MOVIE REVIEWS

Faster Movie Trailer Official (HD)

2010-12-23T22:12:00.001+01:00

TRON: LEGACY

2010-12-19T15:12:00.002+01:00

On a 10-point meter comprised of visuals and story where ideally each would consume five points equally, "TRON: Legacy" tips the scale in the tech department with eight while only leaving two for humanity.

A wonderful, visual display of computer graphics and visual effects, “Tron Legacy,” is one of the most immersive films made in years with a plot that blows last year’s billion dollar baby [Avatar] out of the water. Thematically, this movie is about utopia versus an imperfect world, capitalism versus socialism, fathers and sons, and finding one’s self. Jeff Bridges has no problem rehashing Kevin Flynn, while Olivia Wilde is a doe-eyed surprise. Perhaps the one caveat in this digital world is the ambition to restore a young looking Bridges as Clu 2.0, while the hero of the film, Garrett Hedlund, was not as charismatic as he should have been. Daft Punk’s score sores with electronic sweetness with some slight help from Hans Zimmer’s composing genius. “Tron Legacy” is a movie for the users, not the programmed critics.

It’s no surprise that Tron Legacy is not a critic’s dream film. In fact, almost every review of the film out right now tries to expunge and discredit the film due to its poor screenplay while complementing its outstanding visuals. Seems familiar, as I would venture to guess that most of the people writing these reviews do not remember the original movie nor did they know that movie was a critical dud as well. The original Tron received a consensus that is perhaps not as strong dramatically as it is technologically, but it was an original and visually stunning piece of science fiction that represents a landmark work in the history of computer animation. Tron Legacy in my mind is no different, but where it stands out from its predecessor is that it musters up some unbelievable action, 3D immersion, tasty production design – all mixed within a story that answers some great questions of what Kevin Flynn would do after an experience he had in the first movie.

One thing I commend is they continued the world, made it evolutionary, while not shitting on the original film. They did this while simultaneously rebooting the world of Tron for a potential franchise. Unlike JJ Abrams’ Star Trek, which was a reboot, re-imagining of the world of Trek (creatively made it an alternate reality that does not kill 40 years of canon), Tron Legacy continues the world in the evolutionary way we thought it would.

Perhaps the only complaint I have about the movie is Garrett Hedlund is not the charismatic hero you thought he would be. Thus, Disney didn’t hit a homerun in his casting like a Chris Pine was in Star Trek. He reminded more of a Hayden Christensen in Star Wars. The movie begins with classic exposition, explaining the Kevin Flynn story from the first film, wrapped within the Daft Punk score with hints of Hans Zimmer. The movie becomes immersive for any newcomer or fan waiting to see what will happen next. Just like the original, an Encom break-in series of scenes is shown, even homaging itself with a line like “that is a really big door.” We are then introduced to Sam Flynn, a rebel youth, who would rather sabotage his father’s company than work for it. A cool Ducati scene as he approaches Encom towers is very Dark Knight-esque and was impressive to see, especially with the awesome “Son of Flynn” Daft Punk track going on. In this little series of scenes we get a cameo of a future villain, given a successful box office turn of the movie. You will have to see the movie to know who I am talking about, but it’s a killer move by the screenwriters. Once Sam accomplishes his goal, he is reunited with his friend and mentor, Alan Bradley, who tells him he got a page from his father’s arcade the previous night and that Sam should go check it out.

This leads Sam on a mission to explore Flynn’s Arcade. Once he is there, we find more homages to the original film, such as the staple couch in his dad’s office, Flynn’s version of the portable game player, etc. Sam, not knowing what will happen next, is thrust into the digital world his father created before he went missing. There, the movie begins its 3D immersion and exploration of this new Grid, which Kevin Flynn describes in the beginning of the movie. “A digital frontier. I tried to picture clusters of information as they moved through the computer, what they look like. Ships, motorcycles were the circuits like freeways? I kept dreaming of a world I thought I would never see, and then one day I got in.” Flynn’s experience from the first film spurred him to take all the resources of Encom and change the world. What he didn’t count on was that this manifest destiny to bridge the digital and real world together would backfire. Enter the Tron Legacy storyline, which for most of the movie, is one large set-up. A father/son story, this is also a story of utopia, a story of perfection versus being human. The characters play out a lot like they did in the 1982 movie. I saw critics complain that Bridges’ older Flynn was part Einstein, part The Dude. This is who Kevin Flynn was, and let’s not forget he was Flynn before he was the Dude. In the original movie, there is a great scene at the beginning where he breaks a record on the lightcycle video game and he does a” kung fu zen move” at his friends. Flynn has always been a hippy. Why was this such a weird thing to see in the movie? Clu 2.0 is a lot like Sark and Master Control combined into one, whereas Sam Flynn is much like his dad, thrust in a world he only dreamed of – except for Sam, it was a bedtime story told by his father. There are similar moments too, such as scared programs, the clamoring of an actual user on the grid by programs, the pomp of the disc games and lightcycle arenas all like the original movie, but with our modern CGI and technical flair to bring you more into this world than ever before. Joe Kosinski was brilliant in his production design. It’s like he and Kevin Flynn are the same guy.

Tron Legacy is not a perfect movie. The complaint of Hedlund is just one small reason why, but there are other little things about the movie that are droll as well. First off, it is a tad too long, not enough to bore you, but you feel it after the movie is over. Plus, the action could have been a little better, because after the visual shock of how cool it is, there are some mundane parts to it. Again, not enough to say it’s bad, though. Ultimately, I thought the movie was excellent because it felt like the original movie, a period piece. It was a true sequel that allows for so many directions the franchise could go forward. I also thought the themes in the movie were surprisingly deep and rich. Tron has never been about making a Dark Knight level story, which has flaws. It has always been about pushing people’s imagination while giving them an entertaining thrill ride in a world that exists in the thoughts of every video game and computer nerd. I think if you are fan of the original, love films like Star Trek, Star Wars, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Last Starfighter, and The Matrix then this movie is perfect for you. If you want to look at this movie like an arthouse production, indie movie or even like Chris Nolan’s Inception, then you probably shouldn’t see it, because it is not the same kind of movie and perhaps that critical lens should not be used or you will be disappointed like a lot of these critics seem to have been. Like Tron, I always fight for the user, yeah!

Watch Trailer Here

Tron Legacy - Official Trailer 3 [HD]

2010-12-18T07:48:00.002+01:00

CAIRO TIME

2010-12-15T23:45:00.001+01:00

Cairo Time is the title -- but Cairo time, as experienced by Juliette, a magazine editor who has arrived in the Egyptian capital to meet her husband for a vacation, is something new and seductive.

Cairo time seems languid and revealing, at least about oneself. It unfolds amid the Mediterranean heat and the environs of the ages. It transpires in the midst of a culture nearly as old as civilization and as modern as a cell phone. It reveals itself as something foreign, something exotic and something immensely appealing.

None of that is discussed, in Ruba Nadda's Cairo Time, a movie of many delights for the patient viewer. The chief delight, next to the travelogue beauty of the setting, is the performance of Patricia Clarkson as Juliette, the central character in this exceptionally romantic film.

Juliette arrives in Cairo, expecting to connect with her husband Mark, a diplomat. But she gets to her hotel to find a note from him, explaining that he's been called to the Gaza Strip to mediate a dispute and that he expects to be back in just a couple of days.

In his place, he has detailed a former employee and friend, Tareq (Alexander Siddig), to show her the city and help her deal with any problems she may have. But her only problem seems to be Mark's absence and the fact that, the longer she's by herself in Cairo, the less she seems to miss him.

Instead, she immerses herself in the culture, seeing it both as a tourist and as the guest of Tareq, a local. Is she lonely? Does she miss her husband? Maybe. But she also learns to enjoy her own company, to savor the experiences she is having by herself.

And, gradually, she finds herself drawn to Tareq, who is unmarried but hardly unattractive. She even tries to help him reconnect with an old lover -- and yet cannot deny the attraction she is feeling to him. Nor can he, though he considers her husband a good friend.

Nadda doesn't hurry her story -- or even make it particularly elaborate. If anything, Cairo Time is reminiscent of Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation, in its willingness to simply show people having feelings without talking about them. Yet, thanks to a marvelously nuanced performance by Clarkson, and a smoothly engaging one by Siddig, we feel both the heat of the Egyptian desert and the warmth that grows between these two people.

The film lives and breathes through Clarkson. With her butterscotch hair, her sleepy eyes and her quietly husky voice, she is a woman in full possession of herself -- but one who longs to let herself go, even if just a little. It's a stunning performance of many facets, in which Clarkson conveys as much in a look as many actresses struggle to reveal with overt histrionics.

The pyramids figure in the story as a symbol of Clarkson's marriage: She has promised her husband not to visit them until they can do it together. Yet they loom in the background, sometimes distant, sometimes tantalizingly close. They carry a weight, an imposing presence so strong that, even when you can't see them, you can feel them in all their various meanings.

Cairo Time seduces the viewer with its beauty, with its wealth of emotion that doesn't have to be discussed to be felt. It pulls you into another world so deeply that you are disappointed at having to leave it at the end.

Watch Trailer Here

Cairo Time Trailer

2010-12-14T23:43:00.001+01:00

UNSTOPPABLE

2010-12-13T21:59:00.002+01:00

Unstoppable is fun, rollicking and harmless.

It's loud, it's clangy, it doesn't take itself terribly seriously, and it provides a good helping of arm squeezing “OMG!” moments.

“OMG!” moments: where something harrowing occurs on screen and the person next to you grabs your arm and exclaims “OMG!”. These moments occur in Speed, Silver Streak, Die Hard, Not without my daughter, and True Lies. And now, Unstoppable.

Unstoppable has it all. Last second escapes, speeding trains colliding. A guy dying in a fiery explosion just a few days from retirement.

In case it slipped by, “Unstoppable” follows a runaway locomotive containing dangerous chemicals, and the various attempts to stop a half mile long train before it hits a deadly turn that will surely derail and explode the train, chemicals, and surrounding town. But the plot is actually pretty unimportant. All you really need to know is that this is a movie about stopping a big heavy thing that doesn't want to stop.

Since Roland Emmerich started making disaster movies on a global scale with “The Day After Tomorrow” and “2012”, the smaller, more intimate disaster movie has sort of gone the way of the dinosaur. In the 70s there was the “Airport” franchise, which was sort of like a retro “Saw” in that there was a new campy installment each year. Some were decent, others were bad, but the point wasn't to be good, it was to be entertaining on as many levels as possible.

“Unstoppable” entertains superbly. You can roll your eyes at some of the hokey shots and plot points, laugh at the ridiculous nature of a guy attempting to repel into the cockpit of a train moving 70 miles an hour, and maybe even get a little enthralled as it chugs along to its predictable, but still “OMG!” inducing climax.

One thing you will not roll your eyes at is the special effects. This movie brings the goods in terms of making us believe this story visually. I didn't notice one CGI train or explosion, and it was nice to see a movie using practical effects for a change. There was a curious shot where police try and derail an explosive train within feet of cop cars, and sometimes the train looks like it's not going as fast as it should, but these criticisms are minor considering the film nails the monstrosity that is the modern locomotive.

Tony Scott directs the movie like an episode of “24”. Shaky cams, quick zooms, Grainy footage, and we even get a CTU in the form of Train Control headquarters. This is all in stark contrast to the framing device of the film, which is in the form of a Fox News broadcast or maybe NTA news *lol.

The NTA news footage is curious in that it's blatantly phoney, and none of the shots featured in

this supposed news segments would be seen on TV. But even this observation involves over thinking the movie.

Acting is serviceable, there's a level of polish to these performances that was never really seen in the disaster films of the seventies and we never cringe too much at a line of dialog or an awkwardly phrased sentence, which is astounding considering big budget action adventure movie “STAR WARS EPISODE 3”couldn't figure it out. Rosario Dawson is a strong woman that doesn't make a point to say she's a strong woman, so obviously her performance will be ignored. Chris Pine is a guy going through a divorce, and Denzel Washington is a veteran of the rail yard who was just forced to turn in his papers. The fact that these characters even have back story is a bit baffling, but it's there for the same reason the back stories are in movies like 2012. You need it, even if you're not interested in it.

The movie I'm reminded of when watching this film in curiously, United 93. Not because of plots or themes or similar chaotic nature, but instead because that's the last real film that was like this. Stopping the thing you can't stop makes for wonderful movies, and the genre has died. Unstoppable brings it back. It's about time.

Some of the shots are repeated and very hokey, such as one that features the cam riding over the camera, as we look at the train pass over the camera and the track. This is repeated maybe four of five times in the film.

Scott smartly keeps the running time short and avoids spending too much time on the distracting, made-up back stories and character interaction. Unstoppable is about racing to cheat disaster and, for the most part, that's where the filmmakers keep the focus. The goal is to elevate the heart rate and produce a few nail marks on armrests. Because it achieves that, it's easy to forgive the occasional detour to the cinematic scrap pile of stock parts to plug certain narrative holes. Denzel Washington and Chris Pine are confident and relaxed in these roles, embodying all that's necessary for a working class hero. Name recognition is an important reason for their casting, but their presence aids in identification with the characters. Ultimately, in the face of the awesome power of a half-mile long train barreling along at 70 mph, the efforts of two men seems a paltry thing, and it's the combined sense of heroism and desperation with high stakes that offers Unstoppable at least a chance of fulfilling the promise of its name at the box office. You may as well need a companion to see this...

watch trailer here

Unstoppable Trailer (HD)

2010-12-13T14:11:00.001+01:00

DUE DATE

2010-12-12T12:43:00.001+01:00

The Hangover Director, Todd Phillips, brings us yet another raucous, formulaic comedy, but this time with an improvisational feel and a two-time academy award nominated actor. Due Date tracks the four-day journey of Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.), a stress induced rage filled businessman, as he attempts to make his way home for the birth of his first child. After being forcefully ejected from an aircraft due to an argument over the use of the words “bomb” and “terrorist” on planes, he is left with little other choice than to embark on a cross-country road trip with the very man responsible for said removal, Ethan Tremblay (Zack Galifianakis).

Rest assured Hangover lovers, Due Date packs a double handful of laughs as the two unlikely companions wrestle their way through the obstacles thrown in their path. In particular, the scenes in which Downey attempts to reason, or even have a somewhat logical conversation with the ditsy-yet-lovable Galifianakis, are downright hilarious. Galifianakis certainly has the gift of making the completely absurd believable, and therefore, quite funny. His sincerity and spontaneity as Tremblay give the audience a clear example of his unique comedic genius, and leave one wondering how many of his lines were scripted, and how many were spur of the moment additions that made the final cut. This performance, in many scenes, provides the perfect balance for Downey’s somewhat contemptuously cynical,

condescending Peter.

Where this movie fails is in its creation of a main protagonist who is so despicable for 45 minutes of this film that it is hard to care about his main objective of getting back to his new family. For goodness sake, the man assaults a small child! It would have enabled much greater involvement in the character and the film if the audience wasn’t wondering A. how this man ever managed to get someone to marry him, and B. if it wouldn’t be better if he didn’t die somewhere along the side of the road rather than subject this poor woman and their unborn child to his tyranny.

This unfortunate attribute was particularly pronounced next to Galifianakis, whose Tremblay was so innocent and likable. In fact, there were some scenes between the two of them that were just really sad, far beyond the usual sympathy one feels for the goofy, clueless, loser. The discomfort in this juxtaposition mounts when violence erupts between the two at the hands of Downey. He is simply so mean that the beating ceases to be funny, and looks more like a serious domestic assault.

It is important to be able to find something likable about the film’s main character and its driving force. When Downey’s Peter is finally given some likable traits and signs that he might be calming down, the transition are so oddly placed and unwarranted that it kills what could have been a nice character arc. It is almost as if Phillips didn’t trust Downey to know when to start softening up, and just pushed the repetitive anger until it just couldn’t make sense any more. Todd, you are working with one of the strongest actors of our time, let the man do his thing! All of that said, Downey does have his moments, and even when he is a total Scrooge, he and Galifianakis do share some very funny exchanges.

Personally, I feel every laugh was shown in one of the two trailers that I watched, but there were laugh out loud parts to Due Date. Peter’s freak-outs on Ethan were classic and delivered in a way that wasn’t too over the top. There were a few moments where I feel, based on the circumstances, he held it together better than I would have.

I went into the film thinking that Ethan was going to annoy me to no end, but I found him surprisingly endearing. Granted, there were a few moments (his drug stops, falling asleep at the wheel, the fake name) that made me question his sanity; HOWEVER, I understand that all of these things were the catalyst to make the film funny.

And surprisingly it worked.

While its main focus was obviously comedy, there were a few scenes that took you out of the laughter and made the film more dramatic, and also gave a little depth to the characters, which I appreciated. I understand that I’m in the minority with that one – not many people see a comedy for character development. But the few scenes with Ethan’s father’s ashes, primarily when he spills them on the carpet and Peter helps pick them up, tugged at me. It was unexpected in a film like this.

Of course despite the fights, the mishaps, and yes, even a shooting, everything works out in the end.

My favorite lines that made me actually laugh out loud:

“I got 90 friends on Facebook. 12 of them are pending, but I have 90 friends.”

“I’m sorry we drank your dad.” “It’s okay. He enjoyed coffee. And in the end he was enjoyed AS coffee. Circle of life.”

“I’m at the grand canyon. I’ll be there in a minute.”

Due Date didn’t break any barriers, or try to bring anything new to the movies, but looking at it for what it was – a comedy meant to entertain for an hour and a half, it was great.

watch Trailer here

Due Date - Official Trailer [HD]

2010-12-11T17:11:00.001+01:00

TANGLED

2010-12-05T17:36:00.001+01:00

TANGLED – I saw the movie over the weekend and it’s my pleasure to reveal that Tangled lives up to the original hype rather than its uninspiring trailer.
The movie also brings back memories of Disney’s 1989 The Little Mermaid and 1992 Aladdin with very beautiful animated characters and music all through.

Once upon a time, there was a Magic Kingdom that could do no wrong.

They made fantastic animated movies that captured the hearts of little girls, the imaginations of little boys, and the wallets of parents around the world and of course my pocket too.

Tangled marks the true return of quality Disney 2D animated films. It’s infused with a creative energy that’s been missing from the Mouse House for a decade, a movie filled with adventure, romance, clever gags and exciting action, all wrapped up with great animation.

Which isn’t to say this film is perfect. Most of the film’s weakest moments are in the trailer.

If you believed Disney’s marketing department you’d think this film was Shrek Lite, a psuedo-fantasy epic with fart jokes. But don’t let that inanity keep you from buying a ticket; while the first fifteen minutes are a bit rough as the writers struggle with expositional back story and easy jokes, once the adventure starts this film fires on all storytelling cylinders.

The story is a fun expansion of the classic story of Rapunzel. Like the original tale, Rapunzel (voiced by Mandy Moore) is a beautiful child taken away by an evil enchantress, though in this retelling Rapunzel is also infused with magic from the sun, giving her hair the ability to glow and heal wounds.

Another update is the hero, once a prince but now a thief named Flynn Rider (voiced by Zachery Levi). Running from the law, Flynn seeks refuge in Rapunzel’s tower. She tricks him, hides his stolen treasure (which was rightfully hers of course), and convinces him to guide her to the nearby kingdom where she hope to unlock the mystery of her past and for the very first time, set her feet on the ground (against her abductor’s “MOTHER” wish).

Along the way they encounter some great characters.

While Tangled contains its fair share of needless cute animals and stereotypical evil arch villains, the real gem of the story is

Maximus, a soldier stallion obsessed with law and order. When his rider is thrown off, Maximus takes it upon himself to track Flynn Rider, resulting in clever and exciting action scenes, including a fantastic sword fight between Flynn and a horse with a sword in its mouth, HILARIOUS.Two secondary villains, The Stabbington Brothers (both voiced by Ron Perlman), are a welcome addition, adding depth to Flynn’s story arc and motivating a beautifully dark and scary scene along a smoke-filled shoreline. You might also want to look out for my favourite character, The Old drunken Cupid; I just couldn’t stop laughing from his looks.While Tangled boasts some clever jokes and creative action, it’s the art design that really puts the film above recent animated fare. The tentpole scene is set amidst a festival where thousands of floating lanterns are released into the air. The animation here, as these lanterns surround our heroes (Rapunzel and Flynn) who are in a boat in the middle of lake that reflects each floating light, is so intricate, so inspired, it claims a stake as one of the most beautiful moments in Disney’s archives. Here the filmmakers show their ability for nuanced storytelling, as they cut back and forth between our hero’s love story and Rapunzel’s long lost parents, who light the lanterns each year in remembrance of their missing daughter. With a single look from Rapunzel’s aged father, without a single line of dialog, the directors captured more cinematic magic that the past ten years of Disney animation.

If future Disney films can match the quality of Tangled it could usher in another “renaissance” like we witnessed in the mid 1990s. It’s fun, entertaining, and smart. But most importantly, it’s magic like never before...

TANGLED - Official Trailer [HD]

2010-12-03T21:25:00.002+01:00

STONE

2010-11-27T19:40:00.002+01:00

Often, those people who society judge the most are the ones who are locked behind prison bars. However, in the new Overture drama ‘Stone,’ starring Robert DeNiro, Edward Norton and Milla Jovovich, the misconception that prisoners deserve to be judged the harshest is quickly revealed and proven to be wrong. The movie also shows that those people who are the first to point out other people’s faults are often the ones who have something to hide.

‘Stone’s very simplistic plot follows convicted felon Gerald “Stone” Creeson (played by Norton), who is up for parole after serving eight years of a 10-15 year sentence for accessory to murder and arson. In an effort to get released, he tries to convince correctional officer Jack Mabrey (portrayed by DeNiro) that he’s become a spiritual person, and has changed his ways. Stone even has his wife Lucetta (played by Jovovich) seduce Jack, despite the fact that Jack has been married to his wife Madylyn (portrayed by Frances Conroy) for 43 years.

As in all of his roles, DeNiro proves what a committed actor he is by throwing himself into the role. Despite the fact that Jack attends church every week, reads the Bible with Madylyn and seeks advice from one of the bishops at his church, DeNiro still makes the character despicable. Viewers will more than likely loathe Jack, despite his protests to Stone, Lucetta and Madylyn that he is a good person. He constantly judges people and controls those around him, especially his wife, and doesn’t understand why people become upset with him. While Stone is the prisoner and doesn’t always know right from wrong, he at least admits when he knows he’s made mistakes; Jack is definitely the more hated character in the film, as he does whatever he pleases, and doesn’t care who he hurts in the process.

While DeNiro gave another great performance, Norton is the one to watch in ‘Stone.’ While Stone gives Jack an “I don’t care what you do to me” attitude when he first meets him, Norton is able to convincingly turn his character’s personality around. He makes the audience believe that Stone truly wants to better himself, and has become spiritual in the process. While Stone wants Lucetta to constantly harass Jack to get him to expedite his case, Norton is able to turn Stone’s priorities around as the plot goes on.

Jovovich also shines in her role as Lucetta, creating the perfect femme fatale. Not only is she able to convince Stone that she still loves him, even after he spends eight years in jail, she also uses her hidden sexual charm to lure Jack in to help her. Lucetta is also able to lead Jack into compromising situations at work by bringing him presents, and enters into a dangerous personal relationship with him that affects his marriage. While Jovovich doesn’t have many scenes with Norton, when they are on screen together, viewers are left thinking Lucetta really does love Stone. But when Jovovich is next to DeNiro, that belief totally turns around, and viewers are left thinking Lucetta wants to be with Jack.

While Stone and Lucetta’s drive to convince Jack to recommend he be released from prison is the driving force behind the plot, Overture relies more heavily on the actor’s portrayals of their characters to sell the movie. DeNiro, Norton and Jovovich act well off of each other, and really give tension to their relationships. Fans of any of these three actors will surely like this thriller.

Stone - Official Trailer [HD]

2010-11-27T18:52:00.001+01:00

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS part 1

2010-11-25T21:43:00.001+01:00

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

is the seventh installment in the Harry Potter franchise, in which Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), and Ronald Wesley (Rupert Grint) are on a mission to find and destroy the horcruxes, mystical objects that grant immortality, so that the evil Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) is unable to use it to his advantage.

The focus of this film is really the acting among the three actors who have been together for so long, and how they have made each character they play their own, and that’s really important when you have a setting when there’s not a lot of action going on, overall, but I’ll talk more about that a little later.

I’ve been a fan of the Harry Potter films for quite some time now, and if you haven’t been, The Deathly Hallows Part 1 isn’t going to change your mind. To everyone else, however… well, I hesitate to say that you’re going to love it.

The tone and wonder of the first few films are almost completely extinct due to the heavy subject matter that has been the focus since the end of the fourth film, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, and the past two films have taken the dark subject matter and injected it with a lot of action while the storyline starts coming together and the big picture becomes clear. However, in a film such as this, the characters are on a voyage type of mission, not unlike the events of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of The Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. In a fantasy series, and specifically one where it’s a film adaptations dedicated to the special effects and wonder that is affiliated with an epic (and I mean that literally, there are dragons in Harry Potter) story like the events in Harry Potter. And as plenty have noted, the movie is extremely faithful to the book, but this kind of story truly works better in novel form, as opposed to film.

But the advantage that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 has over other stories where the central theme is finding an object/destroying an object, and being removed overall from the rest of the world’s cast of characters is that Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint have been playing these characters since they were children, and have spent the majority of their lives as their respective characters, so you honestly believe the events that are going on with the characters. Also, the chemistry between the actors is a direct replica of the dynamic between Harry, Hermione, and Ron.

The Good:

It’s all actor/character driven and the team of Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint sell every moment that they are on screen. It’s a great character movie to showcase how the relationships have grown between the central characters and gives the actors the room to flex their art before-with they wrap with the all out epic war for the survival of good within a dark world. Also, the directing and cinematography was fantastic, everything looked flawless, and the look of the movie suited the mood of the story, so everything worked in complete synergy.

The Bad:

It’s not really bad, but it’s a slow-paced movie. It’s not poor pacing, and the pacing’s not off, it’s just that the movie just moves slowly, and for a film that’s over two hours, it can start to wear on you a little. And, as a fan of the action and fantasy that’s been such a big part of the Harry Potter mythos, it felt like the movie was one hundred percent preparation for Deathly Hallows Part 2. On the other hand, the creative team behind the movie sold this tension, which worked to its benefit in the long run, since we’re only getting half of the story.

Conclusion:

As I said before, this installment isn’t going to make new fans, and if you’re just looking for the action and apocalyptic drama of the later films, this movie won’t whet your appetite, but Part 2 probably will, so be patient. But, if you’ve truly fallen in love with these characters, and you honestly care about everything that’s going on in Harry’s world, you won’t be disappointed. You’ll be depressed and want to cry, but you’ll still leave the theatre satisfied.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Trailer Official HD

2010-11-25T20:24:00.001+01:00

THE EXPENDABLES

2010-11-24T16:59:00.001+01:00

In the same vein as 2010’s Predators, Sylvester Stallone’s ambition with The Expendables was to transport modern audiences back to the action cinema zenith of the 1980s, when enormous muscle-bound stars utilized equally enormous firearms and slaughtered thousands of bad guys with ease.

After resurrecting the ’80s aesthetic with 2008’s Rambo, Stallone has given the ailing style a new life to deliver an old-school, action-packed wallop of a cinematic experience. Armed with the most charismatic ensemble of “badguys” to grace cinema screens since 1987’s Predator, along with enough testosterone and manliness to make your spleen explode, The Expendables is a blast; an epic old-fashioned manly movie with infinite replay value. Led by the cigar-chomping Barney Ross (Stallone), the titular Expendables are an elite team of professional mercenaries. Following a violent scuffle with a bunch of pirates, the team is offered a job by a certain Mr. Church (Willis) to travel to the isolated island of Vilena and overthrow a dictator (Zayas) whose strings are being pulled by former CIA operative Monroe (Roberts). Upon arrival at Vilena, though, Ross and his second-in-command Lee Christmas (Statham) discover that there’s more to the assignment that meets the eye, and they choose to decline the job. Yet, Ross becomes haunted by a brave young woman named Sandra (Itié) who willingly chooses to remain in Vilena and fight the evils of her homeland. Consequently, the Expendables suit up for battle - this includes Christmas and Ross, along with Yin Yang (Li), Toll Road (Couture) and Hale Caesar (Crews).More than anything else, The Expendables benefits from a fast and furious pace. The film is a taut, fast-moving actioner that never lulls.

While the film is probably 30 or 40% action, the areas of exposition between the loud explosions and blood-letting are filled with something; interesting plot development, engaging tough-guy banter, one-liners and nail-biting sections of anticipation. It sustains momentum in the lead-up to the final half hour, when the film truly takes off in exhilarating ways. Stallone’s interest in gory combat scenarios and penchant for amazing, visceral action is retained in The Expendables with a climax capable of shaking the theatre walls via the rollicking sound mix and Brian Tyler’s epic score. There’s carnage aplenty throughout the action scenes; men are blown to pieces, men are sliced to pieces, necks are broken, bones are shattered, and there are massive explosions to pieces too *smiles*.

Once the bone-crunching climax draws to a close, you’ll be left wanting more. You’ll also be left wondering what exactly Stallone is smoking (probably IGBO!) and why more Hollywood filmmakers aren’t smoking the same thing. The Expendables features a great deal of outstanding hand-to-hand combat in addition to the shootouts, and Stallone’s embrace of old-school cinematic techniques is refreshing in an age of CGI-laden bullshit like Transformers. While some have complained about the film’s “shaky-cam/fast-cutting” techniques, they’re not pronounced to the point of distraction. Every inch of the choreography is discernible (if you can’t follow the action scenes, you’re blind I guess), as opposed to The A-Team for which you had to wait until the smoke cleared to figure out what just happened. Meanwhile, CGI was used at times for blood and flames, but it looks phoney on only two or three occasions. Unsurprisingly, the critics sharpened their knives in anticipation for The Expendables, and the film ended up being skewered rather harshly. Yet, those critics dismissing Stallone’s magnum opus as a brain-dead action extravaganza are basing those criticisms on untruths. In previous years, Stallone wrote and directed both 2006’s Rocky Balboa and 2008’s Rambo which built and solidified the filmmaker’s reputation for constructing heartfelt action movies, and The Expendables further reinforces this talent. Following the nail-biting opening action sequence, well-paced exposition and character development takes centre stage. Mickey Rourke (in his role as Tool) shows up on a few occasions throughout this section, and his appearances constitute the movie’s heart and soul. With this inclusion, there’s a human element to the action that’s lacking in traditional blockbusters (even the much-acclaimed Inception was marred by boring characters and a lack of humanity). The film underscores that these tough guy mercenaries are people, not automatons without a conscience, and this accentuates the dramatic intensity when the team march off to battle. With this in mind, it’s slightly disappointing to report that character development is lacking. While Ross and Christmas are developed adequately, and Yin Yang is allotted an acceptable amount of development, Toll Road and Hale Caesar are neglected in this department. Additionally, there’s a subplot regarding Christmas’ love life, yet this is only present in small fragments. Of course, these faults are nothing an extended version couldn’t fix. And, thankfully, the characterizations are solid - each member of the titular team possesses their own personality and traits, while the dialogue is a constant source of amusement. Contrasted against the other men-on-a-mission movies of 2010 (The Losers and The A-Team), The Expendables features a likable, fun bunch of tough guys portrayed by an ideal cast.

Speaking of the cast, it’s the biggest selling point of the enterprise. It reads like a laundry list of everyone’s favourite action heroes. Thankfully, each actor is terrific, right down to the supporting cast. Sylvester Stallone and Jason Statham are an ideal pairing of lead performers - their banter is amusing, and their camaraderie feels genuine. Neither star deserves an Oscar, but both afforded a much-needed intensity to key scenes. Alongside this duo, Jet Li also impresses as Yin Yang, while Randy Couture and Terry Crews (my favourite guy from “Everybody hates Chris”) are infinitely likeable. Dolph Lundgren is the film’s biggest surprise: he’s an absolute standout as Gunnar Jensen. In the past, the Dolphster has delivered dud performances, yet he’s in fine form here - this is his most nuanced and believable work in years. Added to these badguys is Mickey Rourke, who’s an outright scene stealer as the Expendables’ handler. In terms of villains, Eric Roberts oozes evil as Monroe and WWE wrestler Steve Austin is menacing as a henchman, but David Zayas barely registers as General Garza. Another of the biggest selling points of The Expendables is the much-hyped single scene featuring Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis. It’s over too quickly, to be sure, but it’s a terrific, hilarious, and well-written scene. The punch line is a humdinger.

Yes, The Expendables is dumb at times, as it features enemies who are slow to respond and can’t shoot straight. Yes, The Expendables is clichéd and largely predictable, too, but the movie should not have been any other way. Granted, any summer blockbuster is clichéd and brainless, but one’s willingness to overlook these aspects depends on how fun the ride is. Whereas something like Clash of the Titans is bland and empty, the fun provided by The Expendables is very pervasive and persuasive - you simply will not care about its pedestrian script. Sometimes you have to put aside your instincts as a film critic to enjoy such a ride. As far as I’m concerned, Sly can continue creating these awesome, manly blockbusters for as long as he likes, as I’ll certainly continue to pay to see them and you should too.

'The Expendables' Trailer HD

2010-11-24T15:46:00.001+01:00

Avatar: Special Edition Movie Trailer Official (HD)

2010-11-20T22:00:00.000+01:00

THE SOCIAL NETWORK

2010-11-16T15:35:00.001+01:00

A word of warning – you’re going to hear and read a lot of hyperbole about this movie. This is why – ‘The Social Network’ is smart, tense, and absolutely invigorating to watch. It is a triumph for crew and cast and the audience as well (a major exception being the real-life people these actors portray).

Whether Network is the defining film of this decade, the last, or the next remains to be seen – and in any case, if this is the kind of wordplay on hand, we must be really starving for a non-condescending, genuinely interesting motion picture to pop up in theatres. At the very least, David Fincher’s new film refuses to spell out proceedings – legal and otherwise.

Ben Mezrich’s book “The Accidental Billionaires” is the jumping-off point for Aaron Sorkin‘s exhaustively studious screenplay, balancing machine-gun wordplay with unexpected (and often delightful) moments of caustic humour. Sorkin draws on a well of information available in this day and age to take us back to an ancient time in human history – Harvard, 2003.A young(er) Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) breaks up with Erica Albright (Rooney Mara, owning two scenes in the film and making us look forward to her taking on the mantle of Lisbeth Salander in Fincher’s next), comes back to his dorm room and hatches…something. From there, we leap between the trial levelled against Zuckerberg by a variety of defendants, former and apparently only friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield…also exemplary) sharing sad and damning glares with Zuckerberg. The other defendants include Divya Narendra (Max Minghella) and a very amusing Armie Hammer, playing privileged twin brothers Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss.

What ‘The Social Network’ undoubtedly is, is a film of the moment, attuned and engineered to appeal to a generation who grew in the midst of one young maven who had the means to put out a killer app and keeps it running. How much truth or fiction is in Sorkin’s script is frankly, irrelevant – it is a problematic account if you choose to scour for true and false details but the film is not about Zuckerberg, or Saverin or even Napster founder Sean Parker (a toned-down Justin Timberlake).

The film is about Facebook, a journalistic approach that doesn’t allow for much characterization but wrings meaning out of action – the pacing and dialogue are evidence to that, anchored by Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall’s spectacularly tight editing.Everyone in ‘Network’ is on the move and downtime as well as self-reflection are allotted rarely and in small doses – Fincher’s eye for composition and blocking is (here comes the hyperbole) reminiscent of Kubrick and you have to commend the man for making Harvard frat parties look like, well, beautiful orgies of flesh and alcohol. Fincher plays host to Sorkin’s dialogue and moves his camera adeptly to match the pace – breathlessly sometimes but still and unmoving at others.

The cinematography, by Jeff Cronenweth, who also lensed ‘Fight Club’, is alluring, Smokey and tinted during the Harvard days or all polished steel locked into the office where the Facebook settlement will be decided.

‘The Social Network’ is equally tempting, so sleek and impeccably delivered that it is easy to get sucked in – a compliment and a warning.

Don’t come to this film for an account of the truth, strange and ribald as it may or may not be. See it because as a piece of film making, it is grand, a time at the movies that will put your brain in traction. And that’s a whole lot of something.You should also be prepared to get inspired, be encouraged to start something or anything and like the mustard seed, wait for it to grow into what has never been seen or imagined.‘

The Social Network’ is showing at Silverbird Cinemas... you should see it!

The Social Network Official Trailer -Showing @ SILVERBIRD CINEMAS

2010-11-14T16:19:00.001+01:00

blbbbbbkkkkakkdblackberry<iframe src="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=widgetsamazon-20&o=1&p=8&l=bpl&asins=B002OGS0SW&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&m=amazon&lc1=0000FF&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr" style="align:left;padding-top:5px;width:131px;height:245px;padding-right:10px;" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" align="left" frameborder="0" scrolling="no">

SOLITARY MAN

2010-11-14T10:15:00.000+01:00

Somewhere between Wall Street's Gordon Gekko and Wonder Boys' Grady Tripp on Michael Douglas' scale of scoundrels lies Ben Kalmen, the proud centre of attention in Brian Koppelman and David Levien's SOLITARY MAN Ben wasn't so scared of sixty -- well-respected as a businessman, well-loved by his family -- until his doctor says that he's not so keen on his EKG. Nothing specific, mind you, but that mere mention of mortality is enough to send Ben out the door and off his path. Several months, a business scandal and a divorce later, Ben's trying to convince himself that his latter-day lifestyle of frequent flings with pretty young things is more of a swan dive than a free fall...

He's a poor husband to college sweetheart Nancy (Susan Sarandon), as evidenced by the divorce. He's a bad father to Susan (Jenna Fischer) -- often asking for her help in covering his rent -- and a worse grandfather to her son, Scotty (Jake Siciliano) -- late to every party and game.

He's a faithless boyfriend to the well-connected Jordan (Mary-Louise Parker) and a poor chaperon to her daughter, Allyson (Imogen Poots), when she goes off on a visit to his alma mater (the library bears his name; you can also guess how the poor chaperon/faithless boyfriend roles may overlap here). And once he's back on campus, Ben even manages to serve as ill-advised mentor to dweeby Daniel (Jesse Eisenberg, also starring in this weekend's THE SOCIAL NETWORK).

But Ben isn't necessarily a bad person. He's flawed, to be sure, but so keen on bursting the bubble daily on his short-term relationships that he doesn't realize when he's burning bridges with his long-term ones; his behaviour stems from his newfound urge to live in the moment and spirals downward from there. And since Solitary Man dwells almost exclusively on the downward-spiral portion of his life, it's mostly left to Douglas to show us the boyish charm on which his

character would've built a career (as some would argue the actor himself has) and also the weary regret that he doesn't have everything to gain, but everything to gain back.

As written by Koppelman (Ocean's Thirteen, The Girlfriend Experience), Ben's journey towards redemption is an admittedly familiar one, perhaps overstuffed with characters willing to guide the protagonist towards an inevitable awakening. (Unmentioned above is the appearance of Danny DeVito as an old school pal of Ben's who has just the type of humble life that our anti-hero should envy, naturally; an appearance made all the more fitting by Douglas and DeVito's frequent collaborations in the past.) But as directed by Koppelman and frequent writing partner Levien, there's a certain grace and maturity to how Ben's problems tie together as his world falls apart that spares the film from devolving into so much finger-wagging, and that balance extends to the ensemble as well.

Sarandon conveys equal parts patience and pity towards her ex; Fischer, meanwhile, grows feasibly frustrated with defending this increasingly unreliable man to her son and her husband. Parker exudes an icy control over their relationship, fully aware of what he really wants out of her and how easily she can deprive him of it, and Poots takes after her on-screen mother when it comes to knowing how to best spite her and Ben both. Eisenberg does fall back on his typically timid ways, but in comes Olivia Thirlby as his girlfriend and surrogate conscience just when it seems that the young man is closest to being led astray and becoming every bit the lonely Lothario that Ben has become. And DeVito, he's sage and sympathetic, if only because he hasn't yet had the chance to be screwed over by his old friend.

SOLITARY MAN: Movie Trailer

Anchor Baby trailer starring Omoni Oboli and Sam Sarpong and Terri Oliver

2010-11-13T19:53:00.001+01:00

WALL STREET 2 - money never sleeps

2010-11-13T16:44:00.000+01:00

In the current climate of reboots, sequels and prequels, it has become a natural reaction for movie-goers to groan at the next film to draw off past classics. So initial cynicism about a 21^st century follow-up to Oliver Stone’s iconic, white collar drama, Wall Street (1987) is understandable. However, putting aside these prejudices, it becomes clear that Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (Wall Street 2) is a rather good idea, particularly when it’s helmed by the same director.

For the uninitiated, Wall Street (1987) was set in the New York stock market of the 1980′s and followed Gordon Gekko, a renowned market player who didn’t always do things by the book. With the recent global financial crisis, a sequel set during the tipping point (and the heart) of this economic disaster seems like an intriguing idea. Even more exciting is the return of Gekko, the character that made the first movie famous

by coining the phrase “greed is good”.

It is 2008 and Oliver Stone’s Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps begins with the prison release of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas). Now an ex-con, with next to no money (at least compared to his previous life) Gekko hits the financial news one more time with the release of a book, aptly titled “Is Greed Good?”. Meanwhile Jacob Moore (Shia LaBeouf) is living in Manhattan with his girlfriend, Winnie Gekko (Carrie Mulligan). Winnie is the editor of a left wing news website and the estranged daughter of Gordon

Gekko, a man she claims means “nothing to her”.

Down on Wall Street, Jacob is trying to get funding for a green energy project, which he believes could change the world and make a lot of money. However, things get sinister when his friend Lewis Zabel (Frank Langella), an investment banker, is short changed by the villainous Bretton James (Josh Brolin), who undercuts Zabel’s bank with life changing consequences. Things soon get personal between Bretton and Jacob after something happens to Mr. Zabel. Meanwhile, Jacob has become Winnie’s fiancé and begins to contact Gordon to try and reunite father and daughter, while also sourcing stock market advice off the former master.

There are some fun references to Wall Street (1987), as well as some bridging back story, none of which I wish to spoil, but as someone who enjoyed the original, these were very welcome. The film doesn’t rest too heavily on its past laurels, though, so newcomers shouldn’t feel alienated. However, seeing the first film will feel like you found a mint under your pillow.

The world in Money Never Sleeps is portrayed similarly to the first film, albeit with a modern twist. The film’s themes touch upon the ethics of legal greed in today’s world, the absurdities of economics and why the “game” is so attractive. Additionally, the story is fleshed out with more personal drama than the previous film. There is a nice social backdrop painting the lives of Jacob, his mother (Susan Sarandon) Winnie and Gordon. Ultimately, the mix of drama between Jacob’s personal and professional life is quite engaging. These additional social elements also provide a rest from the frequent financial vernacular, which makes a return from the first film.

The performances are excellent. Michael Douglas portrays Gordon Gekko with as much confidence and mystique as he did in 1987; it’s a treat in itself to see him return as the character. Sceptics of Shia LaBeouf’s casting may be surprised to hear he does justice to his role and is probably his best performance to date. Carrie Mulligan perfectly recreates a modern left-wing personality, while making her relationship with a capitalist trader seem rather believable. Frank Langella brings his own human element to the economic side of the film, while Josh Brolin personifies the modern corporate villain with ease.

Other than the sometimes confusing financial language, lines are written and delivered nicely. In fact, just like the previous film, this movie has some sharp quotes. “You stop telling lies about me, and I’ll stop telling the truth about you”, is a particularly good one. Brolin, LaBeouf and Douglas deliver with such cool confidence, which does well to draw you in.

Technically, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is very slick. Crisp, sweeping shots of New York City bring an element of fantasy, that only the Manhattan skyline can achieve. The setting even ventures out to the more natural Long Island, a beautiful backdrop for part of the action. The film also uses computer graphics to make portions of the film look more exciting, with numbers and graphs flying across the screen. Unfortunately, these graphics aren’t really used to educate the audience in any tangible sense. At the risk of looking like an episode of Numbers, I feel this could have been used to help people grasp some of the concepts discussed in the film. Nevertheless, it looks pretty. Music has also taken an update from the characteristic 80′s score of the previous film but still manages to make the white collar world feel damn cool.

Oliver Stone has delivered a quality sequel to Wall Street, which ultimately builds upon the original in a logical fashion. For existing fans, this should add to your appreciation of the world created by both films. For newcomers, this is a fine white collar drama with some interesting insights about the economic crisis we are yet to fully overcome.

Opinion:

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is an exciting fleshed out drama, managing to make the financial world even more interesting for fans and newcomers alike.

WALL STREET 2: Movie Trailer

INALE

2010-11-13T12:57:00.000+01:00

The story of Inale is a folklore told in Otukpo, Benue state. Inale is a tale about true love, betrayal, family, duty and tradition; the first Nigerian musical ever in celluloid.

Shot in Los Angeles, CA, USA and in the fruitful lands of Benue state, it centres on the life of the Princess of Otukpo, Inale (Caroline Chikezie) the “treasure” of the land, who found happiness and true love in the heart of Ode (Hakeem Kae Kasim).

The film starts with a grandfather telling his granddaughter a tale he had heard from his many journeys to the great land of Nigeria, which would serve as her lullaby for the night. The story starts with Inale and Ode’s admission of love for each other and how tomorrow will be the first of many of their lives together after he wins the wrestling competition.

Tradition states all eligible men of the village can display their strength, stealth, wisdom and compete for the hand of the princess. King Oche (Dede Mabiaku) was just and showed his people that any man can state their own destiny if he just tried. Whoever wins the competition will win the hand of not only the kingdom but the heart and hand of the princess, which was the best price of all… Ode is determined to win.

Ode conquers all competitors of all shapes and sizes, and as he is about to claim his victory and the heart of his true love, the short lived merriment was obstructed by a masked stranger asking for a chance to compete against the about to be named hero.

Unknown to all, the stranger’s intrusion will set in motion events that Inale nor anyone in the land of Otukpo would have ever contemplated or foreseen. With her love for Ode and her kingdom put to the test Inale’s adventure begins…

Great Movie... brings to life the memories of “Sound of Music” and the Nigerian Soap, “Cockcrow at Dawn”. It is a must watch! showing at Silverbird Cinemas

INALE - Movie Trailer

2010-11-13T11:27:00.000+01:00