Finally Made It To 2006!!

And so we’re on to 2006, which means I’m only 5 1/2 months behind!! Now usually, the beginning of the year is a pretty sluggish time at the theaters, with studios dumping a lot of films they don’t expect to do very well onto movie screens at a time when generally not a lot of people are going to the movies. So you’d think that would mean I’d only have a handful of movies to review, and could quickly skim through early spring so that I could be caught up and ready for the summer season (which is already starting up). And in years past, that has indeed been the case. But this year, being the diehard movie buff that I am, I actually watched A LOT of movies this spring (hell, I think I saw as many movies this spring as I do over an average summer). As is generally expected, most of these movies didn’t bring in a lot of cash (and some of them completely flopped), but that didn’t stop me from putting my money down to see them.

In January, I actually only saw one new movie (about what I’d expect for the post holiday season). February, on the other hand, had me at the theater for FIVE new releases (although at least two of them (both starring Paul Walker, interestingly enough) I don’t think I actually got around to seeing till March, I’ll still cover them under February since that’s when they were first released). March saw the release of FOUR new movies that I went and saw, including the absolutely stellar V For Vendetta (which is this year’s Sin City – a fantastic movie based on an incredible comic book graphic novel). It’s probably not going to rate as highly on my top 10 for 2006 as Sin City did for 2005 (if I’d actually done a top 10 list for 2005, that is), but that’s mainly because this summer’s blockbusters look to be so much better than what we saw last year, so V For Vendetta is likely to have a lot more competition than Sin City did.

Finally, we have the month of April, which was more online with what I’d expect from this time of year – there were a number of interesting movies released, but nothing that really motivated me to get out to the theater. I caught only two movies at the end of April, and I did a double feature and watched them one right after the other the same Sunday (which turned out to be a mistake, since I was just starting to develop a nasty flu, and so by the time I was finished with the second movie I was deathly ill, and ended up home sick pretty much the entire next week – but that’s another story entirely). I probably won’t get to those two movies (or March’s movies) until my next entry (since I saw so many movies in February), but I’ll try my best to get these next two entries done in the next few weeks, so that hopefully I can quickly get May’s movies done and actually be caught up and current and doing my reviews as the movies come out (imagine that!!) by mid-June. The challenge from there, of course, is to actually STAY caught up. We’ll see how it goes. And now, on with the show!

The one new movie I caught in January was the action/horror sequel Underworld: Evolution. Sony was smart enough not to screen this movie for critics, knowing that critics across the board hate this genre (among others) and would likely give it nothing but negative reviews (which is exactly what they did once they saw it after it had opened). To me, this is a smart move, and one I think more studios should follow. In the past, it was always assumed that if a movie wasn’t screened for critics, it meant that the studio wasn’t happy with the results, and it was likely to be a disappointing if not downright awful movie. Critics continue to insist this is the case, but I think nowadays studios are wizening up and realizing that certain genres of film (regardless of how much fans of that particular genre will like them), just don’t get good reviews from critics. So why give the critics a free showing of the movie when you know they’re just going to give you bad press and try and keep people from paying to see your movie? If you know they won’t like it, I say make them pay to see it like the rest of us!! Which is exactly what Sony did with Underworld: Evolution.

I must admit, I was somewhat disappointed with the original Underworld. It just didn’t have the action and excitement I expected from the trailers, and while not a bad movie per se, it was just kind of a letdown from what I’d hoped for (although I haven’t gotten around to seeing the Director’s Cut DVD to see if that version is any better). I must say, however, that the sequel did not disappoint. It had more action, more incredible visuals, and a more well thought out story (in my opinion), not to mention a steamy love scene between Kate Beckinsale and Scott Speedman (damn is she hot!!). The amusing thing about that love scene is that the director of the movie is actually Kate’s husband (they got married after meeting on the first movie), and from interviews I’ve seen with her, it seems that Scott is a actually a good friend of the couple, which made that scene somewhat uncomfortable to film. I had to laugh when I saw her on one of the late night talk shows – they kept bleeping her whenever she said the phrase “cock sock”, which is the industry term for what is used to cover an actor’s penis when they film scenes like that. And as far as director Len Wiseman goes, I figure you've got to either be really committed to you art, or just a little bit messed up and perverted, to not only watch your wife naked pretending to have steamy sex with another man, but to actually be the one directing their actions and making sure that it really looks steamy. I don’t know if I could do that, but that’s just me (no wonder Hollywood marriages have such a high divorce rate).

But enough of Kate Beckinsale’s love scene (as enjoyable as it was to watch – and can I just say she looks so damned hot in skin-tight plastic!!). Overall this was a pretty fun movie – certainly an improvement over the original. They seemed to look at what worked in the first movie and what didn’t, and shored up the weak spots and improved on what worked in the first film. If only more sequels would take that approach, as opposed to just giving you more of the same like so many of them do. I don’t know when or if I’ll ever buy this one on DVD (I still don’t own the original on DVD), but it’s certainly worth renting if you enjoyed the original at all.

And so now on we go to the unbelievably movie-filled month of February. I still can’t believe how many movies came out that month that I actually saw at the theater. Then again, one of the big differences in the spring and fall off seasons as opposed to the summer and holiday blockbuster seasons, is that since it’s a dumping ground for a lot of lower-budgeted, lower expectations movies, studios aren’t as worried about what else is opening that weekend, or what opened the week before or opens the week after, and so I think you get a lot more movies getting released on the same weekend, so it’s much more likely there will be two or sometimes three movies come out the same weekend that all look interesting (although even I usually don’t manage more than two new movies a weekend on a good weekend, so often movies either don’t get seen, or get seen just before they leave the theaters on a weekend that DOESN'T have a couple of new movies I want to see). During the summer and at Christmas, on the other, you generally get only one big new movie that everybody wants to go see, that no one else really wants to compete with, so they move their films to a different weekend. So once May hits, I expect to see one new movie a weekend, and maybe one older movie I hadn’t seen yet that’s still playing if I get motivated to go to the movies on Sunday.

So the first movie I saw in February (at least I’m pretty sure it was the first one I saw in February, it’s hard to remember that far back), was something of a disappointment, and that was the Harrison Ford thriller Firewall. It was your standard, generic action/thriller, and while it tried for a high-tech edge to give it something new, sadly there were a number of technical blunders that as a computer guy really jumped out for me as being hokey and unrealistic. And I have to agree with the critics – let’s face it, at 64-years-old, regardless of the shape he’s in (and for his age, he’s in pretty damned good shape), Harrison Ford is just getting a little too old for these sorts of movies. He’d be better off in the dramas that he’s done very successfully in the past, or in an action/thriller that is a little less physical, with fewer fight scenes (such as Sean Connery in Entrapment). I just think audiences would accept him more in these sorts of roles, as it’s just hard to believe that a supposed computer security expert in his mid-60s could handle the situations he does in Firewall (I certainly don’t know any in that good of physical shape – it’s just not something that tends to go hand-in-hand with being a computer geek). He may have the time and money for personal trainers to keep him in top notch physical condition, but most of his characters proabably wouldn't (I'm just saying). So overall I’d probably give this one about 2 1/2 stars – it’s worth renting if you enjoy this sort of movie, but that’s about it.

The other movie I saw this weekend was much, much more enjoyable, and that was The Pink Panther remake starring the very funny Steve Martin. Now I do have to agree with the critics and with friends of mine who also saw the movie – Steve Martin is no replacement for Peter Sellers in this role (but let’s face it – NO ONE will EVER replace Peter Sellers as Inspector Clouseau – it just can’t be done. He so completely created and embodied that character). So the key to enjoying this movie is to go into it knowing that Steve Martin is not Peter Sellers, and that this isn’t the original character or original movies. If you go into it with that in mind, this is a really, really funny movie. Steve Martin is hilarious, Jean Reno is fantastic in his role (but he’s always done well as the quiet, serious character, and is perfect as the straight man to Steve Martin’s bumbling Clouseau). Also wonderful in this movie is Kevin Kline as Chief Inspector Dreyfus. The things they put that poor guy through! Also fun to watch is Emily Mortimer, who is just lovely and charming and adorable (and with such a sexy accent). I was excited to see her in this, because I loved her female hit woman character in Formula 51 (which is too bad, because despite the wonderful performances by all the main actors, this movie was pretty much complete crap, and not one I’d bother to own, despite how much I liked her and several of her co-stars in it).

The physical comedy in The Pink Panther is fun to watch, and there are a number of great scenes. My favorite featured Clive Owen as Agent 006, an obvious parody on the fact that he was up for the new James Bond role (one which he ultimately did not get). I think this scene proves he would have made a great Bond (but I do admit that I have high hopes for Daniel Craig, also a very talented actor – we’ll see how he does). I was also very pleased to see a cameo by Jason Statham, who's very high on my list of favorite actors. This is definitely a movie I’ll be getting on DVD at some point, and I look forward to a sequel if they decide to do one.

The next movie I saw wasn’t one I’d originally planned on seeing at the theater, but my buddy talked me into going to see it, and I’m glad he did. The movie in question – Date Movie. It was hilarious!! Admittedly, there were a few scenes that were a little gross for my tastes, but sadly that’s to be expected in this sort of parody movie. But regardless of that, the movie is really damned funny. Naturally they poke fun of all sorts of romantic comedies and chick films, but they go so far as to throw in parodies of such films as Star Wars: Episode III and Lord of the Rings! They also reach way back to the 80s and 90s and parody some classic movies (something you generally don’t expect in parody movies -- normally they're pretty focused on strictly recent films). Alyson Hannigan is as beautiful as ever (I so love her!), and incredibly funny at the beginning of the movie when she's in her fat suit, and Sophie Monk is just unbelievably sexy and gorgeous in every scene she’s in!!

And now we have the two February releases that I didn’t get around to seeing until weeks after they’d come out (and probably just before they were due to be pulled from the theaters). Both starred Paul Walker (which had nothing to do with why I didn't catch them when they first came out; it was actually pure coincidence), but otherwise were about as different as two movies can be. The movies I’m talking about are Eight Below and Running Scared (which is in no way related to the original Running Scared from 1986 that starred Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines – which is too bad, because that was a much better movie). Of the two, Eight Below was definitely much more worth the price of admission. For those who don’t know, it’s the true story of a team of sled dogs who are left in Antarctica during the winter when their owner is forced to leave without them due to incoming storms. The story jumps back and forth between the dogs’ struggle for survival, and their master’s attempts to get funding to get back to Antarctica to retrieve them.

What can I say, like most Americans, I’m a sucker for a heroic dog story (how can you not be?). And this one has not just one, but eight dogs in it. And they do a very good job of distinguishing the dogs and letting you get to know them just as if they were human actors, which connects you as a viewer that much more into their plight. And Paul Walker does a surprisingly good job portraying the one person who never gives up on them and does everything he can to get back to save them. While I enjoy most of the movies he does, I’ve never really considered Paul Walker that great of an actor, but I have to say in this movie he does a surprisingly good job with the character. So if you like good wholesome family movies or dog movies of any sort, this is absolutely a movie to check out.

Our final movie for the month of February (and the final movie for this entry, since it’s getting a bit on the long-winded side) is the action crime thriller Running Scared. While not the worst of this genre that I’ve seen (but then again, this is one of those categories of movies that seems to produce A LOT of B-grade, direct-to-video films), it’s hardly a movie I’m going to rush out and buy when it comes out on DVD (although it does have enough gratuitous violence and nudity to it that I’ll probably pick it up eventually, once it's cheap).

Here’s the basic plot outline – Paul Walker plays a small-time hood whose gang is involved in a drug deal gone bad that results in the deaths of several men they discover are actually dirty cops. His boss gives him the handgun that had killed the cops and tells him to get rid of it. Well, instead of getting rid of it, he hides it in his basement. What he doesn’t realize is that his young son and his son’s friend are hiding in the basement at the time and see him hide the gun. His son’s friend is the stepson of a drunken, abusive Russian mafia guy, so he steals the gun, shoots his stepfather in the shoulder, and then runs off. Well naturally when Paul Walker realizes the gun has been stolen, he’s in a panic (since he was supposed to have disposed of it). So from there you’ve got him chasing the kid (who of course loses the gun so once he finds the kid he's still looking for the gun), and his gang is looking for him and the guy in charge of the dirty cops is looking for them. It takes some very, very bizarre twists and turns (such as when the Russian boy is helped out by a really friendly couple who turn out to be murderous child molesters) before finally reaching a finale with a big twist to it that isn’t necessarily what you’re expecting (if for no other reason than because of how hard the movie is to follow), but that doesn’t really come as that much of a surprise once it’s revealed. So not really a movie I can recommend, but certainly an interesting movie to watch, if for no other reason than to see the strange directions that the movie goes in and the goofy, only-in-Hollywood problems this guy has as this gun goes from person to person to person as he does his best to chase it down.

Well that’s it for the beginning of 2006. I’ve got 6 movies to cover for March and April, but I just saw The Da Vinci Code last Saturday, so I’m thinking I’m going to put together an entry for it while the movie is fresh in my mind (and the movie’s actually still new and at the theater so that my review is timely and relevant, for once). Once that’s done I’ll go back and do March and April movies, and then I’ll do an entry for May movies, and then onto current movies from there (well, that’s the plan anyways. We’ll see how well it actually works). Until next time, try to enjoy the daylight!

Holiday Season 2005

Damn! I can’t believe it’s been a good two months since my last entry! I guess time flies when you’re busy as hell. So where was I? Ah yes, December. The big month for big budget family movies. And December 2005 brought us some top notch examples of the quality of filmmaking Hollywood can achieve when it sets its mind to it. The first of these was The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe. I have to say, I really enjoyed this movie. And that’s saying a lot, because I’m a HUGE fan of the original stories, and a very big fan of the old BBC version of this book (which is basically a scene-for-scene, line-for-line, completely faithful translation of the book, which is pretty impressive. Of course, it was also a 165 minute long TV mini-series, which is kind of hard to duplicate on the big screen, regardless of how long theatrical movies are getting these days).

Now I do have to admit, there were a few minor changes here and there from the book that I found annoying (mostly because I didn’t see any reason why they couldn’t have left them as they were in the book), but most of these were very minor, and weren’t items most people would notice unless they’d read the book several times (and they didn’t negatively impact the story flow of the movie at all – they were just different than the book). And I figure if this is the worst thing you can say about a movie adaptation of a wonderful book, then the movie’s done a pretty darned good job.

Visually, the movie is stunning. The visual effects are very well done, and the fantasy creatures all look spectacular. Aslan is especially amazing to watch (and the choice of Liam Neeson to do the voice was just inspired casting – he does an incredible, first-rate job). I also like that they followed the Harry Potter path of getting unknown British kids to play the lead roles. All of the kids did a great job, and I can’t wait to see them again in the next movie. This one I rushed out to buy as soon as it was available on DVD.

The next big holiday blockbuster was Peter Jackson’s King Kong, remake of the classic monster movie. Now firstly, I have to say that while the original King Kong is now considered a classic film, mainly because of the stop motion visual effects used in its making, story wise its basically a B-movie (which is not to say I don’t like it – I love B-movies). Which means that when you get right down to it, Peter Jackson honestly didn’t have a whole lot to work with in trying to turn it into a modern day blockbuster. He does a pretty good job of it, and I did go ahead and buy the 2-disk DVD when it came out. But I have to agree with the comment my good friend Cliffie made after he’d seen it – Peter Jackson (like too many of his fellow directors these days, sadly) has fallen way too in love with what he can do with digital effects. Being a computer geek myself, I can understand how easy it is to get caught up in all the amazing things that CGI can do nowadays. But sadly I also feel that it’s a trap, one that can pull a director away from the story and the characters, which in my not-so-humble opinion are the key elements to making a great movie.

Don’t get me wrong, I did like the movie quite a bit, and it's a lot of fun to watch, but with a running time of 3 hours and 7 minutes, the thinness of the story certainly shows in spots. And much like The Matrix Reloaded (although that was a horrid waste of a movie, which King Kong is not), there are a couple of the big CGI-heavy action scenes that really drag on longer than they need to. Sure, they look great, but you reach a point where you’re like, “Okay, we’ve watched Kong fighting the dinosaurs for long enough; let’s move on.” One positive thing I will say about the visual effects, however, is this – they did an unbelievable job on Kong’s face. You could really see the emotions playing across the big ape’s face in a number of scenes. It was really impressive. So all in all I think I’ll give King Kong three and a half stars. It was a good movie without doubt, but it could have been a lot better with a little trimming here and there and a little more focus on the keeping the story tight.

Which leaves us with one final movie that I managed to catch at the theaters during the month of December – Memoirs of a Geisha (which has been out on DVD for a while now – it’s hard to believe how quickly they’re turning movies around from theatrical release to DVD these days). This was a really enjoyable movie – but I’m a big fan of Zhang Ziyi and have enjoyed everything I've seen her in. And of course there’s the beautiful and talented Gong Li and Michelle Yeoh as well. Not to mention the very talented actors Ken Watanabe, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (an actor I’ve always liked), Ted Levine, and Mako (another actor I've always liked). The visuals are beautiful, the story is well told, and it’s just a wonderful movie to watch. Because of the fact that it’s basically a romantic drama, it probably wouldn’t make my top 10 list for 2005 (but that’s because I’m more of an action/sci-fi kind of guy), but it’s still a movie I’d like to pick up on DVD eventually (when I have the money – and when I’ve caught up with watching the couple dozen DVDs that I’ve bought that I haven’t found time to watch yet).

And that should about do it for 2005. And since I’m so far behind, I’m just going to jump into 2006. I guess my best and worst of 2005 lists just aren’t going to get done (but then again, if you’ve read through all my entries for last year, it’s pretty easy to tell which movies I really liked, and which ones I really hated last year). And so now it’s on to the early 2006 movies, coming soon!!

Korean War Drama

We’re going to take a brief pause in our rush to get caught up on theatrical releases that I’ve seen, so that I can talk about an absolutely amazing movie that I just watched on DVD. The name of the movie is Tae Guk Gi: The Brotherhood of War. It is a Korean film about two brothers during the Korean War. The movie was a huge critical and commercial success in Korea, winning Best Film and Best Director at the 50th Asia Pacific Film Festival, and with good reason – it is a fantastic war drama, and just all around a compelling and intense and exciting and touching movie. I’d like to quote the first line of the movie’s description from the back of the DVD box: “In the powerful tradition of Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers comes this box-office hit from Korea.” Now it’s pretty easy to guess that the distributors of the movie simply listed these other films to try and get American audiences to check out the movie, but the comparison is absolutely spot on. Tae Guk Gi is easily of the same caliber as these movies. If you enjoy epic war films at all, you will love this movie. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

I looked online to find the translation of the title (because I was curious), and discovered that Tae Guk Gi (or Taegukgi, one word) is the Korean name for the South Korean Flag. In one of the interviews with the director on the bonus features disk, he comments that when he came up with the title, everyone else on the production team was against it, and he had to slowly convince them that it was the right title. And I have to agree with him. The movie does a wonderful job of making you think about patriotism and country, and has you asking yourself just what would you be willing to do for your country. It also deals with issues of family, and how important family is, especially in such times as being at war.

Here’s the basic rundown of the movie – North Korea has just invaded South Korea, and two brothers are quickly drafted into the South Korean army, pulled away from their widowed mother and the older brother’s fiancée. The older brother, desperate to protect his younger brother any way that he can, finds out from their commander that if he can win the Medal of Honor, he can get his brother released from the army and sent home. So he goes out of his way to prove his merit – leading every charge, taking on every dangerous mission. The younger brother, naturally, hates to see his brother risking his life constantly, especially since he feels he can pull his own weight, and doesn’t want to go home unless his brother is going with him. I won’t go into any more details than this, since I don’t want to put any real spoilers into this write-up if I can help it. The story follows the two brothers through the war, and the viewer watches their changing feelings about the war, their country, and each other as they fight to survive to return to their family.

The film is written and directed by Je-gyu Kang, whose previous film Shiri I also have on DVD (and it is also a really enjoyable movie). He does a brilliant job here, keeping the movie fast-paced and the action scenes intense, while at the same time really drawing you into the brothers’ story. The ending is heart-wrenching, and had more than a few tears welling up in my eyes by the time the end credits rolled. For anyone who likes war films, or anyone who loves a compelling drama, this is a movie worth seeing. It is yet another example of why I love Asian cinema. There are just so many compelling, original films coming out of Korea and Japan and China these days, which is why Hollywood’s recent trend of remaking so many Asian movies should come as no surprise to anyone. The sad part, though, is that in most cases (as tends to be true with remakes in general, really) what you’re getting from Hollywood pales in comparison to the originals. Even the added hassle of reading the subtitles can’t diminish how wonderful a viewing experience Tae Guk Gi or any of the many other great films coming out of Asia is.

So I will conclude this review with this recommendation – if you’ve never checked out Asian cinema before, give it a try. You’ll be surprised at the great movies that you will discover. And Tae Guk Gi is a perfect place to start. Join me here next time when I push on with my theatrical reviews from December 2005, which of course brings us the holiday blockbusters Chronicles of Narnia and King Kong. Until then!!

Fall 2005

And so now we’ve reached the month of October, which in the spirit of Halloween is generally chock full of horror movies (a trend that is still going strong, much to my enjoyment). The first such film to come out last fall was The Fog, a remake of one of John Carpenter’s early films. I hadn’t seen the original The Fog in I don't know how long, so I broke down and bought it on DVD before the remake came out (mainly because it was pretty cheap, and if I remember correctly, included a movie pass so I could see the new one for free; definitely incentive to go see the remake – that and getting to see Maggie Grace in her undies. God, what a hottie!!). Neither movie is what you’d call a classic piece of cinema, but the original was a lot of fun to watch (but then again, I’m a really big fan of John Carpenter). As far as the remake goes, it wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t exactly great, either. If you catch it on a movie channel, it’s worth taking the time to watch, but I don’t know that I’d spend the money to rent it.

The next October film that I saw was the video game movie Doom (which is also a horror film of sorts, so certainly appropriate for the month). When I first started seeing trailers and reading write-ups on this movie, I was very hesitant about it, for two reasons – firstly, I thought it was being directed by Uwe Boll (who seems to pretty much direct nothing but video game movies), who’s early movies House of the Dead and Alone in the Dark were both mediocre at best. But I guess someone likes his stuff, because he’s got a whole stack of movies lined up that he’s directing, ALL based on videogames (and I do have to say I was actually impressed with BloodRayne, the last movie he did – his directing skills do seem to be improving – guess I'll have to wait and see what I think of his next film or two). The other concern I had was the talk about how they were shooting 1st person perspective scenes to make the movie look just like if you were playing the video game (which seemed like a bad idea that could become really stupid, really quickly).

Well, it turned out that both my concerns were unfounded. First off, the movie was actually directed by Andrzej Bartkowiak, director of DMX’s big action movies – Romeo Must Die, Exit Wounds, and Cradle 2 the Grave – all of which I thoroughly enjoyed (he was also cinematographer on all sorts of great movies). And as far as the 1st person perspective goes, it was limited to one extended scene (as opposed to scattered throughout the movie like I’d feared it would be), and surprisingly enough, was actually done very well. Now don’t get me wrong, the movie was still pretty much just another video game movie (certainly not in the league of Resident Evil or Mortal Kombat), but at the same time it was no Alone in the Dark or Super Mario Bros. or Double Dragon or Street Fighter (the Japanese anime of this is SO much better than the lame live action version starring Jean-Claude Van Damme). The list goes on and on (it’s amazing how many really, really bad video game adaptations there are out there – it's a wonder that they keep making them).

The Rock does a passable job (though not his best performance by any means), and Karl Urban is great like always (I hope to see him in many more movies, so I was very pleased to see that it's got two movies coming out this year). All in all it wasn’t too bad a movie. Nothing spectacular, and I’m in no hurry at all to pick it up on DVD, but I am glad that I saw it at the theater. It could have been a lot worse, that’s for sure.

The final movie of October that I saw was the very non-horror movie The Legend of Zorro. If I wasn’t so far behind in my entries I might take the time to talk about this one in a little more depth, but as it is I think I’ll just give it a quick once over. It wasn’t bad, and I’m glad I went and saw it (if for no other reason than because Catherine Zeta-Jones is just so damned beautiful and fun to watch), but the original was a hell of a lot better (I think the sequel really suffered from the lack of Anthony Hopkins, for one, and for another the script was just really weak, especially when compared to the first film). I’ll probably pick it up on DVD eventually just because I’ve got the first one, but it’s not one I’m in a hurry to get.

Which takes us right on into November, and the beginning of the holiday season! The first movie I saw in November (believe it or not) was the animated family film Chicken Little (I went with some friends who have a couple of little kids – that’s my excuse and I’m sticking to it!). Surprisingly, this was actually a really cute film, much better than I expected. I was a little surprised at how badly the critics hammered the movie, but only a little (we all know how clueless the critics are when it comes to reviewing anything not vying for Oscar attention). I was also very surprised when I looked up the movie on imdb to discover that the voice of Chicken Little was done by Zack Braff from Scrubs (a very talented and funny actor). I highly recommend this one to anyone with kids.

The next weekend another family movie came out – Zathura. It’s one I thought about seeing (since I really like Jumanji), but just never got around to it. It’s out on DVD now, so I’ll hopefully I’ll catch it on one of the movie channels here soon. But considering the lukewarm reviews it got, I’m not in too big of a hurry.

The last film I saw in November was the first of the big holiday releases for 2005 – Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. And I have to say, this film completely redeems the series after the fiasco that was Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (I guess it just goes to show what a difference it makes when you have a British director in charge of a movie based on a British story – not to mention how much of an improvement the script was over the third film). Maybe it’s just because it’s been longer since I read the stories than when I watched the third movie (although I am re-reading the books now), but I didn’t notice nearly as much missing from the fourth movie as the third. But then again, the third movie had so many glaring holes and so much important information missing that it was downright disgusting.

The critics for the most part are calling it the best of the series, but then again, they were saying the same damned things about the previous one, which was far and away the WORST of the series. One critic (and I won't name names) actually had the audacity to say that this one wasn't any better than the third one. Yeah, right! This would be why I generally pay no attention to movie critics – more times than not their reviews are simply proof that they have no clue what they're talking about.

But back to the subject at hand. Harry Potter 4 was just incredible. I saw it at the theatre twice, and wanted to see it again, but there were too many other movies coming out that I needed to see. The visual effects are stunning as usual, but unlike the previous film, the director isn’t so focused on the special effects that they negatively overshadow the story (in case you haven’t figured it out yet, I REALLY didn’t like Harry Potter 3 – I do own it on DVD, just to keep the series complete, but I was really, really disappointed with how it turned out). Watching the actors and characters mature has been very enjoyable, and the filmmakers did a great job with this one in showing the characters’ struggles as they enter adolescence. And considering how long the fourth book is, they did a spectacular job of streamlining the story to fit into a single film, without sacrificing the essential aspects of the book. I had originally figured they’d have to do this book (and the next one) as two movies in order to possibly get everything in that they’d need, but they did a surprisingly good job of condensing it into one film. Let’s just hope the fifth movie does as good a job with what is by far the longest book in the series.

Well, that about does it for fall of 2005, so I think I’ll call this entry complete. Next up will be December, and the big holiday blockbusters of 2005.

Finally finished with September! :-|

Okay, so more and more it’s looking like I’m not likely to ever get caught up with my entries, so it’s time to jump forward and get current. So instead of reviewing all the movies I’ve seen September – January, I’m just going to hit the big movies of the last several months that impressed me enough to comment on them. Along the way I may just touch on other movies (enough to say that I watched them and whether I liked them or not), but that’s about it. So on with the show!

September brought quite a few movies that I didn’t get around to seeing, and several that were disappointing. However, the end of the month brought one of my absolute favorite movies of the year – Serenity. So here’s a quick rundown of the rest of the month:

Transporter 2 – You just gotta love Jason Statham. He is such a kick ass action star. He is so much more fun to watch than Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Steven Seagal. His martial arts style is amazing to watch. Sadly this movie is a little too over the top in spots, and so it’s not as good as the original, but it’s still really fun. Great popcorn movie.

Into the Blue – Jessica Alba looking amazingly sexy in a bikini for an hour and a half. What more needs to be said?

Flightplan – Much as I like Jodi Foster as an actress, this was a very mediocre and predictable film. I wasn’t impressed with this one at all. Panic Room was so much better.

A History of Violence – It stuns me that this film is not only receiving award nominations, but actually winning awards (mostly in Canada, where the director is from – go figure)! This movie was such a disappointment. I’m as big a fan of sex and violence in movies as anyone, but this movie is the definition of “gratuitous.” Okay, so maybe the director was trying to make a statement about the gratuitous sex and violence that’s rampant in our entertainment and our society (that’s what all those idiotic movie critics out there seemed to think). If so, his big, bold statement was lost on me. All I saw was a movie filled with sex, nudity, and violent murder strictly for their own sake. But my bigger complaint goes to story. Being a writer of sorts, I love a good story. As a wannabe filmmaker, I also understand the nature of a good film script – keep the story moving forward, keep the pace steady. Here we have a movie that’s only 96 minutes long (so there’s not much story there to begin with), and yet I repeatedly saw scenes that in my mind had no point being in the movie. They were extraneous distractions that could have easily been removed with no negative impact on the story flow at all. Which leaves you with probably less than an hour of actual relevant scenes. I’m sorry, but if I’m looking for an hour’s worth of nudity and mob violence, I can watch an episode of The Sopranos – and I’m pretty much guaranteed a hell of a lot better story than what I saw in A History of Violence. So my recommendation – if you haven’t seen it yet, don’t waste your time.

Which brings me to the climax of September, the best science fiction movie of 2005 (and easily one of the best overall movies of 2005) – Serenity!! Now, I do have to make one admission – this movie is very much the end cap to the series Firefly, and if you haven’t seen the TV show, then you’re not going to enjoy the movie as much. From an objective perspective (well, as much as I can be objective, considering that I’m a HUGE fan of the show), I would have to say that as a general sci-fi movie, just on it’s own, Serenity is only a pretty good movie (but still very worth seeing). It only becomes a truly great movie when you factor in the character and story development from the series that preceded it. As the theatrical finale to the show, the movie truly shines.

This is probably not going to surprise anyone, but I just can’t help myself – I have to compare Serenity with the other two big sci-fi films that were released this summer: Star Wars Episode III and War of the Worlds (and I have to smile and say that for once the critics and I agree – they also generally feel that Serenity is the better movie over Episode III, and that George Lucas could learn a thing or two from Joss Whedon). Primarily because of who was involved in the making those other two movies (at least as far as I’m concerned), both of them did blockbuster numbers and were huge successes at the box office, while Serenity was a disappointment, to say the least. Which is a shame considering that the first of those other two movies was bad, while the other was downright horrible (I’ve actually read reviews talking about how good War of the Worlds was, which just floors me – what the hell movie were THEY watching?! Obviously there are a few critics out there that figure Steven Spielberg and/or Tom Cruise can do no wrong. Well, sadly they are seriously mistaken). While Serenity had neither the big budget nor massive fan base of the other two movies, it had one thing going for it in spades that the other two films were completely lacking in – a well written script with great dialogue (I’m sorry, but some of the dialogue in Episode III was just painful, and the weak performances that delivered said dialogue certainly didn’t help). Whatever else you may say about Joss Whedon, he is above all the master of fun, engaging, memorable dialogue.

The visual effects aren’t nearly as high-end as those in Star Wars (or War of the Worlds, as far as that goes), but they do justice to the story, which is what really counts, since that’s what they’re there for (George Lucas has a weakness for getting overly focused on the visual effects that I feel hurts his films – a habit that sadly it seems Peter Jackson is developing, but I’ll go more into that once I get to my King Kong review). It’s nice to see the occasional sci-fi movie that has a more lo-tech feel to its technology, as opposed to the shiny, glossy, super-sophisticated hi-tech that’s so common in most science fiction (this was one of the things I loved about Wing Commander, a very highly underrated sci-fi movie in my opinion).

Joss Whedon is just such a master storyteller. His characters have depth and personality, his stories are well thought out, and he combines drama and humor and action and emotional depth together into a compelling tapestry probably better than any writer/director I’ve seen (although I’m sure there are plenty of independent filmmakers out there that are as good; sadly I just seem to watch a lot more Hollywood films than independent films, and I don’t think I’ll get much argument from people about Hollywood’s serious lack of creativity and storytelling ability these days. I mean, my God, just how many sequels, remakes, and movie versions of TV shows can they pump out?).

Well, I think that’s about it. I think I’ve written enough to make it pretty obvious how I feel about Serenity. Bottom line – if you’re a fan of the show, this is a must-see movie without question. If you’re not, but you like well-written, well-acted sci-fi, then this movie is still worth checking out (but maybe not must-see). Of course, if you haven’t seen the original show, I highly recommend it. It is just a fantastic series (it’s just a shame that it aired on Fox, who completely bungled it from word go – not airing the episodes in order, putting it in a lousy time slot, basically giving it no support whatsoever. But that’s a totally different discussion that I could go on about at length, so I’ll just stop now). So until next time (and God knows when that’ll be), take life easy, and make sure to support your local Cineplex.