nived84 Reviews

Zodiac (2007)

"This is the Zodiac speaking."

[10/10 · 4 March 2007]

For those who are expecting David Fincher's latest film to be another Seven, don't. Zodiac bares more in resemblance to Oliver Stone's JFK than it does to The Silence of the Lambs. Seen through the perspective of the journalists and police investigators involved in the legendary unsolved case, the film provides no solid culprit and involves very little on-screen violence. But remember this is a Fincher film, and his real talent is juicing the maximum out of what little he puts on display. The murder sequences (there are three shown here) are brutal, unflinching and cold. For the first time it feels nervously uncomfortable to be watching a film about a serial killer, especially since what we're seeing is fact, not fiction. Particularly chilling is the opening murder and the lakeside attack, while both warming up with a sly amount of playful comedy, quickly and utterly shoots to painful and realistic grim reality. There's no slow motion, no quick cut-aways, no musical score – just violence, in it's most simplest and basic form, and it sent chills down my spine.

This is a crime-drama that's about as by the book as one could make, and that's both the film's strength and weakness. The film is less and less about actual character's, instead it's more focused on showing us the compulsive obsession that the case had on those who where desperately trying to stop the Zodiac. The film begins in July of '68 and ends in 1991, and if you're not prepared for it, it just might feel like it too. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Robert Graysmith (the author of the book for which the film is based on), a cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle and puzzle geek, who becomes obsessed with solving the case. Robert Downey Jr stars in yet another great performance (who is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors) as Roger Avery, a crime reporter for the Chronicle, who is assigned to cover the Zodiac killings, and in doing so becomes a target himself and it ultimately costs him his career (and probably his health too). Mark Ruffalo and Anthony Edwards star as two San Francisco detectives, Toschi and Armstrong, working the case of a cabbie that was executed by the Zodiac. When their investigation goes from hot leads that end up going cold, the two lose their hope of ever catching the killer, and in steps Graysmith, the puzzle geek that just can't seem to keep the Zodiac off his mind. His obsession with the case ends up costing him his marriage, but like a hunting dog, he's on the case, and comes closer to nabbing the killer than any other person.

If the film hadn't been based on an actual unsolved case this would have been boring as hell and extremely anti-climatic, but fortunately that's not the case. I found myself utterly transfixed and fascinated by the case and that was enough for me to get sucked into, so much so I barely ate any of my popcorn. The way Zodiac is shot reminded me a lot of films from the 70's, like the nervous paranoia of Francis Ford Coppola's The Conversation and the "just the facts" mentality of a serious-minded investigation similar to Alan Pakula's All the President's Men. Both solid and great films of that era, before fax machines and cell phones, an era that director David Fincher brings back to vivid life (as if it were almost yesterday) with the gloomy cinematography, which is shot in High-Definition, looks absolutely stellar, and the costumes which don't distract our attention away from the story. I loved all the references to Bullit, Dirty Harry and even the display of a little Pong action.

Much like the case itself, Zodiac isn't a sprint – it's a marathon. Expect a very detailed investigative drama with suspense and intrigue sprawled out over a 160 minute running time, and considering the end result of the case, the ending feels maddening, but justifiably so. I know I'll definitely be watching this one again and again on DVD. Hell, I might even go see it again this week, just to be able to process it all. This is quite easily the most complex and mature of all of the films in Fincher's expanding career. And it's no less of challenge than his previous films, it's not quite the eerie disturbing nature of Seven or the raw brutality of Fight Club, this is mental and exhaustive brutality; which captures the frustration and anxiety of the rare and memorable unsolved case down to every clue and false lead.

Breach (2007)

Solid little thriller that won't insult your intelligence.

[7/10 · 19 February 2007]

After enjoying so many great films at the end of each year, we're meant to suffer and pay for it at the start of each New Year. Usually studios tend to empty their trash baskets in the months of January and February, which always end up being the worst time of the year to go to the movies. Thankfully one decent film managed to escape in good condition this year; Breach, the new thriller based on the true story of the greatest security breach in U.S. history.

Ryan Phillippe plays Eric O'Neill, a smart, young FBI rookie determined to make the rank of an official agent for the bureau. O'Neill is specifically chosen and re-assigned by his straight-as-an-arrow handler, Kate Burroughs (played by Laura Linney), to get up close and personal with his new boss, Robert Hanssen, played with a fierce, calculating subtlety by Academy Award winning actor Chris Cooper.

On the surface Hanssen seems like any other ordinary, dedicated agent, just serving his country, but upon a much closer examination, O'Neill learns that appearances can be deceiving. His loving family and being a devoted Catholic (always praying and attending mass) seems to be the perfect cover to bewilder any and all preconceived notions that O'Neill has. No wonder he was been able to get away with it for so long.

The FBI has reason to believe that Hanssen has been selling secrets to the Russians for years; they just don't have a solid enough case to put him away for good and they want to catch him in the act, red handed. O'Neill spies on his boss, trying to get any inside information on his daily activities to report back to Burroughs.

Breach could have been a tremendously boring drama considering it's mostly just people talking about spying and probing for nearly two hours. Thankfully director and co-writer Billy Ray, whose last film was 2003's Shattered Glass, has an air-tight script and sturdy performances to rely on to keep things gravitated and moving along at a brisk pace. It's a moral drama, pulsating with tension throughout, and with the performances, it's not so much what's said aloud, but more about what lurks behind the eyes.

Phillippe's performance is solid enough for the lead, but it's Cooper's unflinching performance as Robert Hanssen that's so magnetic that it steals the show; creating a character that we can easily dislike, yet as sly and repulsive as he is, we're still intrigued to understand how he turned out to be so rotten and why he decided to betray the country he loved so much.

Breach doesn't really offer any answers for Hanssen's crimes, but nevertheless we are fascinated to see one of our own stray from the path and get caught in the snare by a constant game of cat-and-mouse. The film isn't dumbed down or stylishly over-the-top like Tony Scott's Spy Game. This is a solid little intellectual thriller, that's focused on showing us the how, while dispensing with the why. Breach is as cold and hard as the facts itself, and because it doesn't insult your intelligence is why it is the first good film of the year, and definitely worth the price of admission.

Ghost Rider (2007)

Tired Hollywood formula causes Rider to wipeout

[2/10 · 17 February 2007]

It's official! Mark Steven Johnson is the new Joel Schumacher. It took Schumacher two movies to bring the Batman franchise to its knees, and with only two movies, Johnson has already buried two comic book franchises with 2003's Daredevil and this month's Ghost Rider, which arrives in theaters dead-on-arrival; flat-lined, from it's hokey beginning to it's clichéd video game ending.

Nicolas Cage stars as Johnny Blaze, a famous Evil Knievel-esquire stunt performer that sold his soul to Mephistopheles (or Mephisto for short), played by Peter Fonda, in order to save his dying father, stricken with cancer. In a moment of young, naïve, foolishness he signed, with his own blood no less, a life contract to become the devil's bounty hunter; damned to hunt down fallen angels cast out of heaven.

During the day Johnny is normal, but at night, in the presence of evil Johnny's skin burns off and his skull lights aflame with hellfire. His motorcycle transforms into a speed demon able to travel fast enough to melt parking meters and vertically climb up sky scrapers, and in its wake, leaves behind a fiery trail of destruction.

The idea sounds kind of, well… cool, actually. Unfortunately the studio – in an attempt to cash in on the Marvel product – limited the film to a PG-13 rating in order to reel in a wider audience:10 and 12-year-old boys, which was a terrible, terrible move.

Instead of a fun and wildly entertaining ride, what we got is one of the worst comic book adaptations to crash land in theaters since Batman & Robin and Catwoman. Yes, it really is THAT bad.

Instead of cranking out another soft and wimpy flick about demons, hell and tortured souls straight from the formulaic, cardboard factory of clichés, what we should have gotten was a fun, dark, R-rated blast more along the lines of Blade or The Crow, heck, even Spawn had more bite and attitude! It seems like Johnson isn't even passionate or interested in telling his own story, and it shows.

The heavily forced and completely uninteresting romance between Johnny Blaze and his long-time love, Roxanne Simpson (played by Eva Mendes) has but not a spark of chemistry. Mendes is given little to do, and does little more than stand around and look pretty as the "damsel in distress", whose only real talent is an impressive bust-line.

Nicolas Cage – who is an expressed fan of the Ghost Rider comics – is one of the film's biggest flaws; completely miscast as the macho avenger. Cage is a talented actor when working with the right material (see his performances in the underrated Bringing out the Dead and Matchstick Men), but at the age of 43 (pretending to be 28), and his James Stewart persona of acting just isn't what this particular film calls for.

What it needed was an actor with a hard edge and some grit, someone with the kind of tough-guy presence, like a young Clint Eastwood. Thomas Jane might have made a nice Ghost Rider, and I'm sure if someone like Robert Rodriguez had been working behind the camera we would have gotten that fun, R-rated ride that we should have had to begin with.

The film tries to do many things, and succeeds at nothing. It tries to be humorous, but nothing is funny. The scene in which Johnny tries to explain his night-time dark side to his girlfriend aims to be funny, but all I could think about was the scene in Batman, where Michael Keaton compares his superhero gig as being just another job to Kim Basinger.

Ghost Rider also tries to be scary, but nothing comes close to being frightening, and in the end, after all its constant failures, amounts to little more than boredom. Normally I don't do it, but I was tempted to walk out.

Throughout the film Johnny Blaze talks about deserving a second chance, in order to turn things around, for the better. Cage is an actor who deserves a second chance, especially coming off last year's "it's so bad, it's good" remake of The Wicker Man. As for writer/director Mark Steven Johnson, he's had his second chance. This whole comic book movie thing just isn't your game, kid.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

Del Toro's Masterpiece

[10/10 · 12 January 2007]

For me, the great thing about the winter – besides Christmas – is that this is the time of year when we finally get to see some of the very best films. In October we got The Departed and The Prestige. In November we got Babel, Stranger than Fiction and The Fountain. And this December we got Apocalypto, Children of Men and this film; Guillermo Del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth, which is yet again, another great film, and in my opinion one of my favorite films of the year. I know I've been saying that a lot this time of year, but it's so true. This is the last great film to what I have considered to be a relatively good year for movies. This year's Oscars are going to a very close race, and as I see it Pan's Labyrinth has already won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film of the Year. I shall accept nothing less; my mind is already made up.

In this dark, unique picture; part war-time drama and part horror/fantasy, set in 1944, during a Civil War in Northern Spain, it tells a story about a 12-year-old girl, Ofelia (played wonderfully by the young Ivana Baquero), who moves with her pregnant mother and new stepfather into a new home in the countryside. Her stepfather is Captain Vidal, played with a truly evil presence by Sergi Lopez, has been sent to this remote area to rid it of a small Republican militia. Disliked by the sadistic Vidal (who might as well be Hitler himself), Ofelia buries herself in fairy tales, and discovers an immense and ancient labyrinth guarded by a faun named Pan. He tells her that she is the long-lost daughter of the king of a magical underworld, and to regain entry to her kingdom she must carry out three tasks. So Ofelia enters a strange and no less dangerous world of fairies and extraordinary creatures to complete her tasks.

Director Guillermo Del Toro, whose largely known for such popcorn movies as Mimic, Blade II and 2004's underrated comic book smash-up Hellboy, is at the top of his game and taking a step forward; growing as a filmmaker. The film is both visually imaginative and brutally violent, and sometimes it's not always easy to watch, but Del Toro mezmerizes you so much you can't look away, even when you'd like to. This is a fantasy film where you don't just go to admire the visuals and fantastical elements that are on display, it's also a deeply emotional and sad film with real flesh and blood characters. At the heart of the film is a great performance from Spanish born actress Ivana Baquero, who I think delivers one of the best performances from anyone her age. This Labyrinth most certainly isn't a film for children. Pan's Labyrinth is rated a strong R for graphic violence, and is in Spanish with English subtitles (don't be a pussy, you can do it!). And for it's entire two hour running time I was instantly swept away with Del Toro's uncompromised vision seen through the eyes of an innocent child and I was left heart broken by it's tragic finale, and it moved me to tears. This is one of the best films of the year, and for filmmaker Guillermo Del Toro it is without doubt the finest film of his career. A true masterpiece. I was left stunned and utterly speechless.

Children of Men (2006)

An instant classic

[10/10 · 6 January 2007]

In Alfonso Cuarón's Children of Men we see a startling vision of a future society (2027 London) not on the brink of chaos, but already buried knee deep in it. As massive pollution, super-controlled immigration, violent protests, and constant wars have engulfed the world, as a side effect it has rendered women infertile; unable to breed future children. It's as if God's saying, "If you can't play nicely together, you don't deserve the right to live anymore." The world is slowly coming to an end, and anarchy rules the day. At the start of the picture a man named Theo, played with great skill and charm by Clive Owen, is going through his usual routine of picking up his morning coffee. The televisions report the news that the reported "youngest person in the world" has officially died after taking his own life. The world gathers around the TV and mourns his loss. It's only seconds later; after Theo gets his coffee that a large bomb violently obliterates the café. This is the world of Children of Men; one of the most brutally realized visions of a future all too real to be simply dismissed purely as being mere "science fiction".

When Theo is contacted by his ex-wife, Julian (played by Julianne Moore), who has been working with a militant group of vigilantes, she asks for his help in obtaining official government papers that will allow a friend of hers to travel to a safe zone. But when she is suddenly killed by a wild group of rebels, Theo discovers that "her friend" is a young pregnant woman; just days away from giving birth to the first known baby in over eighteen years, and the possible savior of the human race. Theo takes it upon himself to personally transport the girl through the dangerous countryside and war torn cities of a destroyed England. As Theo tries to escort the woman amongst all the chaos we see a frightening vision of a furious world, painted so vividly, and so painfully real, its images will be burned deep into your subconscious; it's unforgettable. And Cuarón, whose last film was 2004's Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (my favorite in the series), is just the right film maker to bring this uncompromised vision to the big screen. The future has never seemed so real before in any motion picture I've ever seen, and the effect is absolutely chilling.

Everything about Children of Men is stunning. From Emmanuel Lubezki's gritty cinematography to an Oscar worthy performance from Clive Owen and a wonderful supporting performance from Michael Caine as an aging, pot-smoking hippie. The film oozes with heat-pounding suspense and gut-wrenching drama at every unexpected turn. And for along time I would have put Paul Greengrass's United 93 or Martin Scorsese's Departed at the top of the list for this year's Best Picture, but by and far this stunning achievement now sits atop the throne of great films this year. It works not only as a human drama, but as a science fiction fable and as an action-thriller; whatever it is that you're looking for in a great movie-going experience, look no further than Alfonso Cuarón's Children of Men. This is an unforgettable film, and in my opinion an instant classic.

The Fountain (2006)

"Death is the road to awe."

[7/10 · 22 November 2006]

Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain is a film I've been waiting quite awhile to see and now that I've seen it I'm not really sure what to make of it. Yes, I am very much scratching my head over it, because the film could be interpreted in a few different ways. For those expecting to see a love story that spans a thousand years you'll probably be surprised to find that that isn't really the case with The Fountain. The film is set in the present where Tom Creo (Hugh Jackman) a neurologist, is obsessively and desperately searching for a cure to his wife's (Izzi) brain tumor. As her health is withering away she begins to write a novel called…you guessed it -- "The Fountain"; about a sixteenth century Spanish conquistador's dangerous quest to find the biblical "Tree of Life" (go read Genesis folks, Chapter 3, verse 24) found in the Garden of Eden.

The majority of the film is set in the present day as we watch Tom try to find a cure for brain tumors and comfort Izzi; who's pretty much accepted her fate and is no longer afraid of dying, while Tom tries to save her he struggles to accept defeat. The film cuts back and forth between three parallel stories; the sixteenth century Spanish conquistadors, the present day search for a cure and the future, where Tom is encased in a large bubble moving through space heading towards a dying nebula. It is my own personal interpretation that this "future" storyline is really just a visual representation of what Tom is thinking inside his head during the present day events as they unfold. But I could be wrong, that's just my take on it. Aronofsky attempts to turn modern cinema into an artistic expression of poetry, only on a visual medium. It may be too much for some to handle, but it's nice to see somebody try hard to make something bold and different for a change.

Visually it's a grand film, which as surprising as it may seem consisted of little to no CGI or computer effects. Those scenes taking place in space are actually chemical reactions filmed up-close in Petri dishes (cool, huh?). The film strives to be nothing short of a masterpiece, but I don't think Aronofsky's latest quite reaches the same heights of emotional power and sheer thrill as his last film; 2000's soul crushing opus, Requiem for a Dream (one of my favorite movies of all-time). Yes, The Fountain isn't bulletproof, it does have some flaws. Sometimes it can be a challenge to overlook some of those flaws, but they're worth overlooking in order to take in the film's vastly more important and awe-inspiring ideas. It's artsy, maybe just a little too much, and at times perhaps pretentious, but the themes and emotions running throughout The Fountain are so raw and fully exposed they cut deep to the core of every person, especially if you've ever known the pain of losing someone you held deal.

When I first came out of the theater I felt disappointed, then confused, then fascinated, then confused again. There's no doubt in my mind that you'll either love this film or hate it; it's just one of those kinds of movies. But at least one thing's for sure – The Fountain is unlike any other movie you've seen this year or last or the year before that. It's more of an experience, a state of mind, and an exploration of the soul. Director Darren Aronofsky's film doesn't provide any answers, but it does raise a few questions and will most certainly get you thinking. This is an excellent conversation starter and I could see this as being in someway the ultimate date-movie for those looking for a unique challenge. I didn't quite love this movie (even though I desperately wanted to), and I didn't quite hate it either. I was fascinated by it, hypnotized by it, and even puzzled by it. And with a sensational musical score by Clint Mansell layered on top it's probably the closest you'll ever get to having a semi-religious or spiritual experience at the movies. Don't go into The Fountain trying to understand it using your head, instead try following through its multiple story lines by following your heart.

Casino Royale (2006)

"I'm sorry, that last hand... nearly killed me."

[10/10 · 18 November 2006]

Bond is back, and edgier than ever before. Casino Royale, much like last summer's Batman Begins, reboots the tired and formulaic James Bond franchise by taking everything up a notch and giving us a darker, more complex Bond, and a script that's smart and sophisticated and creates heroes from the ground up that we care about and sinister villains we love to hate. Better yet – it gives us a reason to give a damn this time, by making things personal. Bond has been played many times before and by many different faces, many will say that Sean Connery was and forever will be the one true Bond and I would have to agree with that. For the last seven years Pierce Brosnan brought 007 to the big screen and he was a great choice as well. Following in his footsteps comes Daniel Craig, a new Bond for a generation; a Bond will killer instincts and sharp wits to match his lethal skills. Living up to the reputations of Brosnan and Connery is just about one of the hardest gigs in Hollywood, but thankfully GoldenEye director Martin Campbell returns to 007 with a great cast and a number of electrifying action sequences to pull you on the edge of your seat. I think Campbell should just direct Bond movies for the rest of his career.

The film starts off with James Bond acquiring his 00 status after a double assassination in Prague, and then after a visually blazing opening credits sequences races us to Madagascar, where Bond is trying to hunt down a bomb maker which ends up in one long breathtaking marathon of an action sequence. When the operation turns into a massive catastrophe M, played with an anger and scorn by Judi Dench, questions if Bond is really the right man to be part of the 00 echelon of MI6. But before she can do anything about it he's off to the Bahamas to independently track down track down a terrorist cell run by a man named Dimitrios. In the process romances his girlfriend, Solange, and thwarts a terrorist bombing.

Bond sure knows how to get around, but when MI6 learns that Dimitrios was funded by an evil banker known as Le Chiffre, played excellently by Mads Mikkelsen, who launders money through a casino in Montenegro to finance terrorists operations around the world Bond is set by MI6 to play against his in a high-stakes poker game. He's accompanied by a beautiful accountant (and cleavage extraordinaire), Vesper Lynd, played by the stunning Eva Green. Bond's interest in her deepens as they face life and death situations together and even some brutal torture (Ouch! Now that's gotta hurt!) at the hands of Le Chiffre. In Montenegro, Bond allies himself with Mathis MI6's local field agent, Mathis. The marathon game proceeds with dirty tricks and violence, raising the stakes beyond blood money and reaching a terrifying climax.

I haven't seen all of Bond movies, but I'm certainly not a stranger to them. A lot of people are saying Casino Royale is the best of the bunch, and as of now it has the highest rating in the 007 series on the Internet Movie Database, at 8.1, with Goldfinger trailing closely behind with 7.8. I'm not sure if Royale is in fact the best Bond film, but it's certainly one of the best and without a doubt the strongest since the 60's, when Connery reined supreme, and that's saying quite a lot really. I liked Craig as Bond, and could easily see him doing more 007 movies. I especially liked his British accent which seems like it's been missing from the series for a really long time. I loved the cars, the locations, the performances, the villains, the babes (oh the babes!) and the action. Casino Royale is an excellent film, with its only flaw being that it doesn't quite know when to cash its chips in; running about twenty minutes too long, but even that didn't seem to impact my feels about it. This is a solid and exciting thriller and perhaps the best action film of the year (sorry M:I:III). Bond is most certainly back and more alive than ever before.

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)

Stranger than fiction, but much better than average

[9/10 · 10 November 2006]

Marc Forster's latest film maybe stranger than fiction, but thankfully it's also much better than the average movie playing at your local theater, well… almost. It's seems that ever since Scorsese's Departed just about every week there's been a new movie that's actually really good and finally there seems to be a reason to keep returning to the movies. Hey, they're finally making some good stuff for a change! In Stranger than Fiction Will Ferrell plays a calm and orderly IRS auditor named Harold Crick; a man who lives for his job, day in and day out. Harold seemingly has one friend at work, Dave (played by Tony Hale, formerly of TV's Arrested Development), no private relationships and no personal life what-so-ever, and his entire existence is about getting up and going to and from work. Harold is stuck in a never-ending routine that is disturbed one morning while brushing his teeth. While counting the number of brush strokes Harold begins to hear a strange woman's voice narrating the things he's doing as he's doing them. The voice is that of Kay Eiffel, a depressed, chain smoking and very talented author whose come down with a serious case of writer's block. When Harold discovers that Kay's novels are quite famous for their tragic endings, where the hero always dies, he seeks the help of literary professor Jules Hibert, played by the always entertaining Dustin Hoffman, to help get to the bottom of Harold's problem.

Two-time Oscar winner Emma Thompson gives a wonderfully distressed performance as the author that shakes up Harold's life, and Queen Latifah plays an assistant brought in to help Kay break through her writer's block and get back to finishing her new novel. Harold is driven crazy by the voice of the narrator in his head, and is heart is aching for a feisty young woman named Ana, played with a free and wild spirit by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who he's assigned to audit for failing to pay all her taxes as a way of sticking' it to the government. As Harold comes closer and closer to his demise he falls in love with Ana and discovers how sweet life can be with just a few cookies and a glass of milk. Life can be so sweet; we just have to go after it, each and every day. But time is running out for Harold and he is desperately trying to track down this mysterious author while there's still time to stop her from finishing her novel.

Director Marc Forster, whose last films included last year's Stay and the imaginative Finding Neverland has crafted a wonderfully entertaining and equally smart film with some great performances from one of the best ensemble casts this year, right next to Little Miss Sunshine. Will Ferrell gives what is easily his best performance of his career, and his most sincerely enjoyable since Elf. Stranger than Fiction does for Will Ferrell what Eternal Sunshine did for Jim Carrey; it's just the right material for the right actor, and I'd love to see Farrell do more roles like this one and lay off the Anchorman kind of stuff for awhile and give him some room to grow as an actor. I don't know what its Oscar chances are, but given the films that have already come out this fall in my book all bets are off; expect a very close and interesting Oscar race.

Stranger than Fiction is part comedy, part drama and part romance; there's a little bit of something for everyone. I found myself getting so wrapped up in the film's premise and constantly thinking to myself; "How is this all going to come together in the end?" so much so I was never bored for a single moment and not only was I fascinated with it's ideas, but I was also quite touched emotionally with it's engaging performances. I really enjoyed this movie, and more importantly its message. Yes, on the surface Stranger than Fiction may look like a Charlie Kaufman-esquire psycho-babble "weird $hit happens" movie in the vein of Being John Malkovich or Adaptation, but beneath it all there's something that those films didn't quite have – a beating heart, without all the cynicism.

Mission: Impossible III (2006)

The third times the charm

[6/10 · 5 November 2006]

For about the first hour and a half Mission: Impossible 3 is the most intense and exciting and quite possibly the sharpest executed Mission yet, but once it gets to the last twenty minutes things start to fall a little out of place, but your heart will be pounding until the last frame. The film tries to combine elements of the first two films; the intelligence and surprising plot twist of the first film, and the intense, loud action of the second, but part three does try to do one thing different that has yet to be done; giving our main hero and lead spy, Ethan Hunt a personal life, and you don't have to have seen True Lies or the first few episodes of Alias (which was created by J.J. Abrams) to know that spies can't have a personal life, it just flat out doesn't work. Just ask Jason Bourne. I originally thought, "Well this is going to be interesting, it's going to get really personal, and I bet that'll make it much more intense. Cool." But what this really does is shift the focus of the film from "the mission" to Hunt's wife, whose life is now in jeopardy. Hmmm... that doesn't sound much different from the last thirty minutes of M:I-2 does it?

M:I:III isn't really that much different from the other films in the series, and some people might come out saying that this installment is the best of the series. The film does show us for the first time just how a real IMF team carries out missions, which is kind of strange to think that only by the time we get to the third film in the series that it feels like we're seeing it all for the first time. And do you remember how in the first two movies Hunt used a number of face masks to disguise himself? Well we finally get to see where those masks come from and how they are made, and we also get to see how they get their voice to pull the whole trick off, which was actually pretty neat to watch. What's also pretty cool is the variety of missions and different locations that M:I:III travels to; from Berlin to Washington, D.C. to Vatican City and finally ending up in Shanghai, which all makes for some very interesting scenery.

The plot is somewhat hard to explain, mostly because it's so vague it's really hard to conclude just what in the hell was actually going on. It's not quite complicated in a fun and interesting way like the first film, and it's not as easy to follow as the second. The film is over stuff with big action stunts and loud shootouts. This film is easily packed with more action than the first two films combined, but there's no real flow to it all like M:I-2, but some of these scenes early on are quite exciting and highly energetic and thrilling, like one particular scene where Hunt has to jump off the roof a skyscraper in Shanghai (which looks like an amazing city at night I must say) only to swing over and crash on top of the building next to it, but overall this movie does feel like a really intense two hour episode of Alias, and I'd expect a little more from Cruise, but this is pretty much exactly what I would have expected from director Abrams.

The romance that the film is built upon isn't that convincing, probably just as convincing as the one in the last movie, but here we are just forced to "accept it" and move on. The film also tries to inject a little humor that wasn't really present in the first two films. Shaun of the Dead's Simon Pegg plays Hunt's techno. guru that did manage to make me laugh, but casting Pegg in a small role wasn't the only good choice in casting, no; the film is pretty well cast throughout; from Keri Russell as Hunt's protégé to Billy Crudup as an IMF team manager, Laurence Fishburne as the IMF operations director and Philip Seymour Hoffman as the icy villain, but they are all underused, which is a damn shame, and even though these are all great choices and it certainly keeps the film entertaining and exciting.

Part of M:I:III is brilliant and some of the best moments in the series. The cinematography is absolutely great, the lighting was brilliant and the action is very intense, but some of it should have been saved for the ending. The first hour is amazing, but the second hour doesn't really surpass what we've seen in the first, and it shouldn't be that way. The first two Mission films peaked with excitement with their finales; with the train sequence in the first and that awesome motorcycle chase and fist fight in the second, and the film tries a little too hard to play it safe in the end, it would have been better if they had just allowed it to take a few more risks, but it chickens out. I would recommend checking out M:I:III if you liked parts one and two, and finishing up at just a little over two hours long, is very well paced and NEVER has a dull moment, and make sure to expect the impossible. This is one of the best action films of the year, and it's sure to push your adrenaline levels to the max. So pop some popcorn, turn off the lights, crank up the surround sound and have some fun!

Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

Mediocre storytelling with fantastic battle sequences

[7/10 · 24 October 2006]

After having seen Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down I felt like it would be rather pointless to sit down and watch another War/combat film, especially one on World War II. So I wasn't in a really hurry to rush out and see Clint Eastwood's Flags of our Fathers, but my dad dragged me to it (even though I would have preferred to see either The Departed or The Prestige instead) this afternoon and even though I was reluctant to see it in the first place I wasn't totally let down by the picture, and even though I believe this movie was aiming to be Oscar bait, I seriously doubt it will be nominated. This film is about the battle of Iwo Jima, and the subsequent famous photograph of U.S. Marines planting an American flag on the hilltop of the small island, heavily armed with Japanese soldiers. The film centers around three American soldiers who were labeled as heroes when they planted the flag, but what the public didn't know was that these three men weren't the original soldiers that put up the flag. But the military went ahead with the story, when they saw it as an opportunity to sell war bonds and help fund the war. The three soldiers that become over night celebrities from the famous photograph are Navy Corman John "Doc" Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), and U.S. Marines Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford) and Ira Hayes (Adam Beech). Sometimes it's hard to live out a lie, even if it brings hope to millions, and over time it takes its toll on the soldiers.

Flags of our Fathers is just a notch above mediocre and about two notches below greatness. In someways it's a disappointment, and in others it success. It's a success in that we get to see, up close, the battle of Iwo Jima; and the visuals of breathtaking. The invasion sequence is up there with Saving Private Ryan's gut wrenching opening, and the battle sequences throughout are tense and gruesome. The battle scenes is where Flags really shines, but it's a disappointment as a narrative, and never quite knows what it wants to be; at one point it's a veteran soldier's account of what happened, and near the end it turns into a story being documented by a veteran's son, which gets a bit too "preachy" for my tastes (and started to remind me of the ending to Big Fish for some reason). Flags isn't exactly boring, but it does lack a singular perspective or "voice" and it often doesn't hit you emotionally like you'd expect it to. Out of the three main characters, I found myself only sympathizing with one of them (Phillippe), the other two I didn't find that interesting to be honest. If you're a history buff and sucker for War movies I'm sure you'll find something in Flags of our Fathers that's interesting. I think this film does a great job at recreating the look and feel of the battle at Iwo Jima. Stay through the end credits to look at vintage photos from the real battle, it's worth it; you can see just how accurate the film is on a visual level to the real thing. I think it's worth one viewing just to see the battle itself which is pretty exciting, but other than that this film won't teach you anything new that you haven't already seen in a half a dozen other war movies.

The Prestige (2006)

Nolan delivers more than just smoke and mirrors

[10/10 · 21 October 2006]

It's now official in my book; Christopher Nolan is the Hitchcock of the twenty-first century. His films are often dark, psychological and mysterious and always intelligent and carefully planned out; he's a real pro of both direction and misdirection. From his early film, Following, to last summer's blockbuster hit, Batman Begins, his films also usually require some intelligence and maybe even a second viewing to put all the jig-saw piece together. His latest thriller, entitled The Prestige, is a combination of the gloomy cinematography of Batman Begins and the swift and often disorienting editing of Following. Yes, it's a thinker, and yes I'm sure some will easily confuse this film with The Illusionist, but these two films couldn't be anymore different. Where as The Illusionist was a romantic-mystery set in Vienna, The Prestige is a dark mystery-thriller set in Victorian era London. This is a darker, meaner and a much more emotionally colder film about two men's obsession with fame and greatness, and to what lengths they will desperately go to get it.

The Prestige is about two magicians, Rupert Angier and Alfred Bowden, played marvelously by the charismatic Hugh Jackman and the slick and crafty Christian Bale. Angier is a magician with a real talent for wooing the audience with his razzle-dazzle tricks, and Bowden is the more talented of the two, but doesn't quite know how to engage the audience with his show stopping talents. They were once partners working with a magic stage producer named Cutter (played by the great Michael Caine), but when Angier's wife is accidentally killed in a magic trick gone wrong a strong rival and bitter hatred is born. Angier holds Alfred personally responsible for the accident, and then sets out to get his revenge by up-staging his competition with more dazzling tricks or simply just steal the ones he's already using, but just adding a little more pizazz to win over the crowds and ultimately get all the glory.

The rival gets more and more heated when Alfred pulls off an incredible trick that Angier just can't seem to figure out how to duplicate. To the best of his knowledge he tries to replicate the trick, but as he struggles to unravel the mystery behind it meets an obsessed scientist named Nikola Telsa (played very well by David Bowie, that's right David Bowie, how awesome was that!), who's experimenting with electricity. Remember this is the late nineteenth century, and to some that probably was a form of magic back then. As this rivalry gets more and more intense lives are shattered (along with limbs) and friendships are betrayed. The film bounces back and forth from the present time and the past (with the use of 0f flashbacks), which helps to keep the mystery masked until it's ready to be unveiled at the end. But unlike The Illusionist, this isn't a film that's solely a one-trick pony. The Prestige is twisting and turning from beginning to end, and never stops. Some things you might see coming, others you might not, but regardless, Nolan delivers the drama and the suspense to pull you into the film and carry you through it. I won't talk anymore about the film or its secrets; it's far too much fun to discover them for yourself and then talk to others who have seen it afterwards. I noticed a number of people in the theater stayed in their seats until the end credits discussing the film's ending and it's many surprises.

The reason I'm not giving this film a perfect ten is because sometimes it can get a bit too confusing, but I'm sure it'll make it even more fun to go back and watch it over and over again just like Memento. Also, emotionally it was a little tough to get into fully. The characters aren't quite fully black nor white; they're a shade of gray that's constantly drifting from the light to the dark. Jackman is especially impressive because of his charismatic charm (remember how likable Wolverine was? Yeah, me too.) and to see him slip into evil is actually kind of spooky. And what can I say about Christian Bale other than the fact that he's an amazing actor. If anyone is to be the "hero" of this tale I'd probably put my money on him. With The Prestige Christopher Nolan has given me one more reason why he's one of my favorite film directors working today, and so far his track record is flawless and his films are consistently intriguing and refreshingly original. This film is one of the smartest brain teasers of the year and I am certain The Prestige will make my top ten favorite movies of the year list. Now I can't wait for Nolan and his team to get to work on the sequel to Batman Begins; The Dark Knight. I'm sure that once again I'll be left stunned and thrilled.

The Departed (2006)

Scorsese goes back, once again to gangsterland.

[10/10 · 6 October 2006]

The Departed tells the story of two men working for the Boston state police; one is mole working inside the mob, and the other is a mole working for the Irish mob boss. Leonard DiCaprio plays Billy Costigan, the cadet police officer sent undercover to infiltrate the Irish mob, which is headed by Frank Costello, played by the wickedly wonderful and outrageous Jack Nicholson. Matt Damon plays Colin Sullivan, the mole inside the police force that tips off Costello on the police's activity while trying to put him away. Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg also star as police officers that are heading the investigation into putting Costello and his whole crew behind bars (or in a casket). Costigan works his way into the mob and Sullivan works his way up into the internal affairs unit of the state police, who is actually sent in to investigate who's been tipping off the mob.

You can see a bunch of Scorsese's touches throughout the film; from his music selections (great use of Dropkick Murphys, but The Rolling Stones song is getting a bit old now), to long tracking shots and plenty of disturbing outbursts of violence; which hit you like a sledgehammer to face in the film's final moments. Where The Departed really shines are the performances. DiCaprio is great, and this is probably his best performance to date. Damon comes through, but he won't exactly blow you away, he usually delivers good work and he doesn't disappoint here. Nicholson is a scene stealing weasel that will probably be compared to, and loved much like Pesci's wild and crazy work in Goodfellas and Casino. Nicholson is perfectly cast and has a lot of fun playing a character so wildly evil and nefarious you just love to hate the son of a bitch. And what's up with Alec Baldwin? Seriously, when was the last time he was in a film this good, and seemed to be having so much fun. And Martin Sheen was also good, but he really wasn't given enough to do in my opinion.

Whether or not Martin Scorsese will actually admit that his latest film, The Departed, is a remake of the Hong Kong thriller, Infernal Affairs, remains to be seen. I probably would have gotten a little bit more enjoyment out of The Departed had it actually been an original Scorsese film like Goodfellas or Casino, but this film pretty much follows the same exact plot as Infernal Affairs; beat for beat, up until the film's last minute twist ending which, no that I think about it actually does kind of make sense. Should you see The Departed in theaters? Yes, absolutely! Especially when you look at all the other amazingly craptastic movies playing in theaters right now you should definitely go out and see it, hell, see it just for the great performances; they alone are worth the price of admission. Actually the more and more I think about it, the more I love this movie. I'll definitely need to see it again, and if necessary again and again. I actually could see myself rating this one as a ten after multiple viewings.

The Illusionist (2006)

Mysteriously lacking movie magic

[5/10 · 30 September 2006]

The Illusionist isn't the worst film I've seen all year, but it certainly is the frontrunner for being the most boring and emotionally disconnected. Edward Norton plays Eisenheim an illusionist who has returned to Vienna to win back the love of his life, Sophie (Jessica Biel) from Crown Price Peopold, played by Rufus Sewell, in serious douchebag mode. But when the Prince learns of Eisenheim and Sophie's relationship he tries to have him locked up, with the help of Chief Inspector Uhl, played by well by the always amazing Paul Giamatti, but the powerful illusionist uses his mysterious ways to bring down the Prince and reclaim the woman of his dreams. That's pretty much the gist of what The Illusionist is all about. On paper it's an interesting and well constructed romantic mystery, but on film it sorely lacks one important component that is needed to bring all the pieces together - chemistry.

The chemistry between Norton and Biel isn't present enough to build up a relationship worth investing in. Individually the performances are all fine, but the passion that connects them just isn't there. It's the kind of thing that can make or break a film like The Illusionist, and in this case the film comes off so disconnected and flat that I just wasn't hypnotized by the film's plot. I saw the film's magic, but alas I did not feel it. However the film does have some good performances (kudos to Norton for playing mysterious very well) and the sets and costumes. The film also manages to put together a pretty decent surprise ending, but looking back on it now it's seems so obvious, I actually feel rather stupid for actually falling for it.

Music can have a massive impact on how a film is interpreted and experienced. Sometimes if a musical score is too prominent or overly submissive it crushes a particular scene, killing any or all drama from the performances. A lot of the times it's the horror genre that goes overboard with the musical score. The Illusionist may in fact be the first serious drama that I've seen where an abnormal lack of a dramatic score actually hurts the film as a whole; giving the film a sense of emptiness and ultimately one of boredom. I'm actually quite surprised in a lot of the highly positive reviews for this one. I think at best, The Illusionist is okay, but nothing more. Perhaps in the hands of a more experienced director like Martin Scorsese or Ridley Scott I would have been more emotionally swept away with the film's magical mischief. I say skip this and wait until Christopher Nolan unleashes The Prestige later this month. Now that's one magic trick I can't wait to take part in!

The Guardian (I) (2006)

"So others may live."

[5/10 · 17 September 2006]

The Guardian is a decent movie that serves as a long overdue tribute to the men and women of the U.S. Coast Guard. Call it a wet version of Ladder 49 if you want, because that's not too far from the truth. I haven't seen many films take a good look at the jobs of the Coast Guard and until now I'd say the best attempt was in Wolfgang Petersen's The Perfect Storm. In The Guardian Kevin Costner stars as a veteran Coast Guard rescue diver Ben Randall. After suffering a terrible accident and losing several crew members of his rescue team on one unforgiving night on the dangerous seas Ben finds himself coming to terms with the tragedy and haunted by reoccurring nightmares. He's assigned to teach new divers at a training camp facility where he meets a cocky, but surprisingly talented swimmer named Jake Fischer, played by Ashton Kutcher, who actually does look like he could be quite a good swimmer. The majority of the 135 minute running time is spent at the training camp, in which the new cadedets are pushed to their maximum capability, and many of them find themselves "washing out", not able to live up to the high standards needed to become an official Coast Guard diver.

The second act, which mostly deals with the training process, is a tad too long, and does seem to drag the movie on, but none of these scenes are boring, or not entertaining. The movie is quite often humorous and enjoyable (it's always a good sign when the audience laughs at all the right moments), and does a fairly good job at balancing back and forth from human drama to playful comedy. I can forgive the movie for running about 15 or 20 minutes too long, but I still can't help but wonder how better the film would have been if Kutcher had been replaced with another actor, someone who's a little more convincing with pulling off the dramatic or sympathetic moments. Thankfully since there are a number of moments that strive for laughs Kutcher is able to make those moments work, but the best part of the film has to be Kevin Costner as the tough as nails teacher and mentor. He's a perfect choice in casting and easily pulls off the part of the wise and dedicated seasoned professional having a hard time adjusting to old age. Kutcher is a bit of a wild card here. Costner is spot on in his part, but Kutcher seems like an odd choice. I've always enjoyed him on That 70's Show, and have always believed that comedy is he's strong suite. Kutcher does an alright job, and he doesn't derail the rest of the film, but someone like Josh Hartnett or Ryan Phillippe probably would have been a better choice for this part.

The film does resemble Ladder 49 in a lot of ways, and both films certainly have their fair share of problems and flaws that should be overlooked, but I think most of the flaws in The Guardian can be overlooked, but certainly not forgotten. The film does get a little sappy near the end, and there's a bit too much use of slow-motion that used to highlight the more emotionally intense moments. There's a great film within the script of The Guardian, but in the hands of a better filmmaker like Ridley Scott, Ron Howard or maybe even Michael Mann would have been much more interesting or thoroughly and emotionally thrilling. Instead director Andrew Davis, whose only real homerun has been 1993's The Fugitive, takes a good and noble idea and turns it into a run of the mill drama about teamwork, sacrifice and courage. Some moments get a little too "touchy-feely" at the end, which sounded like a rehash of Big Fish (you'll know what I mean when you hear it), but overall I'd say that this is a decent movie, and as a tribute to the often overlooked and brave men and women of the Coast Guard it works quite well. Should you see it in theaters? Maybe, but I would probably save it for DVD. The Guardian gets my thumb up, and comes close to being a low seven, but I'll settle with giving it a high six instead. You can always do worse, right? Or should I remind you of Annapolis?

Little Miss Sunshine (2006)

The best comedy of the year!

[9/10 · 4 September 2006]

When I first saw the trailer for Little Miss Sunshine in front of Thank You for Smoking I thought to myself "Awww that looks like cornball hell". But to my surprise an enormous amount of absolutely glowing reviews came pouring in praising the film. This time you can trust the critics. Little Miss Sunshine is not only the most hysterically funny and original comedy of the year, it's also one of the very best and most delightful films I've seen all year long. That's right, it truly is. This innocence and carefree little flick serves up a great dish of bittersweet drama and plenty of quirky laughs. If the Academy Awards have any real value left to them this film would at the very least get a Oscar nomination for Best Original Screenplay; its proof that movies can still be funny and original without having to rely entirely on potty humor and tasteless sex jokes. This is one of those underrated films that should get more attention, and hopefully more people will go and check it out.

This dramedy about a super dysfunctional family revolves around one little girl named Olive; an innocence oddball child with aspirations to win a beauty pageant named "Little Miss Sunshine". One look at her and you think to yourself, "Well that ain't happenin' anytime soon." Abigail Breslin (the little girl from Signs) is outstanding as Olive, and her performance is a real winner for such a young actress (Look out Dakota!), but this film isn't necessarily all about one great performance, instead we get six! Toni Collette and Greg Kinnear play Sheryl and Richard, the mother and father of this gang of misfits, which includes not only Olive, but her older brother Dwayne, who aspires to be a pilot and has taken a vow of silence until he achieves his goal. And then there's Frank, Olive's gay and suicidal uncle, played by funnyman Steve Carell. Carell, whose ability to whip up laughs in last year's The 40-Year-Old Virgin, keeps himself in a constant downtrodden mood and never seems to try too hard to get laughs, but he gets 'em anyway. He could have stolen the spotlight easily, but he doesn't. And rounding out the family is Alan Arkin as the grumpy and horny grandpa named, well… honestly, it's just "Grandpa". Whose complains about getting old and snorts heroine to deal with his life. All the performances are equally great, no one really seems to outshine anybody else; much like a real family they work together and together they make one of the most entertainingly fun and enjoyable dysfunctional families I've seen on the big screen in quite a long time.

The majority of the film is the family packing into their busted up and literally falling apart VW minivan and traveling hundreds of miles to get Olive to the pageant on time. Sounds like a simple premise, but to anyone whose seen a road trip comedy you can bet that the journey will take plenty of hilarious detours, and the best part of Little Miss Sunshine is that most of the detours you won't see comin'; when you think you know exactly where the joke is headed it immediately takes a sharp turn and goes somewhere else entirely. The amazing script by first time writer, Michael Arndt, is full of tender and soft moments, but the film never gets sappy or corny, and instead sometimes stings with quirky humor and very deep insights into the joy of life, family, and the misery of the pressure to win and the bitter taste of losing. The great thing about the film is how it's handled and how perfectly balanced it is; it never becomes predictably trite or overly sentimental.

Little Miss Sunshine is a delightful little surprise that rides a roller coaster of emotions from sad, to heat-warming to hysterically funny and enjoyable. This isn't exactly a "family movie". It's rated a mild R, for some language and sexual humor and brief drug use. But this is such a charming and entertaining film you hardly seem to notice the R rating. So if you're looking for something refreshingly original and equally funny and enjoyable and you're sick of shallow entertainment like Snakes on a Plane or Beerfest and looking for something that'll put a nice big 'ol smile on your face I'd highly recommend rushing out to the theater and seeing Little Miss Sunshine, even if you have to give your car a push start to make it to the theater, it's worth it.

Apocalypse Now (1979)

"I love the smell of napalm in the morning."

[10/10 · 16 August 2006]

Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now is an absolute masterpiece. It doesn't really matter which version of the film you watch; the original '79 version, or the restored and extended "Redux" cut. Francis Ford Coppola has said that he personally prefers the longer cut of the film which was finally restored in 2001 and added an additional fifty minutes of footage cut from the original release because of it's already long running time of two and a half hours. When I first saw Apocalypse Now I watched the original version and I was instantly taken by it. It was dark, twisted, and surreal and unlike any other war film I had seen before. A few years later I watched the 2001 "Redux" version and was a bit disappointed with it initially. The extra fifty minutes didn't really seem to add much more substance to the overall picture and in return just ended up slowing down the film so much that it just dragged on. Since that time I have only watched the original cut of the film on DVD and still love it. It's one of my all-time favorite war films and probably the best Vietnam war film I've ever seen, and if it's not the best, because certainly Oliver Stone's Platoon is another Vietnam war film that I hold in very high regard, but if Apocalypse Now isn't the best film on Vietnam it's certainly the most original, darkest and fascinating.

The film uses Joseph Conrad's novel "Heart of Darkness" as the basis for the plot, but setting it in the middle of the Vietnam War. Captain Benjamin Willard (Martin Sheen) leads a top secret classified mission to travel by boat up a long and dangerous river into Cambodia to assassinate a rouge Green Beret officer named Colonel Kurtz, played with a powerfully absorbing intensity by Marlon Brando. Kurtz seems to have gone completely and totally insane, and a local jungle tribe seems to have adopted him and worship him as some kind of God. Along the perilous journey the team encounters many strange and unusual people and places, including a gung-ho Lieutenant Colonel of the Air Calvary named Bill Kilgore, played great by a wild and fun Robert Duvall (in an Oscar nominated performance), that leads an all-out assault on a small village of Vietnamese, which is undoubtedly the most infamous sequence in the film. But that's just the beginning of this bizarre odyssey; as the small group of soldiers makes their way up the river they also meet some Playboy Playmates, and come across a nighttime battle over a destroyed bridge that is nothing but absolute anarchy and chaos, with no one seemingly in control of the combat. And just wait until Captain Willard finally gets to meet Colonel Kurtz, face to face; it's well worth the wait. Oh, and the scene where the cow gets sacrificed, that wasn't faked; that was all done for real.

Apocalypse Now is a wild and nightmarish vision of hell on Earth. Francis Ford Coppola's vision of the Vietnam War is so strange and surreal it might as well take place on an entirely different planet all together. The performances are all superb, not a single weak link among them. Among my favorites though has to be Dennis Hopper as an American photojournalist with a motor-mouth and always seems to be on the brink of madness. The Oscar-winning cinematography by Vittorio Storaro is phenomenal, and crisp with bolder darks and beautifully bright colors that look even better on the new DVD transfer. It looks so good it's actually hard to believe that the film is nearly thirty years old. And the action sequences are just another aspect of the film that seems to hold up amazingly well over the years. The helicopter attack sequence is breathtaking and still impressive, even by today's standards. The music of Apocalypse Now is another pretty interesting topic. It's mostly an orchestral score done with synthesizers and a few rock tunes from The Rolling Stones ("I can't get no satisfaction") and The Doors ("The End") and Robert Wagner's classical march "The Ride of the Valkyries", which is a piece of music that has become infamous with the film.

I recently re-watched the "Redux" cut of Apocalypse Now and must say that I did enjoy it more a second time around. Some scenes, while still feeling long and maybe a bit excessive, don't really feel as uninteresting or unimportant anymore. The additional sequence with the Playmates does still seem to be pretty pointless to me, but the scene with the French plantation now seems to have more of a purpose; of reminding Willard of man's potential for both good and evil. This scene used to seem slow and pointless, now it seems to make a little more sense when you think more about the ending and how important choices of good and evil play out. The extra fifty minutes of restored footage in the "Redux" cut seems to add a lot more character development and a little more comradeship to the soldiers, but also it makes the journey up the river longer and more "tiring", but in a good way. Personally I like both versions of the film, but choosing which one to watch really depends on what kind of film you're in the mood for. The original cut is more straightforward and to the point. Apocalypse Now Redux is a little more taxing to sit through (running at three hours and twenty two minutes), but has more substance, nudity and truly carries the weight of a dangerous and surreal journey into the heart of darkness. But which ever version you chose to watch, either way it's a masterpiece.

World Trade Center (2006)

Not exactly a great film, but important none-the-less

[7/10 · 14 August 2006]

I think any film that is made about 9/11 is going to be met with high scrutiny and often with a lot of people who'll just turn their noses up at it; claiming that it's just a shameful attempt to cash in on a tragedy to make a profit. To those arrogant, self-indulgent and brainless people who like to judge films before having actually seen them I only have one thing to say; shut up. This film and Paul Greengrass' amazing United 93 serve a bigger, more important purpose than money or profit. These films are meant to inspire, encourage and act as an important reminder of the power and bond that all Americans have to one another in great times of grief and tragedy. Where United 93 was about a group of strangers banding together to fight a common enemy, World Trade Center is about the courage and strength of men who put their lives on the line to help save others. This isn't a film about death and evil and destruction, it's about life, hope, strength, love and the courage to act, and rise up in a time when you are most needed. Any tears that you cry during this film are more likely to be tears of joy.

World Trade Center is an Oliver Stone film, that's oddly enough not an Oliver Stone film; there's no political commentary or message, and no conspiracy theories. I don't think America is quite ready for those films, but I don't doubt that at some point they will get made, eventually, but as for now filmmakers seem to be sticking to the reality of what happened on that day and not making up wild stuff and passing it off as the truth. Oliver Stone's usual style of intense editing, use of black & white film and historical stock footage isn't present in World Trade Center. It doesn't look, sound or move like your typical Oliver Stone film; this is probably the most straightforward film in his career, and it works well because of it.

This film is based on the incredible true story of two Port Authority Police Officers, John McLoughlin (Nicolas Cage) and Will Jimeno (Michael Pena), who were buried in between the twin towers, below twenty feet of rubble. This is just one story of many on the events of that unforgettable day, but this is their story. John and Will were only two of twenty people that were rescued out of the wreckage of the twin towers. Their story won't just grab your throat, but also touch your heart; it's not in the slightest way depressing, it's downright inspiring. I think this is a film that you don't WANT to see, but you HAVE to see. It's a reminder to live life to the fullest, and to not take it for granted, because you never know what tomorrow may bring.

The film balances back and forth from being stuck in the rubble; fighting to stay alive, and showing us what the families of the trapped men go through during the day. The wives want to remain hopefully, but the tension of not knowing what's going on and what's happening are shaking them to their core. And if you think these guys survived the collapse and are safe, and just waited to be rescued, you'd be dead wrong. The danger is very much present the whole time and at any minute they could have been killed. The performances are pretty good, especially Michael Pena as Will Jimeno. Mark my words; this guy's got an Oscar coming to him in his future. Heck, even Jay Hernandez and Stephen Dorff offer solid and respectable performances. Oliver Stone must have done something extraordinary, right? Maggie Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello also deliver durable performances. Although I must say that those bright blue contacts that Maria wore really distracted from her performance. They looked great in Underworld, but here they just look really bad. World Trade Center isn't a great film, and not quite at the same kind of masterful level as United 93 was, but this film is a respectable and important reminder of that tragic day, and it's done with class, emotion and most of all… respect.

Some people have said that it's too soon for films to be made about the events of 9/11. I think that's bullshit. There have been plenty of books, documentaries (mostly with political agendas) and TV movies made on 9/11, but most of those things have focused on the darkness and death of that day. What's wrong with taking two hours out of your busy day to be reminded of what good that can come out of it? I think we owe at least that much to them. You have to take the good with the bad, and to remember that day as nothing but bad would be a real tragedy.

Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (2006)

"Momma, I'm going' fast!"

[8/10 · 12 August 2006]

Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby is without a doubt the funniest film of 2006. If you liked Anchorman and The 40-Year-Old Virgin and seeing Will Ferrell play a silly Nascar driver sounds funny to you then you better rush out to the theater and check this one out. I haven't laughed this hard, or consistently since Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang; Talladega Nights is the one of the best rides of the summer. Will Ferrell plays Ricky Bobby, a superstar Nascar racer that fires up the race track winning race after race will the help of his trusty sidekick and long time best friend Cal Naughton, Jr., played well by John C. Reilly. The two are a dynamic duo in the race world and things seemed to going great, that is until a gay French Formula One racer named Jean Girard, played by a slimy Sacha Baron Cohen, with a ridiculously hilarious accent. Jean hits the Nascar circuit like a hurricane and just like that, Ricky Bobby finds himself out of the league and forced to deliver pizzas to make money. But with some good old fashioned ass kickin' help from Ricky's long lost father, Reese, played to absolute perfection by the great Gary Cole (you might remember him as the boss from Office Space); he'll be back on the race track in no time to duel with the slimy Jean Girard.

Talladega Nights brings on the laughs and loads of silliness right from the start and never really let's up. And I would go as far as saying that this movie does top Anchorman in not only laughs, but overall entertainment as well, but on the downside, the film does seem to miss a few good opportunities here and there. David Koechner is underused and not really given enough to do, which is a real shame considering how funny he was in Anchorman and Thank You for Smoking, and the story is a bit predictable, but always hilarious. But if you can forgive the thin plot and some of the one-note characters I think you'll have one hell of a fun time. Anchorman director Adam McKay has assembled a great cast with plenty of comedic talent, and as we watch them have fun they don't forget to bring us along for the ride. Talladega Nights is a pure laugh riot of silliness for both racing fans and non-fans alike, and it works so well for the majority of the time it's hard to walk away feeling the slightest bit of disappointment.

The Descent (2005)

The Descent is on par with Carpenter's Thing and Scott's Alien

[10/10 · 4 August 2006]

Neil Marshall. Remember the name; he just might be the next John Carpenter. Personally I've never heard of the man. Four years ago he directed a low budget horror flick called Dog Soldiers. Apparently it must have been a pretty good show, because the sick minds over at Lionsgate gave the dude some quick cash and went on to create one of the years most intense and startling horror-thrillers that manages to easily dodge most of the silly and lame clichés that often plague most modern day horror films. The Decent echoes touches of Ridley Scott's Alien, Brian De Palma's Carrie and John Carpenter's The Thing, and does so in brilliant fashion. I say if you're gonna steal, you might as well steal from the best. The Descent is essentially the polar opposite of Alexander Aja's remake of The Hills Have Eyes; it takes place in a wet and confined climate, deep underground and in total darkness. It's a terrific setting and used amazingly well. This is what I image last year's The Cave was trying to do with a PG-13 rating. Well The Decent most certainly earns it's R-rating and doesn't hold back on any of the blood n' guts. And with a running time of just under a hundred minutes it certainly packs a good, solid punch. This is the stuff classics are made of.

The Descent is about a group of six young women who love exploring and adventuring. One of them is still recovering from a horrible accident that occurred over a year ago. Her friend's think she needs to get out, and go on a cave diving exploration trip, hoping that it'll help her take her mind off things and help ease her tension. Yeah, right! As you can tell from the previews there's something not quite so normal about these caves; there's something very evil and terrifying living deep beneath the surface, and worst yet... it's hungry. That's all I'm going to spill on The Descent; it's a film that is a much more effective journey if you don't know what'll happen next. The direction is masterful, the music is gripping and yes, the scares will have you popping' outta your seat! If you like your horror movies with plenty of blood and gore, tons of suspense and extreme tension and a bunch of girls kickin' some serious ass than I'm sure you'll get a real scream out of The Descent. I would easily rank this as one of the scariest and most intense horror films in years. I seriously didn't expect a horror film to match (or even exceed) this year's The Hills Have Eyes, but I was dead wrong. Definitely see this one on the big screen, because it certainly won't feel the same seeing it for the first time on DVD.

Miami Vice (2006)

It's Michael Mann, not Michael Bay, and don't you forget that!

[10/10 · 30 July 2006]

Miami Vice is one of the top three best adult-thrillers of the year; resting along side V for Vendetta and Inside Man. It's a Michael Mann film, not Michael Bay, and don't you forget it! This isn't Bad Boys or The Fast and the Furious, so don't go in expecting a huge two hour action flick with tons of explosions, car chases and a dumbed down plot that insults your intelligence. Michael Mann's style and his films have always been something of an acquired taste, and Miami Vice is no different. You'll either love it or hate it. Miami Vice didn't quite pack the same kind of punch that Collateral did, but I can say with confidence that this film was more complicated and ambitious than some of his previous films. And at nearly two and a half hours long you'd better be prepared for it, because if you're not you will probably get a little bored. Especially if you can't keep up with what is happening on screen, which some complain about not being able to follow the plot, and get lost in it. Trust me, a second viewing greatly improves and clarifies this issue. Miami Vice is easily one of the most complex and mature flicks of the summer, and its a welcome relief from a lot of bombastic CGI extravaganzas that seemed to have overtaken much of the summer movie season. This is slick and sexy entertainment that works because it's thrills and explosions are real, not fake. There never was a single moment where I thought to myself, "You know that would never, ever happen in real life, not like that." Miami Vice does a great job of keepin' it real. Now that sounds like an impossible mission for Hollywood to do these days!

The film is in the spirit of the 80's television show; it's not an exact replication, it's a re-interpretation of the material. Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx star as the famous undercover cop duo, Sonny Crockett and Richardo Tubbs. The two are quickly assigned to infiltrate the Colombian drug cartel to get information about a possible leak inside in the FBI when one of its agents cover gets blown; resulting in several deaths. In order to get close to the drug traffickers the two cops will have to go deep undercover to expose their business dealings and bring them down. Along the way Sonny gets romantically involved with Isabella (played by Gong Li), who's a banker for the cartel that Crockett and Tubbs have gained access to. Colin Farrell hasn't been this enjoyable in a movie since Minority Report, and delivers a pretty gosh-darn good performance here. But this romantic relationship does drag down the film a bit too much, and takes away from the Sonny and Richardo partnership aspect of the film, which is probably the best part of the film. Jamie Foxx seems to disappear for too long during the second act of the film. One of the greatest and most obvious aspects of Miami Vice was its cinematography and killer soundtrack; two things that are absolutely essential for a Michael Mann film. And once again the man doesn't disappoint.

Miami Vice does drag it's feet now and again, and Gong Li does struggle often to master the English language, but the film also does build up to and deliver a great third and final act. And with all the cards on the table and everyone's lives on the line it leaves no room for error for these two cops, as the try to protect the ones they love and manage to bring down the bad guys. Like I said earlier this isn't Bad Boys. The film shows very well how dangerous this kind of undercover work can be. Their job requires time, patience and intelligence to get it done right and the same can be said about the film itself; it too also requires some patience and intelligence. And if you can come to the movie and deliver those two things, in the end you'll realize that Michael Mann did a good job with the material. The last 30 minutes will grab you by the throat... and squeeze. Especially with a furious gun battle that when shot through the lens of a Hi-Def Viper camera looks more like a finely polished home video; shining with gritty reality, and not some overly slick or "fake" Hollywood style. When all was said and done, and the bullets stopped firing and the smoked dissipated into the sky and Nonpoint's cover of "In the Air Tonight" swooped in over the end credits the movie left me feeling both thrilled and satisfied, but also pretty fatigued. Miami Vice gets a thumbs up.

Superman Returns (2006)

Magical, simply magical.

[9/10 · 29 June 2006]

Superman Returns is magical; a two and a half hour epic adventure with plenty of amazing spectacles, but also packs a lot of heart and emotion to back it up. Bryan Singer pays a great and respectful homage to Richard Donner's 1978 original, and in doing so has also managed to top all of the previous Superman efforts. A large amount of credit has to go to Singer for pulling it all off, but a lot of credit also needs to go to new comer Brandon Routh, who does an absolutely amazing job in the title role. And if you ask me I'd say he does a much better job than any other previous actor who has played the role, and yes, that also includes Christopher Reeve. Routh plays his Clark Kent with a slight touch of klutziness, but it's the kind of klutziness that you know when your watching him it's all for show, it's not just him being a dummy. With Reeve's portrayal it was harder to tell if it was just good acting, or just an amateurish performance. Routh, who does look an awful lot like Reeve, does the Man of Steel justice by giving Superman a strong backbone and tries his best to fit in, but ultimately will always be looking through the window from the outside. There's a great presence about him, that much like Hugh Jackman in 2000's X-Men, just makes you go, "Damn, they really picked the right guy."

Singer's directorial skills and previous experience with comic book films and Routh's performance isn't the only thing that Superman Returns has going for it. Kevin Spacey's portrayal of Lex Luthor is also another nice gem. He's so devilishly diabolical and mean. You can't help but hate him, but at the same time you just love him for it. And I think you can tell he's channeling the essence of Gene Hackman's performance in this film. Kate Bosworth also does a fine job as Lois Lane. I enjoyed her a lot more than Margot Kidder's loopy performance, but Bosworth really has some depth and strength that makes her character really work so well. And James Marsden aka "Cyclops" for those of you who don't know plays Lane's husband, Richard White. I loved the little love triangle between Lois, Richard and Superman throughout the film, it added just the right amount of heart and emotional depth to the big scale excitement.

Right from the start the film hit me in the heart, with its amazing opening credits and blaring music; which was a great tribute to the original film. Thankfully Singer is a great director, and knows that if it isn't broke don't try and fix it. I'm glad that they were able to tie in John Williams' original theme (which I can't get out of my head as I write this, and I don't much want to either) as well as a little bit of Marlon Brando's performance, and that last shot of Superman at the end was a great nod to Christopher Reeve as well. I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a little misty eyed throughout the film. What can I say? This film hit me with a case of serious nostalgia like I've never felt before.

So what's Superman Returns all about? Well it's about Superman… and his return to Earth, of course! The film isn't a sequel, prequel or remake; its set after 1980's Superman II, and ties into the first two films rather nicely. Their not exactly essential viewing in order to understand the plot of Returns, but I'm sure you could appreciate it more, or make it a little easier to follow if you saw the first two films. Superman returns to Earth after a mysterious absence of five years to find that the world might not need him. Well, at least that's the way Lois Lane sees things. But Superman shows the world once again that the world does need a savior and that no one's better suited for the job than the Man of Steel. Lex Luthor's back to his usual evil deeds, and he's out to destroy both the U.S. and Superman once and for all!

Superman Returns is epic storytelling with grand spectacles and heart-felt emotion running through its veins, not seen since Jackson's King Kong. Singer remains faithful to spirit of the comics, and keeps the tension and suspense going from beginning to end. He doesn't feel the need to make things edgier, or darker, because that just wouldn't be Superman. After having seen what Singer has done on this film and the X-Men movies, I believe he could pretty much do any comic book superhero out there and make it a knockout film. I've always found the character of Superman to be a sign of great inspiration, and an icon to hold in high regard for doing the right thing, and fighting for justice and truth, and I still do. And as a die-hard fan I can say with confidence that I couldn't have ask for anything more than what I got. I can't wait to see what Superman will do next, and with Routh's great performance and Singer pulling out all the stops and pushing things to the max is what makes Superman Returns one of the year's best films. This is why I love going to the movies.

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

Oh, c'mon! You know there's gonna be another one!

[6/10 · 30 May 2006]

After three years since Bryan Singer wowed audiences with X2: X-Men United the X-Men are finally back again on the big screen, but sadly without Singer. Nope, he's gone on to resurrect "The Man of Steel" in Superman Returns, which will be unleashed on theaters this June. Filling in for Singer on The Last Stand is Brett Ratner, whose previous films include both Rush Hour movies, The Family Man and Red Dragon. I was skeptical about Ratner being able to live up to the intensity of Singer's films, but I found myself pleasantly surprised when all was said and done. X-Men: The Last Stand looks a lot like the first two films, but with a rock'em and sock'em energy of the 90's X-Men cartoon, and that's not really such a bad thing.

The Last Stand is by and large the biggest, loudest and best piece of action to hit theaters this year, just beating out M:I:III, largely due to the film's exciting climatic finale. This episode in the series claims to be the last, but believe me, when a second sequel rakes in over a hundred and twenty million dollars at the box office in it's opening weekend, you can bet there will be at least another entry in the series. This time the X-Men face possible extermination when a possible "cure" for the mutant "problem" is discovered in a young mutant boy, who is now locked up in a laboratory on Alcatraz Island. Meanwhile Magneto, joined by his new ally, Pyro, try to rally a bunch of mutants to fight back and wipeout the discovered cure. Professor X feels a disturbance in the force and tells Storm and Wolverine to venture up to Alkaline Lake (where the last film ended), where they discover an unconscious Jean Grey. Apparently Jean was able to survive the collapse of the dam and as it turns out there's a dark and powerful force inside Jean's mind that is more destructive than any other mutant on the planet, and it's only a matter of time before her fury, known as "The Phoenix", is unleashed upon the world. Dunt, dunt, duh! All the mutants that weve come to love (and hate) are back, including Professor X, Wolverine, Magneto, Cyclops, Storm, Rouge, Pryo, Mystique and Iceman, but they aren't alone, there's a ton of new mutants that fill the screen during The Last Stand, and the X-Men have a few new recruits including Colossus, Kitty Pryde and Henry McCoy aka "Beast" or as Wolverine calls him, "Fuzzball", played well by a blue and hairy Kelsey Grammar. With all the additional mutants I must say I'm still disappointed that Gambit didn't make it into the picture, but by piling a ton of new mutants into the film is allows for some pretty fun and wildly inventive action sequences, which the film is littered with and in top form from beginning to end. And they finally show us the "Danger Room". It's about time, isn't it? Where does X3 stand in terms of the trilogy? Well, it isn't quite as well structured as the first two films, but The Last Stand is by far the most ambitious of the three, so some of it's short comings can be forgiven for trying, and for the most part succeeding, at doing something wider and crazier than the first two films. Just watch the Golden Gate Bridge sequence or the intense final battle at Alcatraz and try and tell me that that wasn't as intense or was less exciting than the climax of X2. The film certainly lives up the first two films, and in some ways even manages to surpass them. X-Men: The Last Stand is the best piece of summer entertainment so far this year and with a Superman and some more Pirates on the way, things are lookin' pretty good! And if this is in fact the last film in the series, although I seriously doubt it, at least it went out with a bang. Stay through the end credits to see an extra scene that'll leave you scratching your head and going "What the...?"

Kingdom of Heaven (2005)

The Director's Cut - A serious epic from a serious filmmaker

[9/10 · 28 May 2006]

This is my review of the Director's Cut for Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven, which has now been released on a four disc DVD. The Director's Cut is three hours and fourteen minutes long; almost fifty minutes longer than the original theatrical cut that was released over a year ago. This new version, which Scott has said is his preferred cut of the film is Unrated, and does contain a little more sex (no nudity, in case you're wondering) and blood and gore than the original cut. This version contains a number of new scenes that further explain and flesh out the main characters of Balian (Orlando Bloom) and Sibylla (Eva Green), including Sibylla's son, which was completely cut from the theatrical version.

The film is about a blacksmith named Balian, played well by Orlando Bloom is the exact opposite of what he played in Troy. Balian is contacted by his distant father and the Baron of Ibelin, named Godfey (Liam Neeson), a knight whose been fighting in the crusades. He visits Balian in hopes of him joining him back to Jerusalem. Balian decides to join him in hopes of being able to erase his wife's sins, because she killed herself after losing her child during birth. During their journey Godfey is severely wounded during a battle and he knights his son to take his place when is gone. Once he arrives in Jerusalem he meets King Baldwin, played well by a disguised Edward Norton, the King suffers from leprosy and wears a silver mask to hide what his face has become. The King takes to Balian, and asks for his loyalty, which he offers, and then returns to his father's home in Ibelin to make it his own. That is when he falls in love with Sibylla, the wife of Guy de Lusignan (played by Marton Csokas), an evil man who uses his religion and the name of God to justify the massacring of Muslims to quench his own personal bloodlust. Guy's unapproved attacks start a whirlwind of violence between Christians and Muslisms, drawing Saladin, a Muslism King with a vast and powerful army towards the city of Jerusalem to try and reclaim it from the Christians. That's basically the plot of Kingdom of Heaven in a nutshell.

The theatrical version plays out more like an action film; quickly hurrying through the personal human drama to get to the big action set pieces. This cut plays out more like a serious human/moral drama, set amidst an epic landscape with some amazing sets and visuals, and the added depth to the characters really does help you get more into the human aspect of the film, rather than just waiting to get to the next big action sequence. You'll get so into the political/religious/moral/ethical dilemma that by the time you get to the final battle you'll almost be disappointed, almost, but not quite, because the ending siege of Jerusalem is quite a spectacle all its own. I was actually quite surprised how much more interesting this version was, given the fact that it was fifty minutes longer and there's really not that much more action in it than what was already released. But the character development is far better and heavily improved in this cut, which allows you to really get wrapped up in the plot.

Is Orlando's performance better? Well yeah, it kind of is in a way, but mostly because you seem to understand his character a little better in this version and you can sympathize with him a lot more. And some of Eva Green's best moments in this film were the ones that ended up on the cutting room floor. If this version had been released in the theaters last year she might have been up for an Oscar nomination, but that's just my opinion. The Director's Cut is 194 minutes long and it's not an action/revenge film like Scott's previous period epic; Gladiator. Instead Kingdom of Heaven is a serious dramatic epic with a strong message about religion and war and what it really means to be righteous.

There are many parallels between Kingdom of Heaven and Gladiator. Both films have lead characters that have suffered a personal loss in their family, and are both in love with a woman who seems to be very close to the enemy and both female characters have an only child whose life is very much in danger. But what really separates Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven into two separate identities is the fact that in the end Maximus exacts his revenge; killing his enemy, and Balian shows compassion and mercy to his enemy; knowing that doing the right thing may not be the easiest thing to do, but it is the right thing, and that's all that matters. I think this version of Kingdom of Heaven ranks up there with some of Ridley Scott's best work, including Alien, Gladiator and Black Hawk Down. But its not exactly the grand action sequences that make Kingdom of Heaven a memorable film; it's the constant focus on story, human dilemma, moral and ethical decisions that make it a fascinating and ultimately entertaining and satisfying film. This is a gorgeous looking epic with substance and intelligence and this is the film that Ridley Scott intended it to be from the start. Forget about Troy, King Arthur and Alexander. This is a real epic. Thumbs way up.

Almost Famous (2000)

'Almost Famous' is almost perfect

[9/10 · 26 May 2006]

Almost Famous is a touching, well made comedy/drama from director Cameron Crowe, who previously wrote and directed Jerry Maguire. The film captures a strong vibe and energy of the rock n' roll scene during the early 70's, and tells the story of one young die-hard fan/music journalist getting the job of a lifetime working for Rolling Stone magazine to follow an up-and-coming rock band as they travel on the road. The film is very well cast, and it comes through with a number of really great performances, including Billy Crudup, Jason Lee, Frances McDormand, Kate Hudson, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Noah Taylor and newcomer Patrick Fugit, who plays the young journalist that gets swept away in a world that the doesn't belong in, and his performance is the real heart of the picture. Almost Famous was nominated for four Academy Awards, and won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, but unfortunately it wasn't even nominated for Best Picture, which I certainly think it should have at least got a nomination.

The film starts out with a young Will Miller growing up in a house with his strict mother, Elaine, played well by Frances McDormand and his rebellious older sister, Anita, played by Zooey Deschanel, who has a passion for rock music that their mother doesn't approve of because of it's potentially "harmful" lyrics about sex and drugs. Anita decides to move out on her own when she's eighteen because she can't handle living at home any longer, but before she leaves she stashes a collection of rock albums under his bed, telling him that they'll "set him free", and it does, in a big way. Will works for a small music newspaper and is kind of taken under the wing of Lester Bangs, rock music critic and magazine editor, played well by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, which eventually lands Will a gig working for Rolling Stone to pick a band and follow along with them on the road and write an interview for the popular music magazine.

Along his trip with the band he becomes friends with the band and falls in love with one of the group's "band aids", a cute blonde that goes by the name of Penny Lane (yeah, just like The Beatles song) played with a tender touch and free spirit by Kate Hudson. As the trip goes along Will has a hard time trying to write his article, and watches the bands ups and downs, and while he's away his mother can't help but worry constantly about Will's safety and reminds him numerous times not to do drugs, which everybody but Will seems to be taking. The film is a bittersweet journey; one that's not entirely a comedy, nor is it an uptight drama or a full fledged romance. I loved watching Almost Famous, not just because it's a very well made film, but also for all the great rock songs that are played nearly back-to-back continuously throughout the entire film. And I'm already a big fan of Led Zeppelin, so this film certainly put a big smile across my face from beginning to end. At times the film reminded me of another really good movie; Lost in Translation, which is another film about getting lost and carried away in a place where you obviously don't fit in. But the experience of getting to go out on the road and spend some time with "the band" is quite a fun and enjoyable time, and that's exactly what Almost Famous is; fun and enjoyable, and in my opinion Crowe's best film to date.

Ronin (1998)

An unglamorous old school spy thriller

[8/10 · 26 May 2006]

John Frankenheimer's Ronin is one of the top ten most underrated action-thrillers of the 90's. It's a film so well made you could swear it would easily fit in with other spy thrillers of the 60's and 70's, like The Day of the Jackal or The French Connection. The script is mysterious, the characters are all intelligent and sophisticated and the direction it's well crafted; bustling with suspense, intrigue and excitement. The film is about a group of freelancing mercenaries who formerly worked for various different military and intelligence organizations that are hired to steal a case that contains important materials that are wanted badly by both Irish and Russian rouge factions. The team is assembled by an Irish woman named Deirdre (Natasha McElhone) which includes an ex-CIA intelligence officer named Sam (Robert De Niro), a computer expert (Stellan Skarsgard), a fast getaway driver (Skipp Sudduth), a French man who knows how to track down anything and everything (Jean Reno), and a former IRA weapons expert (Sean Bean).

The film is gritty and played out with a realistic hand due to Frankenheimer's constant vision of keeping things real, and not using any kind of CGI-trickery. Ronin isn't stylized or over-the-top, it's down in the gutter with a sense of believable intensity. The violence is bloody, at times a little gruesome, but only because it would only be realistic, not because he wants it to be over-the-top, but because that's the way it would probably be. Ronin is a rare thing in contemporary action films; it's exciting, without ever having to sacrifice any of its brains in the process of being entertaining and for that reason alone it does stand out from all the rest. Much like 1994's The Professional (another film about a gun for hire, which also stars Jean Reno), Ronin is exciting, entertaining, well acted, well scripted and doesn't ask you to buy into preposterous events in order to get some sort of satisfaction out of enjoying the film; you buy it whole sale from the beginning and it never cheats you out of its believability.

The film features two absolutely amazing car chases, which have now become a part of film history, ranking up there with Bullit and The French Connection, and also went on to inspire such films as The Bourne Identity and Supremacy. The chases are purely exhilarating and realistically intense. Why does De Niro have a scared look on his face throughout the chase? That's because that's really him in the car during the entire chase; the stunt driver (usually in the back of the car) was steering the whole time, but it's really the actors in those cars doing 60 through heavy traffic, and driving through those Paris tunnels. John Frankenheimer is probably most remembered for directing the original black and white version of The Manchurian Candidate back in 1962, and if you want to, watch Ronin and turn the color level on your TV all the way down and enjoy it in black and white; and because of the way it's shot it still works quite well even without color. If you're looking for an action movie with some fun thrills without it ever insulting your intelligence, backed up with some solid performances and set against some great European locations than I highly recommend you check this one out.