Reviews

2010 cannot be described as a good year for M. Night Shyamalan. The negative reaction to "The Last Airbender" was immediate and scathing. It went so far as to become an act of revisionist history with some critics dissecting his entire career and declaring it retroactively over after the phenomenal success of "The Sixth Sense". So, I just had to check out "Devil", released a mere three months after "The Last Airbender", and thanks to some ITunes gift cards from Christmas, I could do so without risking my own money. "Devil" opens with a suicide and details the story of five people trapped in a high rise elevator in downtown Philadelphia, who experience events that can only be explained by the supernatural. The "devil" aspect comes into play through a guard in the building whose mother puts Brothers Grim to shame. She told him bedtime stories as a child about the devil taking human form to trap, torture and kill those who will eventually end up in his(or her?) domain anyway. It's a bit of a locked room mystery with a police detective working the suicide who tries to decipher what is happening in the elevator via security cameras. I'll start with my likes which are mostly about mood. The camera work, including opening credits over the upside down city, is excellent with sweeps and mirror perspective shots that keep the viewer constantly askew. The music, also key to the mood, is heavy handed enough to cue an edge or your seat tension throughout. I didn't have any problem with the acting but the characters are all like those found in a hour long Twilight Zone type show. You know, played by vaguely familiar actors and fleshed out just enough to make us pay attention for an hour minus commercials. My dislikes? The ending does have a few "twists" people expect from Shyamalan's work but they are fairly tepid. The narrator is a mildly annoying piece of work also. His "my mama told me" declarations about the devil are at best awkward exposition and at worst silly. Why insert an otherwise rational character who earnestly expects everyone to shake their heads and say "yep it's the Devil, that's for sure"? Verdict? The reports of M. Knight Shyamalan's career suicide are premature and he will make more movies to love or hate I'm sure. "Devil" probably would have been viewed as C grade work but a minor hiccup if it had not come out after "The Last Airbender".

"Charlie St. Cloud" starring Zac Efron is the story of the title character and how he deals with the loss of his younger brother, Sam, (Charlie Tahan) in a car accident made even worse by the fact that Charlie is driving. Seemingly from beyond the grave or only in Charlie's mind, Sam shows up every day for a promised baseball lesson. We flash forward five years and Charlie has given up on college, his love of sailing and become the town recluse all to make his daily appointment with Sam.

From my title of my post you may have picked up on the fact that I think "Charlie St. Cloud" is a awkward mismatch of ideas that don't necessarily fare well in the same movie. Self-editing is a valuable skill that would serve the creative forces behind this movie very well. There are three, possibly four distinct story lines going here including a missed opportunity at a supernatural drama. I don't think any of them succeed because it doesn't appear this movie knows what it wants to be.

As far as acting, Efron has a charming face and disposition that lends well to the humor but not so much the drama. You can practically see him straining in the first part of the movie to keep up with the movie's over the top dramatics. It's further proof to me that Hollywood finds us a bit dense and believes we need a trail of bread crumbs leading to the obvious. In this case the obvious is that the sudden loss of a young family member is tragic. Of course you cannot have Zac Efron as your lead without some romance. Charlie attracts the interest of Tess (Amanda Crew), a young woman training for a round the globe sailing trip. I hate to be harsh but my biggest criticism is for Amanda Crew. She has a delivery so flat as to suck any spark or chemistry out of the scenes between Charlie and Tess. Since I'm really trashing this movie, I will give some props to Charlie Tahan who plays Sam. He is genuinely funny and at times conveys the sadness embodied by his character. Have I made this sound so terrible? There is an audience for this movie but I don't think that includes people like me who take a cynical view about the state of creativity in film.

"Let Me In", set in 1983, tells the woeful story of Owen (Kodi Smith-Mcphee) who is not exactly living the dream of adolescence. In addition to being thin, awkward and bullied, his fractured home life is anything but a refuge. Into his life comes new neighbors who will change everything. An older man and young girl move next door to Owen and he can easily eavesdrop on them from his bedroom. Owen soon makes friends with the young girl, Abby (Chloe Moretz) and almost instantly senses a soul mate. At first she is presented as timid, insecure and possibly neglected. The story moves pretty quickly and doesn't really try to hide that Chloe is actually a vampire, older than she appears and as much vicious killer as timid perpetual adolescent.

There, now we've done the set up; so let's dissect this movie. The atmosphere in "Let Me In" is stark and never lets you rest from the sense of foreboding and that is exactly as it should be in this type of movie. I commend the director for keeping the gore and blood at a level that satisfies without turning off the viewer. He replaces some of the visuals for sound. Just know, when Abby feeds her need, you will have no doubt what is happening even though it may be shot in the shadows or off camera.

The acting is good all around but success rests on the four characters who take up a majority of the screen time. I am in awe of Kodi Smith-Mcphee's portrayal of Owen. I instantly connected with the character and Mcphee's ability to play both the hopelessness and rage of a victim. His bullying at school is the most humiliating sort and is lead by a student who I will describe as a sadistic, future closet-case who is pretty scary despite having Justin Bieber hair. Chloe Moretz would really surprise at this point if she failed to deliver an excellent performance. You will, I think, also be blown away by how she conveys tenderness toward Owen at one moment and animalistic need for blood the next. Richard Jenkins, a chameleon like actor who can play both the silliest of comedy and the tautest of drama, plays Abby's shadowy protector who has obviously sacrificed his life to feed her endless appetite and protect her from the consequences. Owen's mother is played by Cara Bouno and don't worry if you don't recognize her. She is excellently shot the entire movie out of focus with a glass of wine in hand or nearby in a way that clearly says the parents are unimportant in this story.

I'll close by saying that "Let Me In" is a dark, delicious Halloween treat that I highly recommend.

I am a fan of simple and streamlined story telling; so I enjoyed the first movie in the Resident Evil franchise which came out in 2002. The story was easy to follow and enjoy - killer day at the office when all of the employees of the evil multi-national Umbrella Corporation are killed and turned into zombies by a super virus. Survivors and rescuers must fight their way out. I was totally there. I was not such a fan of the second movie and pretty much ignored the third except for a glimpse here and there on cable.

My desire to check out "Resident Evil: Afterlife" was driven by being a sometimes but enthusiastic Milla Jovovich fan ever since first seeing her in the dazzling, hyper-kinetic, Jean- Paul Gautier drenched movie "The Fifth Element". For her fans I have some good news and bad news. You will see a lot of her in "Resident Evil: Afterlife", including, I counted, 11 clones in the opening scenes, but not much of her acting skill. My first big complaint is that she is nothing more than post-apocalyptic eye candy to fill the space between supposedly impressive 3D effects. I was hoping this movie would have the pre-requisite amount of zombie action sprinkled with dark humor and basically repeat the first movie because repetition is not always a bad thing. Nope. Instead there are 97 minutes of what feels like nothing except set up for a fifth movie. Sure there is a story (loosely) where Alice encounters a group of survivors but some of them are so expendable and clichéd they are a waste of time. It all moves too fast and there is never a connection.

I don't know what to say about the 3D, really. There was some stop action moments which if you took the time examine them were visually trippy and interesting but they were overshadowed by the multitude of slow motion fight sequences which were over wrought and boring. So much slow motion in fact that I began to wonder if someone had slipped a Valium into my blueberry slushy(?). Not to mention that this over used effect turned the big bad villain into a tired Agent Smith impersonation. In the end Alice and her cohorts are on a giant ship full of survivors who look like they work for an Apple store in 2020. An army of black clad Umbrella agents are on the way promising an overblown and empty showdown for the next movie. A funny note. Even though I am sure most of the audience, like myself, were heading to the restrooms, we all turned back to the screen like cattle for a super special bonus scene at the end. That's the last slight of the movie because I did not even know who the female villain reveal was until I got home and Googled it. Shame on them. Don't do that people who have to pee.

I've been waiting for "Me and Orson Welles" to have a U.S. DVD release ever since seeing some clips during the 2010 BAFTA(s) and I can say it did not disappoint. The story is that of Richard Samuels (Zac Efron) a bored high schooler who in the course of a week, meets Orson Welles, is cast in the now famous 1937 Broadway production of Julius Caesar and just as quickly fired. It's a fantastic period piece with a backdrop of the sophisticated New York artistic set. Actually maybe that's not completely accurate. The real backdrop may be the over the top ego and personality of Orson Welles(which appears to rival NYC in size). Christian McKay (who has not one credit on IMDb I recognize) is incredible as Welles. The viewer should dislike him but perhaps like the real life person, he is too charming and funny to truly resent. Claire Danes equally impresses at doing well with a role that could be described as a bit flat. She is the older love (and sex) interest who introduces Richard to the unfortunate landscape of adult relationships. I love Claire Danes mostly because I can still hold onto the sixteen year old iconic mopey Angela Chase and still appreciate her as a fully evolved adult actress. The only stumbling point in this movie may be the "me". Zac Efron is a bit of a mystery to me. If he had given himself completely over the dark side of Disney, I am sure I would see him as "that kid" from "those annoying High-School Musical movies". However I genuinely enjoyed him in "17 Again"; so I had to get over that. Here he does the comedy of someone out of their element well but fails to fully convince when he is called upon to do drama. It's a minor complaint though that doesn't detract from the whole...and who knows maybe I will have to eat those words when I see "Charlie St. Cloud" which is getting some good reviews for Efron.

I assumed the story of a woman seeking a new lease on life by spending a year of travel and exploration in Italy, India and Bali would have ample scenery and local color to ignite my natural wonder lust. However the movie conventions I usually adore, were just short of grating in "Eat, Pray, Love". Julia Roberts plays Liz Gilbert, a writer who goes through a vague and hazy sort of mid life crisis, ends her marriage, jumps into another ill advised and doomed relationship and finally sets off on a year long journey to find her zest for life. This beginning set up is a little too long for my tastes and full of modern "Oprah" speak about "lost passion". I did enjoy Liz's best friend played by the very hard working actress Viola Davis. She delivers some great lines like, "Having a baby is like getting a tattoo on your face. You need to be committed". I never did completely understand the source or the nature of Liz's problems but soon she is off to three destinations that are defined by the movie's title.

Italy - This is all about eating and probably my favorite part of the movie. Liz moves into an aptly rundown but beautiful apartment and meets and assortment of funny, sweet international friends. The settings and the food are filmed in a way that really captures the romanticism of travel. My only nitpick with this part of the movie is the conceit that Liz and her new Swedish friend are gaining weight because of the sheer amount of drop dead gorgeous carbs they are eating. To pull this off may have taken some Bridget Jones action but instead we are served the silliness of a still sleek Julia Roberts trading in her really skinny jeans for the next size up of really skinny jeans.

India - Liz sets off to India to meditate and pray away her troubles. The first scenes in India are very well done and capture the overwhelming experience it must be for a first time visitor from the west. The rest of her stay in India is bit of bore in my opinion. We are treated again to a litany of Liz's woes but I still did not understand what she wanted. Again a side character at least supplies some interest. Richard Jenkins, who excels in everything from the deepest drama ("The Visitor") to the silliest of comedies ("Step Brothers"), serves as the voice of the viewer (maybe?) and brashly tells Liz to get over it.

Bali - Liz's last destination answers the core question of the movie, will Liz find true love again? Bali is beautiful and nothing negative about the movie can take away from that. Roberts too is beautiful in a dress up Barbie sort of way as she wears lots of local outfits. You can probably guess that Liz does find love in the end after meeting a teary eyed, feminist wet dream sort of guy played by Javier Bardem. I'll give him credit. He plays his part so well that this was the first time in three years that he did not scare the crap out of me due to flashbacks of the casual violence and menace in "No Country for Old Men".

Why so harsh on this movie? I don't know. Maybe it was sitting through the trailer for Katherine Heigl's new romcom train wreck that put me in a foul mood. To be fair, I'll give it another viewing when it's out on DVD

In our current time of folksy and populist sentiment, I read some early comments on just the trailer for "A Single Man" that labeled it pretentious or worse the "e" word (elitist). Well just forget all of that if you have not seen it. This atmospheric movie about grief directed by Tom Ford and starring Colin Firth, Julianna Moore among others is a beautifully made movie. The 1964 novel by Christopher Isherwood is a first person story with a lot of inner monologue and tells the story of a middle aged college professor who is mourning the loss of his male lover in a era where sexual orientation was only whispered about in most situations. How to portray the inner life of a character has challenged many a movie maker but Tom Ford takes all of the elements that could have failed and succeeds for the most part. Don't go away from this though expecting a "downer" because there is genuine humor here. Colin Firth plays excellently droll opposite Julianna Moore and Nicholas Hoult ( a flirtatious student who you will recognize from BBC's runaway hit "Skins" and earlier "About A Boy"). I especially love Moore and Firth together. They act out a genuinely sad but funny scenario minus the silly baggage gay story-lines are often saddled with. Think Will & Grace if Will had not been essentially neutered and Grace drank too much. One last thought... the above trailer, I think, tries to misdirect from the gay subject matter but the movie never does.

After seeing "Twilight: Eclipse" I had to watch a whole block of "Tru Blood" episodes just to remind myself that vampires are sexy, dark and bloody. I am going to leave you with just a couple of thoughts about why I am saddened by the decision to see this one in the theater, a mistake I assure I will not make for the fourth. Robert Pattinson would rightly be said to carry the burden of male vampire sex appeal in this series. With that in mind, perhaps someone should have pointed out that a scrunched up "I small something nasty" face is not sexy especially for two hours. I recently saw him in "Remember Me" which exceeded expectations and I must say he played the dark, brooding but always earnest bad boy very well. While were on this subject we might as well go ahead and say that Taylor Lautner's shirtless, "well defined" (bad pun, sorry) acting style in "Eclipse" tipped over into cheesiness of the worst sort. In a moment of self referencing humor, Edward even quips, "Does he own a shirt?". "Eclipse" does offer up more action but undercuts itself with some not so special effects not to mention the fact that Twilight vampires when killed look like nothing more than empty mannequins. Maybe this is in line with the books, I don't know, but it was bloodless (even for PG13) and cold. The villain we have been waiting on in the form of Victoria once again has scant screen time and (spoiler!!) dies one of the cold, bloodless deaths. Can someone also explain Bryce Dallas Howard's bad choice of wigs? I did say just a couple of thoughts so I will leave you with my last complaint. Bella's fragile nature is played up to the point of absurdity. She really needs to be made into a vampire before she dies in some horrible toe stubbing accident.

First off, thanks to Staceybon from Twitter for helping me come up with a one word description for "Prince of Persia". You see, I thought I would be clever and asked for suggestions about what to call a movie where you ultimately enjoy the trailers more than the movie. She cut right to the chase with a concise and easy to remember answer - "crap!" Does "Prince of Persia" deserve to be called crap? I think to do so will at least nod toward the fact that some of these big blockbuster type movies are trending toward being unforgettable and unsatisfying. Don't worry "Iron Man II" I'm not talking about you but yes "Clash of the Titans" I am talking about you. I guess now I need to justify such a lukewarm response to Prince of Persia...

I was never any good at video games although I did have a good run at Frogger one time. My characters are klutzes who bump into things and die in embarrassing and shameful ways. Based on all of the jumping, leaping and wall climbing involved in "Prince of Persia", I am sure I would have sucked at the video game the movie is based on. This story is set in the sprawling empire of Persia and is about Dastan (Jake Gyllenhaal) who was adopted by the King and rescued from the life of a street urchin. This happens because like most movie orphans Dastan practically glows with spunk and virtue that the King may see missing in his own over privileged family. The downside of this situation is that eventually somebody is going to try to discredit and/or kill you. When the King is killed, Dastan is framed and finds himself on the run with the most beautiful princess in all of Persia (Gemma Arterton as Tamina). She is no ordinary bare belly Persian princess though because she is the sacred protector of a dagger that contains the "sands of time" which can turn back time. While on the run we get all of the expected video game like action, effects like Dastan using the dagger and snarky flirting between Dastan and Tamina. It's the type of flirting that really begs "get a room" or in this case a tent but never rises to the level of passion implied later in the movie.

The plot really fails when there is exposition about what to do with the dagger. There is a source for the sand but putting the dagger there will lead to very, very bad things, It can be returned to the stone from which it was made or ( and this is where I checked out) there is a secret fortress where it can always be kept safe. OK, why not keep it at the fortress to begin with? Also we only see one other person besides Dastan use the dagger and why not? Couldn't said brave princess use the dagger's power to keep it from being capture to begin with? Oh well, we end up with a huge finale full of sand, fire and death that leads to......wait for it.... a big fat reset button that renders all we have seen moot.

Good points? The scenes of vast deserts and Persian palaces are done well. Alfred Molina and Ben Kingsley can go to the head of the class because they play their one note characters well. Molina is used for quite a few laughs and Kingsley arches his eyebrows in just the right deceptively evil way throughout the movie. I've read that Jake Gyllenhaal's nicely buffed up body might be a reason to pay up and see this movie. I prefer leaner Brokeback Jake, and I don't think the abs factor even makes this movie worth the price of admission.

The set-up for "It's Complicated" seemed promising - middle aged woman (Meryl Streep) who thinks she has her post divorce life figured out finds herself "the other woman" when she starts an affair with her ex husband (Alec Baldwin). Meryl Streep does all things well including comedy and Alec Baldwin is the perfect fit for a character who is full of himself and conveniently self delusional. Throw in Steve Martin and John Krasinksi (who mines comic gold each week on "The Office") and I was expecting a diverting 120 minutes. Instead this movie irritated me continuously for 2 hours. What went wrong? I am going to cut the actors some slack and lay the blame at the feet of director and writer Nancy Meyers. She tends to write movies that have a thin veneer of neurotic self-entitlement. Sometimes it works or is at least tolerable as in "The Holiday" but here she lays it on a bit thick. Streep's Jane is the type of woman who has feng shui'd her life into submission, watches "The Hills" with her daughter, and makes ice cream when she can't sleep ( funny, all I get are bags under my eyes). Her romantic dilemma is a choice between two men - an architect who lost his wife to another man on a couples bike tour of Italy and the ex who lives under the twin threat of his younger wife's fascist ovulation schedule and a demon step-child. Cliché on top of cliché that eventually eclipses the acting.

Speaking of acting. What a waste to have Jim Krasinksi in this movie. His role as Jane's future son-in-law is to wince, shrug, smile and sigh. Note to Nancy Meyers, facial expressions and body language are only the beginning of emoting and not the final product. Last note and then I will stop beating up on the movie, I promise. I don't know what Jane's three adult children are supposed to represent but they are harpy, over emotional and creepy in a Stepford sort of way. As a child of divorce I can tell you I would've ended up in therapy if anyone ever suggested snuggling in bed with my adult siblings as comfort from a divorce that happened ten years prior.

I don't have too much to say about " The Blind Side" . Sandra Bullock looses herself in the role of Leigh Ann Touhy who practically adopts a young African American teenager and takes him off the path to becoming a sad statistic and puts him on one to success. She does this through a shock and awe campaign of southern charm and sassy attitude ( having a boatload of money doesn't hurt). Her character looms so large in the movie as to eclipse everyone else even Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron) who you would have thought would be the center of the story. I like many others was taken in by Bullock's performance but for all of the attention "The Blind Side" received it was a pretty lightweight movie.

As a fan of Alice Sebold's "The Lovely Bone", I have been reading negative reviews of the movie with dismay for months. I made what was probably a mistake and read even more reviews on sites like IMDb after watching "The Lovely Bones" this weekend. The idea repeated in review after review goes something like this : Peter Jackson has gutted the story and left viewers with mostly an empty CGI shell. What can I say, I get it but very much fell for this movie. I can't imagine the number of choices that must be made when adapting a book into a movie. The pull to include as much as possible bumping up against the reality that you have to edit, edit, and then edit some more.

In the story of Susie Salmon, her tragic murder and afterlife Jackson has chosen to make a sparse story that gives you, if not all of the details from the book, then at least the feeling of Susie watching her family from a distance and exerting subtle influence. We get what could almost be described as vignettes of her family's life in the wake of her death. She is meant to be moving on but is constantly drawn back by their grief and desire for justice.

One element I'm surprised to find missing from all of the negative reviews is praise for the great performances. Saoirse Ronan as Susie Salmon is the literal and figurative voice of the movie. Her narration perfectly captures the sweet sadness that runs through the book and her portrayal of Susie before the murder is so endearing as to drive home even more the tragedy of what is to come. As a counterpoint to her role is Stanely Tucci as her killer. Without going overboard he perfectly portrays the idea of the nightmare you don't realize is living next door. I for one am glad his role is a bit subdued. I've tired of movies portraying serial killer's every motivation, fetishes and macabre details of the crimes. I'll admit the under use of Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz is a mystery to me. Susan Sarandon deserves notice as Susie's grandmother, a woman after my own heart tackles life's challenges with a drink firmly in hand.

I probably could not change the minds of those who feel Peter Jackson has ruined a beloved book but decided I could enjoy the movie that is and not worry so much about the one that could have been.

"Crazy Heart" had a lot of hype to live up to with all of the praise during the awards season and Jeff Bridges best actor Oscar win. Bridges plays the aptly named Bad Blake who despite a promising country music career is close to hitting rock bottom when the movie opens. He plays gigs in bowling alleys, drinks non stop and probably wakes up most mornings next to an aging groupie he does not even remember. Bridges flawlessly abandons vanity and lets his body show every indignity this type of lifestyle would bring to someone his age. The movie charts his doomed relationship with Jean, a journalist played by Maggie Gyllenhaal, and an eventual rise back to professional success and sobriety. I am a huge fan of Maggie Gyllenhaal but in this role I wonder what direction she was given or personal choices she was making, Her character is so vague that at the end of the movie, I could not have really have explained why she became involved with Bad so quickly or why she doesn't give him a second chance. My most pointed criticism is for a last minute ploy that is supposed to drive home that Bad does not have many chances left. This comes in the form of him loosing Jean's young son in a public place. It's done in a clumsy and not very realistic way that smacks of "after school special" and is totally unneeded. We got the "he's an alcoholic" point the first three times he threw up in a trash can or toilet. My verdict is that Jeff Bridges was incredible at what he did but the movie itself was flawed by formula plotting.

Writing recently about "Happy Tears" gave me pause to think about my trajectory as a Parker Posey fan which began in the mid 90's with "Party Girl". Unfortunately the indie cult status of "Party Girl" means it has a very very very long wait on Blockbuster.com. They might as well admit that it will never ship. However today "The House of Yes" arrived in the mail. This is a brilliant, wicked film that might suffer from the accusation of being pretentious with it's over indulged, privileged characters and lightning fast witty dialogue. The story is that Marty Pascel (Josh Hamilton) has made the unbelievable blunder of bringing his mousey girlfriend (Tori Spelling) home to meet his wealthy, dysfunctional family on the very night they will all be virtually trapped together by a hurricane. The driving force of the family and the movie as a whole is Parker Posey as Marty's sister, Jackie-O. She in step with the weather outside is pretty much an evil, brilliant, psychotic (with the pills to prove it) bitch in a little black dress. An unhealthy obsession with Jackie Onassis and Marty are icing on the cake. Worse yet for the poor girlfriend, once back in the fold, Marty does very little to discourage Jackie-O and ultimately joins in her twisted games. Nothing ends well here unless you see the world through Jackie-O's eyes that is.

"House of Yes" also contains perhaps my favorite line of dialogue ever - "If people are going to start telling the truth around here, I'm going to bed".

If your experience with Parker Posey is one of "You've Got Mail" and "Scream 3" or worse yet "Superman Returns", I suggest taking a trip back to the 90's to see how she earned the title queen of the indies.

Friday night, we here at the MockingMovies household were in a movie-less funk with nothing to watch. Thank God, for Comcast giving us the option to spend too much money and watch movies that are still playing in theaters. The preview for "Happy Tears' presented what appeared to be a run of the mill dysfunctional family "dramedy" starring Rip Torn, Demi Moore, Parker Posey(this sold me on the movie) and Ellen Barkin. I have been a consummate fan of Parker Posey through her reign as the queen of the indies during the 90's and in her more conventional fare ("You've Got Mail" and "Scream 3"), and I had a feeling that she would raise this movie above the ordinary. I was not disappointed. There is so much going on here that is not hinted at in the trailer. Moore and Posey are sisters who have to return home to take care of their father ( Rip Torn) who is beginning to suffer from dementia. The family dynamic is quickly set up with Moore being the older, responsible sister who takes care of and shelters her younger, quirky, needy sister. Rip Torn walks the fine line between being the dark comedy offered by his dementia and the more weighty prospect of becoming a burden on his daughters. All of this is the run of the mill part I referred to before. The unexpected comes in the form of trippy fantasy sequences Posey's characters lapses into when confronted with anything remotely challenging and the fantastic Ellen Barkin. Barkin is a drugged up homeless woman and possible prostitute who having hit rock bottom appears to have moved into Rip Torn's house under the guise of being his nurse. The running joke is that spends the entire movie with a stethoscope around her neck.

There is much to enjoy here and I would highly recommend "Happy Tears" .

The universe and my own unique inability to waste time has been keeping me out of the theater lately; so I have been watching some old favorites when I have the chance. Today that chance came in the form of 2002's "Dummy" on IFC. I love movies populated by geeks, freaks and losers and "Dummy" definitely fits the bill. Adrien Brody plays Steven, our lovable but completely inept hero who living with his parents and jobless decides to pursue his secret dream of ventriloquism. Brody does a fantastic job inhabiting this awkward guy and also bringing to life his alter ego, the dummy. Of course, it always helps to throw a clunky pair of glasses on the good looking guy a'la Clark Kent. Great performances also by Illeana Douglas as Steven's sister who lives at home too, blames everybody else for her problems, but realizes she's too old to be asking, "Mom can I please borrow the car today".

Some of my biggest praise though goes to Milla Jovovich. She is Fangora (Fanny), Steven's loud obnoxious punk wannabe friend. Think of the person who talks too loud in public and drops the F bomb. You know, the person who might make you regret the eco-friendly decision to use public transportation. I don't think I have enjoyed her so much in a movie besides maybe my first encounter in "The Fifith Element". I hope maybe there is less 3D action zombie movies in her future and maybe something more like "Dummy"

In the end it all works out for our geeks, freaks and losers. Steven in some self medication works out his issues via the dummy and lands his love interest(Vera Farmiga). Fangora channels her anger through punk klezmar music. I don't think I can describe it; so check out this YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRHwyHRfklY&feature=related). Even Steven's sister lets go of her excuses and seems to find her footing. That's the magic of movies because let's face as interesting as characters like these are in movies, knowing them in the real world can be a bitch.

With a title like this I had better have some reasons for really not liking "Clash of the Titans"; so here is my best attempt to list my disappointment:

-I wanted more Greek gods. The opportunities thrown away by not using even Hera are mind boggling ( to me).

-A messy miss mash of throw away characters. I never connected with Perseus whose angst should be driving the story. Andromeda is boring although I did enjoy her drunk father and drag queen like mother. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't "the end is near" prophet in Argos remind you of someone who was headed to Bannaroo and took a wrong turn?

-Clunky special effects. I am not an expert on this. When effects are done well, I know it and enjoy. When they're not I recognize that too. Large scale CGI like the Kraken looked good but smaller effects like Medusa didn't blend well. Worse yet, on the ferry ride to the underworld, Charon ( hope I have that right, anyway the guy guiding the ferry) looked practically animatronic.

-Too much action at the expense of story. I hardly felt we were in the theater for 118 minutes because one fast action sequence moved quickly to another with very little downtime. I need the downtime if not to connect to the characters, then to at least feel that I am watching real people act and not just a CGI fest.

OK, there it is. I'm pinning my hopes on next week's "Kick-Ass" for a good movie experience.

Early in "New Moon", Edward, having decided to leave Forks with the Cullen clan in tow, tells Bella "Don't do anything reckless". I wondered if he remembered who he was talking to. This is Bella Swan, Forks' resident lady of infinite sorrows who exudes teen angst from her pores. Of course she goes off the deep end. After a reasonable period of music video like moping, she realizes that she can have visions of Edward if she is in danger. Don't worry, this is based on a Twilight book, so the self destructive behavior stays in reasonably safe teen territory - motorcycle riding and cliff diving. The visions themselves are a bit awkward. Done in an Obi- Wan sort of way, Edward delivers wooden lines that might as well be "Fasten your seat belt" or "Don't play with matches". Relief is on the way though. Bella develops a deep bond with friend Jacob Black ( Taylor Lautner). This relationship is soon on the rocks too when it appears that Jacob has dropped Bella to join a homo-erotic, Native American, Abercrombie & Fitch gang ( now that is a mouthful). It turns out his secret is a bit more mundane, at least for Forks. He is from a long line of werewolves who protect humans from vampires. Events conspire to bring Edward and Bella back together and we are all set up for her having to choose between the two.

This has been written with tongue firmly in cheek mainly because I recognize that I am not exactly the target audience for these movies. I can appreciate them in some ways but ultimately find the Lifetime movie teen melodrama a bit heavy. I have not read the books, so I may be wishing in vain but I do have a list of things I would like to see more of in the future movies:

(1) Let the adults come out and play more often. The scenes set in Italy featuring the "vampire council" were really good. I can never get enough Michael Sheen ("The Queen", "Frost/Nixon", "Underworld", "Alice in Wonderland") who literally chews up the scenery as Aro.

(2) More vampires and more vampire action! Dakota Fanning as bloodthirsty psychopath = good thing (Yes that's her all evil and red-eyed in the above trailer). Victoria becoming an actual threat would be nice. Oh, and the tourist "buffet" was a great touch.

(3) Let Kristen Stewart have some range. Reviews of "Twilight" often take shots at Kristen Stewarts acting. I don't know how much of that is based on her mumbling, deep sighs acting style in Twilight but she has done much better. I would suggest checking out "Speak" (2004), "The Cake Eaters" ( 2007) and "Adventureland" ( 2009). OK I might be fooling myself because there is a Bella Swan in all of her roles.

(4) Get rid of Bella's almost invisible friends from school or use them more. They appear to be starring in "Degrassi Jr. High" while Bella is in a big teen blockbuster. Hello, producers you have an Oscar nominee in the cast now - Anna Kendrick. Certainly she can be used a bit more than a couple of scenes where her main role is to roll her eyes and look at Bella like, "how did I end up with this freak as my friend".

"Twilight: Eclipse" is out later this summer; so let's see if this story can mature a bit along with the characters.

A formula movie can be a warm cozy place to spend a few hours when done right. Done wrong, you end up with a movie like "Did You Hear About the Morgans?" On paper a pairing between Hugh Grant (romantic comedy darling) and Sarah Jessica Parker (the very model of a plucky big city girl) sounds promising. They are Paul and Meryl Morgan a separated couple living the modern life on steroids - successful careers, uber busy schedules, constantly at their sides assistants and not very much happiness. Grant appears to be a bit chubbier and older than his usual on screen self. Probably a deliberate decision because he is groveling to get his wife back and the debonair charm he usually exudes would seem out of place. Parker plays it safe and basically comes across like a more jaded version of her Carrie Bradshaw character. In some lame plotting, they witness a murder and are ever so quickly ushered into protective custody. We get a out fish out of water comedy because the big city folks are sent to Wyoming. Once in WY, we are treated to every applicable cliché you can imagine. Sam Elliot and Mary Steenburgen are endearing as a law enforcement couple tasked with protecting the Morgans, but the plot never rises above a series of awkward culture clashes. We have bears, horseback riding, Walmart like super stores, and an entire cast of creepy taxidermied animals. Two sort of surreal the moments in the movie that were amusing: (1) Wilferd Brimley as the ultimate meat eating, smoking Democrate hating red state kind of guy. I was not even sure he was still alive. I had some type of impression that an animatronic stand in was doing the Liberty Medical commercials. (2) The red state rodeo crowd dancing to a country version of Queen's "A Crazy Little Thing Called Love. Would Freddie Mercury be spinning in his grave?

"Green Zone opens on the "shock and awe" bombing of Baghdad in March 2003, and I bet it will instantly take you back to that date. I was sitting in the break room at work thinking, "Oh my god, it's actually happening". The movie's main characters may be thinking the same thing because we find them in the midst of chaos and disorder. Chief Warrant Office Roy Miller (Matt Damon) is trying to get his men to a site where they have intelligence that there are WMDs or at least proof an active WMD program. The problem is they are having to fight literal and figurative enemies ( think traffic in a war zone) to get there. As usual there is the tiresome criticism director Paul Greengrass' love of the shaky camera but here I have to say it works well( I've always liked it. People who act as if they have to take dramamine to sit through a Bourne movie are whiny in my opinion). I cannot think of any other way to really capture the frantic, crazy feeling of being in a war zone. "Green Zone" hammers the point home pretty quickly that Miller is not a happy camper. Every time they fight their way to one of these WMD sites, they come back empty handed. Sometimes finding no evidence of activity for years. Miller eventually takes matters in to his own hands, going rogue to find one of Iraq's most wanted and answer the WMD question for himself. Once on the move, I thoroughly enjoyed the action. We are treated to a rollicking ride through Baghdad while Miller deals with insurgents and shady government types from both sides. The only thing that might hinder "Green Zone" is also it's best asset - the overtly political plot. While the Bourne movies only skimmed the surface of post 9/11 politics, "Green Zone" dives in the deep end. In the first 30 minutes we are treated to character dialogue that pretty mirrors the whole, "why are we in Iraq" debate that is still ongoing. The central issue is the lack of WMDs and direct evidence of an imminent threat. The problem? We still don't have answers on this yet. The politics are still too raw. Take a look at discussion boards including the one on this site. People are ripping each other apart arguing over "Green Zone". See "Green Zone" if you are so inclined. I'm happy that I did, but you might have to leave politics in the lobby.

I don't know if the movie, "Pirate Radio" is on people's radar but I would recommend checking it out. The DVD release date is not until mid April but you can find it airing right now via Comcast On-Demand. As a self describe anglophile, I cannot resist movies filled with quirky British characters and was pleasantly surprised at the chance to see it earlier than expected.

It is a coming age fable of sorts about young Carl ( his nickname throughout the movie) who after being kicked out of boarding school is sent by his mother to spend time with his godfather ( the always incredible Bill Nighy as Quentin) in the mid 1960's. The twist is that Quentin runs a pirate radio station off the coast of England and Carl finds himself at the very center of the sex, drugs and rock'n roll generation. As Carl navigates his way through becoming an adult we are also given glimpses of Sir Allister Dormandy, a British government official, who is obsessed with shutting down any and all pirate radio stations ( if you see this movie, do you think it is a coincidence that our villain bears a striking resemblance some sort of pasty faced British version of Hitler?). He is given some of the more over the top lines too. Describing the country's rock'n roll fans as, "drug takers, law breakers and bottom bashing fornicators". I'm still trying to figure that last one out.

This is all pretty standard fare for a movie about youthful rebellion through music. For the most part this movies has great laughs only faltering during some "American Pie" type silliness about Carl loosing his virginity. It's at it's best though when the music does the talking. We are treated to various whimsical scenes of Brits from all walks of life dancing to some of the great rock classics. I called this a fable and I'll leave it to viewers to sort of historical accuracy, but just don't buy into the movie's conceit that it is about real events. It's more about capturing the mood of a time and place.

Sometimes I just know from the first trailer that I am going to love a movie and this was the case with "Up in the Air". George Clooney in the guise of Ryan Bingham plays my favorite type of movie character - he is jaded, disconnected and likes it that way. He travels constantly and has it down to a science; so much so that I would say he is a airport screener's wet dream. His job is to travel around the country and fire people for upper and middle management types who can only be described as spineless. Sound depressing? It's not for him. He dreads spending time at home and has become a legend at the art of firing people. He gives his victims a short speech about how life has handed them an opportunity to follow their dreams, pats them on the head and sends them on the way. We are given a brilliant montage of reaction shots with the actors looking directly in the camera. My favorite is who I will call the "fuck you" lady who deserves some sort of Oscar. In his defense thought, you do feel that Ryan is not just spouting Oprah pop psychology and really believes the "follow your dreams" speech.

Since we meet him at the height of his game, we know he is in for a fall. This comes in the form of two women who in my opinion steal the movie. The first is Natalie (Anna Kendrick who is totally wasted in Twilight by the way) who threatens to ground Clooney by having possibly the worst idea in corporate history - cut down on travel costs and fire people via I- Chat. The second is Alex ( Vera Farmiga) a woman Ryan meets in a hotel lounge. In one of my favorite scenes the two flirt in the language of two people who spend too much time on the road. In some very witty dialogue they turn frequent flyer mile perks into near sexual fetish and share war stories about joining the mile high club. Alex tells Ryan very early on to think of her as "him but with a vagina" and by the end of the movie, trust me, you will believe her. I guess I gave my opinion away to early but I did really enjoy this movie from beginning to end.

One warning though, be very afraid if you are ever called into an office at work and sit down in front of a computer to see a smiling, oh so sincere, "Clooney"esque face looking back.