The pieces are now in place. With this weeks release of Captain America: The First Avenger Marvel has officially assembled its Avengers on screen. Yet how do does its final hero stand amongst the ranks of its fellow blockbusters? Captain America is easily the best Marvel Studios film released in recent years, but it may not be enough to dethrone the Studio's spectacular start with Jon Favreau's Iron Man.

A weakling his entire life, Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) wants nothing more to serve his country alongside his best friend Bucky Rogers (Sebastian Stan). With a war waging in Europe, Rogers wants not only to do his part, but ,as a man who has been picked on constantly since birth, to stand up to the world's ultimate bully the Nazi Party. Opportunity presents itself in the form a super serum created by former German scientist Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), who finds Rogers to be the perfect test subject, much to the chagrin of Col. Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones). Rogers, joined by technological genius Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) and the beautiful British agent Peggy Carter (Haley Atwell) finds himself soon part of a sect of the war that he never knew existed.

Captain America as directed by Joe Johnston plays out like a classic adventure film, very much in vein of Raiders of the Lost Ark. The plot contains creative set pieces, snarling Nazi villains, a bombastic heroic score, an often clever style of humor, mystical weapons from god like powers, and moments of godlike heroism. It would not seem strange at all to find Captain America and Indiana Jones fighting side by side against HYDRA agents.

This in many ways is one of the films only faults. Although this sense of adventure often pays off through exciting  action sequences and clever moments throughout, Captain America at times does not execute this design choice as effectively as it should. The opening sequences of the film often feel awkward, as Johnston attempts to ease into the world he has created. While Rogers's spirit is endearing, he at times feels one and almost saint like in his weakling heroism. This disappears as the film progresses, but those awkward moments at the films start are enough to drag the film down ever slightly. The classic sense of adventure also sometimes strays away from fun and into fleeting points of corniness, which isn't helped by the film's heroic and sometimes bombastic score.

Despite this flaw, Captain America excels as blockbuster entertainment and as a film. The plot is fun and for the most part cleverly paced. The action scenes are exciting and surprisingly brutal for a Marvel film. The film even portrays one of the best romances to grace a comic book adaptation since Spider-man 2. You will never find yourself bored. The characters are engaging, the action is exciting, and the humor is surprisingly funny. Michael Bay could learn a lesson or two from Johnston on how to tell a joke in a summer action flick.

However, the real stars of Captain  America are, oddly enough, its actors. Chris Evans is a empathetic and powerful lead. Despite early scene script pratfalls, Evans sells Rogers as an earnest hero at heart. He creates a hero, that while lacking the depth and energy or Robert Downey Jr's Tony Stark, proudly stands amongst Marvel's heroes.

Even then, it is the supporting cast that truly steals the show. Haley Atwell is largely who sells the compelling romance of the film, and also plays a pretty fun WWII era spy. Dominic Cooper creates a Howard Stark that is every bit the father of the Tony we have come to love. Hugo Weaving plays the villainous Red Skull with brilliant Nazi evil, making a villain that could have easily done battle with a certain archaeologist. Sebastian Stan is also notable as Roger's childhood sidekick. Yet, the real scene stealer is Tommy Lee Jones's Col. Phillips. Jones has an undeniable screen presence and delivers the majority of the films humor with unbreakable deadpan.

If the script had been a bit tighter in its portrayal of the environment and the growth of Rogers as the title character, The First Avenger could have easily become the best. However as it stands now, Captain America stands as a great entry into the Marvel mythos.

Score: B+

There are few franchises throughout history that have had as large a cultural impact as Harry Potter. It has grabbed a generation of readers and viewers under its magical grasp and has created a fanbase as loyal and fanatical as any other. And this week the final official installment in the Harry Potter series was released. On Friday July 15 the final film adaptation of the seventh and ultimate Harry Potter books Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Luckily, for fans it is as every bit as good as they hoped.

With the loss of Dobby the elf behind them, Harry, Hermione, and Ron attempt to track down the final Horcruxes, mystical pieces of the dark lord Voldemort's soul. However, this search them leads them to familiar grounds and with a now wounded Voldemort on their trail, the battle becomes as deadly as ever.

Director David Yates and screenwriter Steve Kloves tackle the monumental job of bringing the screen adaptations of JK Rowling's novels to a close with skill and grace. Both are at the top of their game, and together produce a film that is as slick and stunning visually as it is emotional.

David Yates, who has directed every Potter film since the fifth installment Order of the Phoenix, has an incredible visual eye. Again, the latest Potter film like the two before it features breathtaking cinematography and visual design. The opening shot of a Hogwarts held captive is breathtakingly beautiful, and this carries on for the remainder of the film.

Kloves also adapts the incredibly dense seventh novel with skill. It never feels unnecessarily weighty, and the drama and tension are captured here perhaps better than in the novel. It is truly in the quiet moments that the two really do succeed.

The two together only fail when it comes to perfecting the desired emotional response from the audience. As I sat amongst and watched hardcore Potter fans tear up at the loss of their favorite characters or during the closing credits, I felt lost. I was emotionally affected sure. I had chills down my spine, and my eyes were beginning to water. However, I did not feel the emotional punch that I did for the resolution to the Lord of the Rings films or even the final Toy Story installment. This in no way means that the film's handling of emotion is bad. On the contrary, it is spectacular for a summer blockbuster, especially an adaptation of a novel. It just does not reach the level it could have.

The acting, however, is at the top of its game. With a decade of experience behind them Daniel Radcliffe (Harry), Rupert Grint (Ron), and Emma Watson (Hermione) have matured into powerful actors with an undeniable chemistry. Radcliffe in particular delivers an incredibly powerful performance, which may be the best of his career. Ralph Fiennes also steals the scene as Lord Voldemort, finally capturing the essence of the role after struggling in previous installments. The true star is Alan Rickman as Professor Severus Snape, who single handily carries the film through its most emotional and powerful moment.

As mentioned before, The Deathly Hallows Part 2 is a visual wonder. Not only through its incredible cinematography, but in its handling of action and special effects. The appearance of a dragon during the films opening action sequence is stunning and breathtakingly realistic. Magic is implemented more creatively and seamlessly than ever before. The attack on Hogwarts school is a visual marvel. Spells shoot back in forth like super powered bullets. Giants battle sentient statues to the death. And Harry and his nemesis tumble through the sky in a climactic duel to the death.

Although his score does not match the magical beauty brought by John Williams's take on the earlier films, Alexandre Desplat delivers a musical backdrop to the Deathly Hallows that is fittingly haunting and memorable.

Although it does not reach its highest potential, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 succeeds beautifully at bringing a magical and emotional closure to a beloved series. With a capper like this, it is doubtful that we will see the last of Potter for a long long time.

Score: A

Okay, so I'm aware we had one of these the other day. However, with the release of the final Harry Potter film this week studios have scrambled to preview their biggest upcoming attractions. We've got a wide range of films coming up so let's get started.


1. Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows
----------------------------------------------------


Robert Downey Jr.'s first Sherlock Holmes film was a financial success but in many ways controversial amongst critics and fans of the original series. The decision to make the series more action oriented indeed made it more pedestrian, but at the same time lost some of the source materials wit. The same seems to apply here, except elevated to an even higher degree. Jude Law and Downey Jr. continue to provide standout performances, but they lack the freshness of seeing them for the first time. Plus, seeing Sherlock Holmes in a dress was not on my bucket list.

Score: -B

2. Hugo
-------------------------------------------


Hugo based on the critically acclaimed illustrated novel by Brian Selznick originally caught my attention when it was anounced that Martin Scorsese would direct. However, this new trailer has done nothing but harm my interest for the film. While the source material told an original and spellbinding mystery, this trailer barely hints at it and instead focuses too much on slapstick pratfalls. Not too mention that it is pared with 30 Seconds to Mars's song "Kings and Queens" which has become the go to soundtrack peice for uplifting family films. This trailer is just incredibly bland. There are hints of promise scattered within cover of medicority, but my attention is lost.

Score: C

3. Arthur Christmas
---------------------------------------------


Another trailer that premiered with Harry Potter, this animated holidy comedy first appears promising with Morgan Freeman taking a jab at his own previous work in nature film narrating. Than we descend into one of the most frustrating and long whinded gags I have ever seen in a film trailer. The animation is nice, but the entire trailer relies on a singular joke that goes and goes and goes. The sad thing is, it wasn't even funny to begin with. Although the film stars James McAvoy of X-men fame, after this trailer I have zero to no desire to see this.

Score: D

4. John Carter
---------------------------------------------

John Carter has slowly become one of my most anticipated films for next year. Not only is it a science fiction epic based on the classic books by Edgar Rice Burroughs (who also appears to be a character in the film), but its work is actually being overseen by Pixar. As for the trailer, it is good but not great. While the design for the film is stunning and inspired, we also are treated to a Mars that looks a little too much like the American West. The story also appears to be a bit on the familiar side. Despite this, my interest is piqued and I look forward to see where Disney takes this adaptation.

Score: B

6. The Thing
------------------------------------------


Although this didn't air in front of Harry Potter, the trailer for the remake/prequel to the classic John Carpenter film, The Thing, also premiered this week. While the trailer is exciting and looks to atleast have the potential to be as frightening as the original, I can't help but thinking I've seen this before. The sad thing is that because the film acts as a prequel it has to fit into the previous films canon. We already know what happens to that Norwegian snow base. Wouldn't that take away the scare factor? Sadly, this trailer doesn't do much to convince me otherwise despite the interesting visuals and creepy backdrop.

Score: -B

7. The Dark Knight Rises
--------------------------------

The most anticipated trailer of the week, heck probably the year, and I'm not allowed to show you it. If you want to see the sneak peak of the upcoming Batman sequel you just have to buy a ticket to see the newest Harry Potter film (you should probably do that anyway).

As for the quality of the trailer? Its a teaser, so you can't expect much. We get out first glimpse at Bane, Liam Neeson does some voice overs, and Christian Bale stalks by in his costume. Its not much, but it's affective. Not too mention that creepy chanting from the viral videos is still around.

Score: B+

Its that time again. Time for me to go through the latest movie trailers, and well review them.

Yes, one of these was posted earlier, but hey what you gonna do about it. Gotta get this out of the way before that thing called Comic Con brings in a whole new slew of trailers.

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 Trailer
------------------------------------------------------


Now, I'm aware we will be seeing the actual product in a few days. However, one cannot deny that this trailer brims of marketing goodness. Even for non fans of the franchise, this preview at the film series's final installment. Special effects, spoilers, and a fantastic score give any viewer chills.

Score: A

2. Brave
-------------------------------


Here we have Disney Pixar's Brave. It may be the fact that fans of the stellar animation studio are looking for hope following this year's travesty, Cars 2, but the trailer for Brave works. The animation is stunning, and the glimpse we get at the world Pixar creates is tantalizing. Even more exciting is the idea that Pixar is tackling a Brothers Grimm style fairy tale. That has to be exciting to you.

Score: -A

3. Rise of the Planet of the Apes
--------------------------------------


Ridiculous title aside, this trailer establishes something that the entire marketing campaign for this prequel has been, a deep haunting atmosphere. Caesar, rendered through stunning technology, has already become the emotional focal point for the film. If the film is as strong as these trailers make it seem, than we may have the strongest Planet of the Apes film since the original. Though it still doesn't make sense how about fifty apes can take overall of Los Angeles...

Score: -A

4. Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol
----------------------------------------


Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol seems to be more of the same for the Tom Cruise action franchise. However, that is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to this franchise that is not necessarily a bad thing. There are hints at some interesting action set pieces, and a plot that strays slightly from the norm. I'm still not completely sold, though.

Score: B


5. Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1
------------------------------------


The reason why this film has been split in half is still a mystery to many. Despite the fan service, this trailer really does nothing. Sure, they get married. What else happens? This trailer isn't gonna help. There's alot of vampire sex, and some boy fighting. Nothing else.

Score: D+

6. The Adventures of Tintin
---------------------------------


Although its animations style requires some adjusting, there's little doubt that Tintin is a visual marvel. It is also to see a slightly edgy animated adventure aimed at the all ages demographic. With the promising names of Peter Jackson, Steven Spielberg, and Edgar Wright it's pretty easy to get excited.

Score: B+

When Disney released Tron over twenty years ago it created a cult phenomena. Although the digitally created video game adventure was not a huge hit with critics or the box office, a legion of die hard fans kept the fuel for the film alive for decades. Talks of a sequel to the classic have been in talks for years, and yesterday Disney unveiled the sequel, Tron: Legacy, to the world. With a new mythology, hero, and bigger and flashier special effects, the question was whether this sequel would capture the spirit of the original. In many ways, both good and bad it does.

Tron Legacy picks up twenty years after the ending of the original film. Tron's protagonist Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) after building his corporate empire to new heights disappears into the night, leaving behind his son Sam (Garret Hedlund) in the process. Years go by and Sam is left alone to fend for himself and the company. However, one night Sam is informed that his father may in fact be alive, trapped inside the digital world he created more then twenty years before. Sam is soon catapulted into a world of electronic chaos as he is forced to find his father and save both realities.

Tron Legacy is almost dutifully faithful sequel to its cult favorite predecessor. In fact, it suffers from some of its same flaws.

The majority of what is wrong with Tron Legacy lies in the script by Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz. While high in concept and featuring several story points that are actually rather intriguing, the writing is ultimately the film's downfall. The character's, despite having some strong background work, do not grow as the film progresses. The general plot also covers all too familiar ground. However, the writing's real downfall comes from its terrible dialogue. Hitting every possible cliche, character's spout out lines that become laughable. The only exchange that ever really hits home surrounds a rather genuine dinner sequence between Sam and his father. In fact its the character high point of the film.

The actor's for the most part do their best with the script they are given. Garret Hedlund is only competent at playing the film's protagonist, but yet again he is given little room to work. Olivia Wilde fairs much better as the mysterious and sexy Quorra. In an incredibly artificial world, Wilde feels oddly genuine. Jeff Bridges also performs well as both Sam's father and the villain CLU. However, the true scene stealer of the entire film comes from the short appearance of Michael Sheen's flamboyant club owner Castor. His digital insanity becomes oddly captivating, and his surrealism hits a mark that the rest of the cast never manages to.

The real star of this film are the visuals. Like its predecessor, Tron Legacy's incredible art design and special effects are eye popping throughout the course of the film. Bolstered by above par 3D effects, director Joseph Kosinski wows with creative and fun visual set peices. From disc duels to light bike battles, Tron delivers on the action and spectacle that its video game premise promises. A less obvious achievement is the digital deaging of actor Jeff Bridges for his role as CLU. Modeled after the 1980's Bridges, CLU is incredibly convincing throughout the course of the film. There are few moments where the true nature of the deaging process becomes apparent, but these are fleeting and do not take away from the effect.

Another standout is Daft Punk's score. Mixing electronic dance beats and orchestral cues the French techno duo create an audio treat that complement the visuals in almost perfect fashion. In many ways, Tron functions better as a music video/light show then it does as a film.

Ultimately, despite featuring a decidedly subpar script, Tron Legacy is a fun and faithful adaptation of the original classic. Although sure to be as hit or miss as its predecessor, the film does have its audience. It's loud, pretty, and at moments a whole lot of fun. Just remember to plug your ears whenever a character opens their mouth.

Score: -B

Only several times in a decade does a film like Skyline come about. A film that manages to fail so tremendously that it some how manages to become an entertainment success. Like such atrocities as The Room or the best of the Syfy Channel, Skyline is so monumentally awful that it becomes a memorable experience.

The film follows Elaine (Scottie Thompson) and her boyfriend Jarrod (also known as J-rock)(Eric Balfour) on a trip to LA to visit their successful friend effects guru friend Terry( T-money), played by Donald Faison. While partying up and experiencing drama typical to young hipsters, the group becomes intertwined in a planetary wide alien invasion.

The film's premise attempts to follow along the same lines as Cloverfield, following catastrophic events through the eyes of ordinary people. Unfortunately for Skyline, this has been executed much better dozens of times before it.

Even outside of the film's unoriginal premise the script is a muddled mess. The character's are annoyingly one dimensional and behave like imbeciles through their entire time on screen. In fact, a common pass time for J-rock and T-money seems to be watching homosexual couples have sex through a telescope. Dialogue is flat and sometimes insultingly stereotypical. The plot also moves about at a sporadic and uneven pace, and reaches moments of horrendous tedium.

Little more can be said about the acting. Every character in the film comes off as incredibly bland and uninspired. Whether this can be blamed on the capabilities of the actors is unknown, but there is nary a sympathetic actor to be found in Skyline.

There are, however, glimpses of a better film within Skyline. The special effects are impressive and often believable, and the design work on the various alien creatures in the film is superb. There are even several standout action sequences, which are unfortunately harmed by the film's budget constraints and its unwanted attention on its main cast. There even seems to be some intelligence poking out through various portions in the script. The motives for the alien race featured in the film are left ambiguous and the few glimpses we are given are, while often humorous, sometimes fairly interesting.


Where Skyline does succeed is through its unintentional humor. Whether through its cliched and plot hole ridden script, the banal and annoying characters, or moments of sheer confusion, Skyline, with the right crowd, is a comedic tour de force. In fact in many ways, the film is funnier than most of the comedies we have seen this year.

Is Skyline one of the worst films of the year? Of course, but it is also a damn good time. While seeing the film at a full price screening is not recommended, a group viewing is sure to guarantee a good time had by all.


Score: D

"Due Date" starring Robert Downey Jr. and Zach Galifianakis is yet another "get him to the church on time" movie in the current string of such movies, like "The Hangover" and "Get Him to The Greek". The slight change of plot afforded by the birth of Peter Highman (Downey's character)'s daughter wasn't large enough to distract from this. There are several crude jokes made, including but not limited to a self-stimulating dog (yes, they do show it all). The interaction between Downey and Galifianakis is interesting, and there is a specially fun scene involving the Mexican Border Police. In a slightly predictable way, the characters become friends, learn something on their journey, and stay in touch once the ordeal is over. One particularly shining bit is the soundtrack, with some recognizable and fitting tunes. The movie does try hard to be different, but it fell short of that when the storyline was laid out.

Personal rating: C+

When used to describe films, critics often use the term layered to describe the complexity of the plot and design. Never before has this description been more literal then in Christopher Nolan's intelligent, high octane, heist epic Incpetion.

To accurately describe the plot of Inception would require more space then this review allows. The plot follows Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), who is a world renowned extractor a man who can break into peoples minds and subconcious to steal ideas. After years of studying and building within the human mind, Cobb is accused of a crime he did not commit and is left to a life on the run. However, when a Japanese business man (Ken Watanabe) offers him a chance to clear his name Cobb must assemble a team of specialists ( Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Paige, Tom Hardy, and Dileep Rao) to undertake a task that tries the depths of his abilities, and his grasp with reality.

The complexity of Inception is sure to lose some of its audience in the process of its storytelling. Writer and director Christopher Nolan strengthens his formula for intelligent and exciting plotting. However, there are moments of design and placing within the script that feel unneeded and out of place when put into context. While this adds to the virtual puzzle that is Inception, it creates an unneeded confusion at the of the film. The opposite is also true. Numerous hints and clues are dropped throughout the course of the film that hint towards the larger scale of the plot. While some characters have little depth to them, Inception does occasionally hit a deep emotional core that glues your attention to the screen. The film really shines when the mechanics of Nolan's dreamscape are explained, often through brilliant visual design. The creativity and depth to the world created within Inception is awe inspiring and intriguing.

Outside of Nolan's script, Inception has a fantastic visual design. The dreamscape crafted throughout the course of the plot is repeatedly use to full effect. The cinematography is dazzling and captures the essence of the world created in Nolan's script. There are fantastic special effects sequences scattered creatively and effectivly through the plot. Most of all, Inception's visual style is best used during the fantastic high octane action sequences.

The acting is phenomenal across the board. Leonardo DiCaprio is riveting as Cobb and plays both an effective teacher and torchered sole. Other standouts are Joseph Gordon Levitt as Arthur, Ellen Paige as Cobb's new architect Ariadne, and Cilian Murphy as the victim of the mental heist.

Another standout is Hans Zimmer bombastic and epic score. Adding to scenes of nail biting tension, Zimmer's score places his cues with skill. However, there are portions where the loud and powerful themes of Inception feel out of place and drown out essential peices of dialogue. In a film whose script is already extremly complex, any moment of lost dialogue is a handicap.

Despite its minimal flaws, Inception balances its many aspects with skill and craft. Filled with great acting performances, a layered and creative script, outstanding visual design, and Nolan's skilled direction Inception is sure to be one of the best films of the year.

Score: A+

When it comes to science fiction horror films, the 80’s was a virtual paradise. Filled with such cult classics as Aliens and of course, Predator, these films have spawned numerous spin offs and have become pop cultural icons. While Alien continued onwards into the 90’s, Predator would stay an 80’s creature. That is until Robert Rodriguez (Grindhouse, Spy Kids) greenlit this year’s sequel to the 80’s film. While Predators is a flawed endeavor, Rodriguez’s production is a faithful and fun edition to the franchise.

Predators follows a mostly unnamed group of individuals ranging from various nefarious global organizations (black ops, Spetsnaz, Mexican drug cartel, Yakuza, FBI’s Most Wanted) as they suddenly awake in a hazardous jungle. As it becomes dangerously clear that this is no ordinary rain forest, the unlike team must group together to defend themselves against a group of deadly calculating enemies.

In many ways Predators is faithful to the original Predator film. It manages to capture much of the spirit, tension, and character that made the original the cult classic that it is. However, despite its faithful representation of both the title character and the franchise Predators is dragged down by a mediocre and clichéd script and numerous poor directorial decisions.

The most striking and surprising aspect to Predators is how well the main cast is able to pull of their relatively meager character roles. Adrien Brody’s nose, I mean, Adrien Brody (The Pianist, King Kong), who stars as the mercenary Royce, plays his role with surprising energy and vigor, and the same can be said for the rest of the cast. While the script does not allow for well developed arcs or dialogue, each actor within the film manages to at least steer away from devolving into pure camp. Actors Laurence Fishburn (Stargate SG-1) and Alice Braga (I Am Legend) are among the stars of the film, the real standout is Topher Grace (Spider-man 3) who is a real scene stealer as the deceptive Edwin.

The action scenes in Predators are also exhilarating. Whether it’s the team trying to maneuver their way through a set of traps, fighting off alien hunting dogs, or fighting toe to toe with the Predators themselves the action is gritty, exciting, and well choreographed. However, these even feel bogged down by sometimes less than spectacular special effects and laughably clichéd directorial decisions.

In the end it is Predators poor script that holds the film down. While it’s fun and respectful to the original material, Predators is endlessly clichéd and features bland and uninteresting dialogue. While most of this saved by the outstanding cast and action sequences, there are several moments where the tired moments of the story shine through and it really puts a damper on the film as a whole.

However, despite it’s flaws Preadators really is a fun summer film. It has moments of clever humor, great acting, and plenty of thrills, even if you have to suffer through moments of pure cheese and banality.

Score: -B

There must have been a reason for Nick to bring a girl onto the AC team, and now, I am serving my purpose.

Robin Hood is a timeless classic that is beloved by countless generations of would be adventurers and chasers of freedom. However, this is quiet different from Ridley Scott's adaptation or more bastardization of the arrow shooting legend. Robin Hood is a mess in every sense of the word. Never quiet catching the charm or the feel of the original story, it instead devolves into a poorly written, boring, cliched, and ridiculous action film.


Robin Hood story follows Robin Longstride (Russel Crowe)an archer in the army of King Richard during the early 11th century. Although a trickster, Robin is an honorable and well liked man, who quickly befriends the brutish John (Kevin Durand). Back in the lands of England, the young prince John (Oscar Isaac) plans to usurp his brother as king. Little does he know that his close friend Sir Godfrey (Mark Strong) has betrayed the crown in favor of an oncoming French invasion. When Richard is killed on crusade, Robin is forced to flee the army, and John is put on throne. John's increased tyranny and oppression creates internal unrest and eventually drives Robin into the small village of Nottingham and Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett).


For a main character that is lauded for his accuracy with a bow and arrow, Robin Hood misses the mark in so many ways. Robin Hood is not only disturbingly lacking in heart, and any true similarities to the original legend, it is a an awful mess of a film.


Robin Hood tries hard to tell a version of the classic character that the audience has yet to see. It depicts Robin as a faith inspiring warrior, who bands together an entire nation to fight against tyranny. The result is something that is so far removed from the original legend that it could hardly be considered an adaptation. There is only one scene in the entire film where Robin steals from the rich to benefit a starving village, and even it is a poorly executed endeavor.


However, it is not only the disrespect for the original myth that makes Robin Hood such a poor film. If executed well,it could have pulled off this change in direction. Yet, Robin Hood is an incredibly boring movie. The film drags its feet for a good two hours with little advancement in plot or character. Scott attempts to alleviate this with sporadic action sequences, but even these fail to capture our attention. Despite some early sequences involving Robin and his band of adventurers, the action scenes are horribly shot and chaotic. Most scenes are incomprehensible due to poor editing and camera work, and the half you can see is uninspired.


Even worse are the laughably bad moments that litter the entire film. There are numerous sequences where the camera will randomly cut to the gasping death throws of a dying soldier. Obviously done as an attempt to add a level of intensity to the battle sequences, these scenes instead are so poorly placed and annoying that they become humorous. Later, Robin has a bizarre almost Jedi like vision of his past. There are even moments where the dialogue is laughably similar to the Monty Python films. Robin Hood is even worse when it makes passes at comedy. While some jokes involving Robin's companions may draw a chuckle, other attempts at humor are so out of place that they seem utterly asinine when compared to the overall somber tone of the film.


The acting is the only aspect of the film that is surprisingly even throughout. The entire cast is competent in their roles, but none really shine. They play their roles well, yet there are no memorable performances. Crowe plays a somber and serious Robin Hood, that lacks the charm and wit of the character of past incarnations. However, it is not the actors fault for the slew of poor decisions that mire this movie.


Another standout is Marc Streitenfeld's score. Combining Celtic and classical musical themes, Streitenfeld injects much needed heart and energy into this otherwise abysmal movie. Despite how good the score may be, it is utterly forgettable, and I doubt I will remember any of the themes by tomorrow morning.


Robin Hood is an overly serious, poorly conceived, cliched, and disrespectful film that will be happily forgotten, unlike the character that it tries so desperately to adapt.


Score: D+

(Apologies. I saw this film opening day, but have been unable to post a review until now.)

Arguably the most anticipated film of the summer has landed, Iron Man 2 hit theaters last Friday, and has already had one of the largest openings for a film ever. Does it live up to the hype?

Opening six months after the first film, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr. )is now settling into his role as the metallic crusader Iron Man. He has more then doubled his stardom and lowered his image at the same time. Stark is now seen as a protector of people as well as the playboy industrialist that characterizes him. Stark soon draws the attention of the US government who demand that he hand over the Iron Man suit to the military. Joining the side of the government is rival weapons manufacturer Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), who is secretly creating his own robotic weaponry. Luckily, Stark has the help of Air Force Captain Rhodey Rhodes( Don Cheadle) and his new CEO Pepper Potts ((Gwyneth Paltrow). Yet things spiral out of control when an enemy from Stark's past, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) rises to challenge the now unstable hero.

Iron Man 2 is a perfect example of a sequel that just cannot quite find its footing. While it excels on many levels, it sputters along at things that it should be accustomed to.

The story itself is crowded, but for the most part well executed. Unlike comic book films such as Spider-man 3, Iron Man 2 manages to juggle numerous plots without feeling disjointed. Despite the wide range of plot aspects and numerous villains, director Jon Favreau manages to keep all the elements connected and relevant. The real problem is in a lack of pacing. Iron Man 2 is fun and exciting for the first third, boring and disjointed in the second, and finally returns to from in the final act. Despite this the ending feels hackneyed and forced, leaving numerous plot points with poor resolution.

The acting in Iron Man 2 is phenomenal throughout. There is hardly a poor performance in the entire cast. Downey Jr. and Rockwell work as perfect counters, playing each others weaknesses and strengths. The two have great chemistry and deliver some of the films best laughs. Paltrow is just as strong as in the previous film, but feels overshadowed by the explosions and effects. Cheadle plays the role of Rhodes well, but struggles with some of the more humorous scenes. Rourke also feels like his character has fallen by the wayside when compared with other plots, but manages to add a great level of menace and evil. However, these are minor complaints in an otherwise spotless cast of actors.

One area that has improved from the first film is the level of action. Many viewers and critics (myself included), felt that Iron Man truly suffered when trying to show more intense action sequences. The sequel improves on almost every level. Despite a rather disappointing early scene on a race track, Iron Man 2 uses its sense of humor and spectacular special effects to create exciting and creative action set pieces. The final twenty minutes of the film are so well crafted and choreographed that it almost makes up for the numerous narrative short comings in the films middle act.

However, where Iron Man 2 truly fails is in delivering that spark that sets it apart from the numerous other blockbusters and comic book films being released these days. While it certainly a very good comic book film, it lacks the shine of the original. Neither does it have the gritty realism of the newer Batman movies, or the romantic charm of the first two Spider-man films. The first Iron Man excelled of its political commentary, great acting, emotional story, and charming humor. It even was listed by the American Film Institute as one of the top ten films of 2008. However, its sequel just cannot seem to live up to that. In the end, Iron Man 2 is simply a very good summer movie.

Score: B+

Does Kick Ass kick ass? Or does it just sort of drop one of those wimpy little kicks at your shin? The answer is somewhere in between, but a little closer to the ass kicking one.


Based on the critically acclaimed comic series by Mark Millar, Kick Ass tells the story of Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson), a lonely geek, who asks the question that defines the film: "Why don't people try to be superheroes?" With good intentions and fanboy dreams of success, Dave buys a wetsuit and pair of batons and becomes the masked vigilante, Kick Ass. After initial attempts and failures, Kick Ass becomes an Internet star, and inspires superheroes across the planet. Dave soon finds that he's not alone in the superhero business. Its not long before he encounters the mysterious Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and Hit Girl(Chloe Grace Moretz). However, their acts of heroism and violence soon attract the attention of some rather dangerous people including crime boss Frank D'Amico(Mark Strong) and his son (Christopher Mintz-Plasse). Kick Ass soon finds himself in the midst of gangwar, and way over his head.


Kick Ass is a strange little film. It truly excels in some areas, but finds itself floundering in others, which is strangely like the novel its based on. Kick Ass gets so many things right, but really misses the mark on others.


The acting in Kick Ass is superb throughout. There is hardly a bad performance in the entire cast. Even some of the extras are standouts. Johnson is a capable and likable hero, despite his obvious flaws. Mintz-Plasse is perfectly awkward and uncomfortable as D'Amico's son and feels oddly genuine, something that the comic character never really achieved. However, every performance in the film is eclipsed by the duo of Cage and Moretz. The chemistry between these actors is perfect and is many ways the highlight of the film. Cage is the best he's been in years, and plays a truly demented father that can be considered almost as villainous as the crime lords he fights. The real star of the entire film though is Moretz as Hit Girl. Moretz commands attention and provides for most of the films laughs as the bad mouthed and overly violent preteen vigilante.


Kick Ass really excels when showing its frantic and over the top action sequences. Whether its the almost embarrassing fights between Kick Ass and gang leaders or the over the top badass violence of Hit Girl or Big Daddy, the film never fails to convey the necessary emotion. Most of all the action scenes are fun. They never drag, and contrary to some other reviews, are not overly violent. The film version of Kick Ass succeeds where the novel did not. Director Matthew Vaughn manages to convey the necessary level of violence and action of the comic without feeling like your being bludgeoned over the head by it. Millar's comic action, though exciting and gory, grew tiresome and even sloppy. Vaughn's never does so. Even in the final act where the action is played as much for laughs as for plot, Vaughn never fails to deliver.


Vaughn also never fails to tell a joke. The film is filled with laughs from beginning to end. Jokes are funny, but most importantly well delivered. They do not feel forced or tired, but rather feel incredibly natural. Even when the tone of the film takes a rather annoying turn in the second half, the humor stays consistent.


The real problem in Kick Ass is the oddly uneven script. What many do not realize is that the film version and the graphic novel were actually a joint venture, and were made simultaneously to one another. Despite this, Kick Ass takes several liberties in adapting Millar's tale to the big screen. Some major plot elements are changed, mostly to make the films plot more cohesive and cinematic. There are some changes made to the backstories of the characters that actually work better in the film than in the comic. We also get further exposition on Mintz-Plasse's character . The real problems come when addressing some of the satire and parody presented in the original comic. The original Kick Ass graphic novel told a consistent, if not always sucessful, satire of superhero cliche. The film starts out with this in mind, but eventually devolves into a standard superhero film. Despite this change in tone, the film still remains fun and entertaining, but it feels as if the writers lost the goal they were shooting for in the earlier portions of the film. However, most disappointingly Kick Ass actually falls for some of the cliches it is parodying. One of the things I liked about the original graphic novel was the realistic and pessimistic approach given to the books love interest. The film takes a completely different route, and it feels off kilter with the rest of the story. While the love story actually seems to work, it just feels out of place with the goal of the story. There is also a rather cliched scene at the end that is incredibly over the top and poorly executed. Things also wrap up a little too nicely at the end, something the novel avoided.


Overall, Kick Ass is an enjoyable and entertaining dark super hero comedy. While flawed and frustrating at times, it still succeeds in creating an above average film. While it may not define the superhero genre for years to come, it will certainly remain as one of the better films that have been churned out in recent years.


(Note: In the end, I am giving this film the same score I gave the novel. Despite this when comparing the two, I prefer the film. )


Score: B+

Clash of the Titans’s catch phrase is “Damn The Gods”, however a more accurate one would be “Damn This Movie”. The film is a boring mess that is anything but godly.


Clash of the Titans follows Perseus (Sam Worthington), a boy who was found at sea by a modest fisherman. Perseus turns out to be the son of Zeus (Liam Neeson), and his adoptive family is killed by the vengeful god Hades (Ralph Fiennes) in a battle between the village Argus and the gods. Through a series of events Perseus is sent on a quest by the ungrateful natives to defeat Hades’ gigantic beast, the Kraken.


The film begins well enough with a rather inspired retelling of the origins of Greek mythology through stars and constellations shaped like the Greek gods of old. It’s an interesting and rarely used story technique and it is visually striking in this film. However, after this sequence it becomes painfully obvious that further innovation or creativity will be hard to find in this film.


The acting is wooden and uninteresting. Sam Worthington proves that his acting technique is not to be understated, but just to be flat and uninteresting. Never before have I met a more uninteresting main character. Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes command attention when on screen, and their acting jobs are the only true standouts in the film. The rest of the cast is made up of relative no name actors, and their characters are about as noticeable as they are. The only characters in this film outside of the gods and monsters that are remotely interesting die before we can get to know them. It’s ironic that Perseus gives a speech midway through the film that hails the remaining cast members as noble and heroic men, however he never calls them by name. We don’t know their names either.


The special effects range from being adequate and interesting to subpar, and this hinders a film that is filled with monsters and magic. The only true special effects sequence that was interesting to me was the Scorpion battle which happens in the first third of the film. This sequence is fun and action packed and is a painful reminder of what this film could have been. The creature designs are also creative and fun to watch, but they never do much on screen. Medusa, The Fates, and the wooden Arab creatures (yes I don’t know their actual name) were all creatively designed but for the most part don’t do much for the film. The Kraken however is the most disappointing aspect of the film. Hyped up since the very first lines of the movie, The Kraken makes its final appearance in the final moments of the film. However, it is on screen for little more than five minutes, and four and a half of those are it rising out of the water.


The film is riddled with laughably bad moments, and you’ll find the majority of fun you will have with this mess of a picture is at the films expense. However, it does make one fun reference to the original film that will make some fans happy.


Score: D+

How To Train Your Dragon maybe among the best animated films I’ve seen in the last few years. Easily outranking numerous other Dreamworks films such as Monsters Vs Aliens, and the two Shrek sequels, How To Train Your Dragon is an animated comedy that is filled with wit and spectacle. However, it is not a perfect film and struggles from several minor flaws that prevent me from giving it a higher rating.


The film follows Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) a hapless scrawny Viking, who lives in a village where the only occupation is dragon killing. Hiccup is a screw up inventor, only venturing outside to make mistakes that put others in danger. To make things worse his father Stoick (Gerad Butler) is the village leader, who forces Hiccup to take part in the village academy for dragon killing. Hiccup’s only success is shooting down the elusive Night Fury, a supersonic dragon that strikes in the dead of night. However when Hiccup attempts to kill the downed reptile, he panics and instead lets the dragon loose. Over the time this act of mercy, and Hiccup’s continued fascination with the wounded creature lead to a partnership through which the movie derives its title.


The real star for this film is the beautiful animation and 3D effects. The dragon themselves are creatively designed and are beautiful to watch on screen. There is also impressive detail added to the human characters. This may be a bizarre comment, but never before have I seen hair rendered better then in this film. However, the film really excels when Hiccup and his dragon, Toothless, take flight. The expert animation, editing, and 3D effects create beautiful and breathtaking sequences that are unparalleled in scope. Never before has a sequence of this type aroused such an emotional response in me.


Also of note is John Powell’s beautiful score, which adds to the amazing air sequences. Combining contemporary orchestral music with traditional Vikinig-esque sounds, Powell’s score is beautiful and breathtaking. It is simply a wonder to listen to, and it supplements the animation and actions to a perfect degree.


The story itself is familiar, but well executed. It strikes with a creative heart that is unfortunately missing from so many other animated films these days. The dragon, Toothless, is a scene stealer, and it is hard not to love the creature. It is also expertly voice acted, and Gerad Butler is a standout. However, the film struggles with falling into the occasional cliché, and is riddled with moments of cringe-worthy dialogue. The laughs are also a hit or miss. Some moments you’ll be chuckling heartily and others you will just shake your head at the films attempts at humor.


Despite this How to Train Your Dragon is a well-executed endeavor, and is one that is filled with heart and spectacle. Like Avatar, How to Train Your Dragon is a film that must be seen in a 3D theater in order to fully appreciate the experience. How to Train Your Dragon is a great, if slightly flawed film, that is sure to enthrall audiences of all ages.


Score: -A

Eh. Wasn't that good.



As a fan of the original series, I have to say that the changes that were made were rather irksome. While I normally yell at Harry Potter fans and the like for their whining for changes to the source material, the alterations here seemed irreverent and annoying. The source material was annoyingly disregarded to make things more cinematic and simpler for an audience that the director appears to think is far less intelligent then they truly are.



The first third half of the film feels so rushed and cluttered, that it feels like a mess. It's little fun, and an overall mess of filmmaking. The characters don't shine, and many major points in the book are disregarded and not for the better. The plot ideas although not essential were needed to help streamline the plot, and added to alot of the charcter story.



The second act was by far the most entertaining. Although it two took its liberties from the main plot, it plays like a fun mythological road trip, which is actually a ton of fun to watch. One sequence in Las Vegas was actually very funny, and a joy to watch.



Unfortunatley the third act falls into the same trap as the first, when all the random ideas from the first forty five minutes come crashing together in a colossal train wreck, thats a mess, and only occasionally fun.


While no Harry Potter, it is deffinetly no Eragon either. Despite its many flaws The Lightning Theif is still a fairly enjoyable film. The special effects are fairly well done, disregarding the awful Minotaur sequence. The acting isn't as bad as it could've been, and there are many good laughs throughout.


Score: C+

James Cameron has been hailed as the king of the world when it comes to filmmaking. With films like Terminator, Titanic, and Aliens under his built, he has become something of a legend. However, he took a twelve year break to create the gigantic science fiction epic known as Avatar.

Praised as a revolution to filmmaking Avatar, has been coined everything from the next Star Wars to a colossal flop? Where does the film fall, and are its special effects really so spectacular?

Avatar follows the story of a paraplegic marine, named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), who is sent to the planet Pandora after his scientist brother is murdered. Jake Sully is drafted into the Avatar program, a scientific initiative which has genetically created alien-human hybrid bodies through which the characters would live vicariously. Jake is met with a wide host of characters in the human encampment stationed in Pandora. On one side is the group of corporate heavy weights such as Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribsi) and the extremist military commander Colonel Quatritch (Stephen Lang), the other is the scientific program lead by the botanist Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) and nerdy scientist Norm Spellman (Joel Moore). As Jake progresses through the new world he is met with new beauty in the biology of the world and the natives, particularly the princess Neytiri (Zoe Saldana). As Jake becomes more and more enchanted with the new world which has given him acceptance a conflict boils around him between the increasing greedy and powerful human encampment and the Na’vi natives.

Avatar is one of those films you want to see succeed, and when it slams a hit it hits out of the park, but then will strike out for two consecutive innings. The special effects truly are revolutionary and offer more beauty and spectacle in a film then ever seen before in the history of film. The sheer emotion shown by the Na’vi and Avatars character models are fantastic. Cameron has truly perfected the art of motion capture meshing human performance and special effects to a new high. If there is anything Cameron has truly exceeded at it is building a believable and breathtaking world. Everything about the world of Pandora looks and feels organic and true. Scenes where Jake flies through the world of Pandora on the back of a dragon like beast are surprisingly poignant and beautiful and are a true spectacle. Cameron excels at drawing you into a world filled with unsurpassed beauty and spectacle. Perhaps never since Oz has a film opened and audiences’ eyes and made their jaws drop in true visual astonishment. The creatures in the film are perhaps the most realistically designed aliens ever created, outside of the overly human Na’vi. They feel like animals that would actually evolve on a world like Pandora’s, and they are real treat to watch on screen, especially the flying Banshees.

Perhaps the area of the film that is called most into scrutiny is its similarity to Native American epics such as Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves. However, this story is a powerful and moving one and has never been told with such vigor and creativity as in Avatar. The one area where the film truly starts to falter is in character. Neytiri and Jake Sully are wonderfully indepth and drawn out characters with numerous moments that make them shine. The acting in this film is for the most part well done and fleshed out. The motion capture performances delivered by Worthington, Weaver, and Saldana are spectacular and perhaps more emotional and heart given the majority of the live action actors. Worthington is surprisingly flat as Jake outside his Avatar, and the contrast between the two is sometimes jarring. Stephen Lang is another actor who stands out in the film for negative reasons. His character of Col. Quatrich is perhaps one of the most interesting in the film, but he is hampered by the awful and cliché military dialogue written for him. The dialogue as a whole feels surprisingly flat and hollow compared to the indepth world in which it takes place. Surprisingly the only lines that truly feel deep are spoken by the Na’vi, who barely speaks English to begin with.

James Cameron’s direction is what saves this potentially fatal flaw to the film. Cameron directs each scene of the film with such vigor, excitement, and visual astonishment that the problems with the script literally melt away around you. Every time you begin to question a character or plot point Cameron fixes it with a new sequence of visual and emotional resonance that few other directors have yet to achieve. His direction saves the clichéd plot and makes it exciting, and it even saves some of the poorly written conversations of the film, but they still stand out like a sore thumb.

James Horner’s score is also a standout. Combining sweeping epic battle hymns, tribal chants, and one of the most memorable film themes I’ve seen in years, it works seamlessly with Cameron’s direction providing powerful and moving moments.
Avatar shines best when you are forced to take a step back and realize its epic scope and scale. The battle scene in the final act is impressive, ground breaking, thrilling, and occasionally emotional. Scenes involving the plight of the Na’vi tribes are also wrenching and breathtaking in scale.

Perhaps comparisons made to films such King Kong, Star Wars, and The Wizard of Oz are correct. Avatar is a film that thrives off of a visual uniqueness and power, epic scale, and smart direction and manages to sweep you along with it despite its flaws. When the original Star Wars premiered over thirty years ago it was a film very similar to Cameron’s labor of love. An expensive and ambitious movie, that relied on effects and scope to draw viewers into a deceptively thin storyline and characters. Although rarely done today, if one were to view Star Wars as a standalone film, people would realize its surprisingly simple plot and 2D characters. The same goes for King Kong. King Kong was a spectacle that unleashed a towering stop motion gorilla upon the streets of New York. Once again a familiar plot filled with simple character archetypes, yet these films became classics for their technological innovation and their ability to capture an audience, which Avatar succeeds in almost every form.

Although falling short of my highest mark, it is hard for me not to appreciate the work that James Cameron has done on what is sure to be on the most remembered films of our time.

Score: A