The most recent comedy from the Judd Apatow studio tells the tale of two stoners on the run in a small town, after one of them witnesses a murder, and unwittingly gets the two involved in a turf war between rival drug dealers. The film is Directed by David Gordon Green, and was written by star Seth Rogan and Evan Goldberg.

Dale Denton (Rogan) leads a simple, and self-satisfying lifestyle. He works happily in disguise after disguise serving legal papers to people for all sorts of things, and loves every moment of it. He spends most of his spare time smoking a joint, and blissfully numb to the realities of the world. He is also dating an eighteen year-old high schooler, Angie (Amber Heard), and tries to come to terms with the fact that boys her own age look at her with the same lust he does, and also that she wants him to meet her parents (Ed Begley, Jr and Nora Dunn) over dinner the following evening. After obtaining new and very potent weed (nicknamed Pineapple Express) from his dealer, Saul (James Franco), Dale heads out to serve papers to a Mr. Ted Jones (Gary Cole). While smoking his new weed and waiting for Mr. Jones to appear, a short latino cop (Rosie Perez)pulls up to the house, goes inside and assists Jones in killing a rival Asian drug dealer. Having witnessed this from the street, Dale flips out and speeds off to hide at Saul’s, leaving his halfway smoked joint in the street outside Jones’ house. Soon, Saul and Dale are on the run and hiding from Jones’ hitmen, sent out to find them and silence them.

I’ll be honest, I had heard next to nothing about this movie until the previews began appearing on T.V. a few weeks ago. I’ve not read any reviews of the film, and the film looked kinda wierd from what I did see. Also, Judd Apatow’s films have been largely hit or miss with me. Superbad was horribly unredeemable, while Knocked Up was hilarious the first time, and then lost most of its luster upon repeat viewings. 40-Year Old Virgin stands as the only true gem in the Apatow resumee so far (I haven’t yet seen Forgetting Sarah Marshall), and the only one that has stood the test of time, however short a time it has been. Now, on a total whim, I walked unprepared into a theater and viewed Pineapple Express, and I’ll admit, I was very nervous in parts of the opening half-hour. Rarely did I laugh, and I found myself looking at my watch a few times in that opening act of the film, but I’m here to say that once it got going, Express ends up being a pretty enjoyable ride…part of the time anyways. Mostly, I was left wanting alot more, and came expecting more from an Apatow film.

Complaints aside for a moment…The chemistry between stars Seth Rogan and James Franco is undeniably good, and the true comedic genius of Rogan continues to amaze me with each film he appears in. Apatow also seems to enjoy rebuilding the “guy comedies” and puts his own touch on both the stoner movie and the buddy action film in one shot here. To this point, Apatow’s films (either Directed or Produced, like here) have been acclaimed by boths the public and critics alike for the tender emotional scenes and the honest humanity found within the scripts. That this film has recieved no such praises, and performed well under expectations so far, should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen the film, wiether they enjoyed it or hated it. While both Virgin and Knocked Up has there share of raunchy jokes and sexual behavior, both still contained at the core, a very big heart. The same can not be said for Express, which is largely a modern day Cheech and Chong movie, with a touch of the inuendo-style humor found in both Beavis and Butthead and Austin Powers. When you sit back and analyze it, it really is just another stoner movie, and (in its way) a road trip movie where seemingly random events occur to get the main characters from point A to B to C.

Nowhere in the film, occasionally enjoyable or not, can you find a clear message or a higher purpose the film represents. The film proceeds randomly and without purpose, and rarely takes any time for tender moments between the newly appointed friends. Despite this, we do go along for the ride and the journey they take, both on the run from drug dealers, and as growing friends is believable and mostly enjoyable. The action sequences are highly entertaining, and well placed in the film. Usually each time I found myself rolling my eyes or looking at my watch, an action scene would start, and they are not only fun, but also exceedingly original and brutal. That was a surprise for me in this film, the gore and subtle violence throughout the film is intense, and plays into the guy movie motiff that the Rogan and Apatow obviously were shooting for.

A sequence or two I did really enjoy usually involved the very same, over the top style action. The car chase in the cop car is hilarious and exciting all at the same time. From beginning to end that sequence is flawless, especially the bit with Franco getting his foot stuck in the windshield, after attempting to kick it out. Also the fight in Red’s (Danny McBride) house is wonderfully funny, and McBride plays that part very well. But for every one or two good scenes (also including the bit where Rogan enters his teenage girlfriends house and tries to convince her parents that drug dealers are coming to kill them), there are some painfully bad or slow ones. Early in the film, alot of the scenes seem to struggle with keeping the pace up while establishing the characters, which is surprising from an Apatow film. I thought both the high school sequence and the woods sequence were both awful and is basically when I found myself looking at the ceiling for a bit.

Flaws aside, I can see this movie being very popular on DVD with the 14-20 year old guys in high school and college, because that is the films target audience. The fact that I didn’t enjoy the film more honestly makes me feel kinda old. There was a day, not long ago, that this was exactly what I was looking for in a movie. Now, I not only want more in a film, I demand it, and in a summer that has brought so many high quality films, how can we lower our standards for a run of the mill guy comedy? I feel bad, because I can see why the film would be popular, but none of those reasons clicked with me. Did I laugh in certain parts? Yes. Did I enjoy the movie? Sorta, but not consistantly. Parts of this movie are great and highly entertaining, and just plain fun. Then parts of it are over the top and stupid, and some of it is also boring. I feel sorta like the 1 guy on the planet who gave Dark Knight a bad review here, and now know what he felt like, but the movie just didn’t click all the way for me.

Sadly, I am looking for more in my movies these days. Even the carefree and message-devoid guy comedies.

The first of three “Prequels” to go back and fill in the backstory on the happenings in the Star Wars universe before the events in the original 1977 film (Episode IV), and also tell the tale of a younger Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd) and the beginning of his fateful journey to becoming Darth Vader.

Set approximately thirty years before the events in the original Star Wars, The film opens ominously with the small planet of Naboo about to be attacked by the evil Trade Federation, who has set up a blockade around the peaceful planet under the rule of teen monarch, Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman). In attempts to secure a peaceful resolution to the standoff, the Galactic Republic has sent two Jedi Knights to negotiate with the Trade Federation. However, the two Jedi Knights, Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor), are unaware that the Trade Federation is secretly alligned with the Dark Lord of the Sith, who orders an attack on both the Jedi’s and the planet below. Narrowly escaping the attack, the two Jedi’s stow aboard the landing crafts of the Trade Federation and soon meet the strange, and abnoxious Jar-Jar Binks (Ahmed Best), who helps them reach the Queen and help her escape the planet before she can be captured and forced to sign a treaty with the Trade Federation. However, in the escape, the groups starship is damaged, forcing them to land and hide on the remote desert planet of Tatooine. There they meet young Anakin Skywalker, and soon the various members of the group’s destiny all become intwinged.

Now, one thing must be understood before we continue…I LOVE Star Wars! I do. I love it, and growing up it was my obsession. I had countdowns to this movie for years, and would go on to see the film 33 times in the theaters, preorder the VHS (the DVD came years later) and wear down a copy of that before I came to a horrifying conclusion.. the movie kinda sucks. Not all the way sucks, but mostly, kinda…yeah, it sucks. Don’t get me wrong, there are many cool Star Wars moments in the film, and really the first 20 minutes and the last 20 minutes are both very fun to watch, somewhere it between is where things go awry, and for a die-hard fan…that is very depressing, and very hard to admit…

Some nine years now after its release, the first Star Wars prequel has suffered some pretty harsh criticism over the years. Being a die-hard Star Wars fan, it was hard for me to realize the many flaws in the film during the many viewings I had in its theatrical release. But flaws there are, and many of them. Ironically, with each succesive prequel (Episodes II and III) the flaws only become more apparent. Director and Writer (and producer and creator) George Lucas definetly shows some signs of rust behind the Director’s chair in this film, and really, upon repeat viewings, it becomes apparent that the film was mostly designed to test all the new technology, and all the new film making tools at his disposal in the modern filmmaking world. From a purely visual and technical standpoint, Phantom Menace is a remarkable achievement in filmmaking, and a truely amazing film to watch. There are numerous special effects based sequences, such as the thrilling Tatooine pod-race and the extremely long final battle scenes, that all come together in a very fun and exciting way. Unfortunately, thats about where the positives end and where the complaining begins.

For starters, there is the obvious problems experienced by even the most veteran actors with the (then) new blue screen process of filming fantasy films. All of the actors seem so lost and often bored in this movie, that the dialogue is collectively delievered in a very monotone, unemotional way and that very much hurts the film after the first few times you’ve seen it and the spectacle of the visual effects begins to wear off a bit. Liam Neeson does a pretty good job, and his character is really the only fleshed out part in the movie, and I suspect a lot of that credit goes to Neeson more so than Lucas (who wrote it). Neeson’s presense in a lot of the scenes injects a flair of authority and commands attention, which he should being the wise Jedi Master, but the rest of the cast is either horrible or wasted. Ewan McGregor’s teenaged Obi-Wan Kenobi is reduced to the form of whiny sidekick, and is forced to the sidelines for much of the movie until his dramatic lightsaber duel with Darth Maul (Ray Park). A young Natalie Portman seems mostly bored, confused and lost in the movie, but manages a few scenes that are quite touching with young Jake Lloyd, playing Anakin.

Speaking of Jake Lloyd…he is extremely annoying in this film. Every “whipee!” is like nails on a chalkboard and really clashes with where Hayden Christiansen eventually takes the character in the later prequels. I get what Lucas was trying to do, trying to show that a good natured kid with high morals and a big heart can still fall to temptation and to the dark side, but (at least in this film) he fails miserably, and Lloyd bears much of that blame, and also most of the blame for why the film is so off par in comparison to the other five films, especially the original trilogy. Aside from Lloyd, there is the abnoxiously annoying and dreadful Jar-Jar Binks, who despite being impressively brought to life via CGI, is still the most cartoony and most pointless character in this vast universe that has seen its share of pointless characters. From the moment he opens his mouth all I wanted to do was see Obi-Wan slice off his head with a lightsaber.

Then, lastly, we have the plot issues. Well, if you can call it that. I’m not going to get into the nitpicky stuff, but there are some glaringly awful things that occur during the course of this film. First of all it is basically the same plot structure of the original Star Wars was in 1977, and as much as Lucas wants us all to think it was deliberate and makes sense in the structure of the whole Saga, I don’t buy it. I mean this film even has the damn happy music parade and medal ceremony at the end! Then we have the dreadfully slow Tatooine sequence, where the film attempts to inject most of its exposistion and does so badly. Alot of the mythology around Anakin is very muddy, very convienient and unconvincing. Immaculate conception thru the force?! What?!? The Force is just a bunch of microscopic organisms that crawl around inside you and allow you to do things?! Are you kidding? Please say you’re kidding?! Then they say the Jedi’s were unaware of Anakin, yet say he gives off the most mojo of any of them. Contradiction much? Then theres the whole deal where they are blindly ignorant to the presence of the Sith, which is basically the same deal and is attempted to be explained in Episode II, but done so poorly.

Overall, the film is a visual marvel and a stepping stone to not only the later films in the series, but the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the Harry Potter films, and every other science fiction and fantasy based film in the past decade.  Aside from its amazing visuals, however, the film leaves much to be desired. Looking back at it with the whole picture filled in now, and all six Star Wars movies released, its sad that only about 45 minutes of the film is watchable and only half that is actually necessary in terms of the overall plot of the complete Saga. The film can be fun in moments, completely dreadful in others, and darnright nonsense most of the rest of the time. Not the best film in the series, but the few key plot points set up are fun to see, and the final epic Lightsaber duel is still stunning to watch.

A pompus, arrogant and set in his ways Professor is caught off guard by the sudden appearance of his adopted step-brother, the sudden re-appearance of a former student , and the reality that he has been a poor emotional role model to his two children, specifically his daughter. Dennis Quaid, Thomas Hayden-Church, Sarah-Jessica Parker and Ellen Page head an all-star ensemble cast in this dramedy written by Mark Poirier and Directed by Noam Murro.

After an accident leaves him unable to drive himself around, Professor Lawrence Wetherhold (Quaid) must rely on his adopted step-brother, Chuck (Church), to drive him and unwillingly also allow him to stay with him and his daughter, Vanessa (Page). Emotionally closed off, and visibly arrogant, Wetherhold has emersed himself fully in his teaching career since the death of his wife, and pushes both of his children to excel. He also turns off all of his students and fellow faculty members with his superior attitude, as he tries to capture the job of being head of the english department, and also tries in vain to get his first novel published. Wetherhold also begins an awkward romance with a former student, Janet Hartigan (Parker), after being examined by her in the emergency room. Idealizing her father, and also not wanting to share what little time and attention she does get from him, daughter Vanessa sets out to sabotage the would-be romance to no avail, and then turns her attention to Chuck, who suddenly finds himself in the role of emotional caregiver while Lawrence concentrates on his novel and his romance with Janet.

A wonderful ensemble piece, with witty writing and heartfelt, touching dramatic moments as well, Smart People is a delightful surprise to those willing to get emersed in the lives of people who may seem out of the ordinary, but who ultimately suffer very ordinary problems. The chemistry among the four leads is very special and enduring to watch. Thomas Hayden-Church is fantastic in the role of Chuck, and his dry, witty humor is a perfect beat off of Dennis Quaid’s overly serious Professor. Quaid is a true surprise in this movie. Usually playing very lively, very likable characters, Quaid takes the risk of playing a stuck up, arrogant snob, who very quickly in the movie comes off as a total a-hole. What is remarkable is that Quaid is able to subtly inflect the right amount of character and depth in the opening half of the movie to make the audience aware that something is hidden underneath. For those of us willing to take the journey along with him, we see a remarkable character study and a touching turn in Lawrence by the end of film. His often awkward courtship of Janet is both sweet and enduring, as is his strong connection to the memory of his deceased wife.

His chemistry with Sarah-Jessica Parker leaves some to be desired, but also befits the awkward and unsettling nature of the romance itself. Lawrence is Janet’s former Professor, and so we can reasonably assume he is at least 10-20 years older than her, and the differences in that age gap play out well. Also, Janet hasn’t let go of two things since she last saw Lawrence as a college student all those years ago; her schoolgirl crush on him, and the fact that he gave her a “C” on a term paper. In perhaps one of the better moments of the film, Janet brings the paper to there first date and gives it to Lawrence angrily after he has babbled on for 45 minutes and ignored her completly. Lawrence, in his arrogant way, smiles and sasses back to Janet. He takes the paper home, and humerously changes the grade from a “C” to a “B-” and then moments later back to the original “C.” It is a small scene, but one that encompases the lengths in which Lawrence will need to grow to not only win over Janet, but his children and his students as well.

Ellen Page (of Juno acclaim) is also very fun to watch in this movie, and she does inject the same lovable sarcasm, wit and hints of vulnerability she did into the Juno character last year. That is both refreshing and also somewhat disappointing at the same time. It can be refreshing, in that, she does seem like Juno in another movie, but its also disappointing that she played the parts so similar to one another. I do think it works in this film, but would hope to see something new from her in the future, as she is a fabulous actress, and the script offers her character alot to do in this film. Her character, Vanessa, in some ways, is the opposite of the widowed father played by Quaid. Where Lawrence becomes a likable character by the end, Vanessa does take a few unlikable turns in her attempts for attention and rebellion, but all of them are played quite well by Page. In particular, her relationship to the Chuck character becomes quickly out of control of disturbing, and becomes perhaps the only subplot in the film you may find yourself wishing would conclude itself faster than others.

Ultimately, the film is a fun story. The main characters learn things, and evolve and its fun to see the Lawrence character lose alot of his arrogance and his assumptions about the masses by the end. The film is about Smart People, but is really just a movie about all of us, and the choices we face and the constant ability to redeem ourselves in the eyes of those around us and in our own eyes. We all learn the same tough lessons these characters learn, and simply put…thats why the movie is so watchable. Quaids character, in particular, becomes so identifiable, because he is so set in his ways and in his thinking, and when the Janet character begins to shatter those preconceptions or to challenge them, we see him react much in the same way we all do. We could all only hope to have such perserverance and such lucky results as Lawrence.

I want my money back. 

Worse yet…I want my Mummy back.

Worse even still? I didn’t pay to see the damn movie in the first place. Nope. I had one of the moviemoney deals where you buy a DVD and get a ticket to a movie and so I checked it out…and I still want my money back. I know, I know. I just explained how I didn’t even pay to see it to begin with, but you know what? I demand some sort of compensation for the pile of crap I just witnessed and endured on a perfectly sunny afternoon. Maybe they could figure out how much gas I used and give me a gas card? Might be worth a shot…hmmm, note to self: look into that, but don’t get your hopes up. Ok. Moving on…

I don’t even know where to begin trying to pinpoint exactly where this one went wrong. So much of it is utter rubbish, infact about 98% of it, that its hard to think clearly about it and try to put it into words. So, I will start at the beginning. For starters, Mummy and Mummy Returns Director Stephen Summers did not sign on for this film. Wiether that was his idea or Universal’s, I don’t know per say, but either way, that’s been a red flag for me since I first heard about this a year or so ago. Secondly, a major cast member chose not to return either, and Thirdly, it has nothing to do with the overall plotline of the first two films. I know what you’re thinking: where would they go with the Imhotep character after the conclusion of Returns? That’s the thing, there is nowhere to go with it, and really nowhere interesting to go with the O’Connell’s when the big guy ain’t in the picture anymore. The storyline was concluded. Also: A hero is only as interesting as his villian, and Imhotep was interesting…at least in the first film, and there was still story to tell in the second, and so the cheesiness of that film can be forgiven for the sake of entertainment. To a degree anyways, and yet that second film was a far cry from the greatness of its 1999 predecesor.

But this? My god. So many things had me shaking my head and groaning, yes groaning, in my seat and looking at my watch as I tried hard to fight the urge to just walk out. Afterall, as I said, I didn’t even pay for the thing, but I had hope that new Director Rob Cohen would get his sea-legs under him and turn it around. I was dead wrong.

The story for this third Mummy adventure centers around Brendan Frasier and company, who all return (sort of) as swashbuckling heroes for another go-around fighting the undead, this time they travel to China and are tasked with stopping the unearthed mummy of Emperor Han (Jet Li), a dark overlord with shape shifting abilities and who is also at the head of a gigantic army of undead warriors, bent of conquering the world. Han is cursed by Zi Juan (Michelle Yeoh), an oracle whom Han has his sights set on, but who falls for his best General instead. Like the previous two films, we get all of this in an exhausting backstory in the opening ten minutes of the film. We then flash forward to Rick O’ Connell (Frasier) bored to death trying to learn fly-fishing while his wife, Evelyn (recasted in the form of Maria Bello…more on her later), reads aloud her tales from the previous two films in book form, apparently having become a successful writer in the 13+ years since the previous film. The two lovers are also seemingly bored with one another when danger isn’t lurking about and the two go thru the motions of there lives and marriage.

Just how do the O’Connell’s, bored to death in England, end up mixing it up with evil undead chinese baddies? Well, that’s just one of many stupid plotpoints in a movie filled with them. It seems that the O’Connell’s are lured from a “promise to one another” to live the quiet life by the simplest of crusades for the British government. All they need to do is bring this super shiny thingamabob to Shanghai, where conviently there son, Alex (Luke Ford), has brought his recent find, naturally the entombed cursed emperor, and further still is also where Jonathan (John Hannah) has a night club. Why he’s in Shanghai isn’t explained and apparently not that important, probably to hide how obvious the badly written script really is. After the emperor is released (in ridiculous fashion), an adorable cutie-pie assassin (Isabella Leong) helps the O’Connell’s and just so happens to have the one weapon forged that can kill him, and also knows every step he has to take to awaken his evil undead army. Convient? Or just bad writing? I tend to weigh on the later.

Other tiny details of the time elapsed between films come to light, and it honestly starts feeling like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, from earlier this summer, for awhile, with its specifics about the characters and whats happened. Lets examine them a minute, so you catch my meaning; The O’Connell’s apparently were involved with the British government doing espionage during World War II, and Rick has a brief war flashback while looking at an old uniform in the closet. The now young adult and grown up son is estrainged from the father, yet has run off following his footsteps uncovering forbidden undead nasties in the sands of China. So much of this screams Indy and Mutt from Crystal Skull that I was actually offended. I always realized, and appreciated infact, that Rick was a poor man’s Indiana Jones, but this is too much.

Then its made worse by the horrible new cast members in key roles, none of whom have any identifiable chemistry with Frasier. Luke Ford steps into the grown up shoes of Alex O’Connell, and has to suffer the baggage of how annoying the younger version of the character was in the previous film. It’s a lot like Hayden Christiansen stepping in and trying to make good on Jake Lloyd’s performance as a younger Anakin in Phantom Menace. Unlike Christiansen, Ford fails in all aspects, and wiether its the character, the writing, the acting, or all three, it doesn’t help anything. Ford is horribly unlikable in the entire film, so much so, I was rooting for his demise in the finale. Worse is the recasting of Evelyn. Given a choice between a major character in a franchise I love being recasted or simply written away, I will always take writting them away. Don’t get me wrong, Maria Bello is a fabulous actress, but not in this film. Again, she may be okay, but its up against the wonderfully nuianced performance of Rachel Weisz in the previous films and the amazing and romantic chemistry she had with Brendan Frasier. Bello comes off a bit sexier than Weisz, at times, but her horribly bad british accent got on my nerves quickly. Frasier himself even seems bored and to be going thru the motions in this film.

As for the Asian invasion, Michelle Yeoh is decent, but not in the film much, and Jet Li continues his knack for helping to bury once very good film franchises (Lethal Weapon 4, anyone?). Neither of them are good in the film, and most of Jet Li’s martial arts are done via CGI in the form of monsters or stone. As for them fighting? Don’t hold your breath. They do fight…for about nine seconds. Aside from that, and the badly written script, plently of other things will ruffle your feathers and make you wish they served a nice hard vodka martini during the film. By the end of the film you will witness a horribly bad CGI transformation sequence of Jet Li into stone, blatantly bad homages to Temple of Doom when the O’Connell’s visit Jonathan’s club (nevermind the name of the club), a very bad resurrection sequence followed by an even worse chase sequence in the streets of Shanghai, a plane land on the edge of an ice cliff at a 90 degree angle and then magically fall back on its wheels, a somewhat cute chinese girl begin speaking in jibberish to call Yeti’s to the groups aide and then watch one of them kick a Chinese soldier between two stone pillars while another Yeti makes the referee signal for “it’s good!”, see the group find the entrance to Shangralai in about 5 seconds because one of them is hurt and needs some magic juice to help them recover, and about a million other really ridiculously stupid things that band-aids the films plot along scene-by-scene.

Perhaps the worse thing about the movie is that it didn’t need to be made. The story was wrapped up (no pun intended) in the second film, and this is really just another studio wanting to cash in on a franchise’s past success at the box office. That alone is enough to hate this film, nevermind how bad it actually is, that and the fact that it’s so bad that it almost…almost deminishes my love for the first two films as a result. Its that bad, and for that, there really is no excuse. So, I am forced to say it again…

..I want my money back.

“21″ tells the true story of an MIT professor (Kevin Spacey) who recruits six students and then trains them to count cards and take Vegas for millions in cash. The film is Directed by Robert Luketic and the screenplay was adapted by Peter Steinfeld and Allan Loeb, based off the book written by Ben Mezrich.

Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess) is a brilliant 4.0 student finishing his final semester at MIT, and who has been accepted into Harvard Medical school. One problem: unless he can either write a glowing essay that makes his story stand out from the 70+ other students applying for the same free-ride scholarship he has, OR, he can come up with $300,000 in tuition, his dreams will go up in smoke. After impressing his new professor, Micky Rosa (Spacey), Ben is invited to a secret meeting with five other MIT students, where Rosa is teaching them to beat Vegas and earn millions by counting cards and winning at blackjack. At first Ben isn’t swayed to join the squad, but the very same girl he’s been crushing on, Jill Taylor (Kate Bosworth), also happens to be on the team and uses her feminine persuasions to convince Ben to join. At first Ben does succeed at card counting, and earns himself and his teammates thousands, and also vows to quit after he has secured his Harvard tuition money. However, Ben soon becomes addicted to winning and finds he can’t easily walk away. Meanwhile, an old nemesis of Rosa’s, Cole Williams (Lawrence Fishburne), runs an older casino security program, takes notice of Ben and his team, and moves in to catch them.

Moving along at a painfully, and dreadfully slow pace, “21″ is a perfect example of why casino and card game movies don’t usually work. Unless, of course, you’re James Bond or Daniel Ocean, and even then the pacing and timing needs to be flawless or what you get is a mess of a movie trying to employ every fancy camera trick it can to instill some sort of drama and suspense to a movie that has neither. For starters, none of the characters in this movie seem very interesting and none of the actors playing them seem believable in there roles as brilliant MIT students out for a weekend score in Vegas. Jim Sturgess, who was wonderful in Across the Universe, never striked me as anything his character was meant to be; smart, desperate and cunning. Instead he came off as the latest pretty-boy to badly ruin a movie and drag other young pretty faces down with him. The first large chunk of the movie tries hard to connect the audience with Ben, but I never felt it, and as a result I could care less what happens to him in Vegas, wiether or not he gets the hot girl, or if he is alienating his friends back at MIT. That is what happens when the main character doesn’t work. Sturgess also has a painfully bad narration throughout the entire film, which is always a sign of bad writing. 

The supporting cast is also terrible in the film, even veterans Spacey and Fishburne, who both just seem lost and there to collect a paycheck, have badly written characters that not even they know what to do with. Whats worse is the two veterans have the two most cliche characters to hit the big screen in ages. Is there anyone who doesn’t see where both of there characters are going right away? The other MIT cardplayers all come off as amateurish and unlikable, even Bosworth, who has been in many films and is usually good in them, yet was reduced to the “hot smart girl” who seduces the “shy smart guy” and in a terribly uninteresting manner. Even the premise of the film would seem flawed if it wasn’t a factual story. One would only hope that living it was a lot more exciting than what Hollywood has done with the tale.

Every trick of the camera, every note of annoying hip-hoppish music to try an inject a sense of pace and urgency and every CGI enhanced “thought” by Ben when he is counting the cards all make the movie seem more muddled, boring and slow. Honestly, it seemed like they realized they only had an hour or so worth of story, so they dragged out Ben’s intro at MIT and gave us the annoying subplot with the 2-0-9 competition with his geek friends and showed as many card games as possible to fill the time. I could easily have cut about 45 minutes out of this movie, which wouldn’t have made it any better, but at least it would’ve been mercifully shorter.

The popular television show finally returns on the big screen for its second full-length feature, the first since 1998. Series creator, writer and producer Chris Carter handles all those jobs, as well as Director of the new tale featuring now ex-FBI Agents Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) and Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson), brought in by the FBI to help lend insight to a new “X-file” type of case.

An FBI agent goes missing, and an ex-priest and ex-pediaphile, Father Joseph (Billy Connolly), seems to be the only person with any information. The problem is that he appears to have no direct connection with the case or victim and claims his knowledge is via psychic images from God. After Joseph leads them to a severed arm, but no body and no other leads, Agent Dakota Whitney (Amanda Peet) sends her partner, Agent Mosley Drummy (Alvin “Xzibit” Joiner), to approach Scully at her job in a catholic hospital, where she is searching for answers to cure a young boy (Marco Niccoli) who has a terminable brain disease. Drummy asks Scully to locate Mulder, who has been on the run, and in hiding since the conclusion of the X-Files T.V. show in 2002. Scully confronts Mulder with the particulars of the case, and the FBI’s promise to drop all charges against him in return for his help. Mulder agrees, but only on the condition that Scully help him on the case.

Any fan of the cult-hit T.V. show will no doubt be curious to see there favorite agents on the big screen (or any screen) for the first time in six years, and will no doubt be curious to hear whats been going on since the dismal series finale that saw Mulder flee into exile and Scully alone and out of the FBI. Some back story, some details and some room to catch up with our two heroes. Any fan (myself included) expecting that will be disappointed. The film opens like any other episode of the show, with the familar type font on the bottom of the screen telling us when and where we are as we see the horrifying images of the FBI agent being assaulted mixed with Father Joseph leading a squad of agents across a frozen lake in search for her. After only finding a severed arm, the film cuts to Scully, fighting for answers to cure a patient when she is confronted by Drummy and sent off to find Mulder. We immediately cut to a run-down shack in the middle of nowhere, and a bearded Mulder cuts out newspaper clippings of bizzare news stories and litters his walls with them. We see familiar images of Mulder’s sister’s picture, his tray of sunflower seeds and his iconic “I want to believe” poster featuring a blurry flying saucer over a tree-line. Yet, after a brief discussion, both our agents are back on the case with little time spent on playing catch up for the audience.

Instead, Chris Carter chooses to rush things along and get Mulder and Scully deep into the case as little tidbits of information are given in one of the many small quiet moments in the film. The films title, I Want to Believe, is of course an homage to Mulder’s poster and a statement that can be associated with his character, as the many years on the X-Files and in exile after them haven’t faultered his belief in the unknown or the fantastic. The title also, quite poignantly, can be associated with Scully, who wants to believe in Mulder, but who is also having a deep crisis of faith in the daily dealings of her new job as a doctor in a catholic run hospital. The Father Joseph character affects both heroes in different ways; for Mulder its a way back into his old life and a way to continue his search for proof that the unexplained is explainable, thus helping him maybe come to terms with his sisters abduction and death; for Scully, he represents her faith and all that can be wrong with it and proof that God works in unflattering ways sometimes.

After setting up the tone of the story and the hurried reintroductions out of the way, the second half of the film becomes dreary, moody, confused (even to fans), painfully slow, and has the same problems the more recent Star Trek films have had, and thats that it seems much too episodic, too much like the new weekly episode of the show. Only not as good as half of them. New viewers, not familiar with the show at all, will most likely be bored and confused when it comes to the character moments, whereas the fans will just be disappointed that Carter didn’t do more. I mean seriously now…Fans waited for this? THIS?!? Fox and Carter seem to have aimed low and produced as simple a thriller and simple an excuse for returning these beloved characters to the screen as possible. But where are the X-file-y stuff?? Nowhere in the film is there aliens, monsters, black oil or government conspiracies. Instead, the film has a bewilderingly depressing and unspectacular plotline that takes its sweet time in solving. Nothing more than the characters and theme music directly ties this film to the beloved series at all, other than showing where they’ve gone since.  The only two continuing main storylines discussed at length is Mulder’s obsession with his sister’s abduction and the troubled, on and off romance between the two former partners.

When presenting an audience with a big screen story, you’re somewhat promising them that the story you’re about to tell them is worth $10 and the time to see it, and that it was also worth you putting it on the silver screen, as opposed to just T.V. Unfortunately, I Want to Believe is nothing more than  just a less than mediocre two-part episode of the show. As even just a run-of-the-mill thriller, the movie isn’t terribly good and not all that suspensefull at all. The character moments are good, but too few and too rushed for the sake of the “episode” plotline. Another cast member does make a nice cameo for the final ten minutes or so, which was fun to see, but by that time the film has become nothing but a dismal disappointment. And like the previous film and the ending of the T.V. show, the film closes with more questions than answers, but does seem to try and set-up the possibility that the characters could return. Mostly (again, as a fan), I wish Carter would’ve just left well enough alone.

Written and Directed by Michael Lichtenstein, this independent horror-thriller has the unique premise of a willfully strong teen girl discovering something is very genetically different from her and other girls when she becomes sexually active, much to the dismay of several young men trying to take advantage of her.

Young, blonde, sweet and innocent teen Dawn (Jess Weixler) grows up in an idealic suburban neighborhood with her sick mother, step-father and step-brother (John Hensley). She volunteers her time preaching abstinence to young kids and other teens, and is a leader of a chastity movement of sorts, even wearing a promise ring stating to herself, and others, that she will wait until her knight in shining armor comes along and proposes before giving up her “special gift.” That is until she meets Tobey (Hale Appleman), a seemingly nice young boy who is also supposedly saving himself for marriage. When the two young teens begin a romance, there hormones spin out of control. Dawn tries to stop anything from happening, but Tobey forces himself on her and to horrifying consequences. Dawn is also horrified to learn the truth of what happens. That she has Vagina-Dentala, simply put: her vagina has a defense mechanism…teeth, and it defends itself violently against all phalic shaped invaders. As Dawn begins to get more curious about her body, she also investigates the real-life myths surrounding the phenomenon.

From it’s opening “I’ll show you mine if you show me yours” twist in the family pool, to the over-the-top chastity message, to the squimish, make any guy in the audience feel violently ill gore via castrations, Teeth is a true first in the horror field. It intelligently flips the usual formula in the genre right on its head. Typically the young, attractive female is cornered into any number of situations that require her to be exploited, humiliated, raped or killed. In this film, the female turns the tables on the unsuspecting men, and also feeds not only on the real-life myths on the subject, but also the basic male fears of castration. Never before has a movie so gleefully dismembered males in such a gorey and violent manner. The film can definetly seem anti-male, as nearly every male in the movie, especially the seemingly nice ones, are all painted as violent, sex craved maniacs devoid of sympathy or emotion. Between Dawn’s step-brother obsessing over her, “nice guys” taking advantage of her, raping her, drugging and fondling her, and doctors full fisting her on the exam station, its no wonder her vagina defends itself.

Aside from the gore, which is insanely in-your-face and gruesome, the movie does have its flaws. The idealic suburban locales and the 1950’s style chastity clubs are a little unbelievable and hard to connect with in a modern horror movie. I did like that the movie opens with the panoramic view of the perfect little neighborhood with the huge  nuclear power plant behind, which led to me to immediately think that radiation would play apart in Dawn’s condition, but the plant was apparently there for no reason what-so-ever, which was disappointing, as it is featured in several shots in the film. Also, the film does meander along at a very slow pace for the first 40 minutes or so before the first shocking castration. Following that, Dawn’s story goes in wierd directions and never quite seemed to capitalize on what it had going for it. Dawn spends the final two acts of the film wandering around and investigating her condition as random things occur around her. The whole hospital plot with the sick mom was very confusing in the final act, and the inevitable “confrontation” with her step-brother is way too choreographed.

However, Jess Weixler does a respectable job in the lead role of Dawn, and her “gee-whiz” pure and innocent schoolgirl attitude does help to add to the irony of everything going on. Her journey is a simple, and predictable one, but an enjoyable one to watch. The rest of the cast floats in and out of the movie mostly, with exception of the step-brother role, who is played with no redemptive qualities at all by Hensley. As a horror movie, it was worth the viewing, but not one that needs to be re-watched and not one worth owning by any means. While the gore was top-notch, the obvious message of the movie is ultimately blown with such a ridiculous premise as vagina with teeth, but I doubt that Lichtenstein was honestly trying to preach to younger viewers. Its ironic that most of the viewers of this movie will be younger males, hoping for female nudity from Weixler. If thats the case, they won’t be completley disappointed, but the nudity ratio overwhelmingly swings towards the males, by about a 5 to 1 margain. Sorry boys. Like everything else, this movie is not your typical horror film exploiting females and flashing T&A in every third scene, its the exact opposite actually.

Overall, a well-done and original horror film that in ways satires horror films. Worth checking out, but its definetly no classic or anything.

Director Kimberly Peirce and MTV productions tell the story of a decorated American soldier (Ryan Phillippe) who returns after completing his tour in Iraq only to find out he’s being immorally “stop-lossed” by the President and the Army and being forcefully shipped back to Iraq.

After witnessing the horrors of war and surviving a tour in Iraq, boyhood friends Brandon King (Phillippe) and Steve Shriver (Channing Tatum) return home to Texas, along with others from there unit on leave, including mind-warped Tommy (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). An emotional return home turns into a nightmare, however, when Brandon is told he is being “stop-lossed” by the President and the Army, and forcefully shipped back to Iraq. When Brandon refuses to go, screaming to anyone who will listen that it is wrong and immoral, his commanding officer (Timothy Olyphant) tries to have him put in the stockade until his unit reships out. Brandon flees, and wants to make an attempt to appeal his case before a Texas senator (Josef Sommer) in Washington, D.C. Steve is having problems readjusting to civilian life, and is considering rejoining and enlisting in sniper school. His alienated fiancee, Michelle (Abbie Cornish) agrees to help Brandon get to D.C. and friction arises between the three life-long friends, as they each fight for what they believe in and decide what best to do. 

The opening scenes of Stop-Loss will remind you of Black Hawk Down. The high emphasis on the emotionally warped soldier returning home from war will no doubt conjure images of every Vietnam war movie you’ve ever seen, and the scenes of Texas collegiates drinking and swearing will remind you of Varsity Blues, another MTV produced film. Director Peirce has obviously seen all of those movies, especially the Vietnam ones and tries to use every trick in the book in her movie about soldiers fighting an injust war and being treated unfairly by a dictator-like President in Washington. Honestly, if the opening scenes didn’t take place in Iraq and it wasn’t mentioned constantly, you’d forget it was a movie about the modern Iraq war and think you were watching another Vietnam flick.

Thats not always a bad thing,  however, and when the blatant attempts to make the audience feel bitter, angry and empowered towards the war work, they do work very well and effectively. Much of the time though, the movie comes off as childish and unoriginal. Phillippe does a respectable job in the lead role and commands attention on the screen, but he is also surrounded by inempt actors, obviosuly hired by MTV for there looks or TV star status, rather than there acting abilities. It’s appatent the hope was to bring in the younger generation of movie-goers with the eye candy on screen and just enough skin in the previews to bring them in and spoonfeed the subject matter to them. But aside from Phillippe, they all seem like just that, eyecandy. Cornish, for example, seems constantly outmatched and outacted by Phillippe, whom she spends most of her onscreen time with, and it really hurts her character. Tatum mostly comes off as a pretty-boy, brooding under his macho physique for no apparent reason other than he wants to shoot more stuff. Gordon-Levitt at times plays Tommy well, but mostly only envokes images from  The Deer Hunter and Christopher Walkin’s performance in a similar character, which would be a good thing, except that Levitt is no Walkin and this movie is no Deer Hunter.

Other things that bothered me was the frequent use of abnoxiously annoying hip-hop music behind battle scenes or flashbacks. I know MTV had a hand in this thing, but couldn’t we hire a composer? It was very distracting, and I eventually started muting the TV each time one of those scenes began. I know what the movie was trying to accomplish, and I more or less assume that many such “Iraq is the new Vietnam” movies will continue to be made by a new generation of filmmakers trying to do what a generation of filmmakers did in the 1970s and 1980s during and after that war. However, while similarities exist between them, writers and directors should stop emposing there opinions and comparisons on the rest of us. A great war movie, or movie about the effects of war, will appear senseless, yet speak to people in different ways. Director Peirce leaves no wiggle room in her war movie. It’s her way or the highway. You either agree with everything or not. Either way, the ending seems to take a left turn out of nowhere and seems like a gutless bait and switch by the filmmakers, who campaign towards one set of ideals for most of the two hours and suddenly veer to another for the final five minutes.

Believe the hype.

Believe every second and every word of every overwhelmingly positive review you’ve no doubt read or heard by now on The Dark Knight, and then multiply that by the biggest number that comes to your head, and even then you won’t have a clear idea of just how good and surprising this film really is.

Now, far better than me have been attempting to thrust the film into an unreachable realm of expectation, but let’s face it; the expectations on this film are so high and the buzz around the film so unrelenting, that no movie could hope to satisfy all those seemingly unsatisiable expectations, could it? Well, few movies have stepped up the way Christopher Nolan’s second Batman film does. Let me be clear when I say that, FEW movies have ever, or will ever live up to every ounze of unfair expectation befallen onto it, but The Dark Knight does. And it’s a unique buzz to be sure. It’s not just the rabid comic book geeks (like myself), or the film lovers or merely casual fans of the first film, but also a legion of supporters for the late and great Heath Ledger. Gone well before his time, the actor’s performance as the Joker launched into legendary status within weeks of the actor’s tragic death, but I am willing to bet that had Ledger not passed away, that it would have garnished the same reaction. We’ve all been feasting on the images and trailers and poster art of Ledger’s dark and twisted portrayal of Batman’s arch-nemesis, and as good as it looked in those, its even better on screen.

The plot, of course, follows the Joker’s exploits from the concluding scene of Batman Begins (2005), as he slowly builds a reputation for anarchy in Gotham City. Batman (Christian Bale) and Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) have been tracking him down, and are joined by the new and ambitious District Attorney, Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhardt). Dent is Gotham’s white knight, the city’s true hero and one unselfishly willing to do what it takes to stop the spread of crime and terror in Gotham. The three men combine resources to do a respectable job of cleaning up Gotham’s streets until the Joker comes along and throws a serious monkey-wrench into there plans and begins a psychological assault on the citizens of Gotham, the police, the D.A. and Batman himself, promising to keep killing high profile targets until Batman turns himself in and takes off his mask. His methods are highly effective, and soon the people of Gotham, ignoring all the good Batman has done them, now call for his head on a platter, willing to give in to the Joker’s demands.

But words don’t describe the emotion you will feel while watching this film. The raw emotion will have you buzzing along with the high octane action sequences, laughing at the uncomfortable humor and squirming in your seat, often all in the same scene. Nothing can prepare you for what awaits you when you sit down to watch this movie.

Nothing.

Nolan has crafted the newest masterpiece of our time (sitting side by side with Peter Jackson’s “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy). It’s quite simply one of those once in a blue moon films that comes along at the perfect time and knocks everyone, and I mean everyone, geeks and all, on there collective asses and bends them to its unrelenting ass-kickery and the gut wrenching drama within it. This is more than a Batman movie, more than a comic book movie and more than any other term you want to apply to it.

It’s a compelling and emotional character drama, a wonderfully crafted crime drama on par with the best Hollywood has ever offered, a film about modern terrorism and the price of fighting it in a post 9/11 world and also a wonderful superhero movie. When I say that it comes along at the perfect time, its because I don’t think the pre-9/11 world would’ve accepted this film, at all and especially not as a superhero film, but the world is ready for it now and thats what fuels the fires, so to speak, and what makes the movie so gutwrenching to watch at times. It’s a film completely devoid of hope or redemption and it really sets out to just kick us all in the nuts and leave us numb, to which it succeeds greatly in doing. No matter what Batman or the Gotham police do in the film, things get worse. It’s really a comment on today’s society and how easily the frabic of that society, the glue, can come apart when terrorists know exactly where to hit you. It’s a film about terrorism as much as anything…emotional terrorism.

The Joker isn’t scary because he wants to kill a million people. He’s scary because he kills only a few important ones, dramatically so, and knows just how to push the right buttons to get the response he wants and bring the city to its knees, ready to break at the seams. He is a self-proclaimed agent of chaos, spreading the fires of his soul to the streets of Gotham for no other reason than he wants to do so. He is crazy, psychotic and scary. He is also by far the smartest guy in the room, or any room, and has this shit planned out step by step and is way ahead of the Gotham police, Harvey Dent and Batman the entire film. He’s so far ahead of everyone else, and the audience for that matter, that things seemingly unrelated to Joker at all come back and are suddenly apart of his longterm plan, and not in a “out of nowhere” way either, in a “holy shit! that crafty mother f—er!” way. Joker isn’t just a comic book villian or the “bad guy”, he is pure unadulterated evil, and Ledger plays him as such. Where film villians, especially those in comic book films (i.e.: The Green Goblin) often come off as overplayed and cheesy, Ledger’s Joker is a breath of terrifying fresh air.  The Joker comes off as a wild animal that has been caged up for months, if not years, foaming at the mouth, twitching his tongue and building up the anger and hate and now wants to take it out on you, me and everyone else. And thats exactly how he should be. As Alfred (Michael Caine) points out to Bruce, “Sometimes, people just want to see the world burn.”

Not so surprisingly, Jack Nicholson’s portrayal of the Joker in Tim Burton’s Batman film in 1989 now comes off as clownish and cheesy and well…Ledger’s Joker would kick his ass in a second. Unlike that film, the Nolan brothers (who wrote the screenplay for Knight) don’t bother with a useless origin story for Joker, he simply shows up and starts spreading anarchy in all directions, blowing things up, killing high level officials, and upping the anty with each move he makes. And like all great devilish characters, we sorta root for him, in a way, and we unwillingly start to identify with him each time he tells someone a shocking narrative from his past. The thing to remember about the character, as many writers have always said about the Joker and its certainly the case in The Dark Knight, is that when he tells a joke, he really should be the only person in the room laughing. Perhaps one of the few moments in the film where we’re allowed to laugh with the Joker, is in one of the first scenes, when he performs a gastly “magic trick” in such a casual, unflinching way that we can’t help but uncomfortably laugh. Simply put: Heath Ledger’s performance is something you couldn’t expect, and haven’t seen before and will never see again. It’s pitch-perfect. It’s so perfect in fact, that you didn’t know it before you saw it, but afterwards you’re like “wow, that was the Joker!”

As much as Joker does steal the show, the film is really Harvey Dent’s, it’s his story as much as Batman’s, and just as Nolan effectively made you forget the first film was a Batman movie for the first hour (with the Bruce Wayne origin tale), he makes you forget what you know will eventually happen to Dent in this movie. We know the story, we know who he becomes, but its done so much more tragically in this telling than ever before. It’s like a greek tragedy really, and Aaron Eckhardt knocks his performance as Dent out of the park every bit as much as Ledger does with the Joker. Dent represents the everyman, the blue collar worker and he stands up and fights for Gotham and makes a difference, so much so that he even makes Bruce believe in him and that the city may no longer need Batman. By the time the Joker’s boobytrap does disfigure Harvey you’re invested in him, and you believe in him as much as Gotham does and well…you feel bad for the guy. The physical transformation of Harvey into Two-Face is disturbing, unsettling and gruesome and Eckhardt plays the change very well.

It’s the eerie line the film often crosses, that makes you feel like you’re actually watching the six o’clock news, that makes the film so powerful and so effective. Even when the good guys feel like they’re winning and doing real good, it actually turns out that Joker just let them think that and turns everything on its head again. We may not understand why the Joker is doing what he’s doing (nor should we), but we quickly understand that noone in the film, not even Batman is safe. There are a fair number of notable and surprising deaths in the movie. Through it all, the Joker is unrelenting, as the film itself is also, and just keeps coming at you. The Joker has engaged Batman in a psychological war of wits, and for the entire film, he wins it. His goal in the end, of course, is not to force Batman to turn himself in, but cross the lines he swore never to cross, and each small defeat Batman suffers in the film (and there are plenty) makes him tread dangerously close to that line of becoming nothing more than a vigilante.

Never before has a superhero movie shown such a fallen hero as Batman in this second film from Christopher Nolan. Batman fails in almost every conceivable way during the course of the movie. Every choice he makes is either only a temporary save or effectively spells doom for someone else. It’s alot like the war on terror when you sit back and think about it, and its what the Joker represents. Anarchy. A world without rules. Why terrorists are so effective is they know how to hurt the rest of us. As the Joker points out in the movie, the reason he can’t lose, despite all of Batmans intelligence and strength, is because he (the Joker) has no rules, no codes and no morals. The rest of us and Batman do. The only choice is to give in, thus letting the terrorists win, or keep fighting them and creating more in the process. Its lose-lose. Again, a lot like watching the news nowadays when you think about it.

Not since the first “Lord of the Rings” movie in 2001 has a genre-event film so poignantly echoed the sentiment and realities of the post 9/11 world as well as the events within The Dark Knight. Batman, despite popular opinion (still largely based on the horribly unredeemable 1960’s TV show), has always been like the rogue cop, willing to go out to the edge and do the dirty work noone else can, but while he may teater on the edge of the line, he never crosses it. This film unflinchingly displays the criminal and terrorist reaction to the world fighting back, as was beautifully set up in the final speech from Gordon on the rooftop to conclude Batman Begins. The criminals won’t back down without a fight, and we get caught up in an eye for an eye war with them, we get dragged down to there level. By the end of the film, Batman (and the audience) gets as close as possible to that breaking point and the rules of Nolan’s epic Batman franchise once again shift to the left quite unexpectedly.

As I said earlier, the film is utterly devoid of hope or redemption and will leave you feeling a bit like you just watched your dog get run over and then got kicked in the nuts on a cold January afternoon in a snowstorm. It’s a calculated struggle of good versus evil and the meaning of both. It’s a portrait of the global landscape today and the constant feeling of helplessness at the hands of would-be terrorists. And its simply one of the finest crime drama’s ever made that also happens to be a superhero movie. And in the world we now live in, why would we want anything else from our superhero movies? The Dark Knight is not only the greatest superhero film to date, but easily the best film of 2008 and quite possibly one of the best films ever made.

10 Movies I recently watched, and didn’t feel compelled to write full reviews for, either because I didn’t finish the movie and couldn’t write a full and fair review or because the movie was older and didn’t necessarily need a review, especially in a few cases where I watched them as “catch up” for the pending sequels this summer.

None of these are full reviews, and in the case of the 4 movies listed that I didn’t even finish, it was because they didn’t hold my attention after an extended period of time. I must clarify, that as a film lover, a writer and graphic artist, I usually give films at least 30 minutes to grab me (I call it “the 30 minute rule“), and I try to finish every movie I take the time to start watching, but in some cases the film just is either too boring or just that bad and I don’t feel compelled to finish them. As they’re based on incomplete viewings, the grade suggested is obviously not 100% educated on the entire film.

1. “Batman Begins” (2005)

The highly praised and highly successful relaunch of the once dead Batman film franchise by Director Christopher Nolan, and featuring an all-star cast, including; Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine and Katie Holmes. By far the most faithful screen adaptation of the often dark and dreary comic books, and setting the stage for what should be an even better sequel. Grade: A+

2. “Hellboy” (2004)

The first film in the often fun Hellboy franchise doesn’t quite have the visual style or weight of the just released sequel, and much of that blame goes to the studio for not giving visonary Director Guillermo Del Toro more creative control and forcing the insertion of the most blatant studio character in all of comic book movie-dom, the Agent Myers character. That aside, the film is still highly enjoyable, even if it does get bogged down with several heavy subplots from time to time. Grade: B-

3. “Ressurecting the Champ” (2007)

A film about an ambitious sports beat writer (Josh Hartnett) who finds a washed up boxer (Samuel L. Jackson) living on the streets and allows himself to believe a fantastic lie, publishes it and must face the consequences of those actions. Love Josh Hartnett. Love Sam Jackson. Didn’t like this movie too much. Very predictable writing and not alot of “oomph” to the drama. Grade: C-

4. “The Muppet Movie” (1979)

I picked up the 50th anniversary DVD for cheap recently out of a sense of nostalgia and watched this for the first time since I was kid and loved every second of it. Great characters, great fun and great songs. Grade: B+

5. “Reservation Road: (2007)

After accidently hitting and killing Joquain Phoenix’s young son in his SUV, Benjamin Bratt wrestles with the guilt and torment over what he’s done and the paranoia that he may be caught. Great performance by Jennifer Connely as the grief-striken mother, but aside from that the film was boring, slow and predicatable. Grade: D

6. “Cassandra’s Dream” (2007)

Dreadfully slow, dreadfully bad and dreadful altogether. Easily one of Woody Allen’s worst movies (and he has made a few stinkers in his time), focusing on two brothers (Ewan McGregor and Collin Farell) who agree to kill a key witness for there uncle (Tom Wilkinson) in exchange for much needed cash, and then are torn apart with guilt over what they’ve done. Great ensemble cast. Horrible film. Grade: D-

(the remaining four films were movies that I disliked so much I couldn’t even finish the film…)

7. “The Ruins” (2008)

So…a group of sexy young hollywood actors play a group of really stupid, naive teens who go on vacation in cancoon and then decide to explore the ruins of forbidden myian pyramids and then they are suddenly in over there head and start a series of cliche horror scenes in which they panic, cry and scream at the camera a lot, even though nothing scary is really happening…yeah, I think I’ve seen this type of movie before. A few times, maybe. (Made it about 1 hour and 5 minutes into the film) Grade: Is there a grade lower than “F”?

8. “Charlie Bartlett” (2007)

Self-assured young teen, Charlie Bartlett (Anton Yelchin) is forced to attend public high school after being kicked out of private school. He begins to council kids on there problems and even help supply them with medications. Got bored with this one quickly, even though I love Robert Downey, Jr. (made it about 33 minutes into the film). Grade: F

9. “The Tracey Fragments” (2007)

Juno’s Ellen Paige stars in the title role of Tracey, a warped and self involved teen who lives in a entricate fantasy world within her own mind. She is on the run and looking for her younger brother, whom she supposedly hypnotized into believing he is a dog and who has run away from home. The film is painfully edited into a series of multi-view, multi-screen, disjointed fragments that get old after the first few scenes of the film, yet keep on going as the film progresses. Love Ellen Paige, but couldn’t watch this movie after awhile, nothing redeeming about it all and had no desire to finish it (made it about 45 minutes into the film). Grade: F

10. “The Omega Man” (1971)

After seeing and loving every second of 2007’s I am Legend, I was persuaded to check out a previous film version, starring Charlton Heston in the Will Smith role. Same basic plot exists, only the older film goes in some wierd directions and Heston is hunting the sick people down on purpose in this one. Didn’t hold my attention very long, which I take the blame for, and I couldn’t get into the cheesy make-up effects and really bad ’70s score. I can recognize what they were trying to do, at the time, and Heston is still Heston, but it wasn’t for me (made it about 45 minutes into the film). Grade: D-

Directed by Steven Sawalich, Music Within tells the true story of Richard Pimentel (Ron Livingston), a brilliant public speaker who enlists in Vietnam to help secure enrollment into college, and who loses his hearing in a bomb blast. He returns from the war and finds his true purpose in life; to help disabled Americans find work and he becomes the voice for there cause.

After surviving both a tramatic childhood and Vietnam, brilliant and natural public speaker Richard Pimental returns from the war having lost his hearing. He enters college and teaches himself to lip read and meets Art Honeyman (Michael Sheen), a brilliant genius stuck in a wheelchair with a disfiguring condition called cerebral-palsy, a condition where the person’s brain works normally, but there body doesn’t. After viewing how Art is treated by the students around them, Richard befriends him and they soon meet Christine (Melissa George), a sexually freeminded young woman who falls for Richard. Soon, Richard finds his calling and begins to help other disabled vets find jobs, and then begins to help all Americans with disabilities. Government begins to take notice, and Richard is tasked with writing a handbook for American companies to follow in hiring disabled Americans. Richard eventually travels the country to help major companies and levels of government to train its employers on how to treat the disabled and how to hire them, and it all eventually leads to the inclusion of the disabled Americans act in the early 1990’s.

At once a highly moving, poignant and incredibly well acted film, Music Within will also most likely make even the most callis person feel slightly guilty. The movie’s message is a powerful one, that you can’t treat people differently just because they don’t look like you, and the elegant writing of screenwriters Bret McKinney, Mark Andrew Olson and Kelly Kennemer drives that point home in a very moving and identifiable way. Like women’s rights, the civil rights movement and all the other struggles of the time, it is easy for us today to forget how it was just a few short decades ago, and that if not for people like Richard, a whole group of Americans would have no voice. It’s a story I’m not ashamed to admit I was unaware of, taking it for granted that the disabled Americans act had always been there and I had no idea it was so recent before they finally found that success. I doubt I am alone in that statement, and its why the film is so important and why the fact that its so well done makes it even more remarkable.

The performances by the lead actors also make the movie enjoyable to watch and very inspiring. Ron Livingston’s portrayal of Pimental is extremely well done, and subtly layered in its deepness, playing both his witty, playful and romantic side with Art and Christine and also his passionate drive, anger and ethusiasm while championing his cause. Michael Sheen’s performance as Art is simply phenomonal, and award worthy. He never comes off as cliche, ridiculous or a figure to pitty, as is usually the case when even the best actors play people with disabilities this extreme, instead he comes off a charismatic and brilliant companion to Richard and steals more than one scene in the movie. Completing the leads is Melissa George, who doesn’t seem as comfortable in the movie right away, but grows with her character and eventually has one of the more poignant scenes with Richard near the end of the film on his front steps. It’s a shorter film, and she plays a smaller role within it, but her character does have the biggest change in the film, which (eventually) George plays quite nicely.

Film’s like this often seem like they’re waving a finger at you, trying to make you feel bad, which at times this one will feel that way, but mostly it is just an inspired story of a true American who stood up for what was wrong and changed it. An emotional, heartfelt and compelling drama that is highly recommended.

Barry Manilow’s classic love ballett “Can’t smile without you” blasts thru the halls of the B.P.R.D. (The Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense) as Hellboy (Ron Perlman) and Abe Sapien (Doug Jones) sing along, naturally out of cue, while drinking beers and each brooding over there own special girl. The scene is wonderful, humerous, touching and well…priceless, and if reading that description raised your eyebrow or turned you off a bit, then I’d suggest skipping this movie.

While that particular level of humor is unmatched in the film (or in many others), the film is largely quick-witted and humerous throughout, often even during the fantastically choreographed and highly entertaining action scenes. It’s a film thankfully unrestrained from studio suits, second guessing or backseat directing, as Director Guillermo Del Toro has, by all accounts and appearances, been given full reign and creative control after his worldwide phenomenon Pans Labrynth of a few years back. And thank the film gods for that blessed miracle, and thank the continued success of the comic book film industry (basically holding hollywood on its back these days) for such a wonderous treat as Hellboy II: The Golden Army.

The sequel to 2004’s Hellboy is both a welcome return to favorite characters and a breath of fresh air to a young film franchise that often seemed to suffucate under its own weight during the sometimes fun, sometimes heavy and boring, and sometimes amazing first film. In the sequel, Hellboy and gang find themselves up against Prince Nuada (Luke Goss) and his army of fable creatures set on reclaiming the earth from the human species they feel has grown greedy and heartless, and who have nearly destroyed the once proud planet, forcing there kind into exile. Hellboy must stop Prince Nuada from finding the location of The Golden Army, a large army of monsterious metal creatures who can only be controlled by the unchallenged leader of the realm. To control the army, Nuada will need to reforge an ancient crown that was broken into pieces millenia ago to prevent the army from being awakened ever again. To stop him, his sister, Princess Nuala (Anna Walton) hides the last piece from him and seeks the B.P.R.D.’s help.

Aside from the Army plotline and Prince Nuada, the movie also focuses on Hellboy’s relationship with everyone around him. His relationship with B.P.R.D. head honcho Tom Manning (Jeffrey Tambor) has fizzeled since there reconsciliation at the end of the previous film; His romantic relationship with Liz (Selma Blair) is hitting a rocky point, and she carries a surprise for him thru most of the movie, a delightful surprise the audience is let in on very early on in the film. And then there is Hellboy’s need to draw attention to himself, his need to make everyone like him. As a result of his ego, the B.P.R.D. are outed to the public in the first chunk of the movie, making his rocky relationship with Manning even more so, and forcing the powers that be to send a new agent to take over command of the squad.

That new commander is the highly entertaining Johann Kraus (voiced by Seth Macfarlane), who is basically a robotic body with the spirit of a brilliant scientist living within it. He sounds a bit like the robot on Lost in Space and looks like a bounty hunter from Star Wars, only much more entertaining. Another Star Wars cantina-esche moment is when Hellboy, Kraus and Abe enter a warped version of Diagon Alley from Harry Potter, filled with dozens of amazing creatures, all which put anything in the cantina (or anything else in the films) to shame with its level of detail and originality. At least 6 or 7 times in this movie you will see something and say to yourself: “Boy, I haven’t seen that before.”

It’s simply an enjoyable, fantastic adventure story with great characters and great writing. The character designs and visuals are breathtakingly cool, and Del Toro’s visual flair from Pans Labrynth is once again on full display here. Nowhere have we seen such original, interesting and vibrant looking characters. The result is a scope and believability rarely achieved in such fantasy films like this. Even the action is on a level unachieved in many of its comic book film peers, often adding twists to the excitement, such as Hellboy carrying an infant in one hand while hopping cars, buildings and loading very large guns with the other. Mixed with the same trademark humor from the first film and some strong hints at a possible third film, and it all makes Hellboy II the latest in this summer’s trend of spectacular comic book adaptations. A must see!

In efforts to cash in on the frenzy for the upcoming The Dark Knight, Warner Bros. and D.C. Comics have released the third in the newly established D.C. Universe animated movies on DVD, following the footsteps of last fall’s Superman: Doomsday, and this past winter’s Justice League: The New Frontier. The film takes six different stories (and six very different animation styles) centering on Batman, Lt.Gordon and the status of Gotham City since the events in Batman Begins in 2005. Effectively, the collection of animated shorts is meant both to give viewers insight and knowledge that fills in the “gaps” between the two motion pictures Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Think what the Wachowski brothers did with The Animatrix, filling in the gaps inbetween The Matrix and The Matrix Reloaded, only nowhere near as cool and nowhere near as watchable.

Batman, when you stop and think about it, should be the perfect candidate for Japanese animation, a.k.a. anime, and yet most of the styles represented in Batman:Gotham Knight are terribly unappealing to watch. Sadly, the better styles are often on the less action-filled pieces and just leave you wanting more and wondering about what could have been. Batman is an iconic character, a majestic character and the appeal to his story (when told right) is the darkness of it, the grittiness of Gotham, its criminals and even of Batman himself. Despite popular opinion (much of which is still based on the terribly campy and inaccurate 1960’s T.V. show), Batman is not a happy story. it is a story about a man who loses everything. His parents are murdered in front of his eyes when he is a young child and he turns that helpless rage into something greater. There is a delicate unbalance within Batman, and its why so few screenwriters have captured the character very well. In Gotham Knight, very few of the stories bother to showcase this, or even make much attempt at action. Much of the 74 minute film is talking heads, which works great when its great actors performing it, but not in an animated Batman film, which makes slight attempts to fill us in on the state of things between films, but nothing remarkable occurs, and my guess is anyone skipping this DVD won’t be missing much, if anything at all. For example, nothing is said or mentioned about either Harvey Dent or the Joker, who was set-up in the conclusion of Batman Begins.

Perhaps the greatest disappointment is the collection of great comic book, and film writers responsible for the six stories, who collectively lay one giant egg. Veteran comic book writers Brian Azzarello, Greg Rucka and others turn in stories that seem like they were concieved on the taxi-ride over to the production meeting. David Goyer, co-writer on both Batman Begins and the upcoming The Dark Knight, does provide one of the only two entertaining stories, entitled In Darkness Dwells, focusing on “Killer Croc” and what the Scarecrow has been up to since escaping at the end of Begins. Aside from Goyer’s piece, the only other entertaining short (to me) was the final, much too short, piece introducing a brand new villian named “Deadshot.” The piece also sets up the notion that the crime world is now on the defensive and are beginning to realize they must rid themselves of Batman to restore things to what they used to be. The remaining shorts, varied in animation quality, all just leave you feeling empty and frustrated. All of them are much too short to accomplish any solid storytelling, and the little tidbits of information that may set things up in The Dark Knight don’t make the film worth watching in the slightest.

The only truely great thing is the addition of Kevin Conroy’s voice as Bruce Wayne and Batman in all six shorts. Conroy has been doing the voice of Batman on all the recent animated series’ from D.C. and Warner Bros., including Batman: The Animated Series, Justice League and Batman: Beyond. His familiar tone does ground any longtime fans of Batman and his animated adventures with a sense of comfort, even if the writing and animation around that voice falls short. Ironically, the best things about the DVD (the single disc version anyhow) is the emmaculate digital preview for The Dark Knight and the 10 minute sneak peek at 2009’s Wonder Woman animated movie, which looks extremely fun, accurate and well casted. Too bad none of the those qualities can be used to describe Gotham Knight, a total letdown and complete waste of time…even for the hardcore fan. Thankfully, The Dark Knight looks to be a true masterpiece for both critics, fans and casual movie-goers and the memory of Gotham Knight will be lost and forgotten quickly.

A dark comedy written and directed by Martin McDonagh, In Bruges stars Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson as two hit men who are sent to lay low in Bruges, Belgium after a botched assasination job for there boss, Harry (Ralph Fiennes).

After accidently killing a child, Ray (Farrell) and his partner Ken (Gleeson) are sent to the medieval city of Bruges to lay low while the heat wears down and there boss, Harry can figure out what to do with them. Ray, wracked with guilt over what he’s done, is immediately turned off by Bruges and complains about being stuck there, while Ken quickly discovers all the hidden tourist treasures in the ancient city. The two men not only differ on Bruges itself, but religion, death and the meaning behind the great mysteries of life as they spend time together.

While Ken continues to find fascination with the ancient city, Ray continues to be bored, that is until he meets Chloe (Clemence Posey), a free-spirited woman who, along with her ex-boyfriend hustles tourists for there money. Ray convinces Chloe to go out to dinner with him and along the way his temper gets the best of him, as he gets into a few sorted adventures, most of which center around a dwarf. Meanwhile, Harry calls Ken and asks him to quietly kill Ray, a punishment for his killing the child, and Ken must wrestle within himself to discover wiether or not he can bring himself to kill his friend and partner.

Something I found interesting (and ironic) within the movie, is that Ray is constantly comparing Bruges to purgatory, a place of neverending torment and torture. I found this interesting because that’s exactly what it feels like to watch this movie, which obviously takes place In Bruges. The movie starts dull, ends dull and reaches new points of boredom and dullness inbetween. Not helping is the sleep inducing musical score, and very bleak locales in the movie. While, at times, shot majestically by McDonaugh, they mostly only help to make the viewer, like the characters, feel trapped in this boring city. Now, I realize (and appreciate to a degree) that this is probably a point that someone who enjoyed the film could easily make for liking it. I, however, did not like the film at all, and so enhancing the feeling of entrapment only made things worse. I felt often like the movie had no purpose, no ending in sight and no idea how to resolve itself.

For starters, the plot and characters are dreadfully predictable and unlikable. Even the side characters are unlikable, especially the dwarf, who is a racist bastard hopped up on horse tranquilizers, screaming about the inevitable battle to come between the whites and minorities. Most movies of this sort will at least endow the female lead with some sort of sweetness or innocence to play off the dark hearted anti-heroes like Ray and Ken. Not this film. No sir. Chloe, while insanely attractive and sexy, is almost as bad as the two hitmen, praying on tourists and selling drugs in a city that apparently has no crime enforcement. To be fair, small attempts are made to give some of the characters redeemable qualities, or at least redeemable ideals, but just because an otherwise dispicable character says things like “You can’t kill kids,” doesn’t make them any more likable. It just means they have common sense.

Every plot “twist” can be seen miles ahead of time, so much infact that it becomes frustrating how much behind the movie can get to where you have already guessed it would go. Mainly the problem with In Bruges is that it is essentially one set of poorly written, unlikable characters running into and pissing off other poorly written and unlikable characters, until eventually most of them are dead or dying at the end of the movie. Never before have I even considered so heavily to giving a movie the unheard of “Zero stars,” but I came very close in this one. Basically the presence of the lovely Clemence Posey is worth a “1/2 star” rating on its own, otherwise the movie is utter rubbish.

Directed by Kar Wai Wong, who also co-wrote the screenplay along with Lawrence Block, My Blueberry Nights marks the feature film debut of popular singer and songwriter Norah Jones, who portrays the role of a girl with a broken heart who finds comfort in the blueberry pies baked by small cafe owner (Jude Law) before going on a soul searching trip across the country.

After being mugged in a New York subway and learning her boyfriend is cheating on her, broken hearted Elizabeth (Jones) stumbles into a small cafe and spills her soul to owner Jeremy (Law) over a slice of blueberry pie. She then gets on a bus and travels to Memphis, taking on two waitressing jobs, one during the day and one in the late evening at a bar to keep herself busy. While in Memphis she meets Arnie (David Strathairn), an alcoholic police officer who is having trouble accepting his recent seperation from his flirtatious wife, Sue-Lynn (Rachel Weisz). While on her journey, Elizabeth keeps in touch with Jeremy by sending him postcards, and he begins trying to track her down. Not wanting to stay in one place too long, Elizabeth then moves on and meets a charismatic gambling addict named Leslie (Natalie Portman), who along with all the other offbeat characters she ecounters help her figure out her questions about love and life.

Despite featuring an all-star cast, Blueberry nights is something just on the otherside of boring, and flirts seriously with the idea of becoming a completly horrible and irredeemable film, but manages a few moments, unfortunately very few and far between, that make the movie even somewhat worth watching. First is the plot, well if you can call it that, mostly the movie appears, by what I could tell, to be about nothing. Yes, you can grasp that the Norah Jones character basically snaps after her longterm boyfriend cheats on her and she runs around the country looking for people worse than him to convince her she’s still a good person, but the film just crawls, and I mean crawls along at a snails pace and ultimately gets nowhere in the process. Then there is the non-existent acting ability of Norah Jones herself, who is the main character and the one we’re supposed to be invested in, but who can barely manage an ounze of genuine emotion. I’ve seen people on reality TV with more talent and emotion than Jones could muster in this film, which is sad because she is an amazing songwriter and singer, and I love her music, but she certainly can NOT act.

The rest of the cast has moments, but also mostly seem lost in the script. David Strathairn’s booze-hounding cop comes off as cliche and uninteresting. Rachel Weisz just seems to be screaming all the time and isn’t believable with her cheesy southern accent. Jude Law is barely in the movie, has a few moments of okayness and then mostly seems to struggle with trying to carry Jones thru there supposed tender scenes together. It’s just sad to see this collection of A-list talent and oscar nominees look so lost and confused and…well, bored. You can literally feel the boredom from some of these actors as they read there lines, which makes you wonder if maybe Strathairn really was getting drunk, just to cope with the horrible movie he found himself in. Then, just as you’re ready to give up all hope, the skies clear and the heavens part and lovely Natalie Portman arrives to bring the movie some (and I must stress the word some) redeemable quality. Her character basically sucks as badly as the rest of the them, but Portman seems to try her best to inject some life into it and the film as well, and does better than the rest at carrying Jones thru some scenes.

Overall, the film is horrible and a complete waste of these actor’s talents. I have not seen any of Director Kar Wai Wong’s other films, and this film certainly doesn’t inspire me to do so. Despite some beautifully shot street scenes, Wong just never manages to produce anything compelling or interesting on the screen that makes this film worth watching. Norah Jones should stick to her music, which I have a feeling she won’t have a choice on, and leave the bad movies from singers-turned wannabee actors to Lindsey Lohan and Britney Spears. At least we all knew ahead of time there movies would be horrible.

Based off the bestselling novel by Michael Sharra, Gods and Generals is a prequel to the 1993 hit Gettysburg and follows the complex events from the beginning of the U.S. Civil War in 1861 thru the events preceeding the battle of Gettysburg in July of 1863, as depicted in that film. The film was written for the screen and directed by Ronald F. Maxwell, who also directed Gettsyburg, and the film was produced masterfully by Ted Turner.

With a magnificant scope, brilliant cinematography, painstaking detail and a high level of historical accuracy, Gods and Generals chronicles the rise of the Confederacy under the leadership of General Robert E. Lee (Robert Duvall) and General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson (Stephen Lang) in the early years of the deadly civil war that tore the United States apart for four bloody years. The film begins just days after the attack on Fort Sumter, and after President Lincoln has called for 75,000 volunteers to qwell the rebellion in the cotton states. Lee is offered overall command of the U.S. army, but refuses out of loyalty for Virgina, a state about to join in secession from the union and officially join the Confederacy, and who gives Lee command of the army of Northern Virginia. General Jackson leaves his teaching post at the Virginia military institute to recruit and train the Virginia common army volunteers, and the early stages of the war becomes about who will attack first, when and where?

The film focuses on the three biggest and most important battles of the early part of the war, beginning with the first major engagement between North and South at First Manassas. It is there that General Jackson and his brigade earn there reputation and legendary nickname of “Stonewall” and where the South proves the war will not be a quick 90 day affair as many people previously thought. As the following two years progress, so does the status and acclaim of Jackson and his men, as the South wins one major battle after another, including the battles of Fredricksburg and Chancellorsville, as depicted in the film. Chancellorsville is thought by many historians to be Lee and the South’s brightest moment, but it does come at a high cost, one that will drastically affect the remaining years in the war, beginning with Lee’s bold choice to invade the North and the inevitable battle at the small Pennsylvania farm town of Gettysburg, only 2 months after the stunning Confederate victory at Chancellorsville.

Few historic films take the time or take pride in such authenticity as is on display in both of these Civil War masterpieces by Ronald F. Maxwell. The films perfectly capture the times and the struggles this nation went thru to become the nation we are today. It was simply a different time, and these films serve as an invaluable time capsule of information about our past, a past that must be understood to understand our identity as a nation. In those times people lived more simply, yet more passionately as well. By focusing centrally on Stonewall Jackson and the South, Maxwell allows us to see what it was like to be there. For Jackson, like many of the day, his priorities were straight and he knew them well and would die to protect them and his way of life. God came first, his home (in Virginia) second, then his country. People didn’t yet grasp the idea of a truely United States, and thats why this war was so important. You feel the passion and religious ferver of Jackson and many others in the film.

Wonderfully, Maxwell takes time, between battles and military strategy, to focus on the small moments. We see the struggles of the civilians in the South, and spirit of the Southern women. We see the connection the troops and generals have with the civilians and we begin to understand the difference in lifestyles between North and South, and the difference to those fighting it. The North, right or wrong, was the invaders and the South, right or wrong, was defending there own way of life, and there own homes, families and towns. There is an elegance to that way of life on display, the simpleness of it, and it can be sad to realize that way of life is now gone forever. That was the price the South paid for waging this war, they lost there way of life, and the film (produced by Ted Turner) is obviously sympathetic to that idea of loss, and to the mighty Southern cause, but it also understands and illustrates the bold mission of unity and freedom that the North undertakes.

For fans of Gettysburg, the film is a wonderful companion and prequel. While not as condensed, or as long as Gettysburg (which focused on a single three day battle), Gods and Generals is a remarkable acheivement with a tremendous scope to it. As a Civil War buff, it would’ve been nice to see the battle of Antietam, or even the events of Fort Sumter or even view Lincoln once or twice, but the focus is on Lee, Jackson and the army of Northern Virginia, and in that the film exceeds even the most modest Civil War entusiast’s expectations. While central figures from Gettysburg, such as Lee, Longstreet and Pickett (ironically portrayed by Stephen Lang in that film) have been recasted, other actors do return to wonderfully reprise and expand there roles. Brian Mallon does a great job in an expanded role for Union General Winfield Scott Hancock. And indeed the regiment of the 20th Maine, heroically depicted in Gettysburg returns, and we see the formation of that unit and the struggles they endure before that fateful day. Jeff Daniels returns as Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, and again is allowed a few moments to give elegant and masterfully written speeches. C. Thomas Howell reprises his role as Chamberlain’s younger brother Tom, and Kevin Conway again gives a wonderful performance as the fiery irishmen, Sgt. Buster Kilrain.

But the film’s real star, and focus is on Stephen Lang’s awe-inspiring, mighty, tender and award worthy portrayal of the legendary General Jackson. Jackson was a man of high principles. A god fearing, highly religious and highly loyal soldier, Jackson felt it was his duty, and the duty of all southerner’s to destroy the “yankee invaders” who had dared presume to invade there land or try to dictate and inflict there way of life upon them. Stephen Lang does such a great job of portraying the complexities within Jackson. He has so many sides to him, and Lang hits them all perfectly. We see his fearlessness and determination in battle, as well as his hatred of the enemy and his desire to destroy them. But we also see his tender side, both in lovely scenes with his wife, Anna (Kali Rocha), and in heartbreakingly sweet moments with a young southern girl named Jane (Lydia Jordan).

The Civil War is undeniably the single most important event in our history, and its a blessing to us all that there are filmmakers today that realize that, respect that and who are painstakingly recreating that horribly bloody war onscreen for the rest of us, and future generations to see. How important was the Civil War? Yes, it restored the Union and freed the slaves, but it was much more than that. It gave us our identitfy. The great Civil War historian, the late Shelby Foote, perfectly described what the Civil War accomplished and why it is the most central and important moment in our nations history. He said, “Before the War, it was said ‘The United States are.’ Grammatically, it was spoken that way and thought of as a collection of independent states. And after the war, it was always ‘the United States is,” as we say today without being self conscious at all. And that sums up what the war accomplished. It made us an ‘is.‘”