Bore of the Worlds: “Skyline” Succeeds in Creating the Most Snooze-Inducing Alien Invasion in Cinematic History

If anything, "Skyline" is just a missed opportunity. It was an chance to create a story of an alien invasion from the sole point-of-view of regular people like you and me with the use of a low budget yet with cool special effects. But we already have similar movies like “War of the Worlds” (told from the point of view of average people) and “District 9” (low budgeted but with cool special effects). Hey at least the movie’s trailer was awesome. Even if the movie wasn’t just a conglomeration of other alien invasion movies, it could have at least been interesting or decently entertaining. Two things the film is sorely lacking.

“Skyline” tells the story of “normal” people. I’m hesitant to use the word normal because it implies they are normal the way you and I are normal and yet I know you and I are not this stupid. If you don’t like characters who do the wrong things are precisely the wrong time then steer clear of this movie. Let’s forget for a minute that this movie has a shoestring plot with forgettable characters. (A couple attends another friend’s birthday party in LA. They’re staying in a swanky high-rise. We find out the girl is pregnant. Cue alien attack) Most people will go see a movie with aliens because hello there are aliens in the movie! The aliens here are almost cool looking except that still look like they’re still in the process of actually being completely rendered by the visual effects people. They’re not SyFy Original bad, but decent enough. Ok find, I’m willing to throw this lame movie a bone. And I liked how the giant aliens spit out sticky tentacles, but again not enough to salvage the movie.

Yeah there are human characters here, but like mentioned before they’re pretty forgettable. The film’s biggest stars include Eric Balfour who was on “Six Feet Under” and in “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” remake. His best friend is Donald Faison, who you may know from either TV’s “Scrubs” or as Murray from “Clueless.” These two guys aren’t bad actors by any stretch of the imagination, but they don’t give particularly amazing performances. The ladies on the other hand fare much worse. Balfour’s girlfriend played by Scottie Thompson is just sort of whiny although she’s not as bad as Brittany Daniel, who I’m not sure why is even a paid actress. She has slummed it up in movies like “Little Man” and “White Chicks” where she always plays a Paris Hilton-like bimbo. And poor Batista from “Dexter” is equally horrendous here. Although most of the blame should be put on the writers for making him utter pretty atrocious lines.

Of course, let’s focus the blame on those who deserve it and that would be “the Brothers Strause” who are special effects guys who try to make movies. They’re last effort “Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem” was met with a collect meh from fanboys alike and here they don’t do much better. Colin and Greg should stick with their visual effects jobs and leave the directing work to… directors. I admire their attempt to tell this story from the point-of-view of average Joes and having the film’ story confined to one real location, but in order to do that you must give us characters to root for and keep things constantly moving forward. Things have to be kept interesting or else you’ll lose the viewer. The characters mostly stay inside their penthouse suite mostly because you can tell the screenwriters didn’t know what else to do. Yes I’m looking at you Joshua Cordes and Liam O'Donnell. There is such a horrible sense of pacing to the whole thing too I began checking for the time half way though. I won’t even mention the laughable moments in the film’s concluding minutes or any of the other many laughable moments for that matter.

“Skyline” is the type of movie that as you watch it you actually think to yourself, wow, I really wish I could be watching a Michael Bay movie instead. Admittedly there are some cool concepts here (I sort of liked the parking garage sequence) and seeing a bunch of human bodies being sucked up all at once into a giant spaceship is a pretty horrifying thing to see. So is the movie. GRADE: D

Strangers on a Train: The High Speed Thriller “Unstoppable” is a Triumph of Energetic Suspense

Great Scott! Finally, we have a movie that fits director Tony Scott’s frenetic directing style. His camera is always moving this way that way, zooming in zooming out. And since “Unstoppable” is about a train that wont stop, his herky jerky camera perfectly fits the story of a runaway train and the inevitable disaster that awaits if it wasn’t stopped. His camera constantly has momentum and that’s exactly what we’re given here in a movie that doesn’t stop to take a breath (and neither will you). “Unstoppable” is a great action movie because it gets everything right. It gives us characters to root for, it gives us suspense, cool action scenes filled with plenty of crashes and a great sense of timing and pace. It’s really just one long awesome chase scene. In fact, this could have been and should have been “Speed 2.”

Something I have to say upfront and I know it may sound ridiculous is that one of my favorite aspects of this movie is the way Tony Scott gives the train personality. This train as seen right at the start during the opening titles just sort of looks – evil. The train is given a level of malevolency I’ve never really witnessed in an inanimate object. Not since Spielberg’s tractor-trailer truck in “Duel” has a vehicle been so menacing and ominous. The way it’s shot and lit and the moody music that blares on the soundtrack, just gives us a feeling of doom. You know something scary is going to go down. After being introduced to train number 777, we introduced to some human characters which includes Will (Chris Pine) who’s a young and recently trained railroad conductor. He’s set to work with train engineer Frank (Denzel Washington) by doing some industrial freight train stuff. Meanwhile a sort of clumsy railway worker accidently lets his train get away from him where it slowly begins picking up speed, enough so that the poor goof can’t climb back on board. Freight train 777 (which is a half mile long and pulling loads of hazardous chemicals behind it) is on an unmanned course of destruction through southern Pennsylvania ready to destroy anything or anyone who gets in its path.

It’s really amazing how simply this whole story is and how well it actually works. You can’t help but think along the lines of, “how does this happen.” Well it did, because this is based on a true story. Of course many liberties were taken with the actually events, because let’s face is this is just a fun popcorn movie, not a biopic about the guy who freed India from British rule. Scott places all sorts of things in the train way including a train of school kids on a field trip and our hapless heroes Will and Frank. We do get a little backstory as the film progresses. Enough to make us care but not too much where we’re constantly wanted to see what train 777 is up to. Frank is being forced to retire while the corporation who owns the 777 train is intend on replacing older works with fresh blood like Will. Train dispatcher Connie (Rosario Dawson) is the one who makes the most rational decisions she can make as she watches the train barrel mile and mile through populated towns. The news media have a field day capturing the runaway train on their skycopters ready to capture anything that gets in the train’s way. It looks like Frank and Will might be Connie’s only hope to stop the train and it’s simply a fascinating experience to see how they’re going to do it.

“Unstoppable” is simply a wonderfully suspenseful action thriller. However it’s not just mindless. Am I the only one who thinks there’s more here than meets the eye? Could the unmanned train perhaps represent our current economy chugging out of control with the once seemingly secure American way of life headed for utter disaster? Maybe I’m looking too deeply here because let’s face it this is still just a well-executed action thriller. It's about ordinary people caught in an extraordinary situation. I’m still not quite sure how Scott was able to get some of the shots he did get, but one thing I’m certain of is that this is a movie worth catching up to. GRADE: A-

The Brother, Sister: “Conviction” is an Arresting True Life Drama

One of the main things that the terrific film “Conviction” has going for it is it’s a wonderful story about the bond between a brother and a sister. Not in quite a while have I seen such a touching relationship portrayed in a movie. Betty Anne and Kenny are the type of siblings who really depend on each other. They had a rough childhood. Their father died when they were young and they had a mother who was nearly absent just as much. They were sent from foster family to foster family but were never able to break their special bond, even whenever Kenny would egg on the two of them to do something wrong (like sneaking into a person’s home and pretending they had an actual happy life). Kenny’s borderline repellent behavior wasn’t enough to stop Betty Anne from standing by her brother even when he was accused of murdering a local woman. While he was at first cleared of charges, a person especially close to Kenny would later be responsible for him actually being tried and convicted for a crime he never even committed. And the story of “Conviction,” which is based on actual events, is especially intriguing because it dares to let us care about a person who if in different circumstances, we might as just as well assume the man was guilty.

Kenny Waters, played here by the wonderful Sam Rockwell, whom I especially loved in the underrated “Matchstick Men,” is a person that is difficult to like. And that’s why Tony Goldwyn’s direction and Pamela Gray’s script are so great, because they get us to care about someone who’s really difficult to care about. Kenny has anger management issues, he gets in fights, sometimes he’s just unpleasant. His sister Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank in full Erin Brockovich mode) doesn’t care about his personal issues. When he’s finally sentenced to life in prison for a murder she honestly believes he didn’t - and more importantly wouldn’t commit – she makes it her life mission to get him out of jail. And she does so by first getting her college degree and eventually getting into law school. She’s willing to put her life on hold and even disrupting her marriage to a guy even more unlikable than Kenny. She’s willing to become a lawyer just to help her own brother. How many of us would do that for a sibling?

The outcome of the film’s story isn’t what’s important here, it’s the events leading up to it that counts. And that includes plenty of stumbles and road blocks along the way. Luckily Betty Anne befriends another older woman in her class named Abra (Minnie Driver), mostly because they’re “the only ones in class who’ve gone through puberty.” Abra also makes it her mission to help Betty Anne because like her she’s a strong woman who’s willing to help out a friend who’s in a desperate situation. At first I wondered, once betty Anne becomes a lawyer, what is she really going to be able to do to help her brother get out of jail. I mean, not to be Debbie Downer, but he’s already been convicted. What is she really going to do? Of course there’s a lot more to this story than you or I even knew about. I’m hesitant to use the word “conspiracy” but there’s a lot going on and it’s fascinating to see how much is really going on…and as one character once said in Minority Report: “dig up the past and all you get is dirty.” Well Betty Anne is about to be covered.

The film does have a happy ending and it’s sort of remarkable how you really related to this woman and her struggles. Sure on the surface this all seems like made-for-TV melodrama, but it’s not melodramatic. Sure there’s nothing especially fascinating in how the film is shot, but that’s to be expected in a character based drama. And the film is wonderfully littered with great although brief supporting turns from people like Melissa Leo as a dirty cop, Peter Gallagher reprising his “OC” role as a lovable lawyer, and Juliet Lewis who is great a trashy key witness.

Let’s face it, “Conviction” doesn’t have the emotional punch or flashy goodness of “Erin Brockovich,” but it offers much more substance than “The Blind Side.” It tells a fascinating story in an entertaining and easily digestible way. It features excellent performances from a completely reliable cast and tells a beautiful account about a brother and his sister who refuses to give up hope. Whether Swank gets a nomination or not (does Bening have to watch out again??) it doesn’t matter; what matters is that “Conviction” is a movie worth anyone’s time and money. GRADE: A-

The Mourning After: “Hereafter” is a Beautiful Film That Dares to Show us an Afterlife

Do I believe in an afterlife? I don’t know. Do many people believe in an afterlife? Yes. Do I believe in an afterlife after seeing Clint Eastwood’s gripping drama “Hereafter?” I don’t know. “Hereafter” is a wonderful film, not only because it’s well made and entertaining, but also because it chooses a divisive subject matter and doesn’t force an opinion onto you. What does Clint believe? What does the writer Peter Morgan believe? You won’t really know after seeing this movie actually because this is a film that says “hey what IF an afterlife exists?” but refuses to say “this IS definitely what happens after you die.” I like that. The film features an interesting plot structure and great performances and some truly heart wrenching scenes of moving drama.

The film actually tells three seemingly unrelated stories, which happen to take place in three different countries (think “Babel”). The film opens with a French woman leaving her hotel room and experiencing a near death experience. A giant tsunami rages onshore killing thousands of people, but Marie (Cécile De France) amazingly survives. Of course she practically drowns and is unconscious for a while, until two guys are able to bring her back with the help of CPR. She experiences strange “visions,” of which she simply cannot shake. Meanwhile, a man named George in San Francisco played by Matt Damon, is nearly always being forced to give people psychic readings. He has to turn people down because he just can do it anymore. He’s a legitimate psychic that we’ll learn later in the film comes from a near death experience he had as a child. He’s now able to communicate with the dead, but for him it’s become more of a curse than a gift. And lastly we’re introduced to a young set of twin boys in England. They’re extremely close, as twins tend to be, but mostly because their mother is a fall down drunk. She means well, and I believe she actually loves her two sons, but she’s a complete mess. And they spend most of their times covering for her so they won’t be sent away. Tragedy strikes however, and one of the boys is in dire need of someone who knows how to speak to the dead…

A somewhat fantastic story, almost supernatural if you will, sounds like an odd directing choice for Clint Eastwood who’s given us such great and poignant films recently. “Million Dollar Baby,” “Mystic River” and “Gran Torino” are just a sampling of his fantastic directing work as of late. Those gritty dramas seem a far cry from a story revolving around the possibility of an afterlife, but his style just simply works for this story. He tells human stories with realist people. And that’s exactly what we get here. We get winning performances from the cast and his sort of gloomy and washed out look that could have easily made the film feel macabre but instead feels just right. Peter Morgan’s original screenplay gives us three fascinating stories which seem like there’s no way they could come together, and yet they do. And whether you think the end of the film is predictable or cheesy you can’t deny the power that Eastwood has built as each story gets progressively more interesting. Even a movie revolving just one of these stories would be fun to watch, but he gives us three!

I was pretty impressed with some of the imagery in “Hereafter.” The tsunami opening is equally impressive and disturbing. The story about the twins is heartbreaking. And you really feel a connection with Damon’s character as we slowly learn what it’s like to live with such a powerful ability. We learn, after he begins a friendship with a woman, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, that even getting involved in a romantic relationship just isn’t very easy for a guy who sees dead people every time he shakes a stranger’s hands. “Hereafter” is a moving and emotional film that, doesn’t make you feel drained (nor depressed), nor does it force any sort of opinion down your throat. It wisely takes religion out of the equation and makes it appealing to everyone, no matter what you believe yourself. GRADE: B+

V For Villain: “Megmind” is an Outrageously Fun Take on Superhero Clichés

This is the animated superhero film I’ve been waiting for. Some will say “Megamind,” a funny new animated comedy from the DreamWorks gang, is not much more than a retread of Pixar’s “The Incredibles.” Whether that’s true or not is debatable, what’s not debatable for me is that Megamind is leaps and bounds more entertaining than that Pixar film (Relax! It’s the only one I feel lukewarm about). And if Megamind proves anything, it’s that the villain 9 times out of 10 is more interesting than the good guy. Megamind revolves around the villainous Megamind (Will Ferrell) and what happens when he actually ends up defeating the good guy the heroic Metro Man (Brad Pitt). You see a supervillain is nothing with a superhero.

The film begins by introducing us to how Megamind and Metro Man came to Earth. They came as infants, “Superman” style of course! Metro Man landed in nice neighborhood where a nice couple took him in where his superpowers were harnessed for good. Megamind, however, landed in a prison yard, and was instructed by the inmates on the ins and outs of being bad. These two grew up together in Metro City (or “Me-troc-ity” according to Megamind) and the general public is infatuated with Metroman and they obviously hate Megamind, who is able to escape from prison with the help of a wristwatch that can disguise him as anyone he wants ala Mystique from “X-Men.” With the help of his evil minion called Minion, a fishy alien head with an android body (voiced by David Cross), he returns to Metro City with the intent of kidnapping roving reporter Roxanne (Tina Fey) to use as a hostage to trap Metro Man. In so doing, he actually ends up killing his archnemesis! Now he can take over Metro City, which he does, to the tune of Bad to the Bone.

Of course being a supervillain is no fun with out the superhero, so he decides to create one. He accidentally zaps Roxanne’s goofy camera guy (Jonah Hill) and he becomes “Tighten” (the only name he could get the rights to). But nothing is always as it seems in Metro City and sometimes your expectations about who is really a villain and who is really a hero will be a little off. Which is why this movie works so well. There are plenty of original twists and turns, even if it doesn’t necessarily add anything overall new to the genre. It features a terrific screenplay (by first time writers Brent Simons and Alan Schoolcraft) and top notch voice work by its cast. The animation is great which really helps and the film is actually worth paying the extra bucks for 3D. The film is funny and witty, will great pop culture references, that won’t make you roll your eyes, but will have you laughing. Megamind is actually one of the more memorable cartoon characters as of late.

“Megamind” is a great movie. If you love animation or comedies or adventure or superhero flicks, this movie will be more than satisfactory. It’s a highly entertaining and original take on a genre that beginning to get a little worn out. Sure maybe it doesn’t have the prestige of Pixar but it’s definitely one of the best animated movies of the year. GRADE: A-

Cut and Waste: The Jigsaw Saga Finally Comes to a Close with “Saw 3D”

To see or not to see “Saw 3D.” That is the question. This one is easy. If you enjoy seeing intestines and other various internal organs being thrown at you, see “Saw 3D.” If you enjoy watching someone’s jaw being ripped open by a reverse bear trap see “Saw 3D.” If you enjoy seeing someone’s arms being swiftly ripped off see “Saw 3D.” If you enjoy seeing someone’s eyeballs being gouged out by something pointy see “Saw 3D.” You see where I’m going with this right? Ok, if you’re still with me and not above the toilet bowl ready to puke, I’d like to say that while I admire the Saw films, I’ve never really been a hardcore fan. I like blood and guts as much as the next horror geek, but something about the way these films are usually shoddily shot, edited and sewn together just never really quite sat right with me. Their plots were always a bit too convoluted and you’d have to wear rubber boots just to wade through all the backstory the writers would throw at you. Having said that I didn’t really hate “Saw 3D,” if anything it nicely wraps up this surprisingly popular horror franchise (hopefully) and offers plenty of gore for us sickos. I mean seriously, how’d this film get an R rating anyways?

The most disappointing aspect of Saw 3D is not the writing or acting or editing, but rather has much more to do with the 3D part of its title. Was this movie really shot in 3D? because to me, the filmmakers didn’t really have many cool 3D shots. Horror and 3D really go together and I was slightly disappointed to realize that I could have been watching this movie in 2D and my experience wouldn’t have changed one bit. I mean it’s nice to have an internal organ thrown at you, but it didn’t nearly happen enough. Horror 3D is supposed to be gimmicky, you’re supposed to watch the movie months later at home and roll your eyes at all scenes that would have looked cool in 3D but will just look dumb now that you’re watching it on TV. The filmmakers are supposed to throw stuff in your face and that just didn’t happen here. Lame!

Now I know you’re just on pins and needles waiting to find out what happens in “Saw 3D” (the series’ seventh chapter in case you’re keeping track). The film opens up with a familiar face… hey that’s Dr. Gordon (Cary Elwes) from the oringal Saw. We see him crawling away, one footed, presumably minutes after cutting off his own foot. We see him burn his bloody stump on a hot pipe to cauterize the wound. It’s a nice, and comforting, flashback to a time when Saw was just its own thing and the term “torture porn” wasn’t even on the horizon. Then we cut to a completely pointless scene of two guys in a glass box, trapped with saws near their chests and a woman hanging above them with a saw below her midriff. It turns out they’re in the middle of a crowded city, not the usual grungy basement Jigsaw’s victims usually find themselves in. The girl ends up getting sawed in half (cue the aforementioned intestines) while the onlooker continue to snap pictures on their cellphones (one lady tries breaking the glass with her briefcase to no success) and look mildly entertained. Could it be that all those sick onlookers are actually representing the sick audience that continue to ingest these “Saw” movies? Who knows. Only director Kevin Greuter knows that for sure and we’ll have to wait for his DVD commentary on that one. The rest of the flick involves the cops trying to find Jigsaw’s evil successor Hoffman (Costas Mandylor), but don’t worry Jigsaw himself makes a couple brief appearances. The movie doesn’t spend too much time in boring backstory but spends most of its time killing off its cast members. Seriously does anyone actually survive this movie? The main character who must learn an important lesson is Bobby (Sean Patrick Flannery) who pretends to be a Jigsaw victim and is too busy promoting his new book to realize that he’s about to actually become a Jigsaw victim.

The acting is bad in this movie (Betsy Russell who plays Jigsaw’s wife really sucks at life in this one) and the movie really looks cheap. It also has the standard obligatory Saw Twist Ending which is equally cool and stupid. Did I mention the acting is horrible? But on the brightside (for gorehounds anyways) are there are some pretty sick and twisted kills in this flick. You’ll probably flinch more than once. Is it really scary? Not at all; but you’ll certainly get your money’s worth in blood, intestines and severed limbs. That kind of stuff counts for something, at least when you’re watching a movie called “Saw 3D.” GRADE: C+

The Fear Hunter: You’ll be Scared like a Baby If You See “Paranormal Activity 2”

“Paranormal Activity 2” is not “Blair Witch 2.” Thank God for that. Sure it cost more money ($3 million versus $15,000 for the first one) but it’s still grounded in that made-on-the-cheap look of the original. It still employs shaky, handheld cameras shot by the actors themselves, but this time we also get to see action through stagnant security cams. There are more characters and more scary “stuff” going on here, and this time, the intensity is turned up to an 11. “Paranormal Activity” was an ingenious little film. It was made for cheap, but it was well-made. And it had a savvy marketing campaign. It seemed real and the filmmakers wanted you to think it was real (there weren’t even any titles or end credits!) and the same goes for Part 2. Is it better than the first one? I don’t know, it’s definitely as good. If you were scared of the first, you’re bound to be scared of this. That’s good enough for most people.

The first film shook me up, as it did to many other people. We were introduced to a young woman named Katie who started feeling a strange presence in her home that she shared with her boyfriend Micah. The fist film had scenes of Katie literally being dragged out of bed and eventually becoming possessed, or something like that. Micah was killed, perhaps by Katie’s own hands. There was a demon that was after her. It was never really explained why, if you want to know more you’d better see this new film. What many viewers probably don’t know is that this second movie is actually a prequel. We see Katie, unpossessed and we see Micah not dead. This time however it appears a demon is after Katie’s sister and her husband, stepdaughter and new born Hunter (none of these actors are listed on imdb). A serious “break-in” rattles the family; more so because nothing was actually stolen. The house was just torn up. They install security cameras and so then we get to see each night, in eerie blue night vision. Everything seems normal but as every night progresses more and more creepy things happen. Sure this is practically the same premise as the first film, but this film has enough differences to make it stand out.

Since most of the footage is seen through the security cameras we don’t really get that nauseating shaky camera feeling like we usually get in movies like this. It doesn’t really bother me too much, but I know some people need to take a Dramamine . Since not much really happens during most of the first half of the film, we get a really good layout of the house, so when something moves even an inch, we know it. Our eyes are drawn to it. Of course no one really thinks the house is haunted except for the family’s Hispanic housekeeper. Minorities, and usually animals, are pretty susceptible to knowing of supernatural beings and after the housekeeper begins blessing the house with incense she is promptly let go by the Caucasian and naïve family. The dad is the most naïve and refuses to listen to his daughter’s plead that something weird is going on. She then uses a Ouiji board. Hasn’t she ever seen “Witchboard” or “The Exorcist” even? It seems this time the demon, or whatever, is after poor little Hunter. He even drags the poor baby out of his crib. But don’t worry, Hunter is left unharmed.

I refuse to say anything more about the other spooky goings on in the film. There are scary things that happen during the night which will probably either make you bite your nails or make you yawn, and if you think the daytime scenes won’t be scary think again. There are plenty of fun BOO! Scares and you’ll definitely jump more than once. The film is extremely suspenseful and some images will certainly cause a shiver up your spine.

Is “Paranormal Activity 2” just a rehash of the first film? Some will say yes. It is similar in style and structure. But is it still scary? You bet. I’m glad they didn’t do something radically different like they did with “Blair Witch 2.” They even go more into the mythology about why a demon is after this particular family. There’s definitely enough disturbing things going on here to easily recommend this flick to anyone who wants to be scared. And for God’s sake won’t anyone save poor little Hunter?? GRADE: B+

Old Dogs: “RED” is a Wonderful Action Comedy for the Older Set

Helen Mirren is a great actress. She won an Academy Award for her simply divine portrayal of Queen Elizabeth II in “The Queen.” She’s British. She’s regal. And in the movie RED she is simply bad-ass. In fact, they should have called this movie, “Kick-Ass.” “RED” which stands for “retired, extremely dangerous” is a great story, based on a graphic novel for anyone keeping track, and it features lots of action and humor with a more adult audience in mind. Sure it stars Bruce Willis which will get the fan boys in the seats, but it also features the likes of Morgan Freeman and Mirren who have not been this fun and exiciting in a long time. They certainly let loose and seem to be having a wonderful time. And the audience does as well.

Like all good action comedies there is a romantic element. We begin by being introduced to Frank Moses (Bruce Willis) who’s living in suburbia. He’s constantly making calls to the pension department where he chats with Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker). He’s been getting his checks, but he’d rather rip them up and have a reason to call Sarah. Sarah just so happens to want more excitement in her life. And as luck would have it Frank is a retired CIA agent and Sarah’s life is about to get just a little more…exciting. It turns out that when you’re a retired CIA agent, sometimes there are people who want you dead. So he drives out to meet Sarah, ends up practically kidnapping her and taking her on a wild adventure, trying to evade the bad guys. He meets up with his former team members including Joe Matheson (Freeman), Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich) and Victoria (Mirren).

Why these former agents are being killed off is what drives the story forward. It’s sort of complicated, but not so much where we aren’t having a good time. In fact, were much like Sarah, who doesn’t really know what’s going on. Slowly we learn what these agents deals are. Much of the film reminds me other buddy type comedies like this past summer’s “Knight and Day.” Those who refused to see that film since it featured the borderline crazy Tom Cruise will probably enjoy “RED” since they are similar stories. The scripts from writers John and Erich Hoeber is definitely competent and whatever clichés or tired trappings we’ve become accustomed to in movies like these are instantly forgiven due to the great performances from a top-notch cast.

RED doesn’t reinvent the genre, and it’s not trying to, but what it does do is offer a familiar premise with actors you usually don’t see in these types of movies. See this movie because Bruce Willis is back kicking ass, but stay because Helen Mirren fires a bad-ass gun. And she does it with such class you almost imagine the real queen practically giggling in delight. GRADE: B

Invitation to Hell: Wes Craven’s “My Soul to Take” is a Nightmare of the Worst Kind

Oh dear lord. Where do I even begin? Bad Wes Craven! Bad bad bad Wes Craven! I’m almost offended by the fact that the man who has directed some of my favorite movies (ie, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Wes Craven’s New Nightmare and the Scream series) has made the complete mess of a film called “My Soul to Take.” About half way through I begged someone to take my soul as long as it meant I didn’t have to keep watching. I know it’s my own fault, I didn’t listen to the naysayers. I had to see this train wreck for myself. It was 107 minutes of pure rubbernecking. A movie like “My Soul to Take” shouldn’t require the amount of concentration that it takes to watch something like “Inception” or “Mulholland Drive.” At least those movies actually make sense once you piece everything together. “My Soul to Take” makes no sense whatsoever and will make you leave the theater with a sidesplitting headache. It could be all forgiven if the thing was at least semi-scary or even remotely suspenseful, which it’s not.

I honestly believe “My Soul to Take” is a horrendous movie because Wes Craven is a good filmmaker. Let me explain. I had read that Craven was tired of the recent “torture porn” horror trend and sick of all these retreads and sequels and remakes and reboots. I honestly respect him for attempting to do something original. And it was great to see him back in the writer and director’s chair since he hasn’t fulfilled both duties since “New Nightmare” (If anyone is keeping track, he did co-write the horrible movie “Pulse” and the borderline horrible “The Hills Have Eyes 2”). And instead of just making a simple movie that anyone could follow, he attempted to make a complex story with an attempt at social commentary. It didn’t work. His complicated storyline, which involves a serial killer possible coming back from the dead, is too convoluted to make much sense and any attempt at suspense is wasted because the audience is trying to think so hard there’s not time to be scared.

The story revolves around the town of Riverton. We’re supposed to assume this takes place somewhere in New England (it was filmed entirely on location in Connecticut). The Riverton Ripper is a killer who murdered seven people. He’s a father and family man, but he has several other personalities, one of which is the killer. It’s explained to us by a conveniently placed Haitian paramedic that this man in fact has multiple souls, not just personalities, which I guess means if he dies he’s still got like six more souls to use to keep on living. I think? Anyway, he’s taken away in an ambulance and it crashes and we’re supposed to assume he dies or the body gets lost in the river or something. The film skips ahead sixteen years where we learn that seven children were born the night the Ripper died. The kids known as the Rirverton Seven hold a special séance to help prevent the Ripper from showing himself again. Meanwhile, the Ripper does in fact return to kill off the kids born that night, but it’s possible he may not be back at all and it’s one of the teenagers who’s soul is possessed by the Ripper. Yawn.

Wes Craven attempts to create a “Nightmare on Elm Street” type of back story and it really just backfires. There’s way too much happening, and none of it interesting enough, for anyone to care about what’s going on. Freddy Krueger’s story was so fascinating and it’s not a coincidence that he became a pop culture phenomenon. The Riverton Ripper is definitely destined to do the same thing. Craven’s attempt at creating interesting teenage characters also fails miserably. He introduces us to Bug (a decent Max Thieirot) a good kid who’s shy and might have a seriously close connection to the killer. His classmates are all annoying and/or not appealing. His friend Alex is just obnoxious and has to deal with his abusive stepfather (and the two of them are obsessed with the California Condor for some reason). There’s a jock who picks on these two, a pretty popular girl who is the object of Bug’s affection, a religious girl, and a blind boy who I never realized was blind until he whipped out a white cane half way through the movie.

Ugh I can’t believe how frustratingly bad “My Soul to Take” is. It’s a pretty ugly looking movie that feels cheap. Craven’s films, at least the recent ones anyways, have a nice sheen to theme, this one just looks ugly. It feels poorly slapped together. There aren’t even any memorable death scenes! Wes, what is wrong with you! You created Freddy Krueger for God’s sake! Luckily I avoided seeing the film in 3D which I heard is atrocious and pointless. It’s really a shame, because even some of Craven’s lesser known movies like “The People Under the Stairs “or “The Serpent and the Rainbow” can be entertaining even if they’re a little silly. And heck, I’m even a fan of Horace Pinker. I still love Wes Craven, but I’m hoping that his upcoming “Scream 4” will erase all bad memories of this truly dreadful flick. GRADE: D-

Note: I know someone who worked as an extra in the film. He's in the background in one scene and he's a very good extra. The only thing saving this thing from getting an F.

The Lady is a Vamp: You’d Be Wise to Let “Let Me In” Into Your Life

“Let Me In” if you want to compare it to it’s Swedish counterpart, is every bit as good as “Let the Right One In.” It maintains the same feel without ever feeling like a rip-off. Maybe this movie doesn’t have a reason to exist except that even if it makes people want to see out the original film, it’s at least accomplished something. It’s basically just another version of the book on which it’s based (“Låt den rätte komma in”) and how many times have there been multiple versions of novels brought to the screen? Too many to count. This is just one and it’s a particularly harmless and extremely entertaining take on the recent vampire craze.

“Let Me In,” like the original film, is the anti-“Twilight.” It’s a film that takes itself seriously in a way that is impossible to make fun of. It treats the vampire mythology seriously and is much more akin to films like “Interview with the Vampire” than the recent slate of Stephanie Myers’ wildly popular pop cultural phenomenon. It’s a different take on the “teenager as vampire” in which a young girl, who’s actually most likely hundreds of years old, who must forever blend into a society as a human being even though she is a vampire. Her name is Abby and she’s played marvelously by Chloe Grace Moretz. She moves to a cold, snowy town in New Mexico and befriends a lonely boy named Owen (an equally good Kodi Smith-Mcphee). See this movie because it has vampires in it, but stay because of these terrific young performances.

Owen is a sad little boy. He lives with his mom because his parents are divorced. And director really gets into how detached he is from his mother because we never really get to see her face. He shots these scenes at home from a low level and gets right in there, similar to “Where the Wild Things Are.” Both films are from a child’s point-of-view. Owen is constantly bullied at school and sometimes its pretty disturbing. The film at first makes the bullies seem just like the “bad guys” who we want to see punished until we realize that, like in real life, most bullies only bully others because they themselves are bullied. And once a horrible act is committed against them, it’s not a feeling of retribution or justification we feel, but of sadness and hopelessness. It’s a well-done scene that equally rivals the original film’s stark and powerful images.

Abby, as a vampire, must drink human blood to live. She leaves this up to a man who’s known as her “Father” to go out find her human blood to drink. Father, played here by Richard Jenkins, has probably the most disturbing and horrible tasks to accomplish in the movie. He must go out and commit murders so his “daughter” can survive. These scenes have an eerily spooky feeling, and one shot in particular is jaw dropping and will make you wonder how it’s accomplished. You can tell from this shot alone that that man behind “Cloverfield” (director Matt Reeves) was responsible. Reeves gives us some pretty daring and interesting shots throughout the film, although I think the overall look of the original film looked more “pretty.”

“Let Me In” is that rare film that is as good, if not better than the original source material. It refuses to “Hollywoodize” the story of “Let the Right One In” (unless you wanna count a few instances of cheesey CGI) and instead makes its own unique mark on the film world. If anything, like all remakes, it’s fun just comparing the two and figuring out why certain changes were made and how two different visions could be accomplished from the same source. It’s all pretty fascinating stuff. GRADE: A-

Site Club: I Want to Friend “The Social Network” But I’m Still Awaiting a Reply

As a college graduate myself, and someone who spends more time on Facebook than I probably should, why do I find it nearly impossible to relate to the college-set movie “The Social Network?” Is it because I didn’t go to an Ivy League school and I’m not a genius? Is it because I relied too much on my parents while in school and no intentions of starting my own business while still being too young to even purchase alcohol? Did I just not understand the rapid fire dialogue writer Aaron Sorkin laid out in his Citizen Kane-aspiring script about a seemingly autistic real life college student who sort of unknowingly creates one of the most popular websites on the entire planet? And all from the comfort of his Harvard dormitory. “The Social Network” feels like a movie that doesn’t need to exist and yet here it is the so-called “Facebook movie” about the creation of the popular social networking website that at this point society almost depends on. Maybe it’s supposed to be a slap in the face to all of us to stop spending so much time on the computer and instead interact with our friends in real life rather than in the virtual world of “poking” and “friending” and “status updates.” I for one am guilty as charged.

David Fincher is an awesome director. Take a look at anyone one of his films, from the gritty style of his cult hit “Fight Club” to the creepiness of “Seven” and the technically wizardry of “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” Fincher has provided plenty of wonderful cinematic stories that showcase first rate directorial craftsmanship. He knows how to tell a story visually and is always prepared to show you a world you haven’t quite seen before. Which is why I have to classify “The Social Network” overall as a mild disappointment. It has a lot of great things going for it. It has great performances and an interesting visual look and a clever story structure. But as a movie about college students I didn’t find myself relating to any characters and I felt like an outsider looking in. The college life in this film doesn’t seem real to me. Everything is lit so darkly, that it feels like Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) and his poor roommates are living in a dungeon. And who the heck becomes part of a lawsuit and never makes one phone call to their mom and dad for advice? Who becomes an accidental billionaire without bragging to their relatives about it? And if I got arrested for cocaine possession, I wouldn’t be calling the creator of Facebook from jail.

Supposedly how Facebook was created started when Zuckerberg broke up with his girlfriend. He ran back to his dorm room and blogged about what a bitch she is. Then he created a “hot or not” type of website where Harvard students could choose between two student photos and pick which girl was hotter. That spawned an idea that a website should be made with the intentions of connecting all Harvard students. Each person could create a profile and post information about themselves all the while being able to stalk those who probably don’t want to be stalked. Zuckerberg and his friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield) started developing the idea after these two twin brothers the Winklevosses (played with a little help of seamless movie magic by one Armie Hammer and stand-in Josh Pence) who say Zuckerberg stole their idea after he had agreed to work with them to build a similar site. Soon Napster co-founder Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) gets involved and begins coaching Zuckerberg until the idea of dollar signs begin corrupting all these brilliant young minds. I really enjoyed Timberlake’s performance and I really feel the film came alive when he was on screen.

I guess I’m not too surprised by anything that happens in “The Social Network” because it’s a similar story of a young brilliant mind looking for greater power. It just so happens to be a story about the creation of Facebook, which to this day has about 500 million users around the world. Facebook, as ridiculous as it sounds, is a major deal in the world because it’s so popular, but I’m still not convinced that that movie really needs to exist. Of course you could argue the same thing about, say, “Piranha 3D” but at least that movie doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Look there are plenty of things to love about “The Social Network.” It’s a well-made film . It’s slick and entertaining. Maybe it just caught me on a bad day. I enjoyed many of Fincher’s choices and his use of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’ music is a wonderful choice that fits the film’s gloomy tone. Like one of Fincher’s other recent films “Zodiac,” it may take me a while to warm up to the film, but no one can deny that David Fincher, like many out there in Hollywood, is certainly a force to be reckoned with. GRADE: B-

Shipping Up to Boston: “The Town” is a Superbly Executed Heist Flick

A movie like “The Town” is the hardest type of movie to write a review of. It’s a great movie. You want to praise it, but not over do it. It’s a serious movie so it’s hard to crack jokes about a movie that takes itself so seriously. And it stars and is directed by Ben Affleck, he’s usually the butt of jokes but not here. As a director he’s a force to be reckoned with because as of now his stance is 2 for 2. A few years back he gave us the brilliant “Gone Baby Gone” and directed Amy Ryan’s powerful performance to an Academy Award nomination. Just how is it that this guy, who stared in flops like Gigli and Reindeer Games, on a winning streak in Hollywood. Once just tabloid fodder he is now an auteur who can take simple, emotional character based stories and turn them into fascinating, addictive films. How can you joke about that? Affleck I salute you!

“The Town,” taking place in Charlestown, Massachusetts, tells the story of a man named Doug MacRay (Affleck) and his three friends who are a team of bank robbers. They’re pretty stealth and rarely come into much trouble. They have a sophisticated system that helps them avoid capture from the authorities. The film opens up when them robbing a bank wearing scary monster masks. They take a woman hostage but eventually let her go. This woman is Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall). Claire is obviously shaken up by the robbery and fails to tell the FBI specific things about her captures (including a tattoo seen on the back of Jem’s (Jeremey Renner) neck. Doug begins to follow Claire around to make sure she hasn’t said anything to the feds that could put his team away. In so doing they begin a romantic relationship.

One could easily slap their forehead and claim that Claire is the stupidest character they’ve ever seen. She has no clue that Doug is one of the men who took her hostage and it’s simply fascinating to watch their relationship develop. And it never seems forced, it blossoms naturally. We can credit Affleck and the other two screenwriters Peter Craig and Aaron Stockard (who co-wrote Gone Baby Gone). They write realistic characters who are put into such a strange situation and it makes the viewer just sit there waiting to see what’s going to happen next (The film is based on a novel called “Pince of Thieves.”) Meanwhile FBI agent Adam Fawley (Jon Hamm) suspects Doug and his friends but needs more evidence. He almost gets more evidence during a breathtaking bank heist that almost goes wrong in which the team is dressed in disturbing nun masks. You’ve seen the posters and ads, it’s a very stark image and it stays with you. Doug, who actually works for a local Irish “florist” played by Pete Postweaite is sort of forced to go on a another robbery even though Doug wants out and to be with Claire. This time he’s forced to rob the Heart of Boston itself…. Fenway Park. Oh and Blake Lively from “Gossip Girl” skanks it up nicely as a white trash mom.

I can’t even begin to describe how well these heist scenes are shot and put together. The action is incredible and I don’t even recall blinking because I didn’t want to miss a millisecond of it. The gritty photography from Robert Elswit makes the film drip with a glorious 1970s vibe that I really dug. This is sort of “The French Connection” for today’s generation.

While I don’t think it’s better than something like say, “The Departed,” I think it can easily stand beside it as yet another wonderful Boston-set modern crime film that is exquisitely acted and directed. It’s such a well-made film you sometimes wonder why Ben Affleck spent so much time in front of the camera (although his performance is good here) when all along he should have been in that damn director’s chair from the beginning! GRADE: A

Twin Beaks: “Legends of the Guardians: The Owls of the Ga’Hoole” is…a Hoot

The only thing that really drags down Zack Snyder’s high flying owl adventure “Legends of the Guardians” is what I’m calling his trademark “slow motion hero shot” in which the characters are forced into slow motion while pouncing or attacking an enemy or accomplishing some other heroic action. Twice is cool, a dozen times is over doing it. But what else do you expect from the director of “300.” His fetish for slow motion shots abound, but at least this owl flick is entertaining for its ninety minute runtime.

I never thought I’d find a story about CGI owls interesting in the slightest. I have to say that I didn’t really love the film, but it was enjoyable for what it was. It’s basically “Apocalypto” with birds. We’re introduced to Soren (Jim Sturgess) a barn owl and his brother Kludd (Ryan Kwanten). Like most brothers in stories like these, there’s a hint of jealousy between the brothers. They like hearing stories their father tells of these owl soldiers known as the “Guardians of Ga’Hoole.” And one day after ruffling each others feathers, Soren and Kludd find themselves knocked out of their nest and on the dangerous forest ground. Since they’re young owls they haven’t fully developed their ability to fly. They’re quickly snatched up by some scary owls who go around snatching up owlets to brainwash and form an army lead by the evil Metalbeak (Joel Egerton) and his equally intimidating Nyra (Helen Mirren). Mirren is intimating even as an animated bird.

Eventually Soren is able to escape with his new friend Gylfie. They want to seek out the Guardians to help rescue his brother and all of the other kidnapped owls. We meet a bunch of other colorful characters along the way including a Burrowing Owl named Digger (David Wenham). Eventually they find the Guardians who help them making things right again in the owl kingdom. I never realized how ridiculous this plot seems once it’s all written out especially because all of the characters are OWLS. Of course the film is based on a series of books called “Guardians of Ga’Hoole.”

Zack Snyder seems like an odd choice to directed a family-friendly (although the film is pretty dark) animated film from the studio that brought us the overrated penguin flick “Happy Feet.” And while at first it does seem odd, as the film progresses it makes more sense. A bunch of soldiers who are basically the underdogs trying to fight off a band of evil bad guys? Isn’t that the plot of “300?” Of course this story works much better in animated form because we’re not distracted by annoying CGI effects mixed with live action performances. The whole thing is CGI so there’s that. The movie moves along swiftly enough, maybe too fast because as many colorful characters there are here, we don’t get to known them very well. The film seems to favor action over character for the most part, but I’m not too shocked by that.

Over all I found myself enjoying “Legends of the Guardians.” I thought the animation was pretty specactualr and the film did work as a fun 3D experience. It was immersive 3D rather than gimmick 3D (my personal favorite) but it worked for the film’s style. And I simply love the song “To the Sky” by the appropriately named Owl City. This is a movie you might just find yourself giving a hoot about. GRADE: B

Girlfight: A Great Cast Barely Saves “You Again” From Being Clichéd Tripe

“You Again” is a pure “Hollywood” film through and through. It features famous actors getting caught in unoriginal and preposterous situations and then wraps everything up neatly in a bow. These types of films aren’t always so horrendous in my eyes because sometimes just the littlest thing can make a movie worth seeing. Sometimes you get attached to a character or a performer and you’re willing to stick with them through all the ridiculousness that inevitably ensues. Take for instance a scene in “You Again” in which actress Jamie Lee Curtis uses the bathroom of her archnemesis Sigourney Weaver. She accidentally knocks one of Sigourney’s earrings down the drain and decides to retrieve it by kicking the sink’s pipe, which you guessed it, begins to spray water all over her at full force. She then mistakenly rips off a piece of Sigourney’s dress and uses it as a towel. Hilarious ensues! Why is this scene in this film? Is it funny to watch Jamie Lee Curtis being sprayed with water? Not really. It’s scenes like this that bog down “You Again.” It’s a film with a wonderful premise that could have gone a lot further with its story but alas that pesky PG rating sits there with its tongue out, mocking us for seeing it without anyone under the age of 12. (Watch “Freaky Friday” if you want to see a great PG rated film with a great performance from Ms. Curtis)

Sigourney Weaver and Jamie Lee Curtis are both great actresses. How Curtis has managed to avoid being nominated for an Oscar is beyond me, but I guess that is the curse of beginning your Hollywood career as a “Scream Queen.” Here they certainly make “You Again” worth watching if only because their snide and savvy ways just simply make themselves shine. Kristin Bell plays Marni who just found out that her brother is marrying Joanna (Odette Yustman) the mean girl from high school who made her life a living hell. Curtis is her mom Gail who also finds out that Joanna’s Aunt Romona (Weaver) was her former best friend from high school. They had a huge falling out, mostly for reasons that will come to light later on. The point is that these two generations of women are forced to deal with a dark past and look at it square in the face. I wasn’t too shocked by any of the film’s revelations but at least the actors give good performances.

The possibilities with a story like this are just simply endless, but “You Again” would rather play things a little too safe. Think “Death Becomes Her” without all the dark Looney Tunes violence. This is a situation ripe for black comedy, but the filmmakers would rather go for family comedy. It’s not too shocking to find out that director Andy Fickman directed two Disney movies starring The Rock (who also cameos here). Though he did make “She’s the Man” which, as crazy as that entire movie was, sort of ran with its silly premise and never felt as restrained as things are here. Screenwriter Moe Jelline can't even really find anything funny for Betty White, as Grandma Bunny, to do. She just sort of hangs around making wisecracks here and there in sitcom fashion. She was so well integrated in last summer’s “The Proposal” it’s a shame she’s not given as much to do (save for a priceless encounter with one of her high school rivals, which should have been something the film focused on).

Overall the film was easy to sit through and I was entertained enough. But you can label this as a disappointment. I was eager to see some of my favorite actresses duke it out. And yeah there is some fighting here and there, and I did find myself laughing, but the film had the potential to be great. It was nice to see Curtis on screen again though. Why she continues to be one of Hollywood’s most criminally underused actresses is beyond me. GRADE: B-

Drag Me to Hell: Lucifer Takes an Elevator Ride in “Devil”

Poor M. Night Shyamalan. It started so high, there was nowhere else to go but down. “The Sixth Sense” is a great scary movie. It’s a great movie in general. He was nominated three times by the Academy the year of its release (as writer, director and producer). He’s gone from writing and directing Oscar nominated films, to merely producing films that will never ever be mentioned with the words “academy” or “awards.” Razzie maybe. Ok so I didn’t hate his latest endeavor “Devil” because it has a premise too great to completely ignore: five strangers are stuck in an elevator in a high-rise building and one of them is actually the devil in disguise hell-bent on taking the lives of the other four passengers. As great as is its that Mr. Shyamalan neither wrote the screenplay nor directed the film, it still has his mark all over it which will most likely turn off many viewers. The film has some positives and it has some negatives, but overall I think I in the very least enjoyed myself.

Shyamalan gets things pretentiously underway even before the story begins. We see a “The Night Chronicles” logo which flashes the number “1.” Come to find out this is the first in an intended trilogy of films based on Shyamalan’s short stories. Oh brother. But then as eyeball roll-inducing as that is, we get some near opening titles which are plastered over some jaw-droppingly cool and disorienting upside-down shots of a city skyline. We will learn by the film’s end that at the beginning of the film, things were not always “right-side up.” Director John Erick Dowdle (of “Quarantine” and the still yet unreleased “The Poughkeepsie Tapes”) makes his first mistake by not eliminating screenwriter Brian Nelson’s unnecessary and borderline obnoxious narration. I’m sure Shyamalan made sure that one stayed. He always needs to shove down his viewers’ throats that they are watching a “story” as if we didn’t know already.

We’re told that sometimes the devil comes to earth, in disguise to claim people who have done bad things. Sometimes there are bad omens which show he’s on his way, such as a person committing suicide. And nearly four minutes into the movie, a woman leaps to his death from a skyscraper. Then we’re introduced to five characters who are all sharing the same elevator. We have a black security guard who’s just a temp (Bokeem Woodbine), an elderly woman who seems harmless (Jenny O’Hara), a younger business savvy-looking woman (Bojana Novakovic), a sleazy mattress salesman (Geoffrey Arend) and a mysterious mechanic (Logan Marshall-Green). After a few mintues the elevator stops. It seems to be just a simple malfunction. Even the security guards insist they will have the elevator running in just minutes. The guards Ramirez (Jacob Vargas) and Lustig (Matt Craven) can view the people in the elevator and can even talk to them through a loudspeaker, but the guards can’t hear the passengers. Minutes go by and these people begin to get a little stir crazy as would probably be the case in real life if you were stuck in an enclosed space with total strangers. But things take a turn for the worse when the lights flicker, go out, and the younger woman gets what appears to be a huge bite mark in her back. She’s bleeding and the security guards call the cops. The detective called to the scene just so happens to be the same guy investigating the suicide from earlier in the day. Detective Bowen (Chris Messina) communicates with the people in the elevator and pretty soon the body count begins to pile up in perfect Agatha Christie style.

The film succeeds in that it is creepy and claustrophobic which I enjoyed. It was fun trying to figure out how things would play out, although I’m certainly most viewers would likely guess who the “devil” is. This is sort of a third act twist or revelation that can either be seen as contrived or pretentious. I don’t know, take your pick. One we get closing shots of the city’s skyline, now in their proper upright place and the voiceover tells us that if the devil does exists at least it means there’s a God, I felt like I should have been sprayed with Holy water on the way out of the theater. A little preachy, but I can deal with it.

Overall I enjoyed watching "Devil" mostly because I tend to like movies that take place in tight places and play out in real time (the film is a swift 80 minutes). I had been intrigued by this movie ever since it’s fascinating trailer hit the internet months ago and I’m not sure that it lived up to my expectations, but it was pretty decent for what it gave us. I thought it had genuine moments of creepiness and like true great works in horror had moments where listening to the soundtrack was scarier than anything that could have been shown. I had always been interested in seeing a film Shyamalan thought up but didn’t write or direct, but I’m not quite sure Devil was the winning masterpiece his fans have been waiting for. This isn’t “The Sixth Sense” no matter how much you hoped it would be. GRADE: B-

High School Floozical: “Easy A” is a Wonderfully Irreverent Look at High School and… The Scarlet Letter?

Teen movies can sometimes be amazing things. They appeal to high school kids mostly and are usually written off as just a piece of genre trash that only exist to make money. But the good ones, I’m talking about the really good ones tend to find a wider audience and even seep into the popular vernacular. I’m talking about movies like Clueless and Mean Girls and basically anything that John Hughes made back in the 1980s. Most people live by these movies and quote them nearly every day. It feels so wonderful to find a movie made today that feels just as fresh and original as anything that came out 20 years ago or 10 years ago or even five years ago. “Easy A” is a teen flick that I think most people will enjoy. It’s funny it’s witty and has a very appealing cast and will hopefully give the young and wonderfully talented actress Emma Stone the proper vehicle to drive on her road to superstardom.

I believe it takes several elements to have a successful “teen movie.” One you need an appealing lead. In most of these films the lead tends to be a young woman, ie Cher from “Clueless” or Cady from “Mean Girls,” or Chris Parker from “Adventures in Babystting”and even Viola from “She’s the Man.” They were all appealing. We wanted to follow them around for 2 hours. Here we have Olive (played wonderfully by Stone) who addresses the audience through her webcam. She says that she has a story to tell. And what a doozy it is. Teen movies need to also be sprinkled with wonderfully witty and quotable dialogue. Lines like “as if” and “so fetch” aren’t quoted all the time for no reason people. And lastly, you need warm and colorful characters for our heroine to interact with. These can be either fun-loving parents, siblings or BFFs. Easy A meets all of these requirements.

When Olive first addresses the audience so says she’s going to tell her side of a story. It seems as though a simply piece of gossip which was complete untrue spread around her high school like wildfire. She had told her best friend Rhiannon (Alyson Michalka) that she lost her virginity to a guy from a local community college. Virginity is the epitome of embarrassment for kids in high school and it’s equally something that can easily damage one’s reputation. Once olive realizes that everyone thinks she lost it to some guy during a one night stand she uses it to her advantage. One of her guy friends Brandon (Dan Byrd), who’s constantly being picked on because he’s gay, needs her help. He figures if he acts straight he wont be bullied. If he were to have sex with a girl, even just pretend sex, with someone everyone already thinks is a slut, it could prove that he’s just a cool hetero dude. Olive and Brandon enter a bedroom at wild party and pretend to do it but yelling and jumping on his bed. She even gives him her panties. Classy. What do you know, everyone likes him now.

Olive uses this slutty image to her advantage. Boys of all shapes and sizes begin seeking Olive to help them out with by pretending to lose their v-cards. What girl would want to pretend to be a slut? Olive of course who realizes her reputation is already down the tube, even though it may hurt her chances with Todd (Gossip Girl’s Penn Badgley) the guy she likes. Heck she might as well pretend to sleep with these losers and get some giftcards out of it. She even pins a red letter A to her dress at school, because ironically, like the best high school flicks, her assigned reading in English class is “The Scarlet Letter.” Olive even wittily tells us that if we were to be assigned the book in school it would be wise to watch the original film version and not the one with Demi Moore. Luckily, Olive has miracle, only-in-the-movies parents played terrifically by Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson. And thank goodness for Amanda Bynes who is wonderful as a leader of a religious clique who protests Olive’s adulterous ways.

The film is directed by Will Gluck who co-created the wonderful and underrated Fox sitcom “The Loop” which lasted pretty much 3.5 minutes. And even more shocking is that this is screenwriter Bert V. Royal’s first script. It is great and has some pretty droll observations about life in high school and how much gossip really influences the choices teens are forced to make at such a young age. The script works as a coy look at teenagers and it also works as wonderful tribute to all types of teen flicks most notably the ones by John Hughes.

Easy A is a wonderful teen comedy. I’m 27 and I certainly enjoyed it, so I think that anyone who is fan of irreverent humor and a different take on high school life will find something to like. Stone has never been more wonderful and I can’t wait to see what she has lined up next. GRADE: A-

Leap of Faith: The Mockumentary “The Last Exorcism” Offers Subtle and Eerie Chills

“The Last Exorcism” could have been called The Rosemary Exorcist Project.” That’s not an insult or anything, just a mere observation. It’s obvious that the film has been influenced by other scary films. I spotted influences from everywhere from “Rosemary’s Baby” to “The Blair Witch Project” and to me it has an overall eerie feeling much like the original “Texas Chain Saw Massacre.” Sure some would say it just copies those films, but I think “Exorcism” can stand alone. I find it fascinating that movies with documentary looks, “mockumentaries” if you will, are so popular these days. Heck sometimes they’re even nominated for Best Picture (i.e. “District 9”)! While I’m not too worried about the state of the dolly grip in today’s film industry, I will say that it seems like the shakier the camera the more audiences are eating this stuff up. I don’t think it was a coincidence that both “The Blair Witch Project” and “Paranormal Activity” are two of the highest grossing low budget movies of all time.

Ok so “The Last Exorcism” isn’t as good as any of the above films I’ve mentioned but it still has its moments. Set in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, the film starts off sort of lighthearted by introducing us to our hero Reverend Cotton Marcus (Saved by the Bell The College Years’ Professor Lasky himself Patrick Fabian). He’s a disillusioned man of faith who performs “exorcisms” on people claiming to be possessed. But like you and me, he doesn’t believe any of it. He invites a documentary crew to document what he says will be his last exorcism. He wants to expose his ministry for the frauds they are. He picks up a random letter sent to him and perhaps gets more than he bargained for. And that is of course when the film begins to get super creepy. Marcus goes to see the Sweetzer family who lives in a dilapidated farm house in the middle of nowhere. Leatherface might as well be their neighbor. It seems the young teenage daughter Nell (Ashley Bell) blacks out during the night and slaughters animals on the farm. Her father Louis (Louis Herthum) believes his daughter is possessed. It doesn’t help that Nell’s brother Caleb (Caleb Landry Jones) is almost as strange as anything that Nell does while being possessed. With a few simple parlor tricks, Marcus tricks the family into thinking he has exorcised the demon from within Nell. And then the sh*t really hits the fan.

The film is directed by Daniel Stamm and from what I can tell this is the first film about exorcism that has been filmed in this documentary style. I think the film benefits from this for a couple reasons. The pov camera is great for scary movies because you never know what’s hiding just out of frame. There are several scenes that are 100% more suspenseful because of the camerawork. I enjoyed how the characters actually interact with the film crew which includes the cameraman Dan (Adam Grimes) and the director and producer Iris (Iris Bahr). Dan and Iris, thinking they’re making a film about the fraudulent nature of exorcism have no idea what they’re getting into and that really works here. The film, by starting out sort of lighthearted, takes its time building suspense and focuses on mood. Nothing we see is completely and utterly horrifying but it’s creepy and quietly disturbing. I imagine many will find the film truly terrifying while some will find it merely atmospheric. Perhaps even more will be disappointed with the film’s abrupt end. For everyone person who loved how “The Blair Witch Project” ended (like me) there were ten times as many people who simply hated it.

“The Last Exorcism” is a great example of how much reality television has really influenced cinema in the past several years. I can’t imagine a movie like this playing in multiplexes before the days of “The Blair Witch Project.” This film borrows heavily from other better films, but if offers good and realist performances and has an interesting take on the nature of religion in our society. It offers some creepy and disturbing scenes and will certainly get people talking once the film has ended. GRADE: B

Glad Romance: “Going the Distance” Offers a Fresh Take on the Long Distance Relationship

It is known that the success of a romantic comedy depends on how much you want the main couple to stay together. In bad romantic comedies you hate them and want them to just die already (see “The Break-Up” for instance). This genre is also known for rampant clichés and stereotypes. We always get the main characters discussing their love lives with their best male or female friend, a gay best friend, or a brother or sister. There’s always that big reveal that forces the couple to break up only to be reunited in the end. Some of that stuff makes itself known in “Going the Distance” but besides a few clichés here and there, this is a refreshing romantic comedy that actually has laughs and you don’t need to feel embarrassed for actually having liked it.

I enjoy Drew Barrymore. She’s not the world’s best actress but she knows how to get the job done. She’s appealing. She sort of feels like a real life person, instead of a glamorous movie star. And Justin Long, he’s just a handsome nerdy guy who doesn’t exactly radiate movie stardom. So when Erin (Barrymore) and Garrett (Long) find each other bonding over their mutual love for the arcade game Centipede (of the non-human variety) it seems genuine rather than forced. I imagine most people who fall in love bond over a mutual interest rather than just locking eyes the way, for instance, Jennifer Lopez and Alex O’Loughlin fall for each other in the recent flick “The Back-Up Plan.” Erin and Garret seem to have a lot in common and enjoy spending time with each other until, six weeks later, it’s time for Erin to fly back home to San Francisco where she’s attending graduate school. Rather than miss a great opportunity to have a really great relationship they decide to stay exclusive, even if they’re more than 2,000 miles apart. And here lies the film’s “dramatic conflict.” Can two people have a successful romantic relationship when there are so far apart?

The film is pretty enjoyable for what it is. It doesn’t transcend the genre the way the recent “(500) Days of Summer” did, but that was a very unconventional type of movie. “Going the Distance” plays it straight, and rather safe, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t positive qualities here. Director Nanette Burstein who cut her teeth directing documentaries tries out her first fiction film with decent success. She goes for a more realistic look at relationships and even employs a lot of handheld camerawork. The script, by first time screenwriter Geoff LaTulippe has worked in some pretty good stuff. I particuarlly enjoyed everything about Charlie Day’s character Dan (I’m a big fan of his work on It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia). For instance, when Erin and Garrett begin to share their first kiss he blasts “Take My Breath Away” because he can hear them talking about Top Gun through their apartment’s paper thin walls. Also Chrstina Applegate shows some great timing as Erin’s older and married sister. The whole thing sort of has a Judd Apatow-light feeling, which is a good thing.

“Going the Distance” begins to stumble over itself as it enters its third act because honestly, how much can they really do with a story about two people in love living across the country from each other? That’s really the movie’s only conflict which it establishes during the entire middle section of the film. We don’t know if Erin will end up moving back to New York or if Garrett will quit his job and move out to California. That’s about it. Besides a final act that seems to be stretched a little thin, “Going the Distance” is definitely one of the better romantic comedies out there. It has charming actors and some witty observations; you can’t really ask for more when it comes to this stuff. GRADE: B

The Mexican: The Grindhouse Full Length Feature “Machete” is a Bloody Good Time

Audiences were first introduced to the Mexican “superhero” Machete in the 2004 ode to 70s exploitation flicks, “Grindhouse.” Although not too many people were actually introduced to him; “Grindhouse” was a box office stinker, unfortunately. Luckily Machete lived on in the DVD for Robert Rodriguez’s “Planet Terror” which opens with a trailer for a fake movie. I turns out Robert actually wanted to make the trailer into a full length feature and he did just that. Maybe audiences will turn out for Machete even though they’re only getting one movie for the price of one, instead of two movies for the price of one. Had the economic crisis happened in 2004, why do I have the feeling Grindhouse would be a screaming success? But here we are and Robert has given us “Machete” about a Mexican cop left for dead and wrongfully accused. Someone has just “messed” with the wrong Mexican.

Danny Trejo stars as Machete. Trejo is a character actor who has probably shown up in a movie or two you may have seen. He’s certainly a face you wouldn’t soon forget and that works with actors. Sure he may not be your standard heartthrob action hero but he can certainly kick some ass. He wields a mean, err, machete or any other sharp object. For his feature length debut Rodriguez cooks up a wonderful story all about illegal immigration. Robert De Niro, who seems a far cry from the crime pictures of the 1970s but has still got it if you ask me, plays a conservative (read: prick) senator seeking reelection. He’s running on a platform against illegal immigration. In fact, he just wants those damn Mexicans practically locked up in their homeland, even if it means shooting them himself. Jeff Fahey is his campaign manager and he sets up a complicated scenario which involves framing Machete for the attampted assassination of the senator. Now on the run, and pissed off, Machete must clear his name, and viciously slaughter every bad guy who crosses his path. And occasionally get with hot chicks.

Rodriguez knows exactly what he’s doing with “Machete.” He fills his film with over-the-top gratuitous violence (one scene involves Machete putting intestines to good use) and sexuality. Of course on and off again rehaber/actress Lindsay Lohan shows up as a coke-addled skank, a role that seems left over from her “I Know Who Killed Me” days. I’m sure her career will bounce back. One day. “Machete” is in the vein that he and Quentin Tarantino set up so well in “Grindhouse.” I hope all the fake trailers, which were arguably the best part of the “Grindhouse” theatrical experience, could one day be adapted into real feature films. I still think that “Planet Terror,” and “Death Proof,” are technically better films and come to think of it, I guess that’s why those movies bombed. Rodriguez and Tarantino (who I'll say is much more talented of the two) made really good movies that happened to be an homage to really bad movies. They were cult films made with big budgets. They were meant to be bombs, like their original counterparts, so it makes sense that they wouldn’t be box office sensations.

I’m interested to see how audiences will react to “Machete.” I wasn’t around in the 1970s so I have no idea how authentic this movie is, but it seems to fit in that grimy era from what I’ve read and seen. All of the performances are purposely over-the-top. Everyone is in on the joke. The film is pretty funny too. I’m not too sure everyone who sees the film will “get it” and I’m not really sure general audiences are craving mainstream exploitation films in their local multiplex, but what better way to end the summer than a badass Mexican kicking some major whitey butt? As an ode to a certain era of films, it's certainly a whole lot better than Stallone's attempt with the dreadful flick "The Expendables."GRADE: B

Original Grindhouse Faux Trailer: