Up

It's hard to imagine a world without Pixar. For nearly 15 years (good God, has it been that long?), the animation company has dished out hit after hit, without sacrificing good storytelling. Like many, I consider Cars their least awesome film, but it certainly isn't bad and is still better than most of the animated features other studios are putting out. For me, Up is among their very best films, rivaling the magnificent The Incredibles and last years Wall-E. Which is something I'm glad to say, considering Up may be Pixar's riskiest film to date. An old man as the protagonist? In a children's film? Preposterous. But not only is Carl Fredricksen a fantastic character, he is part of an intensely deep story about love and loss. The soon-to-be widely-discussed first ten minutes, chronicling the life of Carl and his true love, sets the tone for the entire film, and I dare you not to be moved by it, less you be some cold, heartless bastard. Though this does provide the opportunity to say that Pixar films should not be considered kid films any longer, just films children can see and enjoy, but which their parents will enjoy even more. Credit is due to Pete Docter and Bob Peterson for their fantastic work on scripting and directing. Every year, I await the announcement on the next Pixar film, questioning if it'll be the one that ends the streak. With an upcoming Toy Story sequel, I think it's safe to say the odds are in our favor.

Genre - Animation (4)

Screenplay (4)
Acting (4)
Production (4)
Directing (4)

Drag Me To Hell

Welcome back, Sam. It's been many years since you've given us a horror film (even more if you exclude Army of Darkness, given its more action/comedy vibe), yet clearly you've still got it. Even with the limits of PG-13, Drag Me to Hell manages to relentlessly attack the audience with so many jump scares, you'll be on the edge of your seat the entire film, knowing if you relax for even a second, some frightening image will pop off the screen. But while jump scares are usually the cheapest kind, director Sam Raimi knows how to utilize them, especially when they're mixed with his signature comedic touch. Drag Me to Hell wont be the scariest film you've ever seen, but in the modern, watered-down world of horror, you'll be hard pressed to find one that is as much fun. Fans of Raimi's work, especially of his Evil Dead trilogy, may notice little callbacks to those films, and his time as a young filmmaker. In one scene, a possessed many does a little dance jig, which I believe Bruce Campbell did as Evil Ash in Army of Darkness. The acting is solid all around the board, even Justin Long, who is both loved and reviled by so many. Which is comforting, watching a horror film without cringing at terrible acting. Younger horror fans will certainly dig Drag Me to Hell, showing them a side of the genre they might not have been introduced to yet, and die hard Raimi fans will relish the style and passion they remember from his older work. Drag Me to Hell is a creepy, funny, gross little picture, and I guarantee you'll walk out of the theater with a smile on your face.

Genre - Horror (3.75)

Screenplay (4)
Acting (3)
Production (4)
Directing (4)

Splinter

Six cast members. From start to finish, only six cast members step in front of the camera, two of them only for a few minutes. I like that. Especially in a movie like this, when high concept could have stepped in and muddy the events preceding it. While Splinter is hardly a perfect horror film, or even a particularly memorable one, it is a fun flick. The story is simple: monster, hostages, blood/gore, gas station. That about sums it up. For some, Splinter will be lacking in fast paced action, others will enjoy the character development that begins the film but will be disappointed when it tails off halfway in, and others will question the questionable science. But these are problems many horror films face, and in one that doesn't take itself too seriously, as Splinter does, they are easy to forgive. Plus, the monster was an interesting one, building itself from body parts of its victims, which it kills because it is simply a disease/bacteria/virus thing that needs to feed. But the splinter aspect is what really intrigued me, and I hope to see further development of the splintering in another film (though I am not encouraging stealing the idea, but suggesting the creators of Splinter do something cool).

Genre - Horror (2.5)

Screenplay (2)
Acting (3)
Production (3)
Directing (2)

Fido

Oh, how I wanted to love this. A comedy/horror film about domesticated zombies. What's not to love about that? Well, a lot of it actually. Fido is by no means terrible. It is just so mediocre that I can't help but feel disappointed. There was so much that could have been done with Fido, I'm surprised it decided to stick to the same jokes and skimp on any real social commentary. It tries, but never really takes advantage of the opportunity. Maybe Andrew Currie, a writer and the director of Fido, should reexamine George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead for an example of zombie social commentary (zosocom?). But he does have some fun with his characters, building an interesting enough character out of Fido himself, the zombie a middle class family buys as a...well, slave essentially. The character never speaks and instead just grunts, as zombies are ought to do, yet audience's will probably care more for Fido than any of the other characters, which is a testament to that one character, yet kind of a sad statement for the human characters surrounding him. In the end, there are so many zombie films, one disappointment just leaves room for dozens of others to surpass.

Genre - Comedy/Horror (2.25)

Screenplay (2)
Acting (2)
Production (3)
Directing (2)

Chinatown

I've finally seen it. Chinatown is one of those films you always hear about, usually focused on the quality of the film in general, but especially about the screenplay. Is the (film geek) hype right? More or less. There is no doubt, Chinatown is a good film. As a noir mystery/thriller, it gets the job done. Jack Nicholson is at the top of his game, reminding us all how good he can be. So is the rest of the supporting cast. And Roman Polanski directs the hell out of every scene, building tension slowly, drawing the mystery out, until you're left to piece the puzzle together. Oh, and the screenplay is as exceptional as they say. As an example of screenplay writing at its finest, this works as well as any of the best (Casablanca, Pulp Fiction, White Chicks...actually, scratch that last one). Okay, so maybe it works better than more or less. Chinatown is long though, and there are moments it drags (just barely) and gets a bit convoluted with its mystery (nothing that can't be worked out), but these aren't the things you remember after the film is over. Any budding screenwriter (cough, me, cough) should make Chinatown a priority, and so should any other film lover.

Genre - Mystery (3.75)

Screenplay (4)
Acting (4)
Production (3)
Directing (4)

Terminator Salvation

I think we are all waiting, or at least fans of the the Cameron entries, for a Terminator that is as profound and exciting as the first two of the series. Is that unfair, to hope for the same power in a Terminator film that we felt decades ago? No, I think there is still hope. Is Terminator Salvation that film. No. But, this new entry does succeed on one level: excitement. Sure, it isn't as profound as the Terminator films Cameron gave us, and not even the same kind of exciting, but for an action film, it is as good, or better, than Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. That film was fairly decent action flick, but didn't carry the emotional weight of its predecessors. Terminator Salvation seems to be the start of a small series inserted into the Terminator universe we know, so there is time to build on the mystery, the awe.

The main problem is the script, which, again, works well for an action movie, but doesn't quite achieve anything more, except the nods to other films seemed to work, at least for me. What really hurt it was a number of behind the scenes problems, and interference from too many people, that screwed up the possibility of smooth flow. Future films in the series can improve on this, especially by hiring a top notch writer, let someone Dark Knight it (oh yes, I brought in Dark Knight). But Terminator Salvation did some things right. McG proves he isn't a complete hack, with little to do but recieve mockery for his name. Those jokes and jabs have been done to death, and it seems he really wants to improve as a director, so props to him. The cast does exactly what it needs to do, except the John Connor (Christian Bale) we see on screen appears to have something challenging his life, other than robots, which I imagine, and hope, will be explored in the next entry. Sam Worthington plays Marcus Wright and does a great job, as does Anton Yelchin for his Kyle Reese character. But Terminator Salvation is at its best with action set pieces and special effects. There is little to say for them other than they rock. The action was fast and mean, but never shaky enough to take you out of the fight, which is more than welcomed these days. Essentially, this is a film that works because I had fun, because the summer blockbuster excitement was there, and now all I need is that deep Terminator mythology extend, so as long as that is someday sated, I'll be a happy camper.

Genre - Action (3)

Screenplay (2)
Acting (3)
Production (4)
Directing (3)

Step Brothers

Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly. A pair that could be quite potent. In fact, the potential a film like Step Brothers had was huge. But it didn't live up to that potential, and instead fell short (obviously...right?). Unfortunately, there were some very funny parts, little gems that were scattered throughout, that made the whole affair decent, but not great. Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly have a great chemistry, and I would love to see them work together again. Here is my biggest complaint though, which you may have already have guessed by now: the script. The "story" is only half-heartedly sandwiched between the comedy routines I imagine were thought through long before the rest of the movie. So, besides a handful of moments of inspired genius, Step Brothers was kind of a disappointment. Well, wait, I don't want to say I didn't enjoy myself while watching the film, just that I was constantly hoping for more. Which is weird, because I usually find myself feeling this way after Will Ferrell films, understanding a strong idea was behind the film, but one that wasn't fully realized. And Richard Jenkins should have been given better. He is great at drama, and I liked seeing him tackle comedy. I'm sure another version of the same idea will come along again, if not just in terms of feeling, so this is just a stepping stone to something greater. At least I hope.

Genre - Comedy (2.25)

Screenplay (2)
Acting (3)
Production (2)
Directing (2)

Star Trek (2009)

Well, they were right, this is not your fathers Star Trek. That's what the trailers for the film claimed, and the statement holds true. Sure, there are enough connections to the old series to appease the Trekkies, but J.J. Abrams' Star Trek is a fresh reboot that is immediately thrown into high gear and never forgets how to have fun. And that's what I love about it. Sure, there is still room for the old Star Trek film series (including the Next Generation ones), but what Abrams gives us is a new take on old material, much like Casino Royale did with Daniel Craig's Bond. The cast is what holds this new Trek together, each of them fun or interesting enough to merit boldly going through the final frontier a couple more times. Abrams work behind the camera doesn't hurt either, including the little hints at his former television work (polar bears and time travel with Lost, a giant red ball of science for Alias). But, while the weakest characteristic - though that's not saying much in a nearly perfect blockbuster film - is the script, writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman managed to create an alternate timeline for this new Trek series, without erasing the original. All in all, Star Trek is everything you could want from a big-budget summer extravaganza, and both cast and crew deserve full credit. Now I eagerly await the next entry in the Star Trek series.

Genre - Sci-Fi/Action (3.75)

Screenplay (3)
Acting (4)
Production (4)
Directing (4)

JCVD

Something about meta-esque films appeal to me. The self-aware characteristic of a film can draw you in, present a type of story not typically seen. JCVD (short for Jean-Claude Van Damme) is one of those films. He plays an actor, himself, someone with real world problems. Except he is also involved in the robbery of a post office in Belgium, his home country. What ensues is a wacky, multiple perspective piece that finds Van Damme mixed up in some legal issues, all because his wife is trying to take his daughter from him. Finally, he ends up in the post office, using his action star persona to make it through the hostage situation alive. The film is fun, mostly because Jean-Claude is able to poke fun at himself while maintaining a hint of cool that he is best known for. While JCVD is a fictional spin on Van Damme, there is a moment where the fourth wall is broken, leading to the best scene of the film. The plot is thick enough, and told from enough perspectives, that multiple viewings may be necessary. But, perhaps the most surprisingly aspect, is how great a job Van Damme does playing himself. It feels real, his words, his actions, his emotional toils, and you can't help but feel for the guy and his movie problems. Definitely worth a watch, especially if you're fans of Adaptation, Being John Malkovich, or Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

Genre - Drama (3.25)

Screenplay (3)
Acting (4)
Production (3)
Directing (3)

Che: Part 1

Figures in history don't get much more controversial than the man they call Che. Ernesto "Che" Guevara is both reviled and adored by people all over the world. So any film to tackle his life as a revolutionary and guerrilla soldier in Cuba has a lot to contend with. Personal feelings about Che and his methods are not my concern, but my thoughts on Che are. Wait, what? I love Steven Soderbergh's ability to jump from independent features to big-budget flicks and back, but I'm especially impressed when he can blend the two, in the sense that you can't quite tell what type of film he's made. Che is one of his more independent films, but you'd be hard pressed to differentiate it from a big-budget flick tackling the same issue. And the best part? Che has enough action and smarts to keep you interested. Politics are certainly prevalent throughout the film, but never enough to deter you. Agreeing, or sympathizing, with Che and his fellow revolutionaries isn't the point, but getting another viewpoint is. But these political statements are sandwiched between interesting character moments and rapid fire gun battles, so there's something for everyone. Something must also be said of Benicio Del Toro, who disappears into the role of Che Guevara. In fact, with Del Toro being the only recognizable face, the rest of the acting triumphs, because it adds to the realism. The story doesn't end with Che: Part 1, as you might have guessed, and much more of the Che story is yet to be told.

Genre - Biopic/Drama (3.5)

Screenplay (3)
Acting (4)
Production (3)
Directing (4)