Review: Final Destination 5

I really didn't have much hope after The Final Destination. As I mentioned in that review, they were totally out of ideas. But you know what, Final Destination 5 is actually good! Hooray!

Our lead is Sam, played by the charming Nicholas D'Agosto (Fired Up, Heroes). Sam and his co-workers are on a bus, off to their team building retreat. And like team building isn't bad enough, Sam gets a premonition when the bus is on a bridge and, as you may expect, it ends with lots of dead people. So Sammy freaks and several co-workers get off the bus, including his ex Molly (Emma Bell) and his boss Dennis (David Koechner), while the rest plummet to their death. Oh well, at least everyone got out of that team building retreat.

And then it kinda goes into standard FD mode, but with great death scenes, Tony Todd's return and an ending they put more thought into than part 4 as a whole.

Let's talk about that ending.

*SPOILER ALERT*

How awesome was that? I loved it! I must admit, I didn't see the twist coming. I did wonder for a moment if the film took place earlier, because I noticed the championship banners at the gym were old. But then I shrugged it off, thinking, you know, maybe they sucked the past ten years? And I noticed the date on the gift certificate but didn't think anything about it at all. So yeah, I was really surprised with that ending!

*END SPOILERS*

I loved the cast. I'm surprised they got better talent for part 5 than for part 4. Besides D'Agosto there's Emma Bell (Frozen), Arlen Escarpeta (Friday the 13th) and Courtney B. Vance (Law & Order: Criminal Intent). I'd love to know how they actually got Vance to be in the movie.

Overall, one of the better FD films! A must see if you're a fan of the series. A 3,5/5.

Review: Scream 4

It’s been 11 years and now Ghostface is back. While I’m a big fan of the Scream trilogy and the first two in particular, I really had my doubts about part 4. For one thing, it’s part FOUR. How promising could a part four be, specifically one that is made a decade after the third outing's been released? But when it was announced Kevin Williamson would write the screenplay, Wes Craven would direct once again and stars Neve Campbell, David Arquette and Courteney Cox signed on to reprise their roles, the fangirl in me had hope. After all, it was Ehren Kruger who wrote part 3, which by far, was the weakest of the trilogy. How could you not get a bit excited for a fourth installment written by the original writer?

But then Williamson dropped out and Kruger came on board again (WHY HIM?). A far too famous cast signed on. Reshoots happened and recasting. Lake Bell and Lauren Graham came and went. I didn't have much hope left. But then the trailer managed to get me excited again. And as the release date fast approached, I was my 13-year-old self again, waiting for Scream 2 to be released.

I saw Scream 4 today (when I wrote that, now that I'm posting it, like 2 weeks ago), and 26-year-old me didn't exactly have the same reaction walking out of the theater as 13-year-old me did all those years ago. While I was very positive walking out of Scream 2 (and positive walking out of part 3, which I came to partly dislike over the years), I walked out with mixed feelings.

BEWARE OF SPOILERS!

I mean, what kind of opening sequence was that? They should've gone for the real scare and not make it look like the opening for Scary Movie 5. Seriously, why are Anna Paquin and Kristen Bell in it? POINTLESS. If they wanted to have a fake opening, they should've expanded their scene and ditched Shenae Grimes and Lucy Hale. I'm not a fan of Scream 2's opening with Jada Pinkett (because she's awful), but this was even worse.

Other dislikes include the lack of Nick Cave's Red Right Hand. The different font used in the credits. The lack of character development of Anthony Anderson and Adam Brody's deputies. Mary McDonnell being in it and not getting anything to do.

But, all of that makes it seem like I didn't enjoy the film. I did! I prefer it over part 3. And it was great seeing Neve, Courteney and David again. It was like seeing old friends! Hayden Panettiere, Rory Culkin, Erik Knudsen and Aimee Teegarden were good additions. I'm not the biggest fan of Emma Roberts, but she did well.

Overall, a must see for the fans and the people who grew up in the time when the Scream films were popular. I wouldn't recommend the film for the newer generation (typing that makes me feel really old). A 4/5.

Review: Frozen

I watched Frozen with boyfriend last night. And while we were sitting on his comfortable couch in his warm home, we had a terribly uncomfortable feeling watching the film. Even 15 minutes after it ended, we were still feeling tense. And that's a huge compliment.

Frozen is about 3 college kids stuck on a chairlift in a ski resort that has closed for several days.

That may sound like a boring premise, but it's not. Kevin Zegers, Emma Bell and especially Shawn Ashmore make it work with their sometimes emotional performances. Even if their characters are unlikeable in the sense that they put themselves in that situation and you kinda think they deserve what's coming to them. Okay, not always. But sometimes! They convinced the dude at the closing ski resort to let them go one last time even when he warmed them for the bad weather. Yes, very smart.

But besides that, it's pretty great. Well played, Adam Green. A 4/5.

Review: 127 Hours

I sort of have a love-dislike relationship with Danny Boyle. Shallow Grave, A Life Less Ordinary, 28 Days Later and Sunshine are some of my favorite films, but I haven't even bothered to watch Boyle's other films as they don't appeal to me at all.

Now here's his latest film, 127 Hours. On the one hand, we have an interesting story. On the other, James Franco. While I know very well that he is a good actor. I knew that long before I saw 127 Hours as I've been following his career for about a decade, since he became one to watch with roles in Freaks and Geeks and James Dean. Over the years, I just feel he's becoming more and more pretentious. Basically my love for James Franco the actor transformed into a strong dislike for the person these past 10 years.

So James Franco carrying an entire film? Oddly, it kinda works here. Let's face it, Aron was kinda stupid. Yes, go climbing without a buddy. Yes, go do that without letting anyone know where you're going. I sighed to my sister, so this is what people who don't have enough stress in their lives do? They are bored and seeking adventure and think they can just do it all. In that respect, James Franco is perfect for the role. And I swear, he gives a beautiful performance. But really, is it a better performance than Ryan Reynolds trapped in a box in Buried? In my opinion, no. I could feel Ryan's frustration and desperation. Franco's not so much. So why is James getting all the love and is Ryan overlooked? Probably because 127 Hours is based on a true story, it ended on a positive note and is helmed by an Academy Award-winning director.

As for the film, I wasn't fond of the use of splitscreens. I felt it was unnecessary. It's a simple film based on a true story. No splitscreens, this isn't 24. While I'm totally on board that this is a good film, I think an Oscar nomination for Best Picture is a bit too much. I don't think it's anywhere near as good as Boyle's other films I mentioned earlier. A 3/5.

Review: The Social Network

Some thoughts on The Social Network. I finally saw it and I will start by saying that I think it's a good film. However, I'm not getting all the awards love the film has received. Besides the Jesse Eisenberg praise, though. He was fantastic.

To me, The Social Network just is what it is: a film about Facebook. When the credits rolled, it didn't leave me with any kind of particular feeling. Not the OMG-what-did-I-just-watch-it-was-awesome feeling Kick-Ass left me with. Or the emotional state Toy Story 3 left me in. Or that devastated feeling I had while watching Buried. I can´t imagine TSN is a film that will hold up well in time. When the Facebook craze dies down, will people still be interested in this film? How many people will watch this film over and over in the years to come?

While I digged the film's dialogues, in particular all of Zuckerberg's belittling comments, the film is long and at times, moves too slow. Like I want to see the Winklevoss twins rowing. Yes, very vital part of the film. The film is at its best when the focus is on Zuckerberg and his dying friendship with Saverin (Andrew Garfield).

I mostly enjoyed watching Eisenberg at work. I remember watching him in this TV-series called Get Real as Anne Hathaway and Eric Christian Olsen's little brother about 10 years ago. Eisenberg has become a one-to-watch talent since then with roles in Roger Dodger and Adventureland, but I never expected he might be getting an Oscar nomination soon. Good for him.

Andrew Garfield and Max Minghella are two other talented young actors and it was great seeing them all onscreen. Even Rooney Mara didn't suck as bad as she did in the Elm Street remake. Justin Timberlake however.. well, I think Brian at Dark Horizons put it best when he called his performance artificial. Whenever he talks, it just doesn't sound realistic. Shame.

Overall, it's a good film, but the topic has to interest you. I couldn't even convince boyfriend to watch the film so he could check it on ICheckMovies.com. A 4/5 (and only because 3,5/5 is too low and I don't want to give it a .75 rating).

Review: Buried

Buried is an impressive little film featuring a strong performance by Ryan Reynolds. Why he isn't getting any recognition for his role is beyond me. Reynolds is always a solid actor, and here he proves he can do more than play the funny and charming guy. I refuse to believe that James Franco in 127 Hours really is any better than Ryan here and James is getting love from the people who give out awards. Not that I have seen 127 Hours, but I'm pulling James into this, because I hear he also has to carry lots of screentime all by himself.

Buried is about a truckdriver named Paul Conroy, played with effective desperation by Ryan, who wakes up trapped in a coffin with a lighter and a cellphone. And that's basically it. That's the story. The film works better if you don't know more.

I, of course, want to talk about some other stuff as well, so consider this your SPOILER ALERT.

The great thing about Buried here, is that the only thing we get to see is Ryan trapped in the coffin. There are no outside shots. We don't see his kidnappers. We don't see how Ryan got into the coffin. It's just Ryan, the coffin, the phone and his lighter. And it works. I felt Ryan's desperation and frustration. There's a sequence somewhere in the film where I felt they were stretching it a bit, with the sudden appearance of a snake. It was a bit much, but other than that, the film kept it small and plausible. /END SPOILERS.

It's not a perfect film, but pretty damn great. A 4/5.

Review: Easy A

I can't help but get a little bit sad watching Easy A. Emma Stone is a delight. A fun and talented girl to watch. But to see Amanda Bynes play a small role like that? Five years ago Bynes would've played lead girl Olive. How quick things change, huh?

The plot: After a little white lie about losing her virginity gets out, a clean cut high school girl sees her life paralleling Hester Prynne's in "The Scarlet Letter," which she is currently studying in school - until she decides to use the rumor mill to advance her social and financial standing.

While I'm not actually crazy about the plot, there's much to like about the film. It all looks great. I love the use of color in this film. I can't really explain it, but to me, it makes the film come alive. And while Stone is the shining star here, the girl is in good company. How many teen comedies have three Academy Award nominated actors in them? Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson make a great couple, seem to have fun with their roles and their characters are more developed than just the standard dad and mom roles. Thomas Haden Church is always a welcome addition. I was cheering when he got his Oscar nom for Sideways. I've liked him since his Ned & Stacey days. Penn Badgley plays likeable well, however, I think I would've preferred Dan Byrd in the role. Byrd is always good and entertaining, while Badgley, at times, not per se in this film, can come off bland. And Bynes, she's still talented and comedically gifted. Let's hope Hollywood gives her another shot.

One of the surprises of 2010. A 3,5/5.

Review: Skyline

Well Skyline came and disappeared without leaving much of an impression. Which is shame, because boyfriend and I really enjoyed the flick. It's a film with a relatively small budget, estimated at $10 million, and with effects that look much more expensive.

The always reliable Eric Balfour stars as Jarrod, who, along with his girlfriend, visits his successful best friend Terry (Donald Faison in not a comedic role) in Los Angeles. They're staying at his fancy apartment when aliens spaceships appear, trying to capture humans.

Okay, yes, the film is not highly original. Cloverfield and District 9 spring to mind, but did it bother me? No. There's only so many ways you can go making an alien invasion flick. I had a bigger problem with the lack of characterization as only Balfour's character was developed. Making someone pregnant is not characterization. Are we supposed to care for the annoying girlfriend now because she's with child? It's also a cheap way to move the plot forward. I was telling the bf how glad I was they cut out Erin (Jessica Biel)'s pregnancy in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (also starring Balfour) as the film ultimately didn't need it in terms of characterization or plot purposes.

However, I can't really hate on a film that accomplishes as much as Skyline does with a limited budget. To compare, Box Office Mojo tells me Cloverfield's budget was $25 million. Skyline visually looks great and delivers effects on par with certain bigger budget flicks. The film is entertaining and I personally love Eric Balfour so it's great to see him play a lead role in a studio film. Give it a shot and don't be too critical. A 4/5.

Review: Piranha 3D

I've been waiting for Piranha 3D for months now and finally I got to see it in not so glorious 3D, but whatever, it's awesome! It kinda made me sad boyfriend and I made up 67% of the audience though (2 pm showing on a Tuesday).

I've never in my life been more excited to see Richard Dreyfuss. It was a pretty cool cameo. I think they could've expanded it a bit more, but overall I enjoyed his brief appearance. Same kinda goes for Christopher Lloyd. I would've liked to have seen his character be more involved in the story. I actually forgot about him until he popped up again. It was good seeing him on the big screen. I always loved him in the Back to the Future movies. I think both Dreyfuss and Lloyd's appearances are nice shout outs for movie buffs. The younger generation probably has no clue who they are (which is sad btw, cause we live in a world where the Jersey Shore losers are more famous).

The "main" cast is enjoyable as well, but I have to use air quotes, because there almost isn't a main cast. Elisabeth Shue gets first billing, but I think Jerry O'Connell and even Steven R. McQueen (who could easily play Nicholas D'Agosto's brother in something sometime) have more screentime. Adam Scott is a good actor and a gorgeous man, but when I think about the movie, he didn't have that much to do. Shame. He has a good screen presence and his role could have been more heroic. Ving Rhames is totally wasted. He's barely in the movie and I was really hoping I would see him kick lots of piranha ass. I mean, he does kick piranha ass, but they could have expanded his role. It's VING RHAMES. HE'S AWESOME SO IF YOU CAST HIM, USE HIM. You'd think it wouldn't be that hard.

I like the movie, but there is a serious lack of characterization. The only somewhat developed characters are played by McQueen, O'Connell and Kelly Brook. While I don't care for McQueen (Nick D'Agosto's name kept popping in my head every time I saw him), Jerry O. rocked his role as sleazy Wild Wild Girls director. He was great! I have mad love for that guy, he always manages to entertain. I didn't expect to like Brook's character, simply thinking she was there for the T&A, but she has a very likeable quality about her and her character was a nice girl. Jessica Szohr, who I guess we were supposed to root for(?), had nothing to work with and I didn't find her likeable at all.

Dina Meyer and Desperate Housewives' Ricardo Chavira also pop up in pointless roles. Disappointing! I know it's supposed to be a fun, cheesy, gory flick, but if you cast these people, at least give them something to work with. Eli Roth's cameo was entertaining though.

The story is good enough for what the film is supposed to be. There's not much suspense, but that's okay. The make up and special effects were very well done. The carnage was very gory; I had to look away at times. Props for the make up guys!

I wasn't too crazy about the 3D conversion. If the movie was intended as a 3D release, why shoot it in 2D and then convert it? The conversion didn't always work and it took me out the film a bit. Overall though, I have to say I would've prefered the movie to be in 2D. I think they could've done more with the 3D gimmick, but they didn't, which is a shame because it fits a film like this perfectly as it doesn't take itself seriously in the first place. Now the 3D thing feels like an after thought and I'm kinda tired of movies that are in 3D while it add nothing to the experience. Like I said, I could've worked for Piranha 3D, but they didn't make the most of it.

Now it looks like I'm being all negative, but I'm just being critical. Piranha 3D delivers: it's an entertaining flick, it doesn't take itself seriously, there are piranhas and there are boobs. Really, it's a great summer popcorn flick and you should go see it right now! A 4/5.

P.S. I keep thinking about writing something about Alexandre Aja, but I'm not sure what.

Review: [Rec] 2

I liked [Rec], but I felt I had seen it all before. It was just another infection film to me. And while a good film, I didn't think it deserved all the praise it been getting. Then [Rec] 2 came and if I compare the films, [Rec] suddenly becomes a friggin' masterpiece.

Beware of spoilers.

The sequel starts where we left off, with a shot of Angela being dragged away. Then we move to what, a SWAT team? I don't remember, it's been a week since I saw it. They accompany a priest into the building. He needs to collect blood for an antidote. It's a whole frustrating process. Just scrape it off the wall or something!

There's a whole religious angle where the infected turn out to be possessed. Uhuh.. right. I bet that if you exorcise the hell out of them, they'll be perfectly fine. I really did not care for this at all.

Then there's the camera work. In the original, we see everything from Angela's cameraman's point of view. That's scary, cause we can't see what else is going on. Here, the SWAT team members have their own cameras on their helmets and we actually cut to their different cameras. I think this annoyed me more than the religious stuff. It just completely disregards the style of the first film. Why not shoot it as a regular film then?

And then there's the most infuriating part of the film: the teens. Yes, about halfway through, we move to three teens with their own camera who end up in the building as well. Smart move, assholes. In the end, they serve no purpose at all. It's just filler. Blah.

Why does everything have to have a sequel these days? Can't we just have a good film and that's it? The end? A 2/5.

Review: Trick 'r Treat

I finally saw Trick 'r Treat! The movie that was pushed back by Warner Bros., then shelved, before ending up as a direct-to-dvd release. I never understood why though as the trailer looked promising and there was good word of mouth.

I guess people took offense to the kid killing that happens in the film, but this movie definitely isn't worse than any random Saw sequel. I thought the movie was quite tame, even if it was mean spirited.

Trick 'r Treat is an anthology; there are different stories that take place on the same Halloween night. Characters do crossover into the different stories.

The film starts off very strong with Leslie Bibb and Tahmoh Penikett (Dollhouse) as a couple, with Bibb being the Halloween hater of the two. Lesson learned: don't be a Halloween hater. I was impressed director Michael Doughtery managed to create quite a lot of suspense in such a short amount of time. This segment is maybe 5+ minutes long (or short).

Next we have Dylan Baker as the town's principal, who also happens to be a crazed killer. This segment is particularly mean spirited, yet Baker pulls it off with a certain light-heartedness. IMHO, it's the best segment of the bunch as it's a realistic horror we're dealing with here: there could really be some crazy person putting poison or razorblades into your candy.

Then there's Anna Paquin and friends who are out and about in sexy costumes looking for a good time. This is my least favorite story. Without spoiling anything, I wasn't particularly fond of the way the story played out. I prefer realistic horror over the supernatural.

Then there was The School Bus Massacre. I do dig urban legends and this segment was well executed. However, to me, the end of the story felt so out of place. I think the first two stories set up a Trick 'r Treat world where we're dealing with realistic horrors so I found it disappointing when Paquin's story and the School Bus Massacre took a different route. If the order of the stories was changed, I might not have felt the same way.

The last story features Brian Cox as another Halloween hater, who gets a visit from Sam, a tiny trick-or-treater in orange pjs and a sack over his head. It's a freaky segment and Cox definitely learned his Halloween lesson.

Visually, the film looks amazing. Doughtery really captured the Halloween atmosphere. And overall, it was quite enjoyable while watching it. Though when the credits rolled, boyfriend and I just sat there in silence for a minute, unsure what to think. I don't know what it is, I guess the film doesn't work as a whole for me. But I'm not saying it's a bad movie. A 3/5.

Review: Eden Lake

Eden Lake is quite an impressive little horror film. For starters, the movie is beautifully shot. Daytime is brighter than bright, reminiscent of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Hills Have Eyes remakes. I quite enjoy looking at pretty pictures and Eden Lake, is at times, a very pretty picture. Of course, when shit starts hitting the fan, it's a whole different story.

Boyfriend and I were completely horrified while watching the film. Why? Because this could actually happen in real life (see also: The Strangers). Freddy, Michael and Jason are not that scary, because they are 'fantasy monsters' (non-human and keep coming back to life). Who hasn't encountered annoying little shits who think they're so cool and that they're allowed to do anything they want? Seriously, some people should not be allowed to have children.

*BEWARE OF SPOILERS* As we see towards the end of the film, some people REALLY should not be allowed to have children. I quite liked the ending and don't mind the Last House on the Left-ness of it all with the parents taking 'revenge' on poor Jenny. Of course, I would have rather seen Jenny survive, but I think the end works looking at the way it's been set it up. Brett, the leader of kids, has an abusive dad and acts out (or doesn't know better) towards others. At the end, we see the dad peer pressure another dad into killing Jenny, similar to the way Brett peer pressured his friends into stabbing Steve. It's an effed up world we live in. */SPOILERS*

Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds) and Kelly Reilly give strong performances, as well as the kid who plays Brett. The script does not always make sense, but overall it's not too annoying. The writer/director, James Watkins, was also responsible for the scripts of My Little Eye and Gone, so he has a pretty good track record in my book. He's one to watch. Eden Lake, a 4/5.

Review: Right At Your Door

I watched Right At Your Door on TV last night. I saw the trailer years ago, but I don't think the movie ever got released here. At least, I didn't notice the DVD in the videostore or regular store. Anyways, the movie started at midnight and I thought I would just watch the beginning and then go to bed. WRONG! Once the shit hit the fan, I was hooked.

The movie opens slow. Rory Cochrane (Lucas from Empire Records!) stars as Brad, an out of work musician and loving, but needy boyfriend of Lexi (Mary McCormack). He makes her breakfast, wakes her up and then she gets ready for work. Not long after Lexi has left for work, bombs go off in LA. Brad, worried for Lexi's safety, goes out looking for her and tries to call her numerous times without any luck. Over the radio he hears the bombs are dirty bombs and there are toxic clouds spreading over the city.

Brad and the neighbor's handyman (don't ask) follow the news reports that advise them to stay inside and seal the house. After a while, Lexi, covered in ashes and coughing badly, shows up at the house, asking Brad to let her in.

Moral dilemma: would you let your loved one in knowing he/she is infected?

The movie does a good job putting you in Brad's shoes. Cochrane was fantastic. I could really feel he was torn by his decision to leave her outside. As I initially disliked his character (not for leaving her out, but his neediness), I was surprised I ended up caring for him as much as I did. Cochrane bravely carried this movie with his credible performance. I felt McCormack was on/off and didn't care much for her character.

The ending really shocked me. Maybe not entirely realistic, but it was well done. I also liked the opening credits sequence. That was a nice change from all the boring ones! What I really didn't like about the movie were the fade to black transition shots. I kinda got sick of them after a while.

I was never bored watching this movie. I was on the edge of my seat wondering how it would end. And the thought that this could happen in real life just added to the suspense. A 4/5.

Review: Sherlock Holmes

I had no interest in watching Sherlock Holmes, but a friend of mine wanted to see it and I thought: 'why not, I haven't seen Rachel McAdams in anything in ages anyways.' Bad idea, Gwen, bad idea.

It's not a horrible film, not at all. It has its moments and I feel that's all it has: moments. I thought the movie was quite lacking in the story department, which is rather strange for a movie based on characters from a ton of books!

Robert Downey Jr. tries to charm his way through the whole thing. Jude Law hasn't been interesting since The Talented Mr. Ripley. Rachel McAdams looks pretty, but doesn't have much to do.

The whole look of the film is too bleak for my taste, but I did like the costume design. Overall, worth a look if you like this sort of thing. I was rather bored though. A 3/5.

Review: Lars and the Real Girl

One evening, Lars (Ryan Gosling), an emotionally troubled and isolated young man, introduces a girl to his brother Gus (Paul Schneider) and his wife Karin (Emily Mortimer). To their horror, the girl turns out to be a life-size doll. Fearing Lars has gone completely insane, they consult the town doctor Dagmar (Patricia Clarkson). She asks the couple to go along with Lars's delusion that the doll, Bianca, is a real life person, as Lars needs her to cope with his inner struggles.

I wanted to love this movie, but I wasn't really feeling it. I can't really put my finger on it. I found the movie's way of having Lars deal with his emotional problems by enabling his delusions and dragging the entire town into his fantasy world questionable. *SPOILERS* In the end, Bianca dies. This is a sign that Lars doesn't need her anymore. It's a sign that he is getting better and that he wants to make a connection with a real life girl, the very adorable Margo (Kelli Garner). But that doesn't mean he doesn't have a long way to go. Yet the movie ends on a 'cute' note that Lars & Margo will get together and they all will live happily ever after. It doesn't work that way. Lars is still the guy who, for weeks (months?) had an entire town pretend his doll was a real person. Therapy is needed to deal with this and the dead mommy/depressed daddy issues. But I'm just a therapist, so what do I know? */SPOILERS*

Of course, the whole thing does make one quirky and enjoyable film. Gosling was perfect as Lars, proving once again that he is one of the finest actors of his generation. It was a brave performance and Gosling gave it his all, making sure the movie with the ridiculous premise didn't end up being just that: ridiculous. He made Lars lovable, which is quite an accomplishment.

However, I enjoyed Paul Schneider's performance as Lars's older brother better. Schneider is one of my favorite 'One To Watch' actors. I think he can really shine given the right material and I will always love his performance in Elizabethtown. In Elizabethtown, his character Jesse doesn't take life too seriously. In Lars and the Real Girl, Schneider plays the straight man to Gosling's disturbed Lars. It's a wonderful and subtle performance. You see how Schneider's Gus goes along with the craziness, but you can feel the guilt he feels and the pain of witnessing his baby brother's emotional problems.

Kelli Garner is a delight to watch as Margo, Lars's co-worker who has a crush on him. Emily Mortimer has never been a favorite of mine, but she did fine. I heard her accent slip, but it wasn't too annoying.

I was surprised the movie ended when it ended. I felt they could've done more to resolve the baby subplot. Have Karin go into labor and survive childbirth for example. Lars was freaking out about it halfway through the movie. I don't know why they left that hanging. Or does touching the belly means he's over it? Oh movie logic, I will never understand you.

I wonder how this movie holds up on a second viewing. Either I will gradually learn to love it through repeated viewings or I will be bored to death the second time. I do love Paul Schneider though... A 3,5/5.

Review: My Bloody Valentine (2009)

(This review contains spoilers)

Oh My Bloody Valentine, you are a funny film. First you want me to believe that Kerr Smith is playing a teenager, even though he was already too old looking to play one in Dawson's Creek 10 years ago. And then you want me to believe he's the town sheriff. Really, Kerr Smith as the town sheriff. That also looked wrong. I actually like Kerr Smith, but the poor guy seemed so out of place. At least he's a capable actor. Credit where credit's due.

And then there's Jensen Ackles, who looked like he was having a mental breakdown when all the blood was splattered across his face, and looked out of it for the rest of the movie. It was amusing. But that and the pill popping made him an easy suspect.

I can't remember if there was any intentional humor in the movie though. Hmmm..

Jaime King is adorable and quite likeable leading lady. She fought back on several occassions. But there is one EPIC FAIL moment where she does not get a free pass: when Tom is choking Axel in the mine, she doesn't even try to help him! Guess it serves him right for cheating on her, but still.

What I liked about the movie was definitely the beginning. The opening with the newspapers was nicely done (even without watching it in 3D) and then it quickly moved to the aftermath of the hospital massacre and then to the mine party, which was the best scene in the movie IMHO. Even though Kerr, Jensen and Jaime look way too old to play teens and it became unintentionally funny to me.

It was downhill from there though. The movie kinda dragged on and the kills were repetitive. I couldn't tell the old people apart (sorry Tom Atkins), the nude scene ran too long for my liking and I wanted Sarah to slap Megan and shove her in front of the killer.

I also think they should have addressed the fact that Sarah, Axel & Irene left Tom behind after the mine party massacre. I know I would be hella pissed if my friends left me behind with a crazed killer. Yup.

The ending, I ask you: How exactly did Tom not get burned in the explosion?

I did like the scene where Axel told Sarah to stay behind him when they went to check on Megan, instead of telling her to stay where she is. Yes, finally a horror movie where they stick together. Thank you. A 3/5.

Review: Across the Universe

I so wanted to love this movie! I really did. And I certainly loved parts of it, but as a whole? No. It was too surreal for me. Maybe I would've liked it better if I was stoned, but that's not my thing.

The movie worked best for me when it was grounded into reality. Example: Jim Sturgess singing All My Loving to his girlfriend in the street vs the trippy sequence that was Bono singing I Am the Walrus. Don't even get me started on the Eddie Izzard scene. If I would rewatch the movie, I would seriously skip that scene. I would rather watch T.V. Carpio's wonderful version of I Want To Hold Your Hand a thousand times than watch that scene.

I enjoyed the entire cast, in particular Joe Anderson as Max. He's a good actor and his singing surprised me. Between this and The Ruins, I can't wait to see him in other stuff. Evan Rachel Wood is a great actress with a lovely voice, but she always comes across as very young to me, sixteen-ish. Jim Sturgess has a certain something, but I was not always convinced by his singing abilities. T.V. Carpio, Dana Fuchs and Martin Luther McCoy did well with their supporting turns.

While I didn't love the movie, I will be picking up the soundtrack. Besides All My Loving and I Want To Hold Your Hand, my favorites are With a Little Help from My Friends, Let It Be, If I Fell, Dear Prudence, Something, Strawberry Fields Forever and Across the Universe.

I certainly don't regret blind buying this movie, but I'm not sure I would've bought it if I had seen it before. I'm still a bit unsure about how I really feel about this movie. Maybe a rewatch will help. Overall though, I feel this project was too ambitious for its own good. A 3/5.

Review: The Final Destination

The Final Destination? Please say it's so! But looking at the box office and I'm pretty sure it won't be THE Final Destination as it's the highest grossing entry of the series. Of course, the higher ticket prices for 3D has helped the movie quite a bit, me thinks.

I'm still kind of mad that this is the second movie I've seen this year where the opening credits are the best part of the movie (I'm also looking at you, Wolverine!). I wish the rest of the movie was as clever. But no. Just no.

They're out of ideas, man. OUT OF IDEAS. Beware of SPOILERS: Someone gets hit by a bus (see FD1). And there's fun with a nailgun. Which was 'fun' in FD3, but felt tired in part 4. I was like, 'Seriously, guys? Another nail gun? Didn't we already see that in the previous one?' And I couldn't help but think of Palahniuk's short story 'Guts' while watching Nick Zano in the pool (actually, I'm just surprised he could hold his breath such a long time in such a panic-y situation).

The fake out at the movie theater followed by the escalator 'death' was frustrating. It felt like they needed to fill up some time, which I thought was unacceptable as the movie only has a runtime of 82 minutes? How hard is it to fill up 82 minutes? Try character development! /SPOILERS

I did kinda like the scene in the beauty salon with Krista Allen so props for that. Also props to Allen for being a good sport.

The racism was unnecessary. Is this what counts as character development these days? *shakes head in shame* No, wait. SHAME ON YOU, ERIC BRESS! You wrote FD2 and The Butterfly Effect! You could do better than this! SLACKER! /rant

Hmmm.. what else? Oh right, 3D. Don't think it would've made much difference if I had watched it in 2D.

Overall, The Final Destination is the worst of the series (not sure why people hate on FD3 so much). They're running out of ideas and the 12 euros I paid to watch it in 3D were not worth it. A 2,5/5.

Review: Inglourious Basterds

EDIT: I've rewatched it and loved it even more so I'm upping my score from 4/5 to 4,5/5. Best movie of the year so far! /EDIT

I was looking forward to Inglourious Basterds for a long time and now that I've seen it, I want to see it again! I loved it! It wasn't a perfect movie, but I'm also having trouble pinpointing what exactly I didn't like about it.

Christoph Waltz was absolutely amazing. I extremely enjoyed his performance throughout the entire movie. From the first scene at the barn, Waltz was perfect. IMDB tells me that Leo DiCaprio was first choice for the role of Landa, and I think we should all be very thankful Tarantino changed his mind about that and hired Waltz instead. Will go all Basterds on the Academy's ass if they overlook his performance.

More greatness:

The opening scene at the barn was brilliant. Denis Menochet and Waltz played well off each other in the tension-filled scene.

Til Schweiger! I wish Til had a bigger role in the movie. Loved his angry and digusted looks. He was hilarious! Same goes for Brad Pitt with his hillbilly accent when he's trying to speak Italian. Eli Roth's delivery was okay, but I loved his crazy eyes! More Roth in front of and behind the camera is cool with me. BJ Novak is always great. Wanted him to have more screentime though!

Mélanie Laurent and Daniel Brühl also gave great performances. I really felt for Brühl's character at certain points. Too bad he went crazy towards the end. Laurent's scene at the restaurant with Waltz was really well done. Her emotional breakdown at the end of the scene was fantastic.

Tarantino made an excellent and brave decision by casting French and German actors and having them speak these languages for a large part of the movie. It's not something that will appeal to the general movie going crowd, but I guess that can be said for Tarantino's film in general.

Also loved the cinematography. The movie is a visual treat.

Now that I've had some more time to think about the movie, I do have a few negatives. For a movie called Inglourious Basterds not a whole lot of screentime was spent on the Basterds. I think I've only seen Michael Bacall once. Samm Levine had one line? Shame!

Not sure why Tarantino decided to cast Mike Myers. Nothing against Myers, but his character looked and sounded like he just stepped off the set of Austin Powers 4.

Am I morbid for expecting to see more scalping?

I'm having a hard time deciding on my favorite movie of the year so far: Basterds or Star Trek? I can tell you this is my fave Tarantino movie after Kill Bill. A must see if you love movies! A 4/5.

Review: Bride Wars

NOTE: I wrote this unfinished post approx. 2 weeks ago right before I went on vacation. I have very little memory of the movie now, except that it's crap. Didn't want to rewrite the post, because I'm blurry on the details.


Just caught Bride Wars on DVD. And woah.. that was crappy.

I am kinda amused by the lowbudget casting of the grooms: Steve Howey and Chris Pratt. Did Hudson and Hathaway have such high salary demands they couldn't afford say Chris Evans or Mike Vogel? Even Bryan Greenberg would've been a good choice for one of the grooms. Not that Howey or Pratt were bad, not at all! They are just guys I don't see often in high profile films. Props to the casting director for thinking outside of the box.

From the beginning of the movie I felt Hudson and Hathaway were a mismatch. Hathaway is so young-ish looking. I think someone like Liv Tyler would've played off of Hudson much better and the two look the same age-wise. Hathaway does fine though, but I felt she was on autopilot.

I had some problems with the screenplay and (lack of) character development. A big problem for me was that neither Hudson's Liv or Hathaway's Emma are likeable. Who am I supposed to root for here? I was hoping the guys would dump their asses! Especially Liv, who comes off as needy, neurotic and insane before she even gets proposed to. Who announces their engagement when the guy hasn't even popped the question yet?

Howey's Daniel is the painfully nice and understanding guy. Why he puts up with Liv, I have no idea. Then there's Pratt's Fletcher, who starts off nice but for some reason turns into a big a-hole towards the end. You know, just so Emma conveniently ends up with Bryan Greenberg. Of course. Who didn't see that one coming?

Then the war itself.. well, it took pretty long to get to it and then it came and went. They went for the easy laughs. Good lord, they're women. Let them realistically play dirty. I will never believe Emma had the chance to change Liv's hair dye. Mean Girls did it better. A 2,5/5.