Reviews

I think it's time to cut poor Robert Pattinson some slack. Since he was cast as the sweet-talking and pale vampire Edward Cullen in the teen hit "Twilight" all boyfriends in the world are jealous of the one guy their girlfriends are more in love with then them at times, and have therefore labeled him as an atrocious actor with no talent and a face that lacks any sort of expression. Well, granted "The Twilight Saga" or "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" certainly haven't shown him in the greatest light as a performer, but then again those two film series are not exactly best known for their outstanding opportunities to demonstrate fine acting. Therefore, the adaptation of Sara Gruen's novel about a circus during the Great Depression era in the 1930s "Water for Elephants" turned out to be the first big screen trial, and as far as I'm concerned, he passed the test with flying colors. The film turned out to be an extremely well-made, enjoyable and superbly acted drama, that was by far the best film about the circus I have seen in a long time.

In 1931, Jacob Jankowski is just about to get his degree in veterinary sciences from Cornell, when his parents pass away in a car accident and leave their son homeless and without a future. Traveling along the railroads, he one night encounters a train full performers from the Benzini Brothers Circus, who take him to a brand-new life and offer him a job. He soon meets the animal trainer and ringmaster August, a charismatic, but arrogant and brutal man, who first wants to throw Jacob of the train but hesitates when he finds out he is a veterinarian. Instead, he hires him to treat the injury of his star attraction, a beautiful horse, trained by August's wife Marlene. But soon August discovers a new attraction, an elephant named Rosie and he picks Jacob to train her. But when he sees that Jacob is unwilling to establish complete control over her, he turns raging and brutally forces the elephant to listen to his orders. Jacob turns more and more against August, and falls in love with Marlene, who is torn between being with the man she loves, or the man who was responsible for making her a star.

Although Francis Lawrence's only two works as a director so far have been the comic book adaptation "Constantine" and the acclaimed science-fiction horror thriller "I am Legend", he handles a historical film with great ease, and transformed Gruen's novel onto the big screen in a mix of lush sets and colors, but also a tone of sadness and melancholy in regard to the Great Depression. "Water for Elephants", while more of a fairy tale than historical fiction, is brilliantly executed on a fairly small scale that rightfully indulges in its sparse, but well-constructed sets. The film conveys a perfect circus atmosphere, especially when the tent is built and dozens of workers are pulling on the ropes, or a montage of circus acts is shown with the underlying and incredibly nostalgic music by James Newton Howard. Ultimately, it's a tour de force that relies on its escapist tone and particularly a scene when Jacob and August first met, and the latter takes the newcomer on the roof of the train, you feel the thrill and excitement of taking a journey that you are curious to witness. Although the story is not nearly as creative, with a rough, yet charming young outsider falling in love with a beautiful circus performer, who is married to an older and brutish man, and certainly does trip over one or the other cliché occasionally, it's told with passion and dynamically, so there's always the occasional unexpected twist. The film is also a bit light on the real despair that went on during the Great Depression, and although the true horrors are hinted at occasionally, there's a reason it's merely rated PG-13.

As mentioned, Robert Pattinson deserves some props for stepping up his game big time for this film, and considering his face finally doesn't look like a bucket of chalk has been emptied over it, he has a quite weathered and charming aura, that will come to serve him well in the future. His chemistry with Reese Witherspoon though was a bit dry, especially compared to the sizzling of her and Christoph Waltz, which may be because she's 11 years older than him. Nevertheless, individually they are both superb, with Witherspoon giving a tough and sympathetic performance as a star, who's been at the very bottom and will do anything never to get back there again. But the show is once again stolen by Christoph Waltz, who is one of those actors, who never seems to miss a beat or step out of line in the slightest. The delivery of every single syllable is perfectly timed and precisely planned, and he is easily one of the most intimidating and brilliant actors Hollywood has seen in a long time. But it really was quite amazing that August always seemed to be able to pull his bodyguards from hammer space, whenever Jacob was ready to attack him, which was my only real issue surrounding his character. Hal Holbrook also leaves an impression as an older Jacob, narrating the story, and finishing up the film with a moving and wonderfully final line.

Mostly due to the fantastic leading trio of actors, especially Christoph Waltz, and the surprisingly inspired direction by Francis Lawrence, who has just recommended himself for more historical film projects, the film is enjoyable and moving at the same time. I have just won back my love for the circus thanks to this film.

Harry Potter, a series of novels that defied everything that was possible and started a phenomenon unlike anything that ever existed or ever will exist. An entire generation has come to identify themselves with the books and the movies, especially those who shared a similar age with the characters when they came out. Last night, when I saw the eighth and final Harry Potter movie at the midnight screening, I was yelling and cheering when the curtain came open and once again yelling and cheering when the credits started to roll. But I had tears in my eyes, both of joy and immense sadness that it was now over, as one of the greatest film series of all time comes to an end.

After having destroyed their first Horcrux and having buried Dobby, Harry, Ron and Hermione are hiding at shell cottage with Ron's oldest brother Bill, his wife Fleur, as well as the goblin Griphook and the wand maker Mr. Olivander. Griphook tells Harry that the sword of Gryffindor in his possession was supposed to be in the Gringotts vault of Bellatrix Lestrange and the three eventually start to suspect that a Horcrux might be hidden there. After successfully breaking in and barely escaping on the back of a dragon, the three realize that the last stop in their journey will have to be Hogwarts, the school they went to for six years, and where the final showdown between Harry Potter and his nemesis Lord Voldemort will take place. Neither can live, while the other one survives.

As far as I'm concerned the right adjectives to describe this film haven't been invented yet. No words I can think of would do the grandness and perfection of the spectacular conclusion of this film franchise justice, and for now I'll just have to leave it at saying that this has good chances of becoming my favorite movie of the year. When you sit there and watch the movie at midnight with a group of teenagers all nearing the age of 20, who define their childhood with "Harry Potter' you are swept right into a different world of enthusiasm, emotions and nostalgia. I didn't think it was just great, I thought it was flawless. The sad and emotional scenes are so heart-wrenching that I could hear the entire movie theater tearing up, mainly during the scenes involving Snape and his memories that Harry watches in Dumbledore's Pensieve. Snape really comes to define this movie and his character really got to me as a man, who seemed to be the epitome of coldness and villainy throughout the entire series, and in the end turns out to be a tragic hero of the greatest measure, who would even have made Shakespeare proud. The movie is a huge extravaganza of action and visual spectacles, and while the first part was really solemn, apocalyptic and quiet, this one almost indulges in its grand scales and procures a huge battle of magic and some very powerful spells, bringing rock statues to live and creating an enormous energy shield around the castle. I always said that I wanted the series to go out with a bang and in the most memorable way possible and David Yates ensured with his vision that this film will be remembered for years to come.

The acting in Harry Potter has never been as good as it is here. Daniel Radcliffe in his final performance as the hero of this great franchise takes absolute center stage here and after ten years in the role he makes an incredibly convincing, brave and courageous hero, who conveys emotions with credibility and there are some scenes, where his facial expressions are just heartbreaking. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are really just supporting players here, but they have both made quite a name for themselves in their roles as well and all three actors are capable of continuing their careers far beyond Harry Potter. However, I think the key to the film's immense success are the performances by Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman, both of whom are more than deserving of an Oscar nomination. Fiennes, who is one of my favorite actors working today, finally hits the mark completely as Lord Voldemort and he is so menacing, cold and scary in his role that he has now become the living embodiment of evil and the defining villain of a generation. Alan Rickman though has a personality unmatched by any actor I have ever seen before. Snape is someone you love to hate and hate to love at the same time. Rickman's facial expressions as Snape are incredible subtle, but just the slightest change can reveal so much about him, and his carefully chosen enunciation of each syllable he utters is beyond belief. Although he is scary and seems cold-hearted most of the time, in the end when all comes to a close, everyone will feel so sorry for him. Finally though I have to give a shout out to Matthew Lewis who played Neville Longbottom, and after starting off as a chubby and not too bright lad in "The Philosopher's Stone", he's become a rough, determined and courageous fighter who believes in freedom and defending yourself. I was really impressed with his transformation.

For the first time in eight movies, I honestly believed that the screen version worked better than the written version. The pictures just seemed to tell the story so much better, and while some of the book almost felt like a letdown to me, the film finished it all off on such a brilliant and high note and the final image was heart-warming and really felt conclusive, and that's when I knew that it was all over. This franchise will never quite finds its equal, as it has moved and influenced so many people who now come off age. It's always sad to say goodbye, but long live Harry Potter, the boy who lived!

The new shows this fall have almost all been hugely disappointing, starting with the new "Law and Order: LA" which proves that the concept of the show is starting to get old, "The Event" is yet another bunch of twists and turns that will end in the middle of nowhere sooner or later and the hugely anticipated "Hawaii-Five-O" started out strong, but has now taken a turn for the worse, although it's still among the better new shows, which frankly isn't saying much.

"Blue Bloods", on the other hand, really stands out as a gritty and quite realistic police drama, made by the producers of the hugely successful and dearly missed "The Sopranos". Now, we get to see inside the daily lives of a family whose job is to solve crimes, instead of committing them, and thanks to an ensemble of gifted actors, it's quite interesting to see their interactions, both personally and professionally.

Frank Reagan is the chief of police in New York City, a man deeply respected by his family and the people he works with. His oldest son Danny (Donnie Wahlberg) is a homicide detective with a reputation for not doing things by the book, and in the first episode already he sticks someones head in a toilet to get the location of a missing girl out of him. While people admire as someone who gets the job done, he has alienated several people over the years through his views and methods, including his sister Erin (Bridget Moynahan). She is a district attorney, and since Danny often uses unorthodox and even illegal methods to arrest criminals, she has a hard time with convicting them, causing them to argue quite frequently. Jamie (Will Estes) is their youngest brother, and after finishing law school, suddenly decides to become a police officer, much to the dismay of his fiancé. Although still a rookie, he is approached by a secret society called the Blue Templars, who wish to hire him to investigate the death of his brother, who was a cop himself and was shot while investigating a case.

The show comes up with an interesting concept,showing us the interaction of these four family members while investigating crimes and how they often clash in their believes and principles. Donnie Wahlberg's character Danny is probably the most interesting one of the bunch, mainly because it's hinted at that he was in Iraq, and that his tendency to loose patience with the people he arrests is rooted in something he experienced there. It's good to have Tom Selleck back on TV, who is a better actor now than ever, and since I already liked him in the Jesse Stones movies, it's great that I get to see him every week now.

You can watch Blue Bloods every Friday at 10 on CBS, and since it's one of the most successful shows that have ever aired in the time slot, it looks like it stands a very high chance of surviving for more than a season, which will be an achievement not shared by too many of the new shows, I'm sure.

Arthur Golden's famous tale from 1997, "Memoirs of a Geisha" was one of these films that everyone wanted to get made, but for one reason or another it took forever to finally find someone who actually wanted to sit on the director's chair. For a long time Steven Spielberg was pegged as the one to bring the novel to the screen, but now Rob Marshall from the "surprise" Best Picture Oscar winner "Chicago" is the one who can take the credit for this masterpiece of a film.

The young girl Chiyo and her sister are sold by their father to a geisha house, but they are soon separated and Chiyo begins her training as a geisha. Soon though she catches the eye of Hatsumomo, the vain head geisha, who is mostly responsible for the financial well-being of the house, and is forced by her to destroy the kimono of one of the most respected geishas in the city, Mameha. Because of this and her falling off the roof when she tries to escape, the mother of the house decides to make Chiyo a mere servant girl until she has paid off her debt. One day, Chiyo meets a handsome and charming man, who buys her a cup of sweet ice, and from that moment on she is in love with him and tries to everything to win his heart, such as to become a true geisha. Years later, Mameha decides to adopt Chiyo as an apprentice and she can finally fulfill her dream of becoming a geisha and to reunite with the chairman she desires above everything else.

Cynics will say that this is just a feminist propaganda film for women, but it really is a stunning and powerful film about women, or rather their strength and determination in a culture and profession that is quite different than the view Western countries often seem to have of it. Geishas were dancers, artists and mistresses, who satisfied their customers through their skills, and not their bodies, selling themselves away like common prostitutes. It's amazing to see how being a geisha is really about learning self-discipline and control of ones body, and essentially that is the process Chiyo, or Sayuri as she is later called, goes through in this wonderful, exotic and moving film. I was interested in the psychology and personality of every single character, particularly Sayuri and Hatsumomo, who almost redefine the word "catfight" in this film, through the game of intrigues, betrayal and lies they play with each other. Hatsumomo is the villain of this movie, yes, but when she is on screen for the last time I really did feel sorry for her, because despite her arrogance and rotten character, she was capable of love and was denied her feelings by the boundaries and limitations of the life she swore herself to. On the other hand, the geishas are shown to be true artists and athletes, who have to have complete dominance of their posture, their moves and their timing. The most beautiful scene in this movie, which will most likely cause everyone to get goose bumps, is when Sayuri goes through her training to become a geisha and the sensitive, but emotionally gripping score by John Williams is heard, particularly when she receives the task of captivating a man through one single glance. Whether the film was perfectly historically accurate in its portrayal of the hardships the geishas face, is something I don't know much about, and that's probably a good thing as it would have destroyed the haunting spell of the movie. The film is truly beautiful in its production design and the gorgeous cinematography and is just as much a work of art for the eye as it is for the heart. Rob Marshall really managed to hit the right tone and doesn't make "Memoirs of a Geisha" overly sentimental, but created an intimate love story, where Sayuri always wants to follow her heart and her desire to become a geisha, and ultimately realize that she cannot have both.

The film also features the who's who of Asian actresses, starting with the pretty Ziyi Zhang, who gives a haunting and mesmerizing performance as Sayuri, especially when she performs her art of dancing and charming men. Her eyes are captivating and she has exactly the right aura to play such a role, and nobody except the Japanese will say something about her being Chinese in reality. The same goes for Michelle Yeoh, who has a hypnotic presence as Sayuri's master Mameha, and especially the stunning Gong Li, who is perfect as the seemingly cold-hearted and spoiled, but really desperate Hatsumomo. Ken Watanabe, who already showed his powerful screen aura in "Last Samurai" plays a much more low-key character this time, but he has charisma and kindness written all over him.

"Memoirs of a Geisha" does not deserve its reputation as a film that only lives from its visuals and production achievements, although those are indeed the strongest point of the film. It tells a passionate and moving love story, involves a lot of cultural history, and is so beautifully photographed and scored that it becomes a grand cinematic adventure, that will apply to both genders and every person who wants to be reminded of the great class of movies.

I always wondered why nobody ever thought about turning Ken Follett's brilliant epic "The Pillars of the Earth" into a movie. Without a doubt, it is the greatest book I have ever read, with a cleverly constructed and well-researched story, engaging characters and is full of intrigues, violence and sex. There is so much going on in the book that not a single page seems to be wasted, which is saying a lot about a novel that has over 1000 of them. Now, over two decades after the novel hit the bookshelves, Ridley and Tony Scott bring you an eight-part miniseries that promises to be one of the best ones I have seen in recent years.

It is 1135 and a dark time in the history of England. 15 years earlier the king's only legitimate heir died during the sinking of a ship, and England's monarch has neglected God and the church during his reign. The priests and bishops are most eager to ensure a religious man ascends the throne after the death of the king, and in return for swearing allegiance to them, they promise Stephen, the nephew of the king, to put him on the throne. A fierce battle of succession ensues between Stephen and King Henry's only legitimate child Maude. In these times, a young and ambitious monk named Philipp is made Prior of Kingsbridge, a fairly large city that has suffered in recent times and that is in dire need to have its church remodeled. Tom Builder travels through England with his son Alfred, his daughter Martha and after his wife Agnes died in childbirth, they are joined by the two outlaws Ellen and Jack. Finally, Tom finds a job in Shiring, but the Lord Bartholomew is conspiring against the new king Stephen and the William Hamleigh, who was rejected by the lord's daughter Aliena, finally sees an opportunity to take revenge. Philipp, Tom and his family and Aliena are faced with several challenges and hardships, but their paths cross in Kingsbridge, and they all will play a vital role in the construction of the brand new cathedral.

Two episodes into the miniseries, I'm quite impressed by how much the atmosphere of the book was kept and although I was prepared to be disappointed, I am really enjoying it so far. It seems that the best and most expensive stuff was just good enough for this series and the medieval cities of the book such as Kingsbridge and Shiring look stunningly real. I am glad that eight episodes were dedicated to tell the story of "The Pillars of Earth" instead of merely a two-hour movie, although it's not nearly as epic as Ridley Scott's big movies such as "Gladiator". The series does have combat scenes, but ultimately it's more of a dark drama, focusing on characters and relationships before anything else.

The miniseries stays very close to the plot in the novel, and only minor details were changed. One of them is that Tom knows that his son is raised in Kingsbridge from the beginning, and in the novel it's only revealed at almost the very end. And then there is the king, who dies at the beginning of the novel, but here lives through almost the entire first episode. Those are merely small deviations though, unnecessary perhaps, but not really something to make a big deal about. The series was mostly shot in Hungary and Austria, although most scenes are actually confined to the insides of a castle or a town. On a side note, there's a lot of blood, obscenity, violence and nudity in the series, and if you have seen HBO's "Rome", you should already know what to expect.

While there are not too many big names in the cast, some of them you have probably heard of and those are the ones standing out acting wise as well. Ian McShane was the perfect choice to play Bishop Waleran, and he is wonderfully slick and cunning as the main antagonist of Prior Philipp, played by Matthew Macfadyen. I actually find Macfadyen to be almost a little dry in the role of Philipp, but since the character is described with exactly that word many times in the book, I guess he should be commended for his performance. Rufus Sewell so far is the best of the actors in the series, and he is very emotional as Tom and exactly how I imagined him from the books. Natalie Woerner, a German actress, really stands out so far as Ellen and it's unbelievable that she is 43 years old already. She and Sewell have an amazing chemistry together and I completely believe the character's passionate, but scorned upon relationship. Hayley Atwell and Eddie Redmayne as Aliena and Jack will have more to do as the series progresses, as will David Oakes who doesn't seem evil enough for William quite yet. Anatole Taubman, whom you might know from the last James Bond film, is also quite good as Remigius, the manipulative sub-prior of Kingsbridge and Donald Sutherland also appears as Bartholomew in a few episodes. The cast is not well-known perhaps, but definitely strong and I really like what I'm seeing of them so far.

I suppose the miniseries won't be quite as epic as the book, but from what I'm seeing so far it will be a big candidate to pick up a couple of Golden Globes and Emmys in the miniseries category next year. "The Pillars of Earth" deserved a fantastic adaptation, and I'm glad to see that the producers and the director Sergio Mimica-Gezzan were seemingly ambitious enough to ensure that this would be a memorable series, worthy of this great book. But watching the series, no matter how good it is now and will be in the weeks to come, will never be an adequate substitute for actually reading the book.

During the 1930s, which marked the infamous era of the Great Depression, a number of gangsters appeared on the scene and went on killing and robbing sprees throughout the United States. Among them were Bonnie & Clyde, who were immortalized through the 1967, but also Machine Gun Kelly, Pretty Boy Floyd, and John Dillinger. Now, the book "Public Enemies", by Bryan Burrough, which I have indeed read, is about the careers of all of these criminals, and one can assume that the film would have been about six hours long, if all the material from the source would have been incorporated.

Michael Mann, director of acclaimed crime thrillers such as "Heat", and "Collateral", decided to focus on the bank robber John Dillinger and his permanent cat and mouse game with the just recently established FBI. While several historic liberties were taken, the film creates a wonderfully nostalgic atmosphere in 1930s Chicago and other locations, and gives the audience an interesting perspective on the increasing crime spree during these days. Gangster thrillers are not exactly my favorite genre, but this film is a notable exception, as it is more the portrait of two extremely different men, one is the hunter, and one the pray, but both are outstanding in their wits and cunningness.

It is the Great Depression, and several gangsters emerge over the United States and go on a crime spree as there has never been one before in the country. J. Edgar Hoover, the ambitious head of the newly established Federal Bureau of Investigation, asks for more government funding, but is denied and his capability as a leader is repeatedly questioned. One of his most outstanding men, Melvin Purvis, manages to kill one of the most notorious criminals of the time, Pretty Boy Floyd, and earns Hoover's recognition and is entrusted with the task of heading the Chicago field office. Meanwhile, John Dillinger breaks out several of his friends out of the Indiana State Prison, where one of his best men is shot and killed by a guard. After robbing another bank, Dillinger meets Billie Frechette, and she is immediately charmed by his passion and enthusiasm for freedom, even though he tells her quite quickly how he makes his living. Purvis quickly gets onto Dillinger, but during a stakeout at a hotel, Purvis realizes that it wasn't Dillinger hiding out there, but another gangster known as Baby Face Nelson. Quickly, a cat and mouse game ensues between the two, and it is only a matter of time before one of them kills the other.

The mood of this film is extremely dark and the entire atmosphere is nostalgic, perfectly recreating the tone of the 1930s in the United States. Mann cut out several of the story lines found in the book and left out a number of criminals or reduces them to supporting players, like Pretty Boy Floyd and Baby Face Nelson. The entire film, which is just short of 2 1/2 hours, concentrates on the bank robber John Dillinger and his relationship with Billie Frechette, as well as his numerous escapes from the FBI. Even though the majority of the agents are portrayed as clueless amateurs, who make numerous mistakes that allow Dillinger and his gang to get away, the book points that out even clearer, and it's quite evident how much the Bureau has changed in the last 70 years. "Public Enemies" is a very quiet film most of the time, that only uses music sparingly, and that heavily focuses on character development. Once in a while the dialogs are interrupted by short shootings, which more or less succeed in keeping my attention, but unfortunately they also made me realize how long and slow-paced the rest of the scenes really were the movie really could have been quite a bit shorter. It almost seems like the writers couldn't decide whether this film should be about Dillinger and his love interest, or Dillinger robbing banks and shooting up the Feds, and instead of going deep into one or the other, at times they don't really seem to get into either one of the two. The cutting and action scenes look almost a bit sloppy and amateurish at times, but for some reason it seems to fit with the mood of the film.

One of the greatest parts about this film is without a doubt Johnny Depp, who cleverly avoids being stereo cast too much by occasionally playing dramatic roles instead of weird ones for his friend Tim Burton, and succeeds in bringing John Dillinger back to life. He brings an incredible personality to the character, without making him seem really likable, but instead playing him like he probably was in real life, cold and risk-taking. On the other side there's Christian Bale, adding another impressive performance to his resume, as FBI agent Melvin Purvis. Even though he stands on the good side of the law, he comes over as extremely cold and calculating, and there are very few scenes where he actually shows his warm and friendly side.. Marion Cotillard shows once again how much talent she has as Billie Frechette, Dillinger's naive, but eventually really tough girlfriend. Even though her acting is superb, I didn't find Dillinger's and Frechette's relationship too convincing and much too cold to have actually worked out. Maybe that is, because whenever they got really close, the scene was interrupted by another shooting. Those three dominate the plot and very few other actors manage to leave an impression, mainly because you can't keep up with the rapid introductions of new characters. Billy Crudup makes a convincing J. Edgar Hoover, but the character is really not explored too much, which also goes for Giovanni Ribisi and Channing Tatum.

Michael Mann went down with "Miami Vice", but with "Public Enemies" he went straight back to the top again, and let's hope he'll stay there with the next round of ammo he'll deliver.

Let's be honest, "Lord of the Rings" ruined the genre forever, simply because the three movies achieved such cinematic perfection that they remain untouchable by any other fantasy book adaptations. "Eragon", based on the first book in Christopher Paolini's best-selling trilogy, back then still duology, is not essentially a bad film, but it has too many parallels to "Lord of the Rings" and ultimately fails in almost every comparison. Having said that, I really enjoyed the film and it looked fantastic, but again, a fantasy movie these days has to be more than enjoyable to leave its mark.

In Alagaesia, there used to be an army of dragon riders until they were all betrayed by a Galbatorix, who drove the dragons into extinction and proclaimed himself king of Alagaesia. But one night, a young farm boy named Eragon discovers a mysterious stone in the woods near his home and decides to take it home. Shortly afterwards, the stone turns out to really be an egg, when a baby dragon hatches from it, and when Eragon touches it for the first time, a mark is left on his hand. The dragon grows up quite quickly, but Galbatorix has become aware that a new dragon has been born and puts the task of killing Eragon on the shade Durza, a dark sorcerer. His forces ravage through the villages killing several people, including Eragon's uncle, and the boy is only saved by Brom, a strange man from the village, who trains Eragon into using his dragon. He wants Eragon to make his way to the Varden, a group of rebels opposing the rule of the king, and in the process him, the boy and the dragon named Saphira, form a close bond of friendship. But Eragon keeps dreaming of a young woman, who is kept prisoner by Durza and against Brom's advise makes his way to the castle with Saphira, but the evil shade has already put out a deadly trap for him.

I have to admit that I have never read Paolini's books, but considering they were such bestsellers, I assume that they were a lot better than this movie. Ultimately the film, which is also rather short for a fantasy book adaptation with a running time of just over 100 minutes, feels empty and the plot seems to lead into nowhere. Brom leads Eragon to the Varden, but once he arrives, it never becomes quite clear why he was supposed to go there in the first place. The relationships between the characters felt completely dry, there was no powerful emotion, no history, and essentially the film manages to tell its story but there is no depth in there at all. The script written by Peter Buchman, whose only writing credit was the third installment in the "Jurassic Park" series, is not horrible, but full of the typical "young man leaves his home to become a hero" clichés, and there are of course the monologues by the mentor about foolishness, responsibility and his deep dark secret that becomes obvious the first time he appears on screen. While the cinematography and landscape shots are not as present as they were in "Lord of the Rings, they are still quite beautiful and much of the film was shot in Hungary, showing that you don't need to travel all the way to New Zealand to get some fantastic pictures. Patrick Doyle might not be the most well-known composer, but delivers a powerful and epic score, that even gave me goose bumps once, when Eragon sat outside of the farm staring into the far reaching plains of Alagaesia.

So, the cast of this film is absolutely top-notch and I was surprised by how many big names were brought together for this fairly mediocre movie. Edward Speleers tries very hard in the title role and he does have the spark of charisma to him that you need to be a hero in a fantasy film. He also reminds me a bit of Simon Baker, who plays Patrick Jane in "The Mentalist", and ultimately he gives a good performance that should hopefully get him recognized. Jeremy Irons is stellar as Brom and his robust presence on screen makes the mediocre quality of the lines he says almost irrelevant. Although he is the typical mentor for the protagonist, and his motives and history are relatively transparent, I enjoyed to see him again in one of his rare appearances in movies these days. Sienna Guillory makes a beautiful figure as Arya, but unfortunately her character is a complete mystery and her background is never explained at all. Robert Carlyle gets to pull off his role in the craziest way possible and although his character, the shade Durza, is in no way explained as well, it was a lot of fun to watch his maniacal laugh and his grimaces. John Malkovich was in this film, yes, but he can't have been on screen for more than maybe five minutes, and his lines of dialog are limited to about a dozen. A pity that such a talented performer was wasted in such a way. And then there is Rachel Weisz, who doesn't act, but merely provided the voice for Saphira. Merely, are you kidding? This woman has such a fantastic and haunting voice that she outplays almost all the other actors on screen, which really does not speak for the quality of the characters.

Although it in no way reaches the very good representatives of the genre, the film was enjoyable and simple to understand, without the drama and philosophical aspects of "Lord of the Rings" or even "Harry Potter". The actors are mostly fun to watch, although their characters seem like nutshells without the real prize in. I'm neither surprised it wasn't a big success, nor that no sequel was made, but maybe that would have answered a lot of the questions that came up in this film, but were never answered.

Although the James Bond movie franchise is among the most successful and popular ones ever, playing the title role doesn't automatically guarantee future success in other projects. Except Sean Connery, who made several huge hits and won an Oscar in 1988, none of the other actors ever managed to make an impact in the film industry again. George Lazenby. Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton all made appearances in small and obscure films, but ultimately they were never really heard of again. And now, it's Pierce Brosnan's turn to show that he is a good enough actor to leave the typecasting of the James Bond role, and appear in projects that appeal to the audience, and challenge him as a performer.

While this is certainly not a film that requires a lot of acting from any of its actors, Pierce Brosnan turns his image around by 180 degrees, playing someone on the other side of the law, with a shabby beard and an addiction for stealing high-priced jewels. Silly and ridiculous at times, "After the Sunset" is nonetheless an entertaining heist flick, with one or the other surprise.

Max and Lola Burdett are among the most successful jewel thieves the world has ever seen and for years they have been stealing some of the most valuable diamonds. After a really big heist, where they steal the diamond directly out of the car of FBI agent Stan Lloyd whom they put to sleep, the couple decides to retire and moves to the Bahamas. But eventually Lloyd shows up, convinced that Max is planning to steal the famous Napoleon III diamond from an exhibit on a ship that is docked in Nassau for three weeks. Max swears to Lola that he has no intention to steal the diamond, but she is reluctant to believe him, especially since he hasn't written his wedding vows yet, something he promised to do months ago already. After paying the exhibit the visit, Max is introduced to Henri Moore, one of the greatest criminals on the island, who needs the diamond to finance his so-called "humanitarian program". But Moore already has local policewoman Sophie after her, who teams up with Lloyd, to get her the attention of her superiors, to regain Lloyd's reputation, and to bring Burdett behind bars.

Brett Ratner, who already directed the successful action-comedy film "Rush Hour" with Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker, makes another film in that genre, but this time can't seem to find the right balance between the two. Although I did laugh maybe half a dozen times, this is not really a film that aims for laughs, but on the other hand doesn't have enough action to compensate for the lack of them. So, this film is not exactly a great representative of its kind, but I would be lying if I said that I didn't enjoy it. Maybe it's the fact that this film could have easily been used as a promotional movie for tourism on the Bahamas and its all there, the alcoholic beverages, the white beaches, the tropical vegetation, and in the middle two fugitives appreciating a luxurious lifestyle. I doubt there is a better way to promote a career being a criminal rather than one in law enforcement, and although the entire premise is completely ludicrous, it's certainly not the first time the people on the wrong side of the law get to spend more money in a day than a federal agent gets on his paycheck for ten years. But the relationship between Agent Lloyd and Max Burdett, who are playing somewhat of a cat and mouse game, is funny and while I had a hard time believing that Lloyd is trying to arrest Max, it's absolutely hilarious how Max tries to bribe him into leaving him alone, like paying for the famous bridge suite in the Atlantis Hotel.

Probably the best thing about this film is its array of usual suspects in unusual roles, all ahead of course Pierce Brosnan, who throws off the gentleman image that comes with playing James Bond. Leaving his shirts half unbuttoned and wearing a shabby gray beard, he is a lot of fun in this movie, and it's good to see him taking on some roles completely different than what he did before. Salma Hayek, who is thirteen years younger than Brosnan, looks incredibly hot and sexy in this film, and for the entire film I had absolutely no clue what took Max so long to write his wedding vows, considering he would be married to such a gorgeous woman. Woody Harrelson plays Agent Stan Lloyd, a colorful and instantly sympathetic character, and although nobody would probably want him to succeed to arrest Max and Lola, one can't help but feel sorry for him when he constantly laments about how the two make him look like a clown in front of his superiors, and especially, members of the opposite sex. Naomie Harris is a lot of fun as the native Bahamian cop, who has no problem proving her point to the people with a little more violence than necessary. And then there's Don Cheadle as a humanitarian island gangster boss, who is hilarious in his role, but unfortunately completely underused and rarely on screen.

So, while "After the Sunset" might not be the biggest catch out there, it is quite a bit of fun, and not a complete waste of time. The actors take their roles with a lot of humor, and especially Brosnan, Harrelson, and for the five minutes he's in this film, Don Cheadle are absolutely hilarious to watch. Salma Hayek and Naomie Harris are both adorable, and the latter makes a good figure as the no-nonsense cop. If the money is short, or you can't get away from work, this film will have to do as a replacement for a vacation, and after sipping a margarita or two, you will totally have the island atmosphere in your home. Or at least almost.

This film, as the title suggests, is affiliated with the famous children's TV Series "Land of the Lost" from the 70s, which was about Rick Marshall, and his two children Holly and Will, who got stranded in a strange and mysterious worlds, where time and space collided. Now, this take on the story is a parody on the original story, with the same basic concept, but a more humorous storyline.

I have never seen the original TV Series, but I doubt it would have made too much of a difference. "Land of the Lost" is without a doubt one of the worst films of the year 2009; especially considering that I actually thought the movie looked pretty decent in the trailer. I will never know how such an interesting and original concept was screwed up so badly and turned into an unfunny and pointless mess.

Dr. Rick Marshall is ridiculed on national television after he suggests the existence of time warps that could be used to solve the worsening energy crisis. Reduced to teaching science classes at elementary school, Marshall drops his theories, until Cambridge student Holly shows up at the school, and urges him to test his tachyon amplifier, a device that can create the necessary energy waves to open those gates. They drive far out into the desert, where the crazy redneck Will is running a cave entertainment park. While giving them a rafting tour through the cave, Rick and Holly get the tachyon amplifier to work and the three fall down a massive waterfall. When they wake up, they find themselves in the middle of a desert, right next to a Viking ship, proving Rick's theory of an alternate dimension, where the past, present, and future collide. Unfortunately though they lost the tachyon amplifier and now can't get back home to prove to the world Rick's been right all along. After the saving a primate from being sacrificed by his own people, the little monkey-like creature named Cha-ka reluctantly guides them through the strange "land of the lost, which is inhabited by green aliens, large dinosaurs, and filled with objects from the human world.

Several words can be used to describe this film, among them being uninspired, dull, pointless and unfunny. The entire movie pretty much consists of the three main characters stumbling from one enormous mess into another, which for one reason or another doesn't turn out to be so dangerous after all. If you try really hard you might find the attempts of creating a plot once in a while, but all in all the entire thing is just all over place and never seems to find a point of focus. First the dinosaur appears, but when that "plot line" is finished after around ten minutes, the aliens are introduced about halfway through the film and they, of course, have the incredibly evil master plan of conquering the universe. The humor, which includes several sexual references, is childish and ridiculous, with many of the lines often not fitting with the scenes they are said in. And when the primitive monkey man Cha-ka has grabbed Holly's breasts for the fifth or sixth time, I just got really tired of it. To be fair, I laughed about half a dozen times in this film, once when Will Ferrell pours dinosaur urine all over himself in order to cover his human smell. It's really quite amazing how such a disaster was created with a $100 Million budget, and a director like Brad Silbering, who made "Casper" and "Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events", both great and inspired movies. Most of the blame here can be put on the writers, Chris Henchy and Dennis McNicholas, who both don't have too much experience writing comic dialog, and most of the punch lines just completely fall flat. Those unfortunately occur at least two or three times a minute, and it's just painful to see that if the script had been completely rewritten dialog-wise the film could have been so much better.

I'm really not the biggest fan of Will Ferrell, since most of his comedies tend to be hit and miss and often don't really work for me, and this film without a question belongs in the category "complete miss". Surprisingly though, I don't think Ferrell is really the one at fault, and if, once again, the script had been better, this could have been the perfect role for him. But here, he just stumbles around and has absolutely no chance against the horrendous words coming out of his mouth. The same goes for Danny McBride, who is the expert of sexual humor in this film, or at least he was probably supposed to be. While I thought he was amazing in "Tropic Thunder" last year, in here he pathetically fails at being funny. Anna Friel's role is not really a very comic one in the first place, and since she's incredibly serious among the two idiotic men accompanying her, there's not really that much bad stuff that can be said about her performance. Jorma Taccone though, as the primitive Cha-ka, is just plain awful, because even though he doesn't say too much, all of his attempts to be funny are somehow related to sexuality, and that's just not really my kind of humor.

"Land of the Lost" was definitely the biggest disappointment of the summer, and I actually really enjoyed the trailer, which literally contains all the funny moments of the film. Will Ferrell certainly didn't do himself a favor by taking on this role, even though it would be unfair to bash him alone for the failure to deliver a solid movie here. While "Land of the Lost" is not the worst film of all time, which is mainly due to the fascinating sets, the absolute majority of it was catastrophic and it would have been better if the entire project would have landed in the land of the lost.

Only recently, I have purchased some of the DVD sets of the old TV shows from the 1980's, the great classics of entertainment and by today's standards as cheesy as they have ever been. Among them is the first season of "Remington Steele", about a detective named Laura Holt, who invents a male boss in order to attract more clients, until one day a strange con man takes over the imaginary part of Remington Steele and from that point on works with Laura solving cases of all sorts. That was the first big role of a young man named Pierce Brosnan, but when the show was taken off the air after six successful years, Brosnan's career kicked into really high gears. He played the famous British agent James Bond in four films, but after "Die another Day", almost a parody on the franchise, he was dismissed from the role and went on to star in other projects.

Pierce Brosnan, who coincidentally got a hold of Richard Shepard's script, not only agreed to take over the leading role but also became one of the producers, causing the film's budget to rise significantly. It seems as if this movie was exactly what he was looking for and after being the action hero for so long, and the stylish British gentleman, he finally gets to play an unpleasant, rude and bad ass character, who completely goes against anything he has played before. The result is an entertaining mix of comedy and drama about an unusual friendship that takes a couple of unexpected twists and turns.

Julian Noble is a professional hit man, who believes he has the greatest job in the world and travels all over the planet to take out his targets. He doesn't have a home, not a single friend and his romantic interests merely consist of one-night affairs with hookers. Danny Wright on the other hand is a regular businessman, who lost his only son in a school bus accident, is happily married with his high school sweetheart, and now travels to Mexico City to sign a contract that could save his career. The two men, that couldn't be any more different from each other, meet at the hotel bar one night and after a couple of rude remarks by Julian and immediate apologies the two begin to form somewhat of a friendship. Julian takes Danny to the bull fighting arena, where he reveals himself to be an assassin and even demonstrates how he would take out his target. But Danny is not appalled but merely fascinated by this strange man, and ultimately Julian even asks his new friend to help him with one of his jobs. As it turns out though, Julian begins to doubt himself and his unethical profession and after screwing up several of his contracts, his bosses put out a hit on him, causing him to seek the help of his only friend, Danny.

"The Matador" is a very interesting little film that made it lot out of its limited possibilities. Despite having Pierce Brosnan in the leading role, who is always a good candidate for a fast-paced action movie, there are very little action scenes in this film, and it is more of a buddy comedy and relationship drama. Although there are some funny scenes, mostly coming from the dialogs between Danny and Julian, especially when the latter makes one of his inappropriate comments, there are also some somber moments, especially involving Danny and his dead son. The film is R-rated, so you will find your typical use of several f-words, but I would be more concerned with the large number of sexual jokes. Richard Shepard, whose previous work mostly consists of B-movies wrote a dynamic script that mostly focuses on the strange relationship of Julian and Danny, two wonderfully constructed characters with their flaws and good sides to them. But he ultimately concentrates so much on them, that the characters and their dialogs completely dominate the film and the plot is somewhat neglected in the process. There is only a very fragile story attached to this 90 minute film, which causes it to run very slow for some time, especially once the setting shifts from Mexico City to Denver. The other issue with this film is the set design, which was very austere at times, and I had a hard time finding where the $10 Million of budget went.

Pierce Brosnan is at his very best in this film and this might be his finest work ever. He is unbelievably funny, and completely contrary to his usual image, does stuff like walking through a hotel bar lobby in underwear, make a rude joke after hearing about Danny's dead son and, of course, instead of the obligatory "shaken, not stirred" Vodka Martini he now drinks Margaritas, four of five of them in a row even. Julian Noble is an obnoxious, but likable character, and without Pierce Brosnan this film certainly would have lost a lot of its freshness and charm. Greg Kinnear plays Danny, a regular guy, who stands in complete contrast to Julian Noble. While he doesn't get to shine as much as Brosnan, whose role is simply better written, he does a fantastic job both as the nerdy businessman, and later the cool assistant of Julian. There is also Hope Davis as Danny's cute wife Bean and Philipp Baker Hall as Julian's handler, who appears in maybe two scenes for a total screen time of less than five minutes.

Without Pierce Brosnan, "The Matador" would have been a typical independent film without any stars, but a strong script that is shown on a couple of film festivals and then is never heard of again. But instead, this film has now turned into something bigger, changing the image of Pierce Brosnan's character repertoire forever, and providing its audience with a wonderful film about a friendship that is not always top-notch, but enjoyable nevertheless.

Sadness, hatred and bitterness can be found behind every corner in the so-called "city of angels", racism dominates everyone's life in one way or the other and people yell and scream at each other simply because of their color and their language. Words are misinterpreted or misunderstood, which leads to conflicts and arguments, sometimes even fatal. This sad, but wonderful movie documents 36 hours in Los Angeles, with more or less average people finding themselves in unusual situations, and often colliding with each other in the most surprising ways. Whether you are a detective, a cop, a district attorney, a movie producer, a locksmith or a car thief, nobody is safe from being pulled into the Maelstrom of hatred and prejudice, which is ever present in L.A. The film is dramatically and intelligently intertwined, which will bring the audience to tears but at the same time is a piece of hope and optimism at the end.

In Los Angeles, racism dominates the interaction between people and over the time of 36 hours many of them encounter it in closer ways than ever before. Detective Graham Waters is working on a case where a racist white cop shot a corrupt black one, and after finding $300,000 in cash in the black cop's car he is almost sure that the dead man was trafficking drugs. But the city, that wants to save face, wants to present the community with a fallen black hero instead of a drug dealer and persuades Waters to drop the case, in exchange for the clearance of his brother's criminal record. Jack Ryan is a racist cop, who after pulling over a couple that performed fellatio, sexually molests the wife under the eyes of her husband and his partner Tom Hanson. The movie director Cameron Thayer and his wife get in a huge fight after being pulled over by Ryan and Thayer's wife accuses him of being worried more about his reputation than her. Rick Cabot, the district attorney, and his wife Jean are attacked by two black thieves and their car is stolen. After that incident, Jean is in constant fear of people that are not of her race, and Rick tries to spin the incident to his advantage, no matter the cost. Daniel Ruiz, a Hispanic locksmith, gives his daughter a necklace, that is supposed to protect her from any danger, even bullets. After a communication problem with the Persian owner of a store, the store is robbed and trashed, and the insurance refuses to pay because of negligence. The owner is desperate and goes after Ruiz and causes a catastrophe to happen.

This movie is a painful mosaic that spreads out over the city and involves numerous people of different ethnicity, languages and social classes. Just one small event, can cause a dangerous chain reaction that will end in casualties. Paul Haggis, in one of the best screenplays of the decade so far, ties up the plot strings convincingly and created a film with a powerful message. There are no good people in Los Angeles, no heroes and no saints, but some have their moments and most of them have their eyes opened by the end of this film. There is no true beginning or end, as it is just a glimpse into an average day for these people, one of many that is filled with sorrow and pain, but occasional happiness. The viewers are pulled in from the very first word on and won't be able to let go until the end credits start rolling. Some of the dialogs are even funny to a certain extent, because they are full of insults and swear words, but their content is so serious, that the smile just won't come in most cases. The language is extremely dirty and includes dozens of "f-words" that is because the atmosphere in L.A. was supposed to be as authentic as possible, and it certainly is.

Don Cheadle is very calm and moving as Graham Waters, a detective, who tries everything to get accepted by his mother, and in the end she is always more fond of his criminal younger brother than him. Matt Dillon just blew me away, beginning as the racist asshole, who sexually molests a young woman, to the hero, who risks his one life to pull someone from a burning car. Sandra Bullock as the racist wife of a district attorney has not a lot of screen time, but she is so perfectly unsympathetic that one has to congratulate her for a job well done. Michael Pena, playing the only truly good guy in this film, is extraordinary and some of his scenes will move anyone to tears, especially the one that is shown on the poster, of him letting out a tortured scream as he is holding his young daughter. Ryan Philippe proves that he can be considered one of the best young actors in Hollywood right now, giving a great dramatic performance as the young, naive police officer, who goes through an unfortunate transformation over the 36 hours the film takes place in. Terence Howard's character also changes considerably, from an ambitious, well-worded man, to the aggressive, foul-mouthed one at the end. Thandie Newton as the victim of Ryan's sexual molesting gives a sad and moving performance and her scenes with Dillon are among the best in the movie.

Coincidences shape the lives of the multi-ethnical people in L.A., often for the worse as this movie shows. In any case, Paul Haggis crafted a masterpiece of story-telling that goes deep into the people that have to survive the daily life in a city, where racism is constantly present are where trust is a word nobody has ever heard of. Nobody can prevent the crashes and coincidences of life, but we can make the best of them,instead of blaming each other because of a different skin color or language.

Published by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, sometime around the turn of the 20th century, the "Sherlock Holmes" stories have become classics of British literature, and have been turned into movies or TV Series dozens of times. But then, when you think you have seen it all, seen him solve every possible murder involving every possible scenario (my favorite still being "The Speckled Band" about a psychopathic ex-doctor and convicted murderer, who plans to kill his stepdaughters using a poisonous snake), Guy Ritchie comes along and makes a film with the incredibly original and creative title "Sherlock Holmes".

Now, the highly conservative Holmes fans will probably give this film ten minutes before they throw the remote control at the TV, but those who have never read the stories will most likely appreciate Ritchie's take on the material. From the highly intelligent, charismatic, professional, and dry character in the books, Holmes turns into a crazy, obnoxious and cynical figure, who enjoys fighting and gambling in the boxing ring and even has a love relationship, something unthinkable for the original. Rather than a classic detective story, this is a modern, action film with plenty of chases and explosions, set to the background of 1890s London and except for the basic outline, doesn't have anything in common with the literary style of Conan Doyle's works.

Lord Blackwood, a necromancer and practionist of black magic, is caught in the act of performing a deadly ritual on a young woman by Sherlock Holmes and his assistant Dr. Watson and sentenced to death by hanging. Initially, this was also the last case Holmes and Watson were to be working together, before the latter moved out their office and home at Baker Street 221B, and moved together with his girlfriend Mary. Holmes, not too fond of the idea of loosing his partner and best friend, tries to spoil Watson's relationship by any means possible, but he soon realizes that Watson is serious and fears that their long working relationship is over. But then, Lord Blackwood mysteriously vanishes from his grave and is seen wandering around London, murdering the leading members of one of London's secret societies, the Temple of the Four Orders. Watson, who provided the death certificate at Blackwood's execution, is convinced by Holmes to help him close this case, since not only the safety of London is in danger but also Watson's reputation. But soon they discover that there is much more to it, when Irene Adler, a former lover of Holmes shows up in London, but can Holmes still trust her, especially since she doesn't even bother hiding her profession of a thief from him?

Whether you like the modern approach to Sherlock Holmes is of very little importance when looking at the stunning sets that have been build up for this film. London looks fascinating, perfectly creating a nostalgic atmosphere and a creepy feeling in its narrow alleys. Then there are famous landmarks,like the half-finished Tower Bridge, or the Docks, which make the entire scenery even more realistic and it's amazing how easy it has become today to age even a city by 100 years without there being a single glitch in the visuals. "Sherlock Holmes" is wonderfully constructed as an action movie, with not excessively overused action scenes, but some greatly choreographed fights. There is a moment,relatively early in this movie, when Holmes is in the boxing ring with an opponent and the smug detective analyzes and predicts every single movement he needs to make against that rock of a guy to beat him,something shown in slow motion attacks. Many of the typical Holmes clichés are woven into the story just like that, and most of the time it's just incredibly funny how many references to the Conan Doyle stories are included, but yet this film never becomes a complete parody of the character. Hans Zimmer composed a great score, which has a wonderful old, but energetic feel to it, and was among this year's Oscar nominees for Original Score. The one thing that really bugged me about this so-called "popcorn flick" was how much stuff was thrown into the plot regarding the case, and when Holmes eventually starts to reveal the entire mystery towards the end, I had somewhat lost count of which chemicals were used and how exactly everyone met their demise.

Robert Downey, Jr. single-handedly brings the character of Sherlock Holmes back to life, and does it in such a funny, fresh, and crazy way, that he proves once more that he could probably play a brick wall and still receive praise for it. This guy really succeeds in all of his roles, and not only does he have the right charisma and believable ingenuity to play the detective, but he's just so damn sympathetic. Dr. Watson is played by Jude Law, who sadly enjoys a very unfair reputation concerning his looks being better than his acting talent has great chemistry with Holmes and makes a rather convincing doctor and, once again different than in the books, is more than capable of taking out guys with a bigger biceps and Pecs than he has. Rachel McAdams looks cute, certainly, but her chances to act are very limited and most of the time her job is either to look hot or seduce Holmes, making their relationship rather dry, shallow and sparkless, while Mark Strong, whom I already liked in "Body of Lies" gives a menacing and creepy performance as Lord Blackwood.

"Sherlock Holmes" deserves compliments for its freshness and originality in bringing an old-fashioned literary character back to screen. Conan Doyle would probably role over in his grace if he knew this film existed, but those who really want to see an exciting, fast-paced and somewhat unusual flick, should definitely not miss this one.

Based on a popular short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the film tells the story of a man, who is born old and ages backwards, struggling to find a place in a society, which is afraid of the unusual and the unknown. Being Fincher's most expensive project to date, with a budget of $160 Million, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is somewhat of a fairy tale and a historic epic, that takes place in the 20th century, and in the end, has a bit too much ambition for its own good.

On the night the Great War finally ends, Benjamin Button is born in New Orleans, under "unusual circumstances". Thomas Button is confronted with the exact meaning of these words, when he finds out that his wife died in childbirth and that his child looks like the miniature version of an old man on his death bed. Desperate, he takes the child from his home and drops it on the stairs of a nursery home, where two young employees find it and decide to adopt it, despite its physical abnormalities. Although they expect the child, named Benjamin, to die soon, he starts to grow and to everyone's astonishment younger. After a couple of years, he meets Daisy, a curious girl, who immediately feels a certain affection for Benjamin although they couldn't be more different in their looks. Growing up in the nursery home, Benjamin frequently encounters death, as its takes one after another guest of the home, and eventually he decides to leave and go to sea on the tugboat of Captain Mike. Initially reluctant to take the old man on board, Mike is soon surprised by Benjamin's strong will and youthful spirit, and him and his crew travel all around the world eventually ending up in Russia. There Benjamin meets Elizabeth Abbot, who vegetates in an unhappy marriage and starts an affair with Benjamin, who eventually realizes that his true love, Daisy, is far home where he should be. But he questions himself whether a relationship is even possible, when two people age in different direction, and while one of them grows older the other one gets younger.

Watching this film like going through the photo album of a stranger, who evidently had a fascinating life, but we only get glimpses into it without any explanations of what lead to the situations. The film feels like a set of pictures, that was failed to put together properly to create a compact narrative. For the first hour, by far my favorite part of this film, from his early days in New Orleans to his career on the tugboat, I was really interested in the storyline and the strange character of Benjamin. But, as soon as he comes home from the war, the story begins to fall apart, and makes several jumps from one time period to another, without ever really going into them. New Orleans looks wonderfully nostalgic though and the scenes convey a unique atmosphere that make out the magic of this film. What it lacks in story development, the film makes up with an unreachable timelessness. Being filled with motifs of death, war, and loss, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is a highly melancholy film that has few happy moments and therefore becomes more of a historic drama, than a fantasy epic. It's highly philosophical, with Benjamin Button narrating quite a bit of the plot, and inserting his unique views on the world and its people.

As I mentioned previously, the inspiration for the movie was a 32 page short story. So, with the running time of the film just falling short of three hours, I felt that the plot was stretched out too far, and all in all the film is about 30 minutes too long. It's sad, because the story is really one of importance, and it would be a shame for it to get lost to some of the viewers. It's a complex movie, and one that requires a clear mind and attention. Some of the little things in the film really stood out for me, like the introduction story of the blind man, who creates a clock in memory of his fallen son, a shocking and unexpected hook to the story. But, while the film has some humorous elements, like an old man, who had some trouble during his life going out during thunderstorms, it is mostly very depressing, quiet and sad. While comparisons to the films "Forrest Gump", and especially "Big Fish" are almost bound to happen, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" doesn't quite have the passion and the energy of the other two films.

Benjamin Button is played by Brad Pitt, who more than deserved his Oscar nomination for a role that is unusually quiet and philosophical for him. While by no means a bad actor in his other projects, he usually tends to be a bit of the winking "funny guy", rather than the introverted outsider. His performance is striking, yet subtle, and it's especially his expressions and the tone of his voice that make his character so intriguing. Cate Blanchett adds another stunning performance to her long resumee of top-notch character performances. While not quite as mesmerizing as Pitt, she has this captivating aura, that makes her an intense presence on screen. Taraji P. Henson is excellent and proves her undeniable talent for dramatic roles. Tilda Swinton plays Benjamin's first true love in the cold Russia, and while her role is almost a cameo, her chemistry with Pitt is astounding.

The film has a lot going for itself, including the acting, the effects, the nostalgic settings, and the philosophical message that balanced some of the saddest themes of life so well, that it really made me think for many days. But in the end, I keep thinking back to the metaphorical photo album I described earlier and I just have to say the movie is not the masterpiece it should have been.

"Inception" is just brilliant. An unusual premise combined with intelligent story-telling and original writing, resulted in a fantastic science-fiction thriller with both a dramatic love story and an action-packed heist. Dreams have never been explored, defined and created in such an original way before in a film, and in a summer full of sequels and remakes, it's great to finally see a movie with brand-new and thought provoking material that is without a doubt one of the best pictures of the year so far.

Cobb is an extractor and when somebody is dreaming, he and his team will be able to access the subject's mind, find their way around it and then retrieve a specific piece of information. Together with his assistant Arthur and his architect Nash, he is working to retrieve something from the dream of Saito at the beginning of the film, but their mission fails when Saito discovers a flaw in the design of the dream and realizes that he is asleep. Cobb and Arthur are trying to escape from Japan, but Saito catches them and offers them a job, requiring them to perform the act of inception, planting an idea in somebody's mind instead of merely retrieving it. Although Arthur is strictly against it, Cobb reluctantly agrees, mainly because Saito offers him an opportunity to see his children again, who are cut off from their father in the United States. Cobb makes his way to Paris to assemble a new team for this mission, but as it turns out it maybe more difficult than anticipated to make it out alive of this mission.

No synopsis could ever do justice to the complex plot of this film, and the story depends on so many little factors that you simply have to see the film to completely understand it. "Inception" is complicated, yes, but if you can keep your brain sharp for the entire 2 1/2 hours, you are almost guaranteed to leave the movie theatre immensely satisfied with what you have just witnessed. The film may be complex, but at no point in this movie I was confused, and that says a lot about the way this film tries to explain its premise to the audience. You can try to compare this film with others, such as "The Matrix", but ultimately it's in a category all by itself, and could best be defined as a futuristic crime-thriller. Of course, the entire concept of accessing and manipulating dreams has to be explained to the baffled audience at first, before the big coup of planting an idea can take place, a part mostly filled out by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. He has to fill in Ellen Paige's character Ariadne, and his explanations sounded so scientific, that I had no trouble believing that such a deed could be possible.

The film also succeeds, because it cleverly balances an emotional love story, with numerous scenes of action, but still hardly ever slows down. Not a single moment seems to be wasted in this film, and I was captivated by the slowly untangling history between DiCaprio's character and his wife that was very reminiscent of a big puzzle, with small pieces being added throughout the film, but the complete picture only offered itself to the viewers at the end. Christopher Nolan truly shows his ability as a director through the perfectly choreographed action scenes, and the film already opens in high gears, with a great shooting scene. Once again, there is a lot happening in the first 15 minutes, and for a while you won't realize what is going on, but the art of this film is that everything seems to make sense sooner or later. There are several more chase scenes and even more shootings, but without a doubt the best action scene in this film, quite possibly one of the best ones ever shot for a film, involves Joseph Gordon-Levitt fighting off two thugs in the corridor of a hotel room with shifting and eventually no gravity at all.

I still can't believe that the young guy from "Titanic", turned out to be such a great actor, and even makes a convincing hero in an action film. Leonardo DiCaprio, against all odds, became a real badass in his film projects, and "Inception" is bound to give him his fourth Oscar nomination, and possibly his first win. He is fantastic, both as the leader of the team trying to plant the idea, and the tortured husband, who is haunted by the demons of his wife's death. There will definitely be several discussions about which actors with gather an Oscar nomination, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt is certainly a good candidate, if only for the beautiful action sequence without gravity. There is not much revealed about his character, but he has great charisma, and is really the only one who brings a few humorous moments into this film. Marion Cotillard, who is in high demand since "La Vie en Rose" three years ago, is at her very best as Cobb's deceased wife, who still haunts him in his dreams. The rest of Cobb's team consists of Ellen Page as Adriane, who does a great job, especially in her interactions with DiCaprio, Tom Hardy as the cynical Forgerer Eames, and Dileep Rao as the Chemist Yusuf. Ken Watanabe, who has a great authoritative presence, plays Saito, who seems to be a villain, but eventually turns out to be an honorable businessman, and Cillian Murphy plays the man who is supposed to have the idea planted in his head, who will inherit his father's entire business, despite him being disappointed with his son.

Inception is a movie highlight of the year 2010, and through its fresh concept will certainly be a candidate for the big trophy at next year's Oscars. Now, I just hope that nobody will attempt to make a sequel of this film and that Christopher Nolan will put just as much creativity into his next film, the third "Batman" movie.

Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymus von Munchhausen was a historic German nobleman, who became famous for throwing lavish parties at his home in Bodenwerder, where he told the most fantastic tall tales about his adventures. Now a well-known literary figure, Munchhausen has become a synonym for unbelievable and exciting adventures, that often involve tremendous exaggerations and even lies. It's not surprising that the wonderful stories of this man were eventually made into a movie, and interestingly enough it was the one that celebrated the 25 year anniversary of the German UFA film studios. Even more interesting though, is the fact that it was made in Nazi Germany during World War II, and yet doesn't contain one single anti-Semitic reference or propaganda for the cause of the National Socialist Party.

Extremely funny and hilariously entertaining, Josef von Baky created an unusual and highly original odyssey through Europe, of a man pursuing the exciting and adventurous. Those who have read the stories, know that some of Munchhausen's more famous deeds include his ride on the cannonball, tying his horse to the tip of a church tower and breaking into the ice, out of which he pulls himself by his own hairs. The first one mentioned can be found in the movie, as well as other humorous scenes, that perfectly fit into the Munchausen concept. Munchhausen lived at the end of the 18th century in Brunswick, but he always traveled around Europe with his loyal servant Christian Kuchenreuter. The story starts out with Munchhausen returning from one of his several trips to his residence in Bodenwerder, where all the jackets in his cabinet get rabies and Christian introduces a fascinating substance, that makes a man's beard grow in a matter of seconds. Hours later, Munchausen leaves for the court of Prince Anton Ulrich of Brunswick, who is commanded to leave for St. Petersburg, and would like Munchhausen to accompany him. On their way to Russia, Munchhausen and Christian encounter the dark Count Cagliostro, who is wanted all over Europe for performing notorious witchcraft. He plainly tells Munchhausen of his intentions to become count of the Courland, and asks Munchhausen to assist him, which he denies, by telling him that he has absolutely no intention of reigning. In St. Petersburg, he meets Katharina the Great and the two become lovers, and he also meets Cagliostro again, and warns him that Katharina intends to arrest him. Out of gratitude, Cagliostro gives Munchausen a ring that makes him invisible and the ultimate gift of eternal youth, as long as Munchhausen wants it.

Baron Munchhausen was never very complex in the original stories, as they mostly focused on his fairy tales, rather than the vast and interesting personality. But here, the man is a very deep and powerful character, who sees people die around him, while he possesses the gift of eternal life, and becomes more and more torn between his desire for adventure and that to share a mortal life with his friends and loved ones. For this movie the basic concept of the Munchhausen stories was changed a bit, with the film being somewhat of a life story, even though there is no real linear plot, with the narrative reminding more of episodes. While a lot of the film is actually more of a historical drama than fantasy, many scenes will bring you into the wonderful world of Baron Munchhausen, including the cream that makes your hair grow in a matter of seconds, the rifle that can shoot accurately for hundreds of miles and the ride to the moon in an air balloon. An exemplary tale of imagination and creative adventures, Munchhausen's visual effects can't measure up the ones of today, of course, but in perspective to the times, they are absolutely stunning.

Some of the acting in this movie really stands out, even though it mostly centers around the colorful sets. Hans Albers makes the perfect Baron Munchhausen, a witty, intelligent, charismatic and very deep character, who is not the perfect hero, but a man who goes through life trying to have it as exciting as possible. Whether he's deeply philosophical, in the middle of one of his fun adventures, or once again seducing a beautiful woman, Albers is extremely convincing as the flawed, but good-hearted Munchhausen, who learns a lot during his life, enough to choose mortality over eternal life at the end. The film features a huge ensemble of characters, and many of them are just part of one episodes in Munchhausen's life. Hermann Speelmans, who plays Munchhausen's loyal servant and friend Christian Kuchenreuter, was also an exemplary casting choice, and manages to be funny (growing his beard in a matter of seconds) and very emotional (rapid aging on the moon) in a number of scenes. Another performer who really stands out is Ferdinand Marian, as the mysterious Count Cagliostro, who is very power-hungry, self-serving, but in the end a thankful and appreciative man, who rewards Munchhausen for warning him by giving him the eternal youth. Brigitte Horney as Katharina the Great is also great in her role, as the proud monarch, who is completely charmed by Munchhausen.

Another thing that might shock you is the nudity in this movie, that wouldn't get past any US-censor these days, as well as some pretty explicit sexual jokes. Therefore, "Munchhausen" really is a fairy tale for adults and not necessarily for children.

What's left to say, is that "Munchhausen" is a beautiful tale of adventures and imagination, that is an impressive document of what Germany's film industry was able to conjure in the 1940s already. And when Hans Albers rides on the cannon ball, turns his head to the audience, and takes off his hat in greeting, you will completely be captured by his charismatic and smart personality that brings the magic to this outstanding movie.

I always thought that "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" was the weakest book of the series, because it just feels like a bridge between Book 5 and 7, that doesn't have anything to offer on its own. The whole plot basically centers around the romantic problems of Harry, Ron and Hermione, and Harry and Dumbledore traveling through memories that involve Lord Voldemort's past. The excitement factor was just absent for pretty much the first 3/4 of the book, and while the final was quite thrilling, it also fell short of some of the others in previous books. Now, with that in mind, I went to see the film with rather low expectations, and expected to hate it and be mad for a long time that they butchered the Harry Potter film series beyond saving. Well, it turns out I was wrong. All in all, the film was a pleasant surprise, and I have to say that I really enjoyed it. Was it the worst of the six Harry Potter movies? Probably yes. Is it worth watching though? Definitely!

Well, as I said before, "The Half-Blood Prince", the book, as well as the movie, feel a bit empty. Considering that the book has 607 pages, and the movie is more than 2 1/2 hours long, there is just not enough exciting stuff to keep up the thrill for the whole time. One of the pluses is certainly the humor, and I can say for certain, that I haven't laughed as much in any Harry Potter movie since "The Chamber of Secrets". The hilarious, but often not too far-fetched romantic dialogue is so cheesy and ridiculous, that you just have to be amused by it. But like "Order of the Phoenix", the movie  has a very dark and claustrophobic atmosphere from time to time, especially the very beginning and the end. In between, you almost forget that there is an evil dark wizard out there, trying to kill our beloved main character. While the two elements, comic and dramatic maybe a little imbalanced, they are connected relatively well and for most of the time, the audience will definitely be on the edge of their seats, even if you have read the book already. But then, who hasn't these days? "The Half-Blood Prince", while still being a faithful adaptation of the book, makes quite a bit of changes, cuts and additions, so that there are even one or two surprises that you didn't see coming. Interestingly enough, for example, it was decided to completely leave out the battle between the Order of the Phoenix and the students against the Death Eaters, supposedly because it would distract from the upcoming Battle of Hogwarts in "The Deathly Hallows". Anyway, instead we get a thrilling replacement, namely an attack on the Burrow by the Death Eaters, and Harry and Ginny chasing Bellatrix Lestrange and Fenrir Greyback through the fields surrounding the Weasley family home.

The movies have clearly become darker and darker with each new entry, but therefore we also get to see more fights and actions. What I really want to say with that, is that the demand for high quality special effects in the Harry Potter movies is now greater than ever. And the Visual Effects are quite stunning, with the Millennium Bridge in London collapsing after an attack of Lord Voldemort's death eaters, the Burrow exploding, or Dumbledore casting a powerful fire charm against a group of inferi, re-animated dead bodies. While especially the destruction of the bridge is simply there to open the movie with a bang, a couple of stunning scenes can't hurt a movie that is relatively slow-paced and for the most part relies on dialogue, rather than action. All in all, it should have been great practice for the upcoming two movies based on the seventh and final Harry Potter book "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows".

The performances are also great, especially outstanding are Michael Gambon (who finally nails his role as Dumbledore), Jim Broadbent (who is one of the comedy center points of this film as Horace Slughorn) and Alan Rickman (who really only has to be on screen and don't say a word, to scare the crap out of everyone) The thing about the Harry Potter movies, is that no matter how bad the review is, people will still go and see them, just because Harry Potter is in the title. But, while "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" really is nothing more than a bridge to the final entry of the series, it is rather enjoyable, well-made and has some pretty good acting. (4/5)

Even though the plot is not the most gripping one, the movie combines the comic and dark sides of the Harry Potter universe quite well and manages to entertain for most of its running time.

Well, I doubt that this is the movie that Ridley Scott will be most remembered for. For someone like him, who has made numerous critically acclaimed and award winning films, it becomes more and more difficult to produce a movie that leaves a considerable impression with the audience. "Body of Lies" is a very enjoyable and thrilling movie, that kept me on the edge of my seat for almost the entire running time, but the material just isn't spectacular enough to be remembered indefinitely. A spy, who has to work against a net of terrorists in a war zone, is probably not the most original idea ever, but, it still manages to be entertaining, especially if there are enough twists, and things turn out the way you don't expect them to. If there is a surprise, even the oldest concept can fulfill the purpose of attracting an audience.

The war on Terrorism in the Middle East is just as bad as ever, with numerous Americans acting as spies working to infiltrate extremist cells. After the most recent bombing in Sheffield, England, the CIA officer Roger Ferris uses his connections in Iraq, to hunt down the terrorist leader Al-Saleem. Even though, he and his partner manage to track down some valuable information, Ferris' asset dies in the explosion of their car. Ferris has an extremely strained relationship with his boss Ed Hoffman, who trusts in permanent observation, and refuses to make the operations any easier for Ferris. He sends him to Jordan, where the Intel Ferris acquired in Iraq leads them, and is supposed to make contact with the head of the Intelligence Department. His name is Hani Salaam, and while he is more than ready to help Ferris with his investigation, he requires one things from him, which is never to lie to him. Ferris, who realizes that Salaam puts loyalty and honesty above everything else, tries to form a complex bond with him, that is purely based on trust. But, while Ferris is successful and stands quite high in Salaam's eyes, his boss Hoffman, refuses to tell Ferris about other missions he's authorized, and eventually he screws up one of Ferris' operations. Eventually that ends with a chase through the city, where Ferris is attacked by dogs, and has to go to the hospital, where he meets the Iranian nurse Aisha. Trying to hide his true purpose of being in Jordan, he becomes closer to her, but since Hoffman proved that he can't be trusted, he is quite worried that he will loose his target.

Ridley Scott, like very few others, knows exactly how to generate suspense and keep the viewers on the edge of their seats throughout the entire movie. That is what he does in "Body of Lies" and doesn't even need that much action (chases and fights to be more precise) to achieve his goal. While we know the main villain from an early point on, the movie folds out as less than a hunt for him, but for those who turn out not be worth the trust put in them. A large web of lies is weaved around the characters and it is for the audience and Roger Ferris to find out, who his allies are. After a large number of twists and turns though, they become a little bit to twisted and turned, and some of the events seem rather implausible, or at least play out a little bit to conveniently. But, well, otherwise the movie probably wouldn't be as entertaining and gripping as it turned out to be.

A lot of the movie's continued suspense throughout the entire running time is due to the interesting relationship between the characters of Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe. DiCaprio stars as the rough CIA-operative Roger Ferris, who sees himself confronted with violence and hardship every day. He proves once again that he is no longer an adorable boyish actor with a baby face but a great character performer with a rough-edge attitude. His face,surrounded by a horrible, but effective beard, now has a powerful edge, it didn't have 10 years ago, which allows him to show some emotions like anger much better. The only other big name in "Body of Lies" is Russell Crowe, who plays Roger Ferris's supervisor in Langley. Ed Hoffman is overweight (Crowe gained 63 pounds for the film), and pretty much doesn't give a crap about the people he commands, as long as they deliver. He and Ferris are strongly contrasting characters and Crowe, who is actually pretty hard to recognize here, plays his role a lot calmer than usual. That is an interesting change for a man, who is used to play no-nonsense characters.

All in all, the movie has a very rough element to it. Since most of the action takes place in the Middle East, the locations are not exactly the most pleasant ones. A certain kind of sadness and depression can be found throughout the entire movie, which illustrates the senseless war fought in Iraq and against terrorism. This is an enemy that can't be fought, unless the right people are targeted, and those that deserve our trust, can be trusted. But considering that even those that are on the same side, lie to each other without any regrets, it seems impossible. The thrill and constant suspicion of never knowing who the good guys are, keep "Body of Lies" alive for the entire running time, as well as DiCaprio and Crowe in two great performances. It won't become a classic, but shows a piece of the contemporary time period that won't be forgotten. (3.5/5)

Even though the pace is not the fastest one and certain plot elements are not exactly realistic, the constant atmosphere of suspicion, as well as the shaky relationship between DiCaprio's and Crowe's characters, will keep you on the edge of your seat.

--Some minor spoilers, skip the part that describes the plot if you don't want to know anything about it--

Personally, I didn't like the second "Ice Age" movie that much. I thought it just wasn't original enough, and couldn't make an impact compared to the great original. So, since movies franchises often have the tendency to get worse with each sequel, I wasn't expecting very much of the third Ice Age movie "Dawn of the Dinosaurs". But, I have to admit, it was quite entertaining and funny, with many jokes and funny situations. The change of location from the white ice world, the main characters inhabited in the first two films, to the lush and green jungle, also did the movie some good, because the optic is just different and more exciting. While the first Ice Age movie still remains unreached by either of the sequels, the third one considerably improves on the second one, with more humor, better action and interesting ideas.       

Manfred and Ellie, the two mammoths, are expecting a baby, and Manfred, who is really happy to become a father tries everything to make his wife more comfortable and happy. Meanwhile, the saber-toothed tiger Diego, has to deal with the fact, that he is not the youngest anymore, and that his instincts and reflexes are getting worse. He decides to leave his herd, because he feels his life is coming to an end. Sid, the sloth, wants to have children of his own, and when he discovers three abandoned eggs in a cave, he decides to take them with him. One morning, he realizes that three dinosaurs have hatched from the eggs, and to make matters worse their mother is already looking for them. She attacks Sid and her three babies and abducts them to her world, a large, lush and green jungle, that is located directly under the thick layer of ice. Manfred, Ellie, the two opossums Crash and Eddie, decide to save Sid and eventually meet up with Diego on the way again. They are then joined by the mad wannabe pirate Buck, a weasel, who lost his eye to a gigantic monster, named Rudy, that lives somewhere deep in the jungle. Sid, meanwhile, tries to convince the dinosaurs' mother, that he can provide more for the children than her, but eventually has to accept that children belong to their real mother. The squirrel Scrat, once again reunited with his precious nut, has to deal with an entirely new problem. A femme fatal squirrel, who uses her charm to take Scrat's nut away from him. Being a lot smarter and trickier than him, she gets to keep the nut for most of the time, but eventually falls in love with Scrat, after he saves her from deadly lava. But what is more important to Scrat, his nut or his new girlfriend?

With so many animated movies flooding the market these days, it becomes quite hard to come up with new ideas. Talking animals certainly isn't one, but if the characters have enough history and emotion, it really doesn't matter. "Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs" really profits from a slightly new approach to the material, which includes some very obvious parodies. The new character of Buck was most definitely inspired by Jack Sparrow from "Pirates of the Caribbean" and the final battle could have directly come from one of the "Star Wars" movies. Then we have the dinosaurs, who are, of course, extremely evil and always hunt down the main characters. All in all, the movies appears slightly stretched and has some relatively slow bits, for which the beginning and ending compensate, though. Especially the first 20-25 minutes, are some of the funniest in any Ice Age movie. And the scenes involving Scrat and his new girlfriend are just as funny as they have always been.

Then we have once again, the actors who give the characters their voices. Ray Romano, who has such a unique voice, speaks Manfred, Denis Leary is Diego, John Leguizamo is Sid and Queen Latifah is Ellie. Buck, the pirate, is voiced by British actor Simon Pegg. Animated movies can never be judged according to acting, because the true leading actors here are the animators. But just as we are used to, the previously mentioned actors put their best effort into providing their character's voice.

So, Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs is entertaining and enjoyable, but certainly not the best animated movie of the year. Still it is a good 90 minute time filler, and those who enjoyed the previous Ice Age films, will definitely also like this one. (3.5/5)

The third installment in the Ice Age movie franchise is funny and entertaining, with some very original ideas, but certain lengths throughout the entire film.

--Some minor spoilers, skip the part that describes the plot if you don't want to know anything about it--

Angels and Demons, Good and Evil, Science and Faith. The title of the movie adaptation of Dan Brown's novel from 2000 allows for many interpretations, literally and figuratively. But the real question about the film is whether it overcame the demons of its predecessor "The Da Vinci Code", which was panned by critics, despite becoming a huge financial success. Ironically "The Da Vinci Code" was much more popular in its printed form than "Angels and Demons", but yet the later one turned out to be the better film.

From the CERN Laboratories in Switzerland a canister containing a new, dangerous substance called anti-matter is removed and the head scientist brutally murdered. After the death of the pope and on the day of the Conclave, where the cardinals come together to elect the new head of the Catholic church, the four favorites for the post are kidnapped. Robert Langdon, a professor of symbology, is called upon by the Vatican to assist them in their search of the four cardinals, because they have received a disturbing phone call, indicating that a secret and supposedly extinct group of scientists that refer to themselves as the Illuminati are responsible. Together with Vittoria Vettra from CERN and Captain Olivetti he tries to find the cardinals by following a path of illumination, that leads to four churches in Rome and eventually to the headquarters of the society. Meanwhile the Camarlengo, Cardinal Strauss and the commander of the Swiss Guard, Richter, are faced with the annihilation of the Vatican, as the vile with the antimatter has been hidden somewhere deep in the city and will go off at midnight. A race against time begins and more than ever loyalty and faith have to come together for a war that might end in the total defeat of the Catholic Church.

While the movie version of "The Da Vinci Code" followed the book very closely, Ron Howard made a number of changes to "Angels and Demons", most of them for the better. He rewrote some of the characters and could therefore even cross out some of them completely, the most vital one being Maximilian Kohler, director of CERN. Characteristics and certain dialog scenes were also shifted, something that might confuse those who read the book recently, but for those who did a long time ago, it will hardly be important. Indeed, there are some bigger differences, but pretty much all of them improve the plot, and take out some major flaws of the book. The pacing of the movie is also better than its prequel, with a lot more action and less talking, which makes the 140 minutes go by very quickly.

Tom Hanks, who once again plays the role of Robert Langdon, is more involved this time, doing a lot of running and always being in the center of things. That does him a lot of good, because he gets the chance to actually show some of his acting talents, and serve as more than just the person who has to tell the audience the historic trivia that the viewer needs to follow the plot. Kudos also to Ewan McGregor, who gives a very strong and emotional performance as the Camerlengo. He's very believable in his role and like Tom Hanks has a very strong presence on the screen. Ayelet Zurer on the other hand doesn't get very much to work with, and her best scene once again brings the typical church motive of women not being trustworthy to the top. Pierfrancesco Favino as Olivetti and Stellan Skarsgard as Richter both do a really good job, especially the later one as the grumpy leader of the Swiss Guard, who frequently complains about Langdon's old-fashioned and supposedly naive methods of finding the kidnapper of the cardinals. We also see Armin Mueller-Stahl as Cardinal Strauss, a relatively minor role, that he still manages to play great. Interestingly enough "Angels and Demons" has less well-known cast than "The Da Vinci Code" but at most times features better performances.

Due to the controversial status of Dan Brown surrounding the Catholic Church, the Vatican denied the permission to film "Angels and Demons" in the original churches in Rome. Anyway, the production designers did a terrific job recreating the interiors, with all the artwork and nostalgic charm you can only find in a place like that. Hans Zimmer's music is bombastic and powerful, making several scenes more exciting than they are anyway.

It wouldn't be surprising if "Angels and Demons" became just as much of a hit as "The Da Vinci Code" which made $750 Million worldwide, despite negative reviews. The biggest flaws of the movie mostly come from the book already and if you enjoyed "The Da Vinci Code" already there is no doubt you will also like "Angels and Demons" which improved on its prequel without a doubt. It won't end up being a classic, but is still quite powerful, entertaining and a feast for the eyes. (3.5/5)

A fast-paced, thrilling action flick, that does pretty much everything right "The Da Vinci Code" didn't and manages to entertain for its total running time, which after all is more than two hours.

In a very moving and unsentimental Drama, Sönke Wortmann brings us the amazing story of the German National Soccer Team, who unexpectedly defeated the Hungarians in the final of the World Cup 1954 in Switzerland.

After being a prisoner of war for 9 years, Richard Lubanski comes home to his family, only to find himself in a world, strange and unknown to him. His oldest son Bruno is a communist, who plays Jazz music for a living, his daughter Ingrid helps her mother at the family's bar, and his youngest son Matthias is a soccer fan and a good friend of Helmut Rahn, a player of the German national team. Richard in his embitterment and desperation drives his family apart, and for a long time fails to realize that he's the one responsible for it. In the second plot line, the journalist Paul Ackermann gets the honorable assignment of reporting for the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" in Switzerland during the World Cup, news not to well received by his wife Annette, who was already planning their honeymoon. She insists on coming with him and during her stay in Switzerland she learns quite a bit about soccer and in the end knows more about it than her husband. The German National team, under Coach Sepp Herberger, is confronted with very difficult opponents and after an embarrassing defeat against the Hungarians, many Germans already see the team's chances gone of entering the next round. Rahn, who got drunk after the loss against Hungary, but learned from his mistakes, and Fritz Walter, the captain of the team, though, both very ambitious players, try to motivate the whole team and eventually they play in the final, once again against the Hungarians.

Whether you are a soccer fan or not is of little importance when watching this movie, as it is more about family, friendship and teamwork than about the sport itself. At times moving, at others funny, "Das Wunder von Bern" is a wonderful portrait of Germany after World War II, a desperate nation in desire of a miracle. The young Louis Klamroth gives an extremely good performance, as do Peter Franke, Sascha Göpel and especially Peter Lohmeyer as Richard Lubanski. All in all, an excellent piece of German history. (9.5/10)

"From the very beginning, we have wondered how life began, what our purpose is and where we are headed. We have struggled to understand time, matter, the infinite universe, who we are and if we are alone. Great minds have come up with the most wonderful and the most terrifying answers. We invite you to join us on this great journey!" This opening narration by Stephen Hawking is not exactly accurate, because all of the six episodes attempt to answer only one question, and that is where we are headed. The answer is usually the same: Society and Technology will cause the downfall of humans, machines will take over the Earth and the people will annihilate themselves with nuclear weapons. Whatever the case, the next 100-200 years won't be pleasant, according to the Masters.

Masters of Science Fiction gets its title from the authors of the Stories, the episodes are based on. Robert Heinlein, author of the great Sci Fi novel "Stranger in a Strange Land" is represented, as well as John Kessel, Howard Fast, Walter Mosley, Harlan Ellison and Robert Sheckley. The truth is, the ideas of the episodes are always extremely good. Creativity and Originality can be found in all of the six episodes, but while some have very interesting plots, others are quite dull, and lack exciting scenes and dialog.

Even though, the series features some great actors, most of them are terribly underused. Sam Waterston, Terry O'Quinn and John Hurt are the only ones, who get to use their talent in a large number of scenes, while Judy Davis, James Cromwell, Brian Dennehey, Sean Astin and especially Malcolm McDowell shine in the scenes they have, but often make very short or badly written appearances.

Now as far as the individual episodes are concerned, I will go from the worst to best. By far the biggest disappointment was "Watchbird", especially because it had great potential due to the actors (Sean Astin and James Cromwell) and some good ideas (computer birds, who are programmed to attack anyone with the intentions to kill someone). But the whole plot just drags along and the end does not satisfy the viewer.

"Little Brother" is not exactly bad, but in my opinion horribly written. To have computers as the judges in the future índeed was a great idea, but like Watchbird, a lot of potential was wasted, due to overlong scenes. Clifton Collins, Jr. acts quite well given the terrible script.

"The Awakening" now can actually be called good. The writing was all right and Terry O'Quinn once again proves what a wonderful actor he is. But the political message was just a little too extreme, that all countries are willing to lay down their arms, except the United States. That might actually reflect reality to a certain extent, but this was definitely exaggerated.

Now, as for "The Discarded", that episode was quite a treat. John Hurt is perfectly cast in his role, on a ship full of disfigured people, who are suffering from RIGGUM. The message might seems a little extreme, but we do live in a society, where people do everything to be perfect and I don't think this future is too far fetched. The only flaw of the episodes is once again, that some scenes are a little dull.

Heinlein's "Jerry was a Man" starrs a great Malcolm McDowell and Anne Heche, who plays the seventh richest woman in the world. When she finds out that Tibur Cargrew and his company create humanoids, with a limited brain capacity, to do dangerous or unpleasant jobs, she feels sorry for them and even adopts one of them. A fierce legal battle erupts, as to whether Jerry, a humanoid, has feelings and should be considered a man.

Last, but certainly not least "A Clean Escape" is in my opinion the highlight of the series. A woman, interrogating a man in a room might not sound too interesting at first but the shocking ending and the great acting by Judy Davis and especially Sam Waterston make this episode entertaining, gripping and does not leave us cold after the ending.

In conclusion, I do recommend the series to people who like Science Fiction, but I would rent the DVD. True, the episodes are not everyone's taste and some of them are quite mediocre.

Lie to Me is a very interesting series, with a lot of humor and a very interesting premise in my opinion. In addition the 4 Cast members all play their role very good and add to the show's freshness.

Tim Roth (great as always!) plays Dr. Cal Lightman, a human lie-detector, who's able to detect any lie from people's body language. That ability comes in handy when catching criminals, but it also provides him with the misfortune of always knowing when someone is not honest with him, sometimes leading to unfortunate situations. Lightman is a cynic and unpleasant character, who's willing to do anything to find out if someone is telling the truth or not.

The series also features a strong supporting cast, including Kelli Williams as Dr. Gillian Foster, whose husband is cheating on her, a fact everyone of her colleagues is aware of, except herself. Brendan Hines' character is always telling the truth no matter how embarrassing and Monica Raymund starrs as Ria Torres, who has the natural ability of seeing if someone is lying. That often leads to conflict with Lightman, who refuses to believe her ability is as accurate as his, since he needed years of training, while she was just born with her talent.

Yes, there are parallels with other series, especially "The Mentalist", but those are pretty much limited to the ability of the main character being able to detect the truth from people's movements and voices. Besides "Lie to Me" is focused on the science of detecting lies, something completely ignored in "The Mentalist". For example, it will take a person who's telling the truth longer to respond than one who's lying, because the one telling the truth needs to think about the answer.

The only real flaw after 5 episodes is in my opinion that not enough character history is provided. We literally don't know anything about the characters, except a few details. I have no doubt we'll eventually find out more, but it's about time they start. All in all, the series is great fun and entertainment, and maybe you'll be able to pick up one or the other lie in the future, thanks to Lightman's group.

I had a farm in Africa! Those words, wonderfully spoken by the great Meryl Streep, immediately pull you into the movie and from the first moment on, you are hypnotized by the gorgeous landscape, the beautiful music and the great performances. Even though there are several movies I have yet to see, this one is definitely somewhere on top of my list of the greatest movies ever. Sometimes you'll come across a movie that will keep you thinking for days and weeks to come and in my opinion, this is one of those movies.

The plot centers around Karen Blixen, who moves to Africa with Baron Bror Blixen, and marries him there. She is not in love with him and her real interest in him is his title, which he is quite aware of. Karen, who is not familiar with the African language or customs, struggles at first to establish her person, but with her kindness and eagerness soon starts to make people respect her. She also meets Denys Finch Hatton and Berkeley Cole, who are captivated by her way of telling stories. When the war breaks out, Bror leaves to fight with the British and Karen starts to realize that she actually wants him to be there for her. After a tragedy strikes, she has to accept that her wish will never come true and she starts turning to Denys...

In my opinion, there are several key things that make this movie the masterpiece it is. First of all, the acting is probably some of the best I've ever seen, especially from Meryl Streep. It is true, that there are few, if any actresses, who can keep up her with her strong presence and aura. She completely vanishes in her role as the ambitious, but left alone Karen Blixen and brilliantly shows us the conflict her character is in. Robert Redford's performance is nothing short of hers, and it is a scandal that he did not receive an Oscar nomination for his role as Finch Hutton, a charismatic hunter, who is just not willing to form a bond with anyone to closely. Klaus Maria Brandauer also deserves a nod at his point. He frequently manages to dominate the scenes he is in, even though he has a lot less screen time than Redford or Streep, a shame. The rest of the supporting cast, especially Michael Kitchen as Berkeley Cole, Malick Bowens as Farah and Michael Gough as Lord "D", also stand out.

Africa has rarely been more beautiful on screen, than in this movie. During the plane sequence were are invited into a world of the unknown and the undiscovered, and the score by John Barry will most certainly give you goosebumps. The main theme is used several times throughout the film and every time it is more beautiful than the time before.

To be honest, the only shocking thing about this movie, is the low rating on IMDb. A 7.0 is not what Out of Africa deserves, and in my opinion it should be among the Top 250. Rarely a movie has captured me as much as this movie did. Watch it and you won't regret it, I promise

This series was one of the more pleasant surprises of 2008 and even though I didn't expect too much, Leverage has grown on me and I sure was glad to hear it got renewed for a second season. The show is quite light-hearted and has some excellent humor and action, mixing both together brilliantly.

Leverage centers around a team of "honest criminals" led by Nathan Ford (Academy Award Winner Timothy Hutton), a former insurance investigator, who quit his job after his company refused to pay for the treatment of his terminally ill son. Since then Ford has been a heavy drinker, a reoccurring element in the story lines. He always thinks 3 steps ahead of everyone to ensure the team's success, which is usually the case.

The rest of the team consists of the technology specialist Hardison, who has some brilliant one liners, Eliott, who is trained in 50,000 different kinds of martial arts (at least that's what it seems like), Parker, a thief and antisocial person, who refuses to show any kind of emotion and Sophie, an actress, who is horrible on stage, but brilliant when it comes applying her talent for the success of the team.

Now even though the team frequently uses illegal methods to achieve their goals, they do it to help the socially weak, who are abused by people higher up the hierarchy. All in all, the series is a mix of Robin Hood, Ocean's Eleven and the A-Team. The only real flaw is that some of the team's methods just work too conveniently and once in a while you think: "Yeah sure, that's gonna work!" But those are usually minor and if you want to watch a funny series, with some good action, this is the right stuff for you.

--This review includes some minor spoilers--

Many so-called film experts said the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien could never be made into a movie, because of the complex story and all the characters involved. People grew even more skeptic when Peter Jackson, who had only made a bunch of low-budget Horror movies, decided to give it a try. Therefore my expectations were quite low, when I went to the movies, especially since I wasn't a very big fan of the books. OK, they are quite well-written, but at some points they are just boring and too complicated to understand. Now when the movie ended and the credits started to role, I had tears in my eyes. It was one of those moments I was so glad to have been proved wrong. This movie is a masterpiece of fantasy, and back then I didn't know that the sequels would be even better.

The dark lord Sauron created a powerful ring, that contained all his evil and with it he managed to conquer all of MiddleEarth. Isildur, king of Gondor, cut it off during a battle and even though he could have destroyed Sauron's evil forever, he decided to keep it and use it against his enemies. The ring betrayed Isildur and led to his death, disappearing in a river, lying there for 2500 years. Then it was found by the creature Gollum, who took it into the mountains, where he was consumed by it, eventually splitting his personality and driving him completely insane. The ring, which can prolong life, left Gollum after 500 years and was then found by the hobbit Bilbo. Hobbits, small creatures who prefer life when its comfortable, usually don't get involved in adventures. Usually.

Because at Bilbo's 111th birthday, the wizard Gandalf shows up and after Bilbo demonstrates the rings power at his birthday party realizes that he is in possession of Sauron's ring. Realizing that Sauron already send the Nazgul, dark riders, who can feel the ring's presence after Frodo, he urges him to leave his hometown. Frodo, who is accompanied his friend Sam, and the troublemakers Merry and Pippin, finally makes it to Bruchtal, a city of Elves, where the council decides that the ring has to be destroyed in the fires of Mount Doom, which requires a long and dangerous journey. There Frodo decides to take to journey and Sam, Merry, Pippin come with him once again. Gandalf, the strider Aragorn, the elf Legolas, the dwarf Gimli, and the man Boromir, also pledge to aid Frodo and they all become the Fellowship of the Ring.

That is pretty much the first half of the film, the second half depicting the Fellowship's journey over the mountains, the mines of Moria and the Elven Forrest.

The first film in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy brilliantly introduces us to the main characters who are all greatly cast. Especially Ian McKellen as Gandalf (Oscar Nominated), Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn (very emotional), John Rhys-Davies as Gimli (very funny), Sean Bean as Boromir and of course Elijah Wood as Frodo.

The film was filmed in New Zealand, and the spectacular Cinematography makes me look forward to the Blu-Ray release of the film. Also the music, by Howard Shore is one of the greatest ever composed for a movie. The Visual Effects are also brilliant, and you will have a hard time telling what is GCI and what not.

All in all, there is really nothing negative you can say about this movie. As I stated before you don't have to like the books to become a fan of the movies and if you buy Fellowship of the Rings on DVD, I really recommend the Extended Version. It really adds a lot to the story and the backgrounds of several characters.