Defending Your Life

(1991)

Alexis says:

2.5 STARS

Albert Brooks wrote, directed and starred in this romantic comedy about the afterlife where you have to defend your life while eating all you want to. It was a cute and clever comedy, I can't really say anything all that negative about it except that I just wasn't really impressed. The film was creative and clever in the made to make you feel at home afterlife but the story was a little to predictable and formulaic for my taste.

This film is cute enough to sit through, just don't go in with too high of expectations. If you want a funny take on the afterlife with a little bit of a love story mixed in, this film isn't all that bad.

Todd Says:

2 STARS

I found this movie to be a bit on the dull side. It was, I think, supposed to be a 'feel-good' movie, but the only thing to feel good about is that you can eat as much as you want after you die. Who knew that the afterlife would be one big all-you-can-eat buffet?

Anyway, the main character is on trail in the afterlife for living with too much fear. Disappointingly, those in charge don't seem to care that the guys life was shallow and dedicated to making money. I also found it a bit of a stretch the way the guy reaches his personal salvation.

Basically, this movie is interesting only in that it is a new spin on afterlife mythology, but as far as presentation goes it was a little blah. You may or may not like this film, but the chances are just as good that you may be offended by the whole premise.

Rocky

(1976)

Alexis says:

3.5 STARS

This film came from Target packaged with Raging Bull. Rocky, in my opinion is a far better boxing/sports film even if it isn't based on a real boxers life story.

Rocky is an inspiring tale of an underdog getting a chance at the big time. I usually loathe Stallone movies but Rocky is so good in both it's writing (Stallone) and the acting that I really have to give this film credit for really exceeding my expectations.

One thing I really enjoyed about this film was the love story that evolves between Rocky and Adrian (Talia Shire). The film felt very real and the love story was no exception to this.

In all, Rocky is a good sports film that has really held up over the years.

Todd Says:

3.5 STARS

Rocky is a classic for a reason. It is an intense story about a guy who is basically a loser, but gets a chance to prove that he has heart. It's also a nice story about two misfits that find each other.

I would recommend Rocky to anyone, wether you are looking for a good action, drama, or even a feel good movie. Rocky covers all the bases.

Rushmore

(1998)







Alexis says:





3.5 STARS

Rushmore is a charming tale written and directed by Wes Anderson who can be either hit or miss in my opinion. I found Rushmore to be on the hit side.

Max Fischer (Jason Schwartzman) is a 10th grader at Rushmore, an elite academy where he is the founder of most things and the head of everything else in the extracurricular department, where he falls in love with a teacher and life slowly begins to crumble under him in a funny, touching manner. Schwartcman is maybe the best I have ever seen him, he doesn't get on my nerves like he usually does and he pulls off the 10th grade genius wonderfully.

Rushmore is a good comedy, but it is also slightly dramatic, when Cat Stevens 'The Wind' started I thought I might even shed a tear. It is definitely worth your time.

Todd Says:

3.5 STARS

Rushmore is one of those off-beat quirky little comedies that isn't going to be for everybody's tastes. Sometimes the jokes are almost to subtle to catch, but when they do they work well.
I enjoyed watching as the 10th grade mastermind's entire world unravels as he fights for the love of an older woman. The comedy of this film is based on people's ability to be completely oblivious when it suits them. Which, unfortunately, is a fairly accurate representation of modern society.

Anyway, Rushmore is worth watching. You should find plenty about this movie funny.

Harlem Nights

(1989)

Todd Says:

3.5 STARS

A gangster spoof that doesn't forget that a spoof is still a movie and therefore requires a plot. Eddie Murphy writes and directs this movie about a nightclub owner in Harlem who is being muscled out by the big Italian Mob. Equal parts comedy/action/crime drama, Harlem Nights is one of those over the top kind of movies that works.

The story and acting are great, which in itself sets this apart from most comedies. Eddie Murphy, as Eddie Murphy basically with his signature laugh/snort, stars as the nightclub owners son and psuedo-thug Quick. Honestly, this was just an alright performance by Murphy and by far the worst in the film. If Eddie had done half as good acting as he did writing and directing, this would have been a much better movie.

All in all though, this is a good fun comedy that is worth seeing.

Alexis says:

3 STARS

Harlem Nights was way funnier than I thought it was going to be, but then again Eddie Murphy and Richard Pryor are about the funnies comedians of their time. Murphy does a great job writing and directing and his acting is about where it always is but he is still a funny guy. (are we really supposed to believe that Harlem Nights was made because Murphy wanted to star in a period piece or is that just another one of his jokes?).

The film is all around funny and well written, they don't jeopardize the film by failing to come up with a good, sturdy plot. Other than the f- word being thrown around a bit much this is one hilarious film. But then I would probably rather see a film making fun of gangsters than see another film about gangsters.

Raging Bull

(1980)

Todd Says:







1 STARS







Raging Bull may just be one of those movies that you either love or hate, without much possibility of middle ground. I'm not one of those diehard Scorsese fans who love everything he does. On the contrary, I think that his movies are overly similiar in both style and context. Raging Bull proved to be no exception for me.







This movie being very early on in both De Niro's and Pesci's careers, I still see the same old tough-guy gangster performance from both of them in almost every scene. The story is about an emotionally unstable boxer whose life slowly unravels due to his temper and paranoia. I found it hard to feel any real sympathy for the guy, as Scorsese doesn't really round him out very well.







If you like sports movies, this really isn't one. The fights are so abridged to make room for the out of the ring violence that you never really find yourself caring about the boxer's career. If you are a true Scorsese or De Niro fan than this is probably worth a watch for you, but mostly, I'm just tired of the same old same old from these guys.


Alexis says:

1 STAR

Often movies come out that are 'based' on real events or real people and sometimes even based on personal memoirs, such as Raging Bull, which was based on boxer Jake LaMotto's book. However, the screen play was rewritten and rewritten and eventually (and supposedly) the final draft was written by De Niro and Scorsese. So when I say that I don't like this film I believe I am being more critical of the director and the direction he took this story in than I am being critical of LaMotta's life.

I didn't care for the jagged filming with short fight scenes, this is a movie about a boxer right? I am not surprised that this movie got mixed reviews, but am surprised at it's now cult-like status. De Niro and Pesci aren't bad, but they aren't great either. It's impressive that De Niro got in such great shape to play the younger LaMotta and then gained sixty pounds to play the older LaMotto, but that isn't enough to make this a 5 star performance in my opinion.

I just wanted it to be over, I kept hoping for a point and checking the time. I couldn't feel sorry for LaMotta and his bad choices and selfish behavior and I didn't really care for the scene sequencing or the lack of fighting in a supposed boxing movie. I am still having a hard time seeing what all the fuss is about and wondering if I just don't get Scorsese.

The Illusionist

(2006)

Todd Says:

3.75 STARS

This, unfortunately, is one of those movies that you can't watch too often. It is a true mystery, and once you've seen it the first time you find yourself picking up the clues too easily on the second viewing. However, the first time you watch it the mystery falls together seemlessly, and even on a second viewing I could not find any major holes in the story.

Ed Norton and Paul Giamatti and great as usual, but even Jessica Biel does a good job in this one. The Illusionist is a movie about a magician, but it is also a movie about perception of reality. A love story and a mystery and a thriller all cleverly rolled together.

I enjoyed this movie very much, and I think that you should too.

Alexis says:

3.5 STARS

This film came out about the same time as The Prestige, which we saw first. Seeing this one second after thoroughly unenjoying The Prestige, I really enjoyed it. The story came together well and I rather enjoyed the somewhat surprise that came after all was revealed. All of the acting was rather good, I am becoming a Giamati fan with every movie he makes.

This is a good film worth your viewing. However, I must add that the film did lose a bit of it's luster after the first viewing.

Harold And Maude

Todd Says:



4 STARS



This movie is a truly unexpected treasure. Released in 1971, the only thing dated about this movie is the wardrobe. About an unlikely pair of misfits who fall in love, Harold and Maude will make you appreciate life again, in all its fragility and wonder.



Harold, a morose teen who is bored with life, meets Maude, an older woman whose love of everything about life rings out in stark contrast, and the on screen chemistry is instantaneous. The movie shifts from darkly funny to optimistically hopeful to heart-breakingly sad as smooth as possible. Some say that the attraction between the two lovers is off-putting, but if you can't manage to overcome your ageism and enjoy the story for what it is then you're going to be the one missing out.



I highly recommend that you take the time to watch this if you never have, and if it's been a while it probably wouldn't hurt to watch it again.


Alexis says:

4.5 STARS

Recently I was thumbing through 1001 Movies to See Before You Die and I came across Harold and Maude, the title was familiar but that was all. Within hours of reading about the film I had it ordered and headed to my home from Amazon. The story was intriguing and so were the reviews I came across. It seemed you either loved or hated this film.

I fall quite clearly into the camp of people who see this film as the gem it really is. After almost 4 decades the themes in this movie are as fresh as they were when the film was released. This film is funny, original, touching, entertaining and the music by Cat Stevens is fitting and rather enjoyable.

Harold and Maude is the tale of an unlikely relationship forged between two people somewhat at a crossroads in their lives. Some people may find the relationshop offputting. The same people perhaps that couldn't see Brokeback Mountain for the love story that it was. This film proves that love knows no age, race, nationality etc.

Though the film is approaching 40 years old it is still worth a viewing, I hope you will and I don't think you'll regret it.

The Interpreter

(2005)



Todd Says:





3.5 STARS





This is a pretty good political suspense drama, and being an anti-fan of Nicole Kidman's typical work, I will admit that she does a pretty decent job here. The whole cast does actually. The whole crew does, but this movie just never reaches the level of greatness that it's trying for.





Sean Penn, who is almost always great, plays a character so bogged down with his own irrelevant side story, which is never explored very deeply, that he has a hard time getting you to focus. Which may or may not have been the writer's or director's intentions. But the sublte difference between a conflicted hero and a confused one are easily lost here.





Nicole Kidman is left to carry this movie almost alone, even in the company of such great talent, and she does a good job. Her character is the story, so I won't go too deep, but this is a rich and well told character. Good work Kidman, Penn I want to see you after practice.





At the end, after we've seen the story and mystery unravel we're confronted again with a painful scene about Penn's character elusive past trama. But, if you can get past that, or maybe even into it, I think that you'll like this one. It will be worth your time, I think.




Alexis says:

3 STARS

When this film came out I was skeptical because of Nicole Kidman who can do both good and not so good work but I decided that I wanted to see it because of what seemed like an intriguing plot and Sean Penn who is almost always good.

The only disappointment here was Penn who's character was more than just a little bit of a letdown, not only did the character seem not well written but also poorly acted. Aside from Penn's federal agent gone boring the film had a lot to offer, there was suspense and drama and not to much effort into turning Penn and Kidman into lovers (boy do I hate when films go that route without cause or desire from the story).

The story was well thought out (except maybe for Penn's background) and well carried out. I had my guesses but it kept you wondering until the climax just what exactly was going on. It sursprises me even to say this, but this wasn't all that bad of a political crime thriller.

Rescue Dawn

(2006)

Todd Says:

3.75 STARS

This is a movie about the capture and escape of a real American pilot, Dieter Dengler played by Bale, during the Vietnam war. Most of the story takes place in a prison camp somewhere in the jungle, where several American pilots and collaborators are being held. The scenes are done perfectly to convey the sense of helplessness and hopelessness that the prisoners where feeling. "The jungle is the prison" one of the other prisoners tells Christain Bale's character, and I think that the director did a great job at getting that point across.

This film does not over-glamorize war, in fact it does the opposite. There are no Rambo characters, invincible and afraid of nothing. Instead there is a group of tired, scared, nearly defeated men trying to survive under the worst conditions imaginable.

This movie is dark and gritty, yet hopeful at the same time. If you like war movies or true stories this would be a great choice, but I think that most people will enjoy this movie.

Alexissays:

3 STARS

Some of my favorite films about war and conflict are about Vietnam so I was pretty interested in this based on true accounts film about a U.S. fighter pilot shot down in Laos circa 1965. Unfortunately, I couldn't seem to get to the point of really caring about the main character. Dieter Dengler, portrayed byChristian Bale, who seems to be hit or miss to me, just seemed a little to over pompous and sure of himself. He wasn't really all that likable and knowing that this is based on the true accounts of a veteran I knew there wasn't really anything that could have been changed and kept the same true feel.

However, costars Steve Zahn and Jeremy Davies were exceptionable, especially Davies in his emaciated capacity after losing only 33 pounds to get into the role of a fellow camp prisoner. I have seen Davies in other roles but none as good or as moving as Rescue Dawn.

Overall, this was a good enough film, the characters seemed more than real as they are beaten down by their captors, the jungle, and the idea of a full on war with Vietnam. Werner Herzog set out to tell Dieter's true story and I can't fault him for not liking Dieter more.

I'm Not There

(2007)

Todd Says:

2.5 STARS

Let me start by saying that I AM a huge Dylan fan, but it just wasn't enough to make this movie work for me. I'm Not There feels too disjointed, and ends up being hard to follow. Which may have been Director Todd Haynes' intention. I know that the point was to show us how many times Bob Dylan reinvented himself throughout his ongoing career, but his method just didn't sit well with me.

To start with, Bob Dylan is not a character in this movie. Haynes invents totally separate persona's for each phase of Dylan's life, complete with new names. So this is, in effect, a movie about six or seven or eight (it's hard to keep up) different characters. I feel that this method detracts from Dylan's actually ability to grow as an artist, because we never see any of these different characters grow. We're just thrown back and forth in this sloppy time frame between one character and another.

With all of that said, the acting in this film, by the truly all-star cast, is phenomenal. Each actor does a great job of becoming the Dylan they are assigned, whether his name is Jack, Jude, or Billy the Kid. I'm Not There (possibly so named because Dylan isn't even in it) is a jumble of surreal imagery, at times beautiful and poetic and at other times dark and unsettling.

This movie is probably going to be a love-it or hate-it movie for you, so I will warn you to approach it cautiously. If you like surreal film than this is probably a safe bet, if you're looking for a straight forward biopic then not so much. The music is great.

Alexis says:

1 STAR

I was really looking forward to this film. I had heard great things about it, especially Cate Blanchett's performance and I really like Bob Dylan's music and had been listening to the I'm Not There soundtrack for months on and off and The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll is one of my all time favorite songs. With that said, I was rather disappointed in this film.

Cate Blanchett was great and so was the music but the rest of it was just blah. I just really didn't care for the idea. The movie's sequence was confusing and unflattering to the film and whole scenes and actors could have been completely cut from the film.

I wish we would have watched No Direction Home or The Other Side of The Mirror, which are more documentary style and I think would probably be much better. I can accept the fact that I didn't get Todd Haynes vision, but regardless, I didn't care much for this film.

The Last King Of Scotland

(2006)

Todd Says:

5 STARS

This is an example of a Film living up to all of it's critical hype. Forest Whitaker is perfect. Based on the real events that took place in Uganda, The Last King Of Scotland is a powerful telling of one man's quick rise to power in an unstable region and another man's misguided journey for adventure. James McAvoy plays Nicholas Garrigan, who becomes the Ugandan dictator's personal physician and his "most trusted advisor." McAvoy is brilliant, and his character grows in ways that most Hollywood movies don't even attempt to portray.

The story is exciting, and sad, and brutal, and even frightening at times, but it is a roller-coaster worth riding. Garrigan, a young doctor, leaves Scotland looking for adventure and ends up in Uganda. Amin, played by Whitaker, is an army general who just toppled a corrupt government. Both men seem to want to save Uganda, but power corrupts it seems and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Amin's story, even as vicious as he was, is a tragic story of innocence eroding, and a sad testimony that violence truly does beget more violence.

I highly, highly, highly recommend this movie.

Alexis says:

5 STARS

I wasn't so sure about this film, I had heard that is what good but I wasn't so sure that I would enjoy it, but I did more than enjoy it, I learned from it. Aside from enjoying a film because it has a great story or great characters or acting I really love when I can learn something from a film.

Of course this film was only based on true accounts but I was so completely in the dark about Idi Amin when I sat down to watch it that I was bound to learn something about the man and his regime. Forest Whitaker was amazing, as was McAvoy (who was based on Henry Kyemba, Amin's health ministor). The film is also beautiful, can I say that about a film? Well, this film was beautiful.

And I too, highly recommend it.

The Constant Gardener

(2005)

Todd Says:

5 STARS

Simply put, this movie blew me away. It begins at a deceivingly slow pace, working to build a false sense of what is really going on in the story. But then it builds, and it twists, and it turns, and it finishes with such gusto that you're not really sure how or when the movie transitioned from a sad tale of domestic loss to a tragic conspiracy of epic proportions.

Nothing about this film is lacking, but Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weisz stand out as superb examples of what great acting should look like. And the scenery is fantastic, lets just say that if I ever decide to make a movie I'm doing it in Africa. Beautiful.

The Constant Gardener is a top notch film that you will enjoy. Go and make the time to watch this movie.

Alexis says:

5 STARS

Sometimes we run right out and see a bad movie and wait forever to finally see a really good one. The Constant Gardener is one of the really good ones. The film begins slowly and it jumps around a little to bring you to speed through flashbacks, but as the story is uncovered and characters developed you begin to understand why this film was so critically acclaimed.

The cinematography is stunning, from the very beginning, each scene would be a beautiful still shot it seems with panning shots of beautiful Africa. Ralph Fiennes is magnigicent as the British diplomat married to a woman he doesn't even feel he knows when she is murdered. His subsequent search for what she was involved in that could have led to her murder is beyond convincing. Weisz is near her best as the wife who becomes an activist after she uncovers the truth about a drug company. The way you feel about her in the beginning and the way you feel about her in the end just proves how wonderfully pieced together this film is.

The Seventh Sign

(1988)

Todd Says:

2 STARS

This movie tries to overcome what it is and become a serious suspenseful drama, but it doesn't do a very good job. The Seventh Sign is basically a horror movie, and as horror movies go it isn't all that bad. However, if I was to grade this movie on the Suspense Movie scale (which is what I think it wants to be) it would fare much worse. (I could easily list more than seven signs that this is a bad movie.)


There are plenty of options to choose from if you are looking for a Religious End-Times-Are-Near movie, and this isn't the first one that I would recommend. But, all that said, this movie is twenty years old and it does try hard to be chilling. Maybe twenty years ago this was would have been a convincing thriller, now not so much.


So, I'm not saying that you should never watch this, but if you want to see a top notch religious thriller let me recommend Fallen.


Alexis says:

1.5 STARS

This film has not aged well or at least it hasn't aged well with me. When this movie came out, my sister and I loved it. We were so interested in the end of the world-Revelation references and for a while we were as interested in reading the bible as in playing outside. But watching the movie the other night I was trying hard to determine if the movie was always this unintriguing or if the movie just didn't age well.

I think that it's a little of both. First of all, who ever thought that Demi Moore was a great actress? She is pretty, I will give her that, but she seems the same in every role I have ever seen her in. If I am wrong, please recommend something, I would love to see her really 'act'. I know that she was really popular at the time but I think that a better, more talented actress could have helped this film.

I still don't mind the story but I don't care for David, God's messanger, either his acting or what was written for him. I feel that with a little cleverness this story could have been better. I just feel that the movie seemed to drag on and on and then boom, there's your climax and it's over. It just left me unsatisfied.

The Promotion

(2008)

Todd Says:

4 STARS


This movie really caught me off guard, and I mean that in a really good way. I mean when I see Seann William Scott and John C. Reilly are the stars of a movie I expect a lot of low-brow comedy based on two ridiculously stupid characters. This is not that movie.


The Promotion is a touching film that borders on depressing at times. The two main characters are assistant managers of a grocery store fighting for the (you guessed it) same promotion. But instead of a bunch of juvenile eye-poking and crotch kicking, the lengths that these two men go to for this job will break your heart.

I think that it was supposed to be a comedy, but I would file it under light-weight drama. And I enthusiastically suggest that you watch this movie.

Alexis says:

3.5 STARS

I love it when both a film and the leading roles in a film surprise me, this film did both. Everything that I have seen starring either Scott or Reilly is strict comedy. But both of them are so good at their comedy that I was interested in The Promotion. The Promotion is funny but it is much more than that, it is honest and touching. Scott and Reilly can be much more than simply comedic stars. The characters are real and the situations common, but the film takes these real life common occurences and makes them funny and sad.

My first job was at a grocery store, I worked with people exactly like this, I worked with Scott and Reilly. You want to give them advice on how to straighten their lives out but instead you just watch and enjoy.

Get Shorty

(1995)


Todd Says:



3.75 STARS



Somehow I missed this one when it came out thirteen long years ago, when John Travolta was in the mist of recreating himself. My loss. Get Shorty is a fun, original take on the so-worn-out gangster genre. The story is funny and unique, and the entire cast is outstanding.



I highly recommend Get Shorty to anyone who hasn't seen it.





Alexis says:

3.5 STARS



Somehow we missed this film when it first came out, even though I could have sworn we had seen it around the time that it came out. The film is funny, poking fun at both Hollywood and the Mafia. Travolta is perfect as Chili Palmer, the tired mob collector who decides that he would like to make a go at movie producing, because he does love movies.

What ensues is a funny and original story with some good acting from some of Hollywood's best talent (Travolta, Hackman, DeVito). It is both comedy, that sometimes plays with dramatic tones and pulls both off effortlessly. Get Shorty is definitely a worthy comedy to devote a few hours to, unfortunately I hear the sequel is not as good.

Planes, Trains & Automobiles

(1987)

Todd Says:



3.5 STARS



This is one of John Candy's best rolls ever, most of the time he's a bit too over the top for me. Steve Martin also turns in a solid performance here, although he has definately done better (and worse). This movie is not the funniest movie you will ever see, in fact it seems to me that John Hughes was having a hard time deciding whether it should be funny or touching, and times it almost feels awkward.

Overall, however, this is a good movie. It's funny throughout without being rediculous, and Hughes ends it on a nice uplifting tone. I would recommend this movie to everyone, perhaps it will help us all appreciate what we have.

Alexis says:

3.5 STARS

Being an avid fan of John Hughes (at least up until the release of Home Alone 2) I am surprised that I had not seen this film sooner. It is a very funny, yet sad film starring two of the best comedic actors of the time, Steve Martin and John Candy. The film was funny without being stupid and I got a kick out of most of the actors from She's Having a Baby (1988) making cameos in the film.

It is an endearing story about two men who don't seem to have anything in common and the friendship that forms over 48 hours between them. The movie moves along at a good pace as the worst case scenario occurs over and over again. This is a good family comedy that I think most people would enjoy.

Top Secret!

(1984)

Todd Says:

3.75 STARS

This is the Airplane of spy movies. I know that you've heard me say before that I don't care for comedies that try to pass Stupid off as Funny, but there are a few classics that I can let get away with that. Top Secret! is very goof-ball, but it still demands a tiny little bit of thought from the veiwer. Actually, as dated as some of the jokes are it may make some of you think more than you want to.

File this one under Guilty Pleasure, but go ahead and take the time to watch it anyway. I think that most of you will find this movie at least funny enough to be worth the time investment.

Alexis says:

2.5 STARS

By 1984 the people who brought you Kentucky Fried Movie had become a lot more funny, or at least had gotten a lot better at carrying their jokes to movies. I haven't been a fan of Naked Gun humor since Elementary school but there were several things about this movie that I could appreciate and I even found myself laughing out loud once or twice. It is a very goofy parody movie, but one that is rather enjoyable, and to think this was Val Kilmer first film, he does a pretty good job.

Babel

(2006)


Todd Says:

1 STAR


Somebody please help me understand how the Academy decides something is a Masterpiece. And don't get me started on Rex Reed again.

Let me start with the good points about this movie, because that won't take long. First, it is a very touching and sad story. It does point out that people all over the world have problems very similar to our own, and that we shouldn't look down on those not fortunate enough to be born in America. But that's about it.

On the down side, we decided that we would watch this movie the way it was released in theaters, without subtitles. Bad move. Unless you happen to be fluent in Japanese, English, Spanish, Moroccan Arabic and Sign Language then I highly recommend that you use the subtitles option available on the DVD. Otherwise you will be wasting 2 1/2 hours on this movie (just like I did). Somewhere I got the impression that this movie was going to transend the language barrier, that art was more powerful than mere words. I was wrong.

Also, the story simply isn't that compelling. This movie is proof that enough hype can sell anything. Don't waste your time with this one.

Alexis says:

0.5 STARS

I am really torn. I want to tell you that this movie is beautifully filmed and the scenes are put together well, but I would just be searching for something to give this boring, less than intriguing, 143 minute film.

As mentioned we watched this film as it was released in theatres. And we were not impresses, instead we became almost bored. I kept hoping that I was going to get the director's point but I just found myself losing interest and finding that most, if not all, of the characters in this film, were just extrememly selfish, but then again I couldn't have understood the message fully because I could only infer what was going on in 75% of it. So you want to prove a point about language barriers and universal emotions, why not make that message more like 60 minutes or 45 even.

I kept wondering if Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett were given big paychecks to attach their names to this piece in hopes of getting publicity and viewers, I was just less than thrilled. So maybe I don't see the art in it, maybe I don't see how all the stories are really that linked, maybe subtitles would have helped but I just can't in good conscience recommend this movie to anyone.

Radio Flyer

(1992)


Todd Says:

4.5 STARS

This is a sad yet hopeful tale of childhood troubles, and the two kids that overcome them. The movie is really dark (especially for the feel-good category), but has childlike optimism that is slightly contagious. I found it easy to get caught up in the imaginations of the two main characters, as well as to empathize with their struggles.

I highly recommend this movie to everyone who likes to look on the bright side every now and then. I think that you'll easily enjoy this one, and you may even cry a little.

Alexis says:

4 STARS

I have been a fan of this movie since it came out even though it wasn't a big success in the theatres. David M. Evans' Sandlot was a much more successful story sold at the same time, but I find that this film has a charm and innocence not found in a lot of other films. The fact that this film captures childhood so well, both the freedoms and the struggles, makes this one of my top choices still even after all of these years.

Wood and Mazzello do a wonderful job as Mike and Bobby, the two young boys who put their mother before them even at a cost too high for any child to pay. Their performances alone make this a good hit, but the scenes and the writing are also superb.

The Mothman Prophecies

(2002)



Todd Says:


4 STARS




The Mothman Prophecies is a wonderfully suspenseful look at some real life weird occurrences. This movie is based loosely on some real accounts by real people. Of course the truth gets stretched a little in making a script that is captivating enough to hold an audience's attention of two hours, but I think that we can live with that.




I'm usually not a big fan of Richard Gere, but he does an outstanding job here. The whole cast does as a matter of fact, especially Will Patton who plays a regular guy plagued by the bizarre. This movie definitely has that X-Files feel to it, and I mean the good X-Files feel from the earlier seasons (not the movies).



I would recommend this one to anyone who likes a good mystery, or if you're just hankering for a strange creepy story.

Alexis says:

4 STARS

This is one of those films that I have seen several times and always creeps me out even though I know what is going to happen (or at least thanks to my memory most of what is going to happen). The Mothman Prophecies is based on real accounts that occurred in and around Point Pleasant, West Virginia between 1966 and 1967, though the film is set in the present. However, the movie is only very loosely based on anything that occurred during that time and most of the story is completely created for cinematic entertainment purposes.

The film teeters between drama and horror and in some ways loses it's focus. Is the film about the mothman, the loss of Gere's wife of Indrid Cole, or all three? Regardless of what genre it fits into it is a gripping film that you should definitely make time to see.

The Thomas Crown Affair

(1999)


Todd Says:

1/2 STAR





This movie is terrible. Rex Reed says: "A cool, slick, sexy, steamy, clever, fascinating caper movie!" Cool? No, not really, and I like 'caper movies' generally. Was it slick? Whoever talked MGM into financing this thing was slick. Sexy? Maybe, Rene Russo does run around naked or half-naked for half of the movie, not that that makes it worth watching. Steamy? Not so much, the love scenes were too unbelievable. I mean the two 'love interests' seemed to hate each other until they took their clothes off. Clever? The plot may have been clever, sometime before shooting started, but the cheesy dialoge tends to ruin any cleverness left over in the actual idea. And finally, was it fascinating? Well, I'm still fascinated that I sat through the whole thing.

Take my advice on this one, DON'T BOTHER.

Alexis says:

.5 STARS

When we watch a movie we should review it right away, the reason being is that if we watch something we don't particularly care for but then watch the Thomas Crown Affair the next night, well that first movie ends up looking pretty Oscar worthy.

The Thomas Crown Affair is actually a remake of a 1968 film by the same title starring Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway (which most definitely explains her cameo in this film), I haven't seen the original so I don't know if this newer version does anything new for the film but I would have to imagine that it doesn't. The film doesn't have a terrible plot, perhaps just bad writers and not so terrific actors. I have seen Rene Russo in other films, she isn't usually this nauseating but I would have to say that hands down she ruins this film. Everything about her character made me want to gag and at points I felt like I just wanted to hit stop on the DVD player which is a very rare feeling for me.

So what does this film have? Nudity and more nudity, poor unengaging dialougues and art lovers who like to defame art for the fun of it. Oh, and Dennis Leary who far and away had to be the best thing about this film. So for Leary what do you think, .20 stars? .25?

Oh, what the heck have another half a star. But seriously folks, unless you just want to see Russo walk around topless and whining, I would skip it altogether.

X-Men

(2000)





Todd Says:



4 STARS



I know that this one is old, and it's probably hard to remember it in the shadow of some of this summer's latest super-hero movies, but it wonderful. X-Men has everything you could hope for from a comicbook adaptation movie or from an average action adventure flic.



I truly believe that this one is good enough not to be graded on any kind of comicbook movie curve. It has a good original story as well as a great ensemble cast. The movie takes time to explain who is who and what is what to those of us who didn't read the comicbooks, but it also moves along at a quick pace so there is never any danger of getting bored.



I think that this is a great choice for about anyone, especially fans of action.

Alexis says:

4.5 STARS

Before this summer's The Dark Knight this was far and away my favorite super hero movie, it didn't hurt that I grew up loving the X-Men, especially Rogue (who is an increasing disappointment in each sequel).

The thing is that other than Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart and Halle Berry who hardly did any speaking in this film, most of the actors were basically unheard of at the time. Jackman does a great job as Logan/Wolverine which could be the reason that his career has picked up in the years since the first X-Men release.

Everything about this Marvel Superhero movie is dead on. The story, the action sequences, and the even the acting makes it in my eyes one of the best unrivaled movies of it's genre, which do well at the box office and don't usually leave me all that satisfied. I am not sure how this movie did at the box office but it is one of about 3 "comic" book movies that I truly enjoyed.

If you are into hero action flicks and you somehow missed this one you should sign onto Netflix of Blockbuster tonight, this is one of the best of it's type.

Recount

(2008)

Sue says:

3.75 stars

Recount is one side of the story of the fight over Florida's votes in the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush. There's no surprise ending or startling revelations, just an obviously biased retelling of the events. I liked it anyway.

This movie really tries to paint the Gore staff as loyal and principled and the Republicans as sneaky and mean. I imagine the truth lies somewhere in between for both sides. The bottom line is that what happened in Florida was a disaster and should have never happened in the first place. What struck me more than the politics was the disorganization and lack of clear guidelines for the situation.

The acting was good even it the script was a little unbelievable at times. I found it hard to imagine that the democrats were ready to be so incredibly moral at such a crucial time. Laura Dern was quite entertaining as Kathryn Harris the Florida Secretary of State.

The battle over votes and chads wasn't just about picking a winner but rather, if your vote really counts at all. Everyone wants to think that we can make a difference with our vote, but when it comes down to it that's not always the case. What happened in Florida should serve as a reminder that it doesn't do any good to vote only every four years in the national election. We as citizens have a duty to be involved and knowledgeable about our local and state governments.

Drowning Mona

(2002)





Alexis says:





4 STARS





One of the funniest comedies...ever. This is one of those films that Ward suggested but I was leary. Every time we watch it, and we've seen it several times, I laugh out loud. This time we watched it with my dad and grandmother and even they were laughing out loud.





The story is funny, the characters are funny, the scenes are funny. Some of these actors can do serious dramas very well and to see them in a comedic element and pulling it off so well is a nice switch. Sometimes you get a movie that is labeled comedy and it is over the top ridiculous in the hopes of getting a laugh or two but this movie has a perfectly balanced mix of both subtle and not so subtle humor.





If you are in the mood for a comedy this is a good bet.



Todd Says:



4.5 STARS



Watching this movie the other night, I thought to myself: "Self, this might be the funniest movie ever." You see, I don't generally like comedies, at least newer stuff, because it's always the same old thing over and over. But not Drowning Mona, this movie is golden. If you don't laugh outloud watching this movie then there is probably something serious wrong with you (perhaps you broke your funny bone as a kid and it healed back crooked or something).



I guess you could call it dark humor, it is about someone dying after all. But if you like comedy of any kind, I think that you will like this one, a lot. As a matter of fact, if you don't like it I would recommend you seeing a specialist about that funny bone thing.

Mad Max

(1979)



Alexis says:



1.5 STARS



I am going to try really hard to give this movie a fair review, becuase my first instincts are to tell you that it is garbage. But when I try to delve a little deeper and think about the time (the movie was filmed in 1978), the actors (this is Gibson's second movie and first leading role) and the budget ($200,000, Gibson got $5k of that) then I can start to appreciate this movie in a different light.



The idea isn't all that bad, post apocolyptic Australian cops fight against murderous biker gang but the dialogue is lacking and so is most of the acting. But when I think about the fact that even though it was 1978 and Star Wars was being released this is an Australian film and many of the filming techniques used in this film were entirely new to Australian cinema. The chase scenes are actually rather good when you take into account the $200K budget.



So I feel a little mixed, this film is lacking on several levels but at the same time it was groundbreaking for the time and place it was recorded. If you are interested in action films and you don't mind them being a little hokey, this film deserves your viewing.

Todd Says:

3 STARS

Let me start off by saying that Mad Max didn't age well. Yes, by today's standards this movie is definately sub-par. But, it was a B-Movie to begin with. It grew into a cult classic because of it's intensity and originality.

For what they had to work with, and what was around to compare it with at the time, Mad Max actually is a gem. However, with all of that said, the action movie genre has grown by leaps and bounds (no doubt in some part due to movies like this), and Mad Max just doesn't hold up thirty years later.

Is it a good movie? Yes. Will you enjoy it? Only if you approach it with a sense of History.

The Good Shepherd

(2006)



Alexis says:

3.75 STARS

This film was pretty good, as usual Matt Damon evolves into the character he is portraying and gives a five star performance. The story in interesting and the teetering between both flashbacks and present day scenes develops and brings the story full circle wonderfully. Angelina Jolie gives an ordinary but enjoyable performance as well.

The film and the story it tells are sad yet honest. I have to admit that I was a little frustrated the first time I saw this film because I felt completely lost most of the way through, the second viewing I knew where the film was headed and I was able to pay attention to details that I had missed the first time. Unfortunately, I feel like this hurt my overall rating of this film. In the end I was enlightened and satisfied I just wish that I hadn't felt so lost with the story the first time but I imagine that was the director's intention.

Overall, the movie was filmed well and the story an intriguing one and I would recommend you invest a few hours in this one.

Todd Says:

5 STARS

I think that the Good Shepherd offers us a wonderful look inside the beginnings of an institution that is now the cornerstone of America's Foreign Policy. I don't know how much of the movie is factual and how much is fantasy, but to be honest it really doesn't matter much. This film is deep and riveting, and I found it hard to not become emotionally invested in the story.

The cast, which is the epitome of All-Star casting, is superb, and the writing and directing are nearly amazing. Even though some of the characters are hard to like (Jolie's especially), they seem like real people, which is rare in movies anymore.

The story, which is told in a seemingly random chronology, will keep you wondering what exactly is going on until the very end, when you come to the realization that this is a top notch spy movie and that you may never know exactly what you want to know. This movie, in my humble opinion, is brilliant and raises the bar a bit for movies of this genre.

You must see this.

We Own The Night

(2007)

Alexis says:

2.5 STARS

I have come to expect a lot more, maybe too much from Joaquin Phoenix, Mark Wahlberg and Robert Duvall which is possibly why this movie was such a letdown. The story seemed at times rushed and at other times just too farfetched and still at other times I just didn't like it, for no other reason than it just wasn't all that good. I felt like this movie wanted to be The Departed but instead just came off as a less than powerful movie in the same vain.

Here is another one of those movies where hype hurt it because I was expecting far better things than I actually got, and that just doesn't seem good enough.

Todd Says:

3 STARS

We Own The Night is a dark depressing look at the life of a multi-generational police family. One brother (Wahlberg) is an ambitious cop and the other brother (Phoenix) runs a night club owned by the Russian Mob. Robert Duvall plays their father, who is also a cop, and who is having a hard time holding his family together.

The story borders on morbidly depressing, the highest point in the film (emotionally speaking) is when one of the brothers exacts brutal revenge on a member of the mob. So, it's not a feel good story. But, if you happen to be in the mood for a somber police drama, they don't come much more somber than this.

21

(2008)

Alexis says:

2.5 STARS

Las Vegas seems less and less appealing all the time and so do movies about gambling. This is another one of those films that I had high expectations for but left me wanting a little more, wondering where have all the goods films gone.

Having just seen another film about Las Vegas gambling I was not at all impressed with this film. It seemed gimicky and I had a hard time feeling for any of the smart, cocky characters in the film which happens to be a huge downfall when I watch a movie. Well written, well acted characters are so much a part of good films and I found myself rolling my eyes and getting bored with the characters and their sorry scenarios. The 'love' story was rushed and unconvincing, I am often wondering why directors and writers think that every film needs a love story, I am of the opinion that if you aren't going to develop the love story, just leave it out completely.

Producer Kevin Spacey was good as usual and he had to be far and away my favorite thing about this film, sometime I just have to wonder why he gets involved in some of the films that he gets involved in, does he have higher expectations of them too?

The ending was a little transparent but it wasn't all bad. I still had no compassion for any of the characters but I at least felt like rooting for the 'good' guys. In addition to the ending the Las Vegas scenes were eye catching but the gambling aspect of Las Vegas just gets less and less appealing all the time.

Todd Says:

2 STARS

I found 21 to be one of those films that I could tell what was coming from the very beginning. Maybe I knew too much about the story from the History Channel documentary that I saw a couple of years ago, but then again this one was based only loosely on actually events.

For all of the flash and sparkle of this film, I found it rather lacking in the acting department. The story, which is quite a stretch from the story that inspired it, is engaging enough I suppose, the total package just doesn't pull everything together like you'd hope.

The trailer is better than the movie, as is too often the case these days, but if you're into flamboyant getting-one-over-on-the-man movies then you might enjoy this on.