A Bear to Remember: “Kung Fu Panda 2” is a Fun and Worthy Sequel

“Ah, my old enemy… stairs.”

“Kung Fu Panda” was a great little movie, one that I watched for the first time only recently. And it is with that fresh viewing that I happily saw the next chapter, “Kung Fu Panda 2.” I luckily didn’t see it in 3D because let’s face it at this point, unless severed body parts (i.e. Piranha 3D) or flying banshees (i.e. Avatar) are coming at me, I will stick to two dimensions. The animation here is colorful and crisp and bright, why ruin it by putting on darkly tinted glasses that will just end up giving you a headache? There’s enough action to delight the kiddies and enough solid storytelling to entertain us adults. “Kung Fun Panda 2” may not fit the mold of solid sequels like “Toy Story 3,” but why should it? It’s a fun action comedy that fits nicely into this superhero filled summer.

“Kung Fu Panda 2” sort of works as a prequel as it tells us of the backstory of our favorite rotund kung fu fighting panda bear Po (Jack Black). We remember from the last film that Po became the new Dragon Warrior much to Master Shifu’s (Dustin Hoffman’s chagrin. He joined fellow warriors Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Monkey (Jackie Chan), Mantis (Seth Rogen), Viper (Lucy Liu) and Crane (Tobias Fünke himself David Cross). Now we learn that Po’s goose father, the wonderfully lovable Mr. Ping (James Hong), is not his biologically father. Didn’t see that one coming. Turns out an evil peacock named Lord Shen (Gary Oldman) had killed off all the panda bears because a “warrior of black and white” would one day defeat him, but not before Po’s mother hid her baby in a vegetable crate, which made its way to Mr. Ping’s noodle shop. Now Lord Shen is back with a bunch of scary wolves and a powerful weapon and he’s hell-bent on revenge since he was exiled for killing off all those giant pandas.

There are several things I love about this movie and this series in general. First of is definitely Mr. Ping, Po’s father. I don’t know if it’s Hong’s great voicework or the terrific animation or the funny lines he says, but this is definitely one of my favorite characters. I sort of wish he were real. If I was ten years old I would definitely have a Mr. Ping toy or stuffed animal. I love the comradere of the Furious Five. Each character is well defined and their interactions are great and the talent behind each voice (even Jackie Chan!) is tremendous. I loved learning more about where Po came from because since the first movie, my main question always remained, “Why is Po’s father a goose?” And now I know! Both films are great because they’re essentially just action comedies but they are quite successful at taking traditional themes and story ideas (the story of the hero, destiny, the master & apprentice) and turning them into vividly scrumptious animated adventures. Writers Jonathan Aibel and Gleen Berger never dumb down their script just because they’ve written as “kid’s movie.” And first-time feature director Jennifer Yuh should be proud.

“Kung Fu Panda 2” is a warm, and funny and action-packed successor to the 2008 Oscar-nominated original and certainly a welcomed sequel. And since the film sort of ends with a cliffhanger, I can’t wait for part 3. GRADE: B+

Bridal Glower: Kristen Wiig is in Over Her Head in the Hilarious but Heartfelt “Bridesmaids”

“I’m glad he’s single, cause I’m gonna climb that like a tree.”

When hasn’t SNL cast member and all around funny lady Kristen Wiig not ever been just flat out hilarious? Oh wait, she’s hilarious all the time. And she makes no exception for “Bridesmaids” the over-the-top but sweet comedy she co-wrote about a woman who’s asked to be her best friend’s maid of honor. There are several types of wedding movies. One is all about the over-the-topness of planning a wedding (think Father of the Bride) and the ones in which the friend of the bride or groom is secretly bitter about their friend’s impending nuptials. This sort of works as both. And since this movie carries the Judd Apatow seal of approval, there is plenty of gross out humor to make things wonderfully outrageous.

Most would agree that the previews for “Bridesmaids” looks like a female centered “Hangover” complete with gross out humor and silly characters. And while “the Hangover” was is a classic comedy, even for its young age, it doesn’t quite have the heart of an Apatow production. Kristen Wiig is Annie a lonely, single gal. She has a friend with benefits played by Jon Hamm, but he’s sort of a cocky jerk. She finds out her best girlfriend Lillian (Maya Rudolph) has just gotten engaged and she’s promptly asked to be the Maid of Honor. She accepts but realizes it might be a lot of work and rather difficult to watch her best friend move on with her life, while Annie herself is stuck in a rut. Her ex-boyfriend dumped her after their cake shop went out of business and she has two of the weirdest roommates you’ve ever seen. Basically her life sucks.

Things go from bad to worse when she’s introduced to the rest of the bridal party. She gives the daggers to Helen (Rose Byrne) who is the young wife of Lillian’s fiancé’s boss. Helen and Lillian seem to have gotten very close in the few months they’ve known each other and like any normal person would react Annie gets extremely jealous. It’s because Helen is rich and perfect and beautiful. She even steals Annie’s Paris themed wedding shower theme and throws her the most ridiculous party which leads to one of the film’s funniest scenes in which Annie just goes off the wall crazy. There is a truth to the occurrences in Annie’s situations that ring alarmingly true. She’s easy to identify with and Wiig gives an authentically performance. There’s a subplot about her wooing a British police officer which really adds a layer of reality to the film, but she doesn’t let that get in the way of her being flat out hilarious.

This is a comedy after all and the rest of Lillian’s bridal party is a collection of wacky women all played marvelously but the entire ensemble. We have Becca the reserved newlywed played by The Office’s Ellie Kemper, Rita the miserable married woman with three kids played by Reno 911’s Wendi McLendon-Covey, and Megan, who is sort similar to the Alan character from The Hangover, played by Melissa McCarthy. Megan is a larger, fowled mouthed woman who doesn’t let her weight get in the way of acting like the fiery tart she is. She has some terrific moments one of which includes her having to take a dump in a bathroom sink while wearing a bridesmaid dress.

The film is directed by Arrested Development and The Office alum Paul Feig. He has turned Wiig and co-writer Annie Mumolo’s script into a flat out funny and heartfelt romp that will have you laughing hysterically one moment and then practically tearing up the next. There are scenes are flat-out disgusting and why shouldn’t they be? Women have every right to be as gross as guys and they certainly are here. The rivalry between Annie and Helen is just simply astonishing to watch, and a scene involving the two of them attempting to have the last word while toasting at the engagement party is simply a wonderful scene of hilarity and awkward tension that was luckily left intact and not on the cutting room floor. This is a wonderfully made comedy that will certainly be one of the bigger hits of the summer. GRADE: A

Hammer Time: The Thunderous “Thor” Offers Plenty of Action, Humor and Drama

"This mortal form grows weak. I require sustenance!"

I’m not going to lie, all I know about Thor is what I’ve gleaned from the movie “Adventures in Babysitting.” That would be facts which include him having a special helmet, a hammer, a cape and that he lives in the city (downtown Chicago apparently). I do also know that he’s some sort of God with mighty powers, which sort of makes the movie “Thor” seems like a stranger cross between “Superman” and “Clash of the Titans.” While Thor is not an alien he is certainly from a world other than Earth. But he can fly and kill bad guys like a super man indeed with his trusty hammer. In all honestly this magical world of Thor went a little over my head. There were too many words and names I just didn’t understand which is why the film’s best scenes take place right here on Earth.

To put things simply, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is banished to Earth by his father King Odin (Anthony Hopkins) because he’s too cocky. Thor inadvertently reignited a years long war between their enemy people known as the Frost Giants. After his banishmen Odin becomes ill so Thor’s brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) takes over. And it turns out Loki, unbeknownst to him, is actually adopted, but here’s the real kicker: he’s a Frost Giant!

Meanwhile, more interesting things are happening on Earth in New Mexico. Natalie Portman, fresh off her Oscar win plays a scientist named Jane Foster. Her and her assistant Darcy (Kat Dennings) and her mentor Erik (Stellan Skarsgard) witness some kind of weird storm, a tornado if you will. This strange, buff dude shows up (Jane accidently hits him with her van) and they take him to the hospital. It seems as though Thor has been exiled without any of his powers. His magical hammer has been banished too some 50 miles away and only once Thor learns how to be a true gentleman warrior will he regain his powers.

There is plenty of welcomed humor in these scenes. It dares to ask the question: what would it be like if some kind of God from another realm were to crash on Earth. Thor means well but he doesn’t adjust very quickly to the way humans act, especially in public. He gulps down some coffee in a diner and smashes the mug and quickly demands another drink. His three new human friends look at him with confusion and fascination. Jane knows he’s from some place not of this realm and she wants to use her scientific knowledge to open herself up to a world she could only possible know about this chance encounter. It’s too bad the feds confiscate Jane’s equipment and data as these strange happens are being “covered up” and we begin to learn things that will set in motion events that will eventually take place in the upcoming “Avengers” movie spinoff.

As strange as it sounds, Kenneth Branagh, the British actor you may recall has made plenty of Shakespearean films, helmed this project and he certainly lends a wonderful hand. He’s in pretty good control here and he certainly hasn’t met a canted angle he didn’t like. The scenes of the magical God realm is filled with elaborate Shakespearean costumes and set design and almost feels like some kind of weird futuristic setting for Hamlet. These scenes should be silly but somehow work onscreen as confusing as some of the story elements might be. I personally enjoyed the Earth scenes and Thor’s comic interactions with the lowly, powerless humans. The performances are good and there’s really hardly anything to complain about here.

It may not be my favorite comic book movie by a long mile, but Thor does have some impressive qualities. The action sort of flies by and there are some pretty genuinely wonderful moments. Chris Hemsworth doesn’t get to have the same range of character and emotion as say Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark in “Iron Man” but that’s the way Thor is written. I’m sure comic fans will be pleased and Adventures in Babysitting fans will finally get to see what’s so great about Thor in the first place. “Oh Thor, Mighty God of Thunder” *Clink* GRADE: B

Blade of Glory: “Scream 4” Triumphantly Conjures Up ‘90s Slasher Flick Nostalgia

“Who are you, Michael f*cking Myers?”

Oh boy, where do I even begin? I know the Scream films like the back of my hand. They are one of my personal all-time favorite series of movies ever. They exist on an entirely different plane. If you need an actual stuffy critical review please feel free to read Roger Ebert or Peter Travers’ reviews. As a huge horror buff “Scream 4” is everything you could hope and want in a “Scream” movie. It has the characters you’ve loved since the beginnings, new ones who fit into the Scream world, lots of witty humor and enough blood to make a Red Cross blood mobile jealous. Wes Craven who again steps into the director’s chair quickly makes us forget that “My Soul to Take” even happened and resurrects Ghostface in a way that fits easily along the other films and takes this story into the 21^st century with glee and terror.

“Scream 4” is probably most like the original Scream. It takes us back to the small town of Woodsboro where it is the 15^th anniversary of the original “Woodsboro Murders.” Our loving and tough heroine Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) returns to town with her publicist for a book tour to promote her new book “Out of Darkness.” Of course she probably wouldn’t have returned if she knew that two young girls had just been brutally murdered the night before by someone dressed up as our old friend “Ghostface.” Now a new murder spree has begun and we’re all left wondering: first, why would anyone still want to live in Woodsboro and who is doing these new killings? Also, since it’s been ten years since the events of the third outing, there have been several other Stab sequels released. As you know the Stab films are the films within the film that are based on the murders we have seen in the Scream films. It seems as though the new killer, or killers, are Stab fans and insist on copycatting the murders from the films.

A couple other well loved characters make return appearances. Gale Weathers (Courtney Cox) who is now married to Dewey (David Arquette), who is no longer deputy but Sheriff, has sort of retired from journalism. She’s sacrificed her career to be Dewey’s stay at home wife, but she wants to reinvent herself. And solving these new murders just might give her the inspiration she needs. She’s as bitchy and biting as ever and at one point exclaims, “I’ve still got it!” Sidney is staying with her Aunt Kate (Mary McDonnell) and her cousin Jill (Emma Roberts) but Sidney’s sheer presence might put her family and their friends in great jeopardy. Soon Emma and her high school friends are targeted by Ghostface who is the sickest killer since the first film. He quickly stabs to death and guts Jill’s friend and neighbor Oliva (Marielle Jaffe) while Jill and her fiend horror savvy friend Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) watch helpless from a window. Jill is also feuding with her suspicious ex-boyfriend Trevor (Nico Tortorella) who we sort of can’t really believe is the killer because that was so 15 years ago. Then there are the other two resident film geeks Charlie (Rory Culkin) and Robbie (Erik Knudsen) who both share the Randy role from the first film. They explain to us and Gale and Sidney the new rules in horror films that have been established since in the past decade.

There are lots of new characters and most of them, not surprisingly don’t quite make it. But this is a Scream film after all and there are plenty of scary death sequences that Ghostface fans have been waiting years for. Craven does a good job of creating decent tension. This isn’t a film that is as scary as some recent scare fests like The Strangers or Paranormal Activity but it’s definitely the scariest Scream film since the original. And it’s definitely on the of funniest and it the nostalgia factor plays a great role here. The are so many great references to other movies and the conventions we can’t help but get a kick out of the nonstop nods to the other horror flicks we fans are obsessed with. Kevin Williamson’s writing is as sharp (pun intended) as ever, skewering (pun indended) everything from torture porn to remakes. The entire opening sequence, which is almost epic, stuffs so many great in jokes and sly meta humor you almost expect Anna Faris to jump out. And yet with all the laughing you’ll have plenty of time to be scared as well. And such a great job is done with updating the film for the modern age without ever being corny. I wonder if Ghostface would accept my friend request?

“Scream 4” is just hands down enjoyable. If you’re a fan of the series or just a horror fan in general there is a lot to love here. You’ll constantly be guessing about the killer’s identity and if you can actually predict what’s going to happen then you should probably become a psychic because Williamson and Craven still have plenty of great tricks up their sleeves even eleven years later. I certainly left the theater completely satisfied and smiling. GRADE: A

Lame of Thrones: “Your Highness” Offers Scattershot Laughs and Not Much More

“What a coincidence. I was just about to finish thinking of you.”

“Pineapple Express” was good. I can’t image it would be very good if the setting was changed to a fantastical medieval world. And I’d never image that movie would exist. And it does as “Your Highness” a very bizarre hybrid of stoner comedy and swashbuckling medieval adventure. It’s basically a glorified nerd geek fest without any of the real charm or wit these movies tend to have (see “Paul” instead). The movie isn’t really a spoof, even though I think it thinks it wants to be Robin Hood: Men in Tights, because there aren’t any direct references to other movies that I noticed, not does it really offer much skewering of medieval tales, although that’s not really my area of expertise. It’s basically just a bunch of profanity, nudity and sexual references shoehorned into a fantastical plot about two prince brothers and a kidnapped princess. If you wanna see a spoof with a princess see “Enchanted” if you wanna hear dirty jokes see a Judd Apatow movie. This my dear friends is a film that looked much better on paper I’m sure.

If you find Danny McBride to be one of the most hilarious people on this planet then you will probably like “Your Highness” more than me. McBride is sort of like Russell Brand – he works better in smaller roles. I’m not sure either should really carry a film. Luckily here we get the always reliable (except when it comes to hosting duties) James Franco who took time off from Yale to play McBride’s brother Fabious. He’s the elder brother and the heir to the throne. Thadeous (McBride) is the schlubby younger brother who only seems to exist in the shadow of his older, adventure-seeking heroic brother. In Fabious’ latest conquest he has beheaded a Cyclops and had fallen in love with a fair maiden Belladonna (Zooey Deschanel). The two are wed, but then an evil sorcerer played by Justin Therox kidnaps her (she’s a virgin!) so he can have his dastardly way with her.

Of course the two brothers team up to with the rest of their knights, who turn out to be traitors, to find Belladonna. There they find all sorts of weird characters along the way including the Great Wize Wizard, a purple puppet character, who may or may not have molested Fabious when he was younger. (They used to take their shirts off and bounce on his bed together. Where’s Chris Hansen when you need him?) They receive a magical compass which will help them in their quest. They also meet up with loner Isabel (Natalie Portman) whose entire bloodline has been killed. Thadeous quickly falls in love with her, but will she love him back? They also get attacked by a race of pale nudists in one of the film’s many ridiculously strange sequences. The only explanation is that the filmmakers were high when they made this thing.

I honestly did laugh during “Your Highness.” There are some solid moments here and there, but all in all I think this film is a novelty that sort of outwears its welcome before the halfway mark. There are only so many time a word like “f*ck” is funny when in a medieval setting. The film is rather bloody too which I didn’t really mind so be weary not to bring the little ones for sure. I would categorize “Your Highness” as a misfire. It wasn’t offensive or incompetent – there is a level of talent that pervades the production, but it just doesn’t click. GRADE: C

Hanna’s Got a Gun: Saoirse Ronan Kicks Some Serious Butt in “Hanna”

“Sometimes children are bad people too.”

It’s difficult to imagine a teenage girl who has never watched TV or listened to music let alone watching Jersey Shore or listening to Justine Bieber. But Hanna (played ferociously by Saoirse Ronan) has never done either. It’s because she was home schooled. Oh and by home schooled I mean she lived in the middle of the wilderness with her father who taught her how to hunt, defend herself and fight like an action superhero. She’s sort of like Hit Girl from “Kick-Ass” without the disturbing sociopathic behavior. What happens when this young teen, only about sixteen years old, is let out on the world she knows nothing much about? Oh and people want her dead. See the action-packed “Hanna” to find out.

Hanna was raised by father Erik who is played by Eric Bana. We see that they’re in some sort of snowy, woodsy environment. Come to find out that they’re in the wilds of Finland. Erik trains Hanna to have all the skills of an assassin. Erik himself is an ex-CIA agent who we learn had gone rogue. Everything else we don’t know we learn as the film progresses. Erik finally releases her and sends her throughout Europe with a mission to kill a scary operative named Marissa (played ever-so-wonderfully by Cate Blanchett). Hanna is captured an actually kills a Marissa stand-in, who she mistakes for the real person. Now on the run, she’s trying to meet up with her father, while actually being pursued by the very alive Marissa and the henchmen she has dispatched to stop the girl.

“From the director of ‘Atonement’” isn’t exactly what you expect to hear when watching an action thriller about a teenage girl who kicks serious ass. But Joe Wright, surprisingly enough, is the perfect choice to tell this story because he tells his stories with such strong visual elements. There many striking visuals here, which he certainly displayed a knack for in the beautiful “Atonement.” He even borrows his trademark long take tracking shot and employs it here as Erik is pursued by bad guys who he then must fight off. And it’s all done in one glorious, well choreographed take. Sure it may not win a cinematography Oscar or anything, but you so rarely find such great camerawork in an action film, you almost forget that it’s possible to have beautiful and striking images blended so well with all the shooting and arrow flinging. Another major plus here is the terrifically catchy and punchy electronic score by The Chemical Brothers. This one is download worthy.

Of course, “Hanna” isn’t the best movie I’ve ever seen and it probably isn’t for everyone. I did find some parts that didn’t quite seem to gel for me. I though it sort of took a while for the film to get going and so much of the film’s questions remain unanswered for so long it almost makes things confusing. Why is Hanna being training in the woods in the middle of nowhere? Why does she want to kill Marissa and why does Marissa want to kill her? And Hanna meets up with a family traveling through Morocco. She befriends the family’s teenage daughter and the bad guys begin trailing them. Hanna gets away and then we never see these people again. In fact, I’m not even sure why the film actually exists in the first place, but that’s generally the case with action flicks. They exist for entertainment purposes and it’s certainly done its job.

“Hanna” is fun action movie; even if it has a fault or two it features a great soundtrack, great cinematography and beautiful locations and some really great performances. Ronan is certainly a talented young thing. She’s already been nominated for an Oscar and she hasn’t even turned seventeen yet. I love that she plays Hanna as a girl who doesn’t know much about the outside world (she’s mesmerized by a blinking florescent light as she’s never actually seen electricity) except how to survive and kill people. I guess sisters really are doin’ it for themselves. GRADE: B

Boy Meets Otherworld: “Insidious” is a Truly Scary Ghost Flick

“It's not the house that's haunted. It's your son.”

I don’t scare too easily so let it be known that I jumped and screamed a lot while watching “Insidious.” If that’s all that’s required of a scary movie than this movie wins hands down. But besides the terrific spook factor, “Insidious” is an intelligent, wonderful little movie ironically from the writer and director of the first “Saw” film which wasn’t very intelligent nor very wonderful. But here director James Wan and writer/actor Leigh Whannell have crafted a wonderfully creepy story about a family and the things that go bump in the night. It amazingly never feels clichéd; maybe we should also credit “Paranormal Activity” director Oren Peli whose credited here as producer.

With a title like “Insidious” you know this movie is not going to be a happy experience. They could have easily called the film “Sinister,” “Menacing” or “Dangerous” or whatever words a thesaurus could have spit out. The menace starts when a nice family of five move into a suburban home. Dad is Josh (Patrick Wilson) a teacher, mom is Renai (Rose Byrne) who stays home and writes music, and their young sons Dalton (Ty Simpkins) and Foster (Andrew Astor) and their infant daughter. The house is old and creepy and it offers plenty of creaking sounds. Renai notices that sometimes things movie about seemingly on their own. Then young Dalton falls off a ladder in the attic and somehow ends up in a coma the next morning. The doctors say he’s medically fine, but he just won’t wake up. We, the audience, know better. Soon full on figures make themselves known, mostly to Renai; Josh is given the “you’re seeing things” role but does quickly begin to realize something sinister might be lurking. So this wise young couple actually does what everyone in haunted house movies should always do – move out.

Josh and Renai move their family to a new home, hoping to get some peace from ghostly figures who scarily appear in windows and who open their front door in the middle of the night. Of course with only half the film’s runtime gone, we know they’re still in for something way worse. Josh’s mother (Barbara Hershey) recommends they invite her friend Elise (Lin Shaye) who is a medium to their home and her two goofy ghostbuster sidekicks played by Angus Sampson and Whannell. It turns out that the house isn’t what’s haunted; it’s their son Dalton. Now that’s all I’m going to say story-wise. Sure it sounds sort of like “Poltergeist” meets “The Exorcist” and in a way it is, but it feels like a movie that could sit along side them; this is not just a rip-off. To say much more would ruin what some see as a shaky final act but I found ultimately rewarding. Some may dismiss it and I was tempted to at first, but I have to give credit to the filmmakers for going as far as they do and showing us things we haven’t really seen before.

Let’s go back to what makes this film actually pretty original and so downright scary. I have to say a good amount is paid to developing the character so we at least care about them – and they don’t do anything stupid that makes you dislike or distrust them. The scares themselves are genuine; there are shock moments that make you jump, but there’s never a true release. You jump and you’re still in dire suspense. There are no false scares – no cats jumping out or hands grabbing shoulders or silly CGI faces in the bathroom mirror. This is a film that builds the suspense throughout its duration and hardly lets go. The shots are perfectly framed for maximum fright. And let’s credit the “lipstick-face demon” as one of the most disturbingly terrifying images in a movie in some time. And Joseph Bishara’s score is spine-tingling and matches perfectly with every creak of the house.

If you don’t want to be scared, then don’t see “Insidious” - it’s that simple. It’s a competently made spook-fest with enough shocks and suspense to scare even the toughest horror fans. Wan who we’re used to showing us blood and guts does none of that here and takes us back to the simple things that scare the heck out of us. There are no sawed off limbs here; just good old fashioned haunted house thrills. It’s insidiously entertaining. GRADE: A-

Jake’s on a Train: “Source Code” is a Highly Inventive Sci-Fi Thriller

“What would you do if you knew you only had eight minutes to live?”

It’s hard to imagine a movie being released that is as original as “Source Code.” It’s not based on any previously published material and it’s not a remake or reimagining. It’s a wholly original piece of mind-bending science fiction; and it’s pretty darn clever. It hardly takes a wrong step in it’s 94 minute runtime although I imagine some being slightly irked by the film’s final moments, which, to me, I could take or leave. Those out there who have been seeking something original and fresh since last summer’s imaginative blockbuster “Inception” should get their fill here. As long as you don’t mind watching a movie that’s sort of strange mix of “The Matrix,” “Twelve Monkeys,” and “Groundhog Day.”

“Source Code” stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a soldier who is able to relive the final eight minutes of another man’s life, over and over again. This man was on a Chicago-bound commuter train that happened to be blown up by a terrorist’s bomb killing everyone onboard. This film exists in a present day world where scientists have actually invented a way for someone to relive the last moments of a person’s life. Colter Stevens (Gyllenhaal) is given the task to relive the passenger’s final moments over and over again in hopes of finding the person responsible for nuking the train, as the government is aware that this person is about to blow up the entire city of Chicago next. The less said about the rest of the plot the better; it benefit anyone who plans on actually seeing the film.

It’s a wildly unbelievable premise and yet you totally buy into it. There are many questions the audience is faced with that slowly make themselves known. Like how does this technology actually work? And why was Stevens the person chosen for this assignment? And what the heck is a Source Code anyways? Stevens is located in some kind of enclosed pod, which sort of reminded me of the device Jodie Foster gets strapped into in the end of “Contact.” Don’t worry; there are no aliens to be found in “Source Code.” What is great about movies like this that are done right, is even though we must watch the same event over and over again, you’re never bored and each time something unique happens. Stevens gets closer and closer to solving the film’s curious mysteries. The film works as a thriller, and even though we know the train will explode every eight minutes, the suspense is built up for maximum effect.

I haven’t seen director Duncan Jones’ previous directorial effort “Moon” although I’ve heard some rave reviews. It seems as though Jones is fully intrigued by the introspective sci-fi genre and is great at building great character development. We learn so much about Stevens as the film progresses and that is due to Gyllenhaal’s terrific acting abilities and a very strong script from Ben Ripley, whose previous efforts strangely include two direct to video “Species” sequels. Ripley’s script is extremely taut and it brings up so many fascinating issues you’ll most likely be thinking about the film long after it’s ended. The film is filled with great supporting performances from Michelle Monaghan as a fellow train passenger, Vera Farmiga as a military woman giving instructions to Stevens, and Jeffrey Wright as the source code’s creator.

“Source Code” is a twisty, thrilling action flick. It has suspense and it’ll make you think. It’s smartly written, acted and directed and is certainly one of the better films to be released this year. It’ll constantly keep you guessing right up until the end… oh that ending. GRADE: B+

Dream Girls: “Sucker Punch” is an Action Fantasy Featuring Ladies with Big Guns

“If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.”

I’m a little wishy-washy about the cinematic “style” of one Zack Snyder. And that’s probably why my favorite of his films remains his sleek “Dawn of the Dead” remake from 2004. Or it could just be the fact that I remain partial to the horror genre. I remain that his “Watchmen” flick is certainly an ambitious and wonderfully artistic undertaking and “Legends of the Guardians” was a fun animated adventure. The less said about “300” the better. And that brings us to his most recent cinematic romp “Sucker Punch” which sort of has elements of all of these movies.

Say what you want about Snyder’s films as a whole, but her certainly knows how to open a movie. I can recommend “Watchmen,” “Dawn of the Dead” and now “Sucker Punch” based on the film’s opening sequences alone. “Sucker Punch” opens an nary a line of dialogue is uttered and yet the whole film’s story is set up. It’s all set to an updated version of “Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This).” A young woman’s mother dies and her disgruntled stepfather is not thrilled to learn that his wife’s daughters will be getting the inheritance. He tries to abuse this girl, who’s only known as Baby Doll (Emily Browning), and when he tries to attack her younger sister Baby Doll accidently shoots and kills her sister. The stepfather sends her away to a mental institution in Brattleboro, VT where she awaits a lobotomy that will keep her quite for good.

Once our heroine realizes she’s about to get a long piece of metal plunged into her brain she enters a dream like reality where she conceives the mental institution as a burlesque theater-like brothel where the other “patients” are there to dance and perform and meet the need of male clients. She has five days before an unseen client known only as the High Roller will meet with her (which in reality is the doctor who is coming to lobotomize her). While she’s in this “world” she makes friends with the other girls who include Rocket (Jenna Malone) whom she saves from the creepy cook’s clutches, Rocket’s sister Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens) and Amber (Jamie Chung). Without getting to far into specific plot details, it turns out that even in this “alternate world,” Baby Doll can actually go further into a fantasy world in which she battles monsters, robots and steam-punk WWI soldiers. It is in here where she learns she needs to collect five items which will eventually help the girls escape their mental prison, literally and figuratively.

Having said all that, I’m actually sort of surprised how easy it was to buy into all of this. The film’s “you must find five items” story seems just like the plot of a video game and the film’s grayscale and slow motion visuals certainly don’t make it the most stylistically original film out there, but the whole this was relatively easy to swallow. I liked how the fantasy sequences existed only in Baby Doll’s mind when she begins her dancing. I like having a line between reality and fantasy because it helps me ease into seeing something fantastical like flying dragons etc. It’s possible most people will laugh off the silly plot and the fact that the girls are “trained” by a psychiatrist named Dr. Gorski (Carla Gugino doing the best stereotypically cheesy Polish accent possible) makes some of these scenes feel like they’ve been ripped from some ill-conceived Bob Fosse musical reject. The movie is ridiculous enough you’d think they might as well of had musical numbers too. I appreciate Snyder’s goal to finally produce an original story and he does get decent enough performers from his actors…considering one is from High School Musical and one is a former Real World cast member. And he is pretty good at constructing good music cues on his soundtrack.

A lot of people will see this movie because of the fantastical elements, cool fighting sequences and because the girls mostly run around in midriff revealing outfits and they shoot big guns. Its PG-13 rating is a warning enough that there’s very little actual overt sexuality here so those seeking titillation are better off watching Cinemax when they get home. And anyone who thinks this movie is exploitative of women obviously hasn’t seen a slasher flick. This is just a simple genre flick with no real higher aspirations and like the other Zack Snyder flicks that have come and gone it will fade blissfully from memory until the next geeky sci-fi fantasy video game comic book type movie hits the big screen. GRADE: B

Craven More Scream: Appreciating the Scream Trilogy in Anticipation of “Scream 4”

Finally after nearly eleven years another Scream film is making its way to your local multiplex and if you’re a horror junkie like me you’re probably as giddy as a schoolboy. It’s a little more rare these days that we would get a straight up sequel, with some of the actual main characters from the original films, rather than a plain old remake. But the Weinsteins, with dollar signs in their eyes, saw an opportunity too good to refuse. Let’s take the original cast and filmmakers and relaunch one of their most popular franchises. Scream 4 is supposedly the first in a new planned trilogy and if that doesn’t excite you enough, Wes Craven is interesting in directing them all. Heck even George Lucus didn’t direct six Star Wars films. So with that April 15 opening looming every so closely in the future, I’ve decide to take a look back at the films that will provide the backstory for Scream 4 (or Scre4m if you’re paying attention to those ads) and why this trilogy is such an entertaining and ultimately groundbreaking addition to the often maligned but overtly popular horror genre.

Oh to be a horror film before 1996. Let’s see what there was…well there were plenty of sequels…we had Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers, arguably one of the worst of the series… we had Leprechaun which opened the door for future Friends star Jennifer Aniston… Dr. Giggles which opened and closed without much fanfare… Interview with the Vampire was classy and even reaped Oscar noms, as did Bram Stoker’s Dracula, but come on those movies aren’t really scary they’re lavish… There were two Child’s Play sequels… Candyman was a decent success for its time… yup, the early 1990s were pretty much a bust in terms of the horror genre. With the clear exception of Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, there was nary an original or hip entry in the horror canon. New Nightmare was not a financial success… even Freddy fans were turned off by its “too hip” self-reflective approach. The early 1990s horror audience just didn’t “get it.” It was obvious that the horror genre, and more specifically the “slasher movie” was DOA.

Enter fledgling screenwriter Kevin Williamson whose favorite film Halloween inspired what was to become one of the most original horror movie scripts in the history of the genre. His “Scary Movie” script was passed around Hollywood and started a bidding war which was eventually snatched up by those money grubbing Weinsteins. They hired Wes Craven, whose last film was the Eddie Murphy urban vampire flick “Vampire in Brooklyn.” Not only would this next film reinvent an entire genre, but it would revamp Craven’s entire career. Now Craven wouldn’t just be known as the guy who directed “A Nightmare on Elm Street” but also the newly retitled “Scream” a wonderfully subversive take on the slasher movie clichés that audiences had gobbled down for years and years throughout the 70s and 80s. The film featured an extraordinarily well-executed opening sequence which dispatched teen star Drew Barrymore and relaunched her career ala John Travolta in “Pulp Fiction.” The opening scene in which Drew, as horror savvy high schooler Casey Becker, is stalked on the phone by a menacing voice who forces her to answer horror trivia questions is arguably one of the best staged sequences in slasher movie history. It’s really a short film that could exist without even the rest of the film existing. Seriously. Watch it and then turn off the movie and your slasher movie craving will be more than satisfied. But the rest of the movie is simply horror movie gold. The script is about teens who grew up watching horror movies, just like the many fans watching the film. They talk about these movies and their performers and they discuss the clichés we’ve all gleaned from watching these types of films over and over again. The irony is that while the Scream characters scorn movie characters for doing stupid things (like running up the stairs when they should be running out the front door), they do them anyways. One character, Randy Meeks (Jamie Kennedy), even has compiled a list of horror movie “rules” in order to survive a scary movie. These include not drinking, having sex or saying you’ll “be right back.” Each one of these rules are broken in “Scream.” Oh how I can remember almost jumping out of my skin first watching “Scream” when it first came out on video. It scared me and yet I couldn’t get enough. I even made the mistake of watching it all alone again the next day. How I couldn’t get enough.

The first “Scream” was a great film in its own right. It was obvious due to the success of the first film that a sequel was bound to happen. And it did, just one year later. And of course the movie savvy characters discuss sequels in this sequel ‘cause they know they’re in a sequel. While the first film had the ingenious twist of having two killers, which was a twist literally no one on the planet saw coming, with the sequel it was now known that literally anything could happen. Maybe this time there would be three killers? “Scream 2” followed the first film’s hip, self-reflective style and opens with a sequence in which two college kids (who look awfully old to be in college - perhaps they were just going back to get their Bachelors?) attend a premiere of a movie called “Stab” which is based on the events that took place in the first “Scream.” Here we hardcore Scream fans get a reenactment of events from the opening of the first film starring Heather Graham in the Drew Barrymore role. (And later on an ingenius cameo from Tori Spelling as heroine Sidney Prescott)This is played out against our two new characters quickly being stabbed to death, inside a crazy-packed movie theater (but not before having the African American characters fittingly point out that slasher movies rarely feature Black characters). While I don’t personally find this sequel to be as scary or intense as the first film, Craven has to be given credit for constructing some pretty innovative sequences. For instance, it’s in his genius that he can manage to make an open college campus quad in the middle of the day ominous. There are people all around and yet Ghostface manages to snatch a victim within plain sight. And a scene that takes place in a crashed cop car is a pretty great showcase for suspense. The film’s climax, while not as well-done as in the original, is set on a theater stage in an eerie take on "life imitating art" and while the film ends wraps things up nice and neatly, we weren’t all too shocked to learn there would be a part three.

If “Scream 2” was about life imitating art, then this third chapter is about life imitating art imitating life. This film doesn’t take place in high school or in college, but appropriately takes place in the “real world” or rather the real world as only Hollywood could imagine it. It’s now several years later, and so much time has passed that there’s already a “Stab 3” movie in production. So instead of college co-eds here our supporting cast are actors and filmmakers. Funny lady Parker Posey plays Jennifer Jolie who plays Gale Weathers in the Stab films. She gets super excited when she gets to meet the actual Gale Weathers (Courtney Cox) and this doppelganger comically clings to her as if she were her real life twin. The Scream films have always been known for their humor and with the death of Randy Meeks in Scream 2, we needed a new comic relief character. And you can’t go wrong with Posey. It turns out that our heroine Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) is in hiding but a new string of murders brings her out to get rid of her haunted past for good. She teams up with the lovably doofy Dewey Riley (David Arquette). In most cases the third act of a trilogy is about going back to the beginning (the subtitle of Stab 3 is appropriately “Return to Woodsboro”) and we learn things we never knew we never knew. It’s important to note that by the time “Scream 3” was released in February 2000, there had been so many “Scream” imitations it was hard to keep track. Movies like “I Know What You Did Last Summer, “Urban Legend” and even a new “Halloween” flick which has a very Scream-like vibe about it. So not surprisingly “Scream 3” sort of had a lukewarm reception. It’s ironic that the hip flick that restarted the slasher genre sort of became a parody of itself and in so doing, “Scream 3” sort of remains the least scary of the trilogy (and for some reason the least gory) and yet it’s definitely the most tongue-in-cheek. It followed the same formula of the first two films: a shocking opening murder, the reintroduction of heroine Sidney Prescott, Gale Weathers being a bitch, comic relief, hip dialogue, Dewey almost dying, and the revelation of the killer, who must be shot in the head in order to be killed (and this one adds some great cameos from Jay and Silent Bob and even Carrie Fisher). It doesn’t hide the fact that it’s so obviously attempting to be a movie about movies. And even without Kevin Williamson in the writer’s chair it ultimately retains the style of the first two films and concludes the series in a mostly satisfying way.

Overall you can’t deny the impact of the Scream series. The countless imitations it caused made it one of the most influential films in the horror genre since the first “Halloween” film in 1978. Ghostface simply represented the 1990s horror slasher. While Leatherface and Michael Myers ruled the 70s and Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger ruled the 80s. Of course, eventually people sort of got sick of the hip style of these self-referential slasher flicks and the horror film sort of took a nosedive into what became “torture porn” subgenre in the 00s (And let’s not forget the funny parody series “Scary Movie” which itself inspired a whole slew of horrible, unfunny spoofs). It’s interesting to note that while the post-Scream slasher films were hip they weren’t all that fantastically gory. Sure there was lots of blood, but no real guts. Let us remember that the original Scream featured not only one but two disembowelings. It’s great that Scream was able to mix such shocking images with such clever and funny dialogue and feature characters worth caring about and a twisty plot that was too good to resist. Here’s hoping that the fourth entry in the series can go back to what made “Scream” so good in the first place. Scream: A+; Scream 2: A-; Scream 3: B+

Check out the trailer for Scream 4 below and watch it 500 times like I have already. The three Scream films also arrive on Blu-ray March 29th.

Close Encounters of the Nerd Kind: “Paul” is a Funny, Pop Culture Referencing Romp

“Are you gonna draw me like one of your French girls, Jack?”

Curious if you think you’d like “Paul” about two goofs who run into a stranded wisecracking alien during their road trip tour of geeky, obscure alien sites? Did you love “Shaun of the Dead” or “Hot Fuzz?” Do you have a particular love of the films of Steven Spielberg and George Lucas? Are you obsessed with Comic-Con, aliens or quoting movies? Odds are if you answered yes to any of the above questions then you’re bound to love the movie “Paul” like I did (And I’m not even obsessed with aliens or George Lucas like some people tend to be… you know who you are). “Paul” is written by the guys who stared in “Shaun of the Dead” those British funny guys Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. And it’s from the guy who directed “Superbad” (Greg Mottola). So right away you know you’re in for a raunchy, pop cultured-filled adventure that will certainly bring out the immature 15 year old boy in all of us.

Paul is an alien from outer space. He accidentally crashes his spaceship somewhere where Area 51 is currently located, back in the 1940s. He has been held captive by scientists who have been probing and prodding him and were about to cut out his brain when he escaped and happen to run into two sci-fi geeks who happen to be touring UFO sites. Paul is voiced by Seth Rogen, so you’re not surprised when Paul starts sprouting out movie lines, foul language, and lighting up joints. These goofs Graeme (Pegg) and Clive (Frost) reluctantly let Paul hang out in their RV and give him a ride to where Paul is supposed to make contact with his fellow spacemen.

Of course, with an alien on the lose there are many folks in black suits after him. One of those guys is Jason Bateman playing the straight man which we all know he does so well. He’s being ordered around by “The Big Guy” whose voice we recognize as the alien ass-kicking Sigourney Weaver. And Bateman in turn is bossing around Haggard (Bill Hader) and O’Reilly (the weird guy from “Superbad” whose name no one knows…it’s Joe Lo Truglio) who slowly become aware of the fact that their mission is to track down a space alien who is on the run. Graeme and Clive meet a bunch of colorful characters along the way, which tends to happen in road movies. The best is definitely Ruth Buggs (an always wonderful Kristin Wiig) who begins as a one-eyed Bible thumper and then finds new freedom as a profanity-spewing gal whose new number one interest is fornicating.

“Paul” is a movie about sci-fi geeks made to be watched by sci-fi geeks. There are plenty of references to everything from “Back to the Future” to “Aliens.” And even more random references like Titanic and even the Susan Sarandon drama “Lorenzo’s Oil” (Bateman’s character’s name is revealed to be Lorenzo Zoil). There are too many great scenes and lines (and cameos) to spoil here so odds are if you’re a movie junkie you will find something to like about “Paul.” And Rogen does such a great job of bringing his character to life. You’ll be amazed at how quickly you become attached to that little space dude.

Is “Paul” the best movie ever made? No. Is the funniest? No. But it’s certainly one of the best movies currently playing at a theater near you. It certainly fits nicely with movies like “Shaun of the Dead” and “Superbad,” although it kind of felt like a cross between “Zombieland” and “Pineapple Express” meets “E.T.” Unless you’ve never even heard of any of the movies I’ve mentioned, you’re bound to enjoy it. GRADE: B+

Reptile Dysfunction: “Rango” is a Super Weird, but Super Cool Animated Adventure

“Believe in that there sign. For as long as it hangs there we've got hope.”

How could I possibly describe “Rango?” I guess the best explanation would be “it’s an animated Western.” Of course it’s much more than that because if were only an animated Western I probably wouldn’t like it that much since it’s not one of my favorite genres. And it’s not quite a kids movie since it seems too intense for the little ones and probably too confusing for the older ones. In fact, I’m not quite sure what the appropriate audience is for the Nickelodeon-produced flick about a thespian chameleon who gets lost in the desert and happens upon a run down town that has lost their water supply. There’s a social message in here somewhere and there are even a few laughs along the way. The highlight is definitely Rango, our colorful lizard hero who longs to be just that: a hero.

We’re introduced to this lizard guy, voiced by Johnny Depp, as a pet chameleon who gets separated from his human owners and left out in the middle of the open road. He’s quickly given some advice from an armadillo that’s been run over. He’s quickly attacked by a hawk who just wants something to eat. And soon he runs into another lizard name Beans (Isla Fisher) who warns him that her townsfolk don’t take kindly to strangers. This old Western town, appropriately named Dirt, is full of strange inhabitants and they’re all worried about the lack of water in their town. Their bank, doesn’t hold money, but rather precious water which is the source of their very survival. They’re forced to drink cactus juice which appears to cause severe hallucinations. We’re quickly introduced to a bunch of colorful characters which include various desert-dwelling animals. The towns Mayor, (Ned Beatty) a giant wheel-chair bound tortoise, doesn’t seem quite right off the bad and we’re not exactly sure what his deal is. Although it’s certainly suspicious that he hoard some precious water for himself.

This chameleon, who had previously been unnamed names himself Rango and tells the townsfolk that he’s actually a tough drifter and they quickly see him as some sort of possible savior. Of course remember I said he’s a thespian who’s more interested in being something he’s not. Soon that peskly hawk is after Rango again and this time Rango defeats him, which immediately cements the idea that Rango is the one. The Mayor even makes Rango the town sheriff. Soon after however, some thieves make off with the rest of the town’s limited water supply and it’s up to Rango to find the culpriets and bring them to justice. And before we know it there’s an appearance by a Clint Eastwood look-a-like and a scary rattle snake named Jake who seems way too scary a character for little kids to handle.

Rango was written by John Logan, directed by Gore Verbinksi and produced by The Departed’s Graham King which probably all explains the sheer strangeness of the entire thing. The film feels rather cinematic which tends to happen when a live action director does animation. It sort of feels like his previous efforts The Mexican and the entire Pirates trilogy. It features a great Hans Zimmer score and plenty of movie in-jokes for adult audiences. The entire film’s animation style is pretty breathtaking; it’s never truly “cartoony” which is probably explained by the fact that the special effects company ILM animated the entire film (the company’s first such endeavor). The voice work is terrific as well (and the actor’s supposedly acted out their parts with props and such) and there’s plenty of weirdness to talk about once the film is over. If there’s any complaint, it seems the movie appears to run a little long in my opinion, with the film sort of running out of steam towards the end.

“Rango” is certainly a strange and original animated movie. Don’t let the idea that it’s a cartoon turn you off, because it features plenty of good fun for big movie buffs. Rango is a cute character who is certainly memorable and it features some pretty scrumptious animation. Good times indeed. And bonus points for the owl mariachi band, they're definitely a hoot. GRADE: B

Call of Doodie: “Battle: Los Angeles” is a Boring and Dull Alien Combat Flick

“Right now we are being colonized.”

I would watch “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning” on loop for the rest of my life before I would rewatch “Battle: Los Angeles.” Director Jonathan Liebesman, who’s previous directorial effort was the aforementioned Leatherface prequel should stick to grotesque horror, because with this boring sci-fi action movie, he’s made something certainly terrifying in a whole new way. I was really looking forward to “Battle: Los Angeles” and I figured after the disaster that was “Skyline” how could the alien invasion genre get any worse? Ok so “Battle” isn’t really as bad as “Skyline” but it’s not much better. It’s sort of a neat idea to mesh the style of Ridley Scott’s “Black Hawn Down” with something like “Independence Day” but here the formula doesn’t really work and instead we’re left with a two hour nausea-inducing commercial for the Marines. Oooo-yawn!

I’m not usually a fan of the flag-waving patriot view of the military you usually get in action movies like this. I’m looking at you Michael Bay. It’s not that I don’t respect the military, because I do, but in movies like this they sort of glorify combat and make it seem like it’s all fun and games. Look it’s fun to shoot at aliens! Be all you can be! Like I said, the film feels like a commercial for the Marines than an actual movie. And I wouldn’t mind so much if writer Christopher Bertolini could have given us at least one character to care about or at least made the characters diverse enough to tell them apart. I’d at least be willing to give up character development for at least some action that is enjoyable to watch. But here there are so many edits and shaky camera moves I wasn’t quite sure what was going on. Shaky cameras work for something like “Cloverfield” but here where the story is not being shot by an actual character it’s just pointless. It’s just a way to distract you from the cheesy aliens being parading in front of you.

Ok it’s cool that an actual alien combat movie shows individual aliens actually fighting. The aliens seem to be almost part machine and have machine guns for arms it appears. The aliens are some cross between a transformer and a terminator with enough soft flesh to have a few slimy sequences, once of which involves poor Michelle Rodriquez taking a large glob of slime to the face. And besides marines shooting their guns and the aliens firing their guns there’s really not much else going on here. A team of marines lead by Staff Sergeant Michael Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) leads his team of marines into full on battle in Los Angeles against these alien invaders. A massive bomb is going to take out the area so they have three hours to… kill aliens. Meanwhile we as the audience have to sit there for two hours and wait for the whole thing to be over with. I’ll give the rest of the cast a break and not mention they by name here.

I’m sure there are plenty of action fans who will find something to enjoy here. There’s lots of shooting and yelling and loud noises. Normally I wouldn’t mind but it was just sort of boring; like watching someone play a videogame and you’re not invited to join in. The whole film just feels like it exists to make noise. And is it ever boring! “Transformers 2,” as crappy as it was, wasn’t nearly as boring as this is. Say what you want about Mr. Bay, but when he goes big he goes really big and as much of a tool as he is, I never really regret seeing any of his movies. I think Mr. Liebesman should just stick to Leatherface movies ‘cause if I’m going to be subjected to loud noises, I’d rather see someone being ripped apart by a chainsaw. GRADE: D+

Oscar Forecast 2011: “The King’s Speech” with a Chance of Facebook

UPDATED - The Oscars are over already?? In the words of Melissa Leo: "F***!" Well what do you know the Academy wasn't as into The King's Speech as most people thought. So you all need to chill alright. Inception ended up winning just as many awards as "Speech" with four wins apeice. And who knew that Inception would (deservedly) take home Best Cinematography? (Poor Roger Deakins!) And even though The King's Speech was a British period piece, it followed the same exact winning pattern as recent gritty flicks like Million Dollar Baby, The Departed, and No Country For Old Men who all won 4 big Oscars and no technical honors. I'm glad Christian Bale finally has an Oscar and thank godness The Social Network won its most deserved win: Original Score. I'm saddened the Academy couldn't find a place to reward 127 Hours, but that's ok. They couldn't even find room to honor True Grit, which turned out to be this year's Gangs of New York with 10 losses. Ouch. Overall it was an entertaining show and James and Anne did good as first time hosts. I'm sure they'll be criticized in the morning (ie "well they're no Bob Hope or Billy Crystal" But who is anyways?) but they should be proud of their performances. I did decently with my predictions, with a total of 18 out of 24 correct categories. Only 364 days til next year's Oscars.... can't wait! Winners are below in BOLD

In less than 127 hours, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will announce the winners of the 83rd Annual Academy Awards. It’s been a long awards season but the big night is finally here! I think it’s been a pretty decent year for movies, there are some really great achievements out there. (What? No nominations for Piranha 3D?? It’s a Weinstein film for crying out loud!) This is a year in which I actually at least liked all of the Best Picture nominees and there have been years where I’ve only liked two or three. This is the second year of the Academy’s controversial decision to expand the Best Picture race to 10 nominees and while it’s great to see movies like 127 Hours and Toy Story 3 nominated for Best Picture, let’s be frank: they have ZERO chance of actually taking the top prize. I’m pretty confident that if there were only five nominees they would be The King’s Speech, The Social Network, The Fighter, True Grit and probably Black Swan (with a possibility of The Kids Are All Right). And even with five nominees it would still come down to a battle between a nerdy computer guy and a stuttering monarch. So will the Academy friend The Social Network or will they crown The King’s Speech? Without further ado I present my fearless predictions for the 2011 Academy Awards…

Best Picture
WhatWill Win: The King’s Speech. Do I really need to tell you this? Sure The Social Network seemed like a foregone conclusion a few months ago, but the tides certainly changed over there in crazy Hollywood. With the Weinsteins backing your film about a king with a speech impediment you might as well have given them the Oscar during pre-production. I guess there’s still a remote possibility that The Social Network could win, but I doubt it. The King’s Speech has SAG, PGA and DGA awards to back up it’s claim as the frontrunner.
What Should Win: 127 Hours. Hands down the best movie of the year. Emotionally raw, unnerving, majestic yet intimate, disturbing. Everything you want in a well-made film. Audacious filmmaking for sure.
Should Have Been Nominated: The Town

Best Director
Will Win: Tom Hooper, The King’s Speech. Finally we have a race! Hooper could easily loose here to David Fincher, who seems to be this year’s “veteran” who hasn’t yet won. Hooper has history on his side since he picked up the DGA award and his film is the frontrunner for BP. But a split is definitely possible, and I wouldn’t be surprised or shocked to hear Fincher’s name called. I just think the Academy loves The King’s Speech and what’s a best picture without a best director?
Should Win: David O. Russell, The Fighter. I loved The Fighter and I think a lot of its success is due to Russell’s great direction. He directed his actors wonderfully and they all delivered (with three of them being Oscar-nominated). But if I really had my pick I would vote for…
Should Have Been Nominated: Danny Boyle, 127 Hours

Best Actor
Will Win: Colin Firth, The King’s Speech. Like last year’s “race,” yawn. You don't need a pre-cog to see this one coming.
Should Win: James Franco, 127 Hours. This movie is practically a one man show. And he didn’t even talk to a volleyball! Franco’s performance is wonderful and even though he doesn’t stutter once, you are completely drawn into his strange and brutally intense predicament.
Should Have Been Nominated: Ryan Gosling, Blue Valentine

Best Actress
Will Win: Natalie Portman, Black Swan. She gave a great performance, she’s “young and hot,” and she prepared for the role for about a year. Just give it to her already. Poor Annette Bening, even with Hilary Swank not even nominated she’s still being sidelined by the hot young thing. There’s a chance she could still pull it off: Black Swan didn’t get nearly as many nominations as most people predicted (not even for screenplay) which could possibly expose the film’s potential weakness.
Should Win: Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right. Look I love both of these performances and since Bening was robbed for American Beauty, she deserves a little naked golden man.
Should Have Been Nominated: Julianne Moore, The Kids Are All Right

Best Supporting Actor
Will Win: Christian Bale, The Fighter. He gave another great performance, but finally in a movie that Academy likes. I’m worried that love of The King’s Speech could give Rush the edge here, but I’m still thinking Bale pulls it off. I don’t think the others even have a shot.
Should Win: Christian Bale, The Fighter. In any year any of these five actors could win for their performances here. This was a great year for supporting performances. But Bale just sticks out here with such a juicy role which is actually the most entertaining plot line of the film. He’s a scene stealer and that’s a great supporting performance
Should Have Been Nominated: Sam Rockwell, Conviction

Best Supporting Actress
Will Win: Melissa Leo, The Fighter. This is also going to be a close race. Leo has most of the precursor awards but a possible vote split with her Fighter co-star Amy Adams could hurt, which could lead to a victory by the young Hailee Steinfeld (or even in a King’s Speech sweep Carter). Leo is the safest bet, but literally anything can happen in this category. Anything.
Should Win: Amy Adams, The Fighter. I love both the supporting actresses in The Fighter, but I’ve been an Adams fan longer. She should have won for Junebug, and a win here would correct that. And to think she wasn’t even nominated for Enchanted. For shame, Academy!
Should Have Been Nominated: Mila Kunis, Black Swan

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
The King’s Speech

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
The Social Network

BEST DOCUMENTARY
Inside Job

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT

Strangers No More

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
In a Better World (Denmark)

BEST ANIMATED FILM
Toy Story 3

BEST ANIMATED SHORT

Day & Night (The Lost Thing)

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT

Na Wewe (God of Love)

BEST ART DIRECTION
The King’s Speech (Alice in Wonderland)

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
True Grit (Inception)

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
The King’s Speech (Alice in Wonderland)

BEST EDITING
The Social Network

BEST MAKEUP
The Wolfman

BEST SCORE
The King’s Speech (The Social Network)

BEST SONG
“We Belong Together,” Toy Story 3

BEST SOUND EDITING
Inception

BEST SOUND MIXING
Inception

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Inception

If I Had an Oscar Ballot...

It’s every movie freak’s dream to be able to vote for the Oscars (or am I alone here?) But a fan can dream right? So here would be my picks if I had an Oscar ballot in front of me:

Ranking of Best Picture
With 10 nominees for best picture, Academy members are actually required to rank all the films from their favorite to least favorite. They use a preferential voting system to find a winner, which is way too complicated to explain here, but I understand the general gist of it. At the end of the day each member will end up casting only one vote for one movie, but it may not necessarily be the top movie on their ballot. Here are my rankings:

BEST PICTURE
1 - 127 Hours
The Fighter
Black Swan
The Kids Are All Right
Inception
Toy Story 3
Winter’s Bone
True Grit
The King’s Speech
10 - The Social Network

This year, I actually enjoyed all ten best picture nominees. (Although I’d prefer to have The Town in there somewhere). I didn’t dislike any of the movies, and although I have The Social Network ranked last, it’s not a horrible movie by any stretch of the imagination, it’s just that, I wouldn’t want my ballot being unexpectedly cast for that film. 127 Hours was hands down my favorite film of the year.

And the rest… my picks are italicized…

BEST DIRECTOR
Darren Aronofsky, Black Swan
Joel & Ethan Coen, True Grit
David Fincher, The Social Network
Tom Hooper, The King’s Speech
David O. Russell, The Fighter

I loved David O. Russell’s work on The Fighter, it’s quite understated and it’s not as flashy a job as let’s say Black Swan, although Darren Aronofksy is pretty close second here. I would vote for David Fincher just because I’d want him to win an Oscar, but to be frank if he was going to win, he should have won for Seven, Fight Club, Panic Room, Zodiac or Benjamin Button over The Social Network.

BEST ACTOR
Javier Bardem, Biutiful
Jeff Bridges, True Grit
Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network
Colin Firth, The King’s Speech
James Franco, 127 Hours

James Franco’s performance is the default winner here just because of the level of difficulty. He spends the entire film pined to a wall and yet he’s so compelling, likable and heart-wrenching the man deserves more than he’s been given so far this award season.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Bale, The Fighter
John Hawkes, Winter’s Bone
Jeremy Renner, The Town
Mark Ruffalo, The Kids Are All Right
Geoffrey Rush, The King’s Speech

Who doesn’t love Christina Bale, but here we have a chance to vote for not only a great actor who’s shockingly never been nominated, but actually rewarding him for literally his best performance to date. Although I do love Renner and Ruffalo, and even Rush was great but he’s won before. Hawkes’ nomination is his reward.


BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right
Nicole Kidman, Rabbit Hole
Jennifer Lawrence, Winter’s Bone
Natalie Portman, Black Swan
Michelle Williams, Blue Valentine

This is a tough call. I would hate voting for someone as a make-up vote for not winning previously, but I can’t help myself here. Bening was so great in American Beauty and Hilary Swank had to swipe it from her (twice). It’s really impossible to compare Bening and Portman’s performances but they were but equally great. Bening has the edge.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams, The Fighter
Helena Bonham Carter, The King’s Speech
Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit
Jacki Weaver, Animal Kingdom

Same thing here with Adams and Leo. They were both awesome in The Fighter, but in the end I have to give Adams the edge because she lost out on her magnificent performance in Junebug (and she wasn’t even nominated for Enchanted).

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Another Year
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King’s Speech

I think it’s possible that some Academy members will vote for Inception here simply because Christopher Nolan was snubbed because the Director’s Branch made a big mistake (yet again). However it deserves to win simply on the account that it’s not only the MOST original script of the year, it’s also the most fascinating, complex and memorable. Although I’m glad The Kids Are All Right and The Fighter are nominees.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
127 Hours
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter’s Bone

127 Hours just simply shines amongst all of these worthy nominees. I wish The Town was competing but you can’t have everything. On a side note, the book that was adapted into the Social Network, The Accidental Billionaires, is a great read and might even be more fascinating than the movie itself.

BEST ANIMATED FILM
How to Train Your Dragon
The Illusionist
Toy Story 3

I haven’t seen this category’s annual “foreign and or weird/arty” nominee The Illusionist, but I imagine I wouldn’t like it as much as Toy Story 3 or How to Train Your Dragon. In a way I almost want to vote for Dragon simply because Pixar dominates this category way too often and Cars didn’t even win, for shame!

BEST DOCUMENTARY
Exit Through the Gift Shop
Gasland
Inside Job
Restrepo
Waste Land

I’m admitting right now that I haven’t even seen ANY of these movies. But I plan on watching Exit Through the Gift Shop at some point, so it gets my vote simply to see what would happen if Banksy actually became an Oscar winner.

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Outside the Law (Algeria)
Incendies (Canada)
In a Better World (Denmark)
Dogtooth (Greece)
Biutiful (Mexico)

The only one of these film I’ve seen this year is Dogtooth, so technically I wouldn’t even be allowed to vote according to Academy’s rules, but since this is pure fantasy, I will give my vote to what is probably one of the strangest films nominated this year. A film full of incest, shocking violence and bizarre behavior that certainly has zero chances of actually winning. Oh those Greeks!

BEST ART DIRECTION
Alice in Wonderland
Happy Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 1
Inception
The King’s Speech
True Grit

Tim Burton films tend to get recognized a lot in this category and that’s completely justified. Alice in Wonderland wasn’t exactly my favorite of his films and although the production design was great, the jaw-dropping scenery in Inception gets my vote here.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Black Swan
Inception
The King’s Speech
The Social Network
True Grit

I’m not completely excited about any of the nominees this year. Nothing will beat 2007 as THE year for outstanding cinematography. Don’t believe me, go look it up and tell me that not every one of those films looks simply scrumdiddlyumptious. I still can’t believe Roger Deakins doesn’t have an Oscar, so he definitely gets my vote. And there are some beautiful shots in True Grit to be sure.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Alice in Wonderland
I Am Love
The King’s Speech
The Tempest
True Grit

Alice in Wonderland is full of bright colors and some rather eye-popping wardrobes.

BEST EDITING
127 Hours, Jon Harris
Black Swan, Andrew Weisblum
The Fighter, Pamela Martin
The King’s Speech, Tariq Anwar
The Social Network, Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter

I’m not sure I can’t still wrap my head around the fact that Inception is not one of the five best edited movies of the year. I expected it to win and it’s not even nominated! So then I must default to my favorite film of the year (because editing and picture sort of go hand in hand) and it actually features some great editing.

BEST MAKEUP
Barney’s Version
The Way Back
The Wolfman

I would love it if The Wolf man actually won because it would be first flat-out horror film to win this category since 1992 (Bram Stoker’s Dracula). Rick Baker is one of Hollywood’s greatest icons having won plenty of times before and certainly deserves another. The work in The Way Back is memorable if not completely flashy.

BEST SCORE
127 Hours
How to Train Your Dragon
Inception
The King’s Speech
The Social Network

My one vote for The Social Network is proudly cast here with its innovative and completely wonderful sounding score. This is a great slate of films this year, with Inception or How to Train Your Dragon easily getting my vote in another other year.

BEST SONG
“Coming Home,” Country Strong
“I See the Light,” Tangled
“If I Rise,” 127 Hours
“We Belong Together,” Toy Story 3

This category is pretty weak this year; all of the songs are kind of just ehh. Having said that, I’d love to see Alan Menken and a Disney ‘toon win again. Menken, who used to dominate this category hasn’t won since 1995 (for Pocahontas).

BEST SOUND EDITING
Inception
Toy Story 3
TRON: Legacy
True Grit
Unstoppable

The sound categories usually go with the loudest movie and since the loudest movie is also one of the best Inception is an easy choice. Although I’d love to cast a vote for Unstoppable here. Rememebr this category is essentially "best sound effects" so either film would be a viable option.

BEST SOUND MIXING
Inception
The King’s Speech
Salt
The Social Network
True Grit

Inception’s sound like is visuals are simply dazzling. The mix of score and sound is wondrous. This movie deserves to win just for those loud BURRNNNNNN sounds alone.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Alice in Wonderland
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 1
Hereafter
Inception
Iron Man 2

No other movie made audience’s jaws drop like Inception. There are so many cool visual tricks here it’s hard to vote for anything else. Although so many of the trickery weren’t even computer-generated, which is cool, so for shear number of wacky CGI visuals Alice in Wonderland isn’t a shabby choice either.