Transamerica

The Squid and the Whale

Brokeback Mountain

Broken Flowers
Directed by Jim Jarmusch
Written by Jim Jarmusch
Starring Bill Murray, Jeffrey Wright, Julie Delpy, Sharon Stone, Frances Conroy, Jessica Lange, Tilda Swinton
Running Time: 105 Minutes
Rated R
Focus Features
Seen on 01/04/06
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
The resolutely single Don has just been dumped by his latest lover, Sherry. Don yet again resigns himself to being alone and left to his own devices. Instead, he is compelled to reflect on his past when he receives by mail a mysterious pink letter. It is from an anonymous former lover and informs him that he has a 19-year-old son who may now be looking for his father. Don is urged to investigate this "mystery" by his closest friend and neighbor, Winston, an amateur sleuth and family man. Hesitant to travel at all, Don nonetheless embarks on a cross-country trek in search of clues from four former flames. Unannounced visits to each of these unique women hold new surprises for Don as he haphazardly confronts both his past and, consequently, his present. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I have a lot to say about this movie. I doubted renting it because I didn't expect much from it even though I heard a lot of good things regarding it. I am glad I went against my doubts and decided to rent it, because what I just watched is easily one of the best movies of the year.

First of all, it is a damn shame that Bill Murray is not getting an Oscar nomination for this. What a tremendous and beautiful performance. I liked him in LiT, but his work here made me a fan and it was even better than that nominated turn. I just loved him in this film. It is just a very rich and real performance and it just bears repeating: I just loved him. I also really enjoyed Jeffrey Wright and even though this wasn't a showy performance or anything like that, he delivered the goods and with this and Syriana combined, he might just make my shortlist in Supporting Actor. I loved everyone else too. I couldn't believe how great Sharon Stone was. Frances Conroy did a great job too, as well as Jessica Lange. I loved Tilda Swinton's cameo though I wish she would have been in the movie more. This was just a great ensemble.

The thing that surprises me the most in my liking this movie is that there were times when nothing happens in the scene yet in some way it felt important and needing to be shown regardless. And the fading in and out got a little on my nerves but it seemed to serve an important purpose as well in the impact the film leaves on you. And the ending. I love how we don't get resolution regarding the situation with his son. I love how it makes you guess as to what was going on. I can't go more into that really now, but that last shot of him in the street and giving us the feeling that he has lost his son forever was just mind-boggling. That scene between he and the young guy was as well. I just loved the impact the movie left on me. The writing and directing of Jim Jarmusch was top notch as well, and this one will definitely be making my shortlist in Original Screenplay.

I am kind of surprised at how little awards reception this movie has received. It seems like one that the Academy would eat up, and in this weak year it is disappointing that they aren't embracing it. But forget that, I am embracing it because it was a touching and wonderful movie and definitely one of the best of the year. And again it's so weird because I still don't quite know why I liked it this much.

Grade for Broken Flowers: A-

Memoirs of a Geisha
Directed by Rob Marshall
Written by Doug Wright, Akiva Goldsman, Robin Swicord, Ronald Bass
Starring Ziyi Zhang, Gong Li, Michelle Yeoh, Ken Watanabe 
Running Time: 145 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Dreamworks/Sony Pictures
Seen on 01/02/06
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
In the years before World War II, a Japanese child is torn from her penniless family to work as a geisha house. Despite a treacherous rival who nearly breaks her spirit, the girl blossoms into the legendary geisha Sayuri. Beautiful and accomplished, Sayuri captivates the most powerful men of her day, but is haunted by her secret love for the one man beyond her reach. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I would like to present to you the film of 2005 that gets the coveted title "Soap Opera Movie of the Year." When I sat down to watch Memoirs of a Geisha, I knew I was in trouble because of the bad reviews the movie has received and also because of the way the movie opened. We get no explanation as to why these two young sisters are torn from their parents and forced to be slaves. It just happens.

I would like to focus this paragraph on the troubles I had with the movie in a list. 1.) Why are these characters speaking English?? This was set in Japan before WWII and I think that the Japanese people there SPOKE JAPANESE. The most annoying aspect of this was that it was very very very difficult to understand the actors at times because they aren't native English speakers. I hope that doesn't sound too prejudice because it's not a dig at them, it's a dig at it being filmed in English. 2.) It was like two different movies. The first half dealt with seeing the life of a geisha and how you become one and the rivalry that happens within that circle. It was interesting to see how sacred the geisha were during pre-WWII times. But then the war happens and that is really when the movie went downhill...and fast. It was poorly executed and so ridiculously contrived. The romantic aspect of it was poorly put together as well, and the ending was rushed and overall last half was too choppy. There was not a great connection between the before and after of the war times, though it was nice to see how the geisha were sexed up after the war. 3.) Already mentioned this above, but the majority of this movie had so many soap opera aspects that it was initially becoming fun to laugh at, but overall it just became ridiculous. The rivalries between the geishas was seriously from an episode of a daytime soap opera, ditto the romantic aspect and the dealing with the war. 

Acting-wise, Ziyi Zhang was good, but nothing award-worthy here. I liked Gong Li, but I think the MVP of the movie acting-wise was Michelle Yeoh. I don't know what to think of Rob Marshall's work here. I didn't hate his work in Chicago, and I didn't love it either, but this was just...a mess. And the majority of it has to be layed on the doorstep of the director. I did love the art direction though and the score was nice at times though also a little too overpowering. Liked the cinematography. I read a shorthand review of the movie from a critic online that sums up the movie perfectly: a beautiful bore.

I don't know if this story is adapted well since I have not personally read the source material, but I do know that if this was like the book, it's no wonder why it didn't work on screen. I don't even know if another director or the film being put in different hands altogether would have made much difference. Who knows, but all I know is that as is, this is bar none one of the worst movies I have seen this year. I can see why some would like it (like my mother, who loooooved it), but I am not one of them.

Grade for Memoirs of a Geisha: C

A History of Violence
Directed by David Cronenberg
Written by Josh Olson
Starring Viggo Mortensen, Maria Bello, Ed Harris, William Hurt 
Running Time: 98 Minutes
Rated R
New Line Cinema
Seen on 12/31/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Tom Stall is living a happy and quiet life with his lawyer wife and their two children in the small town of Millbrook, Indiana, but one night their idyllic existence is shattered when Tom foils a vicious attempted robbery in his diner. Sensing danger, he takes action and saves his customers and friends in the self-defense killings of two-sought-after criminals. Heralded as a hero, Tom’s life is changed overnight, attracting a national media circus, which forces him into the spotlight. Uncomfortable with his newfound celebrity, Tom tries to return to the normalcy of his ordinary life only to be confronted by a mysterious and threatening man who arrives in town believing Tom is the man who’s wronged him in the past. As Tom and his family fight back against this case of mistaken identity and struggle to cope with their changed reality, they are forced to confront their relationships and the divisive issues which surface as a result. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
One of the most annoying things that can happen to me regarding a movie happened to me during this one. No, adults didn't bring their little 4-year-old children to it and people weren't loud during the movie. What happened is that I was in love with the movie for the first hour and then the last third of the movie turned to crap. Crap is a strong word, but the end of the movie was definitely not a great payoff, and a very disappointing one, seeing as how great the rest of it was. 

To elaborate, the first hour of this movie just had me on the edge of my seat and I loved how it kept me guessing. I love how the beginning of the movie fakes us out into thinking which characters may or may not be in that opening sequence and whether or not it is taking place presently or in the past. When we discover the big secret regarding Tom's past, the movie was still engrossing because his wife and children had to come with grips about it as well as Tom himself. A particularly stunning scene was one taking place on the stairs when a heated argument turns into passionate love-making. But then Tom gets a call from his brother and that's when the movie doesn't live up to the rest of itself. Tom must go to take care of his past and what happens there is rather anti-climactic and again just doesn't live up to the rest.

Another reason the end of the movie is a downer for me is because I wasn't impressed at all with William Hurt, who plays Tom's brother. This is a cameo role if I've ever seen one and it was nothing award-worthy or special. This just goes to show how weak that category is this year if he is a major player there. Viggo Mortensen did a fine job and quite surprised me. I didn't think that he would have a big career outside of LOTR, but he has proven here that it can happen. Ed Harris didn't do a bad job either, but the undeniable acting MVP of the movie is Maria Bello. I wasn't a huge fan of her work in The Cooler, but I thought she was fantastic here and worthy of all the acclaim she is receiving. One particular scene in the hospital where she confronts her husband is particularly well-done. Whether or not she is supporting is another story. I can see either way. The movie is only an hour and a half long and she is in pretty much every frame during the first 2/3 and then isn't there until the final (killer) scene. She is probably more lead than supporting, but I can see a case made for both.

David Cronenberg impressed me a lot, but it's one of those impressions where you can't really pin-point why. I loved his decisions regarding camera angles throughout the movie and I loved how his direction had more of an independent vibe to it, when the movie isn't an indie film. I also liked the length of the movie. It was great to see a movie that wasn't 2+ hours long and could have been cut down to the length this one was. Howard Shore delivered a good score, but at times it was a bit too overpowering.

I really do hate it when the end (or beginning) of a movie doesn't live up to the rest of it, but it's worse when it happens at the end because you are left with THAT impression instead of taking in the rest of the movie as well. I will say though that the movie has lasted with me and the more I think about it as a whole the more I like it. Initially it was a B, but with further consideration I think a B+ is a little more fitting. And it's mainly because of the director, the actors (aside from Hurt), and the killer first 2/3 of the movie.

Grade for A History of Violence: B+

The Producers
Directed by Susan Stroman
Written by Mel Brooks and Thomas Meehan
Starring Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, Uma Thurman, Will Ferrell, Gary Beach, Roger Bart 
Running Time: 144 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Universal/Columbia
Seen on 12/29/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
A shady Broadway producer and his nerdy accountant concoct a scheme to overfinance a huge flop and pocket the excess budget, but the show unexpectedly becomes a smash. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Alright, it's time to 'fess up. I kind of went into this movie thinking it was gonna blow. I didn't expect much from it and the only thing I knew from the show was how popular it was and the wonderful number "When You Got It, Flaunt It," originally performed by Cady Huffman. I also wanted to not like the movie too because I held a grudge that it was getting more attention than one of my faves of the year, another musical, Rent. Hey, at least I'm honest.

But as I stated, yes, this was better than I was expecting. I really adored the first half of the movie, despite a few reservations, such as Matthew Broderick's annoying character. Not dogging on him, because he can sing and dance, it's just his character is really annoying. And the editing during the money scene was horrible. And God love Uma Thurman's killer body and dance moves, but she wasn't the best for this part vocally. The second half wasn't quite as good. The end of it started to drag a little bit, but nonetheless it was a great farce and satire and captured beautifully on film. 

The direction of Susan Stroman, who directed the stage version, was well done, though it did show that she had never directed a movie before. The heart and soul of this movie though is Nathan Lane. I would love it if he landed an Oscar nomination, but I highly doubt it will happen. He was so hilarious here. There were so many great scenes regarding his over-the-top character. Speaking of, that's what this musical is all about, excessiveness and over-the-top material. That's the point, and it is captured wonderfully on film. And Will Ferrell was great here as well, BTW.

I hate that is all that I can think of to write regarding the movie, but it was one of the best of the year, despite my minor complaints mentioned above. I am afraid that some people who see it aren't going to get it. Oooooh! Time for a corny pun. But if you do 'get it,' then see it. Much like how Ulla has it and flaunts it. How pathetic was that? Sorry Mrs. Broderick, my puns aren't quite as clever as yours.

Grade for The Producers: B+

Munich
Directed by Steven Spielberg
Written by Tony Kushner
Starring Eric Bana, Daniel Craig, Geoffrey Rush, Lynn Cohen 
Running Time: 164 Minutes
Rated R
Universal/Dreamworks
Seen on 12/23/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Set in the aftermath of the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, story follows a secret Israeli squad assigned to track down and kill the 11 Palestinians suspected to have planned the Munich attack--and the personal toll this mission of revenge takes on the team and the man who led it. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
It's only normal that people for months after seeing the trailer for this movie have been coining it the one that will be the one to beat come Oscar time. Spielberg did a bold move when he announced there would be no campaign for the movie and at the time it seemed like a brilliant idea, but after seeing the movie, I think it will hurt the movie more than help it to not campaign it. 

The story here sounds whory enough. You have a group of individuals hired to assassinate Palestinian terrorists responsible for the Munich Olympic attacks in 1972. I was glued to my seat during the first half hour of the movie and thought that Spielberg did a wonderful job showing the actual attack at Munich, but after that, though some great scenes followed, it was just hard to sit through the movie for a period of time without changing positions in your seat or looking at your watch. The movie is 2 hours and 45 minutes long and that is very much felt, especially toward the end of the movie. I didn't like the flashbacks to the attack that the main assassin kept having and there were at times an overcrowding of information and names of people that made it a little hard to follow and made the story more confusing than it should have been.

Acting-wise the movie didn't deliver anything too great either. Eric Bana did a respectable job, but it's not Oscar-worthy, and I was disappointed by how little we had of Lynn Cohen, who in her two scenes was tremendous. The action in a couple of scenes was great though and did have me on the edge of my seat, and I liked the art direction and cinematography very much.

I did like how the story came across as not really having an agenda and giving a darker look at the Israeli side of the government, but it's those slow moments and the length of the movie that bring the grade down the most. It's hard for me to give this a grade because I also respect how Spielberg didn't cram a father/son angle down our throats or have the end of the movie be happy-go-lucky and excessively positive. That means that the movie is simply average. I can see why it's not getting universally good reviews and, again, I think not campaigning the movie will hurt more than help, but then again in a weak year for Oscar contenders like this one, maybe the pic will have enough to get a nomination in the big category. It sadly won't be getting in mine though. 

Grade for Munich: C+

Mysterious Skin
Directed by Gregg Araki
Written by Gregg Araki & Scott Heim
Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Brady Corbet, Michelle Trachtenberg, Elisabeth Shue 
Running Time: 99 Minutes
Rated R
TLA Releasing
Seen on 12/22/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
"The summer I was eight years old, five hours disappeared from my life. Five hours, lost, gone without a trace." These are the words of Brian Lackey, a troubled 18-year-old, growing up in the stiflingly small town of Hutchinson, Kansas. Plagued by nightmares, Brian believes that he may have been the victim of an alien abduction. Local Neil McCormick, however, is the ultimate beautiful outsider. With a loving but promiscuous mother, Neil is wise beyond his years and curious about his developing sexuality, having found what he perceived to be love from his Little League baseball coach at a very early age. Now, ten years later, Neil is a teenage hustler, nonchalant about the dangerous path his life is taking. Neil's pursuit of love leads him to New York City, while Brian's voyage of self discovery leads him to Neil--who helps him to unlock the dark secrets of their past. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I had no idea what this movie was about when I rented it. I just knew that it had gotten pretty good reviews and seeing as how it has been the smaller and more independent-type films impressing me, I figured I would give it a shot. Overall I am glad I did. 

This movie is really all about the two lead performances from Levitt and Corbet. They both gave wonderful portrayals of these two people who are strangely connected in some way. Trachtenberg and Shue were okay, but failed to really have the chance to take off with their characters. There were some great supporting performances as well here.

On to the writing. To say the least, the story here is twisted. I loved how the one main character couldn't remember this time in his life and how he resorted to believing it was an alien abduction or something crazy like that. And then the other character believed after this dark series of events in his life that it was the only way to make a living and thrive in life. This all comes together beautifully at the end of the movie, which was both eye-opening but also too rushed. The movie starts dragging bad when Levitt's character moves to New York, but there he gets a big dose of reality and is made to re-examine his current life choices. Levitt's acting in the scene in the bathroom was the highlight of the movie, I thought. His character was knocked out and forced to see things differently through a terrible act.

The music was also great, and the directing was nice. I just wish the slower parts of the movie could have been sped up a little more. And even though the movie lingers with you after you see it, the payoff at the end felt a little too convenient and predictable. Still, not a bad movie at all and yet another small film that surprised me.

Grade for Mysterious Skin: B

The Family Stone
Directed by Thomas Bezucha
Written by Thomas Bezucha
Starring Claire Danes, Diane Keaton, Rachel McAdams, Dermot Mulroney, Craig T. Nelson, Sarah Jessica Parker, Luke Wilson 
Running Time: 102 Minutes
Rated PG-13
20th Century Fox
Seen on 12/17/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
The Stones, a New England family, have their annual holiday gathering. The eldest son brings his girlfriend home to meet his parents, brothers and sisters. The bohemian Stones greet their visitor--a high-powered, controlling New Yorker--with a mix of awkwardness, confusion and hostility. Before the holiday is over, relationships will unravel while new ones are formed, secrets will be revealed, and the family Stone will come together through its extraordinary capacity for love. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
This year has been full of disappointing and underwhelming movies for me. Only a few have garnered A- grades and none have received an A. I wasn't expecting for this movie to blow me away, and it didn't, but it was definitely one of the funniest and most entertaining movies of the year.

The setup is a great one, though a tad cliched -- a man is bringing his girlfriend home to meet the family at Christmas. But what a family. It is full of diverse and hilarious open-minded individuals who are completely the opposite from Meredith (Sarah Jessica Parker), an uptight New Yorker who has her phone glued to her ear most of the time. Of course the family is cold toward her but like the description says, relationships are formed, some are broken, and the pot gets mixed even more when Meredith's sister Julie (Claire Danes) comes to join her and the family warms up to her. I don't want to give much more away about the plots, but what surprised me the most about this movie was that you saw things coming and that is usually a negative to a movie, but the cast and even the writing of Thomas Bezucha rises above it and what emerges is a great and warm film that just makes you feel good.

Now, what about the cast? Where to start? I have never been a great fan of Diane Keaton, but she genuinely surprised me here. I don't think she will get an Oscar nomination, but I would support one. She did a wonderful job portraying this mother and her scenes got even better when we find out her secret regarding herself. I also loved Craig T. Nelson as her husband and the tender father to the Stone children. And no matter what Claire Danes does, I love her. She was so warm and wonderful here. The same is said for Rachel McAdams. I really can't wait to see where she is going because I think it's gonna be far. And I gotta give props to Parker for not bring a lot of Carrie Bradshaw to this role, which I was very much fearing. I was also very happy regarding the handling of the gay deaf son. It wasn't near as bad as it sounds and those were more bonus points. This was just a wonderful cast ensemble.

The end of the movie had me tearing up pretty bad and there is a montage in the middle of the movie with Judy Garland's "Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas" in the background that did the same to me. And there are scenes as well between each parent and one of their children that do the same. Those are the best scenes of the movie. It was as if Bezucha had in his mind his film being one of those individual scenes with the audience being comforted by it, just like a caring parent. Alright, that analogy seems like a little much, but this was a surprisingly tender and heartfelt film that does what a lot of movie fail to do anymore...make ya feel good. 

Grade for The Family Stone: A-

Syriana
Directed by Stephen Gaghan
Written by Stephen Gaghan
Starring George Clooney, Matt Damon, Jeffrey Wright, Chris Cooper, William Hurt, Amanda Peet, Christopher Plummer 
Running Time: 126 Minutes
Rated R
Warner Bros.
Seen on 12/16/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
From writer/director Stephen Gaghan, winner of the Best Screenplay Academy Award for 'Traffic,' comes 'Syriana,' a political thriller that unfolds against the intrigue of the global oil industry. From the players brokering back-room deals in Washington to the men toiling in the oil fields of the Persian Gulf, the film's multiple storylines weave together to illuminate the human consequences of the fierce pursuit of wealth and power. As a career CIA operative (George Clooney) begins to uncover the disturbing truth about the work he has devoted his life to, an up-and-coming oil broker (Matt Damon) faces an unimaginable family tragedy and finds redemption in his partnership with an idealistic Gulf prince (Alexander Siddig). A corporate lawyer (Jeffrey Wright) faces a moral dilemma as he finesses the questionable merger of two powerful U.S. oil companies, while across the globe, a disenfranchised Pakistani teenager (Mazhar Munir) falls prey to the recruiting efforts of a charismatic cleric. Each plays their small part in the vast and complex system that powers the industry, unaware of the explosive impact their lives will have upon the world. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Often, I like to sum a movie up in one word, and for this movie, one immediately pops into my head: crowded. This look at politics and corrupt nature of important people of the world on the surface seems very interesting and intriguing, but the movie itself fails to live up to those qualities.

For one thing, there are too many people in this movie. I love ensemble movies, but I especially love them when each person in the main cast is given a chance to shine (like this year's Crash and The Family Stone), but this movie doesn't have enough time to do that. I care about the issues dealt with in this movie, but the situations regarding these stories and the way they are portrayed here are boring and they didn't grab me like they should have. There was just too much going on. 

Stephen Gaghan's directing was stronger than his writing and the movie features beautiful cinematography and a killer score from Alexandre Desplat. Regarding the cast. Well, I really blame the script more than the actors themselves. I think the MVP of this movie is (yes, I am serious) Amanda Peet. Another great one here was Matt Damon. And what about Clooney?? Well, I think this is going to be a totally wasted nomination for him. All he did, seriously, was gain 50 lbs. That's about it. Nothing award-worthy here at all. 

I will the movie credit for trying to tie things up wonderfully at the end of the movie. The end was much better than the first two-thirds of the movie, but it is still not enough for me to recommend it to people. I kept checking my watch and waiting for the movie to end. At one point, I thought the movie was over and it had another segment when I was starting to get out of my seat. Nothing awful, nothing horrible. Just...there. And crowded. I can't forget about that. Crowded.

Grade for Syriana: C+

Batman Begins
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written by David S. Goyer & Christopher Nolan
Starring Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Tom Wilkinson, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy 
Running Time: 140 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Warner Bros.
Seen on 12/15/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
How does one man change the world? Tormented by guilt and anger, battling the demons that feed his desire for revenge and his need to honor his parents' altruistic legacy, the disillusioned industrial heir seeks the means to fight injustice and turn fear against those who prey on the fearful. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I've never seen the original Batman. I adored Batman Returns, however, and the less said about the other ones the better. I have never been too invested in the franchise, but I loved the cartoons as a child.

Bruce Wayne and the telling of his story and how he became Batman was handled well, though the flashback/current day scenes were a little choppy and the beginning of his story regarding his training from Nesson's characters was a little long and boring, but the film really takes off when he gets a surprised from his past in training and from then on the movie's pace is perfect.

The situations regarding Rachel (Katie Holmes) were the weakest parts of the movie and they bring the grade down as well. The very end of the movie was a little bit of a cop-out as well. Technically, it is thrilling with wonderful art direction, cinematography, and a great score as well.

Christopher Nolan did a marvelous job directing the movie and it is the film's greatest aspect. Christian Bale was okay, but he was trying way too hard with his voice when he was Batman. I know this review is short, but there is nothing left to say really. It was a fun and thrilling ride with some weak moments here and there, but overall it was pretty good. 

Grade for Batman Begins: B

King Kong
Directed by Peter Jackson
Written by Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, and Philipa Boyens
Starring Naomi Watts, Jack Black, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Andy Serkis 
Running Time: 187 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Univeral Pictures
Seen on 12/14/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Flamboyant, foolhardy documentary filmmaker, Carl Denham, sails off to remote Skull Island to film his latest epic with leading lady, Ann Darrow. Native warriors kidnap Ann to use as a sacrifice as they summon "Kong" with the local witch doctor. But instead of devouring Ann, Kong saves her. Kong is eventually taken back to New York where he searches high and low for Ann, eventually winding up at the top of the Empire State Building, facing off against a fleet of World War I fighter planes. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Many people are coining this year's Brokeback Mountain the "gay movie." For the past 6 months, I have been coining King Kong as the "ape movie." I went into the movie with only that thought and the movie featuring a gorilla running and roaring for 3 hours. Though he doesn't appear until an hour into the movie, that description is still very true. But leave it up to Academy award-winning director Peter Jackson to make it a fun ride.

The first hour of the movie focuses on the depression era, and how it is hard for actress Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), or anyone for that matter, to get work. She is desperate and fate gives her a great hand when filmmaker Carl Denham (Jack Black) pleas with her to travel on location with him and his crew to Singapore to shoot a picture. Of course he really means an uncharted island that is supposedly only alive in myth. This portion of the movie focuses too much on the time period and because of that, the movie takes a while to pick up.

The majority of the movie takes place on this island where natives capture Ann and sacrifice her to the king of their jungle. The crew sets out on a voyage to rescue Ann where they will be met with mysterious and killer creatures around every corner. This is where the movie starts to really drag in places. Though Jackson does a great job of thinking up and presenting great scenes of on-the-edge-of-your-seat entertainment, the length of the time felt on the island is deeply felt. The situations that the crew face are focused on too much, but luckily it is mixed with the beginning of the relationship between Kong and Ann, the films best quality story-wise.  

That is the heart of King Kong. Jackson and fellow screenwriters Philipa Boyens and Fran Walsh do a marvelous job of showing the harsh yet sometimes tender nature of Kong. This creature he has found gives him inspiration and there is a wonderful connection shown between the two. This is also accomplished by Watts who graces the screen so beautifully and whose presence on the screen is ridiculously good.

One must wonder how they transport the giant ape back to New York City after her is finally captured and Ann is saved, but this is where the film's greatest scenes occur. We all know the fateful ending of the story, but Jackson delivers it in a way that only he could with both complete passion and beautiful insight. His directing here is among the best of the year, but only if some of the time spent on the island would have been cut back. It's worth seeing for the special effects, technical achievements, and screen presence of Naomi Watts alone, but make sure you nap before seeing it. If not, stick through the slow and excessive moments on the island and wait for the killer finale on top of the tallest building in New York. It's well worth it. 

Grade for King Kong: B

Happy Endings
Directed by Donald Roos
Written by Donald Roos
Starring Lisa Kudrow, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Steve Coogan, Jesse Bradford, Bobby Cannavale, Laura Dern, Tom Arnold, Jason Ritter 
Running Time: 130 Minutes
Rated R
Lion's Gate Films
Seen on 12/12/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Mamie is being blackmailed. This filmmaker named Nicky claims to know Mamie's son--the one she gave up for adoption--but Nicky won't introduce her to him unless he can film their reunion. Enter Javier, Mamie's massage therapist boyfriend, who convinces Nicky to film him instead. Now they're all making a movie about massage--and 'happy endings.' Charley has a longtime boyfriend named Gil. Their best friends, Pam and Diane, once tried using Gil as a sperm donor. They said his sperm didn't take, but Charley thinks those control-freak lesbians are lying. Pam and Diane's two-year-old son looks exactly like Gil. And it's time to set the record straight. Jude is pissed--not at anyone in particular--just in general. When her cousin kicks her out of the house, Jude shacks up with Otis, who's still trying to convince his father, Frank, that he's straight. Frank's a widower. And he's rich. So Jude decides to sleep with him, too. The last thing she expected was to fall in love. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I state it so many times when it applies to the movie, but I love seeing a movie that sneaks up on you and just takes you by surprise. Much like Shopgirl, this movie does just that. I guess the reason for it regarding this movie is that I hadn't heard very much about it. I liked people in the cast and saw that it was a pretty well-reviewed movie and decided to check it out. Glad I did.

The cast of this movie is what really holds it together. I love Lisa Kudrow and she proved to me here (much like she did this year on HBO's The Comeback) that she can play roles and not bring an insane amount of Phoebe Buffay to the role. Her performance here is fresh, funny, and heartfelt. She will be fighting for a slot on my year-end list for sure. The other standout in the film is Maggie Gyllenhaal. I have never seen a lot of her work, but I might have to after seeing this because she has amazing film presence and her singing voice is very pure and fresh. The rest of the cast is great, especially Tom Arnold and Jason Ritter. It's a wonderful ensemble. 

The directing is great as well from Donald Roos. And in a year where my own personal original screenplay category is almost bare, a movie like this comes along with a freshness to it that will more than likely make the shortlist. I also loved the use of songs in this movie. They were new and first sung in the movie so be looking for a couple of them to possibly make my faves of the year as well. The film editing was great here too.

I was just pleasently surprised by this one. It did have its slow moments, especially during the middle of the movie, but for the most part these three separate stories in the movie came together to a very happy ending for me. 

Grade for Happy Endings: B+

The Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Directed by Andrew Adamson
Written by Andrew Adamson, Christopher Markus, Ann Peacock, Steven McFelly
Starring Tilda Swinton, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell, Georgie Henley, Jim Broadbent 
Running Time: 132 Minutes
Rated PG
Walt Disney Pictures
Seen on 12/09/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Follows the exploits of the four Pevensie siblings--Lucy, Edmund, Susan and Peter--in World War II England who enter the world of Narnia through a magical wardrobe while playing a game of 'hide and seek' in the rural country home of an elderly professor. Once there, the children discover a charming, peaceful land inhabited by talking beasts, dwarfs, fauns, centaurs, and giants that has become a world cursed to eternal winter by the evil White Witch, Jadis. Under the guidance of a noble and mystical ruler, the lion Aslan, the children fight to overcome the White Witch's powerful hold over Narnia in a spectacular, climactic battle that will free Narnia from Jadis' icy spell forever. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
When I was watching this movie, I was trying my hardest, I really was. I was trying not to compare this movie to the multi-million dollar franchise that is Lord of the Rings. But I did it to no avail. Can you blame me or any other viewer though?? A lot of people when they saw the trailer thought it looked like a poor man's LOTR. That is a little harsh, but there is no denying that it is going to be difficult for any period epic like this to capture audiences and be as good as the LOTR franchise.

It is not a bad movie, though. The cast is really amazing, particularly Tilda Swinton, whose evil glare will send chills down your spine. The young kids in the movie are great too, but the highlight is little Georgie Henley. She will completely steal your heart as little Lucy. Liam Neeson did a good job as the voice of Aslan, though you gotta think what James Earl Jones was doing when this movie was made. 

The writing here is pretty good overall even though there were some boring parts at the beginning that also felt a little unnecessary. The end of the movie came a little too quick as well and the battle sequence between the armies of the White Witch and Aslan seemed a little too rushed as well. I did like how the adaptors of the screenplay kept the essence of the characters, which is central to the original story.

Andrew Stevenson does a pretty good job directing-wise with the film, and technically it is stunning. The art direction, cinematography, costume design, film editing, make up, original song ("Wunderkind"), sound and sound editing, visual effects, and especially score were among the best of the year.

There's not much left to say. It wasn't a bad movie whatsoever, but the slower moments bring the grade down a bit and I hate to be blunt, but it is no LOTR. I can't blame people for making the comparisons. It's really hard not to. 

Grade for Chronicles of Narnia: B+

Pride & Prejudice
Directed by Joe Wright
Written by Deborah Moggach
Starring Keira Knightley, Matthew MacFadyen, Donald Sutherland, Brenda Blethyn, Judi Dench 
Running Time: 127 Minutes
Rated PG
Focus Features
Seen on 11/26/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
The classic tale of love and values unfolds in the class-conscious England of the late 18th century. The five Bennet sisters--including strong-willed Elizabeth and young Lydia--have all been raised by their mother with one purpose in life: finding a husband. When a wealthy bachelor takes up residence in a nearby mansion, the Bennets are abuzz. Amongst the man's sophisticated circle of friends, surely there will be no shortage of suitors for the Bennet sisters. But when Elizabeth meets up with the handsome and--it would seem--snobbish Mr. Darcy, the battle of the sexes is joined. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors because her ability to bring forth these Victorian romances is just very special. I was a huge fan of the movie adaptation of Sense & Sensibility, and when I heard about this movie I was really hoping that it would be given the same treatment. I am happy to say that it is just as involving and entertaining as the adaptation to S&S, which brings a huge smile to my face.

It's so wonderful when you see something and you know what is going to happen but still you are kept guessing in the middle of the movie. That is how this was. This story of class and rank and romance and love is truly one of the best of the year and I really hope that it lasts until Oscar time because I would love for it to get love there. The story is all together involving, even though there are some slow moments at the beginning of the film. The film also contains many of the best scenes of the year thus far. I won't delve into them because you must see them to get their full impact. Writing wise the movie worked very well, which is where the majority of movies has been failing as of late.

So, the cast. I thought Keira Knightley was so charming and so sweet. Her vulnerability in this character portrayal is sheer perfection and she is among the best of the year. I think she will last until Oscar time and get in and she could very well make my shortlist as well. I was doubting her very much here but she took this role and she soared with it. I thought second best to her was Donald Sutherland, who wasn't in the movie too much, but his few scenes (his last in particular) was unbelievably well acted and the dynamics between both Knightley and Sutherland there was wonderful too. I loved Matthew MacFayden, and aside from being ridiculously sexy and sweet (yet tough), his chemistry with Knightley was truly outstanding. Brenda Blethyn's character is annoying to the max, but Blethyn soars with it. And Judi Dench has two scenes in this movie, but it never ceases to amaze me how much energy and oomph! she brings forth when she is on screen. The cast was wonderful and they all worked great together.

It was also technically one of the most beautiful films of the year. I loved the cinematography especially and it will be hard to top this year. This is the most beautifully shot movie since 2003's Girl With A Pearl Earring. Roman Osin did a perfect job. And I loved Dario Marianelli's score and it was also perfect for the film. Ditto Jacqueline Duran's costumes. The main reason why this movie works the way it does though is because of it's wonderful director, Joe Wright. It's so funny to me. Wasn't Ang Lee not a very well known director when he directed S&S? I could easily see the same thing happening with Wright. There is a ball room scene in particular and it is the most well crafted and directed scene of the year.

The word of mouth for this movie has been very positive and it will even be moreso with this review. Go see this movie. It's the best I have seen thus far in the year and there is something for everyone here. It's dramatic, funny, heartwarming, and even with the slow start the movie got off to, it's just wonderfully put together. It's a true must-see. 

Grade for Pride & Prejudice: A-

Rent
Directed by Chris Columbus
Written by Stephen Chbosky
Starring Rosario Dawson, Taye Diggs, Wilson Jermaine Heredia, Jesse L. Martin, Idina Menzel, Adam Pascal, Anthony Rapp, Tracie Thoms
Running Time: 135 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Columbia
Seen on 11/24/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
A group of young East Villagers in New York City cope with such harsh urban realities as AIDS, homelessness and paying the rent. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
When I went to the great New York City this summer, I knew that one of the things I was going to do was see a Broadway show. I was thinking of possibly seeing a new one like Light In The Piazza or Spelling Bee, but in the end my great friend (<3) Rachel and I decided that we should see Rent, seeing as how it was going to be made into a movie and released in late 2005. I loved the production and it was one of the most amazing experiences of my life, even though the original cast members were (obviously) not appearing. So, after seeing the Broadway production and buying the full length album (and memorizing all of the lyrics...not even kidding), I was very worried (as were many other fans) that the movie would not capture the brilliance of the stage production. Regardless, Rent was my most anticipated film for 2005, because that is what sums up this year for me: Rent. When walking out of the theater after seeing the movie I asked myself if the movie really captured the vision that Jonathan Larson brought forth with the source material. The answer? Yes. And No. 

I am going to delve right into the changes between the stage production and the movie, so I will warn that there are **POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD!! I shouldn't spend a lot of time focusing on it since the majority of the general public hasn't had a chance of seeing the stage production, but the deductions to the movie stem from the changes between the stage and the screen. Of course some numbers were excluded from the movie for length reasons and some of the choices made a lot of sense in not adapting well at all to the screen. There were some differences that weren't bad and well thought out. I loved the opening of the movie being "Seasons Of Love," because it is rather oddly placed in the stage production. I also loved the subway setting of "Santa Fe," the tango dream sequence during "Tango Maureen," and the cutting from Mimi at the club to her apartment in "Out Tonight." I had a mixed feeling regarding the flashback during "One Song Glory" where we actually physically see April, Roger's former girlfriend. But, we weren't told what happened to me and I think the flashback itself could have been handled a little better. I also have mixed reaction about Joanne and Maureen's big number "Take Me As I Am" being set at their commitment ceremony. I agree with my dad that this number happening at a place that is totally inappropriate was really effective, but the addition of the commitment ceremony itself and that being the place felt poorly thought out as well. Then there are the numbers that were pretty much identical in both versions. One of those being "La Vie Boheme," which is the show's biggest and most memorable musical number. Now, the changes I did not like. One huge glaring mistake was the change to the song "What You Own." I hate that this is what people will think what really happens in the show. The whole idea of Roger actually going to Santa Fe was very poorly thought out. In the show it is such a pivotal moment in not caving into running away from your problems and yourself and embracing what you don't believe in. This gave a very poor showing of that. Also awfully thought out was the taking out of the second half of the number "Goodbye Love." In this scene we have a huge moment of connection between Roger and Mark and great insight into their relationship and also in that scene is Mimi's lament to Roger. It being gone really hurt and it was felt very much from those who love the stage production. **END SPOILERS These changes that I did not like can all be laid on the doorstep of Chris Columbus. Many have been doubting him being at the helm of this adaptation since day one, and though he does do a good job overall of bringing the story to the screen, the problems with the adaptation were through his directorial decisions and I can't forgive him for them. I did like how he didn't shy away from the homosexual aspects of the story and he didn't clean them up for middle America.

I am focusing on the negative and it sounds like I am not really recommending the movie and that I didn't like it. Though it's true there are some negative portions and that the majority of the general public will probably not like this, this movie really was one of the best I have seen this year. I am a huge fan of the songs and the music and passion of the show is still here and I really lay all of the credit at the feet of this tremendous cast. Six of the eight return here taking on the original roles they started on Broadway and the majority of them do a good job, and the two new additions do a great job as well. All of the singing is very well done. I think the MVP of the movie acting-wise is the great Jesse L. Martin. His "I'll Cover You (Reprise)" had me in tears and it's the scene of the year thus far. I love that she gave a new spin (more smooth and pure) to the singing voice of Mimi, and her acting was unbelievable and she delivers one of the strongest performances of the year thus far. Of course I am talking about Rosario Dawson whom I just adored here. She especially does a great job during the last half of the movie and floored me. Utterly and completely. I also thought Wilson Jermaine Herredia did a wonderful job as well as Angel. I think both he and Martin did the best job at capturing the passion and spark of the characters they originated on Broadway. It felt like they had been doing it for years. I also loved the chemistry between Idina Menzel and Tracie Thoms. I just love Menzel and her "Over The Moon" is hilariously done. The weakest of the cast were Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp. I like them more than most others, but they were the weakest of the cast. Well, Taye Diggs really hurts because his character is not very central to the story in the first place. The cast really is what holds this movie together. I could only imagine how bad it would have been with more popular names such as Justin Timberlake and Christina Aguilera playing these roles. I shudder to think of that. The movie didn't feel that dated either, which was something else that was worrying me.

It's hard to recommend a movie that you know a lot of people really won't understand or 'get.' And I agree that this is a much better and more effective production on the stage compared to film. But in the long run I do think the movie captures the passion of the original material. I was highly entertained throughout the movie, even though I had minor complaints. I liked it more than the majority of the people who have seen both productions, which does make me feel a little off in my own space, but the highs of this movie to me overshadowed the lows by a long shot. In many parts of the movie I had chills because I was seeing the stories unfold and in others I was so emotionally involved that the tears were continuously coming. In my opinion, it's the strongest musical since 2001's Moulin Rouge!, which is pretty damn ironic in and of itself knowing what inspired both of the stories behind the productions.

Grade for Rent: A-

Walk The Line
Directed by James Mangold
Written by Gill Dennis & James Mangold
Starring Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Robert Patrick, Ginnifer Goodwin
Running Time: 135 Minutes
Rated PG-13
20th Century Fox
Seen on 11/18/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Follows the early years in the career of American music legend Johnny Cash. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Wonderful cast? Check. Seemingly great director? Check. Source material? Check. Looks great doesn't it? I mean, this is based on the life of one of the most beloved music legends of all time, Johnny Cash, and the cast and director are great too. Too bad the movie as a whole doesn't match up to how great it seems it will be. It's bad that 10 minutes into a movie you know that what you are going to see for the next two hours will be nothing new, predictable, and at times rather boring.

The problem with this movie lies in the story and the writing (which is becoming a HUGE epidemic for this year). Even though these events may be true to what happened in reality to Cash and Carter, it's just nothing new. I guess I might just be tired of biopics about music legends. I hate to bring up Ray, because it doesn't seem fair to compare the two movies, but they are very much alike regarding pacing and the overall story. It's just all so predictable. **POSSIBLE SPOILERS** Boy gets haunted/inspired by death of brother. Boy goes on to make it big. Married boy meets married girl. Married boy and now divorced girl hook up. Boy gets addicted to drugs. Boy dumps the habit. Boy wins girl. **END SPOILERS** It's just all so...we know, this happens to almost every famous person. Maybe it was a bad move to have these movies come out so close together. It's about different legends, but at times it's like it was Ray all over again. And even though it might sound bad to say, it seemed like there were too many singing scenes in this movie and not enough scenes giving character development and backstory. And I was also very confused at the time frame and age of some of the characters and there was no aging that went on at all. True that it didn't go into their old age (thank God), but I believe when Phoenix emerges on the screen he is 18. Didn't buy it.

The only saving grace regarding this movie is the cast, and it's the reason why the grade is elevated the way it is (and it's what makes it a little better and more enjoyable than Ray). Joaquin Phoenix does a wonderful job playing the man in black and he is most assuradely a lock in the BActor race (as is the movie...they eat this stuff up). He has many great scenes and rises above the at times crappy dialogue and story. Overcoming that even more though is Reese Witherspoon. She's such an energetic force on the screen. I have always been a fan of her and here she is both hilarious (she has one of the best introductions of the year) and very touching. The connection between these two is what holds the movie together in the end and doesn't make it a complete disaster. Their scenes together are the highlights and the best parts of the movie. She is getting nominated too, though I just don't know if it is enough to get her an Oscar. Don't know why. And I think Phoenix is gonna have trouble winning because Foxx did last year. Anyway, also giving fine performances were Ginnifer Goodwin and Robert Patrick. They too rise above crappy material and their stereotypical characters.

The music was entertaining, I'll give them that. Both leads did a very good job covering these songs, though I like that it didn't come across as mimicking them. This is especially true with Witherspoon. See the movie for the performances, for they are a treat to see. But story-wise this is nothing new. Far from it. June Carter has a line where she says, "You can't walk no line, Johnny." It's too bad the movie couldn't live up to it's title and do so either. 

Grade for Walk The Line: B-

Shopgirl
Directed by Anand Tucker
Written by Steve Martin
Starring Steve Martin, Claire Danes, Jason Schwartzman
Running Time: 103 Minutes
Rated R
20th Century Fox
Seen on 11/13/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Based on Steve Martin's best-selling novella, "Shopgirl" is a story of love in the modern age. Mirabelle (Claire Danes) works the glove counter at a high end department store in Beverly Hills, selling things that nobody buys anymore. An artist struggling to keep up with even the minimum payment on her credit card and student loans, she lives a quiet life and keeps to herself until a rich, handsome fiftysomething named Ray Porter (Martin) sweeps her off her feet. Mirabelle revels in the attention, the sex, and especially, being in love, but somewhere, subconsciously, she realizes that the relationship cannot last. Soon, she has to make a decision: will she stick with Ray, hoping that his feelings for her might grow, or does she take a chance with Jeremy (Jason Schwartzman), a musician who may offer more? (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Don't you love those movies that genuinely surprise you? This one did that for me, and trust me, I was not expecting to be surprised. Especially because of how this was being compared to Lost In Translation, a movie that I wasn't too crazy about. Although the movie wasn't perfect or that deeply moving, it very much exceeded my expectations.

The writing was for the most part very well done. Steve Martin really did a great job writing this. I haven't read his novella, but I heard from a lot of people that it was a great read. It's hard for me to believe that I liked this movie, because even though it is different from LiT, it is a little similar in its storytelling and pacing. Not a lot really happened in this movie, but Steve Martin succeeded in getting me involved with these characters. The story was a little choppy though. I really enjoyed the first half and then it started to drag until the wonderful ending. I think of this as a very smart romantic comedy. There were some lines here that would have totally been ruined in being in a less thought out movie. I also loved how we feel sorry for all of the characters in one way or another, but we also see their flaws and get annoyed by their actions.

A lot of that has to do with the acting too. I would just like to say that I love, LOVE Claire Danes. She really is one of the most wonderful and versatile actresses of her generation. It's a shame that she has not been more hailed as an actress and it's a shame that she won't be remembered come Oscar time. I loved this performance because it was so fresh and it didn't delve into predictable territory. Steve Martin was decent acting-wise, but this was really Danes' show. And I was very pleasantly surprised at how good Jason Schwartzman was. I have never really had that much of an opinion regarding him, but he was very funny in this role.

The music was very appropriate as well and I absolutely loved the opening of the movie too. The narrative parts of the movies felt a little off at times, but in the long run this was a successful movie and I was genuinely surprised by it. At times it is slow and you wonder where it is going, but it is worth the time and money overall. 

Grade for Shopgirl: A-


Capote
Directed by Bennett Miller
Written by Dan Futterman
Starring Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Chris Cooper, Clifton Collins, Jr.
Running Time: 98 Minutes
Rated R
Sony Pictures Classics
Seen on 11/11/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
On November 15, 1959, the brutal murder of a family in a small Kansas town sent shockwaves through the nation and captured the attention of one of the most distinctive minds of our time. One-of-a-kind author Truman Capote was sent to Kansas to pen an article about the crimes for The New Yorker magazine. He ended up writing one of the most celebrated books of the century. Capote follows Truman Capote (Hoffman) on his odyssey to create the landmark bestseller "In Cold Blood." With signature style and mordant wit - and his friend Harper Lee (Keener) in tow - Capote attempts to charm the locals and work his way into the story behind the murders. He's soon shocked, however, to find himself forming a friendship with one of the killers, Perry Smith (Collins). As the book nears completion and execution day approaches, Capote finds himself torn in directions he never anticipated and is forever changed by his experiences. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I have never read the novel "In Cold Blood," but I have a sneaking suspicion that the feeling you get coming out of Capote is a similar feeling. This is the first movie of the year where it's really difficult to muster up words in describing how I feel about it.

The acting is superb, and it's all headed up by the great Philip Seymour Hoffman. He really nails the character Truman Capote, and even though at times he delves into mere mimicking territory, he is still a great enough actor to rise above just mimicking the whole time. Especially during the last quarter of the movie he really gives life to the eccentric character. Catherine Keener is good in her scenes, though she is not getting nominated for this and I honestly don't think Hoffman is the lock that people think he is. Collins was just as good, if not overall better, than Hoffman and I would love to see him get nominated for this. He gave a wonderful portrayal of this man who Capote tried to save or give justification to.

Regarding the story. It's a grizzly one and this is the aspect where it's really hard to bring up feelings and words regarding it. First off, I didn't realize until I got home that Dan Futterman wrote this. Yes, that Dan Futterman. He did a great job of giving sympathy to both Capote and Collins' characters, but not doing so to an extreme degree. We still see their flaws and the writing of the relationship between them was well done too. There were some very slow scenes during the movie though and the pacing was slow during the middle of the movie, hence the downgrading.

The direction from Miller was great and the score was perfect for the movie. I haven't heard much from Mychael Dana, but he just made a score that sounded like something from Newman or another great composer. It was an overall good movie with powerhouse performances from Hoffman and Collins. The slow moving scenes and pacing during the middle are the weak points of the movie, however. It's worth seeing though alone for the performances. 

Grade for Capote: B

Good Night, and Good Luck.
Directed by George Clooney
Written by George Clooney & Grant Heslov
Starring David Straithairn, George Clooney, Patricia Clarkson, Robert Downey, Jr., Jeff Daniels
Running Time: 90 Minutes
Rated PG
Warner Bros.
Seen on 11/05/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
'Good Night, And Good Luck.' takes place during the early days of broadcast journalism in 1950's America. It chronicles the real-life conflict between television newsman Edward R. Murrow and Senator Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee. With a desire to report the facts and enlighten the public, Murrow, and his dedicated staff - headed by his producer Fred Friendly and Joe Wershba in the CBS newsroom - defy corporate and sponsorship pressures to examine the lies and scaremongering tactics perpetrated by McCarthy during his communist 'witch-hunts'. A very public feud develops when the Senator responds by accusing the anchor of being a communist. In this climate of fear and reprisal, the CBS crew carries on and their tenacity will prove historic and monumental. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Before this movie started, my gut told me I wouldn't like it. It's just not one of the types of movies I would normally like. I feared that the same thing that happened with me regarding my first viewing of Sideways last year. A bunch of critics love, but I don't get all the hype and think it's overrated. The opposite happened and the movie lived up to the hype.

It takes a little bit for the movie to take off, but when it does, it does so beautifully. The story of the McCarthy era and the brave and courageous team behind CBS, mainly Edward Murrow, was so eloquently and cleverly put into story form. The pace of the movie was perfect and the events unfolding, though not your typical entertainment, were so interesting and intriguing to see. The only part of the script that brings it down a little bit was the situation happening between Downey, Jr. and Clarkson. It was still interesting to see the events going on there too, it just brought the script down just a little bit. 

David Straithairn is really remarkable here. What is so amazing about this performance is that it doesn't have a shooting up heroine scene, or a huge ouburst of "Is that my daughter?!?!?!" scene. It's so subtle but at times it is those type of performances that are the most memorable and truly wonderful. He has one scene that made me feel so many emotions and I wanted to stand up and applaud (which BTW happened at the end of the showing I saw). The rest of the cast is wonderful, though no one stands out like Straithairn.

The cinematography was top-notch and I loved the choice of music to transition from one scene to another. The film editing was great too, but the real victor of this movie is George Clooney. He did a wonderful job acting in the movie, but it's his flawless direction that makes him a true standout and one that will be remembered come Oscar time. He presented this information in a way that makes it so very intriguing and when you watch it, you can't believe how important this time was.

There is not much left to say other than to highly recommend this movie to everyone. Even if the subject matter doesn't interest you, you might be surprised at how interesting it is and how much the story sucks you in. It's just wonderful filmmaking.

Grade for Good Night, And Good Luck: A-

Jarhead
Directed by Sam Mendes
Written by William Broyles, Jr.
Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Peter Sarsgaard, Jamie Foxx, Chris Cooper
Running Time: 115 Minutes
Rated R
Universal Pictures
Seen on 11/04/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
"Jarhead" (the self-imposed moniker of the Marines) follows Anthony Swoff, a third-generation enlistee, from a sobering stint in boot camp to active duty, sporting a sniper's rifle and a hundred-pound ruck on his back through Middle East deserts with no cover from intolerable heat or from Iraqi soldiers, always potentially just over the next horizon. Swoff and his fellow Marines sustain themselves with sardonic humanity and wicked comedy on blazing desert fields in a country they don't understand against an enemy they can't see for a cause they don't fully fathom. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
It takes everything in me not to use the tagline of this flick. So I will refrain. Something odd happened to me while watching this movie. One moment I loved it, the next moment I hated it, the next moment was too slow, and then I loved the next scene. It was really odd and it was hard for me to put into words when writing this review regarding my thoughts of this movie. So, I will start with the weakest aspect of it...the writing.

The writing to anything, whether it be a sitcom, a movie, a play, etc., is the foundation of the art. Whether the other aspects rise above that or not shows either how great the other contributors are to the movie or how bad they are at perhaps resting too much on assuming the writing is great. The other aspects will be touched on momentarily, but the writing in this movie was hardly well thought out or assembled in an effective way. Don't worry, nothing will be given away further into this review, so you can read on, but there was too much focus on the before of the combat and the time during the combat and then the end of the movie is just dropped on us as an audience. I think the writing succeeds in not really being political and being blatantly pro/con on anything. And I know that my mentioning of too much focus being on the before and during the combat might seem harsh, because I recognize that that was possibly one of the biggest angles the filmmakers here were trying to go for. I just didn't really care for it. The movie wasn't really full of itself, per say, but at the end of the movie after the end occurred, I thought to myself, "That's it? What was the point?" The end of the movie is actually really great but the last 20 minutes is just entirely too rushed. Had there been a little more time put into the after effects of the war, the movie would have succeeded more. True, most war movies rest TOO MUCH on that, but this one needed more. And the depression of some of the marines during the war and their backstories were also rushed and came out of nowhere (especially the main character's). The story just wasn't paced well at all.

But what about the other aspects of the film? Did they rise above the mediocre and not well-paced writing? For the most part, yes. The more I think about the movie, the more and more I loved Jake Gyllenhaal here. This is probably his best performance I have seen from him and what a year he has already had, and BM hasn't even been released yet. He has some really great moments to shine and he does a stellar job in one scene in particular where everything slams him at once. I don't see him making it to Oscar time though, esp. because Lead Actor is becoming a little crowded and also his role in BM will be a little more focused on, I think. Also wonderful was Peter Sarsgaard. I would love for him to make it to Oscar time, but I doubt it will happen for him too. His two big scenes brought tears to my eyes and in one scene, he delivered the best scene from a male actor this year thus far. And I am going to say it, so beware: Jamie Foxx was better here than in Ray. There, I said it and I truly think that and believe it. I think he has the best chance of all of them to last to Oscar time and because that category is so weak, I think he could still make it in, but I am not saying it wouldn't be deserved, because it would be. Though it is early in the game as far as Oscar season goes. The cinematography was wonderful too and of course Thomas Newman's score was great. It was a little different than his other scores, kind of faster paced. And I really loved the direction here from Sam Mendes. He had a great eye for this material and his work is great.

If only the writing was stronger. I want to give this movie a higher grade, but I can't. The writing was just too poor and too slow paced. Some places were too slow while others seemed way too rushed. Too bad that the movie wasn't written a little better and that it couldn't match up with the other aspects of the movie. If so, this really could have easily been one of the best movies of the year. Welcome to the suck, but don't stay seated too comfortably for too long.

Grade for Jarhead: B-

Me and You and Everyone We Know
Directed by Miranda July
Written by Miranda July
Starring Miranda July, John Hawkes, Miles Thompson, Brad Henke, Brandon Ratcliffe
Running Time: 95 Minutes
Rated R
IFC Films
Seen on 10/28/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Christine Jesperson is a lonely artist and "Eldercab" driver who uses her fantastical artistic visions to draw her aspirations and objects of desire closer to her. Richard Swersey, a newly single shoe salesman and father of two boys, is prepared for amazing things to happen. But when he meets the captivating Christine, he panics. Life is not so oblique for Richard's seven-year-old Robby, who is having a risqué internet romance with a stranger, and his fourteen- year-old brother Peter who becomes the guinea pig for neighborhood girls -- practicing for their future of romance and marriage. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I really don't want to spend a lot more time devoted to this movie because watching this for an hour and a half was enough torture. I don't mean to sound this extreme and/or disgusting, but the pretentiousness and self-importance crammed down my throat in this movie was so extreme that it was oozing out of my ass. That's how bad this movie was to me. It is truly one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

There were entirely too many stories going on here and everything was in effect too rushed and nothing could happen with the storylines because there was so much stuff going on. None of the cast had the chance to shine and some of these storylines that were going on were pathetically bad. When a six year-old boy is chatting with someone online and he tells them he will "poop in your butt and then we will do it back and forth forever," yeah...you get the idea. I was disgusted by it and then there was a stupid storyline with a little girl who collects kitchen appliances.

As I said, I don't want to spend a lot of time on this, but it wasn't a good movie. The writing was pathetically bad and what made it worse was that it felt like Miranda July was trying to say something important and effective, and it wasn't. It was full of pretentiousness and is one of the most "full-of-itself" movies I have ever seen. I give bonus points to movies that I don't like but that I can understand why other people might like it, but this movie didn't even deliver that to me. It's hard for me to see how anyone can like this heaping pile of dung. It's cool if people disagree and like it, bu this is one that will easily go down as one of the worst I have ever seen.

Grade for Me and You and Everyone We Know: D-


North Country
Directed by Niki Carro
Written by Michael Seitzman
Starring Charlize Theron, Frances McDormand, Sissy Spacek, Woody Harrelson, Richard Jenkins, Sean Bean
Running Time: 123 Minutes
Rated R
Warner Bros.
Seen on 10/21/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
When Josey Aimes returns to her hometown in Northern Minnesota after a failed marriage, she needs a good job. A single mother with two children to support, she turns to the predominant source of employment in the region - the iron mines. The last thing the miners want is women competing for scarce jobs - women who, in their estimation, have no business driving trucks and hauling rock anyway. When Josey speaks out against the treatment she and her fellow workers face it takes her farther than she ever imagined, ultimately inspiring countless others, and leading to the nation's first-ever class action lawsuit for sexual harassment. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
Silkwood, Norma Rae, Erin Brockovich. These are all movies which all battle something similar. Especially the first two, the happenings and events of higher up administration in corporations is being tested by a lower-tiered worker at the company. This is the very basic plot of North Country as well. So, can it be compared to the greats mentioned above?

The movie takes a little too long to take off. We first see main character Jose (Theron) getting beat up by her husband and fleeing to her parents in need of shelter and work. She finds work in the same mines that her father worked in. The men outnumber the women 30:1 at this mine, so you know what that spells: trouble. Throughout the course of the movie we are flashing back to the events of the mines and to times even before that in Jose's life while we are also seeing the trial taking place as well. This editing was very clever initially, but around the middle of the movie, it became much more incoherent and sloppy. And to answer the question about comparing this to the great similar themed movies. Well, writing-wise it can't. This was at times very sloppy and I hate it when I see a movie like this and there is tremendous buildup to the ending and that is just happens rather quickly and what results is a very anti-climactic ending. And even though they acted the crap out of it, you saw what was coming next, especially with the mother/son tension. The strongest writing in the movie takes place between Theron and Jenkins' characters toward the end of the movie.

Not all of this movie was mediocre. Ah, Charlize Theron. Those who love her work in Monster really love it and think it is one of the best performances of the past ten years. There are some too that only saw it as a mimicry of sorts and nothing too special. I am one of the former people, but going into this movie I don't know why, but I didn't want to like her performance because I guess I thought her performance in Monster could possibly be a fluke and a once-in-a-lifetime performance/role. I was wrong. She takes total command here in portraying this troubled character. This is much more subtle work than her performance in Monster and she proved that that performance wasn't a fluke. She has countless money scenes and is a lock for a nomination. I don't think she will win, though I do think it is possible. I think people are writing off Frances McDormand too quickly from their lists. That category is very weak and this role is meaty and McDormand does a fantastic job. I actually thought she was better here than her award-winning work in Fargo. I know Richard Jenkins from Six Feet Under fame, and here he really surprised me. As mentioned above, his and Theron's scenes were the best and even though we have had the father/daughter disapproving angles before, Jenkins especially rises above that cliche and delivers a very powerful performance. Sissy Spacek and Woody Harrelson do fine jobs as well. I also liked Sean Bean here.

The cinematography was great and I really loved the score. There is one scene in particular at the end of the movie where Niki Carro (who did a fine job here BTW) rests solely on the music and the result is very moving. Acting-wise it is top-notch. I just wish the writing would have been a little stronger. I juggled with a final grade, but in the end I settled with a little higher one than I expected, if only for the amazing ensemble and just how much the situations happening in the movie were successful in completely infuriating me as a human being.

Grade for North Country: B-

Proof
Directed by John Madden
Written by David Auburn & Rebecca Miller
Starring Gwyneth Paltrow, Anthony Hopkins, Jake Gyllenhaal, Hope Davis
Running Time: 100 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Miramax Films
Seen on 10/20/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Based on the Pulitzer Prize-winning play by David Auburn, "Proof" follows a devoted daughter (Paltrow) who comes to terms with the death of her father (Hopkins) a brilliant mathematician whose genius was crippled by mental insanity -- and is forced to face her own long-harbored fears and emotions. She adjusts to his death with the help of one of her father's former mathematical students (Gyllenhaal) who searches through her father's notebooks in the hope of discovering a bit of his old brilliance. While coming to terms with the possibility that his genius, which she has inherited, may come at a painful price, her estranged sister (Davis) arrives to help settle their father's affairs. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I will admit that the biggest reason I saw this was for the acting. I haven't seen the play on stage like a lot of people who were really eager to see the movie. I have heard wonderful things about the play, however. I especially heard how amazing Tony-winner Mary-Louise Parker was in the role.

Based on my reasons for seeing the movie, it is a success. The acting is top-notch and pretty wonderful. Many people said that it was a mistake that Parker was not asked to be in the movie, and even though Gwyneth Paltrow isn't one of my favorite actresses, I didn't think she would do too bad with the role and she didn't at all. I really enjoyed her work here, even more than her Oscar-winning work in Shakespeare In Love. She is very moving and her subtle scenes here are very powerful. I would love for her to last until Oscar time, but I doubt she will. Also wonderful was Anthony Hopkins. He plays the troubled father of this troubled young woman and he once again proves here how unbelievable an actor he can be. Hope Davis plays her role well, but I agree with a lot of people, that I want her to play more likable characters. Jake Gyllenhaal could just stand in the camera frame and it would be fine by me, but this wasn't one of his more memorable performances, though look where his year is shaping up later this year.

That's the good of the movie. The cast is wonderful, and I really like the score here but overall it was an average movie at best. The writing was totally uneven and all over the place. The scenes between Gyllenhaal and Paltrow especially bring the movie down. Of course those scenes between Paltrow and Hopkins were the highlights of the movie. I was going to give this a little higher grade like a B or a B+, but the end of the movie was very anti-climactic and it was just totally unresolving. There was great buildup to the very end and then it just happened.

It's one of those movies where one aspect is really strong (acting) and the rest is just kinda there and can't quite match up with the strong point.

Grade for Proof: C+

The 40-Year-Old Virgin
Directed by Judd Apatow
Written by Judd Apatow & Steve Carell
Starring Steve Carell, Catherine Keener, Paul Rudd
Running Time: 116 Minutes
Rated R
Universal Pictures
Seen on 09/03/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
40-year-old Andy Stitzer (Carell) has done quite a few things in his life. He's got a cushy job stamping invoices at an electronics superstore, a nice apartment with a proud collection of action figures and comic books, good friends, a nice attitude. But there's just one little thing he hasn't quite gotten around to doing yet--something most people have done by his age. Andy's never, ever, ever had sex. His friends at the store consider it their duty to help, but nothing proves effective enough until he meets Trish (Keener), a 40-year-old mother of three. Andy's friends are psyched by the possibility that "it" may finally happen...until they hear that Andy and Trish have begun their relationship based on a mutual no-sex policy. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I have wanted to see this movie for a while and I went with a girlfriend from work and we were both psyched about seeing it. Let's just say that I can relate to this movie and that's one of the biggest reasons why I wanted to see it, whether I'm 21 or 40. The opening scene of the movie (which I won't give away) had me laughing so hard I was literally crying. It is a great way to open up a movie that sets the tone and pace for the rest of it accurately.

I laughed my ass off. There really isn't a lot you can do here in delving into the script and the story, because it is such a simple story, which I guess makes it even more great because this could have so easily been crap had it fallen into the wrong hands. There are countless LOL, knee-slapping, tear-inducing scenes that had me and my friend laughing all the way home. But there were also some really touching moments as well that kinda tug at your heart. And the ending....omg. You have to see it to believe it.

One of the biggest reasons for the success of this is the great Steve Carell. I really like this guy. He was pitch perfect in Bewitched, he's funny as hell and nails this character, he's wonderful on The Office, and he is just so adorably cute. I mean, look at the poster! He's the heart of the movie and makes it what it is. There is a great supporting cast as well, especially Catherine Keener. Ya know, these two delivered really funny and fresh performances and in a movie with material like this, that isn't easy. The rest of the cast was great too.

I downgraded to a B+ because there were some scenes that dragged and felt like they could have been cut, but damn it how much did I laugh during this movie? My friend commented that she hadn't laughed that hard during a movie for a long time, and the same it true for me too. This is what romantic comedies should aim to accomplish (cursing and filth included).

Grade for The 40-Year-Old Virgin: B+

The Upside Of Anger
Directed by Mike Binder
Written by Mike Binder
Starring Joan Allen, Kevin Costner, Erika Christensen, Evan Rachel Wood, Keri Russell, Alicia Witt, Mike Binder
Running Time: 118 Minutes
Rated R
New Line Features
Seen on 08/03/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
After being abandoned by her husband, a woman finds her life changed when a once-great baseball star steps in as her drinking buddy and becomes an ad-hoc member of the dysfunctional family. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I am late seeing this, I know, but with all the talk of the performances from the cast of the movie (save Binder), I knew I had to check it out upon it's DVD release. Better late than never.

Joan Allen truly is a revelation. The only other performance I have seen from her was her stellar work in The Crucible and I really want to see her other works and films because she seems to be a really wonderful actress. She was great here and there were many money scenes and many great moments for her as an actress and I definitely see this performance lingering on the minds of the Oscar voters come Oscar time and I see her getting nominated (and I think she will WIN NBR which pretty much guarantees you an Oscar slot). Kevin Costner really surprised me, for I wasn't expecting a groundbreaking performance or anything but it was pretty darn good stuff. On screen with Allen he was at his best and both of these performances were great. The supporting cast of daughters here was great as well. I really liked Keri Russell especially and Wood and Christensen were good too, and even though she was the weakest of the girls, Witt wasn't bad. Binder as an actor was pretty bad though.

So, the acting is pretty top notch, but the story is not. I thought too much of it was cliched and there were too many attempts on the writers to make the audience try and guess what was gonna happen next. The opening of the movie is a funeral and there are too many happenings in the movie that have us guessing whose funeral it is and it is very tedious and the weakest aspect of the already weak story. There were also many storylines here with the daughters especially that felt too rushed and prematurely developed for anything real to happen with them. Many people have a problem with the ending, but I actually thought the last third of the movie was the best part of the whole thing.

This grade is probably too generous, but it's Costner and esp. Allen who elevates the grade. See this only for especially this performance.

Grade for The Upside Of Anger: B-

War Of The Worlds
Directed by Steven Spielberg
Written by Josh Friedman, David Koepp
Starring Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Tim Robbins, Miranda Otto
Running Time: 117 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Paramount Pictures
Seen on 07/01/05 and 07/08/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
A contemporary retelling of H.G. Wells's seminal classic, the sci-fi adventure thriller reveals the extraordinary battle for the future of humankind through the eyes of one American family fighting to survive it. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I hate Tom Cruise. I do. He drives me insane, and part of me didn't want to give him my money in seeing this movie. His arrogance and ridiculous cramming it down our throats of his 'straightness' make me sick. This was a Spielberg flick though and the last one he and Cruise did together were amazing, so I decided to see it despite the star of the film.

The story here really grabs you. The first words (and last words) grab you too with brilliant narration by the great Morgan Freeman. His voice immediately gives a creepy and uneasy feel to what is about to be seen. Steven Spielberg never breaks away from this feel. From intense lightening storms to running from the aliens themselves to hiding from them, Spielberg certainly knows how to film these suspenseful scenes and he knows how to make his audience hang on the edge of their seats wondering what will happen next. This movie is pretty terrifying. I was scared the first time and even more the second time. It's just a scary concept and Spielberg's direction brings that to life the most. Writing wise, the alien invasion part of the movie is very well done. The domestic fatherhood angle of the movie though was a little too forced and crammed down our throats. I had a problem with the ending initially too but at second viewing it wasn't as bad as it initially was. And technically, it's most impressive. I don't see how it can lose special effects and the art direction, cinematography, and film editing are nomination-worthy as well.

Even when Tom Cruise is acting, there is such a sense of arrogance on his part. It transcends him not even being himself which is something pretty sad, but he really wasn't bad here. He was even better here than he was in Minority Report, probably. He isn't great by any means but there were more tolerable scenes with him here than ones that made me cringe. There is a bit of unnecessary plot development with the Tim Robbins character in the movie. I hear that it is faithful to the novel but it just didn't feel right and felt like an excuse to put the Oscar winner in the film. The standout of the movie though is the wonderful little Dakota Fanning. I guess calling her little is getting to be too much, for she is growing up and she is showing more and more and more potential as years go by for her. The young lady will be holding an Oscar before long because she is the most talented young actress in Hollywood and here she made up for the crap that was Hide & Seek and The Cat In The Hat. I can't wait to see what she does next.

I saw this movie twice. The first time I saw it I went alone and the week after I convinced my dad and sister to see it and I told them I would go with them. The second viewing was much better and I looked over the things that I didn't like a second time around moreso than the first time. This is truly great edge-of-your-set, terrifying entertainment. I wish all summer movies were this suspenseful and great.

Grade for War Of The Worlds: B+

Bewitched
Directed by Nora Ephron
Written by Nora Ephron, Delia Ephron, Adam McKay
Starring Will Ferrell, Nicole Kidman, Shirley MacLaine, Kristin Chenoweth
Running Time: 90 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Columbia Pictures
Seen on 06/24/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Hot-shot actor Jack Wyatt, set to star as Darrin in a film version of the '60s TV series "Bewitched," finds his ideal Samantha in unknown actress Isabel, who just happens to be a witch in real life. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I always remember when I was little how I used to wonder whether Samantha from Bewitched or Jeannie from I Dream Of Jeannie would win in a duel. Corny, I know, but needless to say I preferred Samantha and was a huge fan of Bewitched the TV show growing up which is why I was always really nervous about this film version of the great TV show.

The movie succeeds and fails on many levels. First, the cast. I thought Will Ferrell was hysterical as a desperate and conceited actor who would stop at nothing to make himself be in the spotlight everywhere he goes. Nicole Kidman was a good Samantha and she proved here that she can do something light and not quite as demanding as say The Others or The Hours. Then there's the veteran Shirley MacLaine who was hilarious and whose character has secrets of her own. The standout in the movie though is Kristin Chenoweth who steals every scene she is in with her cuteness and great coming timing and delivery of lines. And Steve Carrell nailed Uncle Arthur. Just nailed that character. 

There is a huge camp factor with this movie. The cast isn't awful and honestly the writing isn't either. But even though there is a camp factor which forces you to like the movie regardless of it's weak moments, the corniness and weakness of the writing does cause downgrading to occur.

Again, it's not horrid writing. But the cutesiness of it all becomes too much and even though there is a liking of the movie, it is sort of only admittedly on a campy level and as an actual film and taking everything into account, it is a slightly above average flick that is adorable and very cute. I upgrade a little too because the movie does know the original material and the filmmakers here know that there are to be the corny and too cutesy moments. It sounds as though I should be grading it higher, but the movie also leaves a bad taste in your mouth when you start to think about it too much. With that, I will shut up because I am rambling and it is late and I am tired. 

Grade for Bewitched: C

Mr. & Mrs. Smith
Directed by Doug Liman
Written by Simon Kinberg
Starring Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie
Running Time: 118 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Twentieth Century Fox
Seen on 06/10/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
A married couple (Pitt and Jolie) are getting bored with their quiet domestic life. What they don't know, however, is that they're both assassins, secretly hopping the world and killing for hire. But their separate lives are about to collide when each finds out their next target is their own spouse. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I saw this one while in New York and one of the biggest reasons why I saw it was because of the speculation of the two main cast members being the reason for the breakup of Brad and Jen. Yes, I admit that I saw it for Brangelina. Going into it, I knew what I was seeing. I knew it wouldn't be rocket science and that it was mostly just going to be action sequences one after the other and that it would be nothing too earth-shattering.

This review won't be earth-shattering or rocket science either. Honestly, my thoughts on the movie can be summed up pretty much in one paragraph. The action sequences are great and do keep you guessing and make you laugh at the same time (there is a very great and hilarious moment for American Idol fans) and Brangelina are red hot. I am talking smoldering hot, but there is really no intriguing story here. It's just...there. It relies too much on the action sequences and the hotness of the main two for there to be anything real.

And that's why there is a 'just there' (average) grade given to the movie. And this grade is probably too generous but damn it if those two's hotness didn't make up for there being no story.

Grade for Mr. & Mrs. Smith: C+

Cinderella Man
Directed by Ron Howard
Written by Akiva Goldsman, Ron Howard, Cliff Hollingsworth
Starring Russell Crowe, Renee Zellweger, Paul Giamatti
Running Time: 144 Minutes
Rated PG-13
Universal Pictures
Seen on 06/03/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Set in New York during the Depression, this is the story of James Braddock, who takes up boxing to make money to feed his family, and ends up becoming quite famous in the process, eventually going up against champ Max Baer. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
This movie reviewer would like to go on record as saying that I didn't want to like this movie. I really didn't. I was a bigger fan of A Beautiful Mind than what most people were, and I love the cast and director involved in the project, but part of me just didn't want to like this. Maybe because it was a 'boxing movie,' but just like Million Dollar Baby did, this pulled me in.

The first of the movie is slow and it's the biggest reason why there is downgrade for the final score. It takes a while for this movie to take off but when it does, it really does it well. The writing is impressive but the directing from Ron Howard is what truly surprised me. This truly is his most complete and least cliched work to date. With his smart and clever uses of the camera, he really gets the movie audience into the ring and into the heart of this one man, his family, and the people of the Depression. He makes it all become so real. I am a huge fan of Thomas Newman as well and even though here more than ever he relies too much on past scores (I swear, I thought that I heard Finding Nemo and Angels In America pieces), it is still a great score. And it is gonna take a lot for this movie's cinematography by Salvatore Totino to be topped this year.

After this performance, I am even more confident that Russell Crowe is the most talented actor in Hollywood. He nails this character and shows another side to himself with this role and portrayal. He could be called the male Meryl Streep in the way that he so carefully chooses which role to attack and bring to life on the screen. He is Oscar worthy here, for sure. In some scenes, just a glance causes the tear ducts to open. Renee Zellweger was surprisingly good as well. She didn't look too impressive in the trailer but she is in the movie much more than what we figured she would be based on the trailer. She shows much more reserve here than she has since her work in One True Thing and what emerges is a great performance. However, I think hers will be the hardest nomination to get come Oscar time out of all that the movie is predicted to be up for. Then there's Paul Giamatti. He has been ridiculously snubbed by the Academy for the past two years and it will be interesting to see if they do it again. He could very easily WIN for this performance and it would be deserving as well. His chemistry with Crowe was really something to see.

This movie is what Seabiscuit only dreamed of being. The tag line to the movie reads, "When the world was on it's knees, he brought us to our feet." This movie succeeds in living up to that tag line in showing the story of this man and his family in more than one way. First, it shows how it was true during the time of the Depression. But bringing people to their feet like that happens today as well. At least it did today when clapping and cheering broke out numerous times during this film from countless people in the crowd of movie-goers, myself included (the last thirty minutes, especially). You feel like you shouldn't bite into the bait that is Cinderella Man, but it's hard to resist. The cast and crew and everyone involved made it that good.

Grade for Cinderella Man: B+

The Sisterhood Of The Traveling Pants
Directed by Ken Kwapis
Written by Elizabeth Chandler & Delia Ephron
Starring Amber Tamblyn, America Ferrera, Alexis Bledel, Blake Lively, Jenna Boyd
Running Time: 113 Minutes
Rated PG
Warner Bros.
Seen on 06/02/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
Based on Ann Brashares' best-selling novel about a special summer in the lives of four lifelong friends separated for the first time. On a shopping trip, the young women find a pair of thrift-shop jeans that fits each of them perfectly and they decide to use these pants as a way of keeping in touch over the months ahead, each one wearing the jeans for a week to see what luck they bring her before sending them on to the next. Though miles apart, the four friends still experience life, love and loss together in a summer they'll never forget. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I am such a huge Amber Tamblyn (or AmTam as we call her) fan and I will admit that that is one of the biggest reasons why I went to see this. I also wanted to take my sister who has read the books and is a big fan of the series. Overall I was glad that I went.

First thing is first in that this movie is not meant to be rocket science. However, it is hard for a movie like this to not fall into really crappy material. Sure, there are some very big teenage romantic dramedy cliche moments, but in a movie like this, it's hard to ask for perfection. But I have to echo what Richard Roeper said regarding this movie in that it succeeds so much better in depicting this demographic which is so easily crapped on in entertainment and movies. 

It's all because of the cast. 100%. I was shocked by the greatness of America Ferrera. I really want to see Real Women Have Curves now. And I know how good Amber Tamblyn can be (and darn CBS to the hot place for cancelling Joan Of Arcadia) and here she was great, esp. opposite that great little talent named Jenna Boyd, who was pretty impressive for just being 12 years old. Alexis Bledel of GG fame was great too (and the boy alongside her was too for different reasons). The weakest of the cast was Blake Lively, but even she was impressive. These five really brought this movie to life and I love that Roger Ebert stated that here they do what most teenage girl actors only dream of doing. That's so true.

So it wasn't perfect and the cliches knock the grade down and it did drag a little, but in the end it was an enjoyable movie which gives this demographic a great depiction and great voice. I have to make a corny cliche, so I'll say that you should try on the pants and enjoy the ride. Oy, Shawn.

Grade for Sisterhood Of The Traveling Pants: B

Star Wars III: Revenge Of The Sith
Directed by George Lucas
Written by George Lucas
Starring Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson
Running Time: 146 Minutes
Rated PG-13
20th Century Fox
Seen on 05/19/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
The third and final installment in the Star Wars prequel trilogy - the sixth Star Wars movie overall. Anakin Skywalker's turn to the Dark Side of the Force, the continuing Clone Wars and the final fate of the Old Republic should be revealed.(Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
I made it a point to see this movie twice before posting a review on it. Mainly because I knew that after the midnight showing and the headache of the crazed fans and it being so late and all, some enjoyment may be taken away. After the first viewing of the movie, I was willing to say it was good but I still liked The Phantom Menace the best of the newest three. After a second viewing, this is easily the best SW installment since 1983's Return of the Jedi, but that really isn't saying too much.

First what is good. The action. Where the first two movies failed in bringing non-stop class SW action (aside from that Yoda/Dooku fight in AOTC), this one delivers. The first half of the movie is rather slow, save the first twenty minutes. But it's in the last half hour of the movie where the action really comes to the surface and shines.

Now what's bad. Everything else. George Lucas is a great director, but he needs to stick with that and stay away from the writing department. The writing in this movie was pathetic and on par with the corny and cliched dialogue in AOTC. The scenes between Padme and Anakin are painstakingly bad. When Padme spews out that she wishes she was back on Naboo, "Just us. No politics. No war. Just our love," I wanna puke my guts out. And the acting. Ewan McGregor is great here but the highlight of the movie is easily Ian McDiarmid and I don't think he is getting enough praise for this performance. He will on my list of the best at the end of the awards season. He was very good, but the rest of the cast...not so much. When ROBOTS and CGI characters outact someone like Natalie Portman, it's kinda cool yet very sad at the same time when realizing it's the great Nat. And I swear, Hayden Christensen is one of the WORST actors in this movie franchise. Wow. He has been great other places (Shattered Glass and Life as a House), but here he is just awful.

I was giving this a B- initially, but I went down to a C+ because the dialogue here is cringe-worthy and ridiculous. This review is short, but to the point. You will be on the edge of your seat here with great action, but if you are looking for something more, don't go looking here. I was looking for a bit more, maybe wrongfully so. I don't know.

Grade for Star Wars III - Revenge Of The Sith: C+


Crash
Directed by Paul Haggis
Written by Paul Haggis
Starring Sandra Bullock, Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon, Jennifer Esposito, Brendan Fraser, Terrence Howard, Ludacris, Thandie Newton, Ryan Phillippe
Running Time: 100 Minutes
Rated R
Lions Gate Film
Seen on 05/06/05
Review by Shawn Elmore

The Plot...
A Brentwood housewife and her DA husband. A Persian storeowner. Two police detectives, who are also lovers. A black television director and his wife. A Mexican locksmith. Two car-jackers. A rookie cop. A middle-aged Korean couple. They all live in Los Angeles. And, in the next
36 hours, they will all collide. (Plot explanation courtesy of movies.yahoo.com)

My Review...
With school being so hectic and crazy, it's been hard for me to see movies and know when ones I am anticipating are coming out. I saw this was releasing this past weekend and had to see it. When I saw this trailer a couple of months back, I was genuinely impressed with the look of the cast and with the overall feel of the movie.

Going in with pretty high expectations, I was worried. It happens every year. I anticipate a movie and it ends up not being as good as my expectations. So, with this, I just decided to sit back and just take it all in. What I got in the end was a great movie-going experience.

The first thing to talk about is this stellar cast. There is not one bad person in this cast and all of the performances were great, though a few did stand out. MVP here I think is Newton, who in about three scenes really captures this suffering wife's problems to the point that we understand her very well. She has one scene with Dillon in particular that is edge-of-your-seat, nail-bitingly good. Also wonderful was Bullock, who emoted great intensity throughout all of her scenes. Also wonderful was the one with the most screentime in the movie, Ludacris. The rest of the cast was great as well, but there is one small setback to this cast: none of them are in the movie enough to really garner any great awards contention. That's something minor though and this cast is great.

Paul Haggis had his first hand at writing something big with last year's Million Dollar Baby and it did him well when he received an Oscar nomination for the work. Here, he had a much bigger end result to accomplish because it wasn't adapted and it also included such a huge cast, whereas with M$B, the cast was smaller. He does a great job though showing the preconceived notions, everyday happenings, and jumping to conclusions aspect of racism in America. A downgrade occurs because these racist stereotypes were a little too much crammed down our throats in the beginning of the movie. I love movies too where all the characters are involved with each other in some way or form. I loved the last 20 minutes of this movie because we see all of those connections come forth. Haggis did an even better job with this in the directing department. Overall he did a wonderful job.

There are many scenes that will have you on the edge of your seat and there will also be some that will make you feel genuine remorse and some that will fill you with anger, but in the end, Crash succeeds in great movie-going. This is highly recommended entertainment. If not for the cast alone.

Grade for Crash: B

2005 Screened Movies (& Scores)
2046 (C+)
The 40-Year-Old Virgin (B+)
Batman Begins (B)
Bewitched (C)
Breakfast on Pluto (C)
Brokeback Mountain (A)
Broken Flowers (A-)
Cache (C+)
Capote (B)
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (B+)
Cinderella Man (B+)
The Constant Gardener (B)
Crash (B)
The Family Stone (A-)
Good Night, and Good Luck. (A-)
Grizzly Man (B-)
Happy Endings (B+)
A History of Violence (B+)
Hustle & Flow (B-)
Jarhead (B-)
Junebug (A-)
King Kong (B)
March of the Penguins (B)
Match Point (B+)
Me and You and Everyone We Know (D-)
Memoirs of a Geisha (C)
Mr. & Mrs. Smith (C+)
Mrs. Henderson Presents (B+)
Munich (C+)
Mysterious Skin (B)
The New World (B+)
Nine Lives (A-)
Nobody Knows (B)
North Country (B-)
Pride & Prejudice (A-)
The Producers (B+)
Proof (C+)
Rent (A-)
Shopgirl (A-)
The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (B)
The Squid and the Whale (B-)
Star Wars - Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (C+)
Syriana (C+)
Transamerica (B-)
The Upside of Anger (B-)
Walk the Line (B-)
Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (A-)
War of the Worlds (B+)
White Noise (F)
Winter Solstice (C+)


Grading Scale
A+...Masterpiece and practically flawless.
A...Outstanding.
A-...Great.
B+...Really good.
B...Good.
B-...Redeeming qualities, but still just okay.
C+...Alright, but some more reservations.
C...Maybe one or two redeemable qualities.
C-...I kinda want my money back.
D+...I really want my money back.
D...Awful.
D-...Total piece of crap.
F...Boiling hot piece of crap. Absolutely nothing redeemable.