The Ugly Truth - Truthfully predictable

There is a formula that about 99% of all romantic comedies follow. Two people start out not knowing each other, many times when they first meet, they actually hate each other, they are forced to spend time together, see the true, inner beauty of the person, fall for each other, something happens where they "break up" or drift apart, then, in the end, they let love take over their heart, and, after some grand gesture, they live happily ever after. We all know that is how romantic comedies are, but that's not why girls make their boyfriends watch them. It's because they are funny enough to make you laugh, have beautiful people in them, and have happy endings. I personally watch them because I secretly hope that I will find one that will make me say, "Wow, didn't see that one coming!" Don't really think it's happened yet, but I keeping up hope.

The Ugly Truth follows this formula to a T. Don't get mad if you think i gave away the ending because we all know how it will end. That, once again, is one of the reasons that we watch them. Katherine Heigl plays Abby. An uptight, anal retentive, controlling, obsessive television producer (she seems to have mastered playing a bitch....hmmmm, makes you wonder...). She is so controlling that she brings a check list of talking points on a date. Gerard Butler (King Leonidus from 300...in a chick flick. i know! so sad! but he was also in P.S. I Love You, for the ladies) plays Mike. The host of The Ugly Truth, a show, which Abby's company picks up and she has to produce, on which he tells "the ugly truth" about what men and women really want. He's rude and crude, but makes a lot of very valid points. Well, if you follow the formula, these two don't like each other, but Mike is so sure about his methods that he convinces Abby to let him to help her land her dream guy using his methods. So through the course of the courtship, Mike and Abby begin to see the real person behind both of their facades. There's some kissing, some heartbreak, and then a super big loving gesture that makes all the girls swoon. Blah blah blah.

Now, I'm not blah blahing because I think I'm too cool to admit that I enjoy chick flicks every now and then. I did laugh at a couple of parts in this movie. And I did find myself smiling at the end. But I mean, I could have told you exactly what was going to happen at the beginning of every scene, which after a while, takes away some of the movie watching fun. I'm going to say this movie was bad, like I often say, its an okay cuddle session movie. Katherine Heigl is beautiful, Gerard Butler is his roguishly handsome self. There are some humorous supporting characters and actual on hilarious scene at a dinner table. But overall, as far as Rom Com's go, this one was kind of lacking. Rent it if you've run out of other cuddle session movies, otherwise wait until its on HBO or something.

Spread - Ashton Kutcher NOT acting like a lunatic.

Spread isn't a bad movie. It isn't all that good, but its not bad. Spread is about great looking twenty something guy (played by Kutcher) who has no home, no car, no job, manages to live the good life by drifting from one sugar mama to another. He hits on an older woman, makes her take him home with her, and then somehow weasels his way into her life in order to have a roof over his head. When doesn't work out, or he and his sugar mama break up, he just goes back out and finds another one and does it all over again. He is, in every since of the word, a player. He has a formula to approaching women, to getting them into bed, to getting them to let him stay at their home. Everything he does is methodical, emotionless, but it appears otherwise. We are let into this little program through voice over narration by Kutcher. All the time he is living with and sleeping with these older women (we are just shown his time with his sugar mama played by a great looking Anne Heche, Ellen's now straight ex-girlfriend) he is hooking up with the hotter, younger girls when his sugar mama is out of town. His idyllic existence is rocked when he meets a girl (played by Maragarita Levieta -- the girl from Adventureland that I told you about a few months ago) who he has feelings for and who appears to maybe be doing the same thing he is doing.

Ashton Kutcher is good looking enough to pull this role off. However, I'm not real sure if he's a good enough actor. I thought he was hilarious in That 70's Show, and I've been pretty entertained by most of his movies, but most of them are comedies. This movie is definitely not. It's actually kind of dark. It's just a little weird seeing him play a serious, playboy type. I don't know if it was my own prejudice or if Kutcher really was uncomfortable in the role, but it was a little difficult for me to take him seriously.

Kutcher aside, everyone of the other stars pulls their weight and does a good job. This movie has a very real, indie quality to it, which helps the audience identify with the situations and believe what is going on a little better. There is one scene in particular that involves a sort of mutual, nervous seduction, that I thought was great because it seemed so real! I could really feel the characters' nervousness, their sexual tension. Nothing explicit happens, but it was the most poignant scene in the whole movie.

Like I said, this movie has a indie feel to it, which turns a lot of people off. The action is pretty slow moving, and a part from a few sex scenes, there isn't a lot of action at all. The ending is "happy" per se, but there is a bit of a twist that was unexpected. I don't feel totally comfortable recommending this movie to anyone but those who really like Ashton Kutcher and want to see him in something different, love dark character driven indie films, or those who are intrigued by the LA lifestyle. Otherwise, you find yourself both bored and frustrated with the lack of anything happening, and the lack of resolution in the end.

The Taking of Pelham 123 - Denzel was great. Travolta, not so much.

Tony Scott directing + Denzel Washington and John Travolta starring = a good movie. Notice I just said good, not really good or great or really great or awesome. Just good. And I place the majority of the blame on John Travolta. Now I am not one of those John Travolta haters out there who thinks that he is terrible. I just think he played his character all wrong, or else was the part was just cast with the wrong actor. In the movie, Denzel is the good guy and Travolta is the bad guy. Normally, the phrase "John Travolta is playing the bad guy" gets me fired up. I think he has played some of the most entertaining, if not over the top, bad guys. See Broken Arrow. See also Face/Off. See also also Swordfish. Say what you want about the guy, those were all some pretty fun performances. This one, however, is not.

In Pelham 123, armed men, led by Travolta's character, hijack a subway train, and hold the passengers hostage for ransom. This turns a normal day for Denzel's character, who is a former big shot at the New York transit authority, now pulling dispatch duty while an investigation against him is on going, into one hell of a day. Because he was the dispatcher for the train that was hijacked, Travolta's villain decides that he will only talk to/cooperate with Denzel. This results in a tense game of cat and mouse between the two.

In this film, you see Travolta's bad guy as a handle bar mustache wearing, neck tattoo sporting thug, who happens to be brilliant. The whole movie, you know that Travolta's true motives are not what they seem, and when his true identity and reason behind committing this crime are revealed, you really have a hard time putting the criminal and the crime together. Travolta's best villains are cool, collected masterminds, who don't get rattled and don't "look" evil. And given what we find out about who Travolta's character is, he should be exactly that. But instead we get a some times cool, some times volatile, thug looking guy who does a terrible job at being a bad guy. Sure he "looks" evil, but he looks like a petty biker thug and not the mastermind that his character is supposed to be. Not only does the image not fit the criminal, Travolta's performance is just awkward. You feel like he couldn't really figure out how to play this guy, and you just don't get that uh oh feeling that you are supposed to get from a super villain like he is supposed to be.

As for every other aspect of the film, its very well done. Tony Scott continues to use the visual style of filming that he has adopted for his last few film, but tones down the choppy scene cuts and strange angles, yet stick with the acid trip color palate. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, think about the movies Domino, Man on Fire, and Deja Vu, and that's how this one is filmed. It just makes you a little less cross-eyed than the others. Denzel is his usual steady, awesome, good guy self. You really feel for the guy even though he is a flawed hero. You want him to win and you want everything good that can happen to him to happen. Because of this, you really hate a lot of the characters at one point or another in the film when they oppose him for various reasons. Most redeem themselves so, in that since its a "happy" film.

While this movie is tense at points and thoroughly entertaining throughout the majority of the film, it is quite predictable, and my roommate Timmy even called the ending to perfection at one point. While it doesn't take too much away from the movie, we, as movie watchers, still like to be a little surprised sometimes.

The only other knock I have is that the cussing got to be a little too much. I'm not one that gets uncomfortable in films that have a lot of bad language. I think a lot of times it is needed to create the tone of the story, and many times lines in movies just don't have the same punch without a well placed cuss word. But this one took the cussing a little too far, and it kind of became a bit of a distraction, if for no other reason other than there were a few unnecessary F-bombs. But I'm nitpicking now.

Overall, i thought this was a very watchable movie. It was far from perfect, and definitely not one Tony Scott's, Denzel's or Travolta's best, but I was still glad that I saw it. I think anyone would not be disappointed if they rented this one. Yes its R-rated, and yes there are too many cuss words, and yes there aer a few violent, and disturbing scenes, but is an R-rated action thriller. That's what its supposed to have in it. I recommend this to any one who likes a good R-rated action thriller every once in a while.

Land of the Lost - Just misses the mark

Land of the Lost stars Will Ferrell and Danny McBride (Pineapple Express, Tropic Thunder, East Bound and Down) so you know its going to be totally stupid humor. I mean I love both those actors, and I think the majority of their movies are hilarious, but it doesn't change the fact that it is stupid humor.

Land of the Lost is a "remake" of a 1970s TV show by the same name. I say "remake" because the really only things it shares in common are the name and the general outline of the story. I.e. going to the alternate world of the "land of the lost." The movie involves a disgraced scientist (Ferrell) who believes that time travel, or parallel universe travel is possible. He is working a meaningless job, when a beautiful young science student played by Anna Friel who adds the requisite "sex factor" convinces him that his theories are possible. Well the duo go to an area that is believed to be a portal to this alternate universe. This place is a third rate tourist stop run by Danny McBride's character. Well as it happens, all three get transported to this other world and the adventures begin. The characters befriend a bizarre monkey-like person named Chaka, get chased by a T-Rex and battle lizard like people named the Sleesack.

This movie misses the mark because the story and events that take place are more suited for a family, kid friendly movie. The special effects are kind of bad, but its like the movie tried to make them bad on purpose, kind of like the bad special effects on many kids TV shows. However, the movie is rated PG-13 mainly because some of the jokes and a couple of the scenes are more geared toward adults. However, not many adults I know would actually enjoy the movie as a whole. Yes, there are some jokes that were pretty funny, and a couple that would have probably been funnier if they weren't in this failure to make a kids movie.

Will Ferrell is his usually crazy, idiot self. Danny McBride has mastered the inappropriately confident, "I'm pretending to be too cool" redneck that he plays in every movie. And while it still hasn't gotten old to me and it's still pretty funny, I think that is the only character he knows how to play. Like I said before Anna Friel, plays requisite pretty girl. And while she not hit-you-in-the-face hot, she is definitely good looking and grows on you through the course of the movie.

This movie is just so-so. It wasn't terrible and I wasn't pissed that I'd just wasted 2 hours watching it, but if I never saw it, I wouldn't be missing out. I'm not going to tell you not to watch it, but I am going to say that you should probably exhaust all other options first. This isn't a terrible movie, but it isn't very good either.

Whatever Works Doesn't Work

I feel like every other movie I watch sucks. Oh well, the life of a movie dork. Sigh. I was very disappointed with this movie. I even had low expectations going in and I still was pissed at how bad it was! Blockbuster Online gave Whatever Works 3 out of 5 stars and that's voted on by very forgiving viewers. By boss, who shares a passion for movies as well, told me that this one was only "okay." And even with all this, I still found my self wanting to believe that a movie written and directed by Woody Allen and starring Larry David (creator of Seinfeld, star of Curb Your Enthusiasm, comic genius) had to at least be kind of funny. Nope. I think I laughed once, maybe twice after I'd finished my second beer. I love Woody Allen movies and I think Larry David is hilarious, but the 2 combined just doesn't work. Its kind of like the fact that I love peanut butter and i love barbecue but a peanut butter and barbecue sandwich would probably make me throw up like I'd just eaten a loaf of bread with a gluten allergy. That's the best analogy I could come up with, sorry for the gross visual.

In Whatever Works, Woody Allen comes back to New York after moving to London and Barcelona to make Match Point, Scoop, and Vicki Christina Barcelona. The movie is written like a play, and it might actually be better as a play. It is a series of very simple scenes that are basically comprised of very simple conversations between the characters. It stars Larry David, who plays a guy named Boris, who has a very negative outlook on life, and who frequently breaks the 4th wall to talk to the audience, which, in an attempt to be humorous, only he can see and everyone else thinks he's crazy. He is a genius and basically thinks every one else is retarded. He's a total ass. He's kind of like his character on Curb, but without any of the funny situations. He's actually A LOT meaner in Whatever Works. The title comes from his theory on love. Do whatever works.

Well, Boris meets Melodie, a blond, naive, overly southern, overly dumb, 21 year old ex-beauty queen runaway from Mississippi played by the usually Goth and dark Evan Rachel Wood (the girl dated Marilyn Manson for a while, so you can imagine how normal she is). Well, to make a long story short, old ass Boris and young ass Melodie get married. Her overly southern (I really hate when actors totally overdo southern accents in movies, it almost ruins some movies for me, but i digress) parents eventually find her, and end of staying in New York. As time progresses through the movie, everyone finds out who they really are and what really makes them happy, and everyone basically lives happily ever after. Very strange for a Woody Allen movie, but even the happily ever after is not "normal" happily ever after.

The movie is quirky like Woody Allen's movies tend to be, but it doesn't really have the off beat humor that they tend to have. There are really only a couple of funny parts and they involve really messed up situations. Larry David is just such a jerk that you kind of want to kick him in the face the whole movie. The way the story is told just keeps reminding you of watching a play, which kind of becomes distracting. When I first heard that Woody Allen's next film was going to star Larry David, i got pumped. Psssssss. That's the sound of my deflation. I was so bored while watching this movie that I started playing Scrabble on my computer while it was on. It actually took me 2 nights to get through it because I fell asleep 30 minutes into it the first night. If you have a thing with seeing all of Woody Allen's movies, then fine, go rent it. Otherwise, don't waste the 93 minutes that it takes to get through the film. The happy ending isn't that great.

Orphan - Not like all those other scary kid movies

When I rented Orphan, I thought it was going to be like all of the other movies where a kid is evil and kills everyone. Kind of like The Omen or Joshua, neither of which I liked very much and neither of which really scared me. I basically rented it because there wasn't much else worth renting and I was kind of in the mood for a scary movie. But man am I glad I rented it. Orphan is a good movie. I really wouldn't even throw it in the horror category. I would describe it more along the lines of a thriller. A very good, very frustrating, very scary thriller.

For those of you who want me to get to the synopsis already, Orphan is about a family who, after a miscarriage, decide to adopt a young child. The decide on a 9 year old girl named Ester. And while Ester is a very unusual girl (one of the reasons they adopt her) things with her are beyond strange little girl unusual, bad things start happening around her.

The movie is incredibly frustrating because the audience sees all the evil things that Ester does. She kills, threatens, and torments. And the only person who sees all this is the wife, Kate, played by Vera Farminga (Matt Damon's girlfriend from The Departed). The husband, John, played by Peter Sarsgaard, (Jake Gyllenhaal's sniper buddy from Jarhead) doesn't see this and thinks that Kate is just going crazy. Throw in the fact that Kate is a recovering alcoholic and it just makes it that much harder for John to believe her. Of course, the audience knows the whole time what Ester is doing, but no one else will listen to Kate.

The little girl who plays Ester does a fantastic job as a sadistic, psychotic 9 year old. Also, the little girl who plays the John and Kate's (HA! Just noticed that, John and Kate...okay, lame...) deaf, child is cute as button.

As, in any thriller you spend the whole time waiting for a twist or a revelation as to why things are the way they are. Many times, you figure it out way too soon and it kind of ruins the movie. In Orphan, there are quite a few questions that you spend the whole movie asking. Why is this girl a murderous psycho? Why does she wear those ribbons on her neck and wrists all the time? Why does she have a picture of a man in her bible? All these questions drive you nuts during the movie, and I personally spent the whole time forming hypotheses in my head. While I kind of guessed the ending, it was still pretty jaw dropping and very cool how it all unfolds.

I highly recommend this to any one who likes a little pulse quickening when watching a movie. If you hate horrors, you may not totally hate this one. Yeah, its creepy and there are some scary parts, and it may keep you up the night of, but its still pretty dang good. The only 2 knocks I have against Orphan, are that it drug on a little too long in the middle -- which leads to even more frustration, and the opening scene is totally disgusting and I highly recommend that you fast forward through it. Not only was it gross and bloody and gory, but its it ridiculously disturbing. Plus, if you miss it, it doesn't affect the rest of the movie. Let's just say it is a nightmare involving a bad child birth. Enough (maybe too much) said. I've been on a string of bad dramatic films (horror, thriller, drama) but this one was really good. Go rent it. It may not be a cuddle session type flick but its still a good movie.

The Proposal - I fun little Rom Com

I don't care what anyone says, Romantic Comedies are pretty fun movies. They are good mindless fun with happy endings. Even if they aren't hilarious, they make you laugh. There's always a pretty girl as the leading lady and you always feel good after watching them, regardless of how unrealistic or cheesy or cliche the movie actually is. I mean lets face it, it's almost impossible to make an unchessy or uncliched Rom Com. The Proposal is one of those fun movies.

The movie stars Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds. Sandra Bullock is hot. Ryan Reynolds is hilarious. Bullock plays Margaret an evil, pushy boss who forces her young assistant, Andrew (Reynolds), to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada where she is from and thus losing her high powered job at a publishing company. However, to do this they must convince the customs official that the upcoming marriage is not a sham. Andrew was just happening to travel to his hometown in Alaska for his grandmother's birthday so Margaret comes along to help make the engagement look real. These 2 basically hate each other in the beginning. Margaret is a hateful bitch and Andrew is her abused sidekick who only sticks around in hopes of getting promoted and fulfilling his dream of being an editor. Well, as Rom Coms go, the 2 characters begin to see each other in a different light throughout the course of the weekend, and then fall in love for real.

I only have 2 knocks against this flick. There is a scene involving Betty White (who I think is the funniest old lady on the planet), and some Indian dancing that should have probably been cut in that is really too goofy and doesn't really fit in the movie, although it does involve some pretty funny dancing by Bullock's character. And, I know this is knit picky, but Reynold's character goes from despising Bullock's to being in love with her over the course of 3 days, which is kind of unbelievable, but whatever, its a movie.

As I mentioned before, Betty White is great as the vivacious, crazy grandmother. But the really scene stealer is Oscar Munez (better known as Oscar from The Office). If you watch The Office and know what kind of a character he plays in that (which is kind of an uptight, prim and proper person) you will laugh your a$$ off to his character in this movie.

I'm not going to sit here and tell you that this is one of the greatest movies I've ever seen. It's not the funniest romantic comedy ever, and while it has its sappy, love story ending, I don't know if the ladies will need to bust out the Kleenex. But it is a funny movie from beginning to end. You will laugh, and you will get that sappy love story feeling a couple of times. You feel good after watching this movie. If that's what you want out of a movie watching experience (and who doesn't?) then rent this one and you won't be sorry.

Drag Me to Hell

Drag Me To Hell is about an ambitious L.A. loan officer named Christine Brown (Alison Lohman) who has a charming boyfriend, professor Clay Dalton (Jason Long - the Mac Guy). Her life is all good until a witch-like gypsy named Mrs. Ganush arrives at her bank to beg for an extension on her home loan. Christine denies the extention and in retaliation, the old woman places the powerful curse on Christine. Christine begins to be haunted by an evil spirit and because she is misunderstood by her skeptical boyfriend, she seeks the aid of a psychic to help her. In order for Christine return her life to normal from the hell it is becoming, the psychic advises her on ways to reverse the spell.

Everything about Drag Me To Hell slightly misses the mark. Everything is just almost. Its like its is just watered down or filtered. The movie is PG-13 which automatically makes all horror movies not scary. There should be a law against making PG-13 horror movies because they are very rarely any good. Drag Me To Hell is a victim of this as well.

You are supposed to feel for Christine, you are supposed to want her to defeat this curse. Yes, she made a tragic error in letting her ambitions get in the way of helping this old woman, but she made a mistake. We all make mistakes right? And while she doesn't deserve what she gets, we just don't really ever feel too strongly for Christine. Maybe it was Lohman's blah performance, maybe she was not meek looking enough to feel for, maybe it was just a badly written part. Whatever it was, you don't feel an attachment to her.

Don't get me wrong, there were a couple of times where I jumped, and there were a couple of pretty scary parts, but not enough for me to say this is a scary movie. This movie is written and directed by Sam Riami. He's the guy behind the Evil Dead movies which were kind of silly, outrageous "scary" movies that didn't take themselves very seriously. I think with this movie, the filmmaker was a little confused on whether he wanted to make this a serious scary movie or a silly scary movie. There are a couple of gory scenes but they are so outrageously gross that they are kind of humorous. There's a nose bleed scene where blood just starts spraying all over the place, and a scene involving a corpse where goo just pours out of its mouth. There's also a scene involving a talking goat. I mean come on! I'm no filmmaker but I don't really know how you can make a talking goat scary. Even with all this, the movie does make you think that something pretty cool is about to happen. There is even an attempt at a twist in the movie, but if you even paid sort of attention, the "set up" of the twist is so obvious earlier in the film that you spot what is supposed to be the twist very early and basically figure out exactly how the movie will end.

I had kind of high expectations for this movie because while the trailer didn't really impress me, I read some reviews of some critics calling it one of the scariest movies they'd ever seen. Either these guys were paid to write that, or they are total wimps when it comes to scary movies. I mean, Dark Knight might have been "scarier" than this movie. I wouldn't really recommend this movie to anyone. It will leave horror fans disappointed. Justin Long, who I think is pretty funny, is not. And its got just enough scares and gore to make those scaredy cats out there uncomfortable. Skip this one at the local Blockbuster.

Music Within - Well, it's a great trailer...

I think there should be an Academy Award for the people who make trailers. These are the things that really make or break most movies. Crappy trailer, crappy box office results. Great trailer, usually great box office results. Now, if the movie is awesome or terrible, word of mouth takes care of a lot of that as well. The real skill lies in making a crappy movie look good with a great trailer and trick the audience into going to see the movie. Year One is a prime example of that. The trailer was hilarious. The way the scenes were pieced together in that one was hilarious. Too bad those were the only funny scenes and only when pieced together that way... Music Within is a movie where the trailer looked awesome, but the movie was just eh. It really actually got me choked up, and excited about seeing it, but nothing about the actual movie did that for me.

Music Within is a true story based on the life of Richard Pimentel, a celebrated public speaker who lost his hearing while serving in Vietnam. When he returned home disabled, he was angered by how poorly disabled people were treated in America. Pimentel then becomes the father of disability reform in America.

Sounds pretty inspirational right? Well, his story and life are, the movie just isn't. I hate to say this, but for inspirational movies to really move an audience, they have to have a certain level of cheesiness and typical cliche's. If it doesn't do that, for whatever sad reason, it just doesn't work. This movie doesn't have that, it's actually very real and anti climatic, which in turn results in a flat movie.

Don't get me wrong, Richard Pimentel is an exceptional person, and a kind person, and the acting in this movie is quite strong, but compared to the amazing trailer, its just kind of disappointing. The movie stars Ron Livingston (Office Space) as Pimentel, Melissa George (the hot Aussie on Grey's Anatomy last year) as his free spirited love interest, and Michael Sheen (Frost in Frost/Nixon) as Pimentel's cerebral palsy stricken best friend. All deliver. Livingston just seems like the nicest guy ever, George is a knockout, and Michael Sheen is really good, but maybe over does a little the cerebral palsy thing.

I just found myself wondering when the movie was going to be over, which means I was super bored. Its a great story, the storytellers just weren't that good. If you feel you want to learn a little bit about a great man's life, you will enjoy this movie, but otherwise I think you'll be bored with the whole thing.

Man on Wire - An intense documentary

The website Rotten Tomatoes is a site that rates movies by percentages. To get a 100% rating is quite difficult to do as it takes the average of all the reviews submitted on a certain film. In the history of movies, only about 100 have gotten a 100% rating. One of those being Citizen Kane, the American Film Institutes Greatest film of all time (I personally thought it was kind of boring but who am I to judge) which comes at a lousy 15. Another factor that determines the "best" movie on Rotten Tomatoes is how many reviews it gets with a 100% rating. Man on Wire is #1 on Rotten Tomatoes. It has a 100% rating and has gotten that rating by 141 reviewers. The next highest is 130.

Now, having said all that, I'll go on a limb here and go out of order and give my review first and say it wasn't THAT good. Don't get me wrong as far as documentaries go, it was one of the most entertaining I've ever seen. It's actually intense, like sitting on the edge of your seat intense. I would definitely give it something in the 90% ish range. And honestly, an A is an A right?

Man on Wire is about a French tight rope walker named Phillipe Petit who tight roped across the World Trade Towers in 1974. Which has been called the most artistic crime in history. The documentary chronicles his early years as a tight roper, his previous tight roping "crimes" and difficulty in planning the elaborate tight roping between the Twin Towers. The film combines old film footage from the 70s of Petit and his "gang," with photos of the planning, with reenactments. The film builds up to a climax like a fictional movie rather than just expose something or give straight facts like many documentaries do. It is quite intoxicating, if not a bit annoying to see Petit's enthusiasm for his art.

As I said before, this is an awesome movie, not to mention an amazing documentary. If you have a bizarrely strong and crippling fear of heights, I'd prepare myself or avoid it all together. For every other person without a crippling phobias, I suggest this be your next rental.

The Brothers Bloom

The Brothers Bloom is a quirky comedy about two con artist brothers named Stephen and Bloom (which makes you wonder why the movie is called The Brothers Bloom if that's not their last name, but whatever) played by Mark Ruffalo and Adrien Brody respectively. The brothers have been con artists since they were little kids. Stephen is the mastermind and Bloom is the actor. Stephen loves conning, and Bloom has his reservations about it and wants to get out. Stephen talks Bloom into one last con. The will con an eccentric, reclusive heiress, named Penelope Stamp (played by Rachel Weisz). The con is to get her involved and then take her money in some ridiculously elaborate scheme. Then hilarity ensues. Or at least its supposed too...

This is a very quirky, odd ball movie. But it tries too hard to be really funny and just doesn't make it. Its not like some of those darker comedies that don't try to be funny, just funny enough to not be serious. It does have a certain dark comedy feel though, but I think that's totally an accident. I had to check the DVD box to make sure that it wasn't directed by Wes Anderson (The Royal Tenebaums, The Life Aquatic, The Darjeeling Limited). It's one of those where all the characters are a little off. The all wear clothes that don't seem to match the time period. There are many times when the action is going on in the foreground and something crazy and totally unrelated is going on in the background.

Now I know con artist movies are supposed to be complex and hard to follow. That's what makes them so entertaining because you are so lost during the movie, but then at the end everything is explained and you have that "Ohhhh, so THAT'S what happened!" moment. Well, this con certainly was complex. I found myself totally lost at many different points. However, that may be because, sight gags and goofy dialogue aside, I was just not that interested in what was going to happen. The movie didn't hook me like con artist movies are supposed to. And then, there's not really one of those explain everything moments. There is one "Oh, WOW!" moments but its really sad so you cant enjoy it.

If you like Wes Anderson movies, you may enjoy this. It has the same feel. I'm personally not crazy about his movies but a lot of people are. It's worth a rent if you just can't find anything else. I'd give it a 6.5 or 7 out of 10 because I'm in a good mood today.

Book of Blah

Book of Blood is a horror movie based on a couple of Clive Barker short stories. In it, a house is a "crossroads" for the dead and strange happenings occur there. Strange meaning faces getting ripped off. While aiding in a study, a man defies the dead and is punished by have to suffer the torture of the dead carving their stories in his skin. I like horror movies for the most part. Let me rephrase that, I like scary movies. I hate gore fests like the Saw sequels that call them selves horrors. This is kind of like that. It's really not scary at all, its kind of disgusting, and the only cool part is that it is filmed in Edinburgh, Scotland, a city I haven't seen very much of. Unless, you like watching un scary, not really gory horrors, don't waste your time.

Tron. Drugs, dude, drugs.

Many of you may have heard a lot of hype about a sequel to the movie Tron coming out soon. Now Tron came out in 1982, the year I was born, so I obviously wasn't with it when this supposedly groundbreaking movie came out, and obviously was totally in the dark with all of the geek sites were freaking out about a sequel. So, being the worldly man that I am, I decided that I needed to watch this movie for myself to understand what the fuss is all about. And I still don't know...

The movie was made in 1982 so obviously the special effects are lacking a little, but for 1982 they are pretty good, or maybe they are just so weird that you have nothing to compare them too. I think this movie was such a hit back in the day because it's about computers and computers were just now getting "popular."

I'm going to try to explain the basic premise to you, but you're probably going to think I just ate some mushrooms because its that weird. Basically, computer programs and systems are their own little world, there are evil over lords, foot soldiers, outlaws, Wizard of Oz types, and they all look like people, more precisely the look like their programmer. Well, some how a human gets transported into the computer world, and joins with other computer programs to fight the evil Master Control program and free all of the other computer programs. In this world, the "people" were weird white suits and helmets that are trimmed in bright neon colors. That's really all I need to tell you because that's really all I can even put into words without my brain cramping.

Basically, this is Star Wars on acid. There are evil, all powerful over lords, minions, good guys who fly little jets, etc etc. But all this in a black world with neon trimmed suits that is actually just the inside of a computer system where programs look like us. Weird. But now having seen this I kind of want to see what Tron 2 will look like given our current technology.

If you are just curious to see how weird this movie is, if you want to do drugs and trip out, if you want to see The Dude (Jeff Bridges) from 1982, or if you like the hot blond from Caddyshack (she only has a small part and doesn't take her clothes off, Tron is PG) then rent this movie. You probably still wont be thrilled but at least you'll be able to say you saw Tron.

If you do not fall into any of the above categories, don't waste your time, you'll just be weirded out.

Bet many of you haven't thought about this one!

You know when you have those random thoughts when you are laying in bed before you fall a sleep. I have a hard time sleeping anyway, so I have way too many of those thoughts. The one I had last night I think actually made me giggle out loud a little bit. Do you remember the movie Reign of Fire? It came out in 2002, only 7 years ago, and starred Matthew McConaughey as a bald, bearded, tattooed dragon hunter. What made me laugh was the fact that McConaughey was the bad ass star of this sci-fi actioner, and was supported by two totally less bad ass, even lesser known actors by the names of Christian Bale and Gerard Butler. Its kind of funny what can happen in 7 years. Hell would freeze over before either one of those dudes would be cast as a lesser bad ass to McConaughey. They are like Hollywood's go to hard asses right now. Just thought I'd share that with you.

SORRY!

I want to apologize for my absence. I know all of you just didn't know what to do without my insights into the movies! But give me a break, football season is here and so is TV season, thus I don't have as much time to watch flicks. But I'm back with quite a few reviews for you so sit back, relax, and let the movie blogging roll. Lame, I know.