A scant two years after the amazing success of Kubrick’s, A Clockwork Orange, it’s star, Malcolm McDowell, conceived of an idea around which David Sherwin wrote a script. Under the direction of Lindsay Anderson this script became O Lucky Man, and not unpredictably its star was, Malcolm McDowell. All this becomes significant to the viewer as the movie progresses and some interesting similarities with A Clockwork Orange emerge.

While A Clockwork Orange looked at the underbelly of a crumbling criminal justice system, O Lucky Man conducts a string of side views of all levels of English society in decline, from a sometimes highly realistic standpoint, sometimes a burlesque, even surreal one. The effects become exaggerated towards the end by a device of inserting more and more of the same actors into different roles. On top of that, the matter isn’t helped any when Michael Arnold Travis (McDowell) displays a curious notice in many cases regarding these familiar faces gracing new roles. Almost like a picaresque novel in reverse.

The separate misadventures of our hero are broken by studio visits with Alan Price and his band wherein we’re regaled with a song sung by Price written to reflect the story line that has just ended. Two scenes are woven with Price and his band and a rich groupie who becomes more integral to our hero’s exploits. At no time, however do other members of the cast join in any score. Calling this movie a “musical” (which many critics have done) is like calling Natural Born Killers a comedy because it has a few (very few) comic reliefs.

Another silly comparison made is that of comparing Voltaire’s, Candide with this movie. Candide retains a blissful devotion to the ideal “this is the best of all possible worlds”, while Travis, perhaps slow in coming around, begins to develop a more and more refined sense of worldliness  than any blind optimism alone affords, believing far more in his own acumen than that of a society classed by estates and consumed by defining each person’s role in life by them.

The cast sports such icons of the English cinema as, Helen Mirren (Patricia, the rich groupie and daughter of Sir James Burgess (Ralph Richardson) who warns Travis of her father being, “the most evil man alive”. Arthur Lowes’ performance as Mr. Duff (Lowes has two other roles) begins a trend in the movie carried throughout of ominous foreboding. After giving Travis a resplendent showman’s suit (as might have been the symbolic representation of Excalibur to King Arthur or a thrown gauntlet before one’s feet) his last words to our hero, upon parting, are, “try not and die like a dog”.

Significant to this foreboding is the posture in which almost all the cast’s ladies come to find varying degrees of empathy for Travis. Sometimes as if sharing an almost last meal with the condemned…or even being sort of one. After the first grave mishap our gravely bruised and battered (and slightly tortured) hero is left wandering the countryside looking for a meal and a place to momentarily rest his head. Stumbling into a country church during service he lays down in a pew at the very back. Awakening he observes the Vicar’s wife (Mary MacLeod) and their two children preparing a setting for a Christmas pageant. Bountiful piles of food adorn the front and when the three depart, Travis goes for a loaf of bread. Discovered by the wife, she reacts, “no, that food is God’s.” That notwithstanding she cradles his head and offers her breast to indicate, one might guess, what is the food of man. The scene ends with him suckling the breast. (And this is not the best of MacLeod’s three roles.)

The height of this film’s intensity is reached in the next “episode” of these strung together misadventures as Travis is picked up by a car while trying to hitchhike to London. The driver suggests he agree to a short detour and consider a chance to earn 100 quid.. At an elaborate and Georgian manor-turned research facility, he is welcomed by staff and doctors for the important “contribution” he’s about to make to “medical science”. After an interesting bargaining session with the doctor-in-charge our hero signs on the dotted line and is ordered given a sedative. The nurse (Mona Washbourne), indicating some mothering concern, evidently doesn’t give him enough medication to knock him out and he overhears a little disconcerting overtone to what’s in store. While exploring the corridors he inadvertently stumbles into the room of a patient in agony only to find a thing with the head of a man and the body of a hog.

The entirely of the movie gradually envelops the viewer into part of it’s own framework, that of everyone outside Travis and his driven perceptions of success and an audience, half cast and half viewer, amused at what they see as self-defeat. Like those that might gather to see some preordained train wreck.

This reviewer saw the movie in 1973. Recalling A Clockwork Orange, while it was still fresh on his mind, the distinct impression (especially when viewing the attribution of O Lucky Man’s conception to McDowell in the credits,) that the young and brilliant actor might have some unfinished business with the former movie’s story line or directing.

Refinement or not, O Lucky Man does indeed take up where, A Clockwork Orange “leaves off”.  Yet still, as always, its success depends on the audience, in this case, sticking their head in a noose they may not wish to oblige with the introspection required. One that really tests the “virtue” of villain (Alex in A Clockwork Orange) with the tool by which much villainy is done, our hapless, Michael Arnold Travis.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Seven years ago Universal Pictures was sitting high atop a successful franchise that had re-imagined one of their classic movie monsters with the one-two punch of 1999’s “The Mummy” and 2001’s “The Mummy Returns”. Following those two CGI-intensive action/adventure films Universal opted to do a prequel starring wrestling superstar Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as the titular character in “The Scorpion King”. Even though The Rock showcased an impressive screen presence, his film managed to only be a moderate hit at the box office, actually proving to be somewhat of a disappointment when compared to the box office haul of its predecessors. The seven year sabbatical that Universal took from this once lucrative franchise, most likely prompted by the lagging returns of “The Scorpion King”, prompted many critics and moviegoers to wonder whether there was even a need to have yet another installment in ‘The Mummy’ series or should the franchise be left alone to rest in peace.

“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” is set several years after the events of “The Mummy Returns”, as Rick O’Connell (Brendan Fraser) and his wife Evelyn (Maria Bello taking over for Rachel Weisz) are living a peaceful, if not boring life free of being chased by the undead. Meanwhile, their archaeologist son Alex (Luke Ford) has discovered an expansive tomb dedicated to a despotic emperor of ancient China (Jet Li), and with his discovery, Alex is set to become just as famous, if not more so, than his parents. However, when the curse that had been placed on the dreaded emperor and his army is lifted, these once lifeless, terra-cotta soldiers are now reanimated and ready to wreak havoc on a strange new world while in search of the fabled Shangri La to attain immortality for their leader, the Dragon Emperor.

Earlier I mentioned that there were some questions that arose as to why a third Mummy film should be made, mostly this was due to the series’ perceived lack of depth and lasting appeal on the part of most critics; plus, over time audiences would most likely not care as much for further adventures after being so far removed from the characters. Now, I know you could easily make the argument that Star Wars successfully returned after an almost twenty year absence, and the same for Indiana Jones; however, there is one major difference between those two franchises and that of ‘The Mummy’, none of the characters featured in the latter are nearly as iconic as those in the former. All that aside, I for one was happy to see that another Mummy film would be coming to theaters, and I was glad to hear that Brendan Fraser would be reprising the most recognizable role of his career, that of archaeologist/adventurer Rick O’Connell. While I was excited for the release, there was some trepidation due to the fact that while enjoyable, both “The Mummy Returns” and “The Scorpion King” were not nearly as good as the first film that reinvigorated the classic monster franchise, “The Mummy”. So, with that in mind, I did wonder if this third attempt would be able to at least equal the follow-up films or possibly achieve what I believed to be impossible, and recapture the freshness, humor, and fun that made the original so enjoyable.

The story for this third entry, as written by Al Gough and Miles Millar (TV’s “Smallville”), was fairly solid throughout, but there were some weak points that surprised me. As a fan of the TV series “Smallville”, I know that Al and Miles knew how to write good character drama mixed with some action and CGI, and based on their work on the hilarious sequel “Shanghai Knights” with Jackie Chan and Owen Wilson, they also know how to handle comedy as well. For some reason in the early portion of the movie, the dialogue seems awkward and lacking any sense of direction, especially between the two leads, to the point that I wondered if the movie was ever going to find its footing and get things rolling. I understand that the opening thirty minutes, at least the parts pertaining to the lives of Rick and Evey, were setup in such a way to show their discomfort with their current life of peace and quiet, as they longed for the action and adventure we had seen them experience in the previous films; however, I feel that given the experience Al and Miles bring to this film, they should have been able to make these scenes work much better and not feel so out of place with the pacing of the rest of the movie. I must point out, that during the opening thirty minutes or so of the movie, the parts not related to Rick and Evey worked very well, giving the audience a building sense of excitement in regards to what is in store when the emperor is inevitably reborn.

Even though the early parts of the movie felt uneven, once the emperor was reanimated the movie definitely finds its pace and really moves along quickly from one CGI-intensive action sequence to another. This isn’t to say that the story is completely put on the backburner in favor of more action scenes, but it does seem to take a little bit more of a back seat to the amped up CGI/martial arts heavy fight sequences than either of the previous films had allowed. One thing that didn’t take a backseat to the action was the comedy; in fact, I felt that there was maybe a little too much comedy, especially of the slapstick variety, than what had been included in the other films in the series. At times it seemed that the movie was intended as more of a comedy than an action/adventure due to the obvious attempts at slapstick, which were funny (some more so than others), but a few of the bits went too far over-the-top and felt somewhat out of place.

The acting is what you expect in a movie such as this, nothing outstanding by any means, but solid given the genre. Brendan Fraser (“The Mummy”) seems to thoroughly be enjoying himself (aside from his early scenes in the movie) once again as adventurer Rick O’Connell. Even after a seven year absence, and two previous outings, he manages to bring the character to life with such excitement and charisma that he still is a lot of fun to watch onscreen. Also returning from the previous two movies is actor John Hannah as Evelyn’s rascal of a brother, Jonathan, who just so happens to own a night club conveniently located in China. John’s involvement in the movie was a mostly welcome source of humor amidst the action packed proceedings. I know that I complained a moment ago about there being too much comedy in this entry; however, my complaint was with the more slapstick related comedy. John’s one-liners were generally well placed within the various fight scenes to break up the onslaught of action bombarding the viewers; although there were a few instances where I felt his witty commentary on the situation would have been better left unsaid. Maria Bello (“A History of Violence”) was decent as Rachel Weisz’s replacement for Evelyn, although some of her line readings seem strained, as if she were struggling to make the words sound authentic in the British accent she was forced to adopt for the character. Aside from the perceived awkwardness of her accent, Maria genuinely seemed to be having a ball, especially throughout the various action scenes. Sadly, the character of Evelyn seemed a bit marginalized compared to what Rachel was given to do with her in the previous two films, which is a shame given how good of an actress that Maria is. Another new addition to the series was actor Luke Ford as Alex O’Connell, while Luke does a good job in the role; I personally feel that he wasn’t an appropriate casting choice given that he appeared to be maybe 5 years younger than Brendan Fraser, who was supposed to be his onscreen father. Martial arts experts Jet Li (“Unleashed”) and Michelle Yeoh (“Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”) seemed wasted in their thankless roles as the Dragon Emperor and the witch that cursed him. Basically, their casting felt like nothing more than a stunt to get more butts in the seats due to the setting of the film being in China this time around. Neither role gave either of the two all that much to do, but their inevitable confrontation was entertaining to say the least, though I do wish it could have been a little bit longer.

Lastly, we come to the extensive visual effects work done for the movie by the talented people at Rhythm and Hues Studios and Digital Domain. There were some complaints by critics that the CGI looked too fake, or not even up to the quality of most big budget films of today. Personally, I disagree with these critics almost 100%, but I must admit that early on in the movie when the emperor is being transformed into a statue, he kind of resembles animated pudding instead of mud or whatever he was supposed to be. Combine the “pudding man” effect (that’s what I’m calling it) with some horribly rendered fire that consumes him seconds later and what you have is a poorly done visual effects sequence that draws way too much attention to the CGI, to the point that most people are looking for any other flaws that can be spotted; instead of just enjoying the rest of the movie. I for one was one of those people that looked for other flaws within the CGI for a little while (truth be told, probably through the whole movie), but I normally do that in CGI intensive movies and it has never taken away from my movie experience before, and I don’t believe it did here either. Other than that weak moment in the visual effects, the remainder of the film looked great, especially the yetis; although, I do wish they would have been involved a little more in the movie, but I’m not in charge.

Overall, “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” is entertaining for the most part; it does struggle to get going in the early moments of the film, but once Rick and Evelyn step back into their adventure clothes, as it were, the movie really gets going. Director Rob Cohen (“The Fast and the Furious”) injects the film with his usual fast-paced visual style that has served him well in the past and continues to do so here. While not nearly as good as “The Mummy”, this third installment in the series does come close to matching its predecessor “The Mummy Returns” and surpasses the quality of the initial spin-off “The Scorpion King”.

“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” is rated PG-13 for violence.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

I’ve never read the literary classics that comprise C.S. Lewis’ epic “Chronicles of Narnia” series. Growing up, I know that some of the books were required reading in some of my friends’ classes, but never in my own, and then once I began to develop my own taste in books, those novels never really seemed to pique my interest all that much. When the trailers began showing up advertising the release of the first film, in what Walt Disney Pictures and Walden Media were hoping to be a hit franchise based on the novels, my initial reaction was that it looked interesting and appeared to have great special effects, but I wasn’t sure if it was the kind of movie I would enjoy. I know that the novels had previously been adapted, with a very limited budget by the BBC into low-budget movies, so I figured this new film had to at least look better than those did, but aside from Peter Jackson’s adaptation of Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” novels, I really hadn’t enjoyed that many fantasy films. I personally didn’t enjoy the ‘Neverending Story’ franchise, or “Legend” starring a younger Tom Cruise, and generally speaking most movies with kids as the main characters tend to be a bit on the annoying side, so my expectations were coming in a tad on the low side. As low as my expectations were for this upcoming film, when the numerous positive reviews began pouring in, and more action and intriguing story elements were being shown in the TV spots appearing on almost every station known to man, my interest along with my expectations began increasing significantly until the movie finally arrived in theaters giving me the chance to see if all the hype was true or if I would be bored to tears, as I feared could be the case.

“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” is the story of four siblings, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy, as they accidentally stumble across the wondrous land of Narnia, via a magical wardrobe hidden in their house. As they begin to explore this strange new world, and encounter several of its inhabitants, the children soon realize that this once-peaceful world has been plunged into what appears to be an eternal winter filled with despair courtesy of the evil White Witch (Tilda Swinton) who has proclaimed herself Queen of Narnia. The longer the children spend in Narnia the more they begin to understand that their appearance in this world was not some random incident, but in fact had been foretold in a prophecy, and that these four children, along with a powerful lion named Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson), would lead the good creatures of Narnia in a revolt against the evil White Witch and her minions to return Narnia to its rightful state of peace and happiness.

So, after going from absolutely having no interest in seeing “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” to being pretty much excited to see it, I was very pleased that once I watched the film I could honestly say that I loved every minute of it. The movie avoided the pitfalls that I expected it to fall victim to, for instance; having the children be too cutesy and/or annoying brats or just being unbelievable as actual kids via their moods, actions, or whatever; having an extremely boring story with the occasional action sequence to excite the audience but not much else to fill the time (i.e. “The Golden Compass”); or knowing that it was a Christian themed story, having the basic story be so cheesy and over-the-top in the delivery of the Christian allegory that it would be laughable and yet another example of a horrible attempt to make a Christian movie. Thankfully ‘Narnia’ maneuvered easily around each of these trouble spots emerging victorious as the first successful entry into what will hopefully become an entertaining franchise for audiences everywhere to enjoy.

The story, as adapted by Ann Peacock, Andrew Adamson, Christopher Marks, and Stephen McFeely, and based upon the novel by C.S. Lewis, was incredibly fast-paced and entertaining, even though the beginning had me a little worried that it was going to drag out the pre-Narnia part of the children’s lives, but even those scenes were surprisingly well-played and lively. Director Andrew Adamson (who also co-wrote the screenplay) deftly handled all of the fantasy elements and action sequences that the story required, while balancing them out with the much quieter moments as the children begin to understand their place in this new world, and the heavy burdens that accompany such an incredible destiny. I was surprised with how solid Adamson’s direction was for this movie, since his previous efforts had been the hit animated films “Shrek” and “Shrek 2” which he was a co-director on for both, so as his first solo outing ‘Narnia’ is an extremely impressive effort that he absolutely knocks out of the park from beginning to end.

The primary cast for ‘Narnia’, namely the four siblings, was comprised of relative newcomers to the world of acting, as this was the first movie for most of the kids. It’s surprising that Walt Disney Pictures and Walden Media would trust newcomers with the starring roles in a movie that could essentially launch a fantasy series that may rival New Line Cinema’s epic ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogy, but the gamble paid off and I honestly don’t think any other actors could have done any better. Academy Award winner Tilda Swinton (“Michael Clayton”) was an ideal choice to play the evil White Witch, and she seemed to enjoy the chance to play such an evil, villainous character and made the most out of every scene she was given. Providing the voice of the majestic lion Aslan, actor Liam Neeson (“Batman Begins”), along with incredibly realistic CGI, gave the character a commanding presence with a calm soothing voice that was firm and authoritative, yet soft and caring.

I honestly could continue complimenting the various elements of the movie for several more paragraphs, but you the reader would no doubt grow weary of me and lose interest. So, I only have one more item that I feel must be recognized when reviewing this film, and of course I am referring to the outstanding CGI work produced by the special effects wizards that worked so hard behind the scenes on ‘Narnia’. Without their expertise and considerable talents, this movie would not have been nearly as impressive, and the various creatures wouldn’t have been brought to such vibrant life in a way that you almost believed that lions could speak, centaurs could walk amongst us, and that a magical world of wonder actually could exist on the other side of a wardrobe and all you have to do is be lucky enough to find it.

“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” is an extremely entertaining thrill ride of a fantasy film comprised of brilliant special effects, excellent storytelling, and a talented cast that when mixed together delivers a movie experience that audiences can enjoy for years to come.

“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” is rated PG for violence.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Sometimes I wonder why I wait so long before watching a certain movie, especially one that has received praise from essentially everyone I know that has ever seen it. Such is the case with the military-themed/conspiracy thriller “Shooter” starring Mark Wahlberg (“Four Brothers”) and Danny Glover (‘Lethal Weapon’ series). I was told from so many sources that “Shooter” is a definite must-see of a movie, yet for some unknown reason I never did get around to watching it, until recently that is. Of course, I had plenty of opportunities to watch the movie, due to the fact that I had purchased it several months back even though I hadn’t seen it yet (a concept which may seem strange to some of you). Who knows why it took me so long, maybe I need to get my head examined (one of my friends sure thought so when I told him I had yet to see this movie). Whatever the case may be, when all was said and done now that I’ve finally taken an opportunity to sit down and watch the movie, I enjoyed every single minute of it and wished I would have gotten around to seeing it much sooner.

“Shooter” is the story of former Marine sniper Bob Lee Swagger (Mark Wahlberg), who after being betrayed by his superiors, has left the service and is leading a quiet, peaceful existence in a remote cabin somewhere in the mountains. However, as much as Bob Lee has tried to remove himself from the outside world, there are those that still possess the means to find him; led by a high ranking Colonel (Danny Glover), a mysterious group within the U.S. government believes that Bob Lee may be the one person on the planet to help them in preventing an impending assassination attempt on the current President of the United States. Feeling the pressure to once again serve his country, Bob Lee reluctantly agrees to lend his expertise; however, all is not as it seems. On the day of the attempt, Bob Lee is betrayed and wrongfully identified as the shooter by the very people he agreed to help. Now, he’s on the run from virtually every government agency in the United States, and as if that weren’t enough to contend with, the group that hired him is tracking him across the country to silence the one loose end that could expose their far-reaching conspiracy to the entire nation.

I’ve got to say that I am becoming more and more impressed by Mark Wahlberg’s acting ability with each movie he makes. Not only are his skills as an actor becoming more refined, but his movies just seem to get better and better as well. Mark’s performance as Bob Lee Swagger was perfect, he was full of confidence without being arrogant, appeared to be an honorable man who seemed to go out of his way to save lives at all cost, and despite being betrayed by his superiors, he still maintained a strong sense of pride for his country and the military; which was a welcome change in character traits from most of the leading roles featured in today’s movies dealing with any facet of the military and/or its soldiers. Michael Pena (“World Trade Center”) was solid in his portrayal of an FBI agent that becomes Bob’s reluctant partner, and one of the few members of any government agency that believes that he may just be innocent after all, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Kate Mara (“We Are Marshall”) plays a widow of one of Bob’s military buddies from his time in the service, and becomes an ally and eventual love interest for him, serving as a means for allowing Bob to open up once more to another human being and to begin to heal from the wounds that his life and career have left upon him. Kate wasn’t given as much to do in this film dramatically as she had been in “We Are Marshall”, but what time she did have on the screen she made the best of, and managed to show that her character was emotionally vulnerable, yet strong enough to stand up for herself if the moment arose; instead of just being the typical damsel in distress that would generally be the female role in a film such as this. Granted she eventually becomes ‘in distress’ so to speak, but not until she’s proven to the audience that she has the means with which to protect herself under normal circumstances. Rounding out the cast are veteran actors Danny Glover and Ned Beatty as members of a secret group within the U.S. government that sets Bob up for the assassination attempt. Danny Glover has played villains a few times throughout his rather lengthy career, and each time he brings a depth and realism to each character, never allowing them to be even remotely the same in their presentation. For his character in “Shooter”, Danny added a slight lisp to his character’s vocal performance, and played him as someone who had at one time possibly been an honorable soldier, but life and/or experiences have jaded him so much that he is essentially nothing more than a soldier for hire to the highest bidder. Portraying the man currently financing Glover’s most recent mission is Ned Beatty, in a surprisingly sinister turn as a corrupt U.S. Senator who feels he has the nation’s best interests at heart, no matter how misguided he may be, and is willing to do anything to see his goals accomplished.

Critically acclaimed director Antoine Fuqua (“Training Day”) delivers movie audiences yet another solid film following up his previous successes, the historical epic “King Arthur”, the military thriller “Tears of the Sun”, and the film that garnered Denzel Washington his first Best Actor Oscar nod “Training Day”. Fuqua deftly captures the frantic action and fast-paced action sequences with the ease of an accomplished action director, utilizing quick edits that have become synonymous with today’s action films; yet Fuqua thankfully avoids overusing the hand-held camera approach that has permeated most of the popular action movies of recent years (a technique that was made popular by director Paul Greengrass’ massive box office success with “The Bourne Supremacy”). For a director whose early successes were found in music videos, Antoine Fuqua has definitely come a long way in the last ten years since he made his theatrical directorial debut with “The Replacement Killers”, and has become yet another one of those directors whose films I greatly anticipate whenever I hear of an impending release, though I don’t always rush out to see them as was the case here.

The plot for “Shooter” was surprisingly more involved and complex than one would expect from most Hollywood action films. The screenplay, written by Jonathan Lemkin (“Lethal Weapon 4”) and based on a novel by Stephen Hunter titled “Point of Impact”, featured plenty of little twists and turns along the way to keep the suspense ratcheted up, and the audience wondering just what exactly was going to happen next. I really appreciated how the script spent time focusing on each of the main characters to flesh them out a bit more than your standard one-dimensional action film characters generally would be; it was this type of work in a screenplay that propelled “Shooter” far above the average action movie that most action buffs love to see. Truthfully, “Shooter” could almost be considered a “thinking man’s action film” so to speak. Who knows, with the success of “Shooter” maybe Hollywood will take notice and begin making more action films with this kind of attention to detail, featuring smart, well-written dialogue, surprising twists (that make sense and don’t appear convoluted and convenient), and plenty of suspense and thrills without resorting to excessive violence as their only means of conveyance. If we begin to see this kind of action movie taking place more and more, maybe the action genre could gain a little bit more respect from the critics; instead, of being looked upon as films for the mindless masses that can’t stand to see any kind of drama being played out, only guns blazing, fists flying, and mayhem galore, maybe there’s hope in the eyes of critics for the action junkies yet.

Every single aspect of “Shooter” was perfectly mixed together, from the acting to the directing to the story; nothing was out of place or off-beat in the least; delivering audiences an incredibly solid action film that boasted plenty of pulse-pounding action, along with a hefty dose of drama, intrigue, and depth to make for a thoroughly entertaining movie experience.

“Shooter” is rated R for violence and language.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

I really hate it when a movie that I was really excited about seeing ends up completely disappointing me once I finally get the opportunity to watch it. Such was the case with the recent release of “Jumper” from director Doug Liman (“The Bourne Identity” and “Mr. and Mrs. Smith”), starring Hayden Christensen, Samuel L. Jackson, Rachel Bilson, and Jamie Bell. The previews were entertaining, showcasing the film’s impressive visual effects, and showing what turned out to be the best scenes from star Hayden Christensen’s performance, in order to paint him in a much more positive light in regards to his less than stellar acting ability. Not surprising to me and many others was the fact that the film was universally panned by the majority of critics across the nation, yet I still wanted to see the movie, because I figured it would still be entertaining due to the fact that critics generally despise science-fiction, and well I generally disagree with them on that genre. Sadly, after watching the film, I now find myself having to say that I completely agree with the throng of critics that blasted the film, and I feel like I wasted 90 minutes of my life that I will never get back on what is possibly the worst film of 2008.

“Jumper” is the story of David Rice (Hayden Christensen), a man who was bullied throughout his childhood and ends up leaving the love of his life, a girl named Millie (Rachel Bilson) to start over, and is now living the good life with all the wealth he could possibly imagine. He’s a man who appears to have everything a person could ask for, except he’s never had to work for any of it; instead, he uses his amazing ability to teleport from place to place taking anything and everything he wants for himself. David believes he is the only one of his kind until he meets another ‘jumper’ named Griffin (Jamie Bell) who warns him of a group known as the Paladins, that are led by a mysterious and deadly man named Roland (Samuel L. Jackson), their goal is to find and eliminate all ‘jumpers’ from the face of the Earth. Now, David finds himself stuck in the middle of a war he doesn’t understand, with the fate of not only himself but everyone he cares about hanging in the balance.

While I was watching “Jumper” a couple of things went through my mind over the course of the film. First, is the extreme confusion in regards to why executives in Hollywood continue to believe that Hayden Christensen (best known for his work in the ‘Star Wars’ prequels) is even a remotely decent actor? Lets face it the man cannot act, he was mediocre at best in his first starring role in the smash hit “Star Wars – Episode 2: Attack of the Clones” and seemed a little bit more comfortable and skilled in “Star Wars – Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith”; however, even in those films (which are by far his best work to date) he was nothing to be all that impressed by as far as his acting talent was concerned. In the recent release “Awake” co-starring Jessica Alba, I thought Hayden had possibly improved his acting game to the point that he was finally an average movie star, but with his work in “Jumper” he quickly put that thought to rest, and firmly cemented himself in my mind as quite possibly the worst actor in all of Hollywood. Well, now that I’ve got that tirade out of the way I can continue on with what other thoughts occurred to me while I was watching this sub-par movie.

The next thing I wonder is why is it that good, sometimes even great actors lower their standards in order to star in drivel such as this. Veteran actor Samuel L. Jackson (‘Star Wars’ prequels) has made so many great movies throughout his career, along with a few stinkers along the way as any actor does from time to time, but why would he even be remotely interested in wasting his considerable talents on this movie is beyond me. The same goes for Diane Lane (“Untraceable”) who has gained more and more credibility as an actress in Hollywood throughout the last decade or so, but then she does a film like this, and you wonder if maybe she’s starting to lose her ability to discern between good and bad movie roles. My only guess, and the only way that I figure these stars can keep their respect and reputations intact, is that they only made “Jumper” for the paycheck, which I would hope was a ridiculously large amount, otherwise the choice just doesn’t make sense to me.

The story in “Jumper” began with some possibility of being interesting to me, but then things began to unravel when Hayden Christensen began speaking his lines as blandly as possible. Aside from that, the story quickly appeared to be too shallow to really draw me into this supposedly ancient war between ‘jumpers’ and the zealous Paladins. I wanted more depth to be given to what drives the Paladins to hunt the ‘jumpers’, explanation as to why the ‘jumpers’ always seem to commit crime instead of using their ability for good, and most importantly what the writers were thinking when they chose to make the hero of the movie, Hayden’s character David, into such an idiot and a weakling. I mean he’s always getting caught, and whenever he gets into a fight he always gets his rear handed to him, that is until he teleports to achieve the upper hand, but in a fair fight he always loses, how are we supposed to root for someone like that. Not to mention the fact that when the other ‘jumpers’ are caught by the Paladins they seem to have a much harder time of escaping, yet David escapes with relative ease by comparison, and his partner in crime, Griffin (Jamie Bell) even points out how stupid David is for getting caught all the time when he makes the statement, “How is it you have survived this long?” (or something along those lines). All in all, the story written by Simon Kinberg (“Mr. and Mrs. Smith”), who rewrote the film after two previous scripts from writers David S. Goyer (“Batman Begins”) and Jim Uhl (“Fight Club”) were rejected by the film’s director Doug Liman, was full of so many holes and instances in the story where it seemed the audience was just supposed to fill in the gaps to make the movie make sense, that I wonder if there was a lot of content that had been edited out of the final film, and if a director’s cut of “Jumper” would possibly make for a better movie experience, although I don’t think I could sit through any more of Hayden’s horrible acting in this film than I already have.

From a visual effects standpoint, “Jumper” is virtually flawless thanks to the extremely talented group at Weta Digital (“Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer”). The teleportation sequences are fun, and at first are exciting to see; however, the film uses the effect so much that it becomes tiresome and each ‘jump’ sequence looks and feels just like the last to where you don’t look forward to seeing them anymore. Now, I’ve seen special effects be repeated within movies before (“bullet time” in the critically acclaimed “The Matrix”), but generally when an effect is used more than once something is done to make it feel different than the previous, and that just did not seem to be the case in “Jumper”. I don’t know if the increasingly bland feeling I had towards the film’s over-reliance on the same effect was because of a lack of imagination on Weta’s part (which I doubt, given their stellar work in the past) or a lack of imagination and/or creativity on behalf of director Doug Liman (which is where I’m more inclined to assign the blame for not only this, but the entire failure of this movie).

Overall, “Jumper” had the potential to be an extremely entertaining, science-fiction action adventure film; however, weak acting, an overly simplistic storyline, and visual effects that went from brilliant to boring brought this film quickly to its knees and left me feeling like I lost a couple of brain cells in the process of having to turn my brain off in order to even sit through the 90 minute run time for the film.

“Jumper” is rated PG-13 for violence, language, and sexuality.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Here is a movie that I figured I knew how it would turn out from the get-go. The premise was that of four buddies who love to go riding their motorcycles together on weekends calling themselves Wild Hogs, and throughout the rest of the week lead rather dull, boring lives. So, with that premise being obvious from the trailers I thought the movie looked alright, it appeared to have plenty of humor from its rather talented ensemble cast comprised of Tim Allen (”The Santa Clause”), John Travolta (”Ladder 49″), Martin Lawrence (”Big Momma’s House”), and William H. Macy (”Cellular”), but I wondered if all the funny parts were in the preview, a problem that many comedies seem to fall prey to. However, upon its release movie audiences were praising it as being one of the funniest films of the year, and a must see movie. This of course made me curious, so one night my wife and I decided to go see a movie and “Wild Hogs” turned out to be the one we wound up going to see. And let me tell you we were absolutely rolling with laughter, as was the rest of the audience.

“Wild Hogs” is the story of four friends, as I stated earlier, who are all having some form of mid-life crisis, and they decide to take a road trip on their motorcycles across the country. With no plan, no map, and no cell phones, just them and the road, these four guys are in for the ride of their lives. However, their trip doesn’t always go as smoothly as they’d hope, after having some rather embarrasing mishaps that they’d love nothing more than to forget about, these four friends decide to stop off at a bar for a drink. Except this isn’t any ordinary bar, it’s a biker bar belonging to a dangerous biker gang known as the Del Fuegos, who don’t take too kindly to wannabe bikers in their territory. So will these ‘Hogs’ survive their road trip adventure or find that sometimes it doesn’t pay to be wild.

This is one movie that definitely surprised me by how good it really was. What surprised me the most was the fact that for being an ensemble comedy it was absolutely hilarious throughout the entire duration, and each of the lead actors had their fair share of the laughs to give. To me, the most surprising of the entire cast was William H. Macy. I’ve always thought he was a good actor, but never thought of him as much of a funnyman, but all that changed with this movie. He was by far the absolute funniest of the 4 main actors. Don’t get me wrong Tim Allen gives his most hilarious performance since his run on “Home Improvement”, John Travolta’s never been this funny, and Martin Lawrence hasn’t been this on his game since the first “Big Momma’s House”. But it’s William H. Macy’s performance that is most memorable. Ray Liotta as the lead biker was a good choice for the villain, and it was obvious he was having fun playing the role opposite such comedic talent and he even had a couple of humorous moments to shine in.

The story was actually much better than I predicted it to be, with plenty of surprise cameos, and humorous setups and one-liners, it was nice to see a comedy that didn’t rely purely on sight-gags and slapstick. Director Walt Becker is no stranger to comedy after helming the hilarious “Van Wilder”, but this was definitely a different type of comedy for him. “Van Wilder” was a very adult-oriented, raunchy comedy as most National Lampoon movies are, but “Wild Hogs” is a fairly family friendly film that doesn’t fall back on the run-of-the-mill sex jokes or fart gags; instead, this film survives on the terrific comedic timing of its talented cast and well-paced script.

“Wild Hogs” is one extremely funny ride of a movie that the whole family should enjoy, especially those with a penchant for motorcycles and road trips.

“Wild Hogs” is rated PG-13 for language and mild violence.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

With the massive success of numerous comic book films over the last decade or so, most of which have been based on well-known characters, eventually the Hollywood studios would gain enough confidence in the genre to tread into somewhat unknown territory by attempting to adapt lesser-known comic books. Hollywood has previously dabbled with the somewhat obscure characters and comic books to a small degree, although their success rate has been hit and miss; the attempts that worked, and worked very well I might add, were films like “Men in Black” or the blockbuster “300”; however, the ones that missed seemed to strike out just as massively as the others had succeeded, examples would be “Elektra”, the spin-off from “Daredevil” and “Zoom: Academy for Superheroes”. The appeal for movie studios to adapt more unknown titles would seem a somewhat risky proposition, but Universal had found great success with their gamble on ‘Hellboy’, so perhaps their confidence was a bit stronger than most. Which brings us to Universal’s most recent film adaptation based on a lesser-known comic book, the critically praised and fan boy approved, hard-edged and extremely violent “Wanted” based on Mark Millar’s comic book miniseries of the same name.

“Wanted” is the story of a weak-willed accountant named Wesley Gibson (James McAvoy), who lives an unenviable life where his girlfriend cheats on him, his boss verbally abuses him, and essentially everyone around him does nothing but take advantage of him every minute of his life. One moment everything in his life seems to be as mundane as ever, until a sexy woman by the name of Fox (Angelina Jolie) saves him from a would-be assassin and his routinely boring life. Now, Wesley is offered the chance of a lifetime from a mysterious man named Sloan (Morgan Freeman), who leads a group of assassins called The Fraternity, to embrace his hidden killer instinct and become the assassin he was destined to be.

With Hollywood’s successful comic book adaptations it seems a good rule of thumb would be to retain as much of the source material as possible, or else the comic fan base will turn on the property faster than you’d believe. Generally, I completely agree with the rule of staying true to the comic book material, and almost every single time an adaptation strays too far from its origins the movie flops massively; however, with “Wanted” I would have to be cliché in saying that sometimes rules are made to be broken. Helmed by Russian director Timur Bekmambetov making his American directorial debut, and written by Michael Brandt and Derek Haas (writers of “3:10 to Yuma”), along with Chris Morgan (“The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift”), “Wanted” loosely follows the storyline of the comic book miniseries written by acclaimed writer Mark Millar. The movie changes some of the characters from the miniseries, removes all of the costumes (aside from some subtle nods with Angelina Jolie’s leather attire), along with the notion that superheroes and villains existed at one point but no longer; however, with all these changes being made from the source material, series creator Mark Millar was still in approval of the production, even acknowledging his own wish to have removed the costumes from the comic book, though he never got around to it.

The screenplay is a mixture of reality based and somewhat science-fiction tinged dialogue and mind-bending action sequences, mixed with an interesting approach to the concept of predestination, all fitting perfectly together for a film in the vein of “The Matrix”. The story is extremely fast-paced, providing a semi-origin tale that takes the traditional origin sequences and puts its own spin on them, along with some truly innovative special effects sequences, and enough action set pieces to satisfy even the most ardent of action junkies. The characters are not the deepest you’ll find in a movie, comic book or otherwise, but there’s enough development sprinkled throughout to keep each character interesting for the audience, and not leave them waiting impatiently for the next fight to occur.

After so many CGI-intensive movies being released year after year, enabling directors and their special effects wizards to create virtually anything their imaginations can conceive of, it is surprising to me to still be able to watch a movie that manages to achieve some originality in the realm of CGI and action sequences. I thought I had seen almost anything that Hollywood could come up with by this point, but director Timur Bekmambetov and his team of creative special effects masters have crafted a truly awesome visual experience that will leave you saying, “Wow, I have never seen that before!” For some, “Wanted” seemed to be the movie that the two ‘Matrix’ sequels (especially the final one, “The Matrix Revolutions”) should have been. I for one enjoyed the two ‘Matrix’ sequels, but that’s for another time, either way “Wanted” is definitely a movie that is just as innovative in its presentation as anything found in ‘The Matrix’ trilogy. Although the storyline isn’t nearly as deep or complicated, or even confusing in some spots, as ‘The Matrix’ trilogy, I believe “Wanted” is still just as much of a fun and entertaining experience as the former.

Of course, the success of this movie wouldn’t be possible without the terrific work done by the three leads in the movie, James McAvoy (“Atonement”), Angelina Jolie (“Mr. and Mrs. Smith”), and Morgan Freeman (“The Dark Knight”). It is a testament to the talent of these superstars to be able to give credibility, and even some depth to such a far-fetched story, and still be able to walk away with their respect intact and their “cool” factor definitely through the roof. Anybody that has seen any of James McAvoy’s previous films will no doubt be surprised by not only his choice of signing on to a movie such as this, but also by the fact that he pulls off the role of an action hero surprisingly well. Angelina Jolie is no stranger to action heroines due to her successful turns in the ‘Lara Croft: Tomb Raider’ movies and “Mr. and Mrs. Smith”, though lately she has done more serious dramatic acting, it was nice to see her cut loose once again and still look just as good doing it as she ever did. Veteran actor Morgan Freeman is another big surprise to find in this movie, sure he’s done the last two ‘Batman’ films, but this role comes much more out of left field than any of his previous work, yet he still gives a great performance. On a side note, there is something strangely humorous about hearing Morgan Freeman channel his inner Samuel L. Jackson at one point in this film.

“Wanted” is by far one of the most visually impressive action films you will ever see, with an interesting story that moves at break neck speed, but doesn’t allow for a whole lot of character development, although you don’t really miss it. The movie is extremely violent and proud of it I might add, approaching the action genre with a boldness to push itself hard into an R rating, a move that many films (action or otherwise) seem afraid to do here lately.

“Wanted” is rated R for violence, language, and brief nudity/sexuality.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Movie franchises are cherished commodities in Hollywood, when a studio finds a series of films that works well with audiences they will fight tooth and nail to hold on and capitalize on that success. Sometimes this tenacity proves to be the undoing of the specific franchise, because in the process of capitalizing the movie studio churns out installment after installment in the franchise, and often times loses sight of what made the franchise so great in the beginning, resulting in diminished box office numbers and the end of a franchise. However, sometimes franchises work for long periods of time, now they may hit some bumps in the road, but after taking a break the franchise returns with renewed vigor and blows audiences away. Examples of this trend would be the ever-popular `James Bond’ series, the `Superman’ franchise, `Star Wars’, and `Batman’. With each of those examples, time away has produced strong box office numbers, and even with changes made with the cast and directors involved the success remains. Examples of franchises that suffered from over exposure and lack of story and craftsmanship are as follows: `A Nightmare on Elm Street’, `Friday the 13th’, and `Halloween’ (note that all of the series’ listed as eventual failures were horror franchises). The focus of this review is on one of the franchises listed above that after having huge success with 4 films, though the final installment was the weakest and turned fans off for some time, took an 8 year absence from the big screen and returned in the summer of 2005 with huge critical and commercial success. The franchise is `Batman’, and the movie that put this franchise back on top, well technically it kick-started a whole new `Batman’ franchise, was Christopher Nolan’s expertly crafted origin tale, “Batman Begins”.

Completely ignoring the previous 4 films from the original `Batman’ franchise, “Batman Begins” delivers an in-depth look at the origins of the Dark Knight. After the murder of his parents, young Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) embarks on a quest to find the means to fight injustice in all forms. This quest takes him all over the world, where he learns how to defend himself and others, become a great detective, and eventually he realizes that his time has come to return to the city that he once called home, Gotham City, and cleanse it of the evil that has corrupted it. However, to do this he must become more than just a man, he must become a symbol. Not just any symbol will work, it must be something that will strike fear into the hearts of men, and with this realization the Batman is born. With the aid of his trusty butler, Alfred (Michael Caine), and his business associate Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), Bruce Wayne/Batman will rid Gotham City from the likes of the maniacal Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy), who uses fear as his weapon, the deranged Ra’s Al Ghul, and mob boss Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson).

After “Batman & Robin” caused Warner Brothers’ faith in the `Batman’ franchise to dwindle, it’s not hard to imagine the difficulty the WB had with returning to a franchise that over the course of 4 films went from flagship franchise to non-existent. To convince the execs at the WB to green light another `Batman’ film required the film to have a top-notch cast, a superb director, and terrific writing. Thankfully, all of these components were achieved, and the WB presented audiences with the best Batman movie ever, and kick-started a new `Batman’ franchise.

With director Christopher Nolan’s success with his sleeper hit “Memento” and the crime drama “Insomnia”, there wasn’t much doubt that he could handle the dramatic aspects of the character, but what worried fans was that since he had never helmed a big budget movie before, especially one featuring a character with so much history from the comics, TV, and the previous franchise that spanned from 1989 to 1997, would Christopher Nolan drop the ball in bringing the Dark Knight back to cinematic life. Fans worries were quickly laid to rest when writer David Goyer (writer of “The Crow: City of Angels”, “Blade”, “Blade 2″, and “Blade: Trinity”) came on board to pen the screenplay with the assistance of Christopher Nolan. Then with A-list casting choices being made, featuring the likes of Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, and Katie Holmes, this film was definitely shaping up to be the blockbuster success that would be needed to do both Batman justice, and to begin a new franchise.

Terrific writing, acting, and directing brought Batman back from the pits of movie hell and back onto the big screen. With “Batman Begins” movie audiences finally learned how Bruce Wayne became Batman. Hopefully with the incredible movie experience that “Batman Begins” brought to the franchise, future installments will continue to build on what was started here, and this new franchise will not self-destruct. Don’t get me wrong, the original `Batman’ franchise was good for the most part, but based on “Batman Begins”, this new franchise looks to take the Dark Knight’s success to even greater heights.

“Batman Begins” is rated PG-13 for violence, language, and minor sensuality.

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Ready set hike! This movie starring Ice Cube and Keke Palmer will have you running for the ball!

The story starts of in an old town in Minen Illinois where an alcoholic man is forced to watch his niece (Palmer) when the mom has to take longer shifts at work. Palmer’s character is a loner who reads constantly and does not fit in, but when she tries the other kids make fun of her. All that changes when her uncle (Cube) takes her to a park where football is the only game the town can hold onto. Palmer’s character (Plummer) becomes the first girl in an all boys league.

There were some discriminatory remarks in this movie; however, the issue was not a huge part in the movie’s game. There was sexism of having a girl play in an all boys team. Girls can’t play football, oh yes they can. One girl took the whole team of boys and made them into champions along with the help of a determined coach when his niece’s father walks out on her.

Family is a controversial issue, for example, when Plummer’s dad tried to come back into her life, it is hard for her to accept the fact that he just doesn’t want to be in her life. At the big game, they lost the game, but they won something great coming home. The town acts as one big family, black and white. They pitch on to restore the town to its natural beauty in the times when everything was lost.

This movie is family friendly and if you enjoy football this movie is cool and fly high. Make sure you are a fan of Beyonce, Tyra and Gracy Brown. If you see the movie you’ll know what I mean

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

Hollywood seems to be stuck in the revival mode as icons from the 70’s and 80’s are being dusted off for one more chance at box-off gold. 2006’s “Rocky Balboa” and 2008’s “Rambo” scored big coin as audiences were curious to see how Sly Stallone, far removed from his signature roles, would interpret them for the new century. Bruce Willis as John McClain returned for the fourth time die hard-ing as fast as he could in 2007’s “Live Free or Die Hard.” While those popular characters garnered impressive bank, it was a no-brainer to make room for the biggest movie icon of the 1980’s, Indiana Jones.

 Indy was never not readied for a comeback; it just took the creative minds to finally agree on a script as the film’s frustrating production goes all the way to 1994.

 1997 briefly saw some movement, but Lucas, Spielberg and Ford could not unanimously agree on a script-production halted. Famous screenwriters of all genres and talents popped up over the years to offer their contributions; Stephan Gagan (Traffic), M Night Shamalan (Sixth Sense, Signs), Chris Columbus (Adventures in Babysitting) and Frank Darabont (Shawshank Redemption, The Mist) in which Indy’s brother made an appearance; all took a stab to no avail.

 Going by their own rule, if the trio didn’t like the script, the movie would not be made. At different times, Spielberg, Lucas and Ford each exercised their veto powers delaying production almost constantly for over a decade.

 As the years moved on, many felt Indy’s time had passed, the media scoffed that Ford was getting too old and Lucas and Spielberg could not find Indy into their schedules and find a satisfactory script- until early 2007 at the Golden Globe awards when the trio happily announced Indy was back!

 The film opens in the Nevada desert 1957; Elvis Presley is playing on the soundtrack as we are instantly dropped into the post war/cold war paranoia of the atomic age. Indy’s entrance is classic, always in the thick of trouble, as Russian infiltrators pull him and his sidekick, Mac, (Ray Winstone) from the trunk of a car with guns in their faces. Trading barbs and demanding information from Indy, Cate Blanchett struts across the screen in a sexy short black wig and a thick Russian accent as Irina Spalko, Joseph Stalin’s right hand woman armed with something extra- psychic abilities and tries to read Indy’s mind. She has a vested interest in what’s in storage inside the warehouse that may or may not be “Area 51.”

 Indy leads the Russians along just enough to form an escape; his trick of the Russians emptying their ammo is fantastic. As slick as Indy often is, his cluelessness and miscalculations are just as important character trait as it keeps things interesting- no one likes a perfect hero. Indy’s escape leads him to a fake town that turns out to be an atomic testing site. As Indy hears the countdown, he scrambles for cover in a refrigerator. The explosion, one of the film’s best shots, throws him clear and put him under the watchful eye of pissed off CIA agents who question Jones’s patriotism and his loyalty as we learn of what Indy has been up to since the close of “Last Crusade” (war hero, witness to the Roswell crash landing) and his involvement with Russian spies.

 Here again we get historical reference points (Nazis, Cultists, Holy Grail), the Red Scare, Atom Bombs) to set the adventure in motion. Once the cold war was in full swing, rumors swirled that the Russians were using ‘psychic spies’ to gather U.S. information through unconventional tactics. The CIA soon took heed and created its own department training anyone with psychic abilities, notability spies adept at remote viewing that could astrally project ones consciousness across oceans, borders and to the far reaches of space. Truth is often stranger than fiction.

 For those of us not alive at the time, Spielberg and Lucas grew up in that era so they give us a great taste of what the “Red Scare” and the atomic era and the post-war 1950’s were all about. Not unlike our current political climate; paranoia and sheep-like-follow-the-leader behavior dominated. Your loyalties were often questioned if you dared to go against the established credo.

 Some of Ford’s best work in years is in this scene as he gives Jones some welcomed passion; insulted that after all those years of service for his country, he’s treated like a criminal.

 Once Indy is let go, he heads back to work as Professor Jones, when Dean Stanforth (Jim Broadbent) informs him that he’s being given a mandatory leave of absence as the government continues to watch his every move. On a train to New York, he is approached by a young greaser named Mutt Williams (Shia LeBeouf) who needs his help in finding their mutual friend, Harold Oxley, played by John Hurt whose been abducted by the Russians. Soon, Indy and Mutt are on their way to South America, where their paths cross with Spalko and her Soviet comrades who are also on the trail of Oxley, the Crystal Skull and a figure from Indy’s past - Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen) returns.

Before this review begins I will state that I never nor should anyone with a rational mind expect this to surpass “Raiders,” an incredibly ridiculous expectation to say the least. Movies of that caliber are rarely done twice especially by the same creative team, but what we get is pretty damn good.

 The performances are what really bind the movie together. The best part of the film is the reunion of Indy and Marion. The sparks are still there and they fight like cats and dog. Their bickering continues on so that even the Russians get sick of their noise. They fight because they are too much alike; stubborn, passionate and demanding, both suck all they can from life and unfortunately from each other at times, one minute they curse the day they met, the next they are in a adoring embrace- love is a kooky bitch. The best exchange, as Marion complains saying ‘I bet there were tons of women after me’ and instead of Indy going for the jugular and being a dick, he caves and replies with, “They all had the same problem… They weren’t you baby! Their squabbling harkens back to the best moments of “Raiders” and if the film’s final scene doesn’t make you stand up and say “HELL YEAH!” then you have no reason to be watching.

 Ford’s enthusiasm is contagious as Blanchett chews every scene with dominatrix glee; I wished many times that SHE had a whip. All of Indy’s villains have been one-dimensional, Spalko is no different, although she’s way more fun than Mola Ram and Donovan, whilst in Peru there is a fleeting moment where it appears that Indy crushes on the hot commie, who could blame him, the chick is HOT!

 Shia LeBeouf makes an excellent sidekick, he doesn’t hog screen time nor does he crap anything up with clunky one-liners or annoying screeching. He’s a tough kid and follows Jones with no problems. There’s no evidence that he would make a great successor to Ford’s heroic position, but as a team player he works just fine. Like in “Transformers” he takes unbelievable situations and gives them a reality that we accept.

 Jim Broadbent and John Hurt are good, although the former is rather a thankless role as the Dean of Indy’s school. Hurt as Oxley, offers some clever humor and much needed exposition as he’s driven temporarily insane by the Crystal Skull and creates an unintentional geek moment, the elongated skull looks similar to an H.R. Giger creation that recalls Hurt’s character, Kane the chest-bursting incubator from “Alien.”

 Ray Winstone as Mac shows Indy’s lousy ability in picking loyal friends.

The warehouse search with the Russians is worth the price admission alone that ends with a quick appearance of the Ark of the Covenant. THE BEST intro since “Temple“, it’s the perfect example of Indy under pressure and using his wits and environment to form his escape. When he cracks that whip and begins swinging and causing all kinds of destruction, a wonderful sense of calm, and nostalgia hit me- “THAT’S MY INDY! Welcome back, old friend!”

 Much as has been written on Ford’s age with the jokes and snide remarks, but he pulls it off wonderfully. The most astonishing thing for me was seeing Ford smile in almost every scene. It’s the first time in over a decade that he’s been a movie that people actually want to see has made him a happy bastard once again and the fun of playing Jones one more time shines through. Ford has always been a guy who looks at least ten years younger than he is, he’s 65 and sure the lines in his face are little more pronounced now, his hair slightly thinner, gray, but father time has been kind to him. Mutt has a great line that shuts down all the naysayers, “You are pretty good in a fight. What are you like 80?”

 His performance is believable, vigorous and human. Not since “Raiders” has Indy been this interesting and three dimensional.

 Sure, the action is over-the-top, like in all the films, but he doesn’t do anything too unbelievable; this is Indiana Jones for Kirk’s Sake! And that includes taking shelter in a lead-lined refrigerator from a nuclear blast!

 The hiatus has behooved the character as the screenplay acknowledges Indy’s advancing years and the important thing he’s missed out on. The movie’s heart shows through in the best scene in the movie; tears well up in Indy’s eyes as he looks at pictures of his friend/mentor Marcus Brody and his dad lamenting their deaths, “It’s been a tough couple of years; first Dad, then Marcus.” The best line in the film comes from Jim Broadbent as he tells Indy that “At a certain point, life stops giving you things and starts taking them.”

 That’s the theme of the film, LIFE. Indy’s has been steeped in irony, sure, he’s one guy who never let it pass him by as he’s always chosen the big adventures searching for the most sought after artifacts and icons of the world, living the life of ten men, yet the simplest things are the most elusive. Having regrettably passed on it once, he reclaims his lost treasure in the films final scene.

 For those that balk at the sci-fi Mcguffin really need to shut their gobs as the finale is no more “over-the-top” or “preposterous” than hearts being removed while the person remained alive or an eight-hundred year-old knight watching over the Holy Grail. We have selective memories when it comes to what we like and often times look like retard stumps when we refuse to acknowledge what came before. To assign any type of logic or reality to Indy is not what you do when watching these films. They are born from a type of storytelling that relies heavily on, nostalgia, fun and suspension of disbelief. The objective is to have fun and when the audience betrays that, they get exactly what they deserve- so for every harsh retard searching for yet another axe to grind against Lucas, congrats! You win…but not really as life will continue to punch you in the nuts. This is a fun film and needs to be seen as such.

 Even though this is the best story since “Raiders,” (George Lucas) the flaws are apparent and lay solely on David Koepp, who takes the best bits from all the previous drafts, especially Frank Darabont’s “Saucer Men” and fashions his own screenplay that works most of the time, but when it doesn’t, we know who to blame. Having never been impressed with his work, it’s to no surprise that his clumsy handprints are found throughout; dumb jokes like: Tarzan, prairie dogs, the snake as a rope, out of character moments for Jones, Mac’s constant switching of allegiances and a Jungle vehicle chase that lacks the usual white-knuckle tension. The screenplay is too front-loaded, too much talk, not enough show. Indy and Marion should have had a few more quiet scenes together, their meeting is classic, but Lawrence Kasdan’s steady hand is missed, although it is rumored that Lars contributed some of their dialogue. Marion is a welcome addition to the story, but she sort of fades off into the action and doesn’t do much until the end.

 Blaming editor Michael Khan would be easy, but it’s Spielberg and Lucas who have the final say and for as creative as the duo is, they should have known better with the flimsy jungle chase, (recall the tension and speed applied to the speeder chase in “Jedi.”) but ultimately I’m quibbling and really need to shut the hell up.

 Despite all that, Spielberg still knows his shit as action director. The man is untouchable at this point and for reasons well known; he knows the geography of a scene. He’s very much like a dancer; he can hear the music and uses his rhythm to follow along. The man’s most important talent is his visual eye that allows the audience to have an idea where they’re at within the context of the action scene both story-wise and geographically.

 Watch any of his action scenes and you will see how the tension is gradually built putting our heroes in danger and the pay-off is done just as flawlessly as there is no mistake in what has just occurred. His films are cut and shot in a way that you always are able to follow the story, yet the tension still rises, and the editing itself has a musical quality to it, as though when you’re watching a scene from any of his four masterpieces; like the barrel chase in “JAWS“, the towns folk chasing the ships in “Close Encounters..”, the truck chase in “Raiders” or the bicycle chase in “E.T“.; you’re not only listening to a great piece of music you’re watching one as well. To have John Williams scoring his work merely underscores both men’s brilliance.

 Today’s directors have no fucking clue how to film an action scene. There’s no editing rhythm established, no idea where this character is at or what the stakes are; no poetry to the action, no coherency and especially no sense of geography. Turn loose the avid and let hacks like Paul Greengrass shake the camera like Michael J. Fox on “Tilt-a-World.”

 I was thrilled to see Spielberg let loose on the motorcycle chase as it has some impressive shots and a great joke referencing the truck chase from “Raiders” with Indy being pulled inside a pursuing car and escaping on the other. Plenty of other great shots and moments are peppered throughout, Indy’s first ’shadowy’ entrance, the Warehouse melee, the motorbike chase and the finale with the huge Spaceship. The man is still on fire and when he sends Indy over not one, but three waterfalls, we know he’s having a total blast.

 Part of Spielberg’s genius is that he takes his massive artistic power as a filmmaker and applies it to stuff that’s fun or escapist in nature. What other Director would have made “Raiders of the Lost Ark” having both action adventure sensibility and high art? NONE.

 No matter if the project is Oscar-bait or packed with Dinosaurs, the man injects his soul in everything he does, even the colossal mess of “1941” shows a passionate artist at work, he’s throwing a party and everyone’s invited and for that he will have my unwavering respect.

 And what would Indiana Jones be without his iconic composer, John Williams. For some strange reason he’s not working with the London Symphony Orchestra, still he does deliver a solid score. The standout would be the jaunty, “A Whirl through Academia” that plays during Mutt’s/Indy’s motorbike chase, sounds similar to, “The Basket Game” from “Raiders.”

 Even though the film is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, I had a hell of lot of fun with it and to have one of my childhood heroes back on the big screen, that’s good enough for me. I personally never thought I would see Indy’s return, considering I was a Junior in high school when Last Crusade was released, but damn if its not worth the wait.

 The movie does end on a personally sad note because this will most likely be the end of Indy’s adventures and future Spielberg/Lucas/Ford collaborations, which is very sad to think about.

 Indy’s back and he needs to be enjoyed! It would take a cold, joyless soul not to be albe to have fun wih Indy’s return. The thing to remember is to not get enslaved in Nerdstolgia and expect to be transported back in time to when life was so much better as a kid, because frankly, if it was, you are a boring S.O.B.  I didn’t expect or desire anything, but two hours of solid entertainment- Guess what? I got it! 

  All I have to say is, because of Spielberg and Lucas, there was no better time to be a kid who loved movies than in the 1980’s. Thank you!

The above author's byline must be attached to the work if being distributed.

 These anti Star Wars, crybaby losers are amusing as they seem to think their words have some sort of Kryptonite effect on George Lucas and if they say it loud enough and often, their self-serving wants and desires will be fulfilled. Jar Jar Binks, the Ewoks and whatever else sticks in the BB brains will somehow be wiped away from all our collective memories. Give me a Nell Carter-sized BREAK!
I’m tired of the bitterness, the raped my childhood sentiments that speak more about the protestor than anything else.
Criticism is all part of the creative process, but it has to be done honestly and with at least a modicum of knowledge and class, which appears to be sorely lacking.
It’s a strange and pathetic society we live in today; emotion has taken the place of logic and reasoning, in the art world as well as politics. If something goes wrong or we don’t get what we want, by god, someone has to pay!
I’m not saying all the of critical reactions are like this, just the ones that take this sickening righteous anger about Lucas and his talents. Get over it!
 If you are one of those nattering naysayers of negativity, move along, please. Your opinions are worthless. Just as a great poet once said, “Opinions are just like assholes, everyone has one and it’s usually full of shit.”
With that I present a POSITIVE review of the “Clone Wars,” basically a 90 minute pilot for the upcoming series airing on the Cartoon Network. Having been referenced way back in 1977 during Ben Kenobi’s BS session with Luke, the Clone Wars were finally acknowledged in Episode II and III, the opening salvo in the former and the victorious denouncement in the latter, or so the Republic thought.
If anyone ever wondered why Lucas left the majority of the battles out of the last two live action chapters, this is why, he’s given ample opportunity and a vast amount of time to tell it exactly how he wants it and to take his time if he so chooses.
This is not quite the Star Wars I grew up, no Fox l