Reviews

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCjCNQ_KGIs

The film stars the fantastic Anton Yelchin and the legendary Colin Ferrell. Anton Yelchin is Charlie, a guy living in a house and Colin Ferrell is his neighbour. We find out pretty early on that Colin Ferrell is a vampire. And now horror ensues.

Also, Charlie's friend that tipped him off to the fact of his neighbour being a vampire is none other than McLovin. Christopher Mintz Plasse is Ed.

Ed is an old friend of Charlie's that he prefers to avoid. Basically, the exact same character as Fogel from Superbad with the twist of being paranoid about vampires. I can see the casting choice. Seems a lot like the work of Alison Jones.

Colin Ferrell is just amazing in this. He's incredibly creepy and he feels completely natural. This is a real vampire we're seeing here. Also fantastic in his role is David Tennant as vampire expert Peter Vincent who Charlie goes to for advice.

I saw the original movie and I have to say that it's not really that great. Its bad in an 80s way of being bad. This remake however has made everything modern. And when you have modern, you have 3D. I saw this film in 3D. the 3D was used pretty well for a horror movie. When you have this type of movie, it's always better to have a more obnoxious 3D. And this movie had some obnoxious 3D, but it was just the right amount. A lot of what I noticed was when there was just an explosion there was always 3D ashes floating through the air. That was pretty cool.

With 3D of course you have CGI blood, which has proved to be horrible in most cases. They seemed to get it right here. My only problem is the blood that spurts out at you as a 3D effect. That only happened once, but it's an example of obnoxious 3D. The frights in the movie are done well, but the scares are elevated by tense scenes.

However, even more than tension there is a lot of comedy throughout the film. At moments, I felt like I was watching an R-rated teen comedy. It might have been because McLovin was there, but I still think people will be surprised by the equal amount of laughs to frights. In fact, it almost felt more like a comedy than a horror movie, which I have no complaints against. Horror comedies are always entertaining.

Overall, I think this was a very fun movie that can't possibly not entertain you.

Video review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYmxCULsEao

The film is about three Israeli Mossad agents who got famous for capturing a notorious Nazi war criminal in 1966. The details remained secret, but the trio struggle to keep some revelations from coming to light. The film takes place in two different time lines in the 60's and the 90's.

This movie starts out completely hard to understand in my opinion. The intro flashes by fast and I had a feeling that because of that I was going to be confused for the rest of the movie. It shows us the characters in their older age first and I'm unaware on which character was even part of the mission. Once the 1966 storyline begins, I started to understand what everything meant and it all started to make sense to me.

So, if I just so happened to be watching this at home I would have turned it off in the first 10 minutes because I would be completely confused. I'm glad I didn't give up on this. This is a thriller that builds tension every step of the way and to my surprise because I didn't even know this was going to be a thriller. I thought this was a movie about accounting. Seriously.

The concept of Jewish people seeking revenge while under cover completely reminded me of Inglourious Basterds. And it wasn't just the concept, I also got that kind of vibe from the suspense. And that could never be a bad thing!

We were introduced to an older character at the beginning that looks exactly this guy Stephan, but it turns out the character is actually the older Sam Worthington. If the movie didn't actually use their names to tell us who was who I would only be able to tell by the personalities. And the personalities, including facial expressions stick. Some pretty darn good facial continuity there.

The cast is overall pretty good. Everyone is great, but then you have Sam Worthington who has developed a reputation of wooden acting. I happen to agree with this as he always seems to have the least defined personality. This is an improvement from his narration from Avatar as he isn't too bad in this except he doesn't really have that many lines. It's almost like his limited acting range suited the role that he was in. There was a moment when he talked German it seemed like he was a completely different guy, but for all I know it could have been dubbed.

The absolute best thing about this movie is that it's completely unpredictable. It was a blessing that I went into it completely confused rather than knowing what was going to happen from the very beginning. The film plays with it's suspense and the surprises were strong enough to make some people in my theatre gasp. If that isn't good suspense, I don't know what is.

8/10, I think you should give this film a chance.

Funny or Die Presents is the new comedy series from HBO, which would basically be the same type of content you would see on Funny or Die. Since it doesn't allow you to rate the segments on TV, it's a mixed bag of some funny sketches, as well as some that are just plain awful.

Will Ferrell launched his popular comedy video website in 2007. In that short time, it's already been producing some of the funniest videos on the internet, that is when it's funny. That is only half of Funny or Die.

There is a certain process to Funny or Die. After watching the video, viewers have the option of giving it a good rating (Funny) or a bad rating (Die) and there is a meter displaying the percentage of people who rated it Funny. It's just like Rotten Tomatoes, but with comedy sketches. The website of course has more Die than Funny, but you don't have to watch them.

I really like how the show is set up like a half-hour television network with 2-5 minute programs, like SCTV has done in the past. The show has some great retro credits and the Steve Tom is very funny when he introduces the segments.

Does any of this sound funny to you?

Drunk History: A drunk person (Jen Kirkman) retells a notable event in history, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, with celebrities mouthing her words. Lincoln (Will Ferrell), Frederick Douglass (Don Cheadle) and Mary Todd Lincoln (Zooey Deschanel) were part of the reenactment. This could be interesting for them to get big names to be part of this. I would even say that it was mildly amusing, but it went on for far too long. I might not have sat through the whole thing on the site so.....low Funny.

Safety Saw: A mock infomercial shows a new safety feature on a power saw. As long as a hamster in a wheel keeps moving, the saw will stop as soon as it makes contact. He demonstrates using a hot dog, followed by his penis. I think you can see where this goes. It's disgusting and not funny at all. Die!

Designated Driver: A sober man (Paul Scheer) picks up his drunk friend (Rob Riggle) from a bar; chaos ensues. If only for how crazy Rob Riggle acts in this, it's the best of the episode. Funny!

Space Baby: Baby in space. Baby has to save Fred Willard. WTF!!! This sketch felt like filler and a colossal waste of Fred Willard's comedic abilities. Die! Die! Die!

Overall, it's a very low-brow show and there's a chance that it could get very funny over the next 11 episodes. If you enjoy a movie like Step Brothers, I guarantee you will get something out of this.

The premiere of the second season was quite an enjoyable episode. Sheldon and his anxious family stand vigil at the hospital while his father, Sam Blecher is repeatedly on death's door. Dave Foley (Kids in the Hall) guest stars as a doctor who might be a little too eager to see Sam pass on. Definitely check out this great adult show on HBO. A detailed analysis of the series after the jump.

Generally, I dislike Canadian humor. They never help out our stereotypes. That was why I could never get into Corner Gas and I won't be watch the upcoming Hiccups or Dan for Mayor. One of the few exceptions which didn't feel completely Canadian was Kids in the Hall. This particular show, Less Than Kind happens to be written and produced by one of the founding members of Kids, Mark McKinney. Perhaps, he's better known in the U.S. for being a cast member on SNL from 1995-1997.

Less Than Kind features Sheldon Blecher an overweight Winnipeg teenager living with his dysfunctional Jewish family. I like the show because it's not trying to glamourize Canada by making it look fun, it's the place last place Sheldon wants to be. In fact, the theme song is titled "I Hate Winnipeg." Less Than Kind was airing on City TV last year. Despite the fact that it was on one of Canada's major networks last year and that the show is about a family, this is a surprisingly adult show, filled with constant f-bombs and the occasional nudity. This year, it's a much better fit on HBO and it will be able to expand to a wider audience.

I love shows with simple concepts. The show is carried by Tim, an ordinary 25 year old New Yorker who works in an office. He has the worst luck. Tim is always getting caught in horribly embarrassing and incriminating situations, that are the centre of the show. I would compare it to Curb Your Enthusiasm in the way that it brilliantly sets up it's scenarios, the build-up and the over-the-top conclusions.

This show is animated and usually people wouldn't be interested in watching new ones, fearful that it's another Seth MacFarlane show or a show that's trying to mimic the style of a MacFarlane show. The Life and Times of Tim is an adult cartoon that Seth MacFarlane has no involvement in. If Family Guy pushes the envelope, Tim goes even further. This is HBO we're talking about here, they have nothing but quality, uncensored programing. This is no exception. It also happens to be HBO's first animated series since Spawn. This is the best animated series in the last 5 years.

The animation isn't amazing. In fact, it's pretty awful looking, but that works in it's favor. It's not a very fast paced show, some people may even find it boring. They could show you the most boring office cubicle on Television because of the drawing style.

Like I said the show certainly won't be for everyone. If you need to be constantly entertained with non-stop action in your cartoons, than this won't be for you. If you are patient, like you have to be to watch shows like Curb Your Enthusiasm, you should give this a chance. The second season just started and you can be able to jump in without having any knowledge about the characters. It's a huge strength for a show to be able to watch the segments in a random order. It's only a half-hour show and each story is 15 minutes, so it's not a huge commitment.

This is the pilot for the new Mark Wahlberg produced HBO show. The follow-up to Entourage. It's obvious that they're trying to turn this into another Entourage. I don't know if it could ever reach that level. Maybe it's because of the lack of likable characters. I can't stand some of them. The concept itself just isn't as intriguing. On Entourage you have successful actors in Hollywood being rich. How to Make It In America has is about trying to get rich by illegally selling jackets on the sidewalk. I don't know about anyone else, but when I see those people I don't want to know about their lives. Also, there was one unintentionally hilarious scene, where the two main characters were in their SUV and the friend driving was having a full conversation. I'm not exaggerating, this guy was looking at the road every 10 seconds. You can't do that in New York.

Perhaps this is just a bad pilot, as I remember Entourage also had a weak start. I will say that the show utilizes it's New York setting very well, possibly better than Entourage uses L.A.

Check it out, especially if you enjoy Entourage because it shares a similar style.

It is remarkably easy to be fooled by a trailer. From the trailer, you might be expecting a film along the lines of something like Taken. If so, you're in luck because that exact film is being delivered to you next week in the form of a John Travolta actioner with the same director. That is called From Paris With Love. Taken and what I would assume From Paris With Love would be are both fast paced exhilarating action flicks, that hardly ever stop for a second. Realism will go out the window. Martin Campbell's Edge of Darkness is a very dramatic movie with some incredible violent sequences thrown in. Was I disappointed? Absolutely not! It's rare that we get films like Edge of Darkness and we should be embracing it. This is a drama that is tense enough to be fully entertaining from start to finish.

Everyone knows by now that Mel Gibson doesn't really have the best image in the public eye. People are going to avoid this because he made anti-Semitic comments back in 2006, which were awful and I understand the reasoning of the boycott. However, people seem to be forgetting that Mel Gibson is still a terrific actor. We're getting the first acting role from him since Signs in 2002. His performance is so great in this, it carries the entire film. If this is any indication of his future work, I would like to see more.

Mel Gibson was on screen for almost the entire film. The secondary cast was all pretty solid, but there were some issues. Ray Winstone as Darius, provided the most comic relief, of the little that there was, he had the bulk of it. My main issue with his character was that he was almost completely pointless. We are treated to scene of him talking to Mel Gibson while drinking a glass of wine and his own visit to the doctor to reveal that he has a terminal illness. I honestly believe that if you would have edited out every scene that he was in, the film would have been exactly the same. It was only at the end where I felt that he served some kind of purpose, but the scene could have easily have been dropped. It was very much a subplot going away from the main plot. Also, there was some over-acting from Danny Huston's portrayal of the primary villain in the film, only in one scene.

This is also the return of Casino Royale director Martin Campbell. Casino Royale, in my opinion, is the best James Bond film. A lot of that had to do with putting the realism back in the franchise, and dropping the gadgets. Edge of Darkness isn't completely out there and far-fetched, it mostly makes sense. I say mostly because I'm still not sure how the milk got into the refrigerator. If you've seen the film, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

I think you get the idea that I highly recommend Edge of Darkness. It's a surprisingly bloodier film than I expected, but that just added to the intensity. The final 20 minutes of the film are just perfect. It has a better ending than most of the Best Picture nominees. So, if you're able to put aside Mel Gibson's unethical beliefs for just 2 hours, you'll realize that this is one pretty damn solid motion picture.

Nick Twisp (Michael Cera) is a 16 year old virgin of above average intelligence, born into a trailer trash family. His parents are divorced and leaving separately. Nick lives with his mother and her trucker boyfriend, Jerry (Zach Galifianakis). Jerry sells a broken car to a group of sailors, who eventually come back for revenge. Jerry takes Nick and his mother on a vacation to a trailer park to escape from the angry sailors. On vacation, his life changes when he meets his dream girl, Sheeni Saunders (Portia Doubleday), who has an interest in French boys. Nick badly wants to be with her, so he creates an alter ego named Francois Dillinger – an evil version of himself that eventually takes over.

Michael Cera is back in another movie about the struggles of losing your virginity. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, Superbad and probably also Juno (mainly the aftermath). We have to put up with him in similar movies and in similar roles. Not to mention his acting style, which is always awkward, while he wears vintage hoodies. I'm going to report right now that I didn't spot a single hoodie on him for the entire duration of Youth in Revolt. Can this be a different type of role for him? Is he finally branching out? Well, yes and no. The Nick Twisp character is similar to his normal acting style, however the character of Francois is like nothing we have seen before – a confident character. Cera as Francois is very amusing to watch and it really works in the film. I don't mind if he keeps the same acting style, I'm particularly fond of that, possibly because I'm a huge fan of Arrested Development. He was great in that show, and it's great to see elements of George Michael in his other characters. I don't mind if he adapts himself, because he's a good actor. He's just good at doing a certain type of role.

The rest of the cast is very strong. Portia Doubleday does an excellent job in her debut role. Justin Long is very funny as Sheeni's brother. Fred Willard and Adhir Kalyan steal nearly every scene that they're in. Adhir, was the stereotypical Indian character in Paul Blart: Mall Cop. He was actually very likable in this because he didn't have to talk in an exaggerated accent. Zach Galifianakis was the only one that was disappointing to me. He wasn't given any funny lines and he was literally a throw away character. Maybe everyone just has high expectations for everything he's in since The Hangover. He was great on the HBO comedy series Bored to Death, but he doesn't fit in here.

The movie itself is pretty brilliant. It's not a sex comedy, it's much more than that. It's not trying to be funny all the time, mostly using subtle witty humour. Once he gets his alter ego, the movie gets very interesting. This is a film for people that have an appreciation for smarter comedies. Don't let Michael Cera turn you away from this delightful little movie in a weekend that's typically a dumping ground.

#629: A man is having an x-ray of his head taken when the doctor and nurse begin having sex in the control room. They accidentally hit the exposure button repeatedly while having sex, eventually giving the patient a lethal dose of radiation. This is one of the brutal and odd deaths explored in this episode. The way it plays out on the show, however, is hilarious.

One of the networks that I try to avoid is Spike TV. They never seem to have anything that's worth watching. Wrestling and obstacle courses aren't my idea of entertainment. I gave this show a chance while I was channel surfing, watched one death and much to my surprise I was hooked.

This show is immensely entertaining and have since changed my opinion about Spike. They did what would seem impossible by taking a real life horrific situation and gave it the feel of an old school slasher flick.

1000 Ways to Die recreates these stories with an abundance of gore and prosthetics giving it the feel of a horror film. It really makes the show a lot of fun, and almost makes you forget that this actually happened.

What I love most about the show is the intentionally bad acting on display here. Everyone's reactions and line delivery are just so bad that they're hilarious.

In short, horror fans will love this show.

Law Abiding Citizen is a hardcore action/suspense film starring Gerald Butler and Jamie Foxx. The movie begins with Clyde (Butler) being portrayed as a family man. His wife and daughter are murdered less than two minutes later. Nick Rice is a district attorney who arranges a plea bargain for one guilty man to be executed and the other to spend a few years in prison. We cut to 10 years later, when Clyde is able to rig the execution, giving him a painful death. He also tortures and murders the man who set free and is arrested promptly afterwards. In prison, Clyde makes a series of demands that must be granted or else he will start killing people. How he somehow manages to kill people while he's locked up is a mystery, but that's what makes the film so damn entertaining.

The intense plot description above would normally sound like spoilers, but all this happens in the first half hour and is all revealed in the trailer. You might also notice that Clyde's intentions are very similar to Dexter's. He is taking the law into his own hands when he's not pleased with the outcome of a trial. I normally wouldn't mind this, but there were a lot of noticeable aspects, such as when Clyde shows the pictures of his family to his victim. At least it had a unique twist on that when Clyde takes his time to torture his victims and leaves everything behind as evidence.

Law Abiding Citizen is directed by F. Gary Grey. He did The Italian Job, which I thought to be a high quality remake. Although, he also did the mediocre Be Cool. He doesn't make the greatest films, but they're definitely not terrible. I didn't have a problem with his directing, I thought it was a very well made suspense film. As for the acting, Jamie Foxx has been better in the past. This isn't another Oscar worthy performance from him. Gerald Butler seems to be perfect for this role, though. These kinds of roles that he plays in movies like this, 300 and Gamer are so much better roles than the awful romantic comedies he's been doing recently. I don't understand how anyone thinks that these action movies are ruining his reputation as a romantic lead, when it's exactly the opposite.

As a critic, I think that this is a fairly difficult film to review. On one hand, it's very dumb. On the other hand, it's highly entertaining, even exhilarating at times. It's difficult to know which one is more important here. The critics here clearly have sided on one angle giving it 22% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. I'll have to disagree with the consensus there. When I pay for a ticket, I would want to have a good time. I will try anything to have a good time, but if I can't then I just don't like the film. In a movie like Law Abiding Citizen, you just have to turn your brain off and be genuinely entertained. Just train yourself to laugh at cheesy one-liners and plot holes. Some of the worst films of all time also may happen to be the most fun to watch with the redeeming quality of unintentional comedy. People praise these films for their many flaws and that's exactly what should become with Law Abiding Citizen, but to a smaller scale.

To get an idea of the dumb scenes can be found anywhere in the film. For some reason, Gerald Butler gets naked before he gets arrested, which isn't mentioned at any point in the film. Also, when the film jumps forward 10 years later, the characters either look even younger or exactly the same. It's not believable that they would look like that after 10 years. I also hated the ending. It was just very satisfying and unsatisfying. The ending brought the movie down for me. There was even a scene where they said the title of the movie like they were winking at the audience. Although, I'll have to admit there were some pretty clever plot twists and kills. The movie even made me jump at certain points.

To conclude this review, I'll definitely recommend Law Abiding Citizen for the entertainment value and the fine performance from Gerald Butler. I'm going to give Law Abiding Citizen an 8.5/10.

Paranormal Activity is a horror movie that is basically found footage of a couple, Micah and Katie, who decide to tape the paranormal events that are happening in their home. It's very low budget and is very similar to The Blair Witch Project except it all takes place indoors and it's much better.

As you might know, Paranormal Activity has a very large amount of hype behind it. What most intrigued me about the film were the rave reviews from critics. One review even went as far as saying that it was the scariest film of all time. This quote is probably what most of the hype was generated from. Now that I've seen it, I don't think that it is the scariest film ever, although you might be able to say that it was the scariest of the decade. It doesn't even get intense until the last 20-25 minutes, but it's very creepy and suspenseful all the way through. It's really impressive how people are saying that it's so scary when there are barely any scares. There's a scene in the movie where Micah and Katie are sleeping with the camera running and the door moves slightly. When that happened, everyone in the theatre was shaking because they were expecting something really shocking to happen. When you can get people getting scared by the smallest things in your movie, it has to have some excellent suspense.

The performances were also solid. Everyone acted like a normal person may act in a home video. All of the dialogue was actually improvised, but I could even tell because the actors had great chemistry. They were completely believable as an actual couple.

I really enjoyed how well the film was edited and it was especially impressive for such a low budget. I really liked how the movie only showed the night scenes in a time lapse, only stopping for important moments. This kept the movie more interesting and run along much faster, because the beginning was somewhat slow but it wasn't a major issue. In the movie, you are calm during the daytime and the movie suddenly becomes tenser at night. I liked how they used comic relief during the day to keep the least interesting bits of the movie more entertaining. I was pleasantly surprised by how funny it was. This time was also used efficiently for character development, which helped me care for the characters, even though Micah wasn't really that likable.

Paranormal Activity is a film that must be seen in theatres. I believe that it's an experience in the theatre, that can't be compared to watching it at home on DVD. Watching it with a huge crowd is amazing because you feel what they are feeling. If someone makes a sound, you will be able to hear it because the movie is so quiet. For me, hearing a crowd react to a shocking moment in a horror movie makes the scares more satisfying. However, this could backfire because obnoxious people may be screaming and cracking jokes at inappropriate times. They usually shut up when the film catches their interest again which can't be too long because the movie is so exciting. Seeing a door move slightly isn't going to be scary when watching the film online, because it lacks the theatre experience.

To conclude this review, I thought that Paranormal Activity was one of the scariest movies I've seen in a very long time, but that's only if it's seen in theatres.

Where The Wild Things Are is about a kid named Max who has a very active imagination. After he has a confrontation with his mother, he runs away from home. He finds a sail boat and travels to an island that is populated by very large, but friendly creatures. They make Max his king and the rest of the plot sets off from there.

Where The Wild Things Are was a actually based on a classic 1963 children's book by Maurice Sendak. It's a picture book that can easily be read in a 2 minutes. It's literally only nine sentences long , but the movie is 94 minutes, which is about 10 minutes per sentence. It was adapted by Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers. This was probably really difficult to expand the plot of the book because everything in the about the book was so simple. The wild things have actually names in the movie, which the book had no time for. They spend a good deal of the film building a fort, which isn't in the book at all. All these added plot lines tend to somewhat change the story, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The book would be perfectly acceptable to let a child read, however the film was much darker than I expected. It's just a very depressing movie, overall. There's just so much in this movie that children might not understand and might even frighten them. It really isn't a family film. It would probably be best enjoyed by adults who loved the book. Spike Jonze is also the director. He's previously done Being John Malkovich and Adaptation. Both of them are amazing film. I will say this movie is a very well made film.

The performance in the film are of course very good, as well. Max is played by Max Records. I thought that it was cool that they actually got a Max to play Max. Anyway, he was great in the film. You really had to love his character because he's the only person on screen for more than an hour. He did very well delivering the jokes that he was given and in the more dramatic scenes. He may have been a little too crazy in the beginning of the film, but that's just a minor nit pick. The actors that were doing the voices for the creatures weren't just doing voice work like you might see in some animated movies. They were actually acting together on a stage. Because of this they were to show just as much emotion and personality in their characters as the human characters. Everyone else was great in the movie, except for Mark Ruffalo as the boyfriend of Max's mother. I actually think that Mark Ruffalo is a great actor but he was just underused in this. He literally only says one word in the entire movie. That's not really a complaint, I just found that funny.

My favourite thing about the film are the visuals. The films looks great, especially with the wild things. I couldn't tell if they were puppets or CGI or motion capture. They were actually made by Jim Henson's workshop with CGI facial expressions. I thought it looked very realistic for CGI, especially in one crying scene. There were also several scenes in the desert which looked amazing. I thought that was green screened but they were actually filming that in Australia.

One thing I didn't like at all was the soundtrack. It seemed to be mostly children's music, but since I don't feel it was a film for children, I didn't really think it fit with the visuals.

So that's it, Where The Wild Things Are is a very good movie, but it is also very depressing. I recommend the book to be read before or after the film. I'm going to give Where The Wild Things Are an 8/10.

Zombieland is the next entry to the horror comedy genre. It is directed by Ruben Fleischer who did some episodes of Jimmy Kimmel Live, but no movies. It stars Jesse Eisenberg who was in Adventureland earlier this year, which I thought was a very good film. It also has Woody Harelson in a rare comedic performance and he's brilliant in it. It also stars Abigail Breslin and Emma Stone. The acting is of course very high quality especially considering that 3 cast members are Oscar nominated actors.

The plot is very simple. The movie takes place in a time where the zombie apocalypse has occurred and America is now known as Zombieland. Columbus, who is played by Jesse Eisenberg has his own rules or surviving Zombieland and he's actually doing pretty well by himself. That is until he meets Tallahassee played by Woody Harelson and they agree to travel together to their destinations. Along the way they meet two sisters who are constantly stealing their car. The whole movie, they are travelling to their destination stopping to kill zombies. They are travelling to a Hollywood amusement park that is supposed to be zombie free.

It is important to note that that these aren't traditional zombies, but they are living people that have been infected with mad cow disease that has become mad human disease. It really isn't a big deal because there have been several great zombie films with this angle, such as 28 Days Later. I like that there isn't much of a plot to Zombieland because that leaves a lot of time for some really intense action scenes and jokes even though the movie is only 81 minutes long. It may sound too short but the movie itself is so satisfying that it feels like the perfect time.

Zombieland worked for me on so many levels. It happened to be the funniest film I've seen in a very long time. Not a single joke fell flat for me. I think this has the potential to be a comedy classic for years. Before Zombieland, I would say that the best zombie comedy was Shaun of the Dead, but I think it was a little funnier than Shaun of the Dead and a lot more fun. There's also an amazing cameo mid-way into the movie that has to be the best cameo in years. The audience was applauding during this epic cameo. I'm not going to be spoiling it here because it will not have the same effect if you already know who it is. The movie also had a good amount of gore and you could tell that it wasn't CGI. I was pleased that they didn't have too much CGI gore because it looked really fake and cheesy in some of the movies that were used in My Bloody Valentine and The Final Destination. That's all I have to say about Zombieland. I think it will appeal to different people. Both comedy fans and horror fans will both love this movie because there is a balance of both in here, though if I would have to pick one I would think that it is more of a comedy than a horror because everything is played for laughs. You shouldn't miss the best comedy of 2009. I give Zombieland a 9/10.

The plot of Sorority Row is very similar to I Know What You Did Last Summer. It involves Sorority girls who plan a prank that accidentally results in the death of one of their sisters. Now, it's 8 months later and they're still living with that secret. All of a sudden, after graduation, everyone that knows about the secret is being killed off one by one. It is important to understand that this isn't a ripoff of I Know What You Did Last Summer, but yet another remake. The original film is The House on Sorority Row from 1983. Horror movies these days can never be original because the studios know that there are unless remakes that could be made and they will be successful. This is another bad one.

The acting in the movie is very bad and that goes for the dialogue as well. I actually counted 15 references to Facebook. Anyway, I just couldn't care for any of the characters. At a certain point, I was just waiting for the next one to die, hoping that there would be some creativity in the deaths. There was probably only one truly disturbing death involving a bottle of vodka that I won't be spoiling in this review because it's probably the most entertaining part of the whole film.

The twist was also very disappointing and didn't make any sense. It was just very predictable that they would take it in that direction.

I'm going to give Sorority Row a 3/10. If you're a fan of nudity and don't care so much for decent acting and dialogue, then you may like it. If you care, then it's best to just stay away from this trash. There really isn't much good about Sorority Row.

Based on the plot alone, I wasn't really forward to this film that much. It looked like a serious film at first, and I can't always get excited about those. Then the trailer came out and took me by surprise. Now the movie looked like a hilarious comedy. So did the movie disappoint? Well, I don't think I was disappointed at all, but the trailer definitely was misleading.

The comedy that was shown in the trailer was probably the funniest moments in the film. Even though the actual movie is more serious that the trailer shows, I still think that it's a movie that you should see, but only if the plot interests you. If it doesn't then, you're going to think it's boring. If you like the plot, then I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the humour.

The performances in the movie were also all very good. Matt Damon's character was an idiot and he played the role perfectly. His character is the only thing that makes it a comedy. Mark Whitacre's thoughts were also a character of it's own. We constantly hear narration of what he's thinking and it's always something bizarre and completely random. There's a scene where he's in a business meeting and he's thinking about a hilarious observation about Polar Bears. You really have to see the movie to get it. Joel McHale from The Soup was also in the movie and he surprised me that he was actually able to act in a serious role. Tony Hale, who was hilarious in Arrested Development, was also great as his attorney even though I have never seen him do a role that wasn't in a comedy. Scott Bakula and Melanie Lynsky were also great in this.

An interesting technique that was used in The Informant was the music. The movie takes place in the mid-90's, although the soundtrack is completely from the 70's. Even in a completely serious scene the silly 70's music will play and you just have to laugh at the awkward placement. It made the movie more upbeat and provided for even more laughs.

To conclude this review, I'm going to give The Informant 8.5/10. It was a very interesting and funny film that I would recommend it under the condition that the plot sounds intriguing to you. Don't expect The Informant to be as funny as The Hangover or you will definitely be disappointed. However, if you are prepared for an intelligent movie, you will enjoy this film.

Extract is the new comedy which is written and directed by Mike Judge from who made some films that weren't too successful such as Office Space and Idiocracy. They have both became cult hits on DVD but they were both flops when they were originally released. I loved these films just because of how truly hilarious they are. You can imagine that Extract would be no different.

The basic plot is about Jason Bateman's character who owns a factory where they make Extract and he wants to sell it. After an accident occurs, the company might get sued which would bankrupt them and he wouldn't be able to sell the company. There's a subplot involving Jason Bateman having problems with his wife not sleeping with him played by Kristen Wiig from SNL, so Ben Affleck who plays his bartender friend convinces him to hire a gigalo to sleep with his wife, so that he could cheat on his wife with Mila Kunis's character, guilt-free. We also know that she's a con artist who is trying to get the company sued.

The plot of this movie is quite a mess. Some parts could have definitely been cut down and others could have been expanded on for this to be a much more effective comedy. I thought anything involving the gigalo was hilarious and that includes the actor who played the gigalo and Ben Affleck. Both of their deliveries really help to sell their lines and most of the times that I would laugh in the film it would be to these two. J.K. Simmons was also very funny as one of the factory workers who couldn't remember anyone's name.

I still think that Mila Kunis didn't even have to be in the movie and she just expanded the plot. She could have at least had a smaller part involved more in the gigalo plot rather than a whole other subplot about her blackmailing the company. If we would have seen more of everything else, it would have been a stronger movie.

Jason Bateman was basically just playing the straight man. Also I thought that David Koechner played the part of the annoying neighbour perfectly. Every time he was on screen, it looked like he was making everyone uncomfortable and I was constantly cracking up at that even there wasn't anything too funny about his lines. Him and Ben Affleck probably made me laugh the hardest.

I don't think Extract can actually be called hilarious, in fact it's even somewhat disappointing for a Mike Judge comedy. I have to admit that it was very funny, but it was probably more amusing than hilarious. It's just not going to be groundbreaking like Office Space was. It does work as an interest companion piece to Office Space but it is no where near the quality.

I have to give Extract a 7.5/10. It was very funny, but it had the potential to be better. Still, this is a slight recommendation or at least a rental and it is still worth seeing because it's still far better than some of the other comedies that are coming out these days.

I've been anticipating this movie for a long time. Basically, the impression I had of this movie was that it was supposed to be a Dirty Dozen style action movie of Jews on a mission to kill Nazis. This sounded similar to Valkyrie which just came out at the end of 2008, but I would see it because I consider myself to be a Tarantino fan.

I've seen Pulp Fiction which is one of my favourite movies of all time because it's so awesome. I've seen Jackie Brown which was rather entertaining and a good movie, but it didn't live up to Pulp Fiction's standards. I've also seen Death Proof which was the second half of Grindhouse. I definitely preferred Planet Terror to Death Proof because I thought the dialogue in Death Proof was rather boring. Tarantino kills off every character after hearing them chat about pointless things. I did, however, enjoy the second half of Death Proof.

Inglourious Basterds is the first time that I feel that Tarantino has come close to the quality of Pulp Fiction. I will even go as far as saying that Inglourious Basterds is my favourite Tarantino film.

The plot of Inglourious Basterds isn't as simply as you might have seen from the trailer. There is a subplot about a Jewish girl whose family is killed early into the movie by Nazis for hiding under the floorboards of their neighbours. She escapes from Col. Hans Landa (played by Christoph Waltz) and we see her four years later when she owns her own theater that is hosting a Nazi premiere. The main subplot involves a group of Jewish American soldiers called The Basterds who are just killing and scalping any Nazi they meet. When they find out that Hitler is attending the premiere, the subplots eventually meet which is closer to the end of the movie. When this happens, I can honestly say that it is the most entertaining scene in any movie I've ever scene.

Everyone assumes that the movie is all about The Basterds and Brad Pitt, but they don't even get a lot of screen time. I think the real star of the movie is Christoph Waltz who plays The Jew Hunter. He's such a great antagonist and is convincingly evil, even when he's just drinking a glass of milk. Everyone in the movie gave a great performance, and many were surprisingly comedic. But we've come to expect that from Tarantino movies.

The most important thing is not to expect an action film, or you'll be severely disappointing because it's a 2 ½ hour movie and 2 hours and 15 minutes of that is probably pure dialogue. Even the dialogue itself is mostly in subtitles translating German, French or Italian. It was my major complaint with Death Proof but for Inglourious Basterds it managed to improve the movie. Still, when there is an intense action scene it doesn't disappoint especially with the final 20 minutes of the movie.

To conclude this review, I strongly believe that Tarantino made an exceptional World War II film, the best one I've ever seen, as well as for Tarantino and I think this will be known as one of the classic films of the decade.

It's hilarious when it needs to be, it's tense when characters are talking for 20 minutes at a time, and when it's gory it's exciting. Seriously, you can be on the edge of your seat throughout the whole movie, if you're enjoying. I know this is sort of a love it/hate it type of movie and hopefully more people will love it and see the movie in the way I did. I saw it twice and this is actually one of the rare times where I feel that I enjoyed it even more the second time. The second time, you are aware that people are eventually going to stop talking and when. You know the purpose of it all and the main timeline of the movie. You may even be able to spot things that you never noticed before.

I won't hesitate in giving Inglourious Basterds a 10/10, it's a perfect movie and easily my favourite film of the year.

I had very strange expectations for this film. It was originally shown in the trailer to be a documentary or mockumentary. Generally, I don't see those types of movies but in this case it was a very interesting way to tell the story. It also looked like there was going to be a lot of shaky-cam which I feel got old after Cloverfield. There wasn't as much of that as I expected. Now the trailers gave very little information as far as the plot goes.

The story is basically about an alien spacecraft that lands in South Africa and after a few decades the people decide to send them away to a concentration camp known as District 9 because of their hostile behaviours. There's a lot more to the story, but that shouldn't be revealed before you see the film.

The main star of the film is a complete unknown. Sharlto Copley from South Africa. I don't think it matters that District 9 has no major stars, these people are all South African and give great performances. It's directed by Neill Blomkamp who is a first time director and produced by Peter Jackson.

The reason I thought District 9 was an effective film was because it was going a different direction with the alien movie. In all alien themed movies in the past, the aliens have been the enemies. In District 9, we are the enemies. I refused to believe that I would actually be rooting for the aliens in this movie, but District 9 achieved it. In my theater, there was applause when a group of aliens ripped a human apart. That's another thing. It's actually a surprisingly gory movie. It's not too bad but it could be quite bloody at times and you should be aware of that.

The special effects were amazing on this film. It's hard to believe that they made the aliens look completely realistic on a 30 million budget. That was just incredible.

My major complaint with the movie was that the first half hour was strictly a documentary and then after that it suddenly becomes more about the characters. It's too sudden when the documentary ends and it changes the tone because I was really enjoying the documentary. Also in a way, I'm glad it ended because it became it became a very entertaining action movie at that point.

To conclude my review, I think you should see District 9. It's definitely the best summer blockbuster because it even has a few things to say about xenophobia and racism. I saw it twice, but I don't think it's necessary, once is enough to absorb all the information in the movie. Although, the final shot of the film completely flew over my head both times, but once I figured it out, the movie was so much better in my mind. I give District 9 a 9/10.

Let me start off by saying that I absolutely can't stand romantic comedies. I think they're unoriginal and boring. However, there have been some good romantic comedies especially the ones that focus more on the comedy and less on the romance. The exception with 500 Days of Summer is that it is told in the male's point of view and that was what was most intriguing to me. This was what distinguished the movie from any other brainless romantic comedies that might as well star Sandra Bullock, Kate Hudson or Matthew McConaughy. 500 Days of Summer was described as an anti romantic comedy. It's not a love story, but a story about love and I think that's why it's so appealing.

The main character is Tom, played by Joseph Gordon Levitt, meets Summer, played by Zooey Deschanel who Tom believes to be the one. We learn that Summer doesn't believe in love, but Tom does and that can be used to frustrate Tom or anyone watching the film because it is in his point of view.

The movie follows the 500 days that they spent together in no particular order. The movie literally starts a 488 and then jumps to day 1 then to 250 then to 4. It sounds like it's going to confusing but it actually wasn't. The story is going to jump all over the place and you have to be aware that this is going to happen quite frequently. This is what keeps the movie creative and original.

The performances in the movie were outstanding. Joseph Gordon Levitt definitely surprised me in this whole because I haven't seen him act in anything that wasn't comedic before. I recently saw him in GI Joe as the main villain and thought he gave a terrible performance. But in this I was able to care about his character and feel all of his emotions. Zooey Deschanel also surprised me. The last movie I saw her in was Yes Man, in which I thought that she gave a lazy performance and appeared like she wasn't paying attention for some reason. She plays the character effectively because you start off liking the character and then by the end, you will think she's evil. It's not that often that a I can change my opinion of a character so quickly, but she pulled it off. The only other performances that are worth mentioning are the Tom's coworkers who were there to support him and be humorous, even though their not big name actors. None of their jokes fell flat for me and I was constantly laughing at them. I didn't expect the movie to be so funny.

It was directed by Marc Webb and 500 Days of Summer is actually his first film. He actually used to do music videos and he even uses that skill in the film. Half way in to the movie there's a very well choreographed dance scene where everyone is dancing in the streets that felt like a music video. When this part comes in the movie it's very unexpected, but it is very funny to watch.

The main problem with romantic comedies is usually a bad script. That's not the case here because everything is so clever and intelligent, that it's so delightful to watch. It's written to be more realistic. When they first meet, it is very awkward and that would usually be what would happen in real life. The script writers previously wrote The Pink Panther 2, which shows that they must not be consistent because that was terrible and dumb. Hopefully, they'll be able to top this film because it was excellent and for a first time director, it's a big achievement.

There's one scene in particular that I really enjoyed. Tom was attending a party and was imagining his expectations for it. For an entire 3 minute scene, there is a split screen with the right side showing expectations and the left side showing the reality. It's very interesting to pay attention to both screens and this is the originality I'm talking about.

To conclude this review, I'm going to give 500 Day of Summer a 10/10. I think it was one of the best films I've seen all year and the best romantic comedy I've ever seen period. I really hope it gets nominated for a Best Picture. I think everyone should see it because it's too good to miss and I know people aren't going to give it a chance because it's an independent movie and it's not playing everywhere, but I recommend it even if you just want to be put in a good mood for 90 minutes.

Normally when you see a blockbuster come out in August, it usually means that the movie isn't that great. That seems to be the case here because GI Joe is very bad. It's a movie, but it can hardly even be called a movie because it essentially is just an elaborate toy commercial as you can see when the Hasbro logo is shown before the film. This is actually the second movie to be produced by Hasbro this summer after Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen in June. There also seems to be a consistent pattern that the worst movies this year have been Hasbro productions.

If you're expecting to see a direct adaptation of the GI Joe cartoon, then that's not what you're going to get here. This is an upgrade in technology and that could actually be quite entertaining for the first hour of the film. It's a big problem when you could tell that a lot of work was put into the special effects and not so much on the character development. I honestly couldn't care for anyone in this movie and it didn't help that they were so annoying.

The plot is very simple. Basically all you need to know is that there are two sides, GI Joe vs. Cobra and they are fighting against each other. You are easily able to identify who is on which side.

The movie is directed by Stephen Sommers that previously did The Mummy, The Mummy Returns and Van Helsing. I actually haven't seen any of the movies in The Mummy series but I have seen Van Helsing and I did like it the first time I saw it. When I watched it recently it was actually quite dull. So, he isn't exactly a great director.

I guess I can briefly talk about the performances. You can't expect the acting in GI Joe to be anything special. In fact, it's quite terrible. No one is believable with these remarkably cheesy lines from the script. Even Dennis Quaid didn't impress me in this. I suppose this is a flaw that would be blamed on the writers, rather than the actors. I do know that Channing Tatum is terrible in anything that he's in. Marlon Waylons was also in it doing the comic relief. I thought that he was funny at times, but mostly his jokes and just fell flat. I can't say more about the performances that hasn't already been mentioned.

The special effects in GI Joe were actually quite good at times, but it looked very fake at other times. Still, it saved it from becoming a complete disaster. I could say that I hated every scene in the movie, with the exception of the Paris scene which was the most fun I has with GI Joe and people seem to agree with me on that.

And of course it ends with characters holding guns and walking towards the camera because it's a stereotypical brainless action movie.

To conclude this review, I'm going to give GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra a 4/10. Still if you are a fan of brainless action movies, you might actually like GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra, but I still was very bad in my opinion.

Anyone that knows me personally would know that I've been look forward to this movie for over a year and now I've finally seen it. Did it live up to my expectations? Yes it did. So here is my review of Funny People.

Funny People is the new dramatic comedy written and directed by Judd Apatow, who did The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up. It's about a movie star named George Simmons, played by Adam Sandler. He just been diagnosed with leukemia and only has a few months to live. So he hires Ira Wright, played by Seth Rogen as a writer and his friend. About 90 minutes into the movie he is cured and is no longer facing death. He decides win back his old girlfriend Laura, played by Leslie Mann even though she is married to Clarke, played by Eric Bana. Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman also star as Seth Rogen's roommates.

First I'll talk about the performances in Funny People. This has to be the best role for Adam Sandler in years and his best dramatic acting to date. A lot of people are going to hate the movie because of that, but Sandler doesn't get enough credit for his real acting. By far, this is also Seth Rogen's best acting and he finally does a character that's different for a change. He was also great in Observe and Report earlier this year. Leslie Mann and Eric Bana were also very impressive. There haven't been that many movies where every actor was able to make me laugh multiple times. The Hangover accomplished this earlier this year.

Definitely think that this is Judd Apatow's most mature comedy to date and it was very brave of him to try a personal project that wasn't completely funny all the way through.

The main complaint with the movie was that it's very long. It's actually just under 2 and a half hours and that is very long. Personally, I didn't have a problem with the length. The ending was dragged out quite long and the ending wasn't really a big twist like you would expect. What bothered me the most was that the ending wasn't as satisfying as I wanted it to be.

Still it was a great movie. There are a lot of laughs in it and it would be a good movie to go with a group of friends and just have a good time. My final rating is 9/10 and I hope you consider seeing the film.

Orphan is a horror thriller about a couple who decide to adopt a kid after having a miscarriage, so they decide to adopt Esther, a wonderful, talented and gifted child. After some bad things start to happen they eventually realize that there is probably something wrong with Esther. Telling you what's wrong with Esther would be a spoiler but I have to say it was the best twist I've seen all year and if anyone says that they saw it coming then they're lying. There's no way anyone saw that coming. Yes, the plot is extremely over the top and cliché for a horror film but I happen to think that the cheese factor really helps to keep this movie entertaining.

I'm now going to talk about the performances in Orphan. The movie stars Vera Farmiga and Peter Sarsgaard who really are two of the best actors in Hollywood today. For this type of horror movie, you really wouldn't expect such respected actors. However, they really seem to be very into their roles, which is terrific and they were never over the top. It's even produced by Leonardo Di Caprio, so maybe it isn't just going to be a mindless horror film with terrible acting and it really didn't. Esther was played by 12 year old Isabelle Fuhrman. It certainly helps that she isn't a big name child actress, so that she is more believable and terrifying as Esther. Her Russian accent really adds to her creepiness. The things that she did in this movie were insane and hopefully she will be able to become a classic horror villain.

Even though I enjoyed the movie, there were some parts that I laughing at the silliness of it. This is not a perfect movie and it has some major flaws. First of all, almost everything about this movie was extremely cliché and not entirely original. The plot of an evil child and bad seed was been done many times before and it's been done a lot better, such as in The Omen. There's a few scenes in the movie where a woman opens the mirror and no one's there, but when she closes the mirror someone appears and it's supposed to scare us. That cliché has been overdone to the max, to the point that it's not scary anymore. They did the same thing with a refrigerator and even used music. It was a very anti-climatic scare. The movie wasn't that realistic either. I don't actually think that they would have kept Esther for such a long time after all the bad things that kept happening. You have to just go with the movie, even if it's in a realistic world. Not everything is going to make sense and if you keep that mentality then you can enjoy the entertainment. The twist, however, was probably the most original thing about the movie as unrealistic as it may be. I actually knew about the twist before I saw the movie because I didn't think I was going to see it. I definitely regret that, but it didn't ruin the experience at all. If you can, don't find out the twist before you see the movie because you'll have a better time.

Orphan is a very effective and delightfully dark horror movie that you should definitely try to see and it's just an easy way to escape from reality and be entertained for 2 hours. I'm going to give this an 8/10. You should see this.

This is the movie that would make you wonder what ever happened to Steve Martin. In this movie, he actually makes you laugh as a jerk character. Also John Candy is a great chatter mouth. John Hughes is the best director of the 80's and this is one of his best films. The movie has music going through the whole film that put a date stamp that says it's taking place in the 80's, but that's part of the reason why it's so delightful.

Steve Martin is just trying to get home when he runs into John Candy over and over again until he must travel with him, even though he can't stand him. The lack of chemistry is used successfully at the end of the movie and as if they were actually strangers by the end of the movie you feel that they have bonded. They are both extremely talented.

It is primarily a goofy comedy but towards the end it will prove to have a lot of heart and you have sympathy for the main characters. You may even shed a tear in Planes, Trains & Automobiles. Why don't we have more movies like this.