"Inception" Review

The past decade has been a drought for truly creative and speculative science-fiction. Hollywood has become over-blown with explosions and one action scene after another to move a plot with an interesting idea, and let go of what that story had that was so fascinating to begin with. Hollywood has forgotten that the most beloved and time-testing sci-fi stories don’t deal with action, but deal with fascinating and heartfelt ideas. Director Christopher Nolan has not forgotten this notion. Nolan works with his amazing cast to tell a story that not only amazes and thrills you, but renews faith in the fact that there are still amazing untapped ideas to be had in the magic that is cinema.
Dom Cobb, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, and his team work in extracting ideas and thoughts from the mind during the dream-state. Cobb and his team find themselving faced with performing the impossible. The task is to not steal an idea, but to plant one while facing the many dangers in not just the mind of the mark, but the dangers from Cobb’s own mind.
The cast for this film is top notch. Dicapro is fantastic as our hero Cobb. The supporting cast has a great chemistry and nobody is trying to steal the show. Everyone has potential to be your favorite character. Fantastic cast and performances all-around.
The screenplay to this film is ingenious. While the film’s structure is simple enough, Nolan delivers a film that leaves an audience with an infinite number of possibilities, but everyone will have their own interpretation. When a film can leave an audience with numerous thoughts on the ending, the film has truly achieved something new and inventive in its narrative. Without giving away spoilers, the film’s idea is intriguing in dealing with the notion of dreams and how they can grow to make or break a human mind. The screenplay while not emotionally driven, is driven by just the originality on how the film is presented. This science fiction film is structured as a heist film. A heist film that takes place in a world of the dream where all the characters are stationary and asleep.
In terms of where this film breaks new ground, apart from the screenplay, this film breaks new ground in the editing and the shooting of the picture. The picture was mostly shot with the notion of not using CGI as a quick answer to a technical problem. Everything in the movie feels real and feels as if everything is presented in a new and fresh way in terms of the world of the dream. The shooting of the picture puts all the amazing visuals, the elevator or the zero-gravity sequences, on-screen practicially to where you feel you haven’t seen a film like this before.
In the editing realm of the picture, Nolan breaks new ground in cross-cutting action spreading across three different worlds. Seeing how an action in one dream world interacts with the other worlds is cut in a way that is thrilling, intense, and has you gripping to your chair. By the end of the picture, you feel as if you had just been put through an intellectual ringer. While the film maybe emotionally-lacking at points for most of the characters, Nolan gives you a fantastic action film that is jam-packed with ideas, like most long lived speculative science-fiction.
In essence, Nolan gives us a dream world that must be seen to be experienced. You have not seen a film like this before. Everything in the film is presented in a fresh new and thrilling way. Nolan has delivered perhaps his most personal and well-crafted film with “Inception.” Everyone will have a different interpetation of the ending as it floors you and leaves you with a question. Nolan’s film feels like it is more interested in the journey and the idea, rather than the ending, and that’s what has sorely been lacking in storytelling lately. This is a speculative science-fiction that is akin to the minds of Kurt Vonnegut or Phillip K. Dick. This is the best and most original science fiction epic since 1999s groundbreaking "The Matrix." Nolan has delivered a masterwork that reminds the audience, as Emes (Tom Hardy) says in the picture, “You mustn’t be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.”

"127 Hours" Review

“I can do everything on my own.” says Aaron Ralston, played brilliantly by James Franco. The underlying reality behind this moving story is that despite this man being a perfect human specimen, he is undone by his selfishness and pays the ultimate price for his forced solitude in getting into the situation that pins him. Ralston’s The combined directorial efforts of Danny Boyle and the above-par acting talent of James Franco, both guaranteed to draw attention come Oscar time, work together to craft an emotionally driven film that inspires and leaves you with a renewed love for life and the belief that nothing is stronger than the human will to overcome any and all obstacles.
The film’s story the real-life events following a selfish and isolated man, Aaron Ralston, who on a canyon-land hike whose arm gets trapped in a canyon by a huge bolder and the film tells his struggle to stay alive for 127 Hours in a canyon with little to no resources. The film works mostly as a one-man show by Franco. Franco delivers the performance of his career as he turns a fairly unlikable character and adds layers of depth to his character. As the audience spends more time with Ralston, Franco gives the character enough empathy with each moment that passes, that by the end the films works up to an emotional crescendo that floors you. Franco’s performance is fantastic as he gives you a portrait of a person who is breaking down the longer he is trapped in that canyon, but in his breakdowns he realizes what he faults are as a human being. Watching these epiphanies unfold on-screen charges up the audience’s connection to Raltson to an extent that when that ending finally does come, the audience, along with Ralston, are feeling that intense and agonizing pain. Franco’s performance is emotionally connected and deep in all the right ways that it’s tough to not think about his portrayal as fantastic in looking back at the film.
The other star of this film is Boyle. Boyle’s job is an impossibly difficult one in that he is narratively confined telling a story about a man stuck in a small space of a canyon. Boyle has to pull every trick he knows as a director to make this film compelling and exhilarating. The editing style is amazing as Boyle figures out a way to convey the wants, needs, and the suffering a character. Never has one wanted to grab a drink more than when walking out of this film. An amazing shot comes in the film when Franco’s character has been stuck for a prolonged amount of time only to realize he has a bottle of unopened Gatorade lying and condensating with beads of water in his car. The shot that follows gets across that thirsty feeling that you just want that bottle more than Franco does, and you aren’t even stuck in the canyon. Boyle does a fantastic job with the direction and he plays to the strengths to the challenges the film throws at him.
Overall, Boyle and Franco put together a film that at best renews your faith in others and what life has to offer. The film presents the notion that a life of solitude is although efficient, it’s not a human way to live your life to the fullest. We all need someone in our lives. Be it all those relationships, friendships, and family, we are all connected and we deserve more than living the empty life that Ralston used to live before the ordeal. “This rock has been following me my whole life.” says Ralston as he comes to realize what his life as amounted to before...well you already know the ending.

Dexter S04E12 "THE GETAWAY" Review

Blood sets Dexter Morgan’s teeth on edge, but the season four finale of “Dexter” has enough twists and turns to pump your blood with enough adrenaline for you to not notice you’ve chewed your nails off till its shocking conclusion. Showtime Channel’s Emmy nominated “Dexter”, based on the Jeff Lindsey novel “Darkly Dreaming Dexter,” started in syndication in the fall of 2006. Serial killer Dexter Morgan (Michael C. Hall) is a Miami PD Blood Spatter analyst by day and vigilante serial killer by night.

The series began with Dexter as a cold, solitary, and emotionless monster and by the start of this season he has come to learn he does feel emotion and starts a family, while quenching his need to kill. The main storyline of the episode has Dexter tying up all the loose ends with the Trinity Killer (John Lithgow) in an intense game of cat-and-mouse. Trinity has discovered Dexter’s ruse with him and plans to flee town after a killing spree that has evaded the Miami P.D. for decades.
The story for the episode takes the relationship the season has built so far between these two killers and relentlessly throws curve balls as you watch both of these calculating serial killers throw each other off their game as they up the stakes on each other. Trinity comes to the Dexter’s station and threatens him to leave him alone. Dexter chases and incapacitates Trinity only for Trinity to escape later when Dexter is arrested for fleeing the scene of a car crash during the pursuit. The script throws both of these characters into a chase that brings the world crashing down on each other. They both are putting each other at risk of losing everything. Dexter’s pursuit is putting Trinity at risk of being discovered after evading justice for 30 years and Trinity’s pursuit puts our hero at risk of losing his new family and revealing his killing tendencies to the world. All bets are off by the start of this episode. The tension and the stakes have never been higher and it keeps you on edge.

Hall’s brilliant portrayal of a vigilante serial killer walks the line between dark comedy and creepy as he tries to overcome his “dark passenger” for the sake of keepin his new family. Hall is at his A-game with his performance in this episode as you watch him slowly break down and get more emotional than he’s ever been on the show. A Great performance by Hall, but the standout performance is the chilling one by Lithgow as Trinity. Lithgow is the best antagonist this show has had by a long shot. Lithgow, better known as for his comedic role as High Commander Dick Salmon in “Third Rock From the Sun,” delivers the performance of his career with his role. Trinity’s arc is layered as the audience sees he is far worse killer than Dexter could ever want to be.

The conclusion between these two reach a sympathetic note, only to lead to a reveal that will go down as one of the most shocking endings for a season finale in television with the Death of Dexter’s wife. The script ends on a melancholy mood dying for the next season because of the possibilities the show opens itself with the loss of a character as important to our hero’s humane-side for the past four seasons as Rita Morgan (Julie Benz) has been. The ending is indicative of the risks the show is willing to take to avoid staleness and repetition. You can’t help but applaud the writers for giving the fourth season such a memorable finish. Overall, the show has reached a new realm with how well each episode has built up to this climatic and exciting conclusion. It’s going to be extremely difficult for the show to top itself next season as it has done each year. This season is nothing short of masterful in making the audience emotionally connected to where the characters have gotten to, but also terrified and excited for where they are all going.

THE CROW PAGE 38

Andres Gallego
11-14-2010
Reviewing The Arts
“The Crow Page 38” by James O’Barr

A place of intense pain and anguish can produce truly moving art, and it is such the case with James O’Barr’s “The Crow.” The experience of seeing his work is a mental challenge as it asks you to almost take your emotional temperature in an odd way. “It wasn’t like she had an illness or something that was anticipated. Just one day out of the blue, someone decided to get drunk and drive down a side street at 70 miles an hour and suddenly she was just gone. I don’t know if I actually believed in a god, but if I did I really felt betrayed by him. Why make this beautiful perfect flower and just trample it? What was the meaning of that? I almost felt like I was being punished like I’d finally been shown this thing and allowed hold it for just a moment and then it was taken away as a bitter joke. I definitely lost my faith in human nature for awhile there.” Recalled comic book author O’Barr on the incident that triggered the creation of his cathartic graphic novel “The Crow.” O’Barr created this story about a man who returns from the dead to seek justice for the gang murder of his girlfriend and himself, after experiencing a state of intense pain with the loss of his fiancé’ and not knowing how to deal with it. The graphic novel is filled with many astounding panels, but the one that truly stands out is page 38. Page 38 is where you feel and smell O’Barr’s blood, sweat, and tears the vividly on. You can sense that this may have been the most difficult thing O’Barr had to draw because in this panel, a ghost figure and a crow are getting ready to take away Shelly from Eric in a grisly manner.

The female, Shelly, represents a pure spirit with her being bare and naked. “Shelly was a just a literal translation of Beverley. I just tried to capture her innocence. Eric was a vehicle for my emotions since I was never quite comfortable in drawing myself.” as O’Barr explains the intention he had in drawing these characters. The Crow and Skull Cowboy (only his gun is shown) are the manifestation of all the negativity and the darkness that can come from life. Most importantly on the panel, you can sense that Eric is O’Barr’s wanting of not wanting to lose that moment with a loved one. As if Eric is demanding for time to not move on and he desperately doesn’t want to lose that white light in his life. The gun in that sequence represents the cold power of life in that scene. A gun has so much potential power in the fact that the loud shots fired have taken lives, changed history, and causes insant fear. Looking deeper into the page, the page is a three act structure. The first act is that sense of euphoric sense of happiness you get in a wonderful relationship translated into the line “Here’s where you smile”. The second act, is that moment you do want that light in your life for the rest of your life and you make the inner pact in yourself to never let it go. That second act is translated to the line “Now the Eternal Love part.” Then the last act is the crow and the Skull Cowboy readying to take away this happiness in Eric’s life. That third act is translated into the line “Idiot.” What O’Barr is trying to say in the page is that happiness, while sublime, will never last. There is no such thing as eternal happiness. Looking at the page, the crow is the only thing that looks towards the camera. Although Eric is a manifestation of O’Barr’s emotions, The Crow is a manifestation of O’Barr’s bitterness and anger towards the world. The whole page is O’Barr himself is referring to the reader and him breaking the forth wall in a metaphorical sense.

Overall, this page is definitely rooted in a place of intense bitterness and anger towards the world and you can sense O’Barr’s distain for life and human nature in this panel. It captured his emotional state so vividly and better than any panel that O’Barr almost makes it impersonal with the framing of each of the characters on the page. These are his dreams and memories. You are outside and given only a peek into his world. While hard to feel anything positive has come from this page in the end, the page makes you feel that sense of loss that O’Barr had at that point in his life. Anybody can relate and recall a moment that they lost someone important in their life, and O’Barr hits that emotional nail straight on it’s head. While O’Barr’s artwork while disturbing, it’s personal and elegantly beautiful. Something that is seldom seen in today’s comics and graphic novels. Overall, O’Barr’s artwork is moving and emotionally charged with every line that it asks you to feel the intense pain that the author endured. With the experience of viewing this piece, you come to know O’Barr more personally without having to have met him.

Calvin Harris, "Ready for the Weekend" Review Rewrite

Calvin Harris, “Ready for the Weekend” (Fly Eye, Columbia, 2009)

With the help of the Myspace internet community Calvin Harris has become one of the United Kingdom’s most prolific up and coming artists. After releasing a couple of demos on the website for a couple of years, Harris signed a record deal with EMI in 2006. The label decided to take a chance and release an album by Harris. Harris burst into the Electro-pop scene in 2007 with his amusingly titled debut Album “I Created Disco.” The album surpassed expectations by remaining in the top 10 UK charts for a long while. While the album wasn’t critically praised, it had attained a small following for the Scottish native in the pop/electro scene. Harris’ first album was received by most critics as a handbag electro pop debut that showed promise for Harris with the hit singles “The Girls,” “Acceptable in the 80’s,” and “Merrymaking at my Place.” Then Harris released his follow-up album “Ready for the Weekend” in 2009.
“I Created Disco” was rough in establishing it’s tone at the start, but “Ready for the Weekend” does that effectively from first track. The album has a smooth and inviting tone showing Harris’ sense of humor. With his debut album called “I Created Disco,” it’s only fitting that this album should start with a combination of electro bass keys and a saxophone solo taken out of a blues song, only to be faded out into a full electro-bit track drowning out all but Harris’ much improved vocals with the saxophone to not sound off till the very end. This opening invites the listener in with the promise of a good time if you go for the ride and for the most part, Harris delivers. Harris took the safe route with the first album being an electronically composed one, but this time he experiments with actual instruments such as the guitar rifts in “Blue” or “Worst Day.”
You can tell Harris has taken the criticism from the last album to heart. His vocals ruined the rhythms and beats of his previous album with songs like “Colours.” This time around his vocals aren’t as clunky and don’t try to upstage his own DJ work as the melodies are the driving force of the album. With the songs “Flashback” and “I’m Not Alone,” Harris is going for a different vibe by putting more of himself and baring his soul. The last album was randomly strung together beats that sounded good without a clear theme or artist intention. Harris gives more of himself in “Flashback” with the lyrics “If I could change my state of mind/then I would disappear/The love I get from you is something I can’t chance/and I can let you slip away without a second glance.” This album displays Harris’ talents in a collaborative vocal effort with Dizzie Rascal and Chrome in the fun and inspired “Dance wiv Me.” When the album works it makes you want to pump up your fist and cheer as that roller coaster is going up that hill.
While “Ready for the Weekend” is an improvement, most of the album’s later songs all feel like filler. This half of the album loses its momentum and becomes a slower and mostly non-vocal performance with “Relax,” Limits,” and “Burn Nights.” The album falls into a stump that it never quite recovers from while you wait for the real songs to come on. This last half isn’t enough to stomp the album as the last one as “Dance wiv me” swoops in to save it and leave you with a good taste in your mouth.
“Ready for the Weekend” is still an enjoyable and more mature artistic effort from Harris. Harris still listens as an artist with a lot of potential still ahead of him. His sound is a smooth transition for those otherwise not a fan of electro-pop. The album is a great next step in the right direction for Harris. He still isn’t quite there yet as an artist, but where he is now is a really fun and highly enjoyable ride for anyone looking for something new. As Harris puts it ‘These are the good times in your life, so put on a smile and it will be alright.”

"Almost Famous" Movie Review

If looking into the world of art with a fresh and honest point of view is tough, try being a 15 year old discovering this world for himself traveling with a band of amateur acting musicians coping with fame and fortune all at once. Cameron Crowe’s “Almost Famous” delivers a fascinating, brutally honest, and loving portrayal of the criticiqueing world in the 1970’s with enough heart to earn its place in cinema as his love letter to both critics and the fans of the magic that is music. Even non-music enthusiasts will be hard pressed to not find a heartfelt and genuine moment among the many that “Almost Famous” has to offer.

“Almost Famous” is a coming-of-age tale of 15 year old amateur writer/music critic William (Patrick Fugit) as he embarks on a long assignment for Rolling Stone Magazine with rock band “Stillwater” as he comes to realize what it truly takes to be both honest with himself as a critic and everyone else in this world he is embarking to learn of. While the 1970’s is an interesting time to set the film in, it absolutely works thematically. It was an interesting time to look back upon since music was progressing and what it meant to be a critic and fan was becoming tainted with the rise of commerce. As the first impression that William is to the band as “The Enemy” when William started as the fan who turned into “The Friend” that the band desperately needed at this venture in their musical careers.


One of the main thrusts of the picture is the believable performance by the actors. The story is well defined in terms of its honest portrayal of the characters. A storyteller will tell you in great stories, the writer must love their characters, and it’s clear that Crowe is absolutely in love with each of them. Crowe’s script paints each of these characters in shades of gray. Russell (Billy Crudup) comes off at times as a selfish egomaniac trying to cover his tracks, be it in scenes where he is putting a good face to William or the scene where he sells band-aid Penny to save his current relationship, but the combination of Crudup’s charisma and Crowe’s writing elevates this character to a point where the audience can hate his moral choices but would gladly share a beer with. Each of these characters is portrayed as fallible human beings. Everyone is putting a face to everyone and themselves, be it William posing as an experienced writer or his mother (François McDormond) using her moral values on her son to shield her inadequacies as a parent. The emotional core of the film is the existential conflict within William.


William is a character who has grown up out of place his whole life being an overachiever, till he finds a “place” with the type of people he’s admired his whole life. Fugit’s performance is great as you can clearly read into him as he is seeing what it takes to be in this job field and the difficult choices to be made if he wants to continue on that road. The film delivers an eloquent message about what it means to grow up, chase your dreams, and the harsh realities that come with those choices be it as a rock critic or a rock star. In watching this film, you not only come to understand each of these characters, but you get to know who Crowe is as a person. This is Crowe’s most personal film as it was written based on his experiences growing up as a Rolling Stones Magazine. By the end of the film you realize exactly how finding a passion can change you and you certainly see how it changed Crowe.


Crowe, with a stellar script and a fantastic cast all around, accomplishes to deliver a film that is both an indictment as well as a loving celebration of criticism and rock music while being a profound film about a young man going through an existential crisis. Overall, a Fantastic and meaningful film!

Calvin Harris: Ready for the Weekend (Fly Eye, Columbia; 2009)

Calvin Harris, who with the help of the myspace internet community has become one of the United Kingdom’s most prolific up and coming artists, burst into the Electro-pop scene with his 2007 amusingly titled debut Album I Created Disco. Since the album’s release, it has enjoyed an expectation surpassing longevity in the top 10 of the UK charts. While the album wasn’t critically praised, it had attained a small following for the Scotland native in the pop/electro scene. Harris’ first album was received by most critics as a handbag electro pop debut that showed promise for Harris with the hit singles “The Girls,” “Acceptable in the 80’s,” and “Merrymaking at my Place.” Then Harris released his follow-up album Ready for the Weekend in 2009.

The last album had a tough time establishing its tone at the start, but Ready for the Weekend does that right from the get-go with the first track “The Rain.” The album has a smooth and inviting tone showing Harris’ sense of humor. With his previous album being called I Created Disco, it only seems fitting that his next electro-pop effort should start with a hybrid of both electro bass keys mixed with a Saxophone solo taken out of the bravado of a blues song, only to be completely cross faded out into a full electro-bit track with the electronic elements drowning out all but Harris’ much improved vocals and the saxophone to not sound off till the very end of the track. This opening invites the listener in with the promise of a good time if you go for the ride and for the most part, Harris delivers. Harris took the safe route with the first album being an all electriconically composed album, but in this album he experiments with actual instruments such as the guitar rifts in “Blue” or “Worst Day”

With this opening song you can tell Harris has taken the criticism from the last album to heart. Harris’ vocals ruined some of the rhythms and beats of his previous album with songs like “Colours.” This time around his vocals, while still there, aren’t as clunky and don’t try to upstage Harris’ DJ work as the melodies are the driving force of the albums songs. With the hit songs such as “Flashback” and “I’m Not Alone,” Harris is going for a different vibe with the album putting more of himself and baring his soul. The last album was a bunch of randomly strung together beats that sounded good, but there wasn’t a clear theme or artist intention apart from wanting to give the listener a fun listen. Harris gives himself with the lyrics “If I could change my state of mind, then I would disappear. The love I get from you is something I can’t chance and I can let you slip away without a second glance.” This album also displays Harris’ talents as more collaborative vocal effort with Dizzie Rascal and Chrome in the fun and dance-floor worthy song “Dance wiv Me.” The album when it works, makes you just want to pump up your fist and cheer as that roller coaster of a tune is going up that hill, until the roller coaster comes down that hill and you're waiting for the next drop down that hill.

With all the improvements, some of Harris’ flaws have followed him in this album. While Ready for the Weekend is an improvement from I Created Disco, most of the album’s songs, apart from the name worthy ones, all feel like filler. The latter half of the album loses its momentum and becomes a slower and mostly non-vocal performance with the songs “Relax,” Limits,” and “Burn Nights.” The album goes into a stump that it never quite recovers from while you wait for the real songs to come on. The last half isn’t enough to stomp the album as it did last time just as the fun and energetic song “Dance wiv me” swoops in to save the album’s momentum and leave you with a good taste in your mouth.

“Ready for the Weekend” is a flawed, still enjoyable, and more artistic effort from Harris, whose music still listens as an artist with a lot of potential still ahead of him. Harris is a difficult artist to compare to. His sound is unique and although he is in the electro-pop genre, not too many have had as much widespread success as he has. Harris’ sound is a smooth transition for those otherwise not a fan of electro-pop. The album is a great next step in the right direction for Harris, who still isn’t quite there yet as an electro-artist, but where he is now is a really fun and highly enjoyable ride for anyone looking for something new, despite its flaws. As Harris puts it "These are the good times in your life, so put on a smile and it will be alright.”

"The Human Centipede: First Sequence" Review

Empty. That’s all to be had with any viewing of the train wreck, cockroach of a film that is Tom Six’s writing and directing attempt called “The Human Centipede: First Sequence.” Upon a single viewing of this film, it is guaranteed to be on your short-list of films that have no purpose to exist.

The basic premise of the film is two very dumb American girls backpacking and clubbing in Germany; their car tire flattens in the middle of nowhere on a dark and stormy night; and they find sanctuary in the creepy home of none other than Dr. Heiter (Dieter Laser), who so happens to be a renowned surgical doctor who is in the process of the ultimate medical challenge...

Are you ready for this?

To sew three human beings together into one digestive tract. A Human Centipede. That’s right! The goal is to sew three people together ass to mouth.


You get the idea…

Where does one start with this film? The story is absolute garbage. The problems all stem from Six. This film is being billed as a horror/comedy but this genius has no sense of what kind of film he wants to make, how to construct a single scare, how to tell a joke, but most importantly: He can NOT write or direct. The cinematography is actually not bad, but that dusty and green color-scheme needs to go. The story is predictably bad. Every twist and plot-point is a terrible cliché. Nobody does anything that even resembles a shred of human intelligence. By the last act, the film keeps giving us point twists that undercut everything the last scene had established. This frustrating aspect gives the film no resonance and you are just sitting there watching one painfully awkward scene after another. The film just feels like a half-assed frat boy joke that is stretched beyond the point of tastefulness and into a realm of complete blackness.


The main thrust of this film apart from it’s extreme set-piece, where an ugly and cruel gag-inducing moment is on the horizon, is the claim that this film is “100% Medically Accurate,” but by the time you get to the end of the second act you come to realize that the director is as full of it as the middle sequence of this human centipede. When you have a film and the kabuki performance from Laser as Dr. Hieter is, by leaps and bounds the strongest performance, your movie is in massive trouble. All the characters are one-directional, poorly acted, unlikable, and underdeveloped that you can’t emotionally connect to a single moment to the point that the only reaction to be had with this garbage is one’s gag reflex. Even when the actual human centipede appears onscreen, it’s bland and boring. The unforgivable thing is that the film just mean spirited and cruel to everyone in and outside the film. Sure everyone is drawn to see three people sewen together ass to mouth, but sometimes we as the audience think we may want to see something, but we don't know what we are asking ourselves.

"I want to see the Clone Wars!"
No you don't.

"I want to Hannibal Lector's childhood!"
No, you don't

"I want to actually see three people sewn together ass to mouth."
Please take this word of advice: No, you don't

People were fast to call films like “Hostel” and “Saw” torture porn, but at least those films had a morality tale, a humane message, and a resonace at the center of them, like a real horror film should! “The Human Centipede” Accomplishes nothing! There is nothing to offer from this viewing experience. This isn’t supposed to be enjoyed. It’s a gauntlet film. It’s the equivalent of a triple-dog dare on the schoolyard. If you are to put yourself through this agonizing experience, God Bless You and the only feeling you can look forward to boils to one word: EMPTY. If you find yourself on an airplane, be thankful that there is no way your airline, no matter how bad, will play “The Human Centipede: First Seqeunce” as your in-flight movie. Not because of the impending lawsuit from the extreme content or how bad the film is, but because of the high casualty mark from people trying to walk out of this film.

"Let Me In" REVIEW REWRITE!

There's always that nails-on-a-chalkboard reaction when audiences hear another film remake is on the way. Especially for a film embraced by critics and viewers as Tomas Alfredson's chilling Swedish vampire-film "Let The Right One In." Sometimes we get remakes that bastardize the original film and are churned out to exploit a fan-base. To all die-hard fans of the 2008 original film and novel: lay down your wooden stakes. With "Let Me In", Writer/Director Matt Reeves has not only crafted one of the best horror films of recent years, but a film that will go down, along with John Carpenter's remake of "The Thing," as one of the best remakes ever.


The basic premise revolves around a reclusive and viciously bullied boy named Owen (Kodi Smith McPhee) as he befriends a vampire-girl named Abby (Chloe Moretz). As the story between the children unfolds, a string of death and tragedy surround their friendship. Story-wise, this film is less of a remake and more of a well-told adaptation of the original Swedish novel. What Revees brilliantly changed is the Swedish landscape to the American landscape and how much that adds to the narrative while still staying true to what made the original film and the novel work to reinvent the vampire story and tell a fascinating story.


"Let Me In" takes place in Ronald Reagan-era 1983 in Los Alamos, New Mexico. During the time when Reagan famously stated "The evil was around America". This adds a chilling and frightening resonance to this vampire coming-of-age story that focuses on the violent nature of growing up and punctuates that chilling fear from the 1980s. Everything in the translation from the original Swedish landscapes works well for an American context. When watching the film, it's hard to not feel that wave of nostalgia and flashback to that moment in your childhood where you felt different from everyone else or befriended the new next door neighbor and plunked down five dollars at the local arcade together.


The writing is so textured that Revees nails it on the head with the emotional beats to where you have a strong sense of pathos to each of these characters. Moretz delivers a mature and chilling performance as Abby. McPhee's performance as Owen is hard to not have empathy for, given the sad nature of being a child of divorce and brutal bullying, a really great performance by McPhee. Richard Jenkin's brilliant performance as "the father" communicates so much with very few words and his eyes that he becomes the stand out performance from the cast.

The direction by Revees is great as well. The cinematography is gorgeous. It uses a yellow hue of streetlamps against the snow to create this gritty and realistic tone to the film. While the film is in the fantasy realm with vampires, this little touch grounds it in reality. The locations are nostalgically recognizable and they seem like that neighborhood you grew up in years past. The shots and the pacing take a leisurely approach. The long shots and slow pace allows for the audience to pick things that once you see the film again, you notice all the little subtleties that Revees put in and it makes the viewing more rewarding.

The film has so much heart that it transcends the horrific elements and becomes really a sweet coming-of-age film between a boy and a vampire-girl. Though this is a remake, don't let that stop you from seeing this. This remake stands above the rest as a film not made for a profit, but because this story deserves to be retold. Revees proves with this film that with the right storyteller and intention, there can still be some great remakes. The story is one of the more profound and original vampire stories to be told. FULL-PRICE!!

9 of 10

"Let Me In" REVIEW

There is always that nails-on-a-chalkboard reaction when audiences hear another film remake is on the way. Especially for a film embraced by critics and viewers as Tomas Alfredson's chilling Swedish vampire-film "Let The Right One In." Sometimes we get remakes that bastardize the original film and are churned out to exploit a fanbase. To all die-hard fans of the 2008 original film: lay down your wooden stakes. With "Let Me In", Writer/Director Matt Reeves has not only crafted one of the best horror films of recent years, but a film that will go down, along with John Carpenter's remake of "The Thing", as one of the best remakes ever.


The basic premise revolves around a reclusive and viciously bullied boy named Owen (Kodi Smith McPhee), as he befriends a vampire-girl named Abby (Chloe Moretz.) As the story between the children unfolds, a string of death and tragedy surround their friendship. Story-wise, this film is less of a remake and more of a well-told translation of the original Swedish story. What Matt Revees has done so brilliantly with this film is have the change to the American landscape add to the narrative.


"Let Me In" takes place in Ronald Regan era 1983 in Los Alamos, New Mexico. During the time when Regan famously stated that "The evil was around America." This change adds a chilling and frightening resonance to this vampire coming-of-age story that focuses on the violent nature of growing up and punctuates that chilling fear from the 1980's. Everything in the translation from the original Swedish landscapes works well for an American context. When watching the film, it's hard to not feel that wave of nostalgia and flashback to that moment in your childhood where you felt different from everyone else or befriended the new next door neighbor and plunked down five dollars at the local arcade together.


The writing is so textured that Matt Revees nails it on the head with the emotional beats to where you have a strong sense of pathos to each of these characters. Chloe Moretz delivers a mature and chilling performance as Abby. Kodi Smith-McPhee's performance as Owen is hard to not have empathy for given the sad nature of being a child of divorce and brutal bullying. Just a really great performance by Kodi. Richard Jenkin's brilliant performance as "The Father" communicates so much with very few words and his eyes that he becomes the stand out performance from the cast.

This film doesn't try to outdo the original film, but brilliantly reinterprets some of the events and attains it's own identity. The film has so much heart, that it transcends the horrific elements and becomes really a sweet coming-of-age film between a boy and a vampire-girl. Don't let the fact that this is a remake of a great film stop you s from seeing this. This remake stands above the rest as a film not made for a profit, but because this story deserves to be retold. In walking out of this film, the argument between the folks waiting in line shifted from whether or not this movie was any good to whether the original or this film was the superior film. Matt Revees proves with this film that with the right storyteller and intention, there can still be some great remakes. FULL-PRICE!!

9 of 10

What makes a good critic? Debatable…

Andres Gallego

09/25/2010

Reviewing the arts

What makes a good critic? Debatable…

In the long discussion of what a critic is, the one critic that is on the right track, in terms of what it criticism is and what it has become, it would have to be Anne Holub. There are few statements that is whole-heartedly agreeable with most of these critics. There is not a right or wrong interpretation of what it means to be a critic and it’s just an opinion. Having said that, Holub has a number of statements that one could consider being unbiased to a certain extent. The first statement Holub hits her point home is the statement where she explains “…subjects are constantly changing and growing. It’s likely going to be a lifelong pursuit.” This statement is very true in the sense that it is a great way to describe the current state of criticism and writing since the field has gotten very cut-throat and very harsh not just towards the art they are criticizing, but from one critic to another.

It’s an age-old discussion of Modern vs. the older critic. We have a lot of the older critics like Roger Ebert for printed Chicago Sun times press and some younger critics like Harry Knowles on ain’t it cool news online printing, who do essentially the same job, but have very dissimilar tastes and writing styles. People are always going to have different values and experiences. While you fall into one camp or another, it’s not about judging criticism on just passion alone, you also must take into account that this person specializes in a certain style of writing and that their values may differ from the last critic you read. It’s clear that Ebert comes from a more classical background in watching films as he saw the medium grow from an earlier place and Knowles comes from a more recent age of films, where he grew up with films comparable to your 35 Year-old film lover. Print and online print have the same standards and integrity as most other forms of criticism where it’s about expression of one’s experience with the art or media. An older demographic might look for Ebert’s view on something, while the younger generation may like to read Knowle’s opinion of a film or work.

In going with the previous statement, Holub also nails it on the head with the saying that “it starts with identifying a critic’s viewpoints.” In reading criticism, it’s all about matching your sensibilities. It’s about finding a critic that you can connect to. Not necessarily agree with, but someone whose word you can trust, but not take as gospel. In reading reviews, you can not take the critic’s word as the final word on the work. It’s just his or her opinion and nobody is right or wrong. Everyone has a different choice and view on the world, and a criticism is mainly their perception of how the work affected them. It’s about how it made them feel and not about what you should feel going in to experience the work. All you can do is keep reading till you find a critic you like to read his or her perception on the work.

Overall, Anne Holub’s viewpoint on criticism takes a more adaptive viewpoint to criticism. A critic shouldn’t conform to a viewpoint and neither should the reader. The reader will find their critic at same point and criticism will always grow and change with every new generation and way to get one’s opinions out.

Buried REVIEW!

There comes a film that taps into a primal fear and puts you through an intense experience unlike anything you’ve ever experienced before. "Buried" is that rare film. What Director Rodrigo Cortés manages to put together, with the writing talent of Chris Sparling and the amazing acting talent of Ryan Reynolds, is a brilliant exercise in claustrophobic tension that grabs you from the beginning and doesn’t let you go till it’s pulse pounding finale.

The story of the film is gripping from the very first frame. The premise of the film is contract truck driver; Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds) wakes up in a coffin buried underground after a convoy ambush in Iraq. It’s a man-trapped-in-a-box story, but it’s told in a fresh way that re-invents the rules on this genre of high-tension thriller. The film takes place entirely in the coffin for the whole 90-minute run-time. The film never slows down or lets up and it’s just an intense experience and definitely not an easy one to sit through at points. What screenwriter Chris Sparling does so brilliantly with this screenplay is that he continually ups the ante and the stakes, especially for it being a film that takes place entirely in a coffin underground. With every plot twist that happens in the film, you feel that knife twist and turn as Sparling manages to turn a situation from bad to worse. It starts off with a real nail-biter premise that reaches on the Hitchcockian levels of tension that continually surprises and leaves you on edge. Then you reach the end of the first act…all bets are off.



It’s impossible to talk about this film without talking about the amazing performance by Ryan Reynolds. He’s pitch perfect for this role as Paul. This is the type of role that could have been played ugly or that could have outstayed its welcome very fast in the hands of another actor. It’d be tough to imagine anyone else bringing as much emotional integrity, believability, and humanity to this role of a man trapped in the worse of situations that is only getting worse by the minute. Reynolds shows a raw range and a depth to his performance that you just can’t take your eyes off of him or want to leave the coffin without him. The performance holds so much charisma and reliability so emotionally textured and draining that you feel for Paul as each second on the clock ticks as he becomes more unstable and unsure of the outcome of this situation. It’s a fantastic performance that is worthy of the praise as Reynolds successfully carries the whole film from six feet under and in total blackness.

Director Rodrigo Cortés does an outstanding job with the direction of the film. For this film taking as many risks as it does on the screenplay level, Cortés rises to the occasion as he takes more risks with the direction of the film. Most of the film is told in silence with little sound effects and Cortés allows the audience to drown in the lack of details on-screen and puts you through this tense, so that any new development that occurs or when any new item is found; it hard the audience as hard as a child getting an early Christmas present. This fear of the unknown and the sense of being trapped in darkness only helps to heighten the tension of the film as we invest more into Paul as a character. Cortés also reinvents this claustrophobic genre of thriller by using some truly amazing camera movements while in the coffined space of the coffin. For the film being entirely underground, there is certainly a lot of action that just doesn’t let up. Cortés doesn’t bend to the confines of the coffin; he reinvents it and delivers something that we truly haven’t seen before.

While I did thoroughly enjoy the experience with the film, I do have a small grip with it. Revealing this gripe without giving any spoilers would be impossible. All I will say is that it occurs in the final act of the picture, but it doesn’t detract or ruin the experience. It’s a small nitpick at best. I’d give this movie a FULL-PRICE!! Definitely go check this out in a theater because it is such a original and amazing experience going with this ride.

9 of 10

The Scathing Reviewer Vs. The Contrdictrian

Andres Gallego

09/15/2010

Reviewing the arts

There are plenty of reviews, but few are able to really convey the sense of the viewer’s emotional experience reviewing the work. The first piece that works as a review is Devin Faraci’s Negative review for “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.” In the beginning of this scathing review, Devin calls out on the notion of how this big budgeted summer blockbuster didn’t need to aspire to be anything bigger than a fun giant robot film. Feraci, like the audience, was expecting to have fun with the film but ended up asking himself “how is a giant robot film boring?” The review goes on to explain what Devin’s emotional response was to the reader. He aptly puts the viewer in his shoes in the cinema by describing how the combination of the flat jokes, boring character work, incomprehensible action, and long stretches of nothing made him turn to his colleague and exclaim “This is grueling.” This film brought up all of these feelings...and he was only in the first act. That statement sums his emotional experience and that’s an experience nobody wants when they drop ten dollars on a big budgeted spectacle like a “Transformers” picture. Feraci in his writing can have so much to say for a great film experience that when it comes to this film; he nails it square on the head with this hilarious statement: “Screenwriters Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman claim that director Micheal Bay locked them in a hotel room for a month to write this movie; they obviously spent 29 and half days watching pay per view porn and ordering room service.”

http://chud.com/articles/articles/19948/1/REVIEW-TRANSFORMERS---REVENGE-OF-THE-FALLEN-/Page1.html

One review that doesn’t work is Armond White’s review of Toy Story 3. Armond’s hatred towards Toy Story 3 has as many holes in his argument as large screen door. Most of the review is spent with White seemingly trying to defend himself and his beliefs as opposed to what his experience in the cinema was. He starts off the review frustrated with the fact that America and critics have forgotten the film he thinks is a superior toy film. The review comes off as more or less a nitpick of the film than anything. White says the film is full of “brand names and product placement that it stops being about the innocent pleasures of the imagination…” That statement is said without any real points to back it up. He only goes on to his next point about the plot abruptly before the reader has any sense of what White was talking about with the last point about why the film isn’t imaginative. The biggest flaw about the review is that the tone of the review is very uninviting. While Devin Farci’s scathing of “Transformers 2” was brutal at points, his tone was more inviting in the sense that Feraci was coming from the viewpoint of the audience who wanted a great time at the cinema. White’s tone takes more of “anybody who likes Toy Story is tool.” without mentioning his experience as to why he was disappointed. Absolutism doesn’t make for a good review and neither does White’s “review.”

http://www.nypress.com/article-21357-bored-game.html

Mortal Kombat REBIRTH

Over the past week Mortal Kombat fanboys (such as myself) were treated to not only the news that their franchise would make it's way back to home consoles, but that Warner Bros. and the director of the mixed recieved FAME (2009) has released a "pitch" video for a REINVENTION or a REBOOT of the Mortal Kombat film series titled "MORTAL KOMBAT REBIRTH"

What are the reactions to this video? The fanboys have been buzzing and they all seem to love it. It's a divisive reaction. Film critics are hating the hell out of this short, fanboys love it to all hell.

As for myself? Being both a fanboy and a critic?

See for yourself the short first.



Ok now my reaction in short...I like it a lot actually. Keep in mind, I know that video game films have a tendency to suck majorly. Unlike most of the fanboys out there, I don't see this film as a truly oscar worthy picture or something that needs to be taken seriously. The film borrows and steals from so many sources. The cinematography yells "DAVID FINCHER'S SE7EN". Also, the way everything is explained or given a realistic gritty tone, it almost seems like as if Christopher Nolan came in and said "Mortal Kombat? Make it all make sense." The performances are hammy as all hell. The dialogue and the script is cliche' upon cliche' trying to blend a NYC grit to the story. There's a bit of an uncertainy of tone in the short. I Know all of the flaws. Yet, I still enjoyed it. I saw this short and thought, if they ever made this into a feature length film, I think I would have a lot of fun with it.

3 Main Reasons why I dug the short.

1. It could be an escapist film.
The Filmmakers seem to be in on the fact that Mortal Kombat is just a ripoff of everything that worked before. Historically, Mortal Kombat is a american ripoff of Street Fighter. Mortal Kombat took all the best elements from the Street Fighter game and americanized it. This short takes all the best elements from every other film. It takes the realistic angle to these completely unrealistic characters (A la Chris Nolan and his Batman Series) as the short tries to come up with a new angle to re-introduce these characters that are fragments of the 90's. The short looks like it's taking MK fans on a new ride and they are trying to have fun, but tell the stories of these characters in a new way. The original Mortal Kombat film from 1995 is arguably the best video game adaptation we have ever gotten, but that story has been told, so why not retell this film in a completely different direction and make it hammy and a bit self aware. Micheal Jai White as Jax is not delivering a serious performance whatsoever, but I can imagine him as Jax, no problem. It seems like everyone involved is having fun and trying to deliver something worthy of the fanbase, but take certain liberties. It could be a hammy and fun crowd-pleaser.

2. It is Mortal Kombat essentially.
While they have changed a lot of the mythos that Mortal Kombat has, it keeps the spirit essentially. Reptile is still essentially reptile and Scropion and Sub-Zero's rivalry will finally be told. While these are just small things, they could lend themselves to fun retelling of this story. They take all of these ideas that came up in the video game and give them a gritty realistic tone, but keeps the spirit. I can dig that.

3. It's going to be R-Rated.
If there is one thing the original film didn't get right was the fact that MORTAL KOMBAT is about cutting people to pieces and ridiculing your friend in the worst way after he loses. The short seems to get it right in the sense that people are actually going to die. This ups the stakes a lot more a bit in terms of when these guys fight, there is actually something at sake as opposed to just laying on the floor and punching someone in the chest and saying Fatality. While the original film was trying to be fun and appeal to a broad audience, it was Mortal Kombat in story, but it wasn't the film we fanboys wanted at the start.

Overall, I know the fanboys are maybe going to get the gritty MORTAL KOMBAT REBIRTH movie, but they are going to be disapointed by it. This is not by any stretch to me, looking like this is going to be a serious movie. This looks like something I could pay ten dollars on a friday night and have a blast with. It will be bad, but I may only pay to see it once. It's going to be a glorious train-wreck...while the statement is redeemed by the word "Glorious"

See you later guys

BTW: Check out the new MORTAL KOMBAT game due out in spring of 2011!

Kick-Ass REVIEW!!!!

Ok Let me state the following before going on with this review...

THIS MOVIE FUCKING KICKED ASS!!!!

Whew!...

Ok!

Now...

Where do I start on how awesome this movie was?!


Ok, well the basic premise of the story revolves around everyday high schooler/comic book nerd/ superhero wannabe: Dave as he goes out and takes the alter-ego named "Kick-Ass". Although his superhero career starts off with some messy results at first, he then becomes a youtube sensation. The film then goes on to introduce us to the idea of superheroes who actually in our real-world, but in a way that truly hasn't been done before. The difference between this and something like Watchmen is the fact that Dave has nothing going for him both in and out of the costume and he is almost sad and pathetic in his attempt to become a superhero. Despite all of these feelings towards this character, we still can't help but cheer him during the low points and high points in his outtings because to quote Dave...

"at some point in all of our lives, We all wanted to be a superhero."

The Positives of the film! The script! The script is just very tight and pretty much is Dave's story. The film nails the aspect of being that invisible kid at high school, who isn't the jock, the super brains, or the popular kid; but is the kid that is just there. The script of the film also doesn't take complete left-field turns...well any that are out of the realm of what this film sets up. It's a comic book film? Yes, but its one that knows what it wants to be. it wants to be a comic book brought to our world and it's going to take the audience on a wild ride. The story was just so relatible for the first act that you buy this kid's story and his reasons for wanting this extra-ordinary lifestyle. Hook, line, and sinker; this story got me right from the get-go!


The acting. Aaron Johnson is pitch-perfect as Dave AKA Kick-Ass. He doesn't have anything going for him as a high schooler or Kick-Ass apart from a gimmick (not to reveal spoilers here) that does give him a bit of a fighting chance. Johnson just nails that geek comic nerd that just wants to be like the heroes he's read all of his life and you can't help but just cheer him on though the film. He is an immediately likable, but somewhat irrational character. He is the guy us virgin comic nerds grew up as who comes to learn what it means to be a superhero and what ramifications that has on the world around us. Johnson just did a fantastic job selling the 17 year old kid.


Later in the film we are introduced to superheroes Hit-Girl; the foul mouthed 9 year old, who automatically will generate applause and a huge fan-base! Chloe Moretz does an awesome job at portraying this killer of a 9 year old, who also happens to be a super-badass! There are so many awesomely hilarious and badass scenes with Hit-Girl that could be hard to narrow down and pick as a favorite. Hit-Girl is one badass character who is sure to become the talk of this film!

Big Daddy; the infamous Nicholas Cage doing his best Adam West Batman impersonation...Enough said!!!!

and Red Mist; the rich and pot smoking superhero. Christopher Mintz-Plasse does a suitible job as Red Mist. Without giving away spoilers, he does what he needs to when the time calls for him to. Good job though! Lastly, Mark Strong was great as the main villain of the film as a mobster hunting down the superheroes. His motivation is clear and it is suitable for the film. I dug it!

The one person that needs to get credit for this film is director: Matthew Vaughn. He delivered a film with some great direction that tonally fits the film. He manages to balance a level of seriousness, camp, and bloody violence in a way that just makes the film a ton of fun! The film doesn't take itself too seriously, but it does know the audience wants to see a comic book working in the real world. Matthew Vaughn also does a great job with the action sequences of the film and he delivers some badass crowd pleasers.

I can't think of any negatives to the film. It does deviate from the comic book quite substantially in the third act, but it's a welcomed change. The book and the movie are two different entities that work in their respective forms. The film decides to dump one emotional beat that is present in the book in the third act. The film works and it's pretty awesome! I reccomend reading the book after watching the movie. Both complement each other and maintain the spirit of Dave's story. Apart from this deviation, I can't think of a flaw to the film.


The film has so much heart to it and it doesn't talk down to the comic geeks. It is a perfect example of a film that celebrates geekdom! It is bloody violent and it is just a great thrill ride! Lots of laughs to be had and a lot of eye candy to offer in a "Kick-Ass" package!! This story borrows a lot of notes from previous realistic superhero takes and just runs with them in a new and exciting way! Needless to say: I loved the film!! Here's to Mark Millar, John Romita, Jr, Matthew Vaughn, and the rest of the crew for telling a story about "us" for "us!"

GRADE: A
10/10

Hot Tub Time Machine REVIEW!!

This is not supposed to be a smart little movie, but it has no right to be as good as it was with a shitty concept like a Hot Tub Time Machine. I was pleasantly surprised by how funny the flick was. It takes some of the age old questions of what we would do if we was to have access to a time travel device and what would happen if we had to deal with no changing the time lines. By no means will this change the time travel genre, but it was a funny movie. The filmmakers seem to know that this plot is ludicrous and instead of trying to bring reality to the situation, they just roll with it and they decide to give the audience just a good time. For the most part, it worked.

The acting is funny and the beats all work. The one character that always gets a laugh has to go to Crispin Glover. All of his scenes are laugh inducing and his gags always leave you both on the edge of your seat and ready to burst with laughter! (You'll know what I'm talkin about when you see it) But his role automatically gets the most laughs! All of the cast is funny in this. John Cusack's role is particularly funny in part because of the fact that we get to see him young once again and this is a nostalgic trip to see him young once again and his role is funny. The only one who fell a bit flat and not that funny and underdeveloped was Chevy Chase. Chevy's character was funny at times, but it kinda seemed like he was underused. It's a minor flaw but its still cool to see Chevy doing a good funny movie again. The story works, but don't put it against any of the time travel masterpieces. It does what it needs to and you need to suspend your disbelief because it is trying to be funny.

Overall, it was a great time at the movies. I would say definitely see this with an audience as the bigger the crowd the more fun it's going to be! Its a flawed movie, but man was it a funny one!

Overall, I'd say a definite MATINEE!

Oscar Predictions! (UPDATED)

Hey guys! It's been a while since I had done a post so I thought since it's round about nearly Oscar time, I Thought I'd give ya guys my predictions for What will Win what.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE: WAS CORRECT!

What I want to win: UP
What I think will win: UP
UP has become one of Pixar's more accessible academy films and this will easyly sweep this award. As much as I enjoyed Mr. Fox, there are some major flaws to be had with that film. Princess and the Frog is just too safe of a film to earn a Best animated film Oscar.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY- WAS CORRECT!

What I want to Win- UP

What I think will win- THE HURT LOCKER

The Up screenplay provides both a fun ride, a great character arc, and a emotionally gripping closure that surpasses anything else that is nominated. As much as I thought the HURT LOCKER was a greatly directed film, everyone seems to be talking about how this script meshes both Action and story and character development in a great fashion. I am in the minority that doesn't see this come across whatsoever in the final film. All I see is an unlikable protagonist that I am waiting for to get blown up. Bigalow made this script more cinematic than what was written on the page. Tarrinatino had his day and his Basterds screenplay although great is a bit flawed in some areas. I think UP should take the cake for originality. I mean A guy flies his house with balloons and then he meets up with talking dogs and a large bird! ha ha ha ha!

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY- WAS WRONG!

What I want to win: UP IN THE AIR
What I Think will Win: UP IN THE AIR
This is a classic case of what happens when Filmmakers adapt books, Jason Reitman took the essence of the original Novel, and added things that weren't there in the book and made a more emotional pungent film that stayed true to the book's theme and expanded it. It also happens to be a great screenplay despite the fact it was adapted.

What ended up winning: Precious


I was shocked when this won best adapted screenplay. The screenplay basically takes a massive shit on it's main character every chance it got to the point where I just couldn't take the film seriously anymore. I didn't like any of it's characters and felt it gloried and reveled in it's stereotypes. A great disappointment in my eyes. Bad move academy!

BEST DIRECTOR- CORRECT!!!

Who I want to win- Kathryn Bigalow
Who I think will win- Kathryn Bigalow

Bigalow is an underrated director that I think is talented enough to warrant a best director award. She took some of the elements of the script and made tension filled moments as the audience is expecting the worse in the bomb defusal scenes. Fantastically directed sequences.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR- FOREGONE CONCLUSION! CORRECT!

Who I want to win: Christopher Waltz
Who I think will win: Christopher Waltz
Why? Because Col. Hans Landa is a fucking great performance that I can't imagine anyone else being able to pull of and he knocks it out of the ballpark! Chirstopher Waltz mops the floor with the other nominees. HE'S GOING TO GET IT!!!

Best Supporting Actress- CORRECT!!!

Who I want to win: Vera Farminga

Who I think will win: Mo'Nique
I think Vera Farminga has never been more engaging on screen and she is the female foil to George Clooney's Ryan in UP IN THE AIR. She was fantastic. But As we all know, Mo'Nique is a shoe-in for this role, because nobody expected her to be as talented as she was in PRECIOUS. I think Mo'Nique has proved her acting talent, but is it the best performance? I don't think so. I like both actresses and I'll be content with either winning, but I'm leaning towards Vera Farminga.

Best Actress- CORRECT!!!

Who I want to win: Indifferent...but if I had to choose one then Sandra Bolluck
Who I think will win: Sandra Bolluck
A weak year for strong female roles I'd say. I mean most of the nominees are dominated females for the most part and thats a shame we don't have more solid roles for females this year. And Sandra Bolluck is for the most part the one that is going to get this. The movie was good, but the performance is a bit generically good. It does what it needs to, but it's nothing nobody hasn't seen before.

Best Actor- CORRECT!!!

Who I want to win: George Clooney

Who I think will win: Jeff Bridges
Talk about a comeback year! Now a Clooney fan after UP IN THE AIR, because at one point I was annoyed by him, but he proved himself to be a fantastic actor with a chops. Bridges is also the same case. It could go either or. I dug both performances but I connected more to Clooney's Ryan character. Both actors are fantastic!


Those are my predictions for the more tougher catagories, cuz all of the other nominations are going to be pretty Obvious as to who is going to take it home and I agree with most of them. The only problem is that this has been a weak year for the acting category for females. I think perhaps the biggest snub at the oscars this year was the exclusion of Ducan Jones' MOON and ignoring SAM ROCKWELL's fantastic performance!

Sam was utterly fantastic in the film and it's a shame he didn't get nominated at he very least for Best Actor. Think I'm wrong? check out this scene.

Anyways till next time guys! I'll have some reviews up again finally! Sorry for the non-updates, but I will get you some reviews again!

SEE YA FOLKS!!!

(3-09-2010)
Well I was right on all counts except one. Not bad. I think this years Oscars were flawed, but they did what they needed to do.

and Also I purposefully stayed away from the BEST PICTURE catagory because I didn't agree with the whole AVATAR vs. HURT LOCKER Deal. I thought AVATAR was a better film, but HURT LOCKER was a technically good film too but the story and script just didn't do it for me. I would have been on team Avatar, but I thought UP or UP IN THE AIR should have won best picture. Anyways!

TILL NEXT YEAR FOLKS!!!

Review coming later this week again!!!

The Book of Eli REVIEW!

A solid Post-apocalyptic movie! It's a fun thrill ride! This film is a harken back to the old classic post-apocalyptic films of the 70's, while also being a film that is a traditional Samurai film. Denzel plays a badass like usually! While of course the religious themes are present in the film, it doesn't beat you over the head with them. I dug the film as an alternative apocalyptic films of today. While it does take place in that world, the world doesn't overwelm the story and the story is actually solid. The 3rd act of the film has a great twist, but it doesn't drag the film at all. In fact it almost makes the film and Denzel that much more awesome. In terms of the acting Denzel is the best. Gary Oldman is as hammy in the role as he is called to be, but he's a fun villain to watch, Mila Kunis was ok, but she doesn't drag the film down. Overall, a surprisingly good film and a good time. I'd say it's a solid FULL-PRICE!

The Lovely Bones REVIEW!

While Visually: it's interesting, but it's ultimately a 2 hour screensaver. I couldn't emotionally connect to each character and I wasn't really feeling the story. Having read the novel, it gets rid of some small key aspects to focus on the more lamer ones sadly. But overall, I thought the performances were good. Stanley Tucci was fantastic as perfectly cast as Mr. Harvey. His performance is so layered and textured and it's unsettling to watch at times. It does it's job,but I can't help but feel let down by Peter Jackson. I really wanted to love this film, but it's a RENTAL. Surprisingly for the first time Peter Jackson isn't slavish to the original book as he was to LOTR, but there will be an inevitable 3+ hr cut of this film on dvd at some point.

The Hurt Locker REVIEW!

Viseral and fantastically made. Everything about the film is well made and provides some of the most tense and suspenseful scenes to come out all year. Kathryn Bigelow proves that she is the best female action/genre director around. While I do like what the film aciheved in a scene building and suspense level, the story didn't do it for me. The story and the character development was almost not there. I hated the protagonist and what his goals were, I thought everybody else was underdeveloped, and I thought that the film was trying hard at times to be heavy-handed with all of these sequences in which you see what these soliders do to each other and some of the things they contemplate doing to each other on and off the field. You get the sense of what these characters are like on the field, but not on a more personal level. I was taken by the chaos that the world of disarming bombs was and I wanted to have something there to hold it all together. I understand that it was the director's intention to not go into the solider's lives, but it alienated me in the sense that I wasn't cheering for really anybody in the whole film. The story was just lacking as was the conclusion to the film. This felt very much like a video game at points with some great set-pieces and tense action scenes, but no real narractive or character to hold it all together. I would have to give this a RENTAL.

Moon Review

Fantastic film! Sam Rockwell proves he is a real talent in entertainment with his brillant performance as Sam Bell. I just loved the direction this film went in and the twist is fantastic and it combines elements that made the classic space movies work so well. It just gave me a new spin on space travel and the mental hurdles one goes through for that long and in complete isolation. Overall, this film is a FULL-PRICE! I loved it!

Daybreakers REVIEW!

I felt that this is the spiritual successor to classic vampire stories such as "I am Legend" The novel and it presents a really interesting world in which vampires are the normality and humans are the minority. I dug everything that the film was doing. It was a great take on vampires in which what would happen if all of society had to deal with being an immortal and what the repercussions of that would be if it happened for a long enough timeline. Apart from the questions the film presents, the film works beat for beat as a bloody gore flick, but it also is scary at times! I just found this film to be very interesting, I got caught up in the story. Ethan Hawke usually annoys me, but here he was good. Willem Defoe steals the show as Elvis! The kills are bloody and satisfying, and the tone and vibe is dark. Really surprised by this flick! Definitely a FULL-PRICE!!