Tron: Legacy

Ultimately, a watchable film with neat visuals and interest from a nostaglia point of view, but kind of lame otherwise. I think it was trying to be the next Matrix or something. Lots of odd pseudo-philosophical mumbo jumbo that never seemed to make a whole lot of sense to me. But, hey some neat action sequences, and nice to see good old "Flynn" (Jeff Bridges) again.

2.5 stars

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows - Pt 1

Yeah I agree with Neil on this. It isn't bad, but I kept thinking how much these Harry Pottermovies are just a re-hash of Tolkien, Lewis, etc. Lots of elements that are reminiscent of those earlier classic fantasy works.

2.75 stars

The Town

Pretty standard heist film built around a love story. Didn't buy into the love story because it was unrealistic. Big problem for movie.

Two stars because it is not as bad as Jonah Hex.

Jonah Hex

I may have seen all of the good movies from 2010 already. This one had potential, but unfortunately just was not salvageable as even a B-movie. Ultimately, it is devoid of joy, and you actually find yourself liking the villains more. I'm actually writing this review during the last ten minutes of the movie.

On paper the movie could have been half-way decent. Malkovich as the bad guy, check. Setting is 1870's, and the main characters are all Civil War veterans, check. Elements of supernatural, and steampunk, check. Plot development, or any idea on how to create an actual story...Missing! I think that Playstation Western game I was playing has a better narrative to it with more character development. This one felt like an average video game, and a pretty bad movie.

One and a half stars out of five for the giant cannon that is in it.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 1

This movie was in bad need of some summary exposition at the beginning that worked so well in The Lord of the Rings. It has only been a few years since I read the books, and I was partly lost most of the time. I had a vague notion of what the main point was, but could not follow most of the major plot points along the way.

The original novel was able to pull this off, and I'm wondering if this section of the series is just too complicated with multiple quests going on, but framed as a detective story. They are trying to track down magical artifacts (for reasons I've forgotten) and in the process discover certain things about Dumbledore.

Also, what the book did was exploit the tension between the three main characters and their relationships with each other. The movie had to spend far too much time on the detective elements of the plot, that it did not really get a chance to do this.

That being said, the actors have all grown up very well, and were able to do a lot with not much help from the narrative. Also, the fight scenes are pretty cool, and if they should still be able to muster up the climax of the story, which will work well on screen if done right. Less detective novel, and more epic battle type stuff. It should be a lot easier to follow. So here's hoping that Pt. 2 will redeem Pt. 1.

3 stars out of 5.

Thor

Well, if Hulk is going to be in the Avengers, then Marvel is two out of three so far for the whole gang's origin movies. Hulk was a dud, but Iron Man and Thor are both solid. I thought this was almost as good as Iron Man. Had a little humor, some action, but not too much action, some romance, but not too much romance, and good character development.

I liked how they spent almost as much screen time on the villain as they did on the superhero, which I'm beginning to think is essential for any superhero story to work. Where are the X-men without Magneto, where is Superman without Lex Luther, Batman without Joker, and so on. Most superheros are defined by their villains, and not the other way around. In this regard, the villain of Thor is great in that he is probably one of the more well defined, and developed as a character. Not quite sympathetic, but very realistic motivations. All of this lets us really appreciate the heroic qualities in the main character all the more.

I also liked how they were not tied down to the original comic books, or the Norse mythology. It seems they put story first as a priority, without any sort of continuity issues with the myths either.

I would give it a solid 4/5. I'd like to know why Chris docked it a .1, unless he is using a different scale than me! Also, it's probably better than that, but I already heard good things from other people, and whenever that happens I do not like it as much as the original reviewer. Or maybe all of the original reviewers were docking the movie a .1 just for that reason.

Thor

3.9 stars, if not more.

I am excited for the future of Marvel movies. Thor did what it needed to do. It introduced this god-like mystical character to the Iron Man and SHIELD technological modern setting in a way that I thought worked. Not perfect, but overall I was satisfied. I thought it all hung together pretty well.

I liked the actor who played Thor. Thought he embodied the power and charisma of the character quite well. Also liked Natalie Portman's character, even, and all the other actors/characters. And of course Anthony Hopkins does a good job as Odin. The story and plot were sufficient, parts quite dramatic I thought. The action and fight sequences were all pretty good; some of them in fact were excellent. The movie had a nice balance of emotion and humor, as well.

I liked it! I can't wait for Captain America. Even more, I can't wait for the Avengers movie (next year?) when we will see Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and others all together (including Hulk I think? Hawkeye, too, is what I hear). Based on their past successes, I have increasing confidence that the marvel people know what they are doing, and that we have a lineup of some very entertaining movies ahead.

A-Team

So I'm not sure if I should make this a comment on Neil's review of the movie, or make my own post as I'm doing.

Anyway -

I agree with Neil on the review of A-Team. It has its moments and good points -- I liked Liam Neeson as Hannibal. I liked the other dude as Face man. I liked the familiar old lines and cheesiness such as, "I love it when a plan comes together" kind of stuff. But aside from that, this is a mediocre movie. As an A-Team fan, it kept me entertained. As a movie on its own, it was nothing all that special.

Salt

3 stars

This isn't horrible. The very ending is a bit silly, but the intrigue and the action scenes are good. Angelina Jolie is believable as an action heroine as usual. It's on instant play on Netflix.

Middle Men

2.9 stars

The moral: if someone proposes a business deal to you and the words "Russian mafia" come up, DON'T DO IT.

The beginning of this is fairly juvenile. The dot com stuff is kind of interesting, but it's hard to have sympathy for the protagonist played by Owen Wilson. The movie did keep us watching the entire time, so it wasn't terrible.

Shutter Island

I'd give this one 4.3-4.7 stars. I didn't know much about this, so I won't say much here for fear of plot spoiling. This is another Scorsese/DiCaprio project, and I think I might categorize it as noir/thriller/horror. I kept thinking about The Shining as I was watching it. There are some genuinely creepy scenes that I absolutely couldn't watch.

Oddly, I think you could do a comparison/contrast between this movie and Inception, but I won't tell you why!

Check this out. I haven't seen such a good horror story since The Mist.

Black Swan

Intense. I liked the juxtaposition of the frail beauty and innocence in the ballerina's world mixed with the grotesque nature of the dark side in this movie. I'm not sure if it would be considered allegory, but it is heavy on the symbolism exploring issues with the artist's soul.

I also liked how at times it appears to be a horror movie, but it is not overdone, which would have been a temptation for the film makers.

Probably one of the best non-Sci-Fi/Fantasy movies I've seen for a while.

The Fighter

I'll add a few things to Neil's comment about this great movie: Wahlberg's love interest was played by Amy Adams who I believe is a female version of Phillip Seymour Hoffman in her ability to play a variety of different roles. She played a little innocent girl in Catch Me if You Can as well as one of the young nuns in Doubt (which actually features Hoffman as a priest). Adams plays an experienced young woman who is tough and has seen it all in this movie. Like Hoffman she is able to convincingly play contrasting personalities in a way which doesn't make you think she's trying too hard. I like watching her alot.

I also liked The Fighter. How can you not like it?

Clash of the Titans 2010

I agree with Chris: this movie just didn't cut it. You really wanted it to be good, especially with the visual effects. This movie managed to mess up the great characters and plot of the original. Liam Neeson was just a pretty dull Zeus, so you have to imagine something was not going right there. The original was much better, so I give this version 1 star.

Angel Seasons 1-5

This is a spin-off from one of the characters on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The show is based on a character named Angel, who was one of Buffy's loves. He's also a vampire with a soul, so he's a good vampire. Long back story that is explored throughout Buffy and this show. I believe it starts around the time of season 4 in Buffy.

This show is actually as good as Buffy, if not a little better at times. It is a little more grown up, and a bit darker. More in line with Firefly in how it explores the meaning of loyalty, the conflict of good and evil, and the main story line of Angel attempting to atone for a hundred years of evil that he had committed.

The minor characters are a little more interesting, and the setting is Los Angeles, so it feels more grown up than Sunnydale, which is where Buffy takes place. Sunnydale is more of a fictional small town that seems to be really generic. Whedon does a great job of mixing demons in the culture of Los Angeles that makes sense and is fun and believable, while at the same time dark and creepy enough when the show needs it to be. There is more room for the epic storylines to take place in Angel with this setting than in the setting of Buffy.

I won't comment in too much detail about the final season, but I will say it was not as good of an ending as Buffy's ending was. I think they were at least purposefully going for something with the final sequence in Angel that would resolve his arc and solidify the change in his character that would make the audience feel satisfied with the ending. This attempt just didn't feel satisfying to be though, and felt a little too open ended. Also, they left one important plot thread unresolved, which is always going to be aggravating.

One interesting thing about this show was that it basically serves as a supplement to Buffy at times, and the two shows often play off of each other. You could see it as pretty much the same show, and so in all, between Buffy and Angel there are twelve seasons.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer Seasons 1-7

I'll go ahead and review all seven seasons, as I watched them between January and April of this year in a marathon viewing of three to four episodes a day on average. It was fun to totally immerse myself in this series.

The genre is right up our ally. Buffy is a chosen superhero that slays vampires/demons and other evil nasties that lurk in the world unknown to most people. She discovers this while still in High School, so the show explores typical Suburban American themes, but with vampire slaying going on in the foreground. The first three seasons of when Buffy is in High School are as good as any televisions series I have ever seen, including Star Trek.

The show's creator is Joss Whedon, who did Firefly. The same style of dialogue is present in Buffy as well. Also, the characters are as three dimensional. While Firefly feels older and more mature, Buffy tackles typical American teen stories, but still is able to explore the nature of good and evil.

It is interesting to draw parallels between the two series. In Whedon's worlds, often the evil characters are those that think they are doing good, or those that start off doing good, but then become too self-absorbed to objectively view their own actions. Of course, there are lots of demons, monsters, and creatures of the night that are just inherently evil as well. Also, like the Reivers, some of the nasties are created by characters who think they are doing good.

The series then moves on in Season 4 to follow Buffy at college, and I think it loses some of its spunk at this point. Of course, at this point you may be too drawn in by the characters to notice it objectively, but the show in Seasons 4-6 started to feel formulaic, and a bit unoriginal. In the final season the show returns to form, and ultimately it does resolve itself in a satisfying manner, concluding all of the character points of conflict, and all of the plot threads that it had explored. I'm not sure I have ever seen a television show successfully do this other than a few of the Star Treks.

Great show that I would highly recommend.

Source Code

I can't really say much without plot spoiling, so I'll just say that this is a good one. The Conway Boys will like it. I'd say it's a sci-fi/thriller. There are some great views of Chicago, and the red brick building next to where the train blows up is a building on the campus of Illinois Technical Institute (it's the oldest building on the campus) where Kurt Haenicke works. I saw that building last week!

Four stars.

The Switch

Romantic comedy with Jason Bateman and Jennifer Aniston. I really wanted to like this movie: there are some really funny moments with the sidekick characters played by Jeff Goldblum and Juliette Lewis, but the plot was predictable and a bit boring. Jennifer Aniston looked bored the entire movie, and they didn't give her many funny lines. Jason Bateman is funny, but the movie was dull. If you are going to have a bad, predictable plot, you really need to cash in on the laughs, and this movie didn't do that. Two stars.

The Fighter

Good all around boxing movie here. You could probably kind of guess the plot line if you've seen the trailers or heard anything about this movie. No real surprises here, though Christian Bale is very scary in how much he resembles a real addict. Mark Wahlberg is pretty sympathetic as well.

What separates this from simply being a Rocky cover song is how messed up and dysfunctional the main character's family is. The dysfunction is not drawn out in an exploitative, my mother's a crack whore kind of way, but in a more believable, working class kind of way, where no one wants to be the one who lets the family down. Seems like they really got the gritty details and the extras straight off the streets of Boston too.

Four out of Five stars for this one.

Iron Man 2

This wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't a great movie. It was just pretty good. I guess after the first one, it's pretty difficult to come up with a great sequel?

I didn't really care for the main villain, though Sam Blackwell is great as usual. The story line for the main character isn't as interesting as the first one's was.

The A-Team

If you've watched the original show lately, then you know what to expect here. They did a good job of capturing the cheesiness that was at the foundation of the predecessor. Also, the campy back-story of each character is intact as well. I'm not sure why they would even want to call this a remake other than there are different actors, more explosions and violence, and the story's setting is a bit updated. Also, it's the origination story of how they become soldiers of fortune in L.A, and not the team actually soldiering of fortune in LA.

Other than that, it's just like the TV series. That being said, the directing wasn't the greatest. I think they could have slowed the tempo down a bit for each scene, and there were some disagreeable conceited moments in the plot line where the writers just seem to have gotten lazy, and found an easy fix that doesn’t really make sense. Of course, certain catch phrases and motifs from the original are intact.

All in all, watch it if your brain needs a break from reality, and you want to see stuff explode.

Robin Hood (2010)

This was a surprise! I wasn't expecting much. This was Ridley Scott's film. He took major liberties with the old Robin Hood story, so the only thing that really resembles Robin Hood of old are the names and certain aspects of the setting. Besides that, it's a pretty good movie about 13th century politics and war. Some good fighting. Russell Crowe is good. They totally set it up for a sequel which I wouldn't mind seeing.

Black Swan

Jen and I were expecting some awful, over-the-top movie since this was Darren Aronofsky. Turns out the movie was good. The grotesque elements weren't overdone, and they were employed at the right times. Watching Portman pluck one tiny, black feather is much more horrific than a full-out transformation. The plot and characters are simple and elegant. The movie moved nicely, so we both really liked it. I'd give it four stars.

The Kids Are All Right

Mark Ruffalo is the best part of this movie. I'm afraid that the film assumes a great deal that I don't quite agree with and that ultimately I found to be a bit unbelievable. The main lesbian relationship just wasn't believable in that the characters didn't seem to actually have real chemistry. I'd give the film a 2.9 because of Ruffalo's performance which was totally--in his words--"right on."

The Time Traveller's Wife

This was Jen's pick, and I'm really surprised this wasn't on my radar. In the spirit of Primer this is an independent film that actually features time travel! I don't want to say much about this except the time travel element is done well, isn't hoaky, and actually advances character and plot. I was pleasantly surprised!

The Social Network

I think the movie does a good job with the ambivalence of Zuckerberg. He's played really well by that young actor who was in The Squid and the Whale. The movie does a good job of avoiding a complete demonization or lionization of Zuckerberg. The Napster dude is played really well by Justin Timberlake.

There's a bit in here about class and about the price that obsession exacts on one's personal life. Good movie. Great soundtrack too!

Dinner with Schmucks

This would be a 3.5 movie. It's funny but not a complete gut buster. But I don't think I really have any smartsy things to say about it. It's worth it just to see Steve Carrol.