wynonasbigbrownbeaver

Hearing mixed reviews, I finally brought myself to watching Dead Snow. I will admit, I liked certain parts, and others I really didn't like, with some other moments leading me to scratch my head theorizing how the script could have done much better.

The cast, though quite generic as a group of partying medical students, undergo their trip to their clichéd isolated cabin in the woods retreat in the winter time. They involve themselves in a drinking game, listening to an old folk lore told by an outsider, warning them about the danger of the Nazi Zombies looking for some gold, when soon after this stranger GOES AGAINST HIS OWN ADVICE and camps out alone to be MURDERED ONE SCENE LATER. After wards these zombies set their sights on the group of college kids, and pick them off one by one. They fend for themselves by mauling other zombies in rather creative ways and dying in a less predictable fashion. I will give them points for that. The death scenes are gory, and some of the action scenes are rather creative and almost comical. There was some impressive camera work involving one particular victim being eaten alive by the Nazi Zombies.

Points are lost for another bone headed plot hole involving a belated cell phone call THE DAY AFTER two of their buddies get killed. Shouldn't they have called the police especially when they were within cell phone range? Another rather weird moment is one guy deliberately sawing his own arm off, which can be seen tucked in the actors sweater, after his self amputation.

Something else I wished what would happen is maybe some exposition, just enough for me to understand how these Nazi Zombies came to be rather than just accept their conceptual existence.

Overall, I am still debating on whether I can actually say I would recommend this movie to anyone. This really isn't a thinking man's zombie genre movie, but watch it for its creativity.

So I ask myself, while watching this throughout most of its entirety: where are the Monsters? It was then I almost overlooked the chemistry between the two main leads, which of course carries Monsters through the seemingly uneventful sci-fi movie. The photographer and the tourist both leave no stone unturned in terms of character development and the actual aliens are placed in the backdrop. I liked the scientific explanation of the monsters and the political scheme.

The two leads tend to play it safe, therefore making it difficult for the plot of the movie to involve itself in anything action packed. The set pieces, (and there are lots of them), add intrigue to the creatures maliciousness. But after I see set pieces complete with an assortment of downed aircraft, tanks, rubble, and broken down buildings, what do I get? More set pieces of destruction, which look rather good, but overly continuous. The movie tended to be a never ending tunnel of set pieces, and sparsely used special effects. The climax tends to be leaning toward an actual romantic connection.

Overall, I will still recommend this movie based on the developing relationship of the two leads. Those who liked District 9 or Avatar may not like this as much. Monsters could have been about anything else. Don't be deceived by what it appears to be. Still a worth while watch.

After all the negative reviews, I found this title to be routine action with nothing special in the wow factor, maybe because I put my expectations real low on this one since all it does is go through the motions. The 3-D is sufficient and the characters are okay in the terms of acting. It looked nice in some parts and the set pieces were decent with the zombie hoards and the opening credits in Japan. Action wise, it was rather forgettable and tried too hard to compensate with excessive slow motion. Though I did like those coin bullets Alice used. A small highlight... Wesker and Chris Redfield characters were decently casted but they need a little more material to work off of. Wesker looks spot on but need more substance than emanating the sinister Agent Smith scowl.

The fiber of the movie is even deader than the zombie itself. I didn't like this as much as the previous, but didn't hate it entirely either. There could have been improvements in some character development. I was wondering how squeaky clean and clean cut the supporting cast remained 4 and a half years after a zombie apocalypse. The supporting cast is routinely placed to get picked off at a predictable level for the sake of plot convenience. A little more so if you know about the characters in the video game. If they're neither Alice or the Resident Evil video game cast, then chances are they'll pretty much die (spoiler). Like the swim team girl, deliberately placed there to get picked off.

Plot holes are obvious, not really making sense in third or fourth dimensions of space and time. If you've seen the predecessors, you would realize that each back story changes during every subsequent movie made in terms of where and how the zombie apocalypse began. First it was Raccoon city and then Anderson decides the apocalypse started in Japan (?). There are more loop holes than that. Alice just didn't kill Wesker, but points a gun to his head with an "any last words?" conveniently enabling Wesker to retaliate against her, for the sake of plot convenience to keep the villain alive in the beginning. I also didn't feel that they elaborated on why Chris Redfield was trapped in a jail cell, because he's dangerous more so than the zombies (?). The roof top scene seemed a little too staged, as if zombies were waiting in between takes and then retry to bum rush our main character. Did the zombies move out of the way after they get shot or something? (spoiler) How did the trio know that Wesker will escape through another helicopter to the extent of where they staged a bomb on it?

Overall, RE 4 didn't upset me, but I really don't think I can recommend it entirely. It is slick looking but overall lacking in any real substance, Anderson knows that this movie wasn't going to be Oscar material but still, it could have been much better. Feel free to watch this, if you can take the mindless action.

Cutting to the chase and the biggest gripe of this movie. (SPOILER ALERT) So they poisoned this girl (who was going to die anyway), and they go on to shoot her? This part really started off bad for me. Then there is this obvious corporation with obvious villains, I MEAN REALLY OBVIOUS (i.e. Danny Huston with the villainous hair overlooking the high rise in his wealth ridden corporate office, the senator under speculation about receiving funding from lobbyists etc). So Mel Gibson, (welcome back, I wish you came back in a better movie.), goes digging and finds a whole bunch of corruption without proper surveillance. He finds this dummy grieving boyfriend who yaps while under surveillance by a van across the street, telling Mel Gibson he is afraid of his life, vocally admitting and professing secrets while he KNOWS HE IS BEING RECORDED, be a little discreet-why don't you. Our righteous protagonist DOES NOTHING about it and lets the sorry sap get sniped. What about those people who come clean about their involvement, why can't the police force offer protection? As for this Corporation, real dumb at hiding their mistakes. Why can't they just use their poison instead. It worked throughout the movie, why did they need to get violent? Why did they need to kidnap Mel Gibson, where he obviously escapes? For the sake of useless plot convenience which leads to his inevitable escape? They could have just broke into his house and poisoned him in his sleep rather than disclose their faces and betrayal. The villains practically enter his house and said "Hi, I am the villain of this movie and we are going to do what all useless villains do, and just bag you and kidnap you so you can escape our evil domain". The villains ruin the movie tenfold.

The only thing part I liked about this movie was Ray Winstone's character. Mel Gibson, outside his old fashioned obsolete police tactics kept the pacing of the movie afloat, just barely. The movie also does its best to get an emotional rise between his character and daughters ghost. But felt a little empty to me.

I hope the audience is smarter than this portrayal. I can't recommend this movie because this is an insult to my intelligence.

This was 86 minutes that seemed to drag on forever. 95 percent of the movie about these 9 not-so-random strangers bickering while in captivity on why they are held. They all pretty much get taser-ed unconscious, bagged, and dragged. They wake up in this Saw/Hostel-like cell without windows as the masked kidnapper removes their blindfolds and gags.

First off none of the kidnapped panic and scream like a normal hostage would do. They just stay bound dumbfounded. Then they spend the next 70 something minutes bickering back and forth on the mystery of their captivity, while one of them gets shot every 10 minutes. Random confessions about their lives of scandalous affairs and murders they commit erupt but take up screen time as they have nothing to do with the plot. I will admit, the script on some of these characters is well made, and the story successfully led me on to the end as each character unearths their own closet skeletons. The Sully Fenton and Coogan characters had some depth along with the bewildered Chinese lady. Fenton was probably the most likable character until his lisp came out which got a little too overbearing in the end. Leon's character filled the black stereotype that wasn't really necessary along with the controversial cop Jackson. But in the end, I found myself not caring for any of cast in the long run.

So as soon as the remaining survivors successfully brainstormed this hair brained reason why they are in captivity, the captor comes clean about himself but it doesn't resolve on gigantic plot hole on why I think Dead Nine is an epic fail. How did he know that Christians character was the one who robbed the convenient store? Which leads me to asking how did he know that Christian confessed to the father Francis about his robbery? How did he know that he bought the gun from Leon and how did he know that Christian loaned money from Sully Fenton? It just seems the captor just psychically channeled this information prior to kidnapping them. Yes, the hostages confessed to their wrong doings but how did the captor know any of this before hand? Maybe in the end, he could have resolved my questions with a couple of lines.

My other complaint about Dead Nine is that it is just too systematic in its premise. Every 10 minutes, some character gets shot. Rinse and repeat. The police are always portrayed as incompetent, even with that brief Baldwin cameo. It also steals the concept of Saw 6, another not-so-great movie with the health insurance fiasco.

I don't recommend Dead Nine even with the solid script and some character development. It is a much more bloodless version of Saw and Hostel in the torture department and delivers very little suspense overall.

I didn't expect much coming into this movie, but here's what I got out of it.

Ninja Assassin started out like a an action movie with bad acting from Yakuza members but interest stimulated me as soon as the severed cranium scene occurred. The opening scene and the training scenes were actually interesting to see how the protagonist played by Rain came into a deadly assassin of the Ozuma "clan". The problem is, they were speaking English to each other the ENTIRE time, which reduced the movie into boring and clichéd English dialog. Ninja assassin would have maintained a certain degree of authenticity had the Japanese language was in play. (Yes I understand the protagonist is Korean) Ninja Assassin didn't get any better after the beginning, it followed up slow in pace to the next action scene. I really disliked how the action was cut, and how the lighting maintained each scene. Most of the fight scenes were confusing and sloppy that I couldn't really tell what was going on. Maybe the ninja magic is too stealthy for me to figure out. Even the silhouette sword fighting scene in Kill Bill was much more decipherable than 90 percent of the action here. The few scenes I did like was when Raiza was ordered to a hit job in the mens room and the very beginning.

The stunts weren't very impressive, and the editing did much to cover up the lack of ninja stunts by making erroneous cuts in each scene. Also, I had a difficult buying into the Ozuma clan's mysteriousness, especially when they launch a full scale attack against an incompetent SWAT team along with a public and confusing battle on the highway. The camera work tactfully cuts away implied ninja flips over cars as if the audience wouldn't catch that. Maybe they should have hired Jackie Chan or Tony Jaa to direct the choreography and I might have been awe inspired. They should have also improved on their cinematography. The movie finalizes with a clichéd "boss fight" in a middle of a burning building. How "original"...

Contrary to popular opinion with a current 6.7 rating, I wasn't real impressed with Ninja Assassin. Optimistically, I would have thought it could have been a decent action movie, but fell short. I don't recommend this movie because I felt like I was a bit cheated into thinking this Ninja Assassin was about choreography and stunt work, but others might find this more enjoyable than I.

Overall I admire Spike Jonze's directing from his predecessor "Being John Malkovich", and was looking forward to this movie. I've been waiting almost a year to watch this movie and anticipated its greatness. I was unable to catch it out here with the release dates but heard mixed reviews about WTWTA. I was sold on the previews with that song by "Arcade Fire" and looked for it constantly on iTunes and the DVD store. Now actually seeing it, here is what I got out of it.

Sendak and Jonze did their best to implement screen time into a feature length film from a mostly illustrated children's story book. Most of this screen time was in observation of the return to animatronics. Seeing many of these nearly life-like "wild things" brought me back into the nostalgic times of the Muppets and Sesame Street. Then it clicked to me, that the target audience was for more so for the adults who were raised with that storybook read to them along with exposure to Jim Henson's works when they are young. Kid's today, are more focused on CG and crap animation. For me, it was like seeing Snufalupagus doing back flips, and rough housing with big bird. The muppets are the bread and butter. The CG wasn't decipherable and blended in with these creatures, if there were any.

I really wanted to like this movie more, I had some trouble trying to identify the emotional connection with between Max and the wild things that supposedly ate their previous kings. I wish there was a tad more interaction instead of the mere befriending and rough housing montages between the characters, it was almost as if Sendak and Jonze were couldn't figure out what to implement next. In the story I thought he was supposed to be sent to his bedroom rather than run into a forested area. Plot points were used sparingly as well.

This movie still works in it's own way, and I really wish it could have been perfected, however not for everyone. WTWTA is still recommendable.

On one episode, O'Reilly once stated that "all" war veterans are reaping the benefits they deserve once their service has been complete and that there are "no" homeless veterans in the United States. He wasn't prepared to eat his words, once a horde of homeless military veterans actually stood outside the Fox News building in protest, demanding his presence to prove to him he was wrong. A petition, that was several hundred pages thick, had names of all veterans experiencing little benefits for their time in service.

He once argued with a son of a deceased 9/11 victim, losing his composure in the process in front of live camera feed, that "he has done more for his country" than his guest "has ever done in his entire life!". Mr. O'Reilly, what have you really done for your country? Do you really look out for the troops your news network claims to support? Certainly your 10 million dollar a year contract reaps more than the troops ever acquire in their time of service and they risk their lives and their limbs out on the field.

Stating this, I AM a capitalist Republican from the south and are appreciative of Republican values portrayed on the News Network. But at least have some integrity when it comes to acknowledging the facts. O'Reilly, your methods of a Republican message to society does a disservice to America. You've done nothing for your country and are an embarrassment to me as an American.

Just finished watching the 3-d version of this as I wouldn't recommend experiencing Avatar any other way. I'm sure there has been much mentioned in previous reviews about Avatar in its strengths and weaknesses but here is what I got out of it.

As far as appearances go, this movie is great to look at, everything seems immaculate in its detail. Some of the creatures seem very real in some of the close up shots. The character played by Sam Worthington is the protagonist I can root for as the wheel chair bound hero turned Nav'i. The monsters were biologically creative with their telepathically physical qualities. It felt like an adventure ride from start to finish. I especially liked the beginning in the space ship where the troops were floating in space. The story, while rumored to be plagiarizing, seems forgivable, though months behind District 9, and Surrogates (a movie I didn't like too much). There were some implementations.

Aside from the seemingly clichéd story, I had trouble with some of the vast amount of expositions that made the story way too predictable. The writing needed to be tweaked in order to sway from the dangerously predictable clichés in Avatar. Mentioned was a dragon head that only 5 members of the Nav'i tribe was able to conquer and tame throughout history, I found myself thinking: lemme guess, Worthington's character will probably take the saddle of this "dragon" later on in the film, and you know what? I was right. Then there was that pointless group-gathering montage, as if the Nav'i from the rest of the planet didn't know that their sacred tree was fallen. I felt that part should have been eliminated too. Then there was that general, while good at his part, seemed like he was all over the place as his character is spread too thin. The general stands watch in the middle of the night, holds meetings, makes strange brainwashed Marine dialog and fights in mech suits. He would have been a better right hand man, not necessarily a colonial or presidential leader. He was over utilized as a universal bad guy which got annoying.

If you think these are major gripes, they are not really. This movie is still "all sorts of awesome" and I will be sure to own the DVD when it comes out. I still recommend it, outstanding visuals will make the story forgivable.

Before any Westerner visits India for the first time, I strongly recommend them to view Outsourced prior to their arrival. The "bread and butter" of the movie is that there is so much one can learn by analyzing some of the customs and trends of Indian culture.

Outsourced is a very light-spirited venture about the life of an American sales manager who is prompted to make a business trip to India in order to train his replacements. All the characters are likable and the key situations that occur seem realistic. (Of course the majority of the cast is obviously Indian so it would make sense.) It was interesting to see the main character go through the transition from adjusting to vegetarianism, learning compassion through generosity, consciously eating with the right hand and other habits.

Being a good hearted film, the only thing outsourced lacks is some prolonged suspense. There is nothing too dramatic about the changes the main character had to go through other than his initial embrace to Indian life, a mild issue with an extra-marital affair, and the brief moment where he had to tell his trainees that they've been laid off. Everything seemed just a little too easy though I am aware it is in the culture of the supporting cast to positively adjust to change.

As said before, I would recommend this movie to any American or Western traveller to forewarn them of the culture shock that he/she would face. I've actually enjoyed this movie to my surprise.

My fellow peers at work told me and warned me about all the disadvantages in regards to this newest Tarantino flick. I was actually hesitant about purchasing this movie from iTunes. But for the love of Tarantino, I decided to purchase it rather than pay 4 dollars for the rental.

I feel Inglorious Basterds is a little bit overrated, but I still liked it anyway. There are many characters that bounce off each other in each drawn out scenario that there is much to like and dislike about this partially true world war 2 story. The Basterds, which in my opinion were the best part of the movie, don't have enough screen time to the point where I found myself shallow in feelings towards them. I really wanted to root for them the whole way through. Tarantino is a genius when it comes to dialog and script to the point where he can have the actors talk about anything on screen.

The trilingual scenarios were interesting but quickly dragged. There was long drawn out sequences spoken in French, German, and even Italian. When there was anticipation of a violent or climactic episode, there was much hesitance in each chapter. I found myself getting a little too anxious when some key circumstances needed to "happen" and Tarantino decides to delay the inevitable over and over again. Each scene seemed about five minutes too long.

Overall, it is an above average movie at best for me. Some may see it otherwise but I still recommend it.

I will briefly describe my experience when downloading the movie: Isolation, on iTunes. I wasn't quite sure what to expect. The movie was listed with a mediocre website score both here on IMDb and on iTunes, so I thought to myself I'd give this movie a shot. The previews looked really good and held out most of the flaws I am about to explain below.

The scenery of a desolate farm in Northern Ireland as well as the classic camera work that was used made it much more atmospheric. This type of solitude in cinema reminded me of the good old days of watching the Thing. The acting was very solid, especially for the protagonist farmer Dan played by John Lynch. It has all its initial suspenseful moments matched up in the beginning where I was with chilly expectations. The intensity was there up until after the segment of the cows rather disturbing and grotesque sequence giving birth to its calf. Afterwards there were some minor moments of freakish creature feature. There is much storytelling involved along the lines to how these parasite monster evolve, some of it is actually intriguing. The movie did its best to conceal the true identity of the monsters/parasites until half way through. This is where the movie started to die in terms of fear factor.

My big complaint about Isolation, was the level of fear factor that involved this parasite monster when it was actually exposed. Sure the minimal special effects did the job on it in terms of quality but it is hard to be afraid of something that resembles a chaotic mess of rubbery flesh that squirms around with its pointy teeth. There was some inconsistency with its size as well. It jumps on one victim like it's 200 pounds, while another actor impales it and lifts it up in the air like it's 10 pounds later on. Physically, it was probably the worst movie monster I've ever seen in recent memory. I wish it was more believable in itself.

I can't hate the movie completely and can't fault it for its merits, the cinematography is very well done and perhaps its biggest strength. I still recommend Isolation though some may understandably find themselves disappointed.

The definition of a vampire is an inhumane corpse supposed to leave its grave at night to drink the blood of the living. Bakjwi nearly nails this concept on the head minus the cliché of pointy fangs and neck biting. Being an R rated movie, I knew this was actually going to pertain to vampires actually being vampires. Which means that the characters in the movie are going to do what vampires actually do without restraint and rightfully lack any glamorous moments in comparison to Twilight. Having viewed Chan-wook Park's preceding Oldboy, I had very high expectations of Bakjwi.

I anticipated some awkward plot sequences with our anti-hero, known as Priest Sang-hyeon, and was very impressed by his performance as a holy-man who is forced into this quandary of being humane and obeying his thirst as a vampire. (SPOILER) After the initial premise of him surviving the defective blood transfusion, he starts to crave blood and discovers his super strength and his flying ability. The screen shots do his transition phase without overbearing on exposition. He starts drinking the blood of the dying and those who wish to be euthanized for moral reasons. The oft tragic and dysfunctional love affair the priest has with the manipulative Tae-joo is very riveting as they are played by The Host's Kanh-ho Song and actress OK-vin Kim. The special effects are properly placed in the backdrop and while it doesn't offer anything new in the ways of stunts and CGI, it didn't impose itself into the plot driven and character developed premise. The story and the pivotal plot points are very perverse and grotesque yet very original in its own Korean style.

There aren't many negatives I can say about Bakjwi. Sometimes I ask myself if the priests transition phase could have showed more of the priest having an emotional crisis with his transformation, but then again this would have made the movie 3 hours long. The movie was long to begin with. On the same token, vampires really don't have much in the way of expressing emotions to begin with. As mentioned before, this movie is very tragic, so don't expect anything hopeful while watching this.

Overall, Bakjwi is delightfully dark, morbid and original. I strongly recommend this movie for serious viewers who are past the teenage phase of Twilight. This is definitely the Korean answer to the Swedish Let The Right One In, which is also a good movie.

I've taken the risk of actually renting this would-be disaster piece on iTunes and realized it wasn't as bad as I thought it to be.

Overall, the movie met my expectations of good special effects, which is basically what Transformers is all about. All CGI looked very real and there was much work put into the stunts. These two parts never faltered throughout Revenge of the Fallen. What sets this movie apart from the prequel was there wasn't as much of awful character development (Thank goodness).

But still, I couldn't stand hearing any of these actors talk. Anything that comes out of these cardboard goofy characters' mouths were just annoying and just plain insulting. Even the voice overs were annoying. Michael Bay had an excuse to create an erroneous and hard-to-follow story line by placing self absorbed and nonsensical action sequences that bring more explosions and chaos to a deafening level. I was having a hard time following the confusing story line in the middle of it. I watched it today and have a hard time trying to explain what this movie was really about.

Yet still, this is not exactly horrible as I anticipated it. I don't quite recommend it fully, but the CGI and the special effects are probably worth viewing if you have nothing better to do.

From what I have gathered from Anderson's Royal Tenenbaums and Life Aquatic, I figured The Darjeeling Limited would be another deadpan cookie cutter since many of choices frequently involve similar actors in 2 or more of his films. I would hate to admit that this movie did grow on me midway through.

The casting of the three "brothers" Wilson, Brody, and Schwartzman actually worked as they gossip, fight and bond through this interesting "spiritual" journey. Anderson meticulously unravels each of their personalities with detail and intrigue without too much exposition thrown in all at once. The scenery of India and its environment was very appeasing to watch with the different types of people in this huge conglomerate of culture. Anderson throws in his occasional trademark diagonal close ups in certain shots to give it that grind house 70's look. The Indian natives acted perfectly natural and nothing seemed pre-staged in the way they go about their day to day lives.

Angelica Huston has a cameo in the end as well as a frequently used Bill Murray while neither were all that awe inspiring. The spiritual journey doesn't really mark anything in the end and is a bit confusing to what the movie was trying to accomplish as far as a moral other than the unity of the trio. The rather open ending was nonetheless the downfall due a lack of climax. I am still trying to wonder about the justifications on why the trio continue to ride the trains though there are more important matters in their lives that they should attend to. (Spoiler) Why would Brody's character want to remain bound to his brother when his wife is close to giving birth? The movie does continue to be complacent in its execution without any justification.

I recommend this movie for any Anderson fan though it isn't for everyone. The scenery and the chemistry between the three brothers are probably the movie's biggest strengths.

When I rented this from my iTunes account, I had no idea what was in store for me in the way of shock value. Admittedly, I was anticipating something of a sequel to Cohen's preceding Borat which heavily involved interviews with a subplot line of traveling the United States and meeting with more of its unexpected residents. Bruno is a dramatic change of tone because it still has many of the remnants of the Borat formula with implementations of the pre-staged sequences.

Bruno found new ways to provide over-the-top shock sequences such as a prolonged phallic scene and various homosexual sex scenes. I have to admit Cohen has a lot of courage to make out publicly with other men and walk around nude talking to rednecks in a tent. Some of it is very funny and it is very humorous to watch the reactions of these many random individuals that interact with Bruno. The part where Bruno was trying out for his new celebrity show was probably the peak of its humor where Harrison Ford was telling him to "f off". Cohen managed to get reactions out of me as I was either laughing or responding in disgust. The movie did its job in shock value. It was also like watching a homo-erotic version of the show Punk'd.

The biggest problem with me is that Cohen's Bruno seems to be a much more mean spirited character underneath his charm and flamboyant nature unlike his likable Borat character. Cohen repeats a similar narrow-minded and undiplomatic portrayal which leads to often predictable conclusions. People generally reject him for who he is just as he was when he played Borat and probably forces him to pre-stage an audience and gather unknown extras as supporting cast. It's probably because many people already knew Cohen for who he is so Cohen could only go so far with the unassuming population. The gay jokes and pranks are extremely overbearing. This made Bruno much more one-dimensional than Borat despite its outrageous approach. I thought the ending was a bit of a sell-out. Personally I'd be embarrassed if I was Snoop Dogg, Bono, Sting or Slash for actually participating in the end credits. The song wasn't even funny. The part where the Mexican laborer was acting as a chair for Elton John seemed a bit degrading.

Granted this movie is not for everyone and I question myself if this movie was even for me because of its offensiveness. Morally Bruno is very questionable for me to recommend. But in the terms of outrageous and breaking ground in cinema today I would say "see it". I might, however, hate myself in the morning for recommending it.

Given the somewhat entertaining track record of these After Dark films, I had some certain expectations with the given supporting cast of Michael Madsen, Vinnie Jones, and Micheal Kelly though in reality they've had a little more than brief cameos. But somehow I found myself losing complete faith this movie due to terrible writing after the first 5 minutes.

One of the few minor positive things about Tooth and Nail was that it had potential. It tried to reference a would-be global crisis of the exhaustion of natural resources, and I thought it would take its aim toward something else more cataclysmic. The two plot twists were only mildly stimulating as I considered them to be possibilities beforehand, but none the less predictable. The flashback was a minor spark in the end.

This is the point of where it started to be insulting. The concept that the apocalypse started after the world "ran out of gas" was very far fetched as best, but what really got me was the aftermath in the storyline. It just didn't make sense. Are people that desperate to just wither away and die in the streets? Would they really starve to death or try to eat each other? Haven't they heard of growing crops, fishing, and raising livestock? Other forms of power such as solar power and hydro-power could have been utilized instead. Even if there weren't any available alternatives, humanity wouldn't go down to that level of savagery. Humanity has survived without gas for tens of thousands of years, and I wouldn't think they would devolve that quickly. That large and obvious plot hole could have been covered.

The level of fear factor in this movie is zero, it shouldn't have been in the mix of After Dark Horrorfest since it seemed like "made for TV" cheese. These survivors deliberately hide in a hospital in hopes "to rebuild society" in the middle of a concrete jungle. What do they do, when one of their own gets killed? They just wait like sitting ducks until another one of their own gets picked off. Their ultimate solution is to "just hide somewhere" in the hospital, enabling these big dummies to catch them and drag them away for food. The survivors' lame excuse for continually dying one-by-one is that the hospital is just "too big" to lock all the doors at night. Oh, that's real genius I tell you... All these characters are labeled the constant horror movie cliché as "too stupid to live". They separate and one dies after another. What was even lamer was that Dakota character not accepting the fact that her boyfriend the Professor got killed. She saw the blood, his glasses were left behind, he is obviously not there.

The credibility of these villains are laughable. Maybe a reference to give these cannibals a better background would have worked. The movie should have told me that these cannibals have mutated or contracted have a zombie virus instead. But these big oafs for villains just walk around in a lobotomized state with tiny little axes and carving knives. They may be strong, but they seemed very dim witted. Michael Madsen obviously wasn't taking his role seriously with some of the worst acting minutes I've seen in recent memory. As for Vinnie Jones, he was fronting his role with a closing psychotic laughter. Oooh...I'm scared. Then there's that eloquent cannibal who was tooting the D flat note with his horn who talks to himself about no other subject than eating meat, just like the rest of the cannibals. The dialog is one dimensional, uninspired and lazy. Okay I've complained enough about this film to the point where it pisses me off.

I can't recommend Tooth and Nail with these noticeable and unjustifiable flaws. Don't waste your time with this movie. Seriously.

I just finished watching the directors cut. I will admit that it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be judging from some of the critiques at IMDb. It was produced well enough with believable visuals and very decent settings for the fact that models have been used throughout. I honestly couldn't tell if it was a CG environment or not while watching this. What showed preemptive promise of Mutant Chronicles were the slew of well known actors are in this such as Thomas Jane, John Malkovich, Ron Perlman, and Devon Aoki. Some of the action scenes were well done to the point that I wished I saw more of that over the Chronicle story. The pace does pick up in the later hour of the film, after the so-so war sequence and the group gathering montage was finished.

I was a bit disappointed that John Malkovich's act was cut short to a near cameo. Also I really didn't feel for rest the cast let alone really get to know them. It seemed to me that they were a bit underplayed in their demonstrations of various talents. Most of the cast showed many budding talents. Tom Wu had a near impressive fight scene with a mutant in a falling elevator, and I wished I saw more of him as well as Anna Walton's and Devon Aoki's displays of swordsmanship.

The writing was flawed a best and probably the "Achilles Heel" of Mutant Chronicles. I had to look up the word chronicle and one of the meanings is 'a work of fiction or nonfiction that describes a particular series of events'. The reason why I am bringing this up is that the initial narration of this movie is a bit confusing. Did I really need to know the extensive storyline between the 4 warring corporations? That part took too much screen time in the first 5 minutes. Also, the narration was done by Ron Perlman who is supposedly accounting for his story of forming this team of mercenaries. The sad thing is, he confusingly throws it in about three or four times throughout the whole movie. Was "Brother Samuel" telling a story even in his own demise while (SPOILER) impaled in his mutated state at the end? I also didn't understand how he came up with eight warriors, when he originally asked for twenty from the Constantine character. I can pick this movie apart on its details all day but I think I'll quit now.

Overall, Mutant Chronicles tried to win me over and was nearly successful in doing that. It is watchable yet mediocre. I can almost recommend this movie as an underdog favorite. Almost.

My anticipation of Away We Go was that it would be one of those "Low Key" comedies / dramas involving family situations such as the Royal Tenenbaums. The unwed odd couple Burt and Verona, played by John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph, are wonderfully magnetic. Both leads act natural in their journey as they visit family and friends across the various cities in North America. The comic relief throughout is nicely timed with the help of the supporting cast who somehow creates moments of laughter out of nothing. Besides the sporadically hilarious script, the pace of the movie tends to play it safe throughout the journey.

The mood dwindled down to a somewhat serious tone in the end. It was to the point that I wound up praying for something else funny to arise. I am aware that director Sam Mendes was inadvertently adding soft rock music to the simple mood of wanderlust in the screenplay. But the background instrumental score was a tad overbearing at times.

Overall I recommend Away We Go as it is very down to earth in it's approach to the audience. It could be treated like more than a movie, but perhaps a lesson on life in general that the audience can easily identify with.

My brief synopsis:

Pro's: 2 Hot chicks with swords (especially the villainess-she's a smokin'!), spontaneous combustion, decapitations, decent fight scenes along with the settings, eloquent Korean dialog (thank goodness for subtitles), "breathtaking visuals" almost unashamedly stealing from CTHD but still cool to look at warriors that glide in the air, and finally the unraveling back-story of the prince.

Con's: Not much to say negatively. People might have problems with the similar elements of CTHD but that's open to discussion. It might be too predictable and linear of a story line for some who expect the typical climactic finish when it comes to battling the final boss.

Overall Assessment: I recommend it, it is pretty darn cool to look at visually and has a story line full of substance. Rent it/ or Own it on iTunes.

I was lured into Chocolate as another Download from iTunes. At first I found it lagging in its story line and the montage on how the gangster parents met and Zen's upbringing. It felt a bit sluggish to me at first. But once the first fight scene started, it started to pick up the pace. I am aware that a story is necessary for this movie, to give a reason why Zen should expose her martial arts prowess against the evil Thai gang. Even though, I didn't completely buy into the concept that Zen was a "special needs" child that kept uttering "Mom's money", but that's just me. As for the fight scenes themselves, the choreography is awesome, especially the climactic 4 story scene. Upon its initial fight scene, I was reminiscent of the improvising Jackie Chan days of cinema. I came to appreciate the pain inflicted upon the whole cast watching the end credits. It references previous Tony Jaa movies and rightfully so, even though it might just be a marketing ploy.

I recommend this movie for any martial arts movie goers. Though, if possible, see the one that has subtitles. I wasn't too fond of the English dubbed version and it didn't seem entirely natural to me.

The movie Senseless was one of those movies I risked renting on iTunes. The premise seemed to display some promise in the suspense department. I am a bit split on my opinion of this movie as it primarily takes place inside this white wall confine in which Jason Behr's character is being held hostage for a televised torture porno. Apparently online viewers can pay his captors vast amounts of money just so they can watch our protagonist undergo sporadic and systematic torture sequences.

Overall, it was well produced and acted. Senseless operated effectively within its budget and didn't take any economical risks since most of the screening is dedicated to that one white walled room. The main villain had some depth but his henchmen other than the villainess Nim were just bodies behind alien masks. The protagonist is well developed yet still remained mysterious as one of the innocent victims. Senesless is a movie with deeply disturbing psychological roots that uncovers certain moral issues. This was a movie that definitely made me think.

Senseless tried to keep me intrigued and sustained in the protagonist's cubicle but nonetheless made me impatient to watch. The occasional supporting cast that play his captors are temporarily refreshing but it gets old quickly when they systematically continue throughout the film maiming Jason Behr's character. Yes, I found myself wincing at the bazaar torture sequences every time they bound him. But it did get repetitive, and it felt like a run around. I hastily anticipated a pivotal escape scene or something else other than a meaningless flashback, but none of that happened.

My other problem was the sensibility in the writing and yes, the questionable flashbacks that didn't really applied to the story but rather too much on Jason's Behr's character. I was asking myself if people are contributing money to the captor's cause, wouldn't the money be tracked straight to the captors hideout? To where a much desired SWAT team could make an intermittent imposition? That part just doesn't make sense and needed more elaboration to why the protagonist was held for 6 weeks without any hope to be rescued.

What would have worked for Senseless was maybe a better side story that would lead to the inevitable "release" of the main character. Maybe some more funding to create a slew of extras to add some richness to the story. Some plot holes could have been covered.

I am a bit iffy on recommending Senseless. But overall it was okay and wasn't entirely disappointing.

I was about to wonder if there was anything new besides sub-par remakes and tired sequels in the Sci-Fi genre. It is pleasing to know that fresh and original ideas can still be released such as District 9. There is not enough praise I can give this movie. Call me, or everyone else who loved this movie, dead wrong.

If there were any flaws that could exist in this movie, District 9 compensated me with a great story line, great acting, great CGI, and above all-adrenaline pumping action that gave me the first person "HALO" experience. I am glad to have watched District 9, regardless of some of the controversy it brings (Oh well, not one ethnicity is sacred these days). District 9 is my personal favorite movie of the year, above Crank 2, and the Hangover.

I strongly recommend it.

The Nines is a metaphysical suspense story about Ryan Reynolds playing three different characters, and how they are all connected.

Not much to discuss on the movie as I would provide immediate spoilers. It is divided into three parts, each delineating the three personalities played by RR and the consistent relationships with the two concurrent supporting actresses, played by Melissa MacCarthy and Hope Davis.

The transitions between the three parts originally raised eyebrows for me, and I was almost getting bored scratching my head with The Nines midway when watching the second act. That was the only weakness I saw in this movie which led me to feel slightly uninterested. Once the final act came in, in which he plays the Video game Designer lost in the woods with his family, the story reconciles with its preceding contrivances. The clever ending gives us the typical flashbacks on the apparent plot-twist, yet it doesn't become overbearing in metaphysical exposition, which might have led to increased boredom.

I felt actually satisfied with the ending, once I got past the first two acts. Despite the adult situations, I recommend this movie for the general audience. The Nines has a certain gentleness about its delivery and doesn't come on too strong, I can't think of any reason why anyone would hate this movie if they watched it through.

I was the sole honky of the bunch when I watched this TP movie back in the day. I was dating a black woman at the time and I entertained her idea of watching this while knowing that I am not the target audience. She must have wanted to teach me something about it, whatever that might have been.

Knowing this, I would accept this movie and view this movie impartially. Bear in mind, I am not the guy that Tyler Perry is trying to sell this to. Just like I am not the guy whom Disney would want to market the Jonas Brothers.

MY REVIEW OF THIS MOVIE....

Production wise, it was adequate. I sat through this movie from beginning to end, trying to empathize with his screen writing and realizing that this is a typical romantic comedy aimed towards African Americans. It contains the same type of drama that white people go through. Lime green space aliens with the same emotions as black and white folks would have given me the same effect of indifference. This is supposed to a Romantic "Comedy", the genre is usually mis-labeled because these types of films are SELDOM COMEDIC at BEST!

For the acting, it was decent. The four portrayed couples acted like couples at the retreat. Just like white folks do. The four couples spend the week in the cabin, both genders split to share stories, gossip, and problems. Tyler Perry and friends "keeping it real" drinking in the porch, while Janet Jackson and friends giving each other moral support in the kitchen. Nothing funny or inspiring about this, just semi-interesting chatter. The dialog plainly takes up most of the film. A ninth and tenth wheel are added for the sake of back-story and now I am forced to keep track of all ten characters in the film. The one character I thought redeemed the otherwise bore was the Alcoholic wife, played by Tasha Smith, I almost liked this movie because of her. Other than that Janet Jackson and Malik Yoba had a semi-inspiring kiss-and-make- up moment near the end, and that is as much credit I can give it.

Earlier I implied that I entered this movie with an open mind, but was a bit alienated by some of the scenes. The White Actors, adding up to four characters with actual lines that are in this movie, are portrayed as shallow and stuck up. Who would really force a woman off a plane because she's overweight, especially when she sat comfortably in the chair? The turd who kicked her off a plane had to be the white man. He just HAD to be TYLER! And what about those old women who re-used the line "WE ONLY TAKE CASH!" to a trio of black women shoppers? (REFER TO EDDIE MURPHY's COMING TO America). THANKS TYLER, I appreciate your stereotypical viewpoints that all white people are stuck-up upper-classed a$$*****. Now I know why this movie isn't for me.

Overall, I am 50/50 on whether or not I would recommend it. Some outside the target audience who are more sensitive than I am, shouldn't go. But for the rest, it's okay I guess.