Reviews

British camp horror at its best. Romance. Heroism. Absurd comedy. beautiful women, half dressed and undressed. Likable characters(mostly), and a fast enough pace to paper over and rush past the plot holes.

I doubt that more than a minute passed between laughs in this outrageous mix of adventure, horror, and love which takes favourite movie tropes out of the magic bag of tricks, twists them all up, and spins them into a weave of freshness.

For a simple escapist romp, they seldom have come better since the heyday of the Python boys. But you better like gore. Sure, it's cartoonish, but there is gore aplenty.Still, I thought it was worth it.

This is a "must watch". Even if you aren't a nature film fan, this charming well made movie is worth the investment of time. It clocks in at a sprightly hour and a half, which flies past like an eagle chasing its prey.

I generally find Alexander McCall Smith's novels 9and the series made from them - No. 1 Ladies Detective Club) a bit too precious. No question though that he knows, and loves, South Africa.

His script for this mock documentary, narrated by Paul Newman in what seems to have been his final performance, teeters on the edge of cliché and sentimentality, but never topples over. The narrative line of personalizing the story of one young meerkat to tell the tale of the Kalahari, of dessert life, and the cycle of life, works effectively, and to my mind, makes this a superior and more accessible movie than March of the Penguins.

The excellent score sets a tone, and a pace, which matches the story perfectly, and gives a sense of place. No soaring Beethoven or Mahler here. Real sounds of Africa. Done by a young English folk singer. Amazing.

What blew me away most though was the cinematography and editing. I can't get over the shots that James Honeycombe and his crew captured in their six month mission, and condensed into a stunning visual.

Please, watch this movie.

I enjoyed this movie a fair bit more than the average viewer, if ratings are to be believed.

This very British film is a nice switch from the typical Hollywood romantic comedy, and does not attempt to squeeze within the conventional mold which runs from Four weddings and a Funeral through Love Actually and beyond. The wry influence of the original Noel Coward play becomes fresh again decades later.

Colin Firth is especially adept underplaying the dissolute father in law. He is just there, being, not acting.Totally believable and convincing. When his character is illuminated in a brief soliloquy two thirds of the way through the movie, he is brilliant, and without the ham fisted exposition of so much modern writing, the entire family story is explained, and powerful social commentary on topics from hereditary lands to fox hunting to war to social decay to euthanasia are digested without chewing.

A great example of "Show, not tell".

Jessica Biel is beautiful, here as always, and is never requested to do more than she is capable of. I particularly liked how the film makers did not beat us over the head with her sexuality, going with a muted sensuality most of the movie, except in key scenes where her full power is unleashed to excellent effect.

Kristin Scott Thomas is well cast as the domineering disapproving mother in law, and the British supporting players are treats, though I thought Ben Barnes as the love interest lacked the presence to hold his own in this cast.

We could use more movies like this.

There must be dozens if not hundreds of more interesting takes on "hopeless emptiness" and the despair of suburban existence, trapped in a life not lived. This film treads the same turf as "Mad Men", but without the subtly pace or humour.

I would not have watched until the long telegraphed conclusion of the story, except that Kate Winslett is radiant whenever she is on the screen. She also brought nuanced acting to her performance, though her accent slipped occasionally. DiCaprio, on the other hand, in my opinion, over acted horridly, displaying anger, confusion, passion, all by shouting and glaring.

The pacing was tedious - too many lingering shots of people staring off into their souls; too many cars pulling into driveways. It felt as padded as a 1960s bra.

Zoe Kazan in a small role as DiCaprio's office fling was a pleasure, but there were too few of those. None of the characters except Winslett's show more than two dimensions.

There are some movies you see because you want to, and some you see because you have to. Little did I suspect that "Up In the Air" is both.

"What's in Your Backpack?" is the motivational speaking sideline of Ryan Bingham, the 'termination engineer' played by George Clooney in this movie, which deftly comes disguised as a romantic comedy – right down to a pivotal wedding scene- but really challenges us to consider what is in OUR backpacks – that we ARE all bogged down both by 'stuff' and by commitments to people. As Bingham preaches, we can chose not to be weighed down. As Bingham comes to realize, we can also make choices to refill our backpack with the things we want in our lives. We may all die alone, as Bingham points out, but it is how we enjoy the journey that is the central puzzle of life, and the object of this film.

Nothing in this film is pretentious or preachy. It is tightly crafted. Though it is a tad heavy with exposition early on, there is significant action – in Bingham's hotel beds; at a party; at a wedding- to entertain. There is humour and melodrama, done lightly – I barely teared up before the wedding, and then again towards the end.

The principal actors – Clooney, Vera Famiga, and relative newcomer Anna Kendrick as Bingham's foil, who demands that he consider whether his life has more meaning than accumulating 10 million American Airlines frequent flyer miles- all become their characters – never once do you see them acting. Kendrick is an especial surprise, playing a character who grows through the narrative, and convincing us of the transition.

Don't be fooled by the plot surrounding Bingham's job as a travelling harbinger of employment death – the film does not skip lightly over this reality, but, as he did in Juno with abortion and adoption, Jason Reitman folds this theme neatly into the mix.

In a decade of big explosion movies and computer animation, this human scaled film about real life is a rare treat.

I wish that I could say that this is a cute piece of whimsy, a moving commentary upon the perils of love, life, family, and coming to terms with the knowledge that we all must, eventually, die - some sooner than others.

Except this movie was spoiled for me first and foremost by Meg Ryan's casting as Sarah, Mom to Lucy(the radiant Kristen Stewart), the potential love interest for Carter(the capable Adam Brody, reprising his usual character), who has returned to his Grandmother's home after years living in Los Angeles, to run away from a bad break up with his movie star girlfriend, Sofia. Meg, once the iconic definition of romantic comedy, has been transformed by bad cosmetic surgery into a clown mask, behind which, she struggles to emote - which calls for acting chops she has never, sadly, possessed. This creates two problems. First, her role is at the emotional heart of the film, and she never captures those moments.This might be caused, and is certainly contributed to, by the second problem - her freakishness makes it impossible to fully commit to the fictional world, because every time she is on camera, the only reaction possible is "Ohmigawd - that's freaky!", which reminds us we are watching Meg Ryan, not Sarah.

If the movie had overcome this disaster, would it have worked? Although the ending is not the classic rom com convention (it is in fact delightfully open ended in at least one crucial way), the plot developments are foreshadowed in obvious heavy handed ways, redoubling the sense of watching a movie rather than immersing in an alternative reality.

The positives - Brody, Kristen, Makenzie Vega as Lucy's precocious sister Paige, Olympia Dukakis as Grandma, the whimsical moments of humour and occasional triumph, rescue this movie from a sub par "wish I never wasted an hour and a half of my life on that", but only barely.

...then this wonderfully uplifting tale of the power of imagination is extraordinary.

From music to lighting, to set decoration, all of the elements come together in a lighthearted tale that should not be overlooked.

Dustin Hoffman, as Magorium, is a trifle too precious, but this is more than made up for by the spot on casting and performance of Natalie Portman as Molly Mahoney. She brings just the right balance of elfin enthusiasm and borderline adulthood to the crucial role. Zach Mills as Eric,who collects hats, sparkles throughout. Jason Bateman as the "mutant" never overplays his part.

If every life is a performance, this movie is an exceptional reminder of the need to live life with joy and gusto, to play every day, and make the world a brighter place.

I saw this movie long after all the hype, and I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Abigail Breslin is charming as the perky kid, and Toni Collette suffers adorably as the Mom, but I found this movie dull boring and tedious. It felt padded by extended road scenes, and asides unnecessary to the plot.

Was it supposed to be funny? Other people seem to think so, but I did not laugh once at this celebration of mediocrity. The characters began as losers, and finished as losers. Who cares?

If this is supposed to be a farce, I suggest that viewers recycle classic Monty Python - they knew farce.

This just left me feeling sad.

School for Scoundrels seems undecided whether it wants to be a (yawn) conventional romantic comedy, or a quirky offbeat indie picture more typical of its stars Jon Heyder and Billy Bob Thornton. The presence of Sarah Silverman in the cast made me expect more of the latter, but alas, she is as underused in this plot as she was in School of Rock - a few biting moments, but not enough screen time. Jacinda Barrett is ornamental as the obvious love interest, but sleep walks through the part. There is no explanation of her motivations for behaviour that leaps over hugely improbable plot gaps (none atypical of the rom com genre. Billy Bob is consistently restrained but over the top at once - more Bad Santa than Astronaut Farmer. Heyder seems misused, misdirected or miscast. Having outgrown the high school roles, he seems uncertain whether he is Tom Hanks boyish leading man, or Mathew Broderick's adolescent twit in an adult body.

There are enough plot twists to keep the movie vaguely amusing, but it never grows wings and soars above the ordinary.

Disturbia was a successful thriller, in that it had jolts. The plot was paint by numbers obvious - about everything you expect to have happen does- but the presentation got you jumping out of your seat. No gore, which disappointed my teen age son, who expected more of a horror movie than a conventional thriller.

The romantic subplot was distracting, but Sarah Roemer, a twentysomething ex model playing the teen hottie was ornamental, and it filled in the spaces between jolts. Personally, I thought Carrie Ann Moss as the Mom was hotter than Roemer.

Shia Lebeouf has enough charm to remain sympathetic as the hero despite being under house arrest. His twinkle in the eye makes the comic relief sparkle. He is a bit less convincing in the romantic lead side of things, and thus I have reservations about him being the next Tom Hanks, let alone the next Cary Grant. But being the next Jimmy Stewart would be just fine.

I went into this movie with high expectations, based on reviews, rather than word of mouth.

The visuals, and the fable plot, were worth seeing. The message, though obvious, was deftly presented, and I was moved to tears.

On the other hand, the gory political polemic that predominated was overdone, and even more obvious. I was bored by it long before the movie ended. As a result, the film seemed long and drawn out. It would have been improved by more focus on the fable/fantasy aspects, or tighter editing.

The acting was superb, even those in the small roles were believable. I never felt I was watching a performance - they each inhabited their roles.

This Jodie Foster vehicle is a thriller with no thrills, a suspense tale without much suspense. I admit I sat through it, reading a novel, until the end to find out if I was right about the answer to the puzzle, but it was so dull I didn't feel like I had to give the film much attention.

There was maybe enough plot for a one hour TV episode.

The solution to the puzzle seemed random, rather than built upon clues. At the same time, it was telegraphed early and often, so the wait to have it confirmed was tedious.

I suppose it might be supposed to be a character study of Jodie's character,and grief, but if so,it never tied together. She seemed alternately comatose and shrill, not necessarily at the appropriate moments.

Erika Christensen as one of the stewardesses filled out her uniform nicely, but otherwise, the movie was about as asexual as can be, on top of everything else.

Tina Fey deserves tremendous credit for manufacturing a story which adopts the conventional teen drama plot, and still adds enough irony to entertain, without ever overtly winking at the audience. The director also slips in lovely grace notes, such as a subtle homage to Carrie.

This achievement is even more remarkable given the necessity of working around Lindsay Lohan's acting inability, and lack of screen radiance.The supporting cast however, including Fey, are almost all excellent and elevate the comedy around Lohan's woodenness and frequent occasions when Lohan can not even muster a credible expression for a close up.

Add in a bit of laugh out loud shtick, and this is probably the most appealing teen movie since " 10 Things I Hate About You" ( which excelled on the wings of its star, Julia Stiles, not in spite of the star, so "Mean Girls" is exceptional).

Not worthy of the time it takes to watch this overly self-conscious art film. Symbols and themes are repeated well past the point where the audience is groaning " we got it already".

At least half an hour could have been cut out of the movie, which would have made it taut and thriller like. Too many scenes unfold at a funereal pace just to impress us how serious the subject is. We got it already. Too many transitional shots repeat the view of the ocean, the fog and the sternness of Ben Kingsley's face. We got it already.

We never find out why Jennifer Connelly's character's husband left. We never find out why she never opened her mail. We never have a clue as to why both her character and Ron Eldrad's operate irrationally. Only Kingsley is given a three dimensional part.

And oh, yeah, Jennifer Connelly smokes way too much.

I will admit I only watched the film because I am a fan of Jennifer C. Skip this one. I wish I had.

Renee Zellweger brings the same charm to this light confection as she shows as Bridget Jones. The similarity ends there. Bridget is bawdy. Down with Love is overly cute.

I am not as taken by the self-conscious referential reverence for the "Pillow Talk" genre as some reviewers and thought that Ewan McGregor was miscast as the romantic male lead.

David Hyde Pierce and Sarah Paulson are excellent as the second leads. Pierce especially plays off the Niles Crane stereotype with just enough of a wicked twist to increase the fun of his acting, and of the movie. Jeri Ryan is pleasantly ornamental, but her British accent wandered the midwest.

I thought the 1962 time setting was a bit awkward if you like accuracy. Germaine Greer's " The Female Eunech " was not published until almost a decade later, and Ms. magazine was also not launched until 1971. Feminism seemed rather advanced in this film. But this quibble takes the work far more seriously than it deserves.

There are clever bits of word play, and some situational humour. If you like Renee, or "girl meets boy/ girl hates boy"comedies, this is worth a look, but Sweet Home Alabama would be a better choice if you don't mind Reese Witherspoon instead.

But an hour later, you'll be hungry again. And craving chocolate.

While not up to the pace and drama of The Italian Job or Heist,this made for cable epic is redeemed by a nice twist ending.

Kristin Booth as the female lead has charm and presence. Her smile lights up the screen and she looks capable of the part played by her character, with a well muscled build unlike the typical stick woman of Hollywood.

David Suchet, who you may remember as the cop in A Perfect Murder, underplays the villain well though the other leads struggle more with the wooden dialogue.

A diverting way to spend some time. Certainly better than The Score, which wasted a huge budget and big name actors. Here, a modest budget and working talent exceed expectations.

Sometimes it is better to approach a film with low expectations and be pleasantly surprised. On that basis, I was in awe of Sofia Coppola's achievement in The Virgin Suicides. That movie haunted me for days, weeks, months. Heck, it still haunts me. It captured pure emotion in a believable manner.

So I approached Lost in Translation late in the day, after reading the reviews and hearing the hype.

It was a set up for disappointment.

Bill Murray was a plus, but I already knew he could do tragedy, having watched his overlooked performance in The Razor's Edge twenty years ago. I had enjoyed Scarlett Johansson in Ghost World. The plot seemed promising.

I can not put my finger on what was missing. Perhaps it was the absence of dramatic tension. There seemed to be no plot, merely a situation and characters. Plus I could not care about either star's character. I never lost the sense I was watching actors . I did not get involved in the lives. I grasped Charlotte's boredom, and the fact that her husband was selfish and self-involved, but this was beat into us with sledgehammer repetition. Bill Murray's Bob Harris was supposed to be adrift in a foreign culture, in a midlife crisis, but he seemed just becalmed. The whole relationship seemed pointless.Perhaps that was the point, but I hope not. Existential angst ought to involve angst not dullness. Otherwise, Waiting for Godot has already captured the flag.

It was like a mediocre regional touring production of old British plays. Uninspired, desperately threadbare and transparently obvious, but not convincing. Ultimately, forgettable.

For me at least, Sofia Coppola's promise remains unfulfilled.

Cristina Ricci not only warms the cold still nights where most of this movie's action takes place, she captivates our souls. Her eyes are mirrors of our inner desires. This film uses this to perfection. John Simm and John Hurt are well cast supporting players, owning their roles. Kyle McLachlan returns to his David Lynch quirkiness, after the shallow Sex and the City detour.

The camera worker bathes her in dark pools of light, approaching her from odd angles, as if she was a sleeping lover watched , or an object of art. Yet she breathes, and lives, and smokes, and smiles radiantly. Few actresses are both sun and moon.

When the nights are not still, rain motifs evoke the sad grasp of the dreariness of existence lived without heartfelt joy, whether the dangerous life of the con artist, or the drab librarian. Both are trapped. Only free will gives us freedom. But choice means pain and sacrifice.

The romance and thriller aspects of the plot clank against each other, and there may be one to many coincidence. None of this seriously harms the overall quality of the film.

Before this film, I thought of Frank Oz only in cuddly Muppet terms. No longer. This movie contains a host of spot on performances. Steve Martin previews the demented dentist later perfected in Novocaine. Ellen Greene is fetching, unrecognizable from the L A Law window dressing. Rick Moranis as Seymour is perfect casting.

The joyful amorality of the film hit a wrong note for me- using musical theater mixed with horror was off. Rocky Horror could overcome this by being outrageous camp, rewriting the rules. Lil Shop hews a bit too close to straight romantic musical to totally succeed.

despite this, overall it is great horrid fun. Just not for the weak of stomach or rigid of morals.

I enjoy movies that make me think, but this one just left me going : "huh?". Clearly, the high vote scores mean there is something happenning here that I missed entirely.

My impression was that this was dark, brooding, intellectualized rubbish with no point. Drew Barrymoore and Maggie G are always worth watching, but if I need to be reminded that "high school is hell", I'll watch Carrie or The Virgin Suicides.

I had the plot figured out within 10 minutes. The fine attractive cast, most of whom stayed true to their roles, combined with a flash of wit and the token hints of homage to the traditions to hold my interest. Loretta Devine was more than fine. Jennifer Morrison as Amy was promising.

Not Scream caliber, but worth watching.

A diverting mess of tittilation and suspense that works best at the beginning and the end. Despite being brief, the middle portion lacked punch. Weak acting and corny dialogue. Less sexy than it hints at.

Not a total waste of time, but more for killing time than any other reason to watch this.

A "6" on a global basis, but "8" if you like action movies. This is more a buddy movie than a gangster movie. It is very violent, and has numerous holes and coincidences in the plot.

Vin Diesel steals the movie despite being fourth billing. His is the character with the most integrity, and grit. You have to wonder, given that it was filmed before Vin became famous, but released after, whether they recut the movie to refocus on his role.

Despite the shaky character development, there is a useful theme of delayed coming of age, the value of trust, and the risks of wanting to be someone you aren't.

Great for fans of Vin, good genre movie.