Reviews

Romantic-comedies have become such a static routine in Hollywood that even the two lead characters in "Friends with Benefits" have memorized its blueprint. Earlier scenes present us with mild optimism when we learn that our impending couple is considerably aware of the genre's most common clichés. But their advantage leads to no benefit when they go right ahead and implement the things they were formerly trying to rebuke.

By the movie's unsatisfying end, we get the feeling that the purpose of the references was to inform us that what we are watching is no different from the rest of its pack. Instead of utilizing its awareness as a stepping stone for improvement, "Friends with Benefits" lingers in mediocrity by idly pre-apologizing to the faults it plans to commit. What's the point?

What the movie lacks in screenplay is made up for in its cast. Reader, you have no idea how refreshed I was to see a rom-com that isn't starring either Katherine Heigl or Ashton Kutcher. These two actors have spent so much time within the territory of their preferred genre that their careers have gone from complacent to comatose. Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher are to romantic comedies as Milla Jovovich and Jason Statham are to action movies. A personal note of mine that may also come in handy in your future is this: Movies starring Heigl or Kutcher must be so bad that only Heigl and Kutcher and would agree to star in them.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/friends-with-benefits-movie- review/

G.I. Joe: Retaliation is a no-brainer of a movie. If a supernatural force beyond understanding urged you to like "The Rise of Cobra", then it is likely that you will enjoy the sequel just as much. Bless you. However, if you hated the 2009 film at least half as much as I did, then you should be smart enough to avoid its 2013 follow-up. Besides, I'm pretty sure that you've long decided on whether you'll see this or not since it's already been out for almost three weeks.

Sigh. I shouldn't be writing this review. It's almost 1 in the morning and I have to be at work in a few hours. (Damn it! I have to be at work in a few hours!) So what gives? You see, movies that are as preposterous as "G.I. Joe: Retaliation" are the most fun to review. And, dear reader, when a movie like this is released, I cannot resist. Roger Ebert specialized in reviewing movies that are dumb beyond belief. I write this in further dedication to his spectacular life.

For the 15th time, Channing Tatum reprises his role as Channing Tatum. He isn't around for long through as he is quickly replaced by Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as the film's lead hero. The Rock (The Tooth Fairy) makes a better action star than Channing Tatum, which doesn't really say much for The Rock, since Justin Timberlake and even Jay Leno would also make a better action star than Tatum. With over 20 movies in his resume, Tatum's career highlight so far is playing a stripper in "Magic Mike". Is it about time for the 32-year-old non-actor to take a long, honest look at himself?

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/gi-joe-retaliation/

As soon as the first of many electrifying robot battles in "Real Steal" went underway, I found myself instinctively recalling old memories that I didn't know I still had. I remember how I used set aside furniture in the living room to create space for an arena. I would gather my toys in that arena, and our gang would have some fun. I thrashed them all around, pounded them against each other, and flung them against the ruthless ceiling. Things would be cooler if my stuff could do more than just withstand nonstop hammering, but it was a restriction that my imagination couldn't handle.

"Real Steel" is the giant robot action movie my inner child has been waiting for. It demonstrates deep affection for its robots by investing in aesthetic qualities that similar movies are indifferent to. Each machine is skillfully designed. All the robots enjoy such a specific shape, physique, color and theme that we can identify any of them upon sight. And because professional boxers were motion-captured to generate the mechanical fights we see on screen, the movements between these visually appealing robots are authentic and in harmony. Here is a good example of a special effects movie that doesn't depend on computers to do all the work.

The world in "Real Steel" has reached a time where man is no longer permitted to box. The roars of the crowd appear to like the replacement of human fighters: huge, towering robots that are assembled to disassemble their challengers through brute force. Robot boxing has become so popular a sport that we see it being held in vacant alleys, dark warehouses, and luxurious stadiums. This is the kind of sport that I would prefer to watch from afar. You do not want to be in the front row, uninsured, when one of those massive robots gets tossed out of the ring.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/real-steel-movie-review/

One scene that defines the stylish and disciplined vigor of "Drive" transpires inside a slim, narrow elevator. Our heroes enter the elevator; the doors slam shut. By the time they open again, we have been taken through a hint of suspense, a moment of intimacy, and finally, a burst of ultra-violence. That the movie was able to depict and contain three different moods in a limited space and time astounds me. This is the rare kind of movie that fully values its existence, using every second of its running time for its benefit.

"Drive" stars Ryan Gosling, the Oscar-nominated actor who was given more international appreciation in his previous work as Jacob Palmer in "Crazy, Stupid, Love". Here, a name eludes him as promotions only refer to his character as "Driver". The inquisitive effect of a screen name like Driver reminds us of Edward Norton's character in Fight Club, who was only identified in the credits as "Narrator". Both evoke the same aura of ambiguity, although the Gosling character is more subtle and composed.

Driver's professional and personal life is centered around cars. He occupies the role of a stunt driver for the movies. He also works as a mechanic, fixing cars when he's not flipping them on set. Beyond that, he also participates in robberies by agreeing to be the getaway driver. Driving seems to keep Driver occupied. He hardly ever speaks. Ask him a question, and his words halt after the answer is given. There are not more than two instances in the entire film where he speaks three sentences in a row. His quiet nature strays away from conventional personalities and takes us to a person so perplexing, even his fellow characters join the audience in trying to understand him.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/drive-movie-review/

Of all the second-rate comic book movies that has occupied most of 2011's summer, "Green Lantern" is the only one of its crowd without a saving grace. "Captain America: The First Avenger" saw a true hero in Steve Rogers, giving as much attention to his human character as with his superhuman attributes. It was the goofy playfulness of "Thor" that made its overall silliness acceptable. "X-Men: First Class" was a prequel that founded itself on prior knowledge, instead of avoiding it. "Green Lantern" doesn't have a singular thing that could make it more than what we already expect. It fulfills the requisites of the superhero genre, then immediately stops trying.

Millions of years ago, long before the nuisance of 3-D, an assembly of aliens called the Guardians formed an intergalactic peace-keeping organization. Each member, called a Green Lantern, was assigned to protect one of the 3,600 sectors of the universe. We're not sure how many planets or galaxies each sector covers, but we trust the judgment of the Guardians. With the whole universe accounted for, the blue, big headed Guardians have decided to spend the rest of their immortal lives in a planet called Oa. This peace is interrupted when a colossal, evil force named Parallax figured that it would be real evil if he started to eat planets; Earth and Oa are on his menu.

Meanwhile, on Earth, our central human characters who coincidentally all have daddy issues, are introduced. Hal Jordan is a reckless test pilot whose actions on the job are always questioned by his authorities. When a severely injured Green Lantern crash lands on our planet, Hal is the one chosen by the Lantern's ring as his replacement. His duty later lands him in Oa, where he meets the Guardians. Plot details are discussed, obvious questions are asked, and shallow dilemmas are regarded with undeserved seriousness as a delay for the obligatory climactic confrontation, like taking 90 minutes to get to a destination 60 minutes away.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/green-lantern-movie-review/

"Soul Surfer" is a based-on-fact film about the life of Bethany Hamilton, an optimistic, blissful young girl who rode lots of waves, lost an arm, and rode lots of waves some more. Back in 2003, when she was just thirteen years old, Bethany's left arm was bitten off by a shark. Now she is a champion surfer, renowned in her field of sport and admired by people worldwide who share similar disabilities.

What we have here is an incredible, inspirational story that's overshadowed by lazy, uninspired movie-making. In "Soul Surfer", Bethany's life has been reduced to formula, filtered through a lens of familiarization. The raw power of her story becomes covered with so much bland, Hollywood melodrama that very little of it makes is retained in the final product. Aaron Ralston should be pleased with what Danny Boyle did with his story; "127 Hours" was one of the best movies of 2010. However, if I was Bethany Hamilton, I'm not so sure if I would be pleased with what Sean McNamara did to my story.

There is the distraction of another surfer named Malina. She appears in the same competitions that Bethany participates in. She is that character who is selfish, and mean, and willing to play dirty if that's what it takes to win. Malina is only here to fill the role of a villain in a movie that doesn't need one. Is there really room for a character like her in a film dedicated to Bethany Hamilton? Another problem is the dialogue. Because the movie's aim is to inspire, we understand it for engaging in its epiphanies and being vocal about them. The mistake is in the decision to prolong them. It extends simple insights into lecture's length, as if we need extra space to get its point.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/soul-surfer-movie-review/

The foremost flaw of "REC 2" is its futile attempt to include a baffling, supernatural plot within its generic, but nonetheless scary, concept. To begin with, the first "REC" wasn't even the kind of film that opens itself to the possibility of a sensible sequel, but here it is anyway, along with the promise of a third and fourth installment.

"REC 2" is an immediate continuation of the original's conclusion. The fast-acting, death-inducing virus is still contained inside the quarantined apartment, surrounded by snipers and covered with some sort of special, government plastic. If there are any human survivors trapped inside, the authorities are determined to keep them in that state. We revisit the apartment when we follow a group of SWAT officers, who are commanded by a Health Official.

They charge into the zombie-infested building with thick armor and heavy weaponry, but their reasons for entering it in the first place are rather unclear. Surely, this isn't a rescue mission, for in the first film, anyone who tried to leave the building was rewarded with a bullet to the face. Once inside, we are informed that their objective is to come up with an antidote against a disease no one outside the apartment has contracted. Yes, a more reasonable option would be to burn down the building until it resembles dust, but no, because that idea wouldn't be enough for three more "REC" movies.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/rec-2-movie-review/

Nick, Dale and Kurt are average Americans with reasonable and respected intentions in life. Some of their aspirations are no different from our own. Nick is the hard-working office employee who is always the first to arrive and the last to leave. He dreams of a big promotion, which he clearly deserves. Dale is committed to the woman he loves. His plan is to marry her, sustaining their relationship through his earnings as a dentist's assistant. Kurt is content with his role in the chemical company he's in. He smiles in the thought that he could one day be in charge. Nick, Dale and Kurt are such harmless, typical fellas that, when they agree that it would be best to kill their bosses, we wonder how evil their superiors could be.

The bosses in "Horrible Bosses" are indeed what the title suggests them to be, and more. Besides being horrible, they're also psychotic, perverted, delusional, and mean. They make other people's life miserable because they can. They take advantage of their authority by engaging in activities that can only be classified as either immoral or illegal. I describe these bullies from observations I made during office hours. How do these people entertain themselves on a Holiday?

The first of three bosses is Dave Harken, played by Kevin Spacey. Dave is so skilled at publicly humiliating others that he might as well host the next Oscars. Dave knows that he can easily make Nick's dream come true, but won't. Next up is Jennifer Anniston's Dr. Julia Harris, the world's horniest dentist. Julia's instinctive habit of seducing the nearest conscious male would make an ordinary man rejoice, especially if you're her assistant, but not Dale. He fears that Julia's regular sexual stunts will jeopardize his engagement. And then there's Bobby Pellitt (Colin Farrell), who has recently took command of the chemical company that employs Kurt. Because everything that Bobby touches turns to a strip club, Kurt is not confident that the company will last long.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/horrible-bosses-movie- review/

"Scream 4", also known as "Scre4m", knows its genre well enough to prove its superiority over the dumb horror films it proudly mocks, but it doesn't come close to matching the quality of some of the great horror films it celebrates. Considering the franchise's satirical nature, the past decade has provided director Wes Craven and writer Kevin Williamson with much material to work with. The movie succeeds when it sticks to the self-aware antics that it's known for. Too bad this sequel often abandons this clever concept for ideas we've all grown familiar with.

Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), one of the survivors of the first three "Scream" films, has returned to Woodsboro to promote her new book. She unwisely decides to visit her hometown near the anniversary of the first Ghostface massacre. Since it was death anniversaries and her surprise visits that triggered the massacres, you would think Sidney would keep a safe distance from Woodsboro, but no worries. Upon news that a new Ghostface has started a killing spree, Sidney re-unites with fellow survivors, Dewey and Gale, who are now married. The mature age of the three has granted them a major advantage over the new generation of students. We all know that, in horror movies, adults have a lower mortality rate than teenagers.

The best thing about this franchise is that it occupies a world that acknowledges the existence of horror movies and the people who are obsessed with them. Almost every horror flick made in the past 30-40 years takes place in a different time and universe where there are no horror movies that could serve as a lifeline to its young characters. As a result, teenagers would always commit the same mistakes that would get them killed, or raped, or eaten. For example, when a victim is chased in her house, she would immediately run up the stairs instead of going out the back door, trapping herself and assuring her own death. The characters in the original "Scream" were fun because it was populated by smart, informed teenagers who ended up dead because of a smarter, better-informed villain.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/scream-4-movie-review/

"I Am Number Four" is an insolent and oblivious lump of trash that has been reused and recycled by countless studios controlled by cash- chugging dimwits. Even the most careless of eyes won't fail to notice its touches of unacceptable stupidity. The movie is so incompetently made that it doesn't even meet the incredibly low standards of a Dumb Action Movie. "I Am Number Four" is significantly lower than that.

The story revolves around a hunky, probably shape-shifting alien who is on a crucial mission to, uhm… Forget it. I have no idea what this is about. Why I can't tell you the movie's plot line may not exactly be my fault. In an earlier scene, Number 4, the alien, makes use of quick, lazy narration in an attempt to explain to us his past life, present predicament, and future threats. What we know is that he was originally from the planet Loraine, which was destroyed by the douchey Mogadorians. Nine children, blessed with extraordinary powers, were able to escape and flee to Earth with one guardian assigned to each of them. Number 4 was one of the children. The others are Number 1, 2, 3… and so on.

What we don't know are these: How did the Numbers travel to Earth? Why Earth? How did they land here without getting noticed? Why do they look like us? Can they change their appearance? How long have these invading imposters been here? What do they do for a living? Why do the Mogadorians want them dead? How did the Mogadorians land here without getting noticed? Since they've already killed Numbers 1, 2 and 3, how were they able to operate in stealth while basting their alien cannons in all directions? Why does Number 4 enroll in a school after finding out that the Mogadorians want him dead? Shouldn't he be busy with more important things? Does this movie have a subtle message that school should be prioritize above everything else? Or is just because aliens like to study real hard?

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/i-am-number-four-movie- review/

"Insidious" is a horror movie about an average family haunted with supernatural forces that possess a natural tendency to open lots of doors and make funny noises. Most fans of this subgenre will praise it not because it is an excellent film, but because the ones that came before it are infinitely much worse. Have you seen "The Haunting in Connecticut"?

The unlucky family in this horror film is the five members of the Lambert family. Each of them is terrorized by a mysterious creature, but most unlucky is young Dalton, who is in a deep sleep and would not wake up. A doctor says that he isn't in a coma. A psychic claims that his spiritual body is trapped in another dimension she likes to call, The Further. Dalton's parents, Josh and Renai, are, to say the least, confused. Whether any of these explanations makes sense or not is not a major concern, because the story mainly serves as an opening to provide scares.

"Insidious" is conscious of the genre's obvious clichés, but it avoids some of them by conforming to an unhelpful, alternative idea that is soon to be a cliché itself. Characters living in haunted houses are often so traumatized by the ghouls that they forget about the possible action of, you know, leaving the house. The Lambert family makes the practical decision of abandoning their home early on in the film, only to have their efforts thwarted when they are told that it's not the house that's haunted, but their son. "Oooooooo". So, instead of one haunted house, we get two haunted houses.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/insidious-movie-review/

It's a nervous feeling, you know, to wonder what kinds of dirty little monsters crawl all over my keyboard when I'm in peaceful sleep. The scariest killers are always those whom we cannot see. "Contagion" is a frightful film because it preys on the universal fear of germs and the diseases they carry with them. It treats its topic with a level of maturity that we can apply in our own surroundings. During the screening I attended, I became more and more cautious of the coughing guy seated in the row behind me.

The epidemic crisis in "Contagion" finds a realistic tone by lining itself with other historical events. If we look back at the time where a major outbreak like The Black Plague took its toll, we'll learn that we don't always get the cure or vaccine as soon as we need them. Some diseases are still without a cure until today. (What would things be like if the common cold was fatal?) The movie gives a convincing depiction of how the present world would handle a similar crisis.

An element that elevates "Contagion" from other "outbreak movies" is that it fully realizes the weight of its threat. As a result, we are spared with the false need of a tangible villain in the form of organizations with nothing but money in mind. Though there is a character by Jude Law who theorizes such things, his accusations only exist to be proved wrong. Every health official in the movie does their job, and they do it well. To watch this movie is to grow a renewed sense of cleanliness. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go wipe my keyboard.

Official review here: http://localmoviereview.com/contagion-movie- review/

I viewed "Hanna" with a mild curiosity. It feels that it started out as an average revenge thriller that was later enhanced by above average talents. The cast and crew of this film did more for the story that it could have asked of them. Sure, a lot of shooting and chasing goes around, but you can sense an evidence of planning and patience within them. The creators of "Hanna" operated with a vision of an audience with an attention span slightly longer than that of others.

The film opens somewhere near the Arctic Circle. A teenage girl, named Hanna (Saoirse Ronan), has just killed a deer with an arrow, followed by a bullet. She drags the carcass of the animal through the deep, icy snow to a cabin in the woods where her father, Erik (Eric Bana), is waiting for her. Not the best conditions for a teenage girl, I'm sure. We learn that father and daughter have been in this place since Hanna was still an infant. She has been homeschooled all her life. And because Erik is a wanted CIA agent, he forms Hanna into the perfect assassin.

Not everyone gets to master martial arts and firearms at that early age, and the secluded home of Hanna offers little distractions. But, this lifestyle is not without disadvantages. Except for her own father, Hanna has not known any other person. Her books tell her that the world contains so much, and she knows that she is a stranger to almost all of them. That is probably why she was more than eager to find out that her mission will require her to travel in order to eliminate lots of bad guys, including a secretive CIA officer, Marissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett).

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/hanna-movie-review/

"Just Go with It" is another step down for Adam Sandler's career. It starts inside the lethargic world of Sandler and ends within the tired formula of the romantic-comedy genre. It's a long, slow slide from crudeness to mediocrity. The morons that are the film's characters are appalling upon the moment of their introduction. Unfunny and mentally incompetent, these people roam around the movie's dead plot until it's time for them to learn their life lesson while somehow finding a way to remain stupid.

Most of the film's first half is devoted to Adam Sandler's compulsion to fool around. Most of the people are around him should be either a hateful jerk or a dumb stereotype, so his character would blend in with the crowd. He plays a rich plastic surgeon, Danny Maccabee. Danny's heart was broken many years ago. As a coping mechanism, he pretends to be a depressed loser in front of pretty women. His life is so miserable that the women have no choice but to sleep with him just to cheer him up.

One night, he meets a cute blonde named Palmer. His pre-planned lies result in their physical intimacy. He wakes up in the morning convinced that Palmer and himself are destined to be together… forever. Danny is apparently delusional enough to base his conviction on a one night stand. Coincidentally, Palmer is dumb enough to agree with Danny.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/just-go-with-it-movie- review/

"Singin' in the Rain" has provided me with probably the most joyful cinematic experience so far in my life. The movie functions entirely on happy juice. Some movie characters can light up a room; the main cast in "Singin' in the Rain" can light up the whole darn street. Many profound critics, like Roger Ebert and Pauline Kael, has declared it as the best Hollywood musical ever made. No wonder.

Great movies have a way of beating time. Their original audience is replaced by a new generation, but the positive reception stays the same. Curiously, "Singin' in the Rain" earned more praise as it got older. Though a success at the box office upon its release in 1952, people were late to give the praise it really deserved. It seemed that the increasing admiration continued with the following generations. And as I saw the film for the first time only a few nights ago, I was struck and stuck in a state of awe. It's been a long, long while since Hollywood has made a musical like this one, hasn't it?

"Singin' in the Rain" is a marvelous movie for many reasons, but watching it at this point in time highlights some things about it that has become a rarity in today's movies, making these things all the more treasured. Consider, for instance, its attention to a sense of movement. The sets are simple and the props are few, but one can tell that the makers of "Singin' in the Rain" have spent a whole lot of time and training to the people and their performances. And these performances were about feelings and passion and about the art of performance itself. Most musicals today, and other genres too, have learned to place too much dependence on money, for the sake of money. The recent excess of 3- D movies may prove a point.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/singin-in-the-rain-movie- review-2/

There's a sad routine going on with romantic comedies nowadays. Bad ones, like "Life as We Know It", enjoy a wide release and a fat box office, while good ones, like "Flipped", remain unknown to many. But then, to our surprise, we are introduced to "Crazy, Stupid, Love". Here is a romantic comedy written with intelligence, driven by its story, and delivered with actors who are both competent and charming. And, what do you know, people actually know about it.

The movie is about a set of individuals who have, in their own personal way, lost track of true love. A few of them may have never even experienced it in the first place, but their story is about how they get there. Let me tell you about them real quick. Cal and Emily Weaver (Steve Carrell and Julianne Moore) are a middle-aged couple whose marriage has hit a major bump. Emily has confessed to being guilty with adultery, and is now requesting for a divorce.

Cal, in obvious shock, is swift to break the news to his children. Most affected is 13-year-old Robbie, who is in the middle of his quest of winning the heart of his 17-year-old baby sitter, Jessica. Kids, at the height of their hormones, can be relentless in their romantic pursuits. There is a lot of comedy between their encounters.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/crazy-stupid-love-movie- review/

Common sense is not welcome in a movie called "Cowboys & Aliens". No other non-sequel title in 2011 has given a more tempting wink to the Summer Movie Audience. It presents a preposterous yet enticing idea that feels destined to be a silly, dumb, fun action-comedy. Led by "Ironman" director Jon Favreau, and guided by familiar names like Ron Howard and Steven Spielberg, we feel confidence in its production.

We tone our brains down in eager wait, only to be left wondering in the end why a concept ready for fun was treated with a large and unnecessary amount of seriousness. It forces upon itself a certain level of depth, which the movie has no time for. The attempts at a heavier story prolong "Cowboys & Aliens" to a running time of 118 minutes, where much of it is composed of overlong explanations and faulty, predictable drama. The bossy jerk learns to cooperate, the useless son learns to practice obedience, and the angry rebel learns to smile. Haven't we seen all of these before? Do they really have a place in a movie called "Cowboys & Aliens"?

The film opens with a wanted criminal, Jake Londergan, waking in the dry desert. Besides the fact that he's suffering from memory loss, Jake is battered, bleeding, and without shoes. (Jake is having a bad day.) On his left arm, is an alien bracelet precisely made to blow stuff up, like the Predator's! How did he come into possession of such an item? Did he trade his shoes for it?

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/cowboys-and-aliens-movie- review-2/

Let me get things straight first. I enjoyed "An Expected Journey" as I was viewing it. From the film's first half hour, I could tell that it wasn't going to be an event as grand and glorious as any of the "Lord of the Rings" movies, which was just fine by me. Though weighed down by several substantial flaws, I felt a mild satisfaction when the credits started to roll. The verdict of a movie reviewer should always be based on the immediate experience, and on that notion I should label "An Unexpected Journey" a success. But my later convictions overruled the other, and I realize that I cannot award a positive rating to a movie that could have easily been great but chose not to.

The three volumes that comprised Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" were made into three different films. That's over 1,300 pages translated into nine hours of film. And while "An Unexpected Journey", 2013's "The Desolation of the Smaug", and 2014's "There and Back Again" are the components of another planned trilogy, there are all based on a single Tolkien novel, 1937's "The Hobbit", which is only around 300 pages long. Does Peter Jackson really have enough material for a trilogy? We don't know yet, but judging on this first installment, it seems that he will stretch his way to his second billion-dollar franchise. Every single sequence in this introductory film is prolonged, and several other scenes feel unnecessary. The story itself is compelling, but the deadweight pacing prevents us from being compelled.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/hobbit-unexpected-journey/

"Sucker Punch" ain't no movie. "Sucker Punch" is an excess of testosterone vomited into a reel of celluloid until it is violently splashed into the faces of its audience. The movie's advertisements are diligent in declaring its promise: "You will be unprepared." They were right. I was not prepared for the overwhelming atrocity that I had to bear during the course of its running time. By the movie's end, I felt that my senses had been pummeled to dust.

The plot, if that's what you call it, is this: A grieving girl who has just lost her mother has been framed by her stepfather for murder, and is now imprisoned in a mental institution. A lobotomy awaits her. So, in the meantime, she creates a fantasy world of her own. Within that fantasy world, she creates another fantasy world. That's twice the fantasy. It's kinda like "Inception", only stupid.

The girl's fantasy actually belongs to Zack Snyder, writer and director. One of his most popular films is "300", a movie where its heroes wage war wearing nothing but a cape and their underwear, so the enemy could marvel at the sight of their abs, and get distracted. In "Sucker Punch", five young women charge into battles with their short skirts and high heels. In the fantasy world, the second one, the girls are against kamikaze robot bombers, blazing angry dragons, giant samurais, and, of course, a few hundred steam-powered Nazi zombies. Movies by Zack Snyder aren't about what's rational or comprehensible. Reaching its truest form in "Sucker Punch", Snyder makes movies to share with the world, his imagination, which was the vomit I was talking about earlier.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/sucker-punch-movie-review/

Ironic, isn't it, how "Rio" uses an outlined plot and a standard story to produce a wacky, out-of-control party where most of its participants either have wings or fur. Humans may have a hard time keeping up with these singing, dancing, rapping animals, especially if two of them are voiced by will.i.am and Jamie Foxx.

"Rio" opens with a lively performance in the jungle. Birds sweep through the air and swerve through the trees. Consistent through the rest of the film, this sequence is bright and colorful. The birds maintain a low height, probably with a fear of being sucked into jet engines. A baby macaw admires the view from a hole in a tree until everyone is interrupted and caged by a group of poachers. How rude.

Fate is very kind to the baby macaw, who later finds itself in the hands of a caring little girl in Minnesota. Years pass. Linda and her pet bird, Blue, are all grown up. Because Blue was captured very early in his life, he never did learn to fly. Linda is not to blame for Blue's flightless lifestyle. When a bird pushes its baby a cliff, it's called normal parenting. But when a human does the same thing to young ones, it's called animal cruelty.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/rio-movie-review/

In September of 2008, we witnessed the collapse of companies, the loss of jobs, and the downfall of the worldwide economy. What we didn't witness, however, is how a few businessmen earned hundreds of millions of dollars as a result of it. We were told that this economic crisis was an unpleasant accident, but no. Turns out, we are at a time where the idea of bankrupting countless of families to the point of homelessness is a feasible option as long as it generates a profit.

"Inside Job" is a hard-hitting, eye-opening, rage-inducing documentary that meticulously informs us how the entire world was screwed over by the giants of Wall Street. The movie points its fingers to the, excuse me… thieves… responsible for the recent economic crisis. Most of us were affected. Many of us are still recovering. Who knows? Maybe a few of us hit rock bottom and stayed there.

And for what cost? A short montage in the movie shows the vast kingdom these businessmen enjoy. They have bought more than enough mansions to make Oprah scratch her head. To spot them not wearing an expensive suit is just about as shocking as seeing me wear one. After being made aware of how rich these bastards really are, we stop looking for reasonable explanations behind their criminal actions. I think one of them just wanted an 8th private jet.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/inside-job-movie-review/

The early 1940's represents tough times. A horrible war is being fought, and Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) strongly believes that sweet victory will be embraced by the side that places more confidence in men than in weapons.

The United States of America needs the best soldiers they can find, and in comes a young man with an unparalleled desire to serve his country. His name is Steve Rogers. He is an asthmatic and weighs less than a hundred pounds. If he's also missing half a toenail, then he'd remind me of myself five years ago. At home, he is constantly bullied, bad- mouthed, and beaten up.

Steve may not have the muscles that are required for the ideal soldier, but he has the heart. Thankfully, Doctor Erskine (Stanley Tucci) sees the goodwill in Steve and offers him an opportunity no 90-pound asthmatic could resist. You see, the military has developed a special technology that, once inserted in the body, could permanently alter human cells and make you much meatier without having to go to the gym. Sounds like super steroids to me, but what the heck. Let's continue.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/captain-America-movie- review/

"Teeth" is a movie about a set of teeth that is not located inside a mouth. It is also a movie where an exploitive gynecologist finds four of his severed fingers on the floor after they are brutally bitten off of his hand. And if you know what a gynecologist does, then you may have already discovered that the preceding occurrence is the work of a vagina with teeth. This will be identified as shocking for most of its viewers, but even more so for the stubborn men who try to take advantage of a pretty, slightly-mutated girl named Dawn.

Multiple castrations are performed to strip men of their masculinity, but we must understand that this particular crime is passive in context. Do we ever see Dawn's genitals creep through the night and mutilate men while they're alone in peace? No. We realize that Dawn's "additional teeth" only attacks when it is first attacked, that it only causes violence when it is first violated.

"Teeth" is a movie that's bloody from the waist down. It targets men with impure and selfish motives against women. Those with methods more vicious than others are suggested to abstain not in respect, but in fear. In a scene where a man cries in pain in exchange for his perversity, the least he could hope for, with thoughts of reconstructive surgery in the future, is that Dawn's additional teeth is only there to bite, and not swallow.

More reviews here: http://localmoviereview.com/

The first minutes of "17 Again" are proud to present a shirtless and sweaty Zac Efron. Now observe yourself. Observe yourself, real hard. How did that first sentence made you feel? Did it excite you? Discouraged you? Made you laugh? Anything? I ask you this because that feeling will most likely stay with you for the rest of the film.

Now girls, calm down. I can explain the negative rating. You see, I'm one of the guys. How would you feel if you watched a movie about Vanessa Hudgens with nothing to be about except to remind you that it's starring Vanessa Hudgens?

More reviews at: http://localmoviereview.com/

Bear with me. This shouldn't take long.

A long, long time ago, there was a war between the humans and vampires. Those fanged bloodsuckers happen to be very strong, and mankind was forced to retreat within the protected city of the Church. In come the Priests, a group of specialized warriors who can slay the vampires so fast and easily, they could have arrived before mankind was threatened to extinction.

Before I continue, I feel that I must inform the younger generation that these vampires neither sparkle nor lust after a woman who can be described by rearranging the word "lust."

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/priest-movie-review/