The Dark Knight stars Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, and Maggie Gyllenhaal whose Cape Crusader is not wanting to reveal himself to the City of Gotham, but is the City ready for the Dark Knight.

The story line was confusing. All I know is that the Joker (Ledger) kills innocent people and the Batman (Bale) has to stop him before he does anymore damage. In the middle is Kent a lawyer who wins the affection of Rachel.(Gyllenhaal) Kent puts most of the criminals in jail by winning a court case. However, things get more serous when the bad guys look to a freak for help. The Joker doesn’t always tick to the plan and he makes a wondeful mess for everyone. The police in charge (Oldman) works with Batman to help catch this monstrous clown, but will Batman prevail? The story continues to get even more twisted when the good guys go bad.

The movies direction was very confusing. One minute you think the Joker is trying to be helpful but then he is bad. Ledger’s acting skills was very pleasing, but he didn’t get the final word. Was he caught or did he escape. We assume he was caught, but he always comes up with something clever. Another view is that Gary Oldman’s role was very disappointing. “So you came back from the dead?” Hmm…isn’t that Batman’s role? Batman always lives.

I loved the way the Joker came up with his tactics of killings. Ledger took things to a whole new level. I love the line when he says, “Why so serious?” Ledger tricks half the City by plotting destuctive mechanisms to make Batman realize what he is really after. Ledger as Joker also plays well when he goes after the heart. But why the good guy goes bad, makes one realize that Kent’s line was right, “You die to be a hero, or you can live long enough to become the villian.” Hmm….I like this quote it had meaning to it.

Overall this movie was pretty good. There were positive and negative things about the movie which gives you some mixed feelings. It was like this because this was Ledger’s last movie However, when you look into the moonlight you see a Dark Knight.

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

Bubble
Directed By: Steven Soderbergh
Starring: Debbie Doebereiner / Dustin James Ashley / Misty Wilkins
Rating:

Firstly, am I the only that constantly confuses Steven oderbergh with David Cronenberg? (At least I can spell their names properly) And secondly, the only Soderbergh films that I have seen previously are the Ocean’s films, Traffic, and The Good German (which I didn’t care for). I can see now that I definitely need to explore more of his earlier work. It’s not all George Clooney and heists.

I randomly picked up Bubble at the library a few days, thinking it was from the director of Eastern Promises and A History of Violence. With that in mind, I really wasn’t expecting the style of the film. About 20 minutes into it, I had to check the director on IMDb.

It’s quite an unusual film, more in the style of the Dogme 95 movement than anything else. I learned afterwards that the three main actors hadn’t acted before and the scrpt was improvised. This definitely makes sense, and I thought that it worked out very well. Everything about the film felt real and not forced. I was especially impressed with the subtelty.

There’s an alternate ending on the DVD, which personally I didn’t care for. I’m very glad that they didn’t use it, as it completely ruins the realistic quality of Bubble. I vastly prefer the ending that I did see. Everything isn’t wrapped up in a nice narrative box. There’s a lot to think about in terms of the characters and their motivations, and especially varying degrees of conflict. And of course, toss a little religion into the mix.

Bubble could almost be qualified as a short film, clocking in at 73 minutes. For me the length was perfect. With a film like this that doesn’t rely havily on professional actors and a developed script, I’m not sure how it would have fared with another half hour or so. The story was concise and intriguing.

I’m not going to summarize the film. I’d rather just recommend that you get a copy and watch it.

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

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.

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

Written by Christopher & Jonathan Nolan
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Micheal Caine & Morgan Freeman

OK. The wait is over, and I need to get this out of the way right now…The Dark Knight is not perfect. Oh, oops, sorry, actually it is. All those with seemingly unsatisfiable expectations, you needn’t worry. I, like many, have been waiting for this sequel for over three years, but it wasn’t until the movie started that I realized I didn’t truly know what I was waiting for. The Heath Ledger (I’ll get to him later) hype had occupied my mind more than anything else, and it kept me from completely understanding what I was expecting. I did know that I expected an improvement on Batman Begins, an excellent movie to begin with, but The Dark Knight surpasses it’s predecessor in every aspect by prodigious margins.

Batman (Christian Bale) has been on The Joker’s (Heath Ledger) tail for a while and with the help of good friend Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) as well as the newly appointed D.A. Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), they hope to take the insane criminal mastermind down. Dent may be the only man, not wearing a bat costume, that’s brave enough to take down crime at any cost, to protect Gotham city. Things are not so simple however as The Joker threatens to kill more and more unless The Batman reveals his true identity. How Batman/Bruce Wayne, as well as those close to him, will react to this disastrous situation is fascinating. To make matters worse, every time a step in the right direction is taken towards putting a stop to the Joker’s madness, it is revealed that those steps are apart of the Joker’s grand plan. I do not want to spoil anything, so I will not go into specific details, but the events unravel in tragic, devastating ways.

Christopher Nolan has crafted the perfect Batman story. This is the best single tale in the extensive Batman mythos. I have trouble imagining a better movie or comic book ever coming to be (never say never). Needlessly to say this is the best shot movie of the year and then some. Nolan appropriately highlights the explosions and various action. More importantly he magnifies the small character moments, getting us so emotionally involved we forget we are watching a movie. Surprisingly, he creates his most suspenseful film and in the most dire of scenes, we actually lose our nerves (in a good way). He does what great directors aspire to do, but it’s a rare happenstance, Nolan grabs his audience early on and never lets go. He commands us, we bend to his will. This is the epitome of masterful film making. The screenplay is full of surprises and daring decisions. The story unfolds in an epic fashion, a crime-drama of the highest quality. Important events are scattered through the beginning, middle and end, always at just the right time. The script has it’s humour, but less so than Begins. Knight is relentlessly dark and bleak, it contains the strongest of moral complexities. Yes, Batman is forced to make tough decisions, but so do many key characters, as well as all the citizens of Gotham. How would you react? At one point The Joker puts a televised hit out on a character. He threatens to blow up a hospital if that character is not dead in 60 minutes. There are no easy answers to the dilemmas contained herein and the consequential soul-searching is not always pleasant. Overall, the dialog is a lot tighter, another factor in making The Dark Knight so believable we find ourselves lost within it.

Of course the acting is tremendous. The supporting cast is flawless, providing one of the deeper casts of characters in recent memory. Leading the way is Aaron Eckhart, who plays his character perfectly, with just the right amount of emotion and complexity. Harvey Dent is one of my favourite characters from the comic books, and it is very pleasing to see him get a proper treatment. Also of note, Maggie Gyllenhaal replaces Katie Holmes (one of very few downsides to Batman Begins) as Rachel Dawes, and is much better and therefore much less distracting than Holme’s
sub-par, boring, unlikeable performance. Two wonderful actors, Micheal Caine and Morgan Freeman, get much less screen time this go-around. This is most appropriate because it is hard not to smile when they are in frame, and The Dark Knight ain’t meant to be too smiley. Gary Oldman continues his brilliant job as the endearing, admirable Lt. Jim Gordon. Oldman brings a kindness as well as a respectable matureness to the role and it is a terrific effort.

Christian Bale brings the true Batman of the comic books to life. He embodies The Dark Knight like none before him, and it’s hard to imagine anyone else ever taking the part. Bale is fierce, confident, conflicted, and powerful as Batman. His “bat rasp” is put to even better use, he strikes fear in his enemies as well as the audience. As Bruce Wayne, Bale is arrogant and incontrovertibly intelligent. He gives his character such an intricate level of substance that it’s difficult not to think Oscar. I truly think Christian Bale is one of the better actors working today. He could play anything. He could take the most serious award-contending roles, which he sometimes does do, but here he takes a character that has been degraded in the past and manages to turn it into a most serious award-contending role. This is surprising to some, but for an avid reader of the source material, it is nothing short of necessary to make the movies as great as they should be.

Now for what I assume everyone is curious about, Heath Ledger’s invention of The Joker. The late Ledger was already an accomplished actor with such brilliant turns in, among others, Monster’s Ball, Brokeback Mountain and I’m Not There. But here is his master work. His performance is nothing short of awe-inspiring, to put it in perspective, it is of Daniel Day-Lewis quality. Ledger’s Joker is menacing, horrifying, thunderous and darkest of dark. Some scenes, and you can certainly credit the writing and directing for this, are unexpectedly terrifying. I really want to get the point across that this is the most frightening, haunting and harrowing picture of the year, and that Heath Ledger deserves infinite praise for making it so. He absolutely disappears into the character, like few in the trade can, there is no trace of him in the film. The unforgettable, hostilely convoluted performance is, in my mind, a no-brainer to win the Supporting Actor Oscar. I would be very disappointed otherwise. Though it is hard to escape the movie without being disappointed. We have lost an immensely talented actor, who would have had a long, magnificent career.

The Dark Knight is not comic-booky at all. It is ironic that the actual comic books the movie is based on are not “comic-booky” either. It is unfortunate that such a limitless medium is seen in such a specific way by those who have not discovered it’s possibilities. The movie is assuredly not as simple as good versus evil, but rather an examination of what good and evil really are and if they even exist. An elaborate meditation on right and wrong. A piece of extraordinary depth. This is why we go to the movies: To be moved, challenged, surprised and entertained. The Dark Knight is a crime-drama on par with the greatest works in the genre (Scorsese, Mann, Coppola). It is also, quite easily in fact, the greatest superhero film of all-time. Most importantly, it is one of the better motion pictures to ever grace the sacred silver screen.

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

This is not a film for the weak-stomached.  This is a very real, gritty and non-glamorous look at drug abuse and a revelation of its many forms and faces.  Darren Aronofsky does an impressive job directing a cast that doesn’t “wow” anyone in name (Jared Leto, Jennifer Connelly, Marlon Wayans, Ellen Burstyn and Christopher MacDonald), but certainly does in performance, particularly Burstyn, who was nominated for an Academy Award for this role.

Harry Goldfarb (Leto) is a lazy ne’er-do-well breaking into the adulthood in Brooklyn who happens to have a little heroin issue.  He’s been supporting his habit by stealing his mother’s television and selling it, only to have her purchase it back on a regular basis from the same resale vendor.  Harry feels guilty, but not that guilty.

Harry’s in love with Marion Silver (Connelly), an aspiring designer with a teeeensy weeeensy cocaine addiction.  In fact, he loves her so much, that he and his best buddy Tyrone (Wayans) decide that if they give this whole drug-dealing thing a whirl, they can put away enough money to open up a store for Marion and live the proverbial dream.

Of course, it’s not as easy as it looks.  Harry and Tyrone have some devastating run-ins with the police and with some big-time dealers.  Marion’s addiction drives her to desperate measures for a fix.  Meanwhile, Harry’s mother Sara (Burstyn) is becoming dependent on diet pills in a fervent quest to fit into a red dress for an elusive television appearance.  All of these characters hit rock bottom, revealing the true evil of drug addiction and how it spins lives out of control.

I know that Aronofsky’s directing style isn’t everyone’s favorite, but I think that this is one film that it fits.  The actual use of the drugs isn’t glorified or even spotlighted.  This is a story about what drug addiction does to people, not about people using drugs.  These aren’t street rats who were born addicts.  They are real people.  They have dreams.  I believe that this film can make people think twice before experimenting with drugs.  It’s that powerful.

The highlight of this film is Burstyn, in all her glory.  You’ll want to cry when she’s having coffee with Harry and speaking of her lonely life, filled with nothing but television and chatty Brooklyn biddies.  This is why her quest for the red dress consumes her.  The refrigerator gains a personality as she increases her dosage of the uppers.  Christopher MacDonald plays an infomercial personality who acts almost as a spirit guide directing her throughout her quest.  Her performance is absolutely dazzling.

As I mentioned above, this film is certainly not for the queasy.  If you think you can handle some rather graphic images, I strongly recommend this movie; if for nothing else, for Ellen Burstyn’s superb performance.

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

I managed to get a exclusive look at the upcoming film The Mutant Chronicles, blasting its way into theaters some time in 2008. The exact release date is unknown as of this writing, but it’s certain that it will be some time this year. The big question is whether or not it is worth the time and price of admission.

During the 23rd century, a soldier by the name of Mitch Hunter (Thomas Jane) guides an army of fierce fighters to battle underground mutants after opening a seal to an ancient creation. This creation is a machine known to turn humans into blade-slinging mutants determined to wipe out mankind. It is up to Mitch and his fierce army to save the world. Quite possibly the first ever pen-and-paper-role-playing-game-turned-movie, The Mutant Chronicles is surprisingly satisfying.

Loud, exciting, very funny, and brutally entertaining, it just might be the action film of the year — a movie full of great fight scenes, excitement around every corner, and visually arresting set designs that will hold even the most cynical viewer’s interest. Truthfully, it is the most fun I’ve had at the movies in a long time.

Sporting an A-list action cast that includes Ron Perlman (Hellboy) and Thomas Jane (The Punisher), it is sure to please a certain targeted audience that has a lust for action and a strong appetite for gore. The thrills, the shocks, and the sheer enjoyment of going to the movies is all there and in full, ass-kicking form.

But don’t get me wrong, readers, this isn’t a masterpiece. It does have its glitches like underdeveloped characters, loads of commentary, and Ron Perlman’s acting (which is nearly laughable). Not to mention the small cameo appearance from John Malkovich was unnecessary and could’ve saved the filmmakers a few bucks by casting an unknown actor for this role. Things like that are giving the movie a bad rep after its premier at the Cannes Film Festival. However, there are enough adrenaline-charged moments to flush out these glitches and make for pure entertainment.

In the final act, we get to see Hellboy and The  Punisher go head-to-head in a battle to the death. It’s an exhilarating moment added to the tons of violence beforehand and a great finish to a spectacular fusion of sci-fi, action, horror, and comedy. The Mutant Chronicles is an authentic film and certainly worth the admission price, popcorn and all. 4.5/5 stars

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

This movie stars Liv Tyler and Scott Speedman.  It is an hour and twenty-five minutes long and is rated R mostly for intense violence and some language.

A newlywed couple try to have a nice romantic evening and are disrupted by a homicidal group of strangers.  The couple (Tyler and Speedman) have no clue why these people, one man and two women, have invaded their lives and are trying to hurt them.  The masked strangers toy with the couple, leading them to hide, seperate and to harm a close friend.  They destroy the couples lives and then they set out to destroy the couple.  Both Tyler and Speedman make attempts to foil the strange killers, but in the end their efforts seem futile as the strangers come closer and closer to causing them death.  Some will live and some will die, all because they “were home”.

Visually interesting this movies scenery sets the setting for the movie.  A lone house on a dusty road with no neighbors, the homocidal strangers found the perfect house to invade.  Trees and a creepy barn add to the scenery.  When the movie begins picking up steam and an earlier character returns the destruction becomes a little more obvious and adds even further to the creepy element this movie attempts to hold.  The acting by Liv Tyler is well done and a different jump for all those who loved her int he Lord of the Ring trilogy.  She is fearfull and scared in all the right places and complacent in the ones she needs to be complacent in.  Of course after saying all of these nice things I must now say what I really thought of the movie.

I thought this movie was pretty bad.  The premise is like one of a million other movies, killers killing because they can and because you are available.  This reminds me of a million other movies like The House of 1000 Corpses, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and even Friday the 13th.  They all have killers who kill randomly because the person they are killing was in the wrong place at the right time.  However most of those movies were interesting and the killers made sense, a homicidal family who kill for fun, a homicidal family who might have been brought on by insest and a killer who is ressureccted for no reason (yes even Jason is more interesting).  These killers aren’t evne that scary to me.  The “scary” scenes used too many startling scare tactics - people jumping out, people looking in windows, things making loud noises, it wasn’t scary.  In fact most of the scenes in the movie were obvious and you knew what scary thing was going to happen next. 

Boring and pointless this movie could be skipped.  No matter that the beautiful Liv Tyler is in this movie, it isn’t interesting enough to stay watching, even though it has some interesting scenes.  Not enough of a draw to watch the rest of the movie, it is too random and the viewer really doesn’t care what happens to the victims or the killers, especially since from the beginning of the movie you know what the end of the movie is going to be like. 

Don’t see it, and if you already have I am sure you suffer from the same watcher’s regret that I do, maybe we should start a support group.  Anyone who has seen this movie, or any of the following Dead Silence, I Know Who Killed Me, Sunshine, or The Happening to name a few.  Skip it, watch something better.

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

Written by Barry Levy and Directed by Pete Travis, Vantage Point centers around an assasination attempt on the President of the United States of America. The high speed political thriller is told and re-told from several different perspectives of those involved and those in the crowd.

In Spain, the President of the United States (William Hurt) is shot before making a speech to promote a peace summit. The paniced crowd runs in all directions, and just as secret service agents, reporters and everyone else are all starting to try and make sense of things, a large explosion goes off, killing many civilians and injuring numerous more. That is the stage for this ensemble thriller, edited with urgency and moving at a mile a minute to slowly reveal the truth behind who did it, why and the attempted cover-up.

Most movies these days have the burden of stretching maybe an hour’s worth of quality story into a full length movie. This is usually accomplished by stretching out an action scene, such as a chase thru crowded streets or a high speed car chase, or adding what I like to call “fluff plot”, where a movie needlessly develops a minor character more than necessary and then kills them off shortly later. Basically, in these cases, the film is banking on gripping the audience by hopefully making them feel attached to certain smaller characters in the movie and then killing them to add a sense of urgency or drama, a feeling that anyone could die at any moment.

In Vantage Point, Director Pete Travis uses the full arsenal, attempting to literally take 20 minutes of story and see how far he can stretch it, retelling the same 20 minutes several times, sometimes to quite annoying lengths. The first time or so, its quite captivating to see the assasination attempt and what occurs afterward and then get the “cliffhanger” ending to that segement and then jump to the next point of view. About a half-hour into the movie, however, it gets really old. Finally, for about the last 35 minutes or so, the movie does break this mold, opens up a bit and concludes the film cohesively, jumping from character to character as the story wraps up, but before that it is an aggrivating political thriller, which attempts to add every concievable twist it can. Wiether this is because the film was just poorly written, or maybe they couldn’t decide where to go and so they did it all, or maybe its just an excuse to stretch the movie out, which is my best guess, but whatever it was, it didn’t work very well.

Filled with many recognizable actors, including Dennis Quaid, Forrest Whitaker, Sigourney Weaver, Matthew Fox, Zoe Saldana and Bruce McGill, Vantage Point does sport a remarkably well casted ensemble, however the constant gimics and last second twists to stretch the story is what ultimately hurts the movie. It seems like it would’ve made a great episode of “24″ or another such show, but as movie, it just doesn’t have enough to it to make it very satisfying.

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

Directed by: Marc Schoelermann.

Starring: Milo Ventimiglia as Ted Grey, Michael Weston as Jake Gallo, Alyssa Milano as Gwen Williamson, and Lauren Lee Smith as Juliette Bath.

Is there a doctor in the house? Okay, so Pathology deals with the other kind of doctor–the medical examiner. Pathology takes place in the ever dreaded morgue of a popular hospital. With gore abound and almost flawless execution, Marc Schoelermann creates a film to die for.

Ted Grey is an anatomy prodigy with wit that goes virtually unmatched. He joins a group of medical school students in residency and is quickly cast as an outsider due to his immense knowledge of gross human anatomy. He then meets the egotistical head honcho of the group Jake Gallo. After going on a drunken tour de slums (with Jake) in which Ted meets an immoral body guard and an even more immoral prostitute grandmother, Ted is shocked to discover the body of body guard in the morgue the next day. Of course, in his drunken stupor Ted wound up blacking out and can’t remember anything, but he does suspect Jake had something to do with the ghastly murder. This is where the game begins. Jake asks Ted to meet him back at the hospital later that evening. After meeting in front of the elevators, Jake takes Ted down to a sequestered wing of the hospital. In the abandoned surgical room lies the corpse of the body guard with a few fellow members of the residency team. Jake explains to Ted the object of the game is to commit the perfect murder. From then on, Dr. Ted Grey is sucked into a deadly game of wits, skill, and sexual temptation. The consequences of his actions are dramatic and heartbreaking. Ted Grey pays the ultimate price…but so does Jake Gallo.

Pathology isn’t your typical brain dead gore horror flick. This film’s dialogue is uniquely intelligent, thoughtful, and downright cunning. Take this snippet of a quote from Professor Dr. Morris as an example:  “You will see the perversion, the corruption of the flesh by all means unnatural. And then we will work backwards, always back to that original pristine design, to determine the affecting cause of death.” The aforementioned quote is completely ironic given the plot of the film. Aside from its irony, the quote (there are many more like them) serves as a prime example for the intellectual dialogue one will discover while watching this film.

What I find to be extremely brilliant is how the film preys upon a common human weakness. When we hear of a registered sex offender molesting and murdering a child or a drug dealer selling dope while his/her kid watches helplessly from a nearby car, it is in our human nature to desire vigilante justice. We actually want to see these types of atrocities avenged! If the law were not holding us back, think of how many people would play judge and jury. Pathology may seem like a zany and nonsensical film, but it leaves the lingering questions for your subconscious to solve. This is what makes Pathology so psychologically terrifying!

Pathology possesses the twisted games and gore from the Saw series and the secluded secret group up to no good from films such as Fight Club. This film is nothing short of a stomach-churning psychological rollercoaster ride. Once you slip the DVD into your player and begin watching, I guarantee you will be entertained throughout. Come on, give Pathology a chance…it will leave you scared stiff.

***4.5 out of 5 stars***

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

Untraceable was directed by Gregory Hoblit, who also directed the thriller Fracture. The movie follows an FBI cyber crime unit as they try to stop a new breed of killer. Someone is killing people live on the internet, devising the murders in a way that the more website visits he gets the quicker the victim dies; essentially making curious internet surfers accomplices to murder. The movie stars Diane Lane, Billy Burke, and Colin Hanks.

To start out with: the movie has lots of bad dialog, the actors cannot be to blame for the stale way in which they deliver such lines. However, I was able to push past such things and “go with the flow.” In this way I was able to indeed find entertainment value. The director sets a solid moody tone with darkness and visual shots which were the main thing that kept me into the film regardless of my initially not being impressed with the dialog. The tension and action is built up quite well.

The premise is an intriguing one, which many automatically want to chalk up to as being a gimmick to become preachy on the way society acts towards violence in the new age of internet media and how people will watch snuff films such as beheadings and or suicides  without thinking how this affects the families of the victims. People would visit the killer’s website to see someone die, whether or not they knew he was a good guy with a family. I thought the obvious morality message was not preached too heavily and was handled fairly well.

People who cannot help but pick apart logic flaws, especially computer savvy or chemical savvy folks, will probably not get as much enjoyment out of this movie. Why did the battery acid melt through skin and bone, but not the plastic ties binding his arms? There are lots of liberties taken and unrealistic scenarios. However, if you hop into this ride just looking for some entertainment: it is a worthy rental. The only thing I will caution viewers about though is the gore factor. The deaths in this movie are fairly brutal and gory ala skin getting melted off and such.

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

A flocking stupid movie!

The Flock was directed by Andrew Lau Wai-Keung  who gained loads of fame for his movie Infernal Affairs; which was the basis for the Oscar winning movie The Departed. The cast for The Flock features Richard Gere and Claire Danes in the leads.  Avril Lavigne is listed in the credits, but her role doesn’t really include a speaking part and last for maybe a minute.

The story: Erroll Babbage (Richard Gere) has spent his career tracking sex offenders and his unorthodox methods are nearly as brutal as the criminals he monitors. When he links one of his deranged parolees to the disappearance of a local girl he and his new partner (Claire Danes) must scour the S&M underground to find her before it’s too late.

The premise sounded interesting to me and fans of the movie Seven might see this straight to DVD feature at their local Blockbuster and think: recognizable actors, interesting premise, what could be so wrong? Let me rain on your parade before you think you’ve just found one of those diamonds in the rough not grand enough to hit the big screen. The Flock is a mess of a movie. As for it being like Seven: they pretty much steal the entire final scene of that movie, except take out the shock and replace it with a cop out happy ending.

The acting in the movie is not bad at all. The story and directing are 100% off though. The basis of the movie involves men who are registered as sex offenders. Apparently in the town Richard Gere’s character lives in almost every other person is a sex offender. Okay, they are in California, large population, I can buy that there are loads of sex criminals. However, in this movie every single one of the sex offenders is portrayed as an over-the-top pervert who breathes heavy at the mere mention of their sexual urges. Every single one of them is a luridly creepy pervert with wonky eyes or obviously still committing vicious crimes, all but one; which naturally points to that one as being the one to watch out for; duh. Oops, did I ruin a plot twist for you? Maybe, but that is because I am telling you NOT TO WATCH THIS AT ALL! It is rare that I cannot find a reason to at least understand why someone likes a bad movie, but this is one if those that is so messed up that if you actually like it: you are not the brightest bulb.

Let me continue with how stupid this flick is. Wai-Keung or the writers, or most likely a combination of the two, haven’t a clue about the subject matter they are handling. They portray people with fetishes as people who cannot control their urges whatsoever. A dude that is into hands is not going to attack every pair of women’s hands he sees and sniff them: he would not be loose if that were true. They also more or less say hand fetish and foot fetish people love to get off on the sight of severed limbs ala feet and hands. I would have to think that is a particular niche of necrophilia, but apparently amongst the pervs in this flick’s world: that is the norm. The sex offenders of the movie not only commit crimes like some sort of super group of comic book villains, but they gather and hold meetings about their addictions without a counselor present. The concept is showing that sex offenders will flock together and work together thanks to special sexual desires and the fact that they can look each other up on the internet. Smart idea to show this, but it is handled in a ridiculous manner.

Once the dragging boring movie does reach the tension of the final sequences as half stolen from Seven, I was so far out of the movie that everything was just bad and corny. Gere’s character is logically flawed and the happy ending does not fit him. He would have been in quite a bit of legal trouble for not only beating people up (I can buy he got away with it), but the public shooting at the sex offenders meeting where he threatened them and busted off caps by their ears: he wouldn’t get away with that.

This movie is flocking stupid. You can become a registered sex offender for getting caught peeing in public, not every sex offender is a wonky-eyed, drooling, complete creepozoid.

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

The Walker was written and directed by Paul Schrader, a man with a mixed bag of past credits. He wrote the screenplay adaptation for Bringing Out the Dead, directed the prequel to the Exorcist, directed American Gigolo, and also wrote and directed the powerful drama Affliction. Dramatic pacing should be his thing and his thing is slower than some, but not as slow as others; with enough attention to detail to provide plenty of intrigue.

The Walker stars Woody Harrleson with Kristin Scott Thomas, Lauren Becall, Lily Tomlin, and William Dafoe. The story centers around Woody’s character, Carter, and his lifestyle as a gay man who escorts older married women around town while their husbands are busy. It is a fancy and rich life he leads, rich with gossip and soon rich with conspiracy as he is drawn into a murder mystery involving a man one of his lady friends was having an affair with.

This movie is a hard one to really recommend and yet I did not dislike it. My eyes may have wondered to check the clock a couple of times during, but I never felt the desire to turn the movie off. This is thanks to the interesting character and the director’s keen directing. The acting from everyone is good as well, though I will say Woody Harrleson’s gay accent slurs a bit too deep and Southern sometimes to be understandable. The chemistry between himself and the actor playing is boyfriend was very intense.

The best way to describe this movie would be to compare it to a similar paced movie and that would be Michael Clayton. If you liked Michael Clayton, The Walker may be more confusing a plot or more simple a plot (could go either way for you), but ultimately I prefer The Walker. I think Michael Clayton was a blatant Oscar bid sort of movie which lacked acting and relied on slow camera close ups of a man just staring. The Walker might not have the cute and cliché twist ending of Clayton, but throughout the movie remained more intriguing for me. I especially liked Carter’s apartment set in the movie along with the music played as he preps for bed, and finally the camera work used during a foot pursuit late in the game. Almost at times bordered on a noir vibe.

The Walker is not a movie I recommend and yet I liked it enough. As conflicting a review as this may seem I’m not sure how else to really describe it for you. Perhaps I have inspired your curiosity to check it out for yourself, or perhaps I have scared you away; either thing works fine for me.

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

“Plastic. I’m talking to a plastic tree.”

Oh boy.

The sixth film by writer/director M. Night Shyamalan is undeniably different than his previous five films. For starters, it is the first film that has recieved a ‘R’ rating, and it’s also (surprisingly) a film without any attempt for his trademark twist ending. There’s no attempt to fool you or to pull something from behind an invisible curtain. In his previous films, Shyamalan had a gift for setting things up and layering the events of the movie in such a way that we were surprised by the ending. Everything was important and so every scene was crucial. That is not the case in his latest paranoid thriller, The Happening, which explains the great mystery of what’s going on very early in the film, and the movie suffers greatly as a result.

The film focuses on a high school science teacher, Elliot Moore (Mark Wahlberg), and his estrainged wife, Alma (Zooey Deschanel) as they try to protect a young girl (Ashlyn Sanchez) while on the run from a mysterious natural threat to humanity. An event starts in Central Park where people suddenly become disoriented and lose motor functions and then finally feel compelled to kill themselves in any variety of horrible ways. Theories spread about what could be causing it, the first theory being that it’s a chemical attack by terrorists. A panic ensues and in Philadelphia, Elliot and Alma join Julian (John Leguizamo) and his daughter, Jess (Sanchez) on the first available train out of the city. Shortly later, reports come in that Boston and Philadelphia have both been hit by the same threat and then the conductor of the train loses contact with the outside world and stops the train in a small Pennsylvania town, leaving Elliot, Alma and the rest of the passengers to fend for themselves. Julian leaves Jess with Elliot and Alma as he hitches a ride to go search for his wife, and the three of them go on the run as they try to figure out whats going on and how to survive it.

The Happening is a truely bizzare film. It is very reminescent of the 1950’s apocalyptic paranoid thriller’s about the end of the world or alien invaders. Most noticably, the writing doesn’t seem as polished as in his previous films. I know I am in the minority, but I enjoyed Lady in the Water and think Shyamalan took a step backwards with this film. Litterally about 1/3 of the way into the movie you’re told what’s going on, that it has something to do with the wind and another thing I won’t divulge here. So, from that point on we’re not as scared, both because of what it is and because the mystery is gone. The movie relies on scare moments and the acting of the main characters, which is extremely wierd and hard to watch at times. Mark Wahlberg plays his role with two basic expressions, worrying and thinking about worrying and does both with the same basic intense look on his face. It’s painful to see a great actor reduced to playing an unconvincing teacher with the emotional range of a wet sack.

Perhaps the moment where I started to lose faith in the film is where Elliot and Alma are walking along in a field with other survivors and Alma confesses having gone on a date with another guy she met at work. Firstly, she does it so mousey and so mumbly that it just seems wierd and ungenuine. Then Mark Wahlberg’s reaction is basically to breathe heavily for a moment and cheesily say “You lied to me?” and then continue walking without another word. I’m sorry, but especially under the stressful situation they’re in, any guy would’ve screamed at his wife at that point, or had some reaction. They both just seem so unbelievable in the movie. Don’t get me wrong, both Wahlberg and Deschanel are amazing actors on any other day, but both played there parts in this movie very cardboard like. Maybe that’s what Shyamalan wanted, maybe it was on purpose and it was for some unknown reason that escaped me, but I didn’t like it. Deschanel’s role is attempted to be explained away as her having trouble expressing herself and her emotions to others, but that doesn’t help her performance any. She has the biggest and among the most beautiful blue eyes in hollywood, but they spend most of the movie in an prolonged hightened sense of terror, often for no reason.

Then there’s the needless attempt for a ‘R’ rated horror film, probably just to advertise the movie as Shymalan’s first. Take out a few gory scenes and the film is essentially ‘PG’. However, the horror scenes are quite graphic, sometimes needlessly so and I often found myself missing the more subtle horror in his previous ‘PG-13′ films, which to me was much more terrifying because we were allowed the ability to see what we wanted and essentially scared ourselves. Here it is just all there for us to see. Blood and gore and all. The scenes depicting humans killing themselves in all sorts of different methods are quite disturbing and horrible, as they should be, but the looming big picture threat wasn’t pulled off as well, and often came off as just silly nonsense. Also, the threat occurs so early in the film, that the main characters are essentially on the run the entire film and that gets old after awhile. There’s nothing worse than a 90 minute film with 45 minutes of worthwhile storytelling to accomplish. 

Threat and acting aside, I do like where the movie ended up, and the messages it got across. Besides the obvious one, which will be apparent when you see the movie, I quite liked another scene near the end of the movie, which was the only honest and well written scene in my opinion. Elliot and Alma are in seperate rooms talking to one another thru a pipe in the ground as the looming threat is outside. They start talking about there first date and how Elliot bought her a mood ring, and they begin recalling what each color meant when they looked it up. Finally Alma asks Elliot if he remembers which color stood for love, and he answers very honestly and tenderly, “I don’t remember.”  It echoes beautifully the estraingement between husband and wife and the distance that has grown between them. That scene has layers to it, and its probably only 2 minutes long and was a great subtle message within the overall message of the movie. It’s a shame that Shymalan appears to have been more focused on shock value with the death scenes and not on writing the usually well written and character driven films we’ve become usued to seeing in the past.

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

After the credits began to roll across the screen, I stared straight ahead, mouth agape. This was not the good type of gawking. I had wasted one hour and twenty minutes of my life I would never be able to get back.

Dark Floors is directed by Pete Riski. The movie was released in Finland just this year. Prior to seeing this film, I had NO idea it was a film featuring a popular Finnish metal band called Lordi. This band is known for its insanely ridiculous getup of monster costumes. When I say insanely ridiculous, I don’t mean scary…I mean fit for the circus ridiculous.

Sarah (played by Skye Bennett) is a mentally troubled little girl. Her unstable condition is hardly discussed save for a scene in which nurse Emily (played by Dominique McElligott) brings about the subject of epilepsy (a disorder causing seizures). One can assume from the girl’s actions she is autistic. Sarah is basically handicapped and must be in a wheelchair. In order to occupy her fragile mind, her father Ben (played by Noah Huntley) allows her to draw pictures. Before the dastardly villains appear, Sarah is shown drawing the monstrous figures on her paper. Ben becomes irritated with the treatment of his daughter and decides (against the wishes of Emily) to attempt to leave the hospital. Ben, Sarah, and Emily board an elevator with a rich snob, a security guard, a homeless man, and another unimportant character.

Anyway, the elevator becomes stuck between the 6th and 7th floors (a cheesy nursery rhyme like something out of Grimm’s Fairy Tales soon follows). Once the doors finally open the hospital appears completely deserted, and the elevator occupants are baffled. Cue the non-appalling creatures from another realm. Surprise! It just so happens the elevator occupants SOMEHOW became trapped in a parallel universe with these hellish beasts. Ultimately, this movie wound up collapsing under its own weight. How could a movie such as Dark Floors begin with such promise and give way to this horrific pile of steaming cow dung?

Obviously the band member’s costumes were used to portray (computer effects were used) the evil villains Dark Floors. The visual effects were sometimes appealing but were mostly monotonous and obtuse. I have no idea what Riski was thinking! These villains were the farthest thing from being utterly terrifying. The closest thing to scary was the apparition I like to call The Screeching Woman. The only purpose she served was making my ears bleed–she was more annoying than scary.

As you may already tell, I believe the plot is absolutely asinine. However, I will give credit for Riski’s horrific atmosphere. Although the creatures failed to produce any scares, the deserted hospital, the darkened hallways, and the eerie musical score created the perfect horror movie setting. If the creatures had been…you know…scary, the film would have been so much better.

After the scene with the old lady in the motorized wheelchair, please stop the movie and take it back or walk out of the theater. That is as good as Dark Floors gets–it’s all downhill from there. It is films such as this that deserve an extra special space upon the abandoned shelf. The sole purpose of this sorry excuse for a film should be to collect dust.

***Dark Floors: 1/5 stars.***

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

The second film by writer/director M. Night Shyamalan (The Sixth Sense, Signs, The Village), focusing on the mystery surrounding a middle-aged man who begins to realize he has unique abilities after he remarkably survives a disaster.

“Do you know what the scariest thing is? To not know your place in this world. To not know why you’re here. That is just an awful feeling.”

After surviving a train derailment outside of Philadelphia, David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is stunned to learn he is infact the only survivor of the disaster, and also that he has no injuries to speak of. After attending the memorial service for the other passengers, David finds a card on his windshield. The only thing written is a cryptic question, asking David how many days in his life he has been sick. He asks around at work, and to his estranged wife, Audrey (Robin Wright-Penn), and noone can remember him ever being ill. David, and his young son, Joseph (Spencer Treat Clark), visit the store shown on the mysterious card left on David’s windshield and meet up with Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson), who shares a fantastic theroy with David about his condition and the possible connection the two may share. Elijah suffers from a condition where his bones are extremely fragile, and he believes that if someone like him exists in the world, that surely someone must exist on the other end of the spectrum…someone like David, someone who can’t be harmed or injured.

Elijah has spent most of his life bedridden because of his condition, and has turned to the stories within American comic-books for inspiration. He explains to David that he believes comics are the last great form of communication, much like the ancient cave paintings or inscriptions within the great pyramids, that comic books are much more than silly pictures and spandex costumes. Elijah not only believes David is his opposite, but that David was put on the Earth for a purpose, to protect the innocent like the great heroes within comic books, and he attempts to persuade David to harness his possible abilities. Eventually, David does begin to realize he does have some remarkable, if subtle abilities and starts to question his life and the true meaning behind it. Is David infact some modern day super-hero? Or is he just an extremely lucky man who walked away from a train wreck unharmed?

The most unique and bold choice by Shyamalan so far, Unbreakable is unlike any of his other films in that it doesn’t quite have the twist ending we’ve grown accustomed to. I don’t think many people were fooled by the ending, but in a way, it makes the film all the better. Knowing what will happen doesn’t take anything from the building drama and the suspense of wondering what David will ultimately do. The film is basically Act One of a traditional comic book origin story told in modern times. Act One in other comic book movies is typically the opening third of the film, but Shyamalan boldly chooses to focus the entire film on David’s journey to enlightenment and building to the moment where he makes the choice to use his powers for good, and to try and help people.

The movie is shot like a comic book as well, with shots framed like a traditional comic book panel would be and the story unfolds very deliberately and narratively like a comic book. Clear examples of this is in the color pallete of the film, which is brilliantly done, and has several scenes that feature very muddy, neutral color schemes and then use bright colors to draw our focus to something or someone. It’s an old-school trick used to great effect by Shyamalan in all of his movies, and perhaps has the best payoff in this film. The best example of this “comic book framing” style of directing used in the film is the opening scene. David is attempting to flirt with an attractive (and married) sports agent and the camera keeps alernating its placement during crucial times in the conversation. It’s remarkably well done and helps us really focus on David and grow attached to him quickly.

The acting is top notch as well. Both Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson are phenomenal in this film. Willis plays David with such restraint and such tenderness that its hard not to root for him. Jackson, meanwhile, instills such humerous brooding contempt into Elijiah that its hard not to feel sorry for him as well. It’s great how deliberate everything Elijiah does in the film is. Its so methodically thought out, and you become mesmerized, wondering what he has up his sleeve next. Both characters go thru remarkable character journeys in the film. David has opportunities to turn away from his heroes journey, and Elijiah has opportunites to right his own path. It’s the choices they make and the complexity within them that make the drama so compelling.

The script by Shymalan is also remarkably strong, as in all of his films, but this one is one of my favorites. I love the structure in the plot of the first third of the movie, in which we see glimpses of Elijiah’s past as we journey with David to the moment he meets Elijiah in his store. Also, as David progresses along on his journey in the film, we catch glimpses of his own past and the single lasting moment that ties all the characters in the movie together with such subtle brilliance. That, of course, is the much talked about car accident, referenced several times in the first two acts of the film and finally seen by us near the conclusion. (Spoiler Alert! Skip to the last paragraph if you haven’t seen the movie) David and Audrey are in college and have a near fatal car accident, infact David is thrown several yards from the car and should’ve died. It’s the first moment in David’s life where he suspects something is different about him, and he has repressed those thoughts into adulthood. He rescues Audrey from the wrecked car, and seizes the opportunity to give up his future as a football star, a topic we’ve already learned at this point, that Audrey had strong feelings about and may’ve changed the course of there relationship had David not faked an injury and quit the game. It’s this great ability and stength of Shymalan to connect everything in his films, no matter how small and ordane and make it all important.

Shymalan has made better films than Unbreakable, but few of the others had such a deliberate message behind them. The film, heroes journey aside, is ultimately about a man who realizes what’s important in his life. He made choices to give up the things he loves for his wife and child, and as grown unhappy with his life as a result. Remarkably he learns how to balance his family and his own needs, which is never easy. Elijiah explains in the film that he thinks the superpowers, and even the superheroes themselves within comic books, are only metaphors for everyday life or the troubles of the time in which they’re written. David represents our ability to right wrongs in our own life, and to not give up. We all get second chances, its up to us to make the best of them, and in Unbreakable, David Dunn shows us that anything is possible.