Waitress

Nathan Fillion is so much fun to watch on screen. Anyone who saw and liked Firefly knew this. You could see the gentle character in there, the one who was destined for the romantic comedy. He had his moments in an otherwise lifeless film Slither but really shines in Waitress. Keri Russell also seemed destined for romantic comedy, despite a misguided turn in Mission: Impossible 3. And to see both Fillion and Russell in this film is a delight. It is also a delight that this film isn't your standard cookie cutter romantic comedy.

The film follows Jenna (Russell), a waitress at a diner with a knack for making pies and recently pregnant although she isn't happy about that. She is married to a jerk of a husband and has solace only in her pie making and her two eccentric friends and fellow workers (Cheryl Hines and late director Adrienne Shelly). She soon connects with her new doctor (Fillion) and also in there is Andy Griffith as the diner owner who is often cantankerous. This was a really enjoyable movie with a heartwarming resolution. It is well acted and just generally put a smile on my face.

Pirates 3

Even as I write this I can't decide if I liked Pirates 3 because it was good or because the second installment was so horrible that by comparison this one didn't bother me much. Although I suspect, the latter is the case. The third Pirates movie is now out and although I hated virulently the second film we can't forget I'm an idiot and a glutton for punishment. These are the reasons I see ever crappy Jack Black film and force myself into the theater when Michael Bay puts out his most recent schlock. So of course I bellied up to the box office and purchased my ticket just like everyone else.

The movie picks up where the second left off. Captain Jack (Johnny Depp) is dead, Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) has been brought back to life and with Elisabeth (Keira Knightly) and Will (Orlando Bloom) has set out to bring him back. They head to Singapore to meet a pirate there played by Chow Yun-Fat and get some special maps. And of course still to be dealt with are Davy Jones (Bill Nighy) and Lord Becket (Tom Hollander) the resident villains.

When it comes to Jack Sparrow, I've come to believe less is more. I'm sure at least one person I know would disagree with that but the more you see him the more his camp becomes tiresome. Now this movie had long been rumored to have a cameo by Keith Richards, the professed model for Depp's performance. Is the scene good? Well its mildly amusing, I laughed out loud when he came on screen (the only one in the theater who laughed)

The movie actually had a surprise I was not really expecting but was glad the director had the guts to do however tempered it ended up being in the end. Of course the film leaves open the possibility for a sequel, so expect one if the film does well. But in the end I think I liked this film, sort of. If you are curious, stay til the end of the credits for a sappy concluding note.

Shrek The Third

I find most animated films tedious. They play for the children and if one is lucky you might get a shout out to the adults in the crowd. This was why the original Shrek was a bit better than the average. It had numerous adult centered jokes going. It wasn't fantastic but it had some truly funny moments. Shrek 2 was a painful reminder of why Hollywood really will exploit and destroy anything it gets its grubby hands on. Shrek The Third was mind numbingly boring.

In the third installment, Shrek (Mike Meyers) is set to become king of Far Far Away. He doesn't want to be king so he seeks out the only remaining heir, Artie (Justin Timberlake). Meanwhile Prince Charming plots revenge with all the other villains and Shrek must save the day. Aside from being virtually the same plot as equally bad Happily N'Ever After it is still a bad plot. The jokes thrown at the adults this time are very strained and it falls into a more traditionally bad children's animated feature.

Zombacoplypse!

I like zombies. I know people like Richard Roeper and Roger Ebert think they are the most boring villain of all time but I couldn't disagree more. I own every Romero zombie film, I own Zombie 2, Shaun of the Dead and even a few zombie films I have never actually watched but wanted to own in any case. I have a growing collection of zombie comic books. I own both Max Brooks books on zombies (if you are a fan of zombies I encourage you to pick up "World War Z". So you can imagine what kind of bliss I was in when I had a full night of zombie goodness coming my way.

A local theater was showing Day of the Dead (1985). Unrated old school zombie goodness with a dash of overacting and 80s synth. Does it get any better than that? Day of the Dead is definitely an acquired taste but I think its awesome and it stars the most loveable of all zombies ever: Bub. You watch it and see Bub and not want to...well hugging him would seem stupid (he is a zombie) but you would certainly smile and if he did bite someone you'd probably think: oh that crazy Bub, he did it again. But this wasn't the end of my night of zombies.

After Day, I went to see 28 Weeks Later. Now yes I know technically, they aren't zombies just rage infected humans but for the most part they are zombies. Now I don't really like the fast zombie as a rule but 28 Days Later was a fun little film. Is 28 Weeks Later a good follow up? Well no not really. I heard plenty of analogies like 28 Days Later is to Alien as 28 Weeks Later is to Aliens. In as much as both Aliens and 28 Weeks Later are sequels this is true. In all other aspects, this is a horrible comparison.

The film has its moments. The opening sequence is pretty good with a nice twist (that every damn review spoils). The drastic measures to contain the new outbreak are crazy and sort of fun to watch. A helicopter and zombies, nuff said. And the fact that to some degree the real villains are the American troops (although the Iraq parallel is a bit heavy handed).

Sadly the film had its crappy moments too. The camera never pauses it seems like and neither does the director. And then there is one amazingly tenacious zombie who shows up all the time. I felt like I was watching a music video where the same guy is hiding in every scene. The poor story line, bad pacing and camera work tie this one down into a forgettable mess. Still it was zombie paradise while it lasted.

Spiderman 3

As I sit here and type this I am currently the owner of over 100 Spider-Man comics. They are all neatly bagged and sitting on a shelf in plain view. I like Spider-Man and I like comic books, clearly. So I would be really insulted if someone criticized me for just not getting comics or not getting what Spider-Man is about. As if making a film just like the comic is a positive criticism. A movie is a different artistic genre than a comic book. It should be different. If all you are going to do is bring it exactly as it was on the page to the screen, what is the point? Why not just go read the page. A movie should stay true to its material but do its own thing.

I felt Spider-Man did this. It wasn't the exact story of Spider-Man's origin but it got it right in the right places. It had a great villain in Willem Dafoe and I bought into what I was shown on the screen. Spider-Man 2 was less successful. I felt Doctor Octopus was a bit one dimensional which is a shame because he was played by the brilliant Alfred Molina. He was just a crazy guy obsessed with as my friend put it "fuuuushhhionnn". James Franco was almost as whiny as Harry Potter and the film in general just pushed the limits of its own universe a bit too much.

I'm tempted to believe Sam Raimi and the entire cast and crew actually conspired to make a horrible film in hopes that no new film would be asked of them for a few years. This would allow Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst from having to reprise their roles. I'm tempted to think Raimi was actually trying to make Batman and Robin (19xx). Then years from now some new director could come along and make a return film which would blow up like Batman Begins (20xx). Although judging by the box office, if that was Raimi's goal, he failed miserably, no movie that makes 150 million in one weekend isn't going to get another sequel.

I'm not going to bother with a synopsis, I rarely do so why should this stinker be any different. I just want to say that when Peter Parker becomes a bad boy for a brief stint in the film, all I could do was think that it was very reminiscent of Superman's bad boy turn in Superman 3 after he was exposed to the pseudo-kryptonite. The bright point of that film was Richard Pryor, this film had no Richard Pryor or even a Richard Pryor-like actor.

The dramatic moments of this film were painful to sit through. The action was more so than usual cartoony and unimpressive. The love triangle is trite, the villains lack real motivation. Needless to say I hated this film.

Lucky You

I can't truly hate a film that opens with a Springsteen song, even if it is "Lucky Town". I hear Bruce belting out his tune and it puts a smile on my face. I also can't truly hate a film that stars Eric Bana and Drew Barrymore. Both are just so damn likable and cute. And finally I can't truly hate a film whose backdrop is poker playing in Las Vegas. That being said I don't have to like a film with such elements either.

Lucky You is a romantic comedy set in Vegas a few years ago and follows Huck (Eric Bana) who is a poker player who occasionally pushes to far and ends up broke especially when playing against his estranged father (Robert Duvall). He meets cute with Drew's Billie and surely enough they have a swift relationship one expects in a romantic comedy. Of course Huck screws up and Billie is hurt and blah, blah, blah.

The romance was kind of forced in this movie, and the real story is about the relationship between Huck and his father. His father has learned how to play poker and have a life; Huck has yet to learn that lesson. His father is trying hard to help him learn it. Which is what I think is ultimately wrong with the film. It just isn't interesting. Despite all the excellent actors in this film, no one wows with the material they have. They don't focus too much on the poker which is good because unless you're a fan, it would drive you insane.

I didn't hate this film, I just felt unaffected by it. Still it did have those Springsteen songs.

Disturbia

David Morse screams serial killer and so having a movie in which he plays one (or a potential one) is about as thrilling as taking out the trash. If you watched the trailer for Disturbia then it basically gave away the major plot point which is unfortunate but it didn't give away how it gets to that plot point. It is that which makes this movie enjoyable to see. It spends a lot of time following Shia LaBeouf's Kale.

Kale is a teenager with angst but the movie gives a fairly unexpected reason for said angst. A quick set up has us following Kale around his house as he is under house arrest for three months. His fed up mom (Carrie-Anne Moss) cuts off his X-Box and his Itunes and Kale starts to go a little stir crazy. That is until he starts watching the neighbors, especially his new attractive female neighbor. To be fair his voyeurism is a big creepy and I'm not sure the watched girl would respond the way she does but in this universe she decides she likes Kale.

It is only after this rather lengthy set-up that we finally move into the thriller part of the movie. Its fairly traditional and follows the guidelines Hollywood set down long ago. Its passable in all this, nothing spectacular happens but it doesn't totally foul it up. For me the movie worked because it spent time in the build up. In the end I enjoyed watching this film. I certainly won't buy it, or likely ever watch it again but for an hour and a half it kept me entertained.

Pathfinder

Pathfinder had two things going for it. The theater I saw it in was empty save for me and my friend and it starred Clancy Brown. Unfortunately I didn't know it was Clancy Brown and he was speaking in Viking(?) the whole time. But the fact that the theater was empty is still a plus. One, it gives me hope that all considerations of quality are not gone from this world. Two, it meant I could make all the jokes at the screen that I wanted.

This film was simply horrible. Caricatured noble savages, tough but apparently incredibly stupid enemies and a ridiculous amount of conveniences and telegraphed set ups abound in this film. Its like watch a poor man's Conan. At least Conan had a plot that made mild sense. Karl Urban is trying desperately to eek out a living as an action star but sadly he lacks one key factor. My vague recollection of the Lord of the Rings trilogy makes me think he was an okay Eomer but since then he has underwhelmed me in everything I've seen.

And back to Clancy Brown. Seriously how can any film hide Clancy Brown behind bulky armor and a helmet. He's Clancy f---ing Brown, don't they understand that? You don't hide Drill Instructor Zim behind a mask, you put him out front chewing up scenery and emoting like you never saw no b-list actor emote before. This is a film travesty of significant importance, just like in Final Destination 3 when there was no Tony Todd. What were they thinking?

I put two and two together and decided you're pissing me off

Back in the days when I had free access to cable (either my parents' or one of my friends') I could watch Adult Swim on tv. One of the odd ball comedies was Aqua Teen Hunger Force. Roughly twelve minutes of comedic insanity that would have dialogue that would just resonate in me and have me repeating it over and over again even though it wasn't all that funny out of context. "Yeah, it is a good morning, it's three in the morning!" That still makes me laugh.

So when I heard that Aqua Teen Hunger Force was going to be a movie, I...well to be honest I thought it sounded like a pretty bad idea. How can a show that is funny in bits of 10 going to sustain itself over 80 minutes? Well sadly this is a question that will remain unanswered because this movie could in fact not hold up for that long. Sure the movie is crammed full of many of the favorites of the show, the Moonanites, the Plutonians, Carl but it just isn't that funny. I would have been better served by just watching a marathon of episodes.

The Namesake

The Namesake is a film directed by Mira Nair following the Ganguli family over a period of about twenty five years. The film starts with Ashoke Ganguli (Irfan Kahn) who is a bookish young man who prefers to read over travel. A train accident makes him change his mind and the book he was reading when it occurred the works of Nikolai Gogol remain in his memory. We meet up with him several years later as his parents are arranging a marriage for him with Ashima (Tabu).

After their marriage the coupe goes to the United States where Ashoke is in school. The film follows the couple as they adjust to each other and Ashima adjusts to living outside of India. They have a family and name their first child Gogol. As Gogol grows up he is resistant to his parents and wants to change his name. At this point the film follows Gogol (Kal Penn) while also returning to Ashoke and Ashima. Tragedy strikes the family and Gogol must struggle between the American life he knows and has established with his Indian culture.

This film was quite good. It's quite pleasing with all the fancy footwork films made in Hollywood pull off, that there are still people making films that are just about people. This is just a character study that follows some very interesting people. Kal Penn is pleasant enough as Gogol but the meat of this film lies in Tabu's and Irfan Kahn's performances. As the couple of an arranged marriage they show amazing range. From the early scenes of disorientation of Ashima being with a man she hardly knows in a country so different from her own to the confident way she announces her plans now that her children are settled, I was fascinated with Tabu's performance. Irfan Kahn was no different. The two of them together had amazing chemistry.

I actually found myself irritated when the film moved away to deal with Gogol's life. It isn't as though he is less interesting (or maybe it is that he is less interesting) but Ashoke and Ashima just leap off the screen. This film is funny and sad (even heartbreaking) all while showing a culture that I know very little about. If you like a strong character driven plot then I recommend this film.

Grindhouse

Grindhouse is what I can only describe as a cinephiletic orgasm. If you watched the trailer you either had no interest in it or you thought it was going to be the event in your life that you needed to see. Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez directing 70s style exploitative violent films. This film delivers although at a 191 minutes long it doesn't give you everything you wanted in a reasonable time.

Rodriguez' Planet Terror is a send up and take on zombie films. It's high intensity and has a lot of humor and beautiful women to fill the screen. As a fan of the zombie film, I was watching eagerly watching the creative ways of killing zombies and the over the top acting from such classic B movie actors as Michael Biehn and Tom Savini!!.

Tarantino's Death Proof is the second film and it has the classic dialogue you expect from his films. It however goes a bit too long and after the no stopping intensity of Planet Terror, this film starts to drag a bit. The action scenes are well done and the film has a largely satisfying ending but it felt a little too self indulgent from Tarantino.

The film also has several fake trailers which are fun to watch from various directors. If you like Tarantino, Rodriguez or film in general (and can stomach a lot of gore) then this is definitely a movie to see, in a large audience if you can manage it.

Reign Over Me

I saw this movie because I like Don Cheadle and I'm trying to give Adam Sandler a chance in serious movies. But P.T. Anderson's Punch Drunk Love this is not. The movie follows Cheadle's character as he sees and re-befriends his old college roommate who lost his whole family in the 9/11 terror attacks. Sandler's Charlie is suffering from PTSD and refuses to even think about his life before. Unfortunately this film has been handled with all the subtelty of a tack hammer to the head.

Director Mike Binder attempts to pull every emotional string he can in the course of this movie and he loads it down with what he considers moving rock songs from his past. Now I like listening to Bruce Springsteen as much as the next guy (actually probably more than the next guy) but the symbolic scene when Sandler and Cheadle 'jam' to a song from the river had one thing going for it, the song. This is a sappy sad story with no real emotional depth but decent performances. You can see Sandler wanting to break out but he holds it in check.

There are two subplots to this film neither of which works in any satisfying way. One involves a bizarrely crazy woman (played by the beautiful Saffron Burrows) who makes a sexual advance on Cheadle, threatens to sue him and then apologizes before falling for Sandler's character. This also helps resolve a weak plotline where Cheadle stands up to his firm partners. The other plot is the struggle in Cheadle's own marriage which gets only the briefest attention and is resolved hurridly at the end.

This bizarre mix of overly bittersweet melodrama and confused side plots makes for quite a mess of a movie.

The Lookout

The Lookout follows the life of Chris Pratt (Joseph Gordon-Levitt , who four years prior had been in a car accident that left him suffering from memory loss. Chris goes through the motions of his day remembering the glory he had as a student athlete in high school and the comparably miserable existence he has now. His roommate and good friend is Lew (Jeff Daniels) who is blind and smart and hoping for the best for Chris. Chris is approached one night by Gary Spargo (Matthew Goode) under the auspices of friendship and ends up hooking up Chris with a pretty ex-stripper Luvlee (Isla Fisher). Soon, it is revealed that its less about friendship and more about bank robbing as Chris is pulled into a plan to rob the bank he works at.

This was a pretty good film. It had strong performances from all the key people and some excellent character work by Bruce McGill as Chris' father. The memory loss plot device is handled well as is the greater character arc for Chris. Some of the characters come and go without satisfactory closure and the ending was a bit weak but the acting and mostly good story telling made it worth seeing.

The PRIDEful SHOOTER killed the HOST

I'm pretty sure no one is reading at this point anyway so dropping my two cents worth on three films seems like an exercise in futility but my whole life is an exercise in futility so ha!

Pride is your typical inspirational sports story. Terence Howard stars as a young man who experienced prejudice in his college years when trying to compete as a swimmer, years later in 70s Philadelphia, he gets a job clearing out a soon to be shut down rec center where he discovers, cleans up and begins using the abandoned pool. A group of local kids who use the lot to play basketball are deprived of the hoops and wander inside the rec center and are soon inspired to become swimmers.

Its typical because it has all the plot points you would expect to see. Early failure, racial prejudice against the black kids trying to break into a "white" sport, training montages, and eventual success. The story is based on true events and you can see real documentary footage of the actual coach if you sit through the credits. Howard's performance was strong and the movie accomplishes everything it sets out to do. I suppose there isn't anything wrong with telling an inspiration tale about keeping kids off the streets and out of gang life through recreational activity but I wonder if there is a way to tell such a story in a less stale cliched way. Swim fans and fans of sports underdog stories may enjoy this film more than I did. I am glad to see Howard still putting everything into his performances, I hope he has lots of success.

Shooter is about as mindless as Hollywood gets sans Michael Bay at the helm. We follow trained sniper Swaggert (Mark Wahlberg) who after being betrayed by the military living in seclusion. He is hired to help find a presidential assassin but is instead imbroiled in a conspiracy on a high level. Wahlberg (phoning in his performance, guess he needed a break from his intensity in The Departed (2006)) plays the sort of Matt Damon action hero well enough. The movie delivers the fight scenes and gun fighting that one wants from a movie like this all wrapped up in a ludicrous plot that is instantly forgettable. But I give a shout out to Ned Beatty who I can't remember seeing in a film since the Superman franchise. He was so great as Otis. Final verdict: Popcorn fluff that I enjoyed well enough.

The Host is a much critically praised horror film (91% fresh rating on RottenTomatoes.com) from Korea. It is apparently the highest grossing Korean film to date. Neither of these is exactly high praise in my view. Night Watch was the highest grossing Russian film to date and that move was seriously lacking in all that is good. This film is trying desperately hard to evoke at least three different genres: 50s horror, comedy, and social commentary. I think it fails at all three. It has all the subtlety of a Jerry Bruckheimer film, forced humor and blunt force anti-American sentiment. I was in pain after watching for a half hour and was praying for the end after that.

Poor acting (apparently intentional), poor character development (again intentional?), and overall pointless meandering story drove me insane. The filmmaker seemed more interested in making the monster move in a neat fashion than anything else. It could have been at least twenty minutes shorter and in general just left me angry.

Smokin Ghost Rider

I have no qualms about writing one very short post about two movies. Smokin' Aces had the potential to be a really fun popcorn flick. Instead it was tied down in stylistic pretentiousness. Ghost Rider by contrast had no redeemable potential at all. I lost two hours of my life and all I got was some gratuitous cleavage of Eva Mendes. And I should note this is a movie that starred Nick Cage, Sam Eliot hell even Donal Logue and Wes Bentley deserve better than this. I'd be shocked that Peter Fonda was in this but he was also in Escape from LA so his credibility is seriously lacking.

Pan's Labyrinth

Pan's Labyrinth follows a young girl named Ofelia who accompanies her pregnant mother to a military outpost in 1944 Spain where her step father is the commander. He is a sadistic commander for the fascist regime that was in power at that time. Ofelia escapes into her fantasies where she believes she is the long lost daughter of the king of another world.

The film follows Ofelia as she negotiates both the violent and dangerous real world and the idyllic fantasy adventure in her head. The fantasy scenes are amazing to view with textured and even very creepy creatures who aid or hinder her quest to be reunited with her lost world. The fantasy world is off set by the quite brutal things that happen in the real world including torture and summary execution.

This film has a nice balance of both worlds and even has an amazingly good resolve. I left the theater liking the movie and two days later I'm writing this and really liking this movie. The acting was well done, the directing was good. The human stories told were touching and the ending was...without giving anything away...very well done.

Letters From Iwo Jima

Letters From Iwo Jima is an good war film. It isn't fantastic. I'm not sure what all the critical praise is about. I think Thin Red Line (1998) is far superior. It tales the story of the Battle of Iwo Jima from a side as Americans we don't often think of. I've heard a lot of critics say that perhaps as a student of history I've always been interested in the other narrative so I always thought war movies that were all patriotic were missing something. Recall that Thin Red Line does in fact have a few words from a Japanese soldier and I would suspect more were disposed on the editing room floor.

Letters does have one very vivid and memorable and also shocking scene involving honorable suicide. The acting is strong, especially Ken Watanabe and the direction solid but I was underwhelmed by this film. I would have enjoyed a deeper delving into the war culture of Japan that caused the men to fight as they did.

The Painted Veil

I think I liked The Painted Veil when I saw it two weeks ago but I can't recall much about it now. It was a bit long and not a very coherent plot but it was more about the characters than anything else. Naomi Watts and Edward Norton play some extraordinarily complex characters who run the gamet of emotions. This is definitely one of those roles an actor loves to get. The cinematography in this film was also breathtaking to look at. This is a rare US movie filmed in china and the country side is amazing to see. I'm glad I saw it so I can comment on any nominations but not memorable for me as a film.

Aliens

A personal favorite movie of mine for years has been James Cameron's Aliens (1986). When I learned that the local indie theater was going to be showing this film on the big screen, I was thrilled. Well the print of the movie I'm pretty sure was from twenty years ago, it was scratched and blurry and actually pretty poor image quality but you know what? I didn't care one damn bit.

As much as Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) was a scary thriller, Cameron's film is an excellent action film. But that isn't to say there isn't suspense in this movie because believe me there is. What exactly happened on the colony? How are the aliens moving around? Who is going to live? Will Ripley save Newt? I know the answer to every one of these questions and I still was glued to the screen.

I forgot how funny this film is too. There are genuinely funny moments with fun dialogue and plenty of action. And I couldn't help but cheer aloud and neither could the rest of the audience when Ripley yells out at the end "Get Away from her, you b*tch!" This is an experience I wish I could have had years ago in its original release but to be fair to me, I was five. Watching this old print with a crowd of hard core fans was almost as good. So go rewatch or watch for the first time an excellent suspense action film from one of the great directors of our time.

The Queen

I went to the theater to see a special viewing of Aliens (1986) and ended up seeing The Queen (2006). I blame the internet for lying to me about when Aliens was showing. Ironically I went initially to see a movie that had a queen (albiet a hideous alien one) in it and after a small snafu I ended up at a movie that had a queen in it (debatably the English royal family could be aliens).

The Queen stands as a historical drama in which I can actually vividly remember the public events it is dealing with. I remember when Diana died and the royal family wasn't talking. This film gives us the inside or at least an interpretation of what was going on inside the royal family at the time. It is really well done and has strong performances from many members of the cast.

Helen Mirren of course stands out. She has been nominated for multiple awards and rightly so. I have not seen every movie on the noms but someone would have to be pretty amazing to upstage her. Sometimes I have personal favorites whom I root for despite the fact that I know they aren't the best performance but be wary to all, she was phenomenal and will be hard to beat.