Rated: PG-13 for crude and sexual content throughout, and language Genre: Comedies Theatrical Release:May 22, 2009 Wide Box Office: $12,622,450 Synopsis: “Dance Flick” is a hilarious new comedy that brings together the talents of two generations of the Wayans family, the explosively funny clan who brought us the “Scary Movie” franchise and “White...
“Dance Flick” is a hilarious new comedy that brings together the talents of two generations of the Wayans family, the explosively funny clan who brought us the “Scary Movie” franchise and “White Chicks,” as well as the groundbreaking TV series “In Living Color.”
Rated: PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and language Genre: Science-Fiction/Fantasy Theatrical Release:May 21, 2009 Wide Box Office: $65,316,217 Synopsis: In the highly anticipated new installment of The Terminator film franchise, set in post-apocalyptic 2018, Christian Bale stars as John Connor, the man fated to lead the human resistance against...
In the highly anticipated new installment of The Terminator film franchise, set in post-apocalyptic 2018, Christian Bale stars as John Connor, the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. But the future Connor was raised to believe in is altered in part by the appearance of Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington), a stranger whose last memory is of being on death row. Connor must decide whether Marcus has been sent from the future, or rescued from the past. As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet's operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind.
Starring: Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin, Moon Bloodgood, Bryce Dallas Howard, Common, Jane Alexander, Helena Bonham-Carter, Jadagrace Director: McG Screenwriter: Michael Ferris, John Brancato Producer: Moritz Borman, Derek Anderson, Victor Kubicek, Jeffrey Silver Composer: Danny Elfman Studio: Warner Bros.
I left Narnia somewhat disappointed. But perhaps that was my fault. I almost forget it was a children's movie. I'll just start out and clarify that this movie falls far short of the grandeur and epic-dom of Lord of the Rings. It lacks the rich and incredibly deep, complicated, and fascinating storyline.
The PG violence, while not pathetic, lacks the dramatic intensity. The score, while professional, lacks the memorable themes and tunes, and just feels like classically expected suspense-strings and triumphant-brass. But let's forget comparisons to that three-movie mega-epic with an obsessive director. After all, C. S. Lewis wrote the book to be a children's story. This one is great in its own right. There are three requirements for transforming a beloved book into a magnificent movie. First, there must be a good story to tell. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is an excellent story, both allegorically and intrinsically. It's the forces of good vs. the reign of horrible evil, of course, yet there's also a little fun along the way. It has the escapist appeal of an imaginary world of talking creatures, yet it has the realist appeal of ordinary children coming to save the day.
Second, the story must be told correctly. Worries that Disney would corrupt the Christianity will be forgotten. Whether it's because some in charge appreciated the symbolism and vowed to preserve it, or because a post-Passion Hollywood was conscious that a correct telling would satisfy the religious masses and translate into more money, or both, Lion... follows the book, point by point, almost to an extreme, removing items only to speed things up and injecting alterations only to appropriately increase the suspense. (Exceptions are the one-thrust "battle" between Peter and Maugrim and the sometimes-wimpy climactic battle sequence, although as a whole it's probably the best ever in a PG movie.) The dialogue smartly declines to always have the actors quote the book, and there are no complaints here, as audiences will welcome the quotable quips and funny one-liners.
Third, the story must be presented wondrously. Or, in layman's terms, sweet special effects. Obviously, in the technology of 2005, nothing less is expected, and WETA and Co. do not disappoint. Whether it's the witch turning living creatures into stone, or the lion turning them back into living creatures, or especially the realistic-looking and enjoyable beavers, wolves, and centaurs, anyone who has seen the BBC versions will breathe a sigh of relief at the justice that has finally been done. (Indeed, I'm sure someone is already thanking God that there will never be a costumed mouse in Prince Caspian.)
Christians will be more than satisfied. Non-believers will enjoy the story for its own merit, and maybe even come to understand the story at the heart of Christianity a little better. Just don't forget that The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is, first and foremost, for better or for worse, a children's tale.
Rated: PG for sci-fi action, some crude humor and mild language Runtime: 1 min 34 secs Genre: Action/Adventure Theatrical Release:Mar 27, 2009 Wide Box Office: $140,203,799 Review : DreamWorks Animation has steadily been trying to chip away at the animation throne held by Pixar Animation Studios for years.
To their credit, they’ve had more successes (Kung Fu Panda and the Shrek series being the most notable) than failures (think Bee Movie). The latest weapon in their arsenal for animated supremacy comes in the form of Monsters vs Aliens. And why shouldn’t they be excited about its’ ability to take a few more chunks from the throne? They’ve crammed in: * Top notch Hollywood voice talent * Use of the latest and greatest 3D technology (something called Tru3D) * An homage to yesteryears B-movies — the 50' Woman, the Creature from the Black Lagoon, the Blob, the Fly and Mothra Yet, Monsters vs. Aliens is missing something. It’s certainly not lacking in the animation department. The artists deserve a fine pat on the back for their eye to the fine details. The Golden Gate Bridge is perfectly modeled and the physics employed as it gets broken apart is damn near as real as it can get. Likewise, the hair of Ginormica (voiced by Reese Witherspoon) and the fur of Insectosaurus is very lifelike. And while I’m not exactly a big fan of the 3D gimmick, I must say, it too was very captivating — this ain’t the same 3D crap Jaws 3-D tossed your way 25 years ago.
What I suspect is absent, is the charm. Monsters vs. Aliens is curiously devoid of any of it. The first quarter of the movie is spent building an uninteresting backstory about Susan Murphy (Witherspoon) and her conceited weatherman fiancé Derek Dietl (voiced by Paul Rudd). The next quarter isn’t that much better as Susan (now Ginormica) finds herself pining away for her old life in a super secret prison locked tightly away with the other monsters — B.O.B. (voiced by Seth Rogen), Dr. Cockroach (voiced by Hugh Laurie), The Missing Link (voiced by Will Arnett) and Insectosaurus (not voiced by anyone). When Gallaxhar (voiced by Rainn Wilson) comes to Earth to retrieve the element Quantonium and gain ultimate power, the movie picks up a head of steam. Lots of eye candy action ensues with comic interludes by B.O.B., General W.R. Monger (voiced by Kiefer Sutherland) and President Hathaway (voiced by Stephen Colbert). Kids in the theater hooted and hollered as the giant insect shot sticky snot from it’s nose. Parents were heard snickering too at some of the double entradas littered about. Then it all winds down and the film wraps itself up to fit neatly into an envelope — everyone learns something about themselves and they all go home. Ultimately, Monsters vs. Aliens is a bit to formulaic in its approach and most of the characters it wants us to cheer for are lifeless caricatures. But hey, at least they’re rendered extremely well and the kids dragging you to see it won’t know any better (it’ll be our secret).
Synopsis: When a radioactive meteor hurtles into Susan Murphy (voiced by Reese Witherspoon) on her wedding day, she is transformed into a towering, platinum-haired giant. Taken away by the government and... When a radioactive meteor hurtles into Susan Murphy (voiced by Reese Witherspoon) on her wedding day, she is transformed into a towering, platinum-haired giant. Taken away by the government and dubbed "Ginormica," Susan is introduced to other scientific oddities, including the amphibious Missing Link (Will Arnett), the dim blob B.O.B. (Seth Rogen), and the brilliant, bug-headed Dr. Cockroach (Hugh Laurie). These "monsters" are released from captivity when a massive alien robot sent by the scheming Gallaxhar (Rainn Wilson) appears in San Francisco and clearly does not come in peace. With little time to adjust to her new stature, Susan must learn to work with her strange allies to avoid an all-out extraterrestrial invasion. Co-directed by Rob Letterman (SHARK TALE) and Conrad Vernon (SHREK 2) for DreamWorks Studios, this enjoyable animated production riffs on 1950s sci-fi movies while also playfully referencing everything from DR. STRANGELOVE to CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND. The vocal talent, which also includes Stephen Colbert as a daft, keyboard-playing American president, is top-notch, adding plenty of personality to the super-sized visuals and eye-popping effects. Conveying an easy-going sense of humor that will delight kids and amuse adults, MONSTERS VS. ALIENS is fun family fare that is sure to leave everyone thoroughly entertained.
Starring: Reese Witherspoon, Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Seth Rogen, Kiefer Sutherland, Rainn Wilson, Stephen Colbert, Paul Rudd Director: Conrad Vernon, Rob Letterman Screenwriter: Rob Letterman, Maya Forbes, Wally Wolodarsky, Jonathan Aibel, Glenn Berger Story: Rob Letterman, Conrad Vernon Producer: Lisa Stewart Composer: Henry Jackman Studio: DreamWorks Distribution LLC
Rated: PG-13 for disaster sequences, disturbing images and brief strong language. Genre: Science-Fiction/Fantasy Theatrical Release:Mar 20, 2009 Wide Box Office: $67,769,550 Review : Let’s all admit it, taking shots at Nicolas Cage’s latest acting gigs has been about as much fun as catching fish in a barrel — it’s fun for a moment, but it’s too damn easy and one quickly gets bored with it.
But hey, he deserved it — Bangkok Dangerous and Ghost Rider, to name a few, were some piss poor movies (I suspect they were done solely for the paycheck).So when it is announced he would be starring in some sort of movie that had him doomed to see the future and not have anyone believe him (i.e., the Cassandra Complex), I immediately got my pencil ready for a scathing review. And then I watched Knowing. The movie review I had expected to write was no longer applicable — I found I actually liked the film. At the center of the movie is a paper on which seemingly random numbers were scribbled upon by a troubled little girl named Lucinda (Lara Robinson) in 1959. 50 years later, this same sheet of paper resurfaces and finds its way into the hands of Caleb (Chandler Canterbury) and his mathematician father John Koestler (Cage). After downing a bottle of scotch in an effort to drown his sorrows over the loss of his wife, John notices a pattern — the numbers exactly align with cataclysmic events. And so begins his attempt to warn and convince others of impending doom when he notices several of the dates have yet to transpire.
Sure, we’ve all seen or heard it before, but there were several things that set Knowing apart from the host of other similarly themed movies. First, it was generally heartfelt. The film showcased strong familial relationships that are easily identifiable and well acted out. Father-son relationship between John and Caleb is rock solid, as they pretty much only have one another as a support mechanism. Most touching is the great lengths and sacrifices John goes through to ensure his son is safe. Then there is the broken father-son relationship between John and his father, Reverend Koestler (Alan Hopgood). Only in the face of their own mortality do they reconcile their differences in a touching scene. It makes one think that the time to bury the hatchet with loved ones should happen well before there is no time to do it in. The biggest bang of Knowing, however, comes rather unexpectedly — the scenes of destruction are magnificently crafted and shot. I don’t think I’ve ever witnesses a plane crash on film quite so disturbingly or vividly real before. You think everyone dies on impact? Think again. Same goes for an incredibly sequenced roll of a subway train going off the tracks. “Wow”, is a word that sums it up rather nicely. But, c’mon, we can’t forget it’s a Nicolas Cage film; there has got to be a downside hidden somewhere within. There is. I could have done without the ending. It’s cheesier than a bowl of macaroni & cheese and thoroughly out of place. There’s also more than a handful of moments where Mr. Cage hams it up for the camera; thankfully, they’re easy to look beyond. So while I can’t look into the future, I’m 97.63% certain Knowing is not a turning point in Nic’s movie choices. Therefore, I strongly suggest seeing it before the upcoming movie Kick-Ass retarnishes his good name and we go back to taking shots at him again.
Synopsis: Nicolas Cage stars in Knowing, a gripping action-thriller of global proportions about a professor who stumbles on terrifying predictions about the future—and sets out to prevent them from coming... Nicolas Cage stars in Knowing, a gripping action-thriller of global proportions about a professor who stumbles on terrifying predictions about the future—and sets out to prevent them from coming true.
In 1958, as part of the dedication ceremony for a new elementary school, a group of students is asked to draw pictures to be stored in a time capsule. But one mysterious girl fills her sheet of paper with rows of apparently random numbers instead.
Fifty years later, a new generation of students examines the capsule’s contents and the girl’s cryptic message ends up in the hands of young CALEB KOESTLER. But it is Caleb’s father, professor JOHN KOESTLER (Nicolas Cage), who makes the startling discovery that the encoded message predicts with pinpoint accuracy the dates, death tolls and coordinates of every major disaster of the past 50 years. As John further unravels the document’s chilling secrets, he realizes the document foretells three additional events—the last of which hints at destruction on a global scale and seems to somehow involve John and his son. When John’s attempts to alert the authorities fall on deaf ears, he takes it upon himself to try to prevent more destruction from taking place.
Rated: PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, some sexual content, language and drug references Genre: Action/Adventure Theatrical Release:Apr 3, 2009 Wide Box Office: $116,497,095 Review : The pickings must be slim for Vin Diesel and Paul Walker these days.
How else can you explain why they would come back to star in Fast and Furious when they left the series on high notes after The Fast and the Furious eight years ago?You can’t, and this half-hearted attempt to recapture what the franchise lost guarantees the pickings for these guys will remain slim at best. Anyways, since they had the audacity to star in this movie and I made the mistake of watching it, let me go through the motions of telling you why you shouldn’t. If you recall from the first flick, Brian O’Conner (Paul Walker) was an FBI agent sent to infiltrate the car theft ring led by Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel). He fell in love with Dominic’s sister Mia (Jordana Brewster), got caught up in the rice racer atmosphere and ultimately let Dominic escape. Now they’re both inexplicably back, teaming up in a mutually beneficial alliance to infiltrate the empire of a drug kingpin known as Braga.
There’s not much else to say, other than the plot is so paper thin it is transparent. Writer Chris Morgan tries to spice this weak, seen it before story by infusing some nagging nuances to spice Fast and Furious up like: Dom still being a wanted man and Brian still being an agent of the law, and Brian having dumped Mia years ago and her not being so happy about seeing him again. Perhaps there could have been something more to these nods to the original but since the characters are so one-dimensional and poorly acted out, what little tension and resolution there is doesn’t mean a thing. And then I realized, Fast and Furious could have had its story centered around barehanded fishing for catfish in a backwoods Georgia lake and it wouldn’t have mattered — it’s all about the flashy neon cars that make high pitched whining sounds when revved hard, heart pounding and reckless street racing, and the flashy broads who love them both. There’s plenty of all three to get the Need For Speed addicts, whom I presume this movie was made for, all sweaty palmed and blurry-eyed. Problem is, aside from the opening sequence in which Toretto and team hijack a tanker truck while moving, there isn’t much to the races/chases to see that hasn’t been done a hundred times before. Hell, at least the utter mess that was The Fast and the Furious:Tokyo Drift showcased a new aspect of racing known as drifting. Things get so bad in this installment that two nearly identical chase scenes are filmed in the same “tunnel” between Mexico and the U.S. (I guess $85 million for production doesn’t cover what it used to). I do have to credit to the marketers of the film though as they really got the tagline right for Fast and Furious. It reads: ‘New Model. Original Parts.’ It’s the first time I’ve seen truth in advertising although they could have gone a bit further with it. It probably should have read: ‘Same as the First. Only More Expensive and a Whole Lot Dumber.’
Starring: Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordana Brewster, John Ortiz, Laz Alonso, Gal Gadot, Shea Whigham, Tego CalderonDirector: Justin LinScreenwriter: Chris MorganProducer: Neal H. Moritz, Vin Diesel, Michael FottrellComposer: Bryan TylerStudio: Universal Pictures
Rated: PG-13 for sexual material including some suggestive dialogue, some violence and thematic content
Genre: Dramas
Theatrical Release:Apr 24, 2009 Wide
Box Office: $28,612,730
Review :
"Obsessed," directed by Steve Shill, isn't very good. In fact, it's awful.
Of course, that probably wasn't the intention of everyone involved in making it, including Beyonce Knowles, who stars in the flick along with Idris Elba and Ali Larter and is listed in the credits as one of the flick's many producers (I think I saw Magic Johnson's name listed as a producer in the opening credits, too).
Everyone involved most likely thought they were making a classy, modern thriller in the vein of "Fatal Attraction." What they ended up with, however, is a gigantic mess.For the first forty or so minutes, the flick isn't that bad. It actually hovers around being decent. Elba plays Derek, a successful assets manager (he's the vice president of something or another at the company he works at, a company run by D-Day hisself, the great Bruce McGill) and a devoted family man (his wife, Sharon, is played by Beyonce) who ends up the target of the hot but psychotic stalker Lisa (Larter). The movie shows its hand almost immediately, letting us know that Lisa is up to no good when she meets Derek in an elevator and introduces herself as a temp. The music is somewhat ominous, and the way the camera focuses on her looking at him, you just know something bad is going to eventually happen. She flirts with Derek, but Derek doesn't really return the favor (he checks out her legs a few times, but beyond that he doesn't engage her. He is very nice to her, though). So some stuff happens, Lisa keeps running into Derek at weird times (she was originally supposed to temp for a day. She ends up temping for two weeks), you can tell more and more that she's really into him, but he doesn't return her the same kind of flirty attention. Again, he's just very, very nice to her. At the big, hedonistic business Christmas party (a party that doesn't allow spouses), Lisa tries to come onto him several times (she dances with him, tries to kiss him under the mistletoe), then confronts him in the bathroom. She thinks he wants to have sex with her in the stall. She rubs up against him, tries to kiss him, but he tells her to just get away. He is just not interested in her. And now he's kind of weirded out by the whole thing. Derek now knows that there's something very, very wrong with this woman, but he's not sure what he should do about it. Should he go to human resources and tell them about Lisa's behavior? Should he tell his wife Sharon? See, Derek has a bit of history when it comes to messing around with women at work. That's where he met Sharon. If he tells human resources, will they believe him or will they just assume that it's Derek being Derek? And if he tells Sharon, what the heck will she do (she told him when they got married that he could no longer have female assistants/temps at work)?
As you'd expect, the situation escalates, as Lisa shows up in his car wearing only a trench coat and lingerie, she sends sexy e-mails to his home computer, she even shows up at a company retreat, poses as his wife, drugs him and has black out sex with him, then drugs herself in his bed in an attempted suicide. This is Derek's lowest point, as the situation basically becomes public knowledge (McGill's Joe Gage finds out about it, Jerry O'Connell's Ben finds out more about it, and, worst of all, Sharon finds out about it) and no one believes that he didn't start having an affair with Lisa. Derek's life becomes total hell. Sharon throws him out of the house, he loses clients to other managers at the firm, and the police detective (Reese, as played by Christine Lahti) investigating Lisa and the attempted suicide doesn't believe him. And then, for reasons that make no sense until you remember that Beyonce's name appears as one of the flick's producers, the movie stops being about Derek and becomes all about Beyonce's Sharon forgiving Derek, freaking about how her family was hurt, and then saying that she planned on beating the crap out of Lisa if she ever confronted Derek again. If you've seen the trailer for the movie, you know what happens in that regard. And while the Beyonce-Ali Larter fight, on its own, as its own thing is kind of fun (it'll make for a nice movie fight clip on youtube some day), it's really just the ridiculous conclusion to a movie that has no business veering off into "Beyonce is a strong woman and ain't gonna take no shit from some blonde bitch in her underwear" world. What the hell does Beyonce's Sharon being a strong woman have to do with anything that happens in the first part of the movie?
Nothing.
"Obsessed" is not Beyonce's movie (well, it shouldn't be). If it wanted to be her movie it should have focused on her character from the beginning (we'd know more about her trying to earn a degree). It should have focused on how she's suspicious of her husband's potential flirting around at work with the pretty blonde chick. If that had happened, maybe the big blow up scene in the middle of the movie, Beyonce's "award moment" where she throws Derek out of the house, would have made sense and mattered more. By that point in the movie we would have likely had a better understanding of Derek's office romance history and why Sharon had any reason to be concerned. But we don't get any of that information in any kind of detail. We're just told about it in passing and we're supposed to just accept it and get behind Sharon because she's a woman done wrong. Derek lied to her. That bastard. And when he eventually "makes it up to her" and she lets him back in the house, I guess we're supposed to go "Yes! Yes! He now respects her!" or some hooey. But you'll most likely end up wondering why the movie needs a long "Derek tries to make up with his wife" montage as it really has nothing to do with anything. Again, we're never really given any real reason to lose respect for Derek and get behind Sharon. Why isn't the movie focusing on what the movie started focusing on in the first place, Lisa's obsession with Derek? Isn't this supposed to be Derek's movie to begin with? It just doesn't make any sense.
Elba is excellent as Derek. He embodies the sort of ultimate family man image without making it seem corny or lame. He also plays the alpha male business man with remarkable ease. He also has great chemistry with both Beyonce and Larter. His best scenes are actually with Larter, as he makes it clear again and again as the situation between the two of them escalates that he has absolutely no interest in her. Larter isn't bad as Lisa, even though she isn't given much of a character to play. She's just supposed to be evil and obsessed and that's it and she does a pretty okay job of it. She's sexy, she gives off that "deadly intelligence" vibe that you need for these kinds of obsessed psycho characters, and she can fight when she has to.
And then there's Beyonce as Sharon. She's pretty decent at the beginning of the movie. You don't really understand why she's so dang suspicious of her husband, but she's warm and she has good chemistry with Elba. She's also nice to look at (that's never a minus). However, when the movie veers off into "Beyonce is a strong woman!" Sharon is just annoying because, as I said above, the movie isn't about her, or at least it shouldn't be about her, it should be about Derek. Sharon shouldn't be proactive and an ass kicker. There's nothing wrong with her being a fighter and going toe to toe with Lisa in a fight (in theory) and even being a protective mother, but why does she need to say "bitch" so much? Where the hell does that stuff come from? It just doesn't make any sense.
Jerry O'Connell is funny as Ben, the male pseudo jock douchebag. Mathew Humphrey's is good as Patrick, the flaming homosexual assistant to Elba's Derek. I would have loved to see more stuff between Patrick and Lisa, as Lisa uses Patrick to get information about Derek's family and work life. They have good chemistry, too. McGill does his usual outstanding job as Joe Gage, the boorish, womanizing drunk business owner that says it's nice to have sexy women around the office (McGill is one of the best at being a sleazebag). Christine Lahti is okay as the detective Reese (she doesn't really do much beyond accuse Derek of lying about not having an affair with Lisa. You'll likely be surprised by how her character doesn't die at the end. I know I was surprised). And Scout Taylor-Compton, the new Laurie Strode in Rob Zombie's horrendous "Halloween" franchise, shows up in a bit part as a babysitter. Is it me or does she look like she's twelve here?
"Obsessed" should have been so much better. It set itself to be, at least, a decent enough little thriller. But it apparently wanted to be a mess, so that's what it does. It ends up a mess and an awful time at the movies. Avoid this movie as much as you can. But, if you're just compelled to see it (I have no idea why you would be compelled, but it could happen) just be aware that you will be disappointed by it. I can pretty much guarantee it.
Don't see "Obsessed."
So what do we have here? Gratuitous up beat R&B opening titles music, a Cadillac SUV, gratuitous Beyonce, Beyonce removing a "For Sale" sign from the front yard of her new house, burning up a "For Sale" sign in the fireplace, gratuitous Beyonce walking around her new empty house smiling and being sexy, an attic that looks like a basement, gratuitous ceiling mirror, attempted carpet sex, gratuitous hot blonde chick in the elevator, gratuitous flirting, hand touching, gratuitous Bruce "D-Day" McGill, gratuitous Jerry O'Connell, gratuitous internets research, dirty diaper changing, champagne drinking, gratuitous flaming male secretary, sexy female thighs, gratuitous Beyonce studying to get a degree and looking sexy in glasses, an awkward meeting, a mix CD, gratuitous office IM'ing, an old lady secretary with massive arm fat, tie picking, the world's greatest bar hamburger, gratuitous drunk and sexy company Christmas party, gratuitous attempted mistletoe kissing, attempted men's room stall sex, shiny rims, gratuitous Ali Larter showing up in a car wearing only a trench coat and sexy lingerie, a great family Christmas, sexy e-mails, a blue smiley face that winks, gratuitous Al Larter wearing a hot red dress, date rape, gratuitous iced tea drinking, attempted crazy bitch suicide, a big family blow up, gratuitous Derek trying to make it up to his wife montage, gratuitous Christine Lahti, gratuitous Beyonce wearing a hot black dress, gratuitous Scout Taylor-Compton, attempted kidnapping, a defiled family portrait, installing a home security system, lawn sprinklers, dress shirt fondling, gratuitous hot chick fight that's just ridiculous, lamp breaking, using a broken lamp as a spear, face kicking, stair rolling, two-by-four beatdown, ceiling hooey, massive glass coffee table breaking, chandelier breaking, and a freeze frame ending that's just bullshit.
Best lines: "You're a temp?," "Are you following me?," "You better watch out, girl. He's married," "Whose legs are those?," "What do you think about giving that magic mirror another test drive?," "I'm just waiting on you," "I think you'll find I'm not your typical temp," "It's nice to meet you, Sharon," "If you think you can pump me for information with a couple of cosmos, you're right," "Excuse me, can I have a dirty martini?," "Hey, office asshole. That's Mr. office asshole," "Lisa! Get out of my car now!," "Maybe you are an asshole," "Do you have a horseshoe up your ass? You're the luckiest guy I know," "Does that feel good?," "Bitch breathe!," "Wait, she was naked in your bed?," "This is bullshit," "Move your foot, Derek," "What am I supposed to do now? Buy a gun?,” “Just try me, bitch!,” “Did you not get my message?,” and “You are completely delusional.”
Synopsis:
THE WIRE's Idris Elba stars in this thriller as a man who seems to have a perfect life. He is married to Sharon (Beyoncé Knowles), and he has just earned a promotion at work. But destruction looms... THE WIRE's Idris Elba stars in this thriller as a man who seems to have a perfect life. He is married to Sharon (Beyoncé Knowles), and he has just earned a promotion at work. But destruction looms when a pretty temp (HEROES' Ali Larter) grows a little too fond of him.
Starring: Idris Elba, Beyonce Knowles, Ali Larter, Bruce McGill, Jerry O'Connell, Christine Lahti
Director: Steve Shill
Screenwriter: David Loughery, Will Packer
Composer: Jim Dooley
Studio: Sony Pictures Entertainment
Rated: G Genre: Comedies Theatrical Release:Apr 10, 2009 Wide Box Office: $32,324,487 Review : omg ashley, i’ve just seen “hannah montana the movie”!! and it’s just as awesome as the tv show only bigger and prettier and she doesn’t fall down so much.
More About This Movie basically hannah the pop star is getting way too cocky for a secret identity so her dad (i wish billy ray cyrus would shave his chin) takes her home to tennessee to remind her her real name is miley stewart (well it’s really miley cyrus but you know what i mean)and she falls in love with this cooool cowboy (i wish we had cowboys in new york!) who wears super tight jeans and has zac efron hair but zac doesn’t play him :( and he likes miley way better than hannah even though hannah’s outfits are really cute (but not trashy like britney or lindsay).Then she paints a henhouse and totally saves her home town from getting a shopping mall (not sure why) by giving a SUPER AWESOME concert with all these new songs about how great it is to climb mountains and then a million people dance. oh, and her dad finds a girlfriend (i know, super gross).i love hannah sooo much. she’s so CLEAN, you know?
Synopsis: After the huge success of HANNAH MONTANA & MILEY CYRUS: BEST OF BOTH WORLDS CONCERT, an all-new Hannah Montana adventure cruises to the big screen with this comedy. Hannah's star continues to... After the huge success of HANNAH MONTANA & MILEY CYRUS: BEST OF BOTH WORLDS CONCERT, an all-new Hannah Montana adventure cruises to the big screen with this comedy. Hannah's star continues to climb, while Miley is in danger of being lost in the shuffle. To help bring her back to Earth, Miley's dad (Billy Ray Cyrus) takes her to Crowley Corners, Tennessee, where there's plenty of love and laughter in the air. HANNAH MONTANA THE MOVIE stars favorites from the TV series as well as Rascal Flatts and Taylor Swift.
Starring: Miley Cyrus, Margo Martindale, Jason Earles, Peter Gunn, Melora Hardin, Mitchel Musso, Lucas Till, Barry Bostwick, Moises Arias, Taylor Swift, Vanessa Williams, Billy Ray CyrusDirector: Peter ChelsomScreenwriter: Dan BerendsenProducer: Alfred Gough, Miles MillarComposer: John DebneyStudio: Walt Disney Pictures
Rated: R for frenetic strong bloody violence throughout, crude and graphic sexual content, nudity and pervasive language Runtime: 85 mins Genre: Action/Adventure Theatrical Release:Apr 17, 2009 Wide Box Office: $11,735,952 Review : It has taken only three years for Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) to end his long fall from a helicopter at the end of “Crank.
”Waiting for him at a busy Los Angeles intersection are a bunch of Chinese mobsters, who shovel the hit man off the street, remove his heart and substitute a machine. Without constant recharging, Chev — and the “Crank” franchise — will die. Like its predecessor, “Crank: High Voltage,” the latest abomination from Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, is boorish, bigoted and borderline pornographic. As Chev charges around town searching for his stolen organ — juicing himself with jumper cables, a Taser and a bout of old-lady frottage — the plot vigorously abuses Mexicans, Asians, women and the disabled with equal-opportunity glee. Bearing the brunt of the punishment is Chev’s pole-dancing girlfriend (Amy Smart) and a besotted Asian hooker (Bai Ling); apparently Chev’s resemblance to a rutting bull is not limited to his neck and personality.
Fans of the original (and you are out there) will be thrilled to discover that the director of photography, Brandon Trost, seems confused about the meaning of the term “private parts” and that the filmmakers are still resisting maturity. “Isn’t everybody looking for their heart?” Mr. Neveldine asks in the press notes. On this evidence, it seems unlikely. “Crank: High Voltage” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). Nipples are sliced, breast implants pierced and horses frightened.
Starring: Jason Statham, Amy Smart, Clifton Collins, Efren Ramirez, Bai Ling, David Carradine, Reno Wilson, Joseph Julian Soria, Dwight Yoakam, Corey Haim, Keone Young, Art Hsu Director: Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor Screenwriter: Mark Neveldine, Brian Taylor Producer: Tom Rosenberg, Gary Lucchesi, Richard Wright, Skip Williamson Composer: Mike Patton Studio: Lions Gate Films
Rated: R for pervasive language, sexual content including nudity, and some drug material Genre: Comedies Theatrical Release:Jun 5, 2009 Wide Review : Based apparently on the reception of one brilliant teaser trailer and a recent full-length trailer, Warner Brothers has decided not to wait around and see how The Hangover performs at the box office this June, deciding to go ahead and greenlight a multimillion script for a sequel
,which will be penned by Todd Phillips and Scot Armstrong (neither of whom have writing credits for the original, though Phillips directed it and is signed on to direct the second entry).This is the second time in a week that a studio has greenlit a sequel before the first installment had even debuted widely — last week, Paramount gave the go-ahead for a Star Trek sequel.
This one, however, is a bit more unusual, in that it’s not based on a franchise with an existing fanbase. Warner is making the decision based on strong test screenings and a positive reaction to footage from that film at ShoWest. You know what else had strong test screenings? Adventureland. It opened with $6 million, and it had Kristen Stewart, who at least has had some box-office success. The Hangover stars Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zack Galifianakis, none of whom have achieved box-office success on their own (and only Cooper has done so as part of an ensemble). Of course, the flick does look brilliant, though Todd Phillips hasn’t exactly given us a lot of consistency: He directed Road Trip and Old School, but he also directed the awful School for Scoundrels and the not-much-better Starsky and Hutch. And, we’re talking about a bachelor party comedy here — is the idea for the sequel that another member of the trio get hitched, thus creating another opportunity for a bachelor party? Or will they get hungover in a different fashion? I don’t get the rush. There have been enough movies with considerable online buzz surrounding them that have not performed up to expectations (Snakes on a Plane, Zack and Miri Make a Porno) to make studios skittish, so I’m not sure why they don’t at least wait until the Monday after the film opens before greenlighting a sequel. But, then again, they’ve never been known for their business savvy.
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Jeffrey Tambor, Rachel Harris, Heather Graham, Rob Riggle Director: Todd Phillips Screenwriter: Jon Lucas, Scott Moore, Todd Phillips, Jeremy Garelick Story: Jon Lucas, Scott Moore Producer: Todd Phillips, Daniel Goldberg Studio: Warner Bros.
Rated: R for pervasive language, graphic nudity, drug use, sexual content and violence Genre: Comedies Theatrical Release:Apr 10, 2009 Wide Box Office: $11,017,33 Review : Observe and Report is not as easy a film to review as I initially assumed it would be. It exists almost in an effort to defy itself. Sold as a comedy starring comic regular Seth Rogen it has a few laughs, but considering Rogen’s character, Forest Ridge Mall security guard Ronnie Barnhardt, is a bipolar man child with delusions of grandeur, a fetish for firearms and is still living with his alcoholic mother we have a bit more than comedy to consider
Early on these personality traits are played for comedic effect, but as the film plays on we realize they define a very real and unstable individual just aching to crack at any moment. Next comes women bloggers screaming “date rape” all while the character being raped is last seen screaming for more. Add police brutality, slow motion naked fat men and the most powerful handgun in the world delivering a serious blow to the chest and we have just eclipsed comedy. So what exactly is Observe and Report? Most will call it a dark comedy, and while it is dark and has its funny moments that is to completely ignore the reality of it all. Writer/director Jody Hill (Foot Fist Way and “Eastbound and Down”) has said comedies shouldn’t be limited to jokes alone. Violence and/or drama in comedies doesn’t need to be funny is his assertion. Citing Taxi Driver as his primary influence Hill has created his own Travis Bickle, but there is a disconnect in this film that doesn’t allow the comparison to completely play out. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Over the course of the first half of this film Hill goes more for laughs, painting Ronnie as one of the most despicable characters you could meet. His self-designated purpose in life is to protect the weak and his attempts to do so are laughable, occasionally comic, but most times pathetic. He has zero social skills and is entirely unaware of just how dumb he is. To put it plainly, Ronnie is an ass of the worst kind, and as a result the character is unlikable in every way. The Bickle connection, however, is lost as Hill walks the fine line between comedy, reality and lunacy proving there isn’t room for everything. Along with Rogen the other “star” of the film is Anna Faris as Brandi, a make-up counter girl embodying all the short-comings you can throw at her. She’s a dimwitted, drug using slut that has caught Ronnie’s eye and won’t give him the time of day until the night he manages to catch her coming home stumbling drunk, which is when he sees no problem in making his move. Their “date” dissolves into some of the funnier moments of the film, but at the same time has drawn questions regarding date rape from various corners. Considering Ronnie’s disturbing behavior throughout the film I think it is an overreaction, but the fact Warner Bros. is selling this film as a laugh-out-loud comedy, and the scene in question has one of the most comedic moments in the film, the criticism has its merits. I bring up this date rape issue not in an attempt to be morally correct, but to show the primary flaw this film has going for it. Despite the comedic aspects, one could argue Observe and Report is a serious film looking at the life of a disturbed individual and society’s reaction and involvement in making him what he is and even, at times, reinforcing his behavior. I have no idea how far Hill actually intended audiences to take the serious nature of the film and how much he expected us to laugh, but based on what I have read he didn’t intend for audiences to necessarily feel good about what they were laughing at. What Hill has attempted is inspired, and maybe in the hands of another director it would have worked, but with Observe and Report it just dissolves into utter chaos, which again may be intentional, but that would just be reaching too far. For what it’s worth I didn’t really enjoy the film. I had a few moments of laughter, one of which involves Ronnie alone on a dark street corner surrounded by crack heads led by Danny McBride (Tropic Thunder and “Eastbound and Down”) and the subsequent scene with Ronnie and Detective Harrison played by Ray Liotta, whose character actually disappointed me. I originally expected Harrison to be the counterpunch to Ronnie, but instead the two were one-in-the-same. If this is Hill’s way of making a point that’s great, but to know a police detective can be just as crazy as a bipolar mall cop doesn’t do much for me and really adds nothing to the movie. With Observe and Report we are talking about something I would define as an anti-comedy and it bucks the system at every turn. I can’t say I have seen a movie like it, but that doesn’t mean it gets extra points for being original (Okay, maybe a few). Yet, when all is said and done, it will be interesting to see how audiences take to the film overall and how many, like me, will have their share of laughs, but come out ultimately disappointed.
Synopsis: At the Forest Ridge Mall, head of security Ronnie Barnhardt (SETH ROGEN) patrols his jurisdiction with an iron fist. The master of his domain, he combats skateboarders, shoplifters and the... At the Forest Ridge Mall, head of security Ronnie Barnhardt (SETH ROGEN) patrols his jurisdiction with an iron fist. The master of his domain, he combats skateboarders, shoplifters and the occasional unruly customer while dreaming of the day when he can swap his flashlight for a badge and a gun.
Ronnie's delusions of grandeur are put to the test when the mall is struck by a flasher. Driven by his personal duty to protect and serve the mall and its patrons, Ronnie seizes the opportunity to showcase his underappreciated law enforcement talents on a grand scale, hoping his solution of this crime will earn him a coveted spot at the police academy and the heart of his elusive dream girl Brandi (ANNA FARIS), the hot make-up counter clerk who won't give him the time of day.
But his single-minded pursuit of glory launches a turf war with the equally competitive Detective Harrison (RAY LIOTTA) of the Conway Police, and Ronnie is confronted with the challenge of not only catching the flasher, but getting him before the real cops.
Seth Rogen stars in the dark comedy Observe and Report, written and directed by Jody Hill (The Foot Fist Way). Donald De Line (The Italian Job) will produce, with Andrew Haas (Without a Paddle), Marty Ewing (Blades of Glory), Thomas Tull (The Dark Knight) and Jon Jashni (Sweet Home Alabama) serving as executive producers. The film also stars Anna Faris (The House Bunny), Michael Pena (Million Dollar Baby), Celia Weston (Junebug) and Ray Liotta (The Rat Pack).
The behind-the-scenes creative team includes director of photography Tim Orr (Snow Angels), production designer Chris Spellman (Superbad) and editor Zene Baker (The Foot Fist Way). Music is by Joseph Stephens.
Starring: Seth Rogen, Anna Faris, Michael Pena, Ray Liotta, Celia Weston, Collette Wolfe Director: Jody Hill
Synopsis: At the Forest Ridge Mall, head of security Ronnie Barnhardt (SETH ROGEN) patrols his jurisdiction with an iron fist. The master of his domain, he combats skateboarders, shoplifters and the... At the Forest Ridge Mall, head of security Ronnie Barnhardt (SETH ROGEN) patrols his jurisdiction with an iron fist. The master of his domain, he combats skateboarders, shoplifters and the occasional unruly customer while dreaming of the day when he can swap his flashlight for a badge and a gun.
Ronnie's delusions of grandeur are put to the test when the mall is struck by a flasher. Driven by his personal duty to protect and serve the mall and its patrons, Ronnie seizes the opportunity to showcase his underappreciated law enforcement talents on a grand scale, hoping his solution of this crime will earn him a coveted spot at the police academy and the heart of his elusive dream girl Brandi (ANNA FARIS), the hot make-up counter clerk who won't give him the time of day.
But his single-minded pursuit of glory launches a turf war with the equally competitive Detective Harrison (RAY LIOTTA) of the Conway Police, and Ronnie is confronted with the challenge of not only catching the flasher, but getting him before the real cops.
Seth Rogen stars in the dark comedy Observe and Report, written and directed by Jody Hill (The Foot Fist Way). Donald De Line (The Italian Job) will produce, with Andrew Haas (Without a Paddle), Marty Ewing (Blades of Glory), Thomas Tull (The Dark Knight) and Jon Jashni (Sweet Home Alabama) serving as executive producers. The film also stars Anna Faris (The House Bunny), Michael Pena (Million Dollar Baby), Celia Weston (Junebug) and Ray Liotta (The Rat Pack).
The behind-the-scenes creative team includes director of photography Tim Orr (Snow Angels), production designer Chris Spellman (Superbad) and editor Zene Baker (The Foot Fist Way). Music is by Joseph Stephens.
Starring: Seth Rogen, Anna Faris, Michael Pena, Ray Liotta, Celia Weston, Collette WolfeDirector: Jody HillScreenwriter: Jody HillProducer: Donald De LineComposer: Joseph StephensStudio: Warner Bros.
Rated: R for pervasive language, including crude and sexual references Runtime: 1 min 40 secs Genre: Comedies Theatrical Release:Mar 20, 2009 Wide Box Office: $58,865,219 Review : I Love You, Man operates within serious highs and lows. When this movie is funny it’s really funny, but when the jokes aren’t rolling it hits rock bottom. This isn’t necessarily a problem for the first half of the film or so, but there comes a point where you hope it will get out of its funk and gain a bit of consistency, but it never does.
It’s an R-rated comedy directed by John Hamburg who found some success with Along Came Polly back in 2004, but I just can’t be sure if I Love You, Man will follow suit despite the caliber of comedic stars and its harder edged comedic tone. I would say my biggest issue is with Paul Rudd who plays Peter Klaven, a man about to get married who has no real male friends and is encouraged by Zooey (Rashida Jones from NBC’s “The Office”), his finace, and family to spread his wings (after all, he needs a best man). The problem comes about when I can’t tell if Rudd has always been this boring as an actor and I just didn’t recognize it, if it’s just his character that bores me or if he just can’t carry a lead role when the story relies on him doing more than delivering one-liners. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Much like in Role Models, Rudd is more of the straight-laced character whereas the guy he befriends, Sydney (played by Forgetting Sarah Marshall’s Jason Segel), is the crazier of the two, much like how Seann William Scott was the crazy guy in Role Models. The difference here being the two never find much of a cohesive friendship — despite the movie implying they have — and Rudd’s character’s tendency to be the ho-hum life of the party drags the film down between punch lines. Jason Segel serves as the straight-forward attempt at getting the audience to laugh as every moment he is on screen is dedicated to getting you to chuckle at or with him. Segel’s character, for all intents and purposes, sort of came off as a fraud to me and I fully expected that to be the film’s turning point and when it wasn’t there was a brief glimmer of hope, which was soon dashed when the alternative was just as boring as Peter. However, contradicting Peter’s disturbing life routine he is fortunate enough to be marrying someone as fantastic as Zooey. Rashida Jones is so cute, she seems almost too good to be true and she creates a character equally charming. Why Zooey would decide on such a dud as Peter is beyond me. Andy Samberg plays Peter’s gay gym-trainer brother and is good for a few laughs as Samberg eats up each scene he is in and would have likely been a better character to focus on than the route this story went. The loud mouth couple played by Jamie Pressly and Jon Favreau is an excellent addition, but the joke there soon runs out as Hamburg goes to the well one too many times, something he seemed to do consistently throughout this film. I Love You, Man isn’t a bad film, it just isn’t much of a good one. It has some extremely funny moments, most of the time dealing with scenes where both sexes are involved outside of the typical rude humor accessed when Rudd and Segel are sharing scenes alone. The film could have benefit severely by shaking things up and not relying on the same old tricks we have seen in other films of its ilk, and most notably making its lead character a little more accessible, something Judd Apatow films are best at and an easy way to distinguish this one from the Apatow filmography. Rudd’s character is such a bore that by the time the film is over you are surprised anyone would have a dedicated interest in marrying him, let alone calling him a best friend after only a few months.
Synopsis: After years of swiping scenes from the leading men in such movies as KNOCKED UP and THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN, Paul Rudd finally headlines a star vehicle of his own. Unlike those Judd Apatow... After years of swiping scenes from the leading men in such movies as KNOCKED UP and THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN, Paul Rudd finally headlines a star vehicle of his own. Unlike those Judd Apatow productions, it's John Hamburg (ALONG CAME POLLY) who directs I LOVE YOU, MAN, albeit with many of the touchstones of Apatow's highly successful freaks-and-geeks-with-heart aesthetic. In other words, this is not an Apatow film, but, with the male capacity for--and simultaneous inability to express--fraternal love as its core comic conceit (and emotional centerpiece), it may as well be. Rudd plays Peter Klaven, a real estate agent with a blossoming career and an imminent marriage to Zooey (THE OFFICE's Rashida Jones)--basically, he's lucky in all things except male bonding. The narrative arc centers on his quest for platonic man-love--as opposed to, say, finding the girl of his dreams--and follows the boilerplate dictates of a standard rom-com with a subversive wink. In this case, boy meets boy, boys bond over their common love of Rush and Andre the Giant, boys break up and make up, etc. Rudd and co-star Jason Segel (FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL), a fellow Apatow alum who plays Sydney Fife, the Type B object of Klaven's affection, imbue their roles with winning charisma and elevate the plot with real and nuanced chemistry. With a whip-smart pace, the film continually tills fresh comic ground as Hamburg finds punctuation points in every scene and never lets a gag overstay its welcome. While the supporting cast features many memorable turns by the likes of Jon Favreau, Jaime Pressly, and Andy Samberg, I LOVE YOU, MAN ultimately belongs to Rudd, who approaches insecurity and social awkwardness with the same dead-eye marksmanship that Peter Sellers did for slapstick.
Starring: Paul Rudd, Jason Segel, Rashida Jones, Andy Samberg, J.K. Simmons, Jane Curtin, Jon Favreau, Jaime Pressly, Lou FerrignoDirector: John HamburgScreenwriter: John HamburgStory: Larry Levin, John HamburgProducer: Donald De Line, John HamburgComposer: Theodore ShapiroStudio: Paramount Pictures
Rated: PG-13 for some intense sequences of terror and disturbing images Runtime: 1 min 32 secs Genre: Horror/Suspense Theatrical Release:Mar 27, 2009 Wide Box Office: $46,488,580 Review :
For those of us growing up in the '70s, there was one seminal, supposedly true, scary story.No, it wasn't Helter Skelter or the trumped-up Texas Chainsaw Massacre. No, in high school cafeterias everywhere, we teens were talking about George and Kathy Lutz and their 1977 journey into red-eyed demonic pig terror, The Amityville Horror. The novel was a post-modern masterwork, a complete con passing itself off as irrefutable "fictional" reality.
Now comes The Haunting in Connecticut, a similarly-styled exercise culled from a novel, plus an episode of the always trustworthy TV show from the Discovery Channel. Oddly enough, it's another network -- Lifetime -- that sets the tone for this tepid terror tale. Ever since he was diagnosed with cancer, life has been a struggle for Matt Campbell (Kyle Gallner). While his recovering alcoholic Dad (Martin Donovan) tries to maintain house and home, well-meaning Mom (Virginia Madsen) drives several hours to Connecticut to try an experimental technique which offers some hope. The toll on the teen is too great, however, so Mom eventually moves the family to an old dilapidated house so he can be closer to his doctors. Almost immediately, weird things start happening. The building creaks and odd ethereal noises are heard. Soon, Matt is seeing spirits and discovering the facilities for a funeral home in the basement. As dark forces torment him and the rest of the Campbell clan, Reverend Nicholas Popescu (Elias Koteas) tries to save them from the evil forces festering in this psychically charged dwelling with a terrifying, telling history. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Let's get one thing straight right up front -- when you move into a former funeral parlor, complete with intact embalming room, crematorium, and séance-drenched legacy, you should expect a little paranormal activity, right? If you didn't get a heaping helping of problematic poltergeists and demon disturbances, you'd ask for your escrow money back. Apparently, the notion of living where the dead used to be preserved (and in this case, desecrated in confusing, ambiguous psychic rituals) holds no sway over the Campbell family. They're too busy sniping at each other and worrying about young Matt's rampaging illness to let stories of a young boy, his wicked mortician boss, and the evil acts they committed get in the way. Australian novice Peter Cornwell can crow all he wants about this tale's veracity, but there's more legitimacy in your average urban legend than in the entire 100 minutes of this flimsy excuse for false shocks. Granted, we do feel the unsettling atmosphere of this converted death palace, and there are times when a sense of dread starts sneaking up on us. But then the first time feature filmmaker ruins it all by telegraphing his scares with the standard combination of menacing music cues, obvious framing, and drawn-out dramatic pauses. If something didn't go "boo" after all that, the audience would feel completely ripped off. Too bad Cornwell overcompensates while ignoring everything else that could possibly be horrific about this situation. Indeed, the real shame about The Haunting in Connecticut is that a decent premise is totally wasted via a dimwitted, dialed down PG-13 execution. It's the same with Amityville and other "true" haunted house films as well. You have to balance seriousness and skepticism, giving the viewer a chance to put themselves in the place of the characters and indentify with the fright. By constantly stopping the shivers to delve into Matt's disease, the father's potential relapse, and the mother's obsession over both, we experience the equivalent of being dragged out in the cold, clarifying rays of the sun. The accuracy of this tale will always be suspect. The facts of its subpar cinematic translation are beyond reproach.
Synopsis: A direct descendent of classic haunted-house films like BURNT OFFERINGS (1975) and THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979), THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT also features the classic premise of a family moving... A direct descendent of classic haunted-house films like BURNT OFFERINGS (1975) and THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979), THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT also features the classic premise of a family moving into a new home where the bad deeds of previous tenants have left a foul psychic residue. Reportedly based on true events experienced by the Snedeker family in the 1970s, Peter Cornwell’s film has plenty of effective scares, but it is also a moving family drama featuring an impressive performance by Virginia Madsen (SIDEWAYS). It is 1987, and Connecticut teenager Matt Campbell (Kyle Gallner) is undergoing painful, experimental cancer treatments. Long drives to the hospital are making a trying experience even worse, so his mother, Sara (Madsen), rents an old house and moves the family closer to Matt’s clinic. Soon after moving into the house, Matt begins to have disturbing hallucinations of strange figures; but believing these visions to be unfortunate side effects of his cancer therapy, he keeps them to himself. When the visions persist, a bit of sleuthing reveals the Campbells’ new abode to be an old funeral home where séances were held in the 1920s by a mortician who also had dealings in the black arts that have left some restless spirits wandering the house. The first half of THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT, where it isn’t clear if Matt’s visions are real or imagined, is driven more by the touching story of a mother and son caught in a painful situation than by shocks and scares. Once it’s confirmed that the ghosts are real, however, the film becomes a tight little thriller with some genuinely creepy moments. Martin Donovan, as the alcoholic father of the Campbell family, and Elias Koteas, as a sympathetic priest, do great work in supporting roles.
Starring: Virginia Madsen, Martin Donovan, Kyle Gallner, Elias Koteas, Amanda Crew Director: Peter Cornwell Screenwriter: Adam Simon, Tim Metcalfe Producer: Paul Brooks, Andy Trapani, Daniel Farrands, Wendy Rhoads Composer: Robert J. Kral Studio: Lions Gate Films
Rated: PG for intense sequences of action/violence and brief mild language Genre: Action/Adventure Theatrical Release:Apr 10, 2009 WideBox Office: $4,756,488 Review : While I am a fan of anime I could never understand the craze over Dragonball and Dragonball Z and all the other Dragonball incarnations reigning out there.I watched an episode of the series and I was simply confused. It seemed like all these super muscular dudes did was fly around blasting each other with massive blasts of ki force. Still, I respected the Dragonball franchise as a beloved fantasy/martial arts legend.
Now that legend has hit mainstream Hollywood with a live action feature brought to us by 20th Century Fox and James Wong (director) and Stephen Chow (producer). While this is not the first live action film based on Dragonball (A Korean adaptation called Dragonball: The Magic Begins was released in 1990) this big screen adaptation boasts an international cast, snazzy effects, and vision blurring stunt work. With Mr. Chow (Kung Fu Hustle, Shaolin Soccer) and Mr. Wong (Final Destination, The One)at the helm plus Chow Yun-Fat (Bulletproof Monk, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon) in the cast Dragonball Evolution shows some hit making potential.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Overall, I thought it was entertaining. There were a lot of things about the movie that made me not regret buying a ticket. For starters, I loved the diversity of the cast. So many different faces and skin tones and accents helped to jazz up the energy. The majority of us are living in communities mixed up with all sorts of nationalities and its high time big movies like this portrayed that. I was especially glad to see Japanese actors featured since Dragonball is a Japanese product. The effects are good. No complaints there. From Bulma’s hi-tech gadgets to Master Roshi’s ki manipulation Dragonball Evolution has plenty of eye candy that will keep you stimulated for that 84 minute running time. The stunt work was okay. It varies from "Holy Cow!" to "Eh, that's nice". The opening training session between Goku and Grandpa Gohan takes place on two thin ropes. Watching the two spar while trying not to fall off the wires took me back to those outrageous battles in the classic Hong Kong action films of the 1990s. I was most disappointed by a scene where Chi Chi has to fight her doppelganger. Great concept but it looked more difficult to execute than the filmmakers expected. Couldn’t they just have hired twins? Anyway, for the most part, the wirework and gymnastics are oodles of fun to watch. Dragonball Evolution starts out as a humdrum high school drama. Poor Goku (Justin Chatwin) is so misunderstood. He has no friends but plenty of bullies. The irony is that Grandpa Gohan (Randall Duk Kim) has trained Goku in martial arts for years so Goku could wipe the floor with his aggressors but he promised Grandpa that he wouldn’t fight at school so he endures the abuse instead. And then there’s the lovely high school hottie, Chi Chi (Jamie Chung), who he secretly pines over but knows he’ll never get because he’s the designated loser. So, yes, at first you’ll have to sit through the good old “high school misfit overcoming adversity” schtick. Take heart, my fellow “filmfreaks”, because the evil Piccolo (James Marsters) manages to escape his mystical prison and goes hunting for the seven magical Dragonballs. If he collects all seven then he’ll be able to have his deepest wish granted by the dragon god, Shen Long. I don’t think I’ll have to tell you how majorly devastating Piccolo’s wish would be for the rest of us. Still, thanks to the green skinned baddie Goku has no time to wallow in high school theatrics because now he has to go on a cross-country quest to retrieve the Dragonballs before Piccolo does. Goku gets help from Grandpa’s teacher, Master Roshi (Chow Yun-Fat), plus some additional support from Bulma (Emmy Rossum) and Yamcha (Joon Park). Yamcha is a thief looking to cash in on the Dragonballs while Bulma is a smart and savvy inventor hoping to utilize the ancient relics as renewable sources of energy. Throughout the journey Goku will have to train and develop his skills so he’ll be able to defeat Piccolo in the inevitable final battle. Sadly, since I’m not a Dragonball devotee I can’t tell you how much the movie differs from the manga and anime adaptations. At the very least, I think fans will appreciate the attempts at preserving the classic forms of the characters. Even though the origins and outward appearances are drastically overhauled Bulma is still a talented inventor, Yamcha is still a crook, and Chi Chi is still cute as a button but tough enough to brawl with the likes of Goku. Nothing against Justin Chatwin (and I give him much respect for walking around with that ridiculous hair style. Can you imagine the film’s budget for styling gel?) but I wondered how the movie would be if Goku were played by a Japanese man. Just a small little notion that’s probably not even worth mentioning. But am I the only one that notices the hero in some of these U.S. kung fu flicks (The Forbidden Kingdom instantly comes to mind) is usually Caucasian? Would the hero be less relatable in the States if he were Japanese, Korean, or Chinese? Another thing that I wondered about is the less controversial emancipation of Piccolo. According to the prologue, a group of monks sealed Piccolo away deep inside the center of the Earth. Then suddenly he manages to break free, obtain a henchwoman named Mai (Eriko Tamura) and snag a massive flying vessel. I realize that 84 minutes meant a lot little things would go unexplained but I would at least like to know who Mai is. Is she human or alien? And if she is human then why is she helping Piccolo in his quest to plunge the Earth in fire and chaos? And most importantly where did Mai find that fabulous red snakeskin bodysuit? I’m not saying I would wear it all the time. Just when I’m vacuuming or mowing the lawn. Dragonball Evolution isn’t prefect but it has a lot of good stuff that manages to cover most of the cracks. There’s the always exciting “chosen one must save Earth from total devastation” plot. The action is fierce and the special effects are splashy. The female leads (Rossum & Chung) are great role models for the up and coming independent women out there. Even Tamura’s evil “Mai” is worth noting for her determination and spirit. The filmfreaks will dig appearances from sci-fantasy film veterans Chow Yun-Fat and Ernie Hudson (you’ll never believe what role he’s playing). Plus, get a kick out of Emmy Rossum and James Marsters' new looks that render them almost unrecognizable. I kept trying to find Marsters’ signature sunken cheeks beneath the latex but I couldn’t find it. And his voice! I was like, wow, is “Spike” really in there? However, Marsters fans might be a little bummed that his "Piccolo" is kept in the background for most of the film as the evolution of Goku and the Dragonball hunt share center stage. It depends on your perspective whether hiding the villain in his ship until the final act helps or hinders the movie. Personally, I didn't hate the approach but I do wish more was revealed about Piccolo such as why was he so bent on seeing the Earth charred and broken. Is he just sadistic or was he dumped on prom night? There is a chance I missed something in that quickie introduction. I was also surprised at Chow Yun-Fat's comic talents. If he's not playing a reserved kung-fu master then he's a brooding assassin most of the time. Dragonball Evolution gave me an opportunity to see a completely new side of Yun-Fat and I thoroughly enjoyed it. If you’re still on the fence just think of Dragonball Evolution as an appetizer for X-Men Origins: Wolverine. And stick around after the first volley of end credits. If things go well we could be seeing the potential for a second Evolution.
Synopsis: Dragonball: Evolution is based on the popular Japanese manga created by Akira Toriyama, whose work spawned best selling graphic novels, video games and a phenomenally successful television series. ... Dragonball: Evolution is based on the popular Japanese manga created by Akira Toriyama, whose work spawned best selling graphic novels, video games and a phenomenally successful television series. The live action adventure centers on a team of warriors, each of whom possesses special abilities. Together, they protect Earth from a force bent on dominating the Universe and controlling the mystical objects from which the film takes its name. --copy; 20th Century Fox
Starring: Justin Chatwin, Emmy Rossum, Jamie Chung, Chow Yun Fat, James Marsters, Joon Park, Eriko, Randall Duk Kim, Ernie Hudson Director: James Wong Screenwriter: James Wong Producer: Stephen Chow Composer: Brian Tyler Studio: 20th Century Fox
Rated: PG-13 for crude and sexual content throughout, and language
