Reviews

This film is a philosopher's paradise. The two Gerrys (they have the same name) walk, run and crawl about the screen like a pair of ants lost in a shag carpet. G Van Sant, M Damon and C Affleck illuminate a human's relative insignificance to the planet before exposing us to where our significance may exist.

There's little dialogue and even less action in these 100 minutes. It is minimalistic the way My Dinner with Andre is. The desert scenery is sweeping and panoramic. Van Sant contrasts man to his environment. It is a moving/memorable if you take the inner journey the filmmakers intended. But, as I began, this is a thinking person's film - for those with the time and inclination to analyse its purpose. Its similar to a trip to the Museum of Art. Aficionados of Sponge Bob SquarePants and standard brain-dead Hollywood fare will do themselves a favor by selecting something else. If you tote this one home, however, watch it rested, well fed and carefully. There is good value in its 100 minutes.

There's poetry to its pace. The lost men ride the human spirit with the ups and downs of a single note's sine wave. As its vibrations wane, the sound fades - but you know its vibration forge on elsewhere in the grand scheme of life in the universe. As do the spirits of the beaten pair who never expected to get turned around - either from their car or the life they knew. And yet it happens. It could happen to any of us.

You'll pack an extra water bottle for your next hike! Bet on that. I enjoyed it. I recommend it. 8 out of 10.

Problems are hurled at the McKay family as if they were in a batting cage with an endless supply of quarters and no bat. This South Boston Irish-Catholic family deals with the rock bottom side of life they best way they know how. Baseball quietly emerges as a rallying dynamic for the seemingly-defeated male McKays in this coming of age story. It has a lot of heart, and there's a lot to like here. My criticism is that there's too much misfortune for one 95 minute story - as if every stereotype in play today had to be included. It moved me nevertheless. I recommend it. It seems to have gone directly to DVD but should have enjoyed a stint in the theater first.

Looking for an escapist movie free of political propaganda? See something else.

Looking for a complicated thriller where seemingly disconnected plot lines neatly converge after two hours with brilliant acting by all, this is for you.

This may decomplicate the plot weave a smidge:

• George Clooney plays a veteran CIA operative on the down-stroke of his career selling explosives and arms to Iran terrorists;

• Energy analyst (Matt Damon) is recruited to advise Crown Prince Nasir (Alexander Siddig). Nasir, the wiser of two brothers vying to succeed the retiring Emir for his kingdom. Nasir wants to evict the wicked American Oil company so Communist Chinese oil enterprise can step in ( … yipes!) for the ultimate good of his country.

• There's this American Oil company (Connex) which is considering a merger with a much smaller oil company (Killen) that holds the exclusive Kazakhstan oil drilling rights.

• Connex's lawyers send an attorney (Jeffrey Wright) to discover just how Killen "got" those rights before the SEC does. (The SEC, you see, has to approve the merger)

• And then we have your Pakistani migrant oil workers suddenly confronting the realities of unemployment after the Chinese take over. They're recruited by a religious fanatic after yet another spell of idle poverty.

The film provides perspective on why and how things can get "confused" in this part of the world. Weirder still: that the Chinese and the religious zealots come off as the good guys as the evil US oil companies make prey out of Nasir, justifying corruption for their version of a greater good.

It's a well made film. But, man-o-man, for simpler entertainment, check out that Harry Potter and his Fire Goblet. For this one, wear your thinking cap and bring your paranoia defenses. 7 out of 10 . . . for the acting.

I walked away from The Constant Gardener wondering how drug companies actually bench test their drugs. (The current Vioxx settlement certainly inspired cynicism) This is a thriller for the thinking crowd – with sufficient chase scenes and action sequences to justify the genre. It's paced slower then the average Grisham or Ludlum (Jason Bourne) movies I've come to love. But if you're interested in the stark realities of how medicines are tested in third world nations without having to endure negative consequences, this is a film you will want to see. It purports to reveal real-world events from Africa.

Pharmaceutical company corporate greed and compromised government ethics set the mood as Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weisz (on separate courses) do what they can to reveal the corruption spinning all around them. Fiennes is a British diplomat who understands what it takes to succeed in a compromising diplomatic position. Weisz refuses to give in. She's on a mission to reveal the truth - taking the political activist route - from the moment they meet. Fiennes is a love interest to the luscious Weisz, someone who offers an opportunity to cut the red tape and speed the truth about the mischief to which the drug company(s) are up to in Africa.

It's a brilliant movie showcasing how third world countries are (or can be) exploited. It deals with how a major pharmaceutical firm conducts harmful tests on ignorant, unsuspecting Kenyans. We see the other side of Africa – the side unseen in the enticing Kenyan safari tourist posters.

This is a thriller that thrills both the mind as well as the spirit. It left me wondering, "how close to the truth did they actually come?"

Must Love Dogs I saw the sneak preview. If this doesn't become a sitcom after wearing out the theater circuit, I'll be amazed.

The script is hysterical. The soundtrack is first rate. The characters (every one of them) click with one another on screen. I'd have to stretch to find something not to like. Maybe the hackneyed story line if I had to cite something; but who comes to a romantic comedy expecting breakthrough drama? The plot: Diane Lane (Sarah) is a recently divorced preschool teacher whose "hounded" by her family to get back in the dating game. Since she's not anxious for another heartbreak, her devoted sisters post an Internet ad in her name… something along the lines of "Voluptuous – sensuous - alluring and fun. DWF seeks special man to share star lit nights. Must love dogs" beneath her high school photo. The offers flood in - and the fun begins.

John Cusak and Dermot Mulroney are the two ends of Sarah's romantic triangle. Cusak builds boats and Mulroney is a PhD candidate. Let the neuroses begin! Stockard Channing – Sarah's Dad's romantic interest at age 71 - is on the prowl as well in the background. After the three daughters predictably push back on Mom #2, Stockard becomes a fountain of romantic wisdom (after more husbands than she could remember) to keep the others on track.

Also, keep an eye on Jordana Spiro – who plays the stereotypical ditsy-blond Cusack hangs with toward the end. She has Cameron Diaz-like screen presence which could spell "big future ahead". An enjoyable character to wrap up a delightful movie.

I guarantee you will like this perfect date film. 8 out of 10, for tickling the funny bone.

This movie tugged at my heartstrings delivering an unforgettable portrayal of Afghan life. It's a 10 out of 10, poetically revealing modern life in a city relegated to Neanderthal living conditions after the Taliban was sent packing.

The Film's title is the title of an extraordinarily relevant poem, recited twice during the film.

Though a tough way to learn Farsi (it's subtitled - phew!) "At Five in the Afternoon" awakened me to the plight of the poor souls coping with the rubble and 19th century technology.

The film describes (teenaged) Noqreh's life as she attends school and struggles to discover her role in society now that "any" job is within her reach. She decides to become the country's President.

The zesalots may be gone ... but there's plenty of cranky, old, conservative men (her father among them) who long for the "good ole'days". The country's problems (among them: live buried mines, religious extremism, the absence of basic social commodities - water / education - after several wars) serve as the antagonist as Noqreh's father carts her and her extended family across the Afghan dustbowl in search of her brother, The film moves slowly and deliberately, but I guarantee you'll be paid for your time investment with a once in a lifetime education about Afghanistan.

I hope you find a copy or a showing, and allocate the 2 hours to let it wash over you and take hold.

You will love it! Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, and Tim Robbins are the heart and soul characters that make it all work. H G Wells' famous tale is converted into a "coming of age" film here, courtesy of Mr. Spielberg.

Specifically coming of age are Cruise's son Robbie (Justin Chatwin) and daughter Rachel (Dakota Fanning) (who delivers the best one liners in the film). Ray Ferrier (Cruise) seeks only to protect his family; son Robbie seeks only revenge, first against his Dad and vicariously next against the aliens. Eventually, Robbie joins the battle that his father knows we cannot win. Spielberg touches a modern nerve here in this doomsday scenario.

He delivers a "war" that immerses the audience's angst of natural disasters, terrorist attacks and the anarchy that would logically result when life loses its balance – all delivered under dark, dreary skies. The film invests winning elements of Independence Day and Men in Black (without as much delightful repartee - regrettably). It's on par with both as an entertainment barometer.

Tim Robbins is brilliant (!) as the hospitable nemesis, Ogilvy. At one point, he declares: "This is not a war. This is an Extermination," with his flare for extracting all that is bleak and pessimistic from a situation. It's a great role filled by the perfect player.

This is vintage Spielberg, from its subtle humor to its child's-eye perspective. For example, as the city is being trashed by the aliens, the camera pans a "No Littering" sign. The initial attack yields dialog like "… is it the terrorists again, Daddy?" And you learn that the average Dodge Caravan is every bit as durable as a Hummer when TriPod machinery is at the height of its vicious attack. No one captures a child's terror and reactions better than Spielberg's lens. He's the Master.

Cruise throws only one tantrum on screen involving an unwarranted peanut butter sandwich. Glib as this standalone scene is, it refreshed my memory of his Today Show antics opposite Matt Lauer on issue of "dealing with psychological imbalance, drug-free". I think he could have used a pill.

When the moment is right, like the story magician he is, Mr. Spielberg taps his magic wand and wraps up the fairy tale for the fantasy ride it has been…a bit too unbelievably as you will see for yourself - which is why it earns an 8 instead of a 10. See it soon.

I've seen this film 5 or 6 times. It occurred to me on the last viewing that it could be the ultimate Touched by an Angel – Ben's time in Las Vegas, that is. I believe author John O'Brien thought he was living through a hallucination in the final throes of his diseased life.

The possibility rises out of several conspicuous dynamics in the film.

First, that Ben's life was invested developing Hollywood drama prior to being dismissed by his boss, who will clearly miss his talent and personality in the office, a talent singularly broken by the ravages of alcoholism. He is good at inventing and developing "story". If his occupation had been Investment Banking or Teaching, I'd feel differently. But John O'Brien bore him with a Hollywood mind. That lit the flame for me.

That Ben repeatedly calls Sera his angel during his demise - as he enjoys the best of - and endures the worst of - Las Vegas living. It is possible that all of it is a hallucination during the final pathetic act of his life. The invention of Sera makes his passing bearable, doable, a possible goal for him.

That Sera endures the college team horrors, discuses her relationship with the off-camera therapist to whom she confesses her soul-deep love for Ben ... even the problems with her pimp and landlord constitute deep back story in the mind of a man with a talent for such invention, desperate to flesh out the reasons why this angel will escort him to the next world. In my last analysis, she is an angel divined in his fertile mind to embody all of the good people and events in his life (the wealth flashback memories, e.g.). Sera has come to take him out while steeling the love in his heart. She sees him for what he is, because that's what responsible angels do.

This is a work with metaphor far beyond the veneer of the surface dialog. It's a film demanding to be viewed more than once. Or perhaps, I'm just going nuts, have lost it and I'm hallucinating in my own right.

Either way, enjoy. 10 out of 10.

It's about hope, surviving despair with integrity, and a "natural talent" exercising his god given talent for boxing.

The acting is terrific by Crowe, Zellweger and Giamatti as expected.... But make room for Craig Bierko (Max Baer) and Paddy Considine (Braddock's pal: Mike Wilson), a Stephen Baldwin lookalike, who are spectacular in their supporting roles.

Wrapped in the Great Depression, the riches to rags story held my rapt attention for each of its 150 min run time. Ron Howard's direction and the editing perfectly delivers the story of J J Braddock and family without losing me once. In today's vernacular, it's all good.

Squeamish on boxing's impact on the human body? Look away. The film is too good to miss based on that alone.

This film is in "The Natural" (R Redford) class, with enough great one-liners that'll have devotees quoting them as they liberally do from the Godfather franchise. It's a magnificent rendering of Rocky, with the bonus of being true to boot. I loved it. 10 out of 10.

Hitchhiker is every bit the Tour de'Fun that "Men in Black" was 8 years ago. Just when the human ego starts thinking it's really King of the Universe, a film like Hitchhiker comes along to slap us back to reality, to properly appreciate our relative relationship to the universe. Few things put life into perspective like a great, philosophical comedy.

In the opening sequence, for example, protagonist Arthur Dent's biggest problem becomes dwarfed by the identical problem on a far grander scale. It is done with Monty Python's smart style. It's (literally at times) a roller coaster ride in the amusement park called life.

The meaning of life is explored, answered, questioned and confusing ... in that order, all in less than 2 hours. Great characters, voices, caricatures, all wrapped up in a plot that held my attention tenaciously. 100% fun.

Seriously: Don't take everything so seriously. Enjoy the ride, during the movie and afterward in the real world … and see this film every time you lose sight of the grand scheme of things.

Thank you, Douglas Adams. Great book and great translation to the screen (... he exec produced it!) 8 out of 10

This film held my rapt attention. Every frame. Back to front.

The U.N. serves as the setting for this intelligent thriller whose match I've not seen since Joan Allen's/Jeff Bridges' "The Contender". It's about a UN (Kidman's) interpreter's assumed insight into an assassination plot; but the bigger, better, more intriguing plot is what held my attention as the story unfurled. Riveting stuff. You'll never once gaze at your watch - not once . . . ever, I promise.

Nicole Kidman and Sean Penn and cast are collectively out'STAND'ing.

Though the well-choreographed "cut to the chase" bus sequence is riveting, the best part of this film is its dialog – the best I've enjoyed in many years. Words - and the subtle dialectal meanings attached to them - are Sylvia Broome's (Nicole's) special skill and business. She cuts the air waves with them as though wielding a knife. Sean Penn ((The FBI agent assigned to the assassination threat) hears all of them as a part of the puzzle he has to unravel to do his job. He makes a sharp sounding board for her wordplay.

Sydney Pollack: Thank You! You're back. There's so much low quality film out there today, I rely on you to raise the bar and keep me on the edge of my seat. You beat Condor with this one. And that takes some doing.

9 out of 10.

I liked it. Here's what to watch for:

1) Best actor: "Lisa the BabySitter". Even if the film this isn't your cup of tea, stick around to catch a glimpse of babysitting-2005 courtesy of Ms. Lisa! She's great. Ryan Reynolds (a Jason Lee lookalike) in truth gets the best actor award for his macabre transformation. He's good!

2) Most unusual moment: When the family tries to elude danger one dark and stormy night like the Von Trapps on a hot, wet roof. The scene conjured up images of the Sound of Music for me, swapping out the nasty Nazis with a Lizzie Borden-like ax man.

3) Economy: One priest gets the job of four (from the original) done. When the priest is played by master character actor "Philip Michael Hall" what would you expect.

4) Scary: ... has it's moments. Nothing unique and original . . . but Director Andrew Douglas gets the job done for newcomers to the horror genre. Enjoy.

All in all, it's a 6 out of 10. Better than the original. Truly.

Two pivotal ideas make this film memorable: Clever euphemisms and (conceptually) 'the moment' of change. When exactly does someone fall in love? How does someone? Euphemisms weave their way throughout the dialog, tossing four people ragged on the seas of love without dramamine, to discover The Moment. Closer – the title itself – is euphemistically used to help me understand the moment in the games people play en route to falling into and out of love.

Nothing is held back. No bridling. Passion and emotional turmoil are served up raw. That Natalie Portman and Julia Roberts are the female objets'desire drew me in from frame one (and there's Jude Law and Clive Owen for the ladies - no worries).

Unless ice water flows through your veins, you'll get Closer to the work of Mike Nichols - who started down this path with Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolff four decades ago, his first and best gem.

Enjoy! I did. 8 out of 10.

If you like wine, you'll find there's more to fermented grapes than just another way to get a buzz. Grapes are complicated. Kind of like people. Good story, characters I like and an interesting (wine!) plot line to make it work is what I like in a film. I got it all here.

Giamatti, Church, Madsen and Oh are the four stars I cared about and coincidently how I rated this film. When it seems like someone is born to play a role, it's clicking. I had read Thomas Haden Church was a young Richard Dreyfuss. I disagree. He is a young Nick Nolte … absolutely. He's a Viagra and Cialis cocktail with legs. Giamatti personifies 'lost love depression' so convincingly, any woman would dump him just to smile again. Yet you never want to do that. It's just that 'je ne sais pas' thing. Virginia Madsen (God, I love her – S Sarandon's younger sister?) and Sandra Oh (the best part of HBO's Arli$$) are so well cast, they're bronzed into my memory. They are perfect.

That it's a long film never mattered. They could've made it longer. There's one unnecessary scene sequence involving a lost wallet I wished they didn't use; but it soon became clear it was needed to segue to the film's resolution. All brilliant : All the time.

Make sure there's a gourmet wine ship near your theater. 4 out of 4 stars.

You'll be pleasantly surprised if you see this movie without expecting too much. It's entertaining, good Saturday-matinée material. It reminded me of an Indiana Jones romp, updated for the repartee of the average "Alias" episode. In fact, a genealogical study might reveal linkage between Alias' Marshall Flinkman and NT's Riley Poole. One mold for those two.

The formula for this movie will permit as many sequels as viewers are willing to pay to see. Any icon, symbol or event that could be misinterpreted or misunderstood is what makes the movie work. For National Treasure I, the back of the dollar bill, secret societies (reborn in The DaVinci Code) and a good conspiracy theory unleashes a plot line. 'National Treasure 5' might take the Microsoft Logo, the 'you've got mail' voice and a conspiracy theorist to discover Elvis lives on. Whatever... it yields a grand chase scene that wiles away two hours with good, old-fashioned, don't-think-too-much entertainment.

And that's EXACTLY what I was in the mood to see this particular Saturday afternoon! 7 out of 10.

Lovers of the grifter genre - you will love this one most of all. It earns a 9 out of 10 from yours truly. Sincerely. Sure, I'm biased for the genre.

But this one has the style of a low budget 'Sting' with a story line on par with Steve Martin's 'The Spanish Prisoner'.

Grifter movies rely on competent, likable con men and women, gullible marks and a logical plot. The audience can be(come) the mark, as can the cons themselves. That's why this genre yanks me in … and why it entertains so well. I am (you are) the detective. Figure out what's going on before they tell you: That's the ame. I'm a cynic by nature and I'm always equal to the task.

Now this one - I couldn't figure it all out before they revealed it. What they reveal is worth the wait and meandering through the story. I doubt you'll piece it all together either. Therein lies how it earned its 9.

The plot works. Oh . . . and "Cut to the chase' will never be the same after you see how "Criminal" cuts to it. It's brilliant and timed with perfection. It's something you'd expect from the likes of Spike Lee.

Sorry to be oblique here; but if I tell you any more, the ending would be exposed. The last two minutes tell all - and the first 85 are every bit as entertaining and important. John C. Reilly, Diego Luna and Maggie Gyllenhaal are worth the admission price. Superb, all! See it. Tonight!

An unexpected delight. It's the Rocky of tennis, with a twist.

In Rocky, Trainer Mickey advises love-struck Rocky with 'Women weaken legs!'

Wimbleton's wisdom - 28 years after Rocky I - is that 'Boy get strong - does well - showing off for girl'. Either way, it's fun to watch and a good inside look at the ways and means of Wimbleton.

Hey Spiderman: Watch out! Kirstin Dunst and Paul Bettany are a hot item here. Their chemistry works. Jon Favreau plays a completely believable whored-up agent with a strong "despicability quotient". James McAvoy (new to my movie going experience) is the younger brother of Paul Bettany. He delivers convincing sibling rivalry to a dysfunctional-anyway Colt-household. Everyone else in the cast is fodder for those big 4. They're all good. No one is hogging lines or camera time. It works. It entertains. Not too much thinking is involved, making it a good date film.

7 out of 10. Would be more if they broke new ground. Maybe next time.

Classic Shyamalan drama (… wait for the ending!) 6 out of 10. Slow drama. I guessed the ending 20 minutes into it. This film will not setting box office records this weekend.

Best: Acting. Bryce Howard is excellent. Brody, Phoenix and Weaver are good as always. Hurt overacts as though on a Shakespearian – as expected.

Worst: Slow. Overloaded with Blair Witch drama and the Basic Instinct transition music. At one point I almost hoped Basic Instinct would take over.

M.Night's signature surprises (endings) I may've walked away after those first 20 minutes. My intention to see Bryce Dallas Howard (of Ron Howard notoriety) act - kept me seated. Good movie to see on DVD. Maybe it's 5 out of 10 on second thought.

This many geeks haven't covered the big screen since the 'Revenge of the Nerds' franchise in the 80s. Napolean Dynamite offers a birds-eye view inside the Geekdom, focusing on 3 or 8 main characters depending on whether you see it as a comedy or a documentary.

For me, it was an entertaining documentary of "geeks and meats". The Dynamites eat steak and only steak. It's set against a caricatured backdrop of the meat industry. From Napolean's job moving 8,000 chickens from one cramped cage to another, to the demise of Ellie the field cow, how meat gets to those shrink-wrapped supermarket bins is subtly shared. Swap out Sam Elliott's 'Meat: It's what's for dinner' with 'Meat: eat it and turn out like me!' and you get it. Don't worry: It's neither distracting nor a major thing; ... it's just there for those who enjoy the subtle aspects of independent film.

That's pretty important for this movie, because subtle characteristics, odd behaviors and human ticks are what this gem is all about.

Eight characters drive the bus in this story: Napoleon, brother Kip, friend Pedro, love interest Deb, I'net chat pal LaFawnduh, Uncle Rico, Grandma and sensei Rex. Deitrich Bader's 'Rex' is outstanding though brief. Napoleon and Kip redefine 'dweeb' in more ways than your mind can imagine. Three generations of nerds are showcased, providing an ample glimpse into what could lie ahead if they stay an unmotivated course like Uncle Rico. I think these guys will be alright. The plot line subtly tells us so.

It's fresh, different and entertaining as MTV films usually are.

Leaving the theater, our audience was surveyed with that survey where you bend down the tab on a card to reflect your opinion. Mine was bent to reflect a 7 out of 10. Most of those points were earned for the unique acting. The storyline: needs work. Make sure you're not looking for mainstream when you go. Worth the cost of a matinée. See soon... Si?

Just saw the sneak preview in Tampa. Excellent. 8 out of 10! ... It's up there with Reese Witherspoon's Legally Blond and Tom Hanks' BIG. It's a nostalgic romp that'll make anyone with a memory smile.

Jennifer Garner sparkles with charisma and sizzles with charm. She's got that whole `girl next door' thing going on, supercharged with a personality that just doesn't quit. There's great chemistry amongst the cast - and all of them makes this light-hearted tale work.

The plot - seemingly done to death with `Big', Peggy Sue Gets Married, 18 Again (etc) - turns out to be amazingly fresh. It's funny, light . even logical (as a fairy tale that is) with a simple message for us all. "Be nice. Do the right thing. And live to be happy."

It'll pull the audiences (aged 8 to 80), make a ton of money for the producers and keep Garner's, Ruffalo's and Winick's phone ringing for some time to come.

Curmudgeons and violence addicts will do well to sit this one out. Great date flick `and' an outstanding family film. If you're looking for a great way to invest 100 minutes of your life, see From 13 to 30..

It's rare to find a thriller that makes you think these days. Mamet thankfully keeps the primary story and dialog simple, because his plot takes more turns than the Tour D'France. I had to pay close attention to ‘get it'. It'll thus not make a big box office take here, but it is an excellent way to invest two hours of your life.

Mamet writes distinctively (big fan here). He takes a common tale, throttles up the intrigue by slowing dispensing the whole store; he makes you care about his characters, clicks you up to the top of his roller coaster rails then lets it fly. In this episode, there's a gullible president whose daughter's gotten herself into a jam (… how improbable!) The president's handlers handle most matters for him. I got the distinct impression that the sitting president wasn't all that bright. Though implausible, I suppose it could happen in real life ... so I hopped on board for the ride.

That Mamet directed the film as well is a double treat. Al Bundy from Married with Children turns in a brilliant performance. Kilmer hasn't been this good since he played Jim Morrison. Kristen Bell's career gets a leg up from this gem. Wm. H. Macy plays too small a role to be rated. Our local paper suggested that all of the above turned in wooden performances. For goodness sake: they were playing government employees. What are they looking for? … song and dance! Their role was to keep the action moving. They did that flawlessly.

I've gone binary with my ratings. I love it – or hate it. This film I loved it. IMDB's system is still 1 – 10, so I'm giving it a 10. See it with a clear, unfettered mind. You're going to need 100% of the 2% with which we think. Enjoy.

I liked it. Everyone needs to settle down and absorb this work the way they'd experience art inside a gallery. Mel Gibson is not chasing entertainment here. He presents a deeply personal emotional experience about one of the most passionate chapters in history. Were it not so, a religion would not have been born by it.

Anyone who starts hating Jews or Romans after seeing a motion picture is wound too tight. The naivete of the day is to blame, not a certain group of people. If anyone hates after seeing this, this film is simply an excuse for their behavior. It's a passion play driven by extremes. Gibson's point: One cannot experience the ecstasy without enduring the agony. So he gives it to you, lock stock and barrel. And though some critics deny it, there IS ecstasy in this film – if you make it to the end.

Much of the movie is cast under a vigilant full moon ( metaphorically `God's eye' I think). The 12 hours presented center on three people: Jesus, his Mother Mary, and the devil (played by a woman :-). Everyone else is supporting cast. The Romans are cast as Tony Soprano's ancestors. Anthony Quinn's dapper Barabas has evolved into this menacing serial-killer type (his next role will be in Silence of the Lambs III, I think). Sophia Coppola could body double for Mary Magdalene.

It's bloody, gory and horrific as only Hollywood does it - but no more so than Braveheart. I agree with the critics re: `no man could withstand the torture portrayed by the scourging, let alone lug a tree trunk cross uphill to the crucifixion site. But then we're not talking about a rank and file man here. [When I hit my thumb with a hammer, enough expletives escape my lips to deliver me to the nether regions. ... true!]

The music haunts with this mega-voice chorus, Much more intense than the use of choral voices in "2001 a Space Odyssey". If the theater owner replaced popcorn aroma with incense, I would have thought I was in a church. It's that intense. . . . . so where were the Beatles with `All you Need is Love' when I needed them?

Those who say `if you're not a Christian, you won't understand the story' aren't paying attention. Jesus' back story – from his carpenter gig through the last Supper – are woven throughout the story. Most people (where this film is playing, at least) understand all they need to know about Christian beliefs unless they've been living in a cave.

Listen: don't rely on `second hand opinion' to cast your vote. See it, then hate it or love it. Under normal circumstances, I would have waited for the DVD. But thanks to the media's (Gibson's?) marketing ploy, I saw it sooner. I'm glad I did. Though draining, it was terrific, though for the life of me, I cannot decide on how to rate it. It's between an 8 and a 10. You can't go wrong with that.

An Ingmar Bergman film always takes me to film school. `Silence' offers the PhD. Metaphors and character arcs: No one does it better than Bergman.

It's a study in contrasts. It's about the strife sewn into the lining of family intimacy, contrasted with the perfection of strangers engaged in the base behaviors. Complexity vs. Simplicity. The common ground shared by youthful innocence and ignorance vs. the confusion imposed by years of living. Short people seeking acceptance vs. normal folk who are so completely unacceptable to each other. It's about a dying woman whose life's work is translating one language to another so others can understand it vs. two people who speak the same language who cannot understand each other (further) vs. two other people who speak different languages who have a better understanding than those sharing a common lexicon. And on and on.

Watching this film, it occurred to me how deeply Bergman's work influenced the likes of Kubrick and Hitchcock and Aldrich and Leigh … so many more. 2001 Space Odyssey, Psycho, so many of the great films have seeds here. The screen was Bergman's canvas; the camera his brush. Neither the script nor the imagery alone created the work. His work has a soul from the combination of all of it.

Watch Bergman's life's work and save yourself a bundle on film school. You'll be in the master's care.

9 / 10. This is the Rocky of Hockey, with a better ending. Tampa hosted a sneak preview. The line to get in was long, akin to the Saturday matinee lines I remember from the 50s. Miracle gives you more value for your movie dollar than any alternative playing today, if smiling all the way home is a goal.

Ironically, Miracle underscores that hard work, discipline, focus and `wanting it badly enough' is what it takes to win - everything EXCEPT a miracle in fact. Super stars - the most talented - aren't the ingredients that get the job done. Unification of the human spirit - developing the will to win - is by far the more important element.

Kurt Russell is brilliant. Patricia Clarkson (wife) peppers sage advice that influences Herb's thinking and his evolution as a coach. Listen to her words. The team members were unknown actors (to me). But just as they were the right players for the team in Brooks' view, every one was the right actor for the film.

The demand for Herb Brooks' autobiography will skyrocket. This is a man of vision, whose mind records an opponent's vulnerability so that he can compete and win against it. He has this innate understanding of how a coach molds solid individual talent into a team . . . a family. Every smart CEO across the land will use metaphors and clips from this great film to inspire their corporate personnel to go and do likewise. I know this because it happened with Hoosiers; Miracle is Hoosiers-on-steroids (quite possibly the most inappropriate sports simile ever written :-).

The hockey play is superbly choreographed. The psychology of the game - as well as the heart and mind of the player - is explored in depth. You can't help but learn the mechanics of the game along the way. Whether a current hockey fan or not, you'll better understand the game two hours after the the film starts, an unintentional benefit.

This film made me 'prouder YET' to be an American. To live in a land that produces the likes of Herb Brooks and this caliber of cinderella team. My blood was pumping. I suddenly wanted to be in better shape; vowed to be more focused on goals in my own life. I knew these games occurred many years ago, but the movie made me feel like it all happened yesterday.

Don't exit too quickly unless knowing what the players are doing now is unimportant. Go see it the day it opens and pass the buzz.

I loved this movie! 10 / 10: I'm holding nothing back. I don't think it's necessarily going to be good for the whoring business along interstates in Florida mind you, but it made one riveting on-screen story. "Charlize Theron: You've done it!' I've followed her career since 'That Thing You Did'. At first I thought her evil twin was cast in error. She was on FIRE! Brilliant. Scary. Perfecto.

Charlize had been script fodder to me . . . filler . a pretty face, nice body to draw the men but without talent of (say) Meryl Streep's caliber. A few more `reach roles' will be necessary to hit Meryl's stride, but she's on her way. Independent film tends to draw the best from an actor's ability, taking payroll cash out of the equation. It separates pretty, rich faces from the talented pretty, rich faces. That should be a right of passage for any wannabe star.

Now why every theater in Tampa isn't vying to show this film (limited distribution in Tampa at least) is beyond me. Yes, this is Florida, and sure - the real Aileen did her felonious mischief only 97 miles away. But if Psycho was mainstream in 1962, surely 41 years later a real psychotic's behavior is fair game today.

The F word is used more often than in Scarface; lesbian sex a/k/a male heaven is prominent (keep the kiddies home), and I think the woman behind me in the theater viewed it as a training video based on her unsolicited commentary of the action. The genre is somewhere between Thelma and Louise, Psycho and Star Trek . . . the latter because it boldly goes where Patty Jenkins hadn't gone before. A monstrously successful outcome at the Oscars do I predict for Charlize. Did I mention this was a 10 out of 10?