Reviews

I can only imagine that the critics who have praised The Force Awakens were due to pure spite towards the prequels and the desperate need to once again revisit that magical world from 1977. Truth is, the Star Wars of 1977 was a product of that era and while the prequels as much harm as they did helped create a larger world and a larger context. Part of my disappointment in TFA is that I was expecting the movie to go into an uncharted era, but it ended up very much like a retreading of the older movies. When I say I was expecting more, what mean is I was expecting something a little different. This is a wasted opportunity since The Phantom Menace as flawed as it was it also had very similar story beats to A New Hope and added way too much material that while a lot of it was it hit- and-miss, it didn't feel like a complete ripoff of the 1977 classic. And to be fair TFA kinda started out in a different way, yet slowly but surely began hitting the same beats and started getting way too preoccupied with nods to the classics and much like the prequels, there's so much info left unexplained and unaccounted for (the evil empire and the main villain's motives are sketchy at best). The story itself is interesting, the search for the missing Luke Skywalker, a storm trooper who has a crisis of conscience and leaves the First Order, a certain smuggler comes back, a young girl who begins to feel a connection to the Force, a new villain with clouded motives and a new weapon of mass destruction. All of this is good material to take the series into new area to explore but JJ just seems happy to play it ubber safe.

With a suggestive such as this one: One would expect a shallow echhi / harem style particularly as it involves a rather risqué subject. Not so much in this case.

The entire plot revolves around Kyosuke and Kirino, two siblings who got along really well in early childhood. But, for reasons that we later discover towards the series finale, they suddenly drifted apart and have been living in their parents house treating each other as complete strangers. Cut to Kyosuke being a young adult, getting ready for his entrance and such, in a weird situation he bumps into his sister and discovers that she's holding an adults- only PC game. Much to his surprise, he discovers that his little sister have been stockpilling adult-themed erotic pc games and various assorted little girl anime. Kyosuke sees an opportunity to help her sister out of that addiction, help her find new friends and fix their strained relationship. Of course, things start going down an interesting road as it becomes clear that Kirino herself holds bottled-up feelings towards her big brother that start to crack as the series progresses and their relationship improves. New friends, awkward situations, romantic rivalries and comedic hijinks follow suit.

Yet, despite the risqué subject and even the fact that the series goes off the rails and plunges into stupid town in the final episodes, it isn't plagued by lewdness, what little ecchi is there is played purely for comedy. More emphasis on romance, drama and feel good comedy. And to some extent it works. The writing in this series, however, isn't particularly strong there are a few things that don't work. Odd that a such young girl would be a magazine model and a track and field star at such a young age is a little weird and Kyosuke suddenly being a chick magnet is a little weird as well. Kirino's infatuation with her big brother is probably the best writing aspect of the show. You see, we learn from flashbacks that Kirino and Kyosuke were close when they were really young. She was frankly admired by her seemingly perfect big brother: smart, confident, he would do anything to help her. In her naive mind, he was the perfect little brother, but not just that in a way he was very much the perfect boy. As they grew older, she became dissatisfied by the changes she noticed in her brother and after a particularly nasty exchange of words with another childhood friend whom she blames was responsible for changing his brother, she drifts away from him. That's when she discovers and gets hooked into erotic little sister-themed PC games. Why? Well, because the main characters, the big brothers in those games are overprotective and seem closer to the big brother she idolized when she was younger. She found her happy place in those erotic little sister games. Of course, the series does beats you over the head with the problems of overindulging in otaku culture and how Kirino's brother complex can cause trouble for her and him. One episode in particular has a very amusing start when Mom and Dad confront the siblings over the alarming number of red flags between the two which result in Kyosuke living on his own for a short while so he can study for his mock exam and win their trust. Which I can say more but due to IMDb limitation I will end on this: the final episodes are arguably the dumbest thing ever. You could remove the incestual undertones and it would have worked perfectly as two siblings just working out their problems and fixing their broken friendship.

I'll get this out of the way: I never liked any of the Naruto series. It's everything that's wrong with the shounen genre. Gave up on the first TV series after episode 100 when the onslaught of unbearable filler started. Watched a few episodes here and there of Shippuden then decided to read the manga up until the final chapter. This movie feels like what made just for me because it focused on arguably the one only thing that I found interesting about the Naruto universe: the relationship between Naruto and his background filler / friend Hinata. In the middle of all the insane chaos with Orochimaru, Sasuke and all the major wars, this side story with these two characters is something' that was lacking and felt very unexplored. Thankfully, a movie was made that bridges the gap between the final chapter and the epilogue. Movie starts with new scenes that place Hinata as a childhood acquaintance of Naruto, who stands up for her which results in bullies mocking his botched shadow clone technique, getting beat up and having his red scarf ripped apart. Hinata thanks him and he offers her his scarf as a keepsake which triggers her to develop feelings for the kid. Time jumps to the first few episodes of the original Naruto series where Hinata scribbles down Naruto's name and makes it her goal to win him as time and adulthood chimes in. But Hinata's quest to win Naruto's heart gets sidetracked by a menacing villain who kidnaps her baby sister. Let's start with the good: - Top notch animation all around. Character animations and the smoothness of the thankfully short combat scenes. Characters who are not pertinent to the plot are relegated to being cameos and all the characters who matter are the main focus. As much as I hear many complaining about Sasuke being basically a glorified cameo, let's get one thing straight: he has nothing to do with this. This is Naruto and Hinata's story. Sakura makes sense because she is pertinent to this story as she is both Naruto and Hinata's longtime friend and companion. Shikamaru is there because he is assigned by Kakashi and Sai also plays an important role. Cool Sasuke cameo but in the grand scheme of things, he had nothing to do with the plot. Using a doomsday scenario during peacetime, The Last: Naruto the Movie is a slow moving but satisfying romantic dramedy with plenty of action to go around. The first 25 minutes we deal with Hinata's doing her best to knit that scarf as a both a present and a confession. Grown up, a wartime hero, we also see a less crazy, more mature and focused Naruto enjoying life, pestered by groupies and scolded by Sakura who is pro actively helping Hinata while chastising Naruto for not putting two and two together as he is oblivious to Hinata's every attempt to win his heart. Enter the main bad guy who kidnaps Hinata's sister. The main bad guy is somehow connected to the abnormal lunar activities so Kakashi assembles a task force. He sends them on a mission to save Hinata's sister. After a long battle to gain entrance to the Toneri's hideout, the team is frozen by a technique that traps them into a slumber in which they relive their memories over and over. This is one of the most beautiful sequences in the movie. With Naruto starting to connect all the dots as to how Hinata feels about him by inserting himself into her memories from his perspective. That sequence helps Naruto evolve as a character, being more mature and understanding that there was a void in is life. The dream sequence is an interesting metaphysical venue for Naruto to understand both his feelings as well as understand Hinata's feelings towards him. I admit I do not have all the information since I didn't watch enough of Naruto to piece all the history between these two characters, but the movie does a good enough job covering all the logistics of how Naruto and Hinata's history would lead to this particular event. Naruto as a kid, stands up for Hinata and offers her his torn scarf, not understanding at first how just much of an impact it would have on her life. The movie reminds us that in the time frame in which Naruto was ostracized, Hinata was the only person who was genuinely kind to him during his formative years and again the movie clearly shows that he never quite understood why. And Hinata's confession to him while he was engaged in a bloody battle against Pain was a surprise but once again, it's clear that he didn't quite understand. It's only when he looks into Hinata's memories from her perspective, particularly just how much Hinata is also a constant presence in his own memories. The team starts their search in an abandoned village and this also has important character moments in which Naruto himself is more relaxed, but also clumsier. Hinata walks into a small cobweb which prompts Naruto to act more kindly. Moments later, the hero himself hits a bigger spiderweb. This shows that Naruto is more relaxed in her presence but also distracted by his newly understood feelings. It's charming to see this kid who screamed about being a Hokage every single episode in an unfamiliar territory. What our hero sees as Hinata going into the arms of another is actually a clever reveal with flashbacks in which Hinata acts as a Trojan horse, but it also pains her to keep the act to gain Toneri's confidence at the cost of losing Naruto. The final act is bookended by a massive showdown with Naruto and Toneri. But fighting is nothing compared to the last set piece in which Naruto and Hinata return to Earth, effectively ending an important chapter in the hero's life. Be sure to take in the music and the wedding stills during the credits.

I felt something was off from the moment I laid eyes on the first trailer for this movie.

And here's the gist of it: Whatever bad impressions you got from the movie based on the promotional material, I'm sad to say that all the negative impressions came true in this 2 hour action flick.

What's wrong with it? Plenty. TAS tried to imitate The Dark Knight and it did OK. This one, however tries to take the same approach: One main antagonist that spawns another major antagonist, but everything here reeks of Spiderman 3.

But these villains are simply all setup with next to no payoff. Jaime Foxx's character is billed as one of the central antagonists, but really nothing more than a hired muscle with a motivation that would make even Joel Schumacher cringe. He also wears an outfit that feels like a rejected Fantastic Four costume. Harry Obsborn at the beginning has some promise but ultimately he's barely a presence in the movie. He's Two-Face, if he were written by The Farelly Brothers instead of Jonathan Nolan.

Oh and that amazing revelation 'bout Peter's parents and their tragic "accident"? All this setup (with a fairly impressive opening scene) for a 3-minute grainy Youtube video in which Pete's Dad gives us some exposition that can summed up in "Oscorp is evil". Thank you, I wasn't aware of that.

Romance is still awkward, the actress who plays Aunt May seems to have forgotten how to act.

You can argue that TAS did too much in trying to expand upon Peter Parker's life, Ben's death and the hunt for said killer and all that. But the sequel on the other hand seems to think that "less is more", when really it feels like "stuff just happens".

Since when did Spidey develop Jedi-like evil sensing powers? Why does Pete only see Captain Stacey when the plot demands it? Why are the police and firefighters more than willing to let Spidey call the shots since he is still technically a vigilante? Was Gwen fired from Oscorp? And if not, did they pretend she didn't exist after she walked out of the building? They were keeping tabs on Harry hanging out with Peter and the electric guy that nobody gave a flying hoot about and nothing was done to the one random employee that happened to search for Max Dillon's name? Oh and Harry doesn't get killed yet because he knows his way out? How does that work? Is Peter in colleague yet? 'Cause it's a little hard to tell, since he's either fighting crime or making a meager wage sending photos to the Daily Buggle. How come a genius like Peter doesn't know 8th grade science? How does a damaged webshooter work to magically save a whole lot of people from being shocked? Who is Mr. Friers? And does Harry get back to normal?

So much stuff that doesn't work...

Avatar is a look-at-the-pretty-scenery movie, it tries to distract you with pretty scenery and amazing CG creatures, while in the meantime you might not even notice the movie's political message that will likely take you out of the experience if you happen to get bored from the CG half- way through and actually start paying attention to what the characters are implying.

Let's brake down to what I dislike, considering it's 80% RT count with so many five-star reviews, I have to ask did everyone set the bar lower for the term "best movies of the year".

In order for a movie to even begin to qualify as the best movie of 2009,you need a strong story, you need memorable characters and you need good twists.

Avatar has none of the above.

Starting with it's main hero, Jake Sully, played by an obviously bored Sam Worthington, whose animated Avatar actually has more charisma than his real life counterpart.

Sigourney Weaver's character is fun, but pointless, Michelle Rodriguez does not play a bad girl, except for the latter part of the film where she stands up to Quarricth and has one of the most brainless death scenes I've ever seen.

Shame we never get to see Zõe Saldanha, as she is quite attractive, but her Na'vi character is that first quite smart(she does have one great dramatic scene) but her character later loses her charisma.

Quarritch is a forgettable villain and well as the head of the RDA who is a jerk and greedy for no apparent reason other than the script demands him to be so.

The Na'vi are for the most part a mix of the most clichéd aspects of the noble warrior, a common myth that has no ounce of truth to it anywhere but in popular culture.

And let's talk about the plot, for a plot this derivative and look while I understand that there have been homages and more shameless rip-off than Avatar and that it's really not a big deal, but for Cameron to hype his script as 14 years in the making, he's not being honest.

The movie offers very little surprises and for it's derivative nature it plays it very safe. TDK, as an example again, takes the superhero clichés behind the tool-shed and shoots it right between the eyes. Avatar does nothing of the sort.

Instead, it plays on more modern themes, such as environmentalism, hence almost spoofing Ferngully: The Last Rainforest and also seems to say something about the military and not in the most flattering way, as Quarritch arrives on the scene to get the Na'vi to leave and with his army tries blows up the Na'vi's home in a scene that pretty much mimmicks the September the 11th attacks. Except that in the context of the film, it's greedy white military/mercenaries that commit such an atrocity against foreign natives in order to steal their wealth.

And that's when you see the movie's true heart of darkness, when it parallels the mindset of "blood for oil". It's scary, I know...

Avatar is basically a gross revisionism and reinterpretation of political zeitgeist of the past 8 years.

I was both shocked and rolling my eyes during that climactic scene. But with villains this basic and one note, how could you not feel for the Na'vi?

At that point, all the Na'vi, including Neyfitri are angry because at Jakesully(that how they call him), because he betrayed and they have every right to be so. But what does our hero do? Do something that no Na'vi, considering the context of the film even thought, but Jake Sully who has been a Na'vi for roughly 3 months, by catching a mythical bird that like I said before, no Na'vi ever remembered and presto, Nefitiry already forgives him and he becomes a leader to them, just like that.

It gets even more idiotic that the same Na'vi who pray to their trees when the inevitable showdown looms and Ewya does nothing except when Jake Sully uses his naturally grown USB port and asks for Eywa to help.

And so the final showdown between Quarritch, his men and the united Na'vi tribes begin. As things look bleak for the Na'vi, who instead of just marching right into the line of fire, since they are a warrior tribe, Ewya decides to intervene, making animals and general wildlife fight the invaders, all thanks to Jake Sully, of course, Eywa could have been much nicer to it's people if she had decided to act before most of the Na'vi had already been shot. What a beatch, if you ask me.

Avatar is just not as good as many critics will have you believe.

Somehow I saw this coming. This was to be expected, after Borat took a lot of people by surprise, 3 years later, Bruno's antics seem roughly calculated and staged. Nothing's changed much, it just seems more obvious. Another dead give-away is that Bruno sparked considerably less lawsuits than it's SBC's previous work, so either real people actually went along with the joke or the whole thing was entirely staged. Now, Bruno is not without it's merits, it can be at hilarious and outrageous(even more than Borat naked wrestling scene), but the film can be at times inconsistent. It's a loads of fun during the first 40 some minutes, then we get a much weaker second half when the set pieces get the really good bits are too far and between. Sasha Baron Cohen is great, never breaks character, so no complaints there. The rest of the cast do a decent enough job. But even they can only do so much, I think the worst scene in the whole movie would be the baby casting bit, no serious person would laugh at that, it might have worked in back in Ali G sketches, but not here.

I like Dwayne Johnson's work(even his kid friendly stuff such as Game Plan) and since watching him steal the show from Steve Carell on Get Smart, I always wanted him to go back to making good PG-13 or heck even R-rated action movies, so I'm proud to say that we get a bit of that "action"-Dwayne in RtWM. A remake of 70's movie that I never saw. It's kinda fun, something along the lines of a typical sci-fi conspiracy movie with a dash of what could be considered a G-rated version of Predator. So we get Jack Bruno, a taxi driver, frustrated by his work that consists of picking up sci-fi geeks in Vegas, while being harassed by his former employer's henchmen, until he picks up two mysterious kids who appear out of nowhere, they sound weird, they act weird and even more troubling an evil organization is after them, which is apparently some sort of spin-off of the Department of Homeland Security who want to take in these kids. And they are evil, why exactly? I have no clue, the writers forgot to give us any indication as why the movie's main villains do what they do, apart from general vagueness of it all and an eye-rolling random and out-of-context mention of The Patriot Act.

Heck, the alien stalker(which could be mistaken by some as The Predator's baby brother)should've been the true main villain and he has a far more solid and clear motive. Oddly enough, for a movie based on sci-fi, they also pokes fun at the tin-foil mentality of the science fiction and nothing really changes with the main characters, Jack Bruno doesn't go gaga after all is revealed and Carla Gugino's Dr. Alex is amazed but never warped. On the acting side, Dwayne Johnson performs his little act with both physical prowess and some subtle acting, the kids are generally likable, though the little girl who plays Sara got a little on my nerves as she at times was either over-acting or just being over- dramatic. The main villain is well, evil, has an evil stare, it's a completely different contrast to his own henchmen, namely Chris Marquette who looks like he's in a completely different movie, though he gets kudos for his delivery on that particular gun stand-off that seems like it was taken from a John Woo film. My advice: It's worth watching at least once, if you haven't seen it yet, Rent it. It's 90 minutes worth of good family friendly action fun.

Terminator Salvation is the forth installment in the sci-fi trilogy that started way back in early 80's. Who knew that such a film would become a franchise of it's own spawning TV spin-offs, comic and eventually a fourth film.

How does Terminator: Salvation hold up without it's most recognizable star? It does a decent job, actually...however... be prepared for a different kind of movie.

It starts with a convict named Marcus Wright on death row, the year's 2003, then we shift to 2017, with John Connor, played by Christian Bale, who has greatly matured from the T3 Nick Stahl days, trying to understand what is Skynet plotting and how Marcus who suddenly wakes up in that year, fits in to all of this.

This fourth Terminator movie starts off with a very different kind of scope, the story cuts away between Marcus's POV and John Connor's POV until they cross paths, in which a somewhat predictable twist appears.

Like I said, it's a different movie, we no longer have one relentless machine stalking our heroes as they team up with a slightly inferior model, we kinda only get something along that template near the end of the film.

It's a little disappointing to see that the future doesn't hold as much menace as the other movies have mentioned. The trailer gives a glimpse of despair and complete loss of hope, a bleak picture, but the finished product reveals humanity as capable of facing such a threat as John Connor outsmarts and outfights a Terminator early on, as the movie goes on, machines are most of the times bested, particularly in chase scene with Kyle Reese, Marcus and a little mute girl we never actually get to know, who sorta seems to be thrown in to have a kid character.

Of course, if you're looking for loads of action, T:S delivers just that, but in the scope of a war movie. Some catchphrases from previous films make their timeless appearance. Though slightly out of place, but I have to admit that when Bale says "I'll be back", it does sound kinda cool.

But when I think about the plot, I think they could've done something better. My main beef is that Skynet never had any possible way of knowing that Kyle Reese is Connor's father. It doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense, I mean, was Skynet making a list of hits, was it randomly generated? Was it a coincidence Reese was in the hit list? That was a might big coincidence...

We never know, it's not clear, equally silly is how Marcus was only under influence of Skynet, but never truly controlled by them. They do nothing to stop him. Again, very silly.

Now, acting-wise, as much as I praised Bale in his other films, I have to admit that his modus operandi has become slightly predictable, his deep voice really sinks in, but there was nothing in there that could be considered extreme(this because, that fight with Shane Hulbert was still fresh in everybody's mind), but he passes the test. Finally get to see that brave John Connor, almost Rambo-like, instead of the annoying wimpy teenager, young adult from the Sarah Chronicles series and T3.

The Australian actor who plays Marcus Wright, Sam Worthington, also makes for a great performance, a half-man, half-machine with an identity crisis, at least when the twist arrives.

The rest of the cast do a terrific job and I have to give props to Roland Kickinger with his cameo, with the digital Arnold slapped into his face. I admit, my heart nearly stopped and I felt the urge to shout"Oh, yeah, I payed my ticket to see this!". Short, obvious CG Arnold, but a very nice touch.

I went in expecting a complete disaster, but I was somewhat surprised. This is leagues better than John Cena's last star vehicle which was the awful The Marine. Of course, that's not saying much. However, John Cena is by no means a good actor but his delivery was acceptable so something good can come out of this. Cena's matured a little in this movie, though there will still be some cringe-worthy deliveries, though not many this time around. What hurts the movie most is that it's just too similar to Die Hard. People who've seen any of the Die Hard movies are already 10 steps ahead of any of the characters in this movie, none of it's plot twists will come as a surprise. Even character archetypes follow a predictable pattern such as the obviously Euro-trash villain that in no way looks, acts and sounds like Simon Gruber, OK sorry about the sarcasm. It's a shame, because apart from the shaky cam(through I've seen worse), it's a well made and shot action thriller, it's just that by 2009 standards, it feels outdated. Still I gotta give them kudos for showcasing a little more of New Orleans, which looks like a wonderful city. I say the movie's at least worth a rental.

The Dark Knight is the second installment in the re-imagining of the Batman movie mythos. Chris Nolan along with sibling screenwriter Jonah Nolan and most of the returning cast and a few additions(one of which is no longer with us, sadly), created what could be essentially the greatest superhero movie of all times. Many people can look at this movie and see it as either: a) An action packed superhero movie b)a crime drama c)A case-study on human morality d)all of the above. There are a lot of layers to this film. It starts with Batman, Harvey Dent and Jim Gordon team up to take down the remaining crime bosses, but not all goes well when a new criminal mastermind wearing clown make-up starts to wreck havoc in Gotham City, which ultimately leads to the big issue of this movie: No one is safe. As a superhero movie, we are told that everyone's safe, nobody gets hurt, the hero will save the day, good always thriumps over evil 100% percent. But no, The Dark Knight enters a realm of darkness, something we haven't seen since The Empire Strikes Back. I can't think of any superhero movie, save for that piece of trash Daredevil, where the hero's main squeeze gets taken out of the picture. It's simply scary, even more terrifying because it's real, it's plausible. The main villain in this film is perhaps the greatest evil of them all. It's more than his disfigured look, mannerisms and twisted sense of humor, he is crime's logical response to someone like Batman, of course, the Joker is someone that nobody understands. But somehow, his train of thought makes some sense in some creepy way, that's what scares me. The Joker is perhaps the most terrifying incarnation of evil and it lies mostly on his nihilism, his complete and utter disregard for human life and rules, we can thank Heath Ledger's performance for this. To the Joker nobody is pure. Everybody has a price, even Batman. The Dark Knight's greatest challenge is fighting this monster without crossing the line himself. Batman ultimately in the face of apparent defeat near the end, sacrifices all he accomplished for the greater good, albeit in a slightly unclear manner. The rest of the cast does their job well. Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman never go beyond their mentor/assistant roles, though Alfred continues to be the voice of reason and Bruce's father figure. Rachel Dawes, by Maggie Gyllenhall certainly washes off the bad taste brought in by Katie Holmes and Aaron Eckhart plays a little like what you expect, but he too reaches the heart of darkness and can be at times as disturbing as the film's main nemesis. It's a shame The Dark Knight was snubbed at The Oscars, this movie as well as The Watchmen prove that comic book movies can be serious, intelligent and still be fun to watch.

What is the correlation between editing media footage and a zombie plague? George Romero's lastest indie work seems to throw in a below-average zombie flick with scenes taken from the Loisiana Katrina-riots in order to get make a point. Oddly enough, all the scenes edited where said social commentary fit in are featured, not in the actual footage, but non-sequitur segments. Anyway, here's yet another story where a group of people stumble, in this case a group of colleague filmmakers are doing a b-movie and they get the news about a mysterious outbreak of dead rising from their graves.

A group of mid-20s complete with stereotype Texan, jocks, nerds, camera obsessed dude and his girlfriend(can you guess that it's going to them in trouble?), skeptic dude and a charming British professor, arguably the movie's only character worth rooting for. Also throw in generic army types with a face carrying a "I'm gonna rape you" smirk. They spent most of their time recording everything that's happening and of course, it's all shaky cam.

Occasionally, they'll even shoot it with the camera looking down on the floor as they strut, which does the opposite effect of what filmmakers want, that is bore the heck of you. It's not as horrible as the one I've seen on REC, but as far as fear and tension go, Diary of the Dead is substantially weaker than the Spanish shaky-cam zombie fest.

Occasionally you might jump once or twice, though the biggest scares seem to happen roughly at the start of the film when our hero goes to pick his girlfriend at the colleague campus, which is a creepy atmosphere that could set the tone for what's to come, but the movie never follows through.

As you've seen dozens of times, one zombie pops up here and there and then things always get out of hand and all humanity is lost... yadadadada(however the ending is strange). It's noticeable even though it feels small scale. The protagonists aren't too bright, unfortunately, instead of finding bunkers, they try to crash into their respective parents or friend's house, assuming that they'll be safe there and that they are all right, then things go wrong, oh what could possibly go wrong?

What can I say? There's nothing here you haven't already seen. Save of course, the need to feature Youtube and other social networking websites that should serve a purpose in this. But then we get to the subliminal Katrina riots that are used on this film, why I'll never understand. It's hard to immerse yourself in the experience, when they use that unrelated footage that really adds nothing to the story. "There are more sides to a story" doesn't fit into the context of a zombie flick, because walking dead isn't exactly the sort of thing that no serious press would lie about. In Romero's world there are rules and meshing them into a real world setup doesn't quite work as it should.

During Dr. Jones's long hiatus, at least two characters have been successful as adventurers/tomb raiders. We have Nicolas Cage as Benjamin Gates as a smart scholar/treasure hunter, the other one is no other than Brendan Fraser's Rick O' Connell, in two action packed films that pray tribute to the old Mummy movies. A third movie as been a long time coming, I missed the film premiere, but I rented the DVD yesterday, so does this movie fly like an eagle or does it just crash and burn?

Taking cues from the original film, we get about 10 minutes worth of an evil Chinese Emperor(Jet Li) who seeks out an attractive sorcerer(Michelle Yeou) that can give him everlasting life,however, his own general steps on his toes and pays with his life, the sorcerer then curses the emperor and his army which in turn are turned into stone. It's an unusually long setup(it almost feels like another movie) and it takes even longer to jump start the actual plot.

Right off the bat, continuity is a mess, Brendan Fraser and Maria Bello(filing in for Rachel Weisz) are now apparently retired, seeing how this now takes place 10 years after the second movie. However no of them look any older than they were 3 years ago, yet self-referencing age jokes proliferate in this one, which is an odd choice. It might fly with Indy, but Brendan Frasier hasn't even turned 40! Anyway, continuity is a complete mess, Rick and Evelyn look like they barely aged at all, yet they've already retired, but his son goes from a British boy to an American-speaking treasure hunter and colleague dropout(what's with this obsession nowadays?). He also seems to be enamorated with a mysterious girl who seems to be guarding tombs. Evelyn's brother returns, but this time given much less to do, aside from being comic filler. Maria Bello isn't quite a miscast, but Rachel Weisz's absence makes her interaction with the other actors feel awkward, at least to me as a viewer, but c'est la vie.

Like I stated before, the plot takes forever to get going, it really starts at the 30 minute mark, when the crew suffers an unthinkable betrayal to help an aging Chinese extremist general resurrect the dragon emperor. Aside from that, and the continuity goofs, this third installment is a satisfying, if average action movie. Nothing that you see here is remarkably different than the older films. As action set pieces rage on and quirky one-liners are mixed with the usual family torn apart sub-plot, with Rick and his son's occasional arguments about everything from him not taking his son seriously as well as weapon analysis.

As far as acting goes, Brendan Frasier is a notoriously bad actor, but the Mummy movies and well as the new Journey to the Center of the Earth, really make him stand out as a decent action movie star, there's some charm and I do appreciate the references to the earlier movies. Luke Ford takes a while to get used to, as he sorta fades in and out of focus, especially before he reunites with his parents, afterwards, he is mostly stuck with action pieces and his romantic subplot with Isabella Leong's Lin, who later reveals herself as the sorcerer's daughter. Jet Li is always a welcome addition to this film. I guess he does OK as a villain, but then again with a fully fleshed out back story, who wouldn't?

Today, as I re watched Casino Royale, I can't seem to shake the feeling that that movie was indeed better than I had judged. With brings me to Quantum of Solace, to which I had never felt so indifferent about it during it's full 2-hour run.

The director and producer must've thought it was a good idea to make a movie that would be fit for our favorite Austrian turned California governor and Bruce Willis, except that they forgot that Arnold and Willis were generally very colorful, in here we have a stone faced Daniel Craig who takes himself so seriously that the movie at points feels un-intentionally funny as it provides some embarrassed laughs.

Anyway, the first shocker would be to learn that this movie takes place just a few hours after Casino Royale, I'm impressed at how Bond magically goes from the occasional screw-up into a perfect fighting and killing machine, British spies do make the world safe,'cause in this world, CIA agents are worthless pencil-pushers with mustaches that spout endless platitudes and are willing to work with nefarious organizations just for a taste of black gold.

But anyway, Bond becomes the perfect killing machine and all it took was to snuff out his Vesper and in the process sets out on the hunt for the organization Mr. White works for and in the process uncover that terrible conspiracy by it's leader, the new Bond villain Greene, or at least standing in for an actual villain.

Be prepared for some action, shooting, flirting, a bit of tought interrogation, intense close quarters combat and no endless card game in sight, I thought it was a pretty good thing, but like I said before, I felt so indifferent to the whole thing. Every action set piece looks calculated, sometimes unnatural(like the hotel in the desert that seems to have explosions set on cue) and just too flashy. Not is to say that it's bad, far from it, but underwhelming.

As an action movie, The Dark Knight overshadows Quantum of Solace because TDK feels like a heavy and dramatic roller-coaster ride, while QOS is a tamer, less exciting and often predictable ride.

Like I said, the set pieces are unexciting and have a feel of dejà vù, as it they tried to much to make it feel like the older Bonds of days passed. It also hurts this movie's chances that the opening theme song is perhaps one of the worst I've heard in years, what were they thinking? I miss Chris Cornell's intro from Casino Royale.

Also part of the blame falls on the actors as well, I concede that Daniel Craig's Bond is what he makes it to be, a cold and efficient killer, but his entire motivation for this quest is revenge and the trailers make it seem like he's losing it, when you see the actual movie, he feels so calm and restrained, it feels more like a routine job than a personal quest, no offence to Craig. By contrast, Judi Dench's M is so distrustful of Bond that she will jump to conclusions on the slightest twitch, I wonder,why does she let him be on the force at all, since Bond to him, does nothing but steps on everybody's toes and kill off the people whom he's after? In short, if you miss on Casino Royale, Bond's motivations are very unclear.

The bond girl this time played by Olga Kurylenko has considerably less screen time, just barely more than her previous 2 movies, based on video game properties. But her screen time was worth it, it was enjoyable, she was hard-hitting, expressive and had no-nonsense attitude about her mission, which is also a personal vendetta as we later discover.

Dominic Greene fails at the highest level, you want to pass off this character as the owner of an evil eco-friendly company(That surprised me, I never thought they would go there) as a bad guy, nay... the leader of that terrible organization? Not that I didn't enjoy the twist, which is really was he is after, but other than that, he feels like a stand-in for the real bogeyman.

To cut this short, Quantum of Solace is a decent if underwhelming action movie. To watch this, I would advise watching Casino Royale first, or else it will feel like a generic action movie.

I was somewhat interested in seeing this movie, I mean Shia LeBouf is a likable actor, it also features Billy Bob Thorton and it's from the Disturbia director, what could go wrong?

I was enjoying this movie(even with the eyebrow-raising opening sequence), until it hit the 90 minute mark.

Had gone a different way, Eagle Eye would've been rated higher.

First we kick off with a sentinel cam spying on a possible known terrorist, while Mike Chikilis as the Secretary of Defense monitors an event that looks unclear. A group of villagers somewhere in Afhganistan are being joined what appears to be the number 1 ghost terrorist on their grid. Their automated re-con device detects a 21% probability of an identical match, then jumps to 50% but it advises an abort.

The Secretary of Defense can't make up his mind, so he rings the President, with a familiar speech pattern and accent and decides to order it regardless, even tought we never actually see what the villagers are burying.

They all get blown to kingdom come.

At an early point, I had no clue what that was about. Then we meet Shaw, played by Shia LeBouf, a dropout working on a computer store, who gets the news that his brother, a service man in the army is pronounced dead. Again, what did this have to do with anything?

We find out soon enough, that Shawn finds millions of dollars on his account and he discovers in his house that he has enough fire-power to start his own urban warfare and he gets called by an unknown woman.

Agent Morgan stops him at first, only for Shaw to escape with some unusual help and in the meantime another seemingly random character gets pulled into the fray, when she also gets a call.

After that chases unsure, make that impossible-to-follow-due-to-terrible-editing car chases, tense stick ups and an odd conspiracy plot that starts off right and interesting, but then we get to that twist, which is exactly when we find out what the eagle eye is.

What the eagle eye does and how it settles in the big picture is also related to two early scenes that I mentioned. A somewhat disturbing premise, one that ties in with the current War on Terror. It also borrows elements from War Games, Terminator and a little of Minority Report, as well.

Minority Report, I can understand, since Spielberg has executive credits on this, but the rest feels like a carbon copy of said movies. I don't mind, you can blatantly rip off any of these movies as long as you do it right,yet Eagle Eye never lives up to it's own hype.

DJ Caruso did a great job with Disturbia, I felt it had the perfect combination of a horror movie with the delights of a teen movie. But here, with a bigger budget and bothersome shaky cam, especially in car chases that made me feel puzzled instead of thrilled, doesn't get to the same level.

I could also number a lot of flaws in the movie, but some reviews here have already got everything covered.

If you're in the mood for a movie that still feels like a summer movie, this is it. Better this than Max Payne, that's for sure.

Once in a while a game based movie comes along. Only to have terrible reviews and generally disappointing box office performances. Now add a credible director with some respectable action credentials, billed as the next Richard Donner, John Moore and you have an equally credible action star, Mark Whalberg whose embarrassing Marky Mark days are long gone. Then you have a game which is just perfect for a movie.

The end result? Nothing more then a disappointment. I should've figured it by now, with only 24 hours before the US premiere, barely any reviews are to be found, which lead me to believe that 20th Century Fox themselves didn't have much faith in the project.

Max Payne goes the way of many others that have gone by: Dead or Alive, Hit-man, Doom and Alone in the Dark, to name a few.

Max Payne would make a very good movie, but even in the hands of competent people, it feels nothing more then a messy and lackluster production.

Enter Max Payne, who is pushing pencils but at the same time following clues that lead to the bizarre and brutal murder of his wife and baby son. All this related to a string of weird murders with people using tattoos. Max Payne starts digging around, as his trails keep getting cold and also teams up with a mob girl called Mona Sax who wants to find the culprit who murdered her sister. All this related to an odd drug that's making people go insane. Expect a lot of rough Jack Bauer-esquire questioning and gun play, right?

Sadly, Max Payne is not as action packed as the trailers make it seem, expect only one actual gun play sequence in a very familiar place to fans who played the first game(the subway station). Then an investigation plot that seems to take forever, until we get to the much hyped twist and betrayal bit... all the time I was wondering, is this Max Payne?

If it weren't for the visual presentation(which I will get to soon enough), this would be a very generic TV cop pilot episode. The fact that Max Payne is a 7 year old game hurts this movie's chances of getting out there, because a lot has happened in these last years, so it's twists and turns will be seen coming a mile away.

While a literal translation of the game plot would be perhaps overly complex, anybody who remembers the original game, will be puzzled as to how this plot works, as it feels like it's jumping around. The lack of characters like the Punchinello mob and the secret society lead by Woden make the end result seem messy and the ending delivers no sense of closure at least for us, the audience as it comes quickly and abruptly.

If feels like they picked the first two levels, ignored everything else and glued the final level, hoping it would tie the loose ends by itself, that's how it felt to me.

Even the twist does very little to get people excited. In this case, part of the blame falls on the lead star himself Mark Whalberg who at often times seems to use the exact facial expression for either being mortified by his wife's slaying and when he's does something completely different. While Max's obsession in his the constant reminder of his family's loss and the movie environment looks decent, much of the character's mumbling and deep narration from the game is almost gone(it's shown in the early part of the film where Max is struggling to avoid drowning).

Whalberg just doesn't sell Max Payne to me. He's not nearly as bad ass as he could've been, except in the final 20 minutes when he becomes deranged as a result of using that drug as well. Other then that, I generally cringed at his performance.

Mila Kunis is also a huge disappointment, as she does very little, apart from showing up just in the right time at the end of the film. A mysterious character in the game reduced to a couple of eye candy shots for the male audience. In a brief moment sarcasm I'll say that her presence in the movie was as relevant as her role as Meg in the new Family Guy episodes.

In short, Max Payne is yet another disappointing entry into the game to movie adaptation history, as the successful and critically acclaimed chapter has yet to written.

Those of you expecting a decent cop movie, might get a cheap thrill or two if you're into the movie's premise and don't know what the game, the rest will better wait for a cheap movie night or wait till the DVD. It's just that disappointing.

This one was a though nut to crack. I had the chance of watching the movie in an empty theater, with no annoying little kids trolling around, I started watching this new "movie", which is really 3 episodes glued together with an open mind.

At the start, I was somewhat disappointed that the original Star Wars tune was somewhat missing and the opening crawl was replaced with an out-of-place World War 2-style news reel. Weird way of setting the mood, I raised an eyebrow, but about 5 minutes into the movie, it felt like I was watching yet another Star Wars movie.

Perhaps a little too heavy for kids as the furious ground battles between clones and droids are often very intense. The plot has been the Aquile's heal of the new Star Wars movies, as an adult, the plot when compared to the original movies, including the last prequel movie, feels a bit watered down, but then again this is a setup for an upcoming TV series.

The dialog is perhaps more casual, unless you count a one or two quotes from Qui Gon Jin to get your Star Wars kinks flared up. It also shows often times the complexities of being a general leading an army and how much split-second decisions can have an impact among ranks, but that's about it.

But despite that, The Clone Wars is not a hard movie to like. 3 years later, I'm not as crazy about the franchise as I once was, but I did find some warmth in this short movie. Like I stated before, there's a bigger focus on the actual Clone War, unlike in the live action films where the battles are only briefly shown and cut right away to move the plot along.

As this is a movie called Clone Wars from a series called Star Wars, this definition is truer then ever. I enjoyed the intensity of the battles as they unfolded, of course we are already 20 steps ahead of this story, but still I was anxious and sometimes fearful of what might occur. The camera work does an awesome job of watching the clone army charging the droids, in an almost D-day like perspective and you feel right in the middle of it.

The light-saber duels were OK, not very impressive but they serve their purpose.

Animation-wise, other then a couple of badly animated bits(even good video games manage to do better) and of course, light years behind Wall*E, it fits the mood with it's semi GC/semi Japanese anime feel. For a TV show, however, it does look impressive.

Now character-wise, like I said before with a more dialog and a basic plot, the characters would surely suffer, in this case not much. In fact, making those first two parts slimmer actually makes you pay more attention to the actual characters. Considering Hayden Christensen and Ewan McGregor have been replaced with CG-renditions of themselves in-character, they are still the same, even with different voice actors, they stand out.

Anakin is still Anakin, he's let loose and we finally get to see what makes him the often quoted One Man Army(as seen on many novels). His deep troubles and disturbing background story is kept mostly vague and he seems to be cheerful for once, with only his darkness making a few appearances. Obi-wan on the other hand really takes a backseat to the action, I guess I was kinda disappointed by how the character was treated. Not much I can say about Padmé in her very short appearance. Ventress proves to be scary enough as Dooku's Sith girl.

Ahsoka Tano, however, is a huge change in this series, I haven't completely decided on her. She seems to be a mix of the early kid Anakin that most people watching The Phantom Menace grew to despite and a little of episode 2's Anakin and his penchant for being hot-heated. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. You end up caring and noticing even the nameless clone troopers that sacrifice themselves in the grand scheme of things.

The soundtrack is also a bit disappointing, a more modern score I guess, but I miss some of the deep tunes.

I think it's worth watching at least once in the big screen before it makes it's way onto DVDs. At least for nostalgia's sake.

The answer: A very clichéd zombie movie with headache inducing camera work.

Remember Brian Griffin's reaction to Blair Witch Project? It was something like this: Nothing's happening... Nothing's happening... Something about a witch... Nothing's happening... Movie's over, a bunch of people in the audience look angry.

It was little more then what I felt about this particular motion picture. Let me give you an idea of what's going on, a news reporter(who apparently does a TV show for late night that nobody watches) and her trusty camera man tag along with some firemen who received a distress call from an old lady who is apparently locked in her own apartment. Police and firemen arrive only to for the woman to suddenly bite a police officer, then one thing leads to another as army guys quarantine the building and things start getting out of control.

First off, is the movie really scary as some claim it is? Depends. on the screening I attended there were two types of audience members, the 15 to 17-year old and the over 24... I noticed completely different reactions. The younger crowd was so scared they had to leave the room a couple of times to relax. The other half, in which I was inserted, kept whispering sarcastic remarks and complaining about the camera angle and of course, disappointment was obvious in their looks, when it ended.

That's doesn't mean that REC is without any merits, the environment is quite tense but sadly it's the only honorable achievement this movie ever gets right.

Other then that, prepare yourself for a few dead moments where the characters are just talking and talking and talking. In the building watch some guy badmouth his Asian neighbors while not aware that the camera is on. Watch the main character interview dozens of uninteresting folks and it justs goes on and on. The first part of the actual motion picture seems to take forever, it meant to give us some emotional attachment to our main lead. But as the movie progresses, she becomes easily the most annoying character here.

Yes, she does... Mos-Def-in-16-Blocks annoying. She feels the need to scream at the top of her lungs and confront some character with stuff like "What the heck is this!?" over and over even though the character is explanation her everything with perfect sense and the items she gathers are all in perfect order.

The only character I felt sorry for was the tough-as-nails firefighter who ends up having to fight off monsters with nothing more then a hammer. Everybody else is unappealing.

The camera work here takes cues from TBP, of course, the shaky cam. I've been somewhat supportive of this method because it tends to make everything feel a lot more tense, especially in fight scenes. This isn't a martial arts movie, so at times it feels more nauseating then actually scary, tense or both for that matter.

And this is the first documented motion picture to have PDS aka Portuguese derangement syndrome, you'll know it when you see it. I didn't watch Cloverfield and somehow I'm grateful for doing so, as I feel that these real-time documentary scary movies aren't really that good. Want to get really scared out of our wits? Play the Condemned games on Xbox 360 and PS3, they seem scarier then the vast majority of horror movies lately.

That's what I felt after waisting 2 hours and 4 bucks on this rental.

Syriana thinks it's has a plot, it's apparently 4 stories that are somehow connected, or so the promotional tagline would make you believe that.

We have a lawyer who investigates some shaddy business with a merger, a CIA operative who sold some guys missiles but it all went wrong, a financial expert who gets a job as a consultant for an arabian prince, especially after his son dies from shock while plunging into a pool who just happened to be from the father of said arabian prince. Then two workers who become unemployed because of the merger and turn to Islam after one of them forgets to comply with a simple(and huge) sign that just says "no talking" while in line...

This is what I could gather from what I've seen at the start of the movie, after that it feels like an enormous conspiracy that's wrapped into an even larger conspiracy that seems to take it's pot shots at the oil industry and takes into account some popular myths and, dare I say it, fantasies about terrorists.

The mere idea that a person that mercilessly plunges himself into a crowd and takes away his own life and other several hundreds innocent men, women and children with him, because greedy and sleazy evil American oil companies took his job thus making it justifiable is almost laughable and seems like something out of Batman Forever(also released by Warner Brothers), where Edward Nigma becomes a super villain, because his boss just happened to dislike his ideas.

Of course, in this case terrorist plunge themselves into rich, evil capitalist executives, thus making it, at least in the minds of the writers, perfectly justifiable, though for some odd reason actual terrorists never seem to do that. They seem happy to just blow themselves up in the nearest civilian market they can find, kidnap random civilians, torture them and tape their beheadings just for fun, so this is a movie about actual events, right?

Next point, in the storyline of the young lawyer who wants to iron out the ins and outs of this merger, here's the way to make an oil executive seem evil: just change the tone of his voice, so everything he says sounds sinister, especially when you make him say the most vague, empty and meaningless remarks about business, the world, oil and financial accountants. This is what best describes the boards meetings and conversations between executives in this movie: empty. I confess I don't know how the oil business works, but then again, neither does the movie. It also doesn't hurt to make a senator do a cringe-worthy "corruption keeps us warm" monologue just for kicks. The lawyer also happens to hang out with a nameless character that seems a drunk who confronts him with often silent stares, which lead to nothing.

Then the CIA agent(played by George Clooney who seems to be overweight in this movie, because that the only thing I noticed from him), who screws up after making a crucial mistake in losing precious missiles, wow, surprising how such a veteran agent gives away two missiles and gets tricked by a dealer who was apparently such a big friend of his, while suspecting any possible backstabbing. But that doesn't happen until he's back and the other CIA uppers want to cover it up by sending him on another mission, without the chief's consent or approval. He's apparently going to take a hit on an arabian prince(who just so happens be the boss of the financial expert... so everything is connected, except that it's called a coincidence), this attempt which also fails, leads him to be beaten and tortured by a double-crosser, after he contacted Hezbollah. And then he goes back yet again, to warn the prince...o...k...

Syriana works as far as cinematics go, music's fine, acting is acceptable, though I find it puzzling that Clooney won an Oscar for this as best supporting actor... 2005 must've been a pretty crummy year, worst then what I remembered.

I've grown somewhat detached from Kung Fu movies in the last year or so. Some of these Japanese mafia/Chinese mafia related stories feel so much alike that sometimes it feels like you're just going through the motions, I felt pretty much the same way with Rouge Assassin until the twist actually kicked in. Say what you will about the shaky-cam technique, martial arts movies in general, especially Jackie Chan's movies, are so obviously choreographed, that you no longer feel that the fighting is dangerous and it really does feel more like a dance, Jackie Chan gets off most of the times, since that's how we works taking cues from the late great Charles Chaplin and also since his movies and generally aimed at a PG and PG-13 crowd, but again, most of these types of movies feature fight scenes that feel too much like the actors are doing dance steps rather then fighting. Rouge Assassin's no different.

For the most part, the story's about Jason Staham's character quest to avenge his best friend after he had been taken out by a mysterious hit-man who seems to change his allegiances between the yakuza and triad mob bosses as easily as one changes his sweater.

However, no amounts of Jason Staham-related scenes(his scene where he confronts a Yakuza enforcer in Japanese is cool) can make up such for a generic kung fu movie. But the twist, which mostly likely nobody will see coming when it hits, but careful viewers will probably notice some odd stuff at some point. Believe me, it will change your entire perspective of all the characters involved in this odd conspiracy.

I was also somewhat disappointed by Devon Aoki's performance, who doesn't really do much then looking a little tough, but just demanding a salad to his hench at gunpoint looked a little silly on screen.

The cast was decent, we had Jet Li, once again giving his usual performance and Jason Staham, who has pretty much now cemented himself as a top Hollywood bad boy, gives once again , another of his great performances.

The cast also includes some rising Asian stars, who play their part with competence(save for Devon Aoki), thought the movie seems a little too condescending enough and assume that the audience knows no difference between the Japanese mafia and the Chinese mafia.

It's worth a rental, it's a generic kung fu cop movie like many others before it, but has only one thing that elevates it above everything else. And that's the said twist.

This has to be one of the most hysterical action movies I've seen a while. The simple story of a lone man who goes a long way to protect a new born baby from a group of hired hit men. It could have been the perfect mindless action movie, think about it: guns, hot women and mindless shootings. A good guy who isn't afraid to fight. One guy taking out a thousand or so guns in the most creative ways in even more ridiculous shooting situations(who thinks of a shoot-out during a sex scene)? And even some very dark comedy... An evil, yet comical bad guy who reaches the most amazing conclusions based on the faintest of clues. This is the most impressive action movie, then suddenly 20 minutes left, we are given preachy gun comments and how that played in the heroes past, hmm... OK... Clive Owen does very good with some fairly simple lines and Paul Giamatti does what he does best. Kudos for Monica Belluci, but don't expect her to be any more then eye candy. It's a great action movie, only ruined by a few brief minutes of pointless gun control mumbo jumbo...

This is Ben Affleck's directorial debut, after his acting career has been somewhat reduced to being fairly mocked on Family Guy, he made this movie which is quite good. This movie had been slightly derailed over comparisons to the notorious McCaan mystery that has been all the talk in Portugal, so understandably there might be tendency to pre-judge and people are likely going to get upset, however close examination of it's plot reveals no similarities to the elusive real world case, but speculation continues... This story centers around Patrick Kenzie, a private detective who's assigned to look for a missing child that sparked a lot of media attention, the child of a single mother who goes missing for hours on end. As Patrick and her partner/girlfriend continue their search, nothing is what it seems and suddenly the truth is much scarier then you might think as the people you trust and the people you meet on this case become more ambiguous. The mystery storyline is quite impressive, with some great twists and turns that you won't see coming(at least not at first). There's also an interesting moral struggle near the end of the movie, which will likely make people take sides over this matter. Acting is acceptable, thought Casey Aflleck didn't strike me as entirely convincing, was it his accent? Because he sounded fairly one tone(ironically kinda like his brother). Patrick is presented as a detective with lots of connections who apparently can wave threats to a sleazy Haitian crook, but his appearance doesn't make it entirely convincing, but the character's sense of morals make up for these shortcomings. Michelle Mohganagan is also acceptable and Morgan Freeman is just being himself. Ed Harris shines as the hardened cop who the audience will keep guessing as to his true intentions. Overall, it's an acceptable cast. You can say that Gone Baby Gone is also well shot, with some shots of people walking around Boston, emerging you into it, but also the underbelly of civilization is briefly shown through petty thieves and most disturbingly in the house of a coke-addicted couple and their child-molesting buddy(quite a shocking scene, even if when it's not entirely shown). The soundtrack feels just about right. This is a great movie and I recommend everybody watching this.

I remember the first two movies, while made essentially for kids, they had good enough jokes adults could watch.

This new movie, however, seems to confirm the trend that often times, the third movie of the series ends up being more controversial in the sense that after two good movies(well an acceptable one and a pretty good one), fans are obviously expecting more, but it's precisely at the third time around something happens: the actors seem bored, the acting feels tired and stiff, the plot is nothing special and ultimately, the crowd notices that it is a bad movie. The same happened in Spider Man 3, Asterix follows that trends.

In this particular story, even the title is misleading, a lovesick gaul wants to be engaged to a Greek princess, but her father begs her to marry Cesar's son(OK, first off, major continuity error: in the second movie, Cesar was a somewhat young emperor and had just married Cleopatra, now he appears as old man and already has an adult son). Ultimately, she decides to wed the winner of the upcoming Olympic tournament, so the guy decides to recruit Asterix and Obelix to help him win the Olympics. OK, fair enough.

However, that's where things start crashing down... As the main characters, Asterix and Obelix end up for the most part being side characters to assist the main one and the vast majority of the famous Asterix characters are reduced to background filler, surprisingly the village singer gets about as much screen time as the main heroes, but even Asterix had few lines and does very little then do his whole routine which is beat up romans, though they don't do much of that here nor can they use most of their powers with the potion, since it's the Olympics they get themselves disqualified for using them(through doping tests done by blowing into weird-looking beetles).

So by removing those powers they end up doing very little, other then giving the villains the edge until they turn it around for them. Of course, you would expect Asterix to be filled with funny gags and lots of historical references, but here not only do the jokes feel stale, but most of the times it's a very hit and miss affair...

One obvious example would be the light saber gag, where one of the soldiers plays around with a light saber that just so happens to be in a shelf of an chemical lab and does an Obi wan-style pose. That gag, as well as countless others, seems so forced, predictable and repetitive(like Brutus's useless attempts to do away with his father that just ends up always the same way). The only remotely good jokes are very far and between...

Again, back to the performance of the actors, Asterix is barely there, the actor who plays Brutus becomes tiresome after a while and Gerard Depardieu continues to do his same routine of a huge dummy but there he just doesn't put as much heart in it as he used to, it's safe both of them, including the other main character disappear at the end of the movie. Everybody else doesn't stand out, not even a returning character from the second movie(I had hopes that he would be the saving grace at the end of this picture only to be lost with a host of pointless cameos that just make the ending go longer and longer for no reason).

In the end, this movie might only be acceptable for the most hardcore Asterix fans, but even they could be in for a huge disappointment. Honestly? Wait for the DVD, so you can rent it, because not even special effects save this from being an average at best comedy movie.

I didn't read the book, but from what I've seen Jumper is an average action movie based solely on a great concept. Young David Rice discovers that he has the power to teleport to any desired location, that happens when he falls through an ice cap in the river near his school, with his new found ability Rice flees from his father and seeks a new life for himself in the big city.

Normally in a superhero fashion, David should only use his powers for good, but his only chance to make it big is make one simple heist, that indeed gets him by, but when a mysterious man known as Roland(played by Samuel Jackson) enters his life 8 years later, he's thrown into a secret war between people who have the ability to teleport and those hell bent on hunting them down,and that's pretty much where the plot begins to show it's most glaring flaws.

Rice apparently walks away with millions of dollars and nobody notices a young man suddenly making it big with a deluxe apartment affording it all with stolen bills which were likely marked and what is his occupation exactly? I'm sure somebody in the IRS would raise an eyebrow, not some Paladins(the people who hunt down Jumpers)...

And would they mind filling us in on how exactly is this secret war going on(all we know is that it's been around since ancient times). Also some things aren't very clever, the hero who just gets exposed wants to take his long time girlfriend on a trip, even though some shadowy group will likely harm his relatives and close friends? How reckless...

There's just too many unanswered questions in Jumper...

Acting-wise, Samuel L. Jackson just does his same routine, the difference is that he sports white hair and stabs Jumpers with a knife that's for some reason always concealed before each kill. Hayden Christensen has sorta matured since his Star Wars years, playing a somewhat grey but well intented anti-hero, but often times he just seems bored. The actor playing Griffin ends up being far more interesting then the main hero, occasionally stealing the hero's thunder.

We also have great action scenes and good special effects, but in itself, Jumper is an average at best action movie, that's not going to be remembered much.

It's hard to push animated movies for the older crowd, Final Fantasy: Spirits Within's abysmal box office performance made producers stray away from these types of productions. Enter Robert Zemeckis, who after Polar Express, takes another shot at this complex genre.

Set in a non-specific a.c. time, the movie tells the tale of one Beowulf, a hero sent to a land where king Hrotgar and his people are plagued by a (really)horrific monster named Grendel who begins attacking the townspeople because he is upset by their loud music and dancing.

For a PG-13 movie, I must say it really stretches that rating with sexual innuendo,nudity, 300 style violence and bestiality.

Visually, it's nice to see, but sometimes the animations are not too perfect, making it look like a video game. Performance-wise, the movie's only two flaws are John Malkovich who uses the same accent from Eragon, a movie which will likely haunt him to this very day and Angelina Jolie's terrible accent. Everybody else does good, though sometimes you'll notice the voices are not entirely matching the action on screen.

Another downside, is that even for a 100 or so minute movie, it feels very slow, some pieces kinda take forever to end, of course when it gets to the action bit it's all good.

The story strikes me as odd, because of how it's more a cyclical tale of moral ambiguity and lust for power, which leads a man to it's ultimate demise, then the heroic, sarcasm-free and perfect hero Beowulf slaying all that dare challenge him, be it monster or a human foe.

This Beowulf character can defeat anyone, but apparently he can't kill Grendel's mother, but her offspring(product of interspecies breeding) can be decimated. I never understood why...

Sequels are funny thing in the business, however one can tell when a movie franchise got past it's prime and it's now featured in direct-to-video sequels. I normally don't dwell into this world, but I decided to give it a shot. American Pie: Band Camp is a weak attempt at comedy, it only hurts itself by having some of the original characters from the earlier movies. Stiffler's younger brothers gets sent to band camp after messing up a rehearsal, but tries to make smutty hidden camera videos from the band camp members. I barely laughed at the film, was only grossed out by a few scenes(which have become mandatory in teen comedies), but one does wonder how weak this looks compared to Superbad which honestly relies more on dialog to get it's point across. Also Stiffler's brother's cursing doesn't work anymore, Sean William Scott(the true hero of American Wedding) already squeeze the last of the American Pie funny bone juice out of this franchise. The actors make it clear that this is a direct-to-video release and I'm surprised Eugene Levy and Timothy Stack would even bother to show up on a movie, did Levy appear just tell us that this is an American Pie movie? Never mind, if you like teen comedies, don't bother. It's not worth the rental.