Marathon Man - 6 stars out of 10

Marathon Man - 6 stars out of 10

"Marathon Man" is really twisted.  For a movie whose first hour is incredibly slow, they sure do create a lot of intensity once the dental instruments come out.  I understand that the film is critically acclaimed and, while I think that Dustin Hoffman's performance was excellent and Laurence Olivier showed a sinister stroke of genius in his characterization, the film's slow start left me disappointed.  I was particularly baffled because there are a few thrilling parts in the first half of the film but the pace remains slow in spite of them.  All of the necessary pieces of the story are introduced but I wish that they would have done so in a more interesting way.  But then Olivier entered and the entire film changed.  Watching him torture someone who is completely innocent really made me feel vulnerable.  This is magnified by filming that portion from a first person perspective, placing the audience in the dentist chair.  I will never be able to hear the words "Is it safe?" again without getting chills.  The resolution of the plot is very smart as the main character is completely motivated by revenge and the diamonds have no appeal to him.  I would recommend this film, but only if you are prepared for disturbing content and a short nap during the first half.

Memento - 10 stars out of 10

Memento - 10 stars out of 10

"Memento" is the ultimate mind-bender.  Even after seeing it four times, I still can't help but say "Wow!"  The film is just unlike any other, presenting its scenes in a nonlinear fashion that makes you watch as if putting together a puzzle.  Even though this format is unorthodox, it has a form that gives it a sense of order and keeps it from overwhelming the audience with confusion.  The film alternates between two different sequences of events.  The scenes from one sequence appear in color and are ordered in reverse, literally beginning with the final scene of the movie and then playing the penultimate scene, then the third-to-last scene.  The scenes from this sequence are interspersed with a different sequence of events that appear in black and white.  These scenes are ordered chronologically with the first scene, then second, then third.  It is difficult to explain but makes perfect sense when you see it.  This presentation is more than an artistic option.  Since the main character cannot create new memories, it helps us to sympathize with him since we are just as clueless to what happened in his life three minutes ago as he is.  The screenplay is nothing short of genius and it is absurd that it lost the Oscar to "Gosford Park."  Aside from its well thought-out plot and awesome twists created by its format, the acting is just fantastic.  We are transported into the world of an anterograde amnesia patient through Guy Pearce's amazing portrayal of the disorder, not to mention that his improvisation during the black and white scenes create a realistic, raw feel.  Joe Pantoliano's performance is interesting as his character is consistent but, depending on the context of the scene within the film, he appears genuine or suspicious.  Carrie-Anne Moss is also awesome, as her true intentions are revealed through the progression of the scenes in reverse.  The progressive revelation of truth, even though it was there the entire time, is so incredible.  Christopher Nolan may be remembered for creating the awesome "Batman Begins" series, but this film is the evidence of a refined and inspired film genius.

Oliver! (1968) - 7 stars out of 10

Oliver! (1968) - 7 stars out of 10

"Oliver!" is a classic musical and this film version is a masterpiece.  I wouldn't call it perfection, but all of its aspects pull together to create a memorable experience that will embed Lionel Bart's catchy tunes in your brain for weeks after you watch.  The casting is wonderful, from Ron Moody's conniving performance as Fagin to Mark Lester's innocence as Oliver (even if they dubbed over his singing with a female voice).  Shani Wallis accomplishes two character dynamics as Nancy, first as the appealing girlfriend and then snapping into the matronly figure around the urchins.  The performance that left the biggest impression on me is Oliver Reed, making Bill Sikes truly evil and yet making the character's rash actions seem understandible.  It is no surprise that this film won six of its eleven Oscar nominations with its elaborate period sets and costumes.  My only complaint is that a lot of the musical sequences became long-winded and began to lose my interest.  This musical does not need to be 2 1/2 hours long to properly develop the characters, present the plot, and create a sense of time passing by.  "I'd... do... anyfin..." to shorten this movie, but I truly believe that Carol Reed directed a winner with this musical adaptation that does justice to Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist."

The Pirates! Band of Misfits (The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists) - 7 stars out of 10

The Pirates! Band of Misfits (The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists) - 7 stars out of 10

"The Pirates! Band of Misfits" is a hilarious new adventure from the animation studio that brought us "Wallace and Gromit."  Everything about this film is RIGHT.  Sight gags, historical satire, and quality stop-motion animation make this a feast for the eyes   The best part of this film is its script.  The Pirate Captain is wonderfully developed as a TERRIBLE pirate but a lovable idiot.  You will find yourself laughing at his blunders but pulling for him to win Pirate of the Year.  Hugh Grant provides great voice acting in this lead role, while other great characters emerge like the blonde woman in an obvious orange beard, and Cutlass Liz perfectly voiced by Salma Hayek.  Every minute guarentees at least one laugh, making this film entertaining from start to finish.  "The Pirates!" is much more than a children's movie, providing plenty of visual comedy and clever dialogue that will bring out the child in all of us.

Shark Night 3D - 1 star out of 10

Shark Night 3D - 1 star out of 10

"Shark Night 3D" is terrible.  Terrible characters, terrible acting, terrible screenplay, terrible editing, and it very well may be the worst story ever written.  In fact, the main draw of this film is its violent shark attacks and they couldn't even get THAT right!  It fails to provide the gruesome shark deaths desired by its target audience in order to keep it at a PG-13 rating, allowing high schoolers to throw their money away at the box office.  The only attack deserving of this film's concept is Katharine McPhee's scene with the cookie cutter sharks - the rest cut away or don't show anything, which works in a Jaws-esque film but not in a movie masqueraded as a shock-inducing gorefest.  And even when they show the sharks, it appears that the producers WANTED them to look like they were CGI (but don't get me wrong, this is nowhere near "Birdemic" standards).  Bad acting has been socially acceptible in horror films as long as they provide a few screams, but the poor acting was absurd in this one.  It borders on comedy (again, nowhere near "Birdemic" standards).  The bad acting certainly is a lot more humorous than their pitiful attempts at comedy, like their reinactment of "March of the Penguins."  I just felt dirty watching this film, realizing that I'd been exploited by Hollywood businessmen with their epitome of cheap 3D tricks (even more than "My Bloody Valentine", which actually contained a few scary moments).  They could have at least put these 3D tricks into a movie that didn't have the worst plot ever.  It's as if a few writers sat around and said "Let's make a 3D movie where a group of teens gets eaten by sharks."  "How are we going to justify having all of these sharks around?"  "Hmm... the guys from 'Deliverance' decide to surround an island with various species of sharks, you know, so that it's educational?  OH!  And the sharks are wearing cameras and filming live deaths for Shark Week on the Discovery Channel?"  "You. Are. A. GENIUS!!!!!!!!!!"  The entire film is predictable and boring despite its constant shark attacks.  In the end, everybody gets what the deserve.  Including the audience, for paying to see such a crappy movie.  Thank goodness this film was only 85 minutes long.

The Wiz - 5 stars out of 10

The Wiz - 5 stars out of 10

"The Wiz" is a cool, funky interpretation of "The Wizard of Oz."  Unfortunately, this movie version misses a beat.  I did find the NYC atmosphere to be a really cool departure from the standard story, particularly the Tin Man's carnival atmosphere and the skyscraper Emerald City, but the filmmakers got so wrapped up in the bells and whistles that they lost the heart of the story.  It just doesn't feel like The Wizard of Oz.  By turning Dorothy into an adult role so that Diana Ross could play it, the youthful innocence (and subsequent important life lesson) is lost.  Michael Jackson is excellent as the Scarecrow, especially when he sings with the crows.  Nipsey Russell was a great Tinman, even though his crying was a little bit annoying.  And after a perfect set-up by timidly peeking out from behind the giant metallic head, Richard Pryor just had to stand there to make the Wizard a memorable character.  The film is filled with stars and catchy music, but it becomes a show instead of a story with an important moral.  Even though it isn't the best film that I've ever seen, it was worth watching for it's awesome choreography and slice of 1970's culture.  I enjoyed the music but I can see why this was heavily panned by critics and hope that they'll remake this again soon with a focus on the story.

Cowboys & Aliens - 5 stars out of 10

Cowboys & Aliens - 5 stars out of 10

"Cowboys & Aliens" is precisely what it sounds like.  But amidst the absurdity of this concept, an interesting story emerges.  The first half of this movie was precisely what I had hoped for - a genuine Western feel that, other than the title following the opening credits, would never give the indication of anything other than a Western.  The second half of this movie was precisely what I was afraid of - an alien movie whose only indication that it was a Western were a few cowboy hats.  The only reason that I gave this film a chance is because of Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford, figuring that there must have been something good about the script for two huge stars to sign on.  That, plus the curiosity as to how they could actually make this concept work.  I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of character development that brought these characters to life.  The acting was strong all around, and I really enjoyed the performances of Sam Rockwell (who is always a favorite of mine) and Olivia Wilde (who made it nearly impossible to look away from the screen).  I even thought that Paul Dano was really well cast (in spite of my inability to take him seriously in any role).  On the other side of things, the special effects were very impressive and I really liked the artistry of the aliens.  Unfortunately, the two sides did not properly gel.  A more appropriate title for the film might have been "Cowboys OR Aliens."  This is a decent Friday night action movie, but just be prepared for it to feel like an alien-from-outer-space film or an illegal-alien-from-Mexico film, but rarely like both at the same time.