brought this out in January instead of July. Like I said...Might be the worst movie I've ever seen.

JD

Making a sequel to the unique and very original Trainspotting was never going to be an easy task. Danny Boyle and the team did a great job with it for the most part though, terrible name (T2) aside of course. It "felt" like Trainspotting and they had many of the old characters back. How they inserted quick shots/scenes from the original was poignant and well done. Overall, I'm glad they made the movie and it will be a welcome addition to my Blu-Ray collection. However, I did have some issues with the final product...

Before I begin, I'd like to remind you I gave this a 8 out of 10...it is also a unique movie like the original and I certainly enjoyed watching it. Though I must say, I do wish the movie had a different story-line and had left out a few implausible scenes/situations. Maybe this stuff is in the book Porno and they wanted to follow that, I'm not sure. But I can't help but be disappointed by the direction to movie took in a lot of ways, despite giving it a 8. (Spoilers ahead). For instance, they had Begbie escape from prison at the beginning...after losing out on his parole. Why not just parole him and send him on his way into the public? Instead, they go through a ridiculous scenario in which Begbie escapes a crowded hospital by doing the old and tired "knocking someone out in the hallway and switching clothes with him off-screen" routine...something that I'm sure has never actually worked in human history beyond movies and TV. On top of all this, the cops never even check the house where his wife and kid live, as Begbie easily shacks up there. Also, the cop who was watching him while in his hospital bed must take the longest #2's his side of the Pacific Ocean! Begbie talks the cop into leaving him un-handcuffed while the cop goes to take a duke...then apparently before the hospital is put into lock-down by cop who wouldn't have been gone longer than 15 minutes, Begbie un-tethers himself to all the wires he's hooked up to, he roams the halls looking for a spot that is empty so he can knock someone out, knocks that person out, removes and changes clothes with his limp body (would be a very time-consuming task, especially while one person is limp and the other is injured), then casually walks out...all before the cop is done with an on-duty #2?! Come on. Then later Begbie (in an implausible way) meets Renton - who's a runner in his off-time now - and a foot-chase begins. The much older-looking Begbie, who's just coming off a 20-year stint in the clink while the younger Renton has been training this whole time, somehow keeps up with Renton during the long chase. He then stabs Renton in the arm. This arm gets no attention the rest of the way, despite what looked to be a pretty serious injury...he's fine the next scene. All of this should have been re-written. Which leads me to Spud. Spud, if you haven't seen the movie, is no longer the happy-go-lucky Spud...he's suicidal and becomes, get this, an author! Whatttt?! Again, a re-write here would have been preferred. And, also, now Sick Boy has a coke problem but doesn't do heroin anymore. Trainspotting was kind of about, you know, heroin! 3 of the 4 barely even mention it anymore...they do more coke and drinking than anything...and by the end, none of the 4 are hooked in any sort of way. Spud seemed to drop his 25+ year habit after a long jog and a nice talk. Why did the filmmakers decide on the unnecessary and unlikely change of heart towards the characters and heroin? This is Trainspotting!

What should have been done instead? I think Renton should have came back because he ran into a illegal money-making situation like his mates did with Mikey Forrester 20 years earlier. Maybe a plan to rob a warehouse where he somehow found out heroin was being stored there. He would decide to come back to town and meet up with the three old mates and relieve his guilt, offering them a deal where they make up the 4000 pounds plus a heck of a lot more in exchange for their forgiveness. This would have been a great start to a fun sort of story (fun like Trainspotting was fun to watch). And you could have ended it a million different exciting ways. Instead there is a lot of depression and regret and guilt by the characters and it weighed down the fun factor in my opinion.

Overall, I was just so glad to see the old characters back. And despite the flaws, it's an interesting movie to watch, an alternate sort of take to Trainspotting. It's a really good movie that really could have been a great one with a little better script.

JD

The first "Kick Ass" was a decent effort. Not particularly my favorite movie of all-time, but its certainly watchable. I hadn't anticipated watching KA2, especially at the theater, but I found myself purchasing an opening-night ticket out of sheer boredom.

Now, if you're a teenager, I'm about to sound like a grumpy old man. And maybe I am. But seeing uniformed police officers get savagely ambushed and murdered shouldn't be anybodies cup of tea. I thought how the killing of the officers was done in particular (up-close scenes of uniformed cops being shredded by bullets before having any chance to respond) was terribly in bad taste. I'd have to think that is #2 on my complaint list though. My #1 complaint, or question really, is: at what point does parading around a 14-year-old girl constantly with "screw me" looks on her face become child porn?! Seriously. 14 years old...and in this movie she's dating, kissing, dressing up as a slut, consistent "adult-eyes" close-ups, and - of course - saying the "F" word constantly. Didn't anybody call the real police during filming?! It was off-putting to say the least.

Those cringe-worthy scenes aside, the movie still had gaping holes in it. After numerous police are killed, news stations are somehow still fixated on the townsfolk dressing up in costumes. No federal response whatsoever. Then, after Kick Ass'es dad gets killed (who the news is reporting as the actual Kick Ass), they show his funeral surrounded by about a half-dozen cops. Really? Evil super-villains just killed dozens of cops...then they kill what people think is Kick Ass (somehow got to him and got out even while he was sitting in a jail cell)...and the police response at the funeral was a few random cops?!?! In real-life, the FBI would have taken over the town and that funeral would have been swarming with, heck, a near military presence. Even later in the movie, Hit Girl incredulously asks her father "Who's gonna stop the bad guys if not me...you? The townsfolk playing dress-up? WHO?!" Um...how about the joint task force of the local police, FBI and CIA?! She kinda skipped over them as possibilities somehow! In the end, things like that in this movie made little sense.

If you think I've covered the mess entirely, you would be incorrect. Even a 17-year-old Kick Ass is, get this, screwing one of the other superheroes in bathroom stalls quite frequently! And I don't mean somebody teasing them about it...they actually show the bathroom stall shaking back and forth while all the moaning is going on! They might not be showing it, but you know...right behind that bathroom door, he's doing things to her you wouldn't do to a farm animal!

The worst scenes of the movie, other than all the cop-killing, has to be an near-unwatchable couple minutes where they mix in vomiting with fart/diarrhea jokes. This might have been the first ever R-rated movie exclusively for kids.

All-in-all, this movie lacked class. It attempted to appeal to the lowest-common denominator. They even sold it as Jim Carrey having a decent-sized role...he didn't. (Though Carrey was probably the only bright spot I could find in this movie...he was good as usual). If you're a thinking adult, pass on it. If you're a raunchy kid or tween, this will likely be right up your alley.

(Love IMDb!)

JD

First off…how in the hell are they ever going to resuscitate Josh Peck's career after THAT?! I seen better acting out of unpaid extra's in Matthew Broderick's "Godzilla"! Peck's performance in Red Dawn made me feel bad...not for him, but his mother! Perhaps the worst performance in modern movie history.

But Josh Peck looks like Gregory Peck compared to the pitiful Connor Cruise. Connor appeared genuinely scared...not of the invading North Koreans, but the camera! If he gets any meaningful work anytime soon, I'll kiss your ass.

I wouldn't say the beginning of the movie was promising by any means, but the middle and end made the start look like "Gone With the Wind" by comparison. It started out with the actual game of high school football, rather than just a mention of the score like in the 1984 version (in both versions, both teams lost BTW). But the implausibility of the actions in the football game made you wish they had simply just mentioned the score too. Peck couldn't stop you from noticing his bad acting even with a helmet and shoulder pads on. And that was the "good" part of the movie! It got Troll-2-like bad after that.

In the rugged, gritty 1984 version, you could feel the hunger of the kids, their fatigue, their anger, their uncleanliness. They ate everything from wild animals to cereal without milk. The women looked war-torn, disheveled. In this dud, the women apparently never ran out of lipstick or shampoo and the kids, get this, robbed a Subway for food! And because obvious product placement like robbing a Subway isn't quite enough, they called the guy behind the counter a "Sandwich Specialist" during the robbery. What was that, an extra $10,000 or so for that line to be throw in there?! Then, they eat like a typical bunch of teenagers at a party, simply throwing out leftovers. Nobody truly hungry would behave in that manner, kids or not. A single piece of rice is like gold to a hungry person. Then, when recounting the things they miss, they all mention something dumb, but one of the kids mentions Call of Duty. Really? Call of Duty, a video game about war, is on your mind when you're in an actual war? Come on. Atrocious writing. The writer just had to drop a video game reference in there, to be cool you know.

One last thing that drew my ire…The scene in the original '84 classic when they shot the deer was heartfelt and memorable. In this version, I won't tell you what happened, but they could have just brought out a DVD of the '84 version and took a crap on it instead, would have worked about the same.

This movie isn't worth the buffalo sh1t on a nickel! Avoid it, trust me.

JD

Oliver Stone...you sir, have lost your touch. After making such brilliant films as JFK, Platoon and Natural Born Killers, you have lowered yourself to the likes of Wall Street 2 and this heaping pile of dog manure, Savages.

The star of the movie, Blake Lively, essentially plays a spoiled whore. Hard to root for that type of person. She is paired up with 2 rich entrepreneurs. Now, I know there are different relationships on this planet, but I find it a bit hard to believe that 2 young, attractive, in-shape rich guys would end up sharing a girlfriend like that...it just didn't feel possible. Atrocious writing. Then, in a line that rivals "Oh my Godddd" from Troll 2 and "He's the Lawrence of my labia" from Sex and the City 2, Lively spouts, when speaking of screwing the war veteran, "I have orgasms. He has wargasms." Grrrrr! How f-ing stupid is that f-ing line?!?! It pisses me off to be honest with you. Wargasms? Come on. Just bad writing.

The voice-over from Lively as well...terrible. It truly sounded like an audition tape from one of those online broadcasting colleges. And Emile Hirsch...what was he doing in this movie? His part should have been played by a talented extra. He was completely wasted, a "nothing" role. Hirsch personally must have had a few difficult days driving into work during filming, wondering where his career was heading.

And how in the world, Stone, are you going to start a movie off with the voice-over of Lively saying something to the effect of "just because I'm talking at the start doesn't mean I'm alive at the end"...just for her to end up being friggin alive at the end?! WTF?! But I could excuse all these things...all of them...if the movie wasn't such a BORE! Stone should be having fun with this movie, ala Natural Born Killers, instead he made a cheap, lazy, boring movie with a terrible ending that ended up costing me $5 and two hours of my life. Oliver Stone, you sir, can supple upon my ball sack!

JD

I'm not saying you must have a lower-than-normal IQ to enjoy this movie...but IF you do have a lower-than-normal IQ, you probably enjoy this movie.

The plot...whew...It has more holes in it than a horse-trader's mule! Where do they come up with this stuff?! First, Craig's character escapes 3 people who have rifles pointed at him from a fairly safe distance...then he escapes the townsfolk who have, get this, a $1 Million Dollar bounty on his head (a RIDICULOUS dollar amount for the late 1800's), then he escapes a she-woman-alien who's following him, then he escapes some aliens who chase him, then he escapes what seems to be 500 Indians (the actors were Mexicans in Indian gear), then he escapes some aliens again...then I turned the movie off! Who knows what he else he escapes from?! Craig's escape-ability would make Houdini blush!

I don't like the word "retarded", but come on, what other word can possibly be used?!...I'm not Stephen King ya know! Get this...Craig once jumps from a running horse onto the wing of an flying alien spaceship!!! I can approach this from so many angles, its difficult to choose where to begin! I mean, really, how fast was the damn horse running in the first place not to be completely blown-away by a spaceship that conquered interstellar space travel?!?! Then, and you barely even need to be paying attention to notice, but...Craig is hanging off the wing of this spaceship, the one he just jumped onto from a horse, traveling at a tremendous rate of speed, which he then manages to blow up, and all the while Craig's frigging hat stays on!!! That hat would have had to of been welded onto his head for it to stay on there! Then he lands in a river and the hat is finally off his head...I guess that G4-like wind wasn't enough to knock the hat off, nor was the massive explosion he was just involved in, but hitting the water sure did the trick! Its just stupid. On a side note, the horse-to-spaceship-jump supplants the previously #1-ranked "Idiotic and Unrealistic Jump In A Movie", the bus-jump-without-a-ramp scene from Speed, down to #2!

Also, beers were apparently .50 cents -- in 1883!! I get 50-cent beers during happy hour here in 2012! 50 cents in 1883 would buy you more than a beer…this movie makes no sense. Watch for Craig too, while at the bar, to hammer a few shots, then pours a shot, gets interrupted before he drinks it, then pours himself another shot in the shot glass that should have already been full! My buddy asked "How could they make such an obvious mistake?"…I responded with "You mean that scene or the entire movie?!"

At the time of this writing, I've watched over 1800 movies...and this is one of the worst! It stinks.

JD

Repeat: There's a turd in the punch bowl!

This movie is a microcosm of everything wrong with Hollywood...and, unfortunately, humans in general.

You see, in the most basic terms possible...people are, for the most part, stupid. There are far more of these stupid people on Earth than intelligent ones. So, if you want to sell something to these people, like a movie, you need to dial-down the intelligence level of the product. (In this way, Iron Man 2 succeeds!) For instance, let's say you want to sell a product to a group of Sarah-Palin-backing Tea Baggers. You already know, without ever meeting any of them, that this a group of people who supports a brainless political creation, one who doesn't even belong to the Tea Bagger party! (High intelligence there, eh?!) So if you were to invent a t-shirt with a saying on it, with the intention of selling it to a Tea Bagger...would you create an articulate, detailed argument on the t-shirt...or would you create something that appeals to the lowest common denominator? Would your t-shirt say something smart and factual like "90% of Tea Baggers got a tax cut under Obama!". Or would you just put Obama on the shirt with a Hitler mustache?! Which one is going to sell better? Same thing here with "Iron Man 2". A producer COULD spend $200 Million on something highly intelligent and with some redeeming value -- and sell less tickets -- or that same producer could spend the $200 Million on a bunch of special effects, A-list stars and explosions -- and sell more tickets. So, intelligent people (I'm assuming if you have read this much, you're probably more intelligent than most), we get stuck with these sorry excuses for movies all the time! And I, for one, am sick of it!

Where does Iron Man 2 go wrong? Where to begin?! First off, Mickey Rourke looks like a feminine version of "Professor Chaos"! Where did they come up with that suit design, the Johnny Weir collection?! And Gwyneth Paltrow? How does she keep getting work?! She's the "Mark Harmon" of actresses! In one scene, she seductively kisses the Iron Man mask -- with no human in it! (Imagine her horror when she read the script for the first time and came across that scene!) I almost felt bad for her...then I reminded myself that she is Gwyneth Paltrow! Next in line for this money-grab excuse of a movie is the usually brilliant Robert Downey Jr. If his performance were any more wooden, his nose would grow when he lied!!

In my opinion, there has only been one Comic Book movie worthy of a "10" rating and that was "Batman Begins". Iron Man 2 falls woefully short of that standard. A big step back from Iron Man 1 even. Don't let the fancy CGI and big explosions fool you...this is a clunker!

Thank you for reading!

JD

Simply put, "The Crazies" stunk.

I was satisfied after a strong opening 20 minutes, but then it sunk like the Titanic (the boat, not the movie, lol)! It slowly transformed from thoughtful and intriguing (like an old "Twilight Zone" episode) to resorting to cheap scares (loud BOOM out of nowhere that would awaken someone out of a coma) and "saved at the last second" scenes. One "saved at the last second" scene could have been predicted by a blind Stevie Wonder! Sheriff and Deputy arrive at a house. Sheriff goes one way, the Deputy another. Sheriff gets "cheap-scared" after searching an empty room, a loud boom noise from the movie's Score, then turns around to a pair of sneaky (and previously QUIET) zombies! After a struggle, a few bullets shot, and the nozzle of a gun pointed right at the Sheriff...quick shot of the gun, quick shot of the scared Sheriff, quick shot of the gun, another shot of the Sheriff who's resigned to death...then guess what? BOOM! The trusty Deputy is there to save the day, pulling the trigger at the very last moment! Wow, I couldn't have seen that one coming! (And to top it off, he somehow had the angle -- and the viewpoint to see what the heck was going on upstairs -- to shoot the zombie in the heart from the front lawn!) Lots of corny lines (when pointing a gun at the Sheriff, the Deputy says "ONE...TWO...THREE...that's how many times I saved your life!") and unbelievable situations continue.

Small points also make little sense. One of the zombies, at the beginning stages of becoming a zombie, actually gets taken to the doctor. After reacting extremely strangely to the doctor, so strange that the doctor should consider hospitalization or getting mental experts involved, she basically says to the family "Have him take two of these and call me in the morning"! Guy goes home and proceeds to kill his family. Doctor, after a complete swing and a miss on the diagnosis, takes no responsibility for the deaths whatsoever. Movie moves on. Blah.

The movie isn't entirely without merit though. I thought it was actually well-made from a technical standpoint. The actors, though inexperienced, showed a passion for acting. After the 2005 debacle that was "Sahara", one of the least memorable movies in modern history, Director Brent Eisner finally got a job 5 years later...and I he did well in his return. He should do fine being at the helm for "Flash Gordon" in 2012.

The Crazies...great start then descends into mediocrity at best. See it at your own peril!

JD (LittleShopOfPosters.com >> Coming soon!)

The post-apocalyptic genre...my favorite genre by far! I believe the reason why it appeals so much to me (and others like me) is that it creates a non-industrialized world where every day brings a challenge in a struggle to survive. In the current world of bills, taxes, 40-hour work-weeks...and climbing that damn rope in gym class as a kid...it's appealing, almost relaxing in a sense, to get thrust into a world where simple survival is key...and losing your social security card wouldn't bother you in the least. Most people feel the world would be "too hard" without electricity, running water, health & public services and whatnot. But for someone where this genre appeals, like myself, the "hard" is exactly what is most appealing. To me, and others like me, scavenging, hunting, gathering and relying on survival skills trumps a life of perpetually going to school and work and eating Wendy's every stinking day! So when "The Book of Eli" was released in all of it's post-apocalyptic glory, you know I was there opening weekend! I knew going in that it was going to be about the Bible -- being a very non-religious person, that was highly unappealing -- but a post-apocalyptic movie is not to be missed, so I went.

There was a lot to like about the movie. For the most part, it had the feel of a futuristic, barren landscape. It definitely serves its purpose for those who love post-apocalyptic themes. And some really creative touches were added...a "A Boy and His Dog" poster in the background, a dilapidated (but working) Ipod, and an old couple resorting to listening to a hand-crank record player. And there was a standout performance was from the fantastic Gary Oldman, playing Carnegie.

On the flip side, I thought the dress could have been a bit more creative. Everybody - and I mean everybody - wore dark colored trench-coat style clothing. You would think somebody would scavenge a house and find, then wear, an old white Adidas sweatshirt every now and again! But, no, everybody was dressed as if they shopped at the same Army fatigues store. And it was difficult to tell at times if it was hot or cold. It appeared as if everybody was wearing heavy multi-layered clothing, there was a snow scene at the beginning, and fires to keep people warm were burning at many times. Yet, there was no vapor coming from anybody's breath, the wide shots of the highway seemed as if it was the middle of summer, and Mila Kunis had no problem wearing a thin one-piece sexy outfit (bare feet and all) in Eli's unheated hotel room.

The biggest downer in the movie was the inconsistencies with Eli's character (aptly played by Denzel Washington). At one point, it appeared as if Eli was either Jesus or protected by God. He was fired at by one of Carnegie's henchmen at close range and the bullets seemed to turn to dust when it hit him. Then later, he gets successfully shot in the stomach...HUH?! (Eli then proceeds to patch himself up with some duct tape!) There are some points where Eli is clearly using his eyes...then you find out he's blind in the end! Smaller bad points include: A scene where it shows a malnourished cat...yet a nearby rat appeared plump and healthy. Water was "the good stuff" in Carnegie's city (supposedly because water was so impossible to come by)...yet Carnegie owned a spring that sprouted fresh drinking water. You would think a working spring would help alleviate the water problem a bit! At least to the point where whiskey would still be considered "the good stuff". Some of it was just a bit absurd if you think deeply about it.

One last thing I would like to touch on was Mila Kunis. I just couldn't buy her as Solara. The IMDb trivia states Kristen Stewart was originally offered Mila's role...they should have done whatever it took to land Stewart. She has the face and body of somebody "worn" and would have fit in nicely in a post-apocalyptic world. Mila Kunis, on the other hand, looked like a beautiful Hollywood star that just walked out of the costume designer's room and onto the set. I don't think you can just "dirty-up" somebody that stunningly beautiful...and it didn't work here.

But if you look past the inconsistencies in the story and with its characters, "A Book of Eli" is some good eye candy. Turn off your brain for a while and sink yourself into a world of no W-2 forms, no lobbyists and no Sarah Palin! Just imagine! :) If you want a "Book of Eli" type movie without all the bible-thumping and inconsistencies, I strongly recommend "The Road" starring Viggo Mortensen. That is my personal favorite post-apocalyptic movie. Thank you for reading! JD

I strolled into "The Road" on opening day in Detroit, Thanksgiving Day 2009. I had been waiting a full year to see the screen adaptation of my favorite book of all-time...The Road by Cormac McCarthy. And let me say...it did not disappoint one bit. "The Road" instantly turned into one of my all-time favorite movies as well.

One thing that post-apocalyptic movies tend to miss or leave untouched is the toll on the human mind and body. And that toll is on full display here. You feel the terrible hunger and pain, you feel the grime on everyone's skin and clothes, the depression, the never-ending cloudiness...and especially, you feel the loneliness. The memories of a time that once was and never will be again. Long days and endless nights of a bleakness that cannot be described. It is beyond frightening and heartbreaking to see the difficulty of trying to raise a child in this environment, much less keep yourself sane. And you are there every difficult step of the way. This is not a story about cool CGI and a post-apocalyptic Earth...it's a story about human behavior and human emotions.

The little things are not missed either...the production team sure did their homework. How would a 8-year-old boy who has never even seen a soda can before approach drinking from it? (Hesitantly was the answer here). How would attempt to filter and drink brown water filled with ash? Nothing grows or swims anymore...so would you resort to eating people? What would you do to a baby in this world...try to somehow raise it, or put it out of it's misery, along with filling your empty stomach, by killing and eating it? What would you do about your family? Risk them getting raped and eaten by savages...or suicide? Rivers flowed what looked like rusty anti-freeze. Rain had an ash tint to it. Trees were dead or dying, a few falling over here and there as the pair walked. It had the feel of what was intended...a complete environmental disaster without a shred of hope for the future.

Onto the cast. Viggo Mortensen is at the top of his game here. You can feel the emotion in his eyes and voice...he gives a truly memorable performance. And how about a big thumbs-up for young Kodi Smit-McPhee?! He was sensational as well. The Boy's first ever can of Coca-Cola (a product as essential to my life nearly as much as electricity) brought tears to my eyes in both the book and the movie. "It's bubbly!" The Boy exclaimed while his father gushed...great moment. And I'd be mistaken not to mention the work of Charlize Theron. Though her screen-time was very limited, she nailed her character in a tremendous performance. Great work by one of the very best actresses Hollywood has ever seen.

It's difficult for a movie to be both utterly bleak and good entertainment at the same time. Schindler's List is one of the few successes that come to mind. But "The Road" will also scrawl it's name on that short list...it's that special.

Along with "Inglourious Basterds", "The Road" is one of the best movies of 2009. For the intellectual mind, I cannot recommend a movie more. 10 out of 10.

Thank you for reading!

JD

Before you dismiss my post as "not getting it", let me say...I'm one of the biggest Richard Kelly and "The Twilight Zone" fans out there. Donnie Darko is one my all-time favorites and I even thought Southland Tales had it's moments. I'm a HUGE sci-fi fan. I was very excited to see "The Box", couldn't wait for it to come out.

Having said that..."The Box" is terrible. Behind "Drag Me To Hell", this was the worst movie I've seen in 2009. And it just simply WILL NOT end! Whenever you think you've reached the end, another change in the plot and you're off to more torture. I was actually groaning in the theater by the end of the film...I could hardly take it anymore.

The biggest problem with "The Box", no matter how you slice it or try to justify it, is that it simply makes little sense. Trust me, I "got it", I understood what was going on. But that doesn't mean it makes a lot of sense looking back on it. Take the basics for example. The main couple...Cameron Diaz and James Marsden, playing Norma and Arthur Lewis. Diaz loses her finances at her job, then bemoans that they are "living paycheck to paycheck". Well, sell that f-ing Porsche your husband is driving then!!! They live in a beautiful 2-story house in a nice subdivision. Marsden is working what seems to be a high-paid job at NASA and Diaz is an accomplished teacher. And, yes, Marsden drives an overly expensive car. But they are somehow living paycheck to paycheck?!? No need to press the button, just cut down your high-priced lifestyle a bit! The movie would have worked better if they showed the couple jobless and in serious debt. Instead, they are seemingly desperate for money...all the while living what I would call a luxurious lifestyle. Like I said...you can understand what's going on, yet it still makes little sense! That's a rare combination.

There was an awful scene in a library that I feel will go down as one of the worst segments in movie history (terribly acted too by the way). It was idiotic, illogical and out of place. I can't even begin to fully describe it actually, so I will move onto a subplot that involves nose-bleeds and body possession by aliens. (Yes, I'm being serious unfortunately). A kid is in Diaz's class with a wicked and smile on his face (a sinister smile that seemingly goes by completely unnoticed by everyone in authority at the school). He starts asking Diaz personal questions, literally embarrassing her in front of her class. No punishment is given to the kid whatsoever...he didn't even get asked to stay after class for a talk! Then Diaz is at a party...and the same kid is one of the hired help...ironed shirt, apron and all! I don't know many alien-possessed kids (who appear to be in Junior High) that also moonlight as a bus-boy at parties sponsored by teachers and school officials...but we found one here! (See what I mean...you can understand it completely, but it still makes no sense...a rare combo!) Like many things in the movie, the kid comes and goes...no real explanation about him, no ending to his character. Moving on... A lady then approaches Diaz in a grocery store, telling her that experiments are being ran secretly and her family is one of the test subjects. Well...hmmm...if aliens possess the powers where they can take over a body remotely...and the aliens don't want to help Diaz...then who was taking over this lady's body and giving Diaz advice?! Again...The lady was trying to help Diaz...and the aliens weren't interested in helping Diaz...so who the hell was controlling her body?! Never explained. Never talked about again. No nothing!! It goes on and on and on like this for, what seemed to me like, 2 weeks. It would not end! I wonder if this movie underwent a massive re-shoot at some point. It was poorly edited. Diaz's accent was there one minute, gone the next. Sub-plots began but never ended. The numerous push-backs of the release date obviously shows the problems the producers had with the finished product. It's truly a train-wreck.

Pass on this one...there's no redeeming value in it whatsoever. 3 out of 10, just because I like Diaz and sci-fi! But it probably deserves a 1 out of 10.

Thanks for reading!

JD

I just might be one of the biggest "end of population" movie fans on Earth. Any movie dealing with an apocalypse...comedy, horror, thriller, etc...automatically starts out with "6" on my IMDb voting list. You can only go up from there. I love the genre so much, I even gave "The Postman" a "9"! To get stuck at a "6" means it was just too flawed. The movie which Zombieland is most compared to, Shaun of the Dead, I gave a "9" vote.

First of all, I understand you need to suspend reality before you even step in the theater when you watch a zombie movie. But the stupidity of some of the actions was beyond retarded. I'll explain more later.

Zombieland has it's moments. It looked great on the big-screen...you could tell a lot of time went into the appearance. The deaths were done very well (especially a scene where a lady is thrown from her car and her face bounces and drags along the pavement, leaving a stream of blood). Woody Harrelson was great as usual, but the big kudos goes to supporting actress Emma Stone, who was excellent. This changes all the time, but after seeing 'Zombieland', I now want to "plow" Emma Stone more than any other girl on the planet! She's hotter than a Mexican chili pepper in the middle of July! If I had the option of marrying her before I ever met her, my answer would be a resounding "Yes!"...and I'm not the marrying type to say the least! :)

But, the bad clearly out-weighs the good. The lead actor, Jessie Eisenberg, was annoying at best and downright terrible at worst. He's no Marlon Brando, that's for sure. I can't recall one thing he said or did that I laughed at. For a comedy, to get zero laughs out of the main actor is a joke in itself. Then there was a completely shameless sub-plot revolving around Woody Harrelson's love for a Hostess product, Twinkies. (They might as well have just stopped the movie halfway through and went to a Hostess commercial). At one point, Woody and Jessie find a Hostess truck crashed into a ravine. Upon opening it, one would think there would be BOXES of Sno-balls or Twinkies there...but what's there? Individually wrapped Sno-balls fall out of the truck like it was packed to the roof with them! Um, I think even a 13-year-old kid knows food items aren't shipped individually like that. Product placement needs to be done a bit more subtle to be effective, otherwise it just blatantly looks like a money-grab, which it was. Uggghhh.

Perhaps the biggest laugh and the biggest disappointment came during the same segment. Bill Murray's cameo. I won't re-hash the laugh, but the scene began with something beyond implausible. Murray, as a joke I guess, decides to -- not once, but twice -- "surprise" the pairs of armed guests by pretending to be a zombie. Perhaps the #1 thing I wouldn't do during a zombie attack is surprise somebody who's carrying a machine gun! And even after he surprised the first pair of people and barely escaped with his life, all 3 of them had no problem with Murray pulling the same joke on the second pair of armed people. Not surprisingly, Murray gets shot. Even Stevie Wonder could tell that was coming. Perhaps the 2nd biggest thing I wouldn't do, knowing the zombies were attracted to lights and sounds, is turn on the power at an amusement park right at dusk! How unbelievably corny. Also, in some scenes, the zombies are "28 Days Later" style FAST and ferocious. In other scenes, you could be crippled and still get away with relative ease. Plus, how was electricity even available after 2 months of no people running the power plant?! There are many things like that which you just shake your head at. Gas is never mentioned. All cars have the keys in them already. Seat-belts somehow stop you from getting even a headache after a high-speed head-on collision, much less a scratch. Twinkies are somehow EXTREMELY hard to find. Grocery stores look pristine, like they are ready to go, all powered-up and everything. People con you out of your car and guns, twice, even though cars and guns are easy to come by. Be prepared to roll your eyes a couple dozen times.

Finally, I simply can't recommend this movie. I love the genre, but this one was just too goofy. The love scenes were fake and implausible. I would have to think Emma Stone would be more attracted to Harrelson over the complete and utter dork they made Einsberg out to be. And Harrelson attempting to cry and bring some drama to the movie was awful and out of place. It's a comedy about zombies, people -- not all movies need the love interest and drama! Big mistake to try to cram those two things in.

I wanted to like the movie, I love the genre...but I just can't recommend it.

Thanks for reading!

JD

Quentin Tarantino. What else can possibly be said about the most admired, fearless, and successful Director in Cinema over the past 20 years? During that time, the self-proclaimed "film nerd" has turned the movie world upside down.

The film's final scene sums up Tarantino's brilliance...not just with Inglourious Basterds, but with his entire career. In that final scene, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize Tarantino is speaking through Brad Pitt to the audience. It has Brad Pitt and BJ Novak looking downwards at the camera, Tarantino's signature camera angle, with Pitt saying "...I think this just might be my masterpiece", then the screen going to black with the words "Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino". Wow. What a great ending to a tremendous movie.

And Tarantino just might be right. Inglourious Basterds is a glorious, nerve-racking hit. QT's best ever though? In the words of John Travolta from Pulp Fiction..."That's a bold statement!". Pulp Fiction just might be the best film to ever hit the Silver Screen. Personally, I would consider Pulp Fiction as Tarantino's masterpiece, never to be topped. And Kill Bill, both volumes, have to easily be consider two of the most "fun" movies to watch in the history of film. Add the brilliance of both Reservoir Dogs and Death Proof and you have a resume that is difficult to top. But Tarantino nearly outdoes himself with IB. This is truly a monumental film. It combines all of these aspects into one movie: WW2, the early 40's, two separate plot-lines, American, French & German actors and languages (along with some Americans hilariously trying to speak Italian), and one huge Hollywood star. Imagine the scope of this project...I firmly believe only Tarantino could have thought of something so brilliant, written it, and made it. The performances he brought out from the female leads in particular, Diane Kruger and the stunningly beautiful Melanie Laurent, were beyond reproach. And how about a big, big thumbs up for Christoph Waltz's performance as Colonel Hans Landa. Once again, Tarantino shows off to the world his ability to cast the PERFECT actor for a character. His knowledge of actors, some whom most of us had never even heard of, is second to none. It is hard to overstate the brilliance of Tarantino and his movies.

As with most Tarantino movies, it takes a 2nd viewing to soak it all in. I strongly suggest taking the time to see it twice within a week. 10 out of 10.

JD

It was summer, mid-June, 2005. After seeing the previous and futile attempts at a good Batman movie fail miserably throughout the 90's, I was dragged to the theater by my brother to see Batman Begins. After LOVING Batman as a child, the previous installments of Batman movies made me disinterested in the franchise altogether. I had given up. Then...Wow! Batman Begins was an eye-opening masterpiece. It explained, for the first time, WHY somebody would want to dress up as a bat and fight crime. By the time Batman Begins came out, I had no clue WHY the Batman character would even exist. The development of Batman was about as good of "character development" as possible in a movie. It laid the ground-work for the masterpiece that became "Batman Begins", a movie I have now watched at least a dozen times.

Fast-forward to 2008. Needless to say, I was more excited for "The Dark Knight" to come out than any movie in my 33 years on Earth! I simply couldn't wait. I watched the two main trailers probably a hundred times each. And being a Heath Ledger fan (he was tremendous in "Brokeback") - my enthusiasm and eagerness was at an all-time high. I purchased my tickets two weeks in advance for the 12:05 AM showing on Thursday night/Friday morning. And then...

...though I liked the movie, it did not have the much-needed character development that existed in Batman Begins, therefor it was not quite as good in my opinion. I walked in expecting to see WHY the Joker became the Joker, just as WHY Batman became Batman in the previous installment. Think back to why Batman became Batman (in Batman Begins). Bruce Wayne explained to Alfred "People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne, as a man I'm flesh and blood. I can be ignored I can be destroyed, but as a symbol, as a symbol I can be incorruptible, I can be everlasting." He was also afraid of bats as a child (there was a reason and background story for that too) and this was a way he could create a symbol and overcome his childhood fears, both at the same time. It showed, not only HOW he created the bat-suit, but the WHY! There was a reason for every piece of the costume, even the cape. It showed why he had a Batcave, why he needed to keep his identity a secret, why Commissioner Gordon began to trust him, and why he and Rachel had such a long-lasting love.

Now the Joker - how did they develop that character? In short, they really didn't. They quickly mentioned at the start why he wore face paint (one of the crooks claimed it was to scare people, like war paint). That was it, no background story at all. Why did he come to Gotham? Another quick answer, no background. Why did he have the hate in his heart to do all these horrible things? No background there either. The Two-Face character should have been scrapped (waited for a part 3 perhaps) and more background to the WHY's of Joker's personality should have been written in. (And since the only truly memorable scenes had The Joker in them, they should have made more scenes with him!) The Joker's childhood, like that of Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins, would have been enthralling. Instead, we get a couple of contradicting verbal sentences from the Joker on why his face was the way it was...and nothing more. To have shown a young Joker, perhaps getting abused by his father, perhaps wrongfully arrested and harassed by police throughout his teen years, then perhaps an accident which caused scarring and burning to his face...that would have been the way to go. Instead, in The Dark Knight, the Joker simply is the Joker because he is.

I also need to mention a quick scene that was beyond ignorant. When the Joker is captured and put in jail, he virtually evacuates the police station by telling the Batman the addresses of where Two-Face and Rachel were located. The Joker is in a locked interrogation cell with one-sided glass. Would have been quite easy to just leave him in there! Could have just watched him through the glass or not watched him at all! Instead, they put an unarmed guard, a guy who has had 6 of his friends murdered by the Joker, in the cell with him! WTF?! The Joker quickly and easily antagonizes him into a fight and wins, creating his escape from jail and prolonging the movie at the same time...big surprise there.

Still, on it's own, The Dark Knight is a good piece of action and adventure. And the Joker was played wonderfully by Heath Ledger. The feel of an epic crime drama was done well. But, simply put, this movie would have been better if Two-Face had been introduced at the end of the "TDK", like The Joker was introduced at the end of "Begins". And that would have opened up more screen time for The Joker's early background. Then it would have been perfect. Instead...

A good movie -- but, oh boy, what could have been...

8/10 - thanks for reading!

JD

I'm getting really tired of movies that portray a Ghost as a modern-day "The Riddler" from the Batman TV series! Like The Riddler, the Ghost in "What Lies Beneath" has all the answers that you're looking for -- but you're only going to get pieces to the puzzle one incoherent piece at a time.

Let's all get on the same page here for a minute. We know, having watched the movie in full, that the ghost has these powers/abilities: 1) Can TYPE ON A COMPUTER KEYBOARD (or, at the very least, get words to appear on a computer screen)!! 2) Can write easy-to-read English on a fogged-up mirror, as if you were using your finger. 3) Can appear to numerous people (as the ghost appeared, in one way or another, to both the main stars in the movie). 4) Can open closed doors. 5) I'm not entirely sure about this one, but it seemed as if the ghost "took over" Claire's body and/or mind at one point (and mysteriously began acting sexually towards her murderer of all people, Mr. Ford).

Why would a ghost, with the abilities outlined above, give you vague clues in pieces and not simply tell you what the hell is going on?! As a Ghost, if you can get words to appear on a computer screen, WHY IN THE HELL wouldn't you just write "Your husband is a murderer, you can find my body at the end of your dock, my name is...". Why would you simply type your initials hundreds of times over and over?! Again, are we dealing with The Riddler here?! If that wouldn't work, how about just writing to Claire on the mirror after every shower each day?? If you were a Ghost, and all you COULD DO is leave messy clues to somebody you hope will help solve your murder, would you, upon getting screamed at from the top of your helper's lungs "What do you want?!?!" -- really write back a simple "You Know!"???? Obviously she didn't know yet, she was still gathering clues and thought she was going insane!! Wouldn't you have used that moment to write something just a bit more profound?! Like, maybe, "I need your help!". Wow.

And at one point the Ghost "took over" Claire's body and/or mind -- don't even get me started on how she could have easily killed her murderer -- so shouldn't she have tried killing Harrison Ford's character, her murderer, instead of just getting him horny?! I could go on and on, but at this point, I'm fatigued over this plot-hole-filled tripe. I just want to emphasize -- I hate when Ghosts are portrayed as The Riddler's character in the Batman series - as simple clue-givers.

:)

JD