Movie Review: THOR

It is rare that I have the opportunity to review such an absolute triumph of a comic book film. Truly, a triumph of a film in general. Let me preface this review by saying, however, that it is the film's embrace of the source material and numerous nods to the fandom that push Thor to its very high rating. If you are even a casual fan of the Marvel Comics character like myself, you'll fully understand my point of view.

Thor takes place about half on Earth and half in the realm of Asgard. These two locales are nothing alike, but the pacing and cinematography keep the film's transitions feeling fluid and natural, even when we're going from a planet of frost giants to a desert in the United States. The stark differences in setting reflect the changes in our titular character's attitudes. Thor is, in essence, the story of one man's, er, one god's redemption. Our main character, the god of thunder himself, is portrayed by Chris Hemsworth. Being unfamiliar with most of his work, I was not sure what to expect of his performance, but Hemsworth really lives in the role. He made me believe he was the Norse god he said he was.

In fact, not a single actor in this film came out that way to me. While trying to fill some quite ludicrous roles, even those actors we don't always expect powerhouse performances from, delivered masterworks. I feel we have director Kenneth Branagh to thank for this, as he even got great performances out of smaller roles like love interest Natalie Portman, who absolutely requires a good director and script to fulfill her potential. With a lesser director we could have gotten a repeat of her wooden deliveries in 3 Star Wars films in a row.

Even our side characters, specifically Sif and the warriors 3, are both believable and instantly compelling in their roles. Some disappear so completely, like Ray Stevenson as Volstagg, that I was completely shocked reading the credits. Heimdall, a character cast as Idris Elba, was perhaps the most believable character in all of Asgard, despite the seemingly constant complaints from the online community about a black man playing a Norse god. The only member of the Norse pantheon who outclassed him, was the inimitable Anthony Hopkins as Odin All-Father, in an amazing performance.

Now, let's talk villains. In this movie we have 3. Loki, S.H.I.E.L.D., and the Destroyer armor. And to an extent, the frost giants. Yet, the film does not feel cluttered. In fact, we wish for more time with each of the enemies. Loki, portrayed by Tom Hiddleston, is of particular note, delivering a human, yet sinister performance as Thor's brother, a role I very much look forward to seeing return in The Avengers.

If you're going to see this movie for the special effects, not only will you be satisfied, but you will not even realize what you're looking at is computer generated. It may be the way the actors treat their sets, rather than the sets themselves, but nothing comes off as fake. Asgard feels like Asgard. Lightning feels like lightning. The rainbow bridge is a rainbow bridge!

If you're going to see this movie as a comic book fan, you will be overjoyed. The mythology is addressed, famous names like Donald Blake Tony Stark, and Clint Barton are tossed around. Everything about Thor's comic book identity is kept spiritually in place. The powers, the attitudes, the language, the world, everything any Marvel Comics fans want, and I went to the midnight showing with Marvel Comics nerds who informed me of such. Oh, and you had better stay after the credits.

My only complaints for this movie were the shortness of the fights, and the unnecessary 3D affects. However, these are my only complaints. All of my other expectations were either met or exceeded throughout. Better even than the first Iron Man film, Thor is the best picture Marvel Studios has ever released, and I hope that the upcoming films such as Captain America and 2012's The Avengers will continue to raise the bar. If things keep going this well for Stan Lee and company, The Dark Knight Rises may have true competition. Thor receives 4 and 1/2 stars, out of 5.

****.5 out of *****

My everything....

After watching an ex's house and dog for a week, she began to realize that she still cared about said ex. She's been keeping our relationship a secret from him because she was afraid he'd leave and take all of their mutual friends with him, pulling a chunk of her life away. She finally told him about us and now he wants her back, he won't let her leave without a fight.

But they were broken up, the fight was over. They were done. She cared for him, but wasn't in love with him. When asked by him, she said she loves us both.

I need to know she's in love with me, not him, and she is scared, and hurts, and upset with herself, borderline suicidal, and doesn't want to hurt either of us.

I never thought this would happen, I just thought he'd be mad and leave with the friends, leaving her broken, but with me to fall back on. Instead he's challenging me for her, and she doesn't know what to do, now that he wants her back.

I may lose her, and I cannot fathom that. She promised me forever, to love me always.

I'm falling apart.

Movie Review: Sucker Punch

Director Zack Snyder finally gets to step out of the shadow of other creators and do a picture all his own, instead of another of the comic book adaptations that have made him his career. This is good for Snyder's creativity and an admirable choice. The problem seems to be however, that Snyder can't write worth a damn. It may have been quite the misstep to go from a literary giant like WATCHMEN and follow it up with a thin action film with copious style but little substance.

Sucker Punch is about a group of women in a 1930's-esque brothel, all trying to escape, accomplishing goals in vast metaphorical fantasies of unique action and violence. All of this is set within a framework of a woman trapped in an insane asylum, committed there against her will for things she didn't do. But that last bit only serves as bookends for the rest of the film, so you can more or less ignore it for 95% of the film. I feel the movie's plot would actually be better without that device. With the asylum plot it adds a layer to this film that the rest of the script doesn't compensate for. Sucker Punch would be a much better film without that added bit. It raises questions that are never even addressed, let alone answered.

Particularly worth questioning is this film's rating, a hard PG-13. This movie screams for an easy R rating. It's about women in a brothel fighting science fantasy monsters with guns and swords. Yet there's no blood, and no nudity, and not even any cussing. If this is Zack Snyder's true vision realized on screen, I would be very surprised. I'm hoping for a director's cut DVD edition of this so I can see what it really should have been. Expect a 2nd review if and when that comes to be.

There isn't much to say for the plot other than what it is. It's ok. The writing is weak, the dialog is tedious, the performances of most of the girls wooden, with the exception of Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish). Solid if predictable performances from Oscar Issac as brothel owner Blue Jones and Scott Glenn as a character simply called "Wise Man." There were no performances that were truly great, but it was still better than one usually expects from an action movie.

The soundtrack, especially if seen in IMAX, is very fitting and occasionally gives off the epic feel Snyder was going for. He failed, however, to acquire a soundtrack that was unique. Two songs came right off of the WATCHMEN soundtrack, and the iconic Pixie's song "Where is My Mind" from Fight Club is covered by Yoav featuring Emily Browning. The soundtrack is good, it just doesn't feel unique, which is sad, because Snyder wanted this film to stand out. In the long run, I feel almost nothing about the film will.

I haven't said anything about the fights because they're absolutely amazing. No complaints, and I could watch those cool as hell sequences over and over again. It's all that stuffed in-between the action that bored me. If you're going into see Sucker Punch for a great action film, you'll be distracted by the rest of the plot, but not at all disappointed by the combat. Giant samurais wielding mini-guns, steam-powered Nazis, and even a dragon, Sucker Punch will satisfy your orgy of absurd combat fetish no problem, but if you're really looking for more, you're going to be disappointed.

Despite some reviews calling for Snyder to never direct a film again, this movie really isn't that bad. It isn't particularly good, well-acted, or memorable, but it serves its purpose as a flashy action film. A good flashy action film even. Sucker Punch receives 3 stars, out of 5.

*** out of *****

Movie Review: Rango

I was hesitant to see this film until I read a few short reviews online. Despite the film's odd marketing strategy of showing the most boring parts of the film, Rango is actually a damn good film, by any standards. I, like many of you, had my doubts about this movie, especially when looking at some of the production team. Nickelodeon does not have the strongest track record in this area, with the last film of theirs I generally liked hailing all the way back from 2002, but Rango's sheer excellence will keep me from disregarding film's based on Nickelodeon's involvement ever again. My one biggest issue with Rango's marketing is that this film is not a comedy. Rango is an action-adventure tale of finding yourself, that has comedy sprinkled throughout. Don't take that to mean I didn't laugh though. I laughed a hell of a lot, but what I remember most is the plot and the action, not the jokes.

Johnny Depp plays the titular Rango, a pet lizard accidentally left in a harsh unforgiving desert landscape who is forced to forge a new identity in this new environment, an environment that was pulled right out of an old Clint Eastwood western. Not only is Depp great in this, but he even reprises a fan-favorite role for a brief but very satisfying Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas cameo. Depp's performance as Rango is masterfully precise. But from Depp, what else would you expect?

Western genre veteran Timothy Olyphant makes a brief appearance as a character simply named The Spirit Of The West. When the character shows up I got giddy like a schoolgirl. I'd say more, but I really don't want to spoil this one for you, because I want you to go out and see this movie.

The rest of the cast was similarly chosen and plays their parts similarly well. Particularly well done is the character Beans, Rango's love interest, as portrayed by actress Isla Fisher. We get a few powerful performances by veterans like Bill Nighy, Ned Beatty, and Harry Dean Stanton. I don't have much to say about any of the voice actors in this film, because I have no reason to complain. Every performance was dead on, and the animation matched the voices perfectly, this most likely owing to the "Emotion Capture" style of acting employed. It's hard to explain precisely what they did, so here's the video: http://www.reelzchannel.com/movie-news/8671/new-rango-featurette-offers-hilarious-look-at-emotion-capture/

Like any good western film, Rango features its share of action scenes out in the desert, but not all of them are simple gun fights. In fact, none of them are. Amazing chase scenes, a couple great shoot outs, and an incredible aerial battle where moles ride on bats and shoot machine guns. Yeah, that's what I said. Moles riding bats and shooting machine guns.

The music was ever-present and always fitting, sometimes expected, but never disappointing. I can now say I've heard Wagner played on banjo, if that gives you an idea. The music is done mostly by the sometimes capable, sometimes amazing, Hans Zimmer, with occasional help from the band Los Lobos. The score may not be as iconic as the classic westerns it is trying to emulate, but it comes pretty close, and is anything but disappointing.

Rango was given a hard PG rating. There's violence, a few adult jokes, and a few surprising curse words. Not many films can find the balance where both children and adults will love the story and how it is told, but Rango absolutely does it. I was taken aback and pleasantly surprised when I heard one of the film's more terrifying enemies, Rattlesnake Jake, say words like "Hell," and, "damn." Actually, that really describes the whole film for me. Taken aback, and pleasantly surprised, by the writing, the acting, the story, the action scenes, the overall messages, I could go on, but what else is there for me to say before I begin rambling and spoiling? If you love animation, or westerns, or comedies, or just Johnny Depp, this film is for you. Go out and see this great movie, whether with kids or not. Rango receives four and one half stars, out of five.

****.5 out of *****

Movie Review: All Star Superman

As a fan and a collector, I hold some comics to be sacred. A few Batman titles, the ever-popular Watchmen, and the unique comic perfection that is All Star Superman. What a colossal disappointment this DVD is to it. All Star Superman is a miniseries of comics created by the similarly all star team of writer Grant Morrison and artist Frank Quitely. There are multiple opinions on the series, ranging from dismissive to fanatical devotion, but it is generally received as at least a good comic, if not spectacularly great. I followed the series when it first came out, and since then have re-read it countless times, including once after having seen this film. Having done so allows me to see how much the film fails to grasp. Where do I even begin?

The pacing is awful. You'd think being a comic book geek I'd take issue with character portrayal or changing story lines or screwing with continuity, which I will get to, but no, this film's biggest weakness is the awful pacing. The whole movie moves with this rapid pace, allowing for no scenes to linger, and there are scenes where just a few seconds of silence and stillness would have made a world of difference, but they are tossed aside as the film powers forward with this enthusiasm as if the ending we rush towards was even worth the wait. All Star Superman has a run time of just over an hour. There's comic content for at least 3 hours of movie. An extra ten minutes even could have made this film a lot better. Left out are all of my favorite moments from the comics, moments that at most would have added 2 more minutes to the film. I'm talking about parts of scenes that are already in the film that were cut, one assumes, for run time.

Despite the breakneck speed of the film, everything feels static. All of the glorious flowing art of the comic is not even close to imitated. Everything feels still, like watching a play on a fixed stage. The artist for All Star Superman is famous for his ability to convey movement from still images, something the movie isn't able to convey with actual movement. People gripe about the book's art because everything looks a little ugly and superhero comics and their characters famously feature almost all super-model level attractiveness, and All Star Superman doesn't. But the movie does! I don't understand how they could have screwed up so completely.

Despite being a little average-looking in comics, All Star Superman's titular character portrayed an amazing strength of heart and sincerity and all of his actions and dialog. The superman of the film is an arrogant, patronizing, jerk. James Denton plays all his lines with this syrupy moral goodness, but none of the heart and soul that makes the character what he is. I appreciate that they are trying to use new voice actors in all of these different movies, but not many have been able to live up to the ones we grew up with. 2010's Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths featured a new take on the voice, employing the excellent Mark Harmon in the role. I had my doubts about him but loved his portrayal, even though it wasn't the familiar Tim Daly. Why couldn't Harmon have been used again? I feel similarly about Christina Hendricks' Lois Lane. It just didn't feel real.

Conversely, the voice of Lex Luthor, Anthony LaPaglia, despite being utterly different from every Luthor portrayal I've seen since Gene Hackman held the role, was excellent. I loved his more business-man like approach to the character's arrogant inflection. It is an absolute shame that we didn't get to hear him deliver some of the comic's classic lines, such as, "And then the inimitable Lex Luthor opened up the floor and shook hands with a baboon in a Superman suit." I could have dealt with some of the confusingly bad line changes in this film if only everyone gave as powerful a performance as LaPaglia. The voice for Luthor's neice Nasthalthia "Nasty" Luthor, Linda Cardellini, was also spot on in her delivery of this unique voice.

While we're on voices I have to mention that Robin Atkin Downes' Solaris was utterly perfect, and I just wish we got to see that battle in its complete length, and that the Superman he was bantering with wasn't James Denton. Ed Asner as Perry White was amazing, but were there any doubts? As usual, All Star Superman employed Andrea Romano as voice director. I'm not one to doubt her legendary casting choices since she's been doing casting and direction for essentially every animated DC picture since the early 90's, but with rare exceptions, All Star Superman's cast needed an overhaul. Where's the Andrea Romano who cast Neil Patrick Harris, or James Woods?

The inner fanboy won't let me leave this review without touching on the differences between the comic and the film. They are numerous, and they are confusing. The most discussed has been the removal of the Bizarro world subplot. In the comic Superman goes to the planet of what is essentially a twisted mirror world. There's more to it than that, but this is not the place to explain it. It features such heroes as Bizarro Flash, the world's slowest man, and Bizarro Superman who has such powers as freeze lasers from his eyes and fire-breath, the reverse of Superman's powers. The section is perhaps the most poetic of the comic, and its removal is disappointing, but understandable. The removal of other sections such as Doomsday, Kandor, and the Superman squad, are confusing. All Star Superman is intended to be a modern retelling of the Hercules myth in which he must perform 12 labors, with Superman in his place. The film touches on maybe 4.

As one last insult to the comic, the final frame of the film is the same as in the comic, an unmoving picture of Superman. While in the comic the image is glorious, in the film it is bland. Despite using the exact same pose, context, character, and so on, they chose to draw their own. Had it been animated, this would be fine. But it is not animated. It is a still frame shot, just as in the comic, but not drawn as well.

All Star Superman just misses all the points that made the comic great. The deep understanding of the character's mythos, the acknowledgment of modern interpretations as well as deeper mythological allusions, the genuine love for the characters, for the story, for the legacy that is Superman, everything that makes the comic great. The fights are sub-par, the music is forgettable, and the overall film leaves little to no impact. It is really quite sad. The comic is great, and with just a few more minutes and a little extra effort, this could have been one of the great DC animated films, and could have gotten a lot more people interested in reading the much better comic. The film is worth a viewing, but only if you're a fan. Precisely one viewing, and absolutely not worth the purchase. Two and one half stars, out of five.

**.5 out of *****

Movie Review: The Mechanic

Very unusual for me to be reviewing something still in the theaters, I know, but I went with my girlfriend to see this movie after she expressed a desire to. I went not because I had any particular notion to watch it, but because she wanted to, and I want to make her happy.

This movie is ok. It isn't anything special, and there's not a whole lot to be said about it. The Mechanic is a remake of the 1972 film of the same name starring the legendary Charles Bronson. Jason Statham plays an assassin who goes by the name of Arthur Bishop, and after killing his one friend in the world, he trains the friend's failure of a son to be a hit man like himself in an attempt to try and justify his actions, as well as to help him fix his own inner loneliness. Donald Sutherland plays the dead friend, and Ben Foster plays the gun for hire in training.

Frankly, as far as shoot 'em up plots go, I was impressed. We get to see a fairly engaging story, which I was not expecting. True, it could have been done better, but it wasn't done that badly. Jason Statham continues his trend of playing Jason Statham. Not impressive, but not unexpected, and he fits the hole his particular peg has been assigned to quite well. Ben Foster provides the best performance in this picture, really selling himself as the sort of pitiful but not hopeless inured puppy person he is playing. Donald Sutherland is wonderful as usual.

The music for this film is memorable not for the quality, but for how shoved into your face it is. There's a piano theme used at least 3 times that is supposed to be what you come away with when you think of the film's music, and there's a quasi-James Bond action theme they use at least twice, that fails as many times.

Now for what you actually came for, the action. Is it good? Yes. Is it great? Once or twice. There are a few knock down drag out fights that impressed me, both with their choreography and their ruthlessness. Obvious fight directions are ignored and unusual but not unlikely choices are made in combat scenes. It is refreshing as hell to not see the same fight in 40 successive films, and The Mechanic really does deliver some satisfying combat scenes. I was quite pleasantly surprised.

Overall, not as bad as I was expecting. The fights were entertaining, and even got me to wince once or twice, not an easy feat I assure you. Though the R rating level content in some places was absolutely unnecessary. The nudity is in there for no purpose, and comes from characters that are picked up, never developed, and thrown away before the credits. Furthermore, there was a homophobic undertone to a section of the movie that could have been lost and no story element would have been affected. I understand its a machismo fueled film, but it is 2011 people. Still, despite its issues, it wasn't terrible. If you're the kind of person that likes Jason Statham movies, you'll probably like this one. What more can I say? 3 stars, out of 5.

*** out of *****

On a personal note

Like a machine with the wires ripped out, the entire Katie situation broke me. For months I haven't been able to cry, not from deep emotion, from my favorite films, from powerful music. I cried, but it was from deep depression.

But Elaine, she fixed me.

Movie Review: Trick 'r Treat

After an exhaustively terrible series of films I was finally treated to this relatively unknown but widely reviewed piece of film stuff, Trick 'r Treat. Hailing from 2007, this film garnered little popular acclaim but was nearly unanimously well received by critics. I had actually not heard of it until recently, and that is a damn shame, because I absolutely loved this picture.

More a series of vignettes than an actual film, Trick 'r Treat features a few short but sweet scenes, all intertwined around one time-line and all set within one town. The stories have little effect on each other, but could function effectively as their own short films if viewed independently. No one section is weaker than any of the others. Despite being a collage of creepy Halloween stories, there is no one element that brings it down. Contained within you will find such glorious cliches as the serial killer principal, the old man with a shady past, the macabre town legend, a grim scavenger hunt, and even a squadron of horny women in slutty costumes. Yet nothing feels forced.

Trick 'r Treat simply could not exist were it not for the massive foundation of horror films that precede it, from the chilling to the creepy to the campy. We see shades here of slasher movies, stalker films, monster movies, and even television Halloween specials. Trick 'r Treat is as much a wonderful horror sampler as it is an homage to the entire genre. However, it is not a satire. It is a celebration! A film cartoonish at times in its portrayal of Halloween movies, but played entirely straight and without an ounce of pretension.

Coming out almost as strongly as the beautiful cinematography and rambunctiously creepy atmosphere is the constant but elegantly placed score. The music ranges from creepy classics to Marilyn Manson to borrowed pieces from other genre films, and the piano is channeling Danny Elfman's work in The Nightmare Before Christmas, or Shirley Walker's work on Batman: The Animated Series. A well-balanced addition to the film's imagery.

It is rare that a film of any genre can find the sweet spot between genuinely scary, and genuinely funny, but this one does, and it does it very well. With a very limited amount of time to establish any of its characters it still makes you root for some and against others, care about what happens in the story, and allows for both humor and terror to flow naturally around them. Featuring some dynamite performances by Dylan Baker, Anna Paquin, and Brian Cox, as well as the introduction of actress Samm Todd who plays Rhonda, and who I am hoping will continue to act. Trick 'r Treat appears to be her only film credit, but she absolutely stole the show in this picture.

My one concern here is that Trick 'r Treat is not a great film, by usual standards. It won't win any awards, it won't be considered a classic of cinema, and it doesn't have anything important to say. However, for a Halloween film, an annual tradition of fun and fright, this movie is irreplaceable. It feels much more like a television holiday special than a piece of real cinema. This is the only area in which Trick 'r Treat loses points and gets the score brought down. If I was reviewing on Halloween it would get a perfect rating, and I plan to start watching it annually starting next Halloween, but I can't in good conscience give it a perfect score. If, however, you are a horror fan, you will love it.

Actually scary, actually funny, very well written, and wonderfully atmospheric, I recommend Trick 'r Treat to anyone who has ever loved Halloween movies, or just loved the holiday itself. It's sweeter than a Snickers bar full of razor blades. 4 stars, out of 5.

**** out of *****

Movie Review: August Underground's Mordum

Another one of those movies I watched not out of genuine interest, but merely for the godawful reputation it has for being sick, twisted, violent, and extreme, with little to no redeeming artistic qualities. How did it hold up? Not well.

This movie is based off of an earlier production called August Underground, which presumably is even worse than this. I have to assume that they learned from their mistakes and made the sequel a better film, despite how unbelievable that is. Shot in the realistic home movie style i.e. camera in hand, the film feels authentic if simply for the very low quality of the technology used, and there's something to be said for the film's use of normal looking people. No one looks Hollywood beautiful, a trait that detracts from some films like The Descent, a good movie absolutely, but filled with distractingly beautiful women. August Underground's Mordum at least has that going for it.

The film stars Fred Vogel, star of the original August Underground, Crusty, portrayed by Cristie Whiles, and Maggot, portrayed by Michael Schneider, killers with all of the motivations of Alex in A Clockwork Orange, but not one ounce of the charm. The acting isn't even believable. They don't look like monsters, they look like young actors trying to pretend to be screwed up people. But they just come off as lousy actors.

Describing the plot of this movie is almost impossible. There's sex, murder, robbery, rape, cannibalism, violence, necrophilia, vomiting, and it just keeps going. There's no real story, just a lot of criminal incidents thrown together with no edit points. It feels like you're watching a police evidence tape, which apparently was the intent. Still, I think those would be a heck of a lot more entertaining than this was.

They use shaky cam, obviously, a method I actually approve of when done well. Shaky cam in horror movies is acceptable, and I understand that every little 3 person studio wants to make the next Blair Witch, but this movie makes Cloverfield look like Lawrence of Arabia.

August Underground's Mordum is a borderline unwatchable mess of pointless dialog, unnecessary scenes, and bad special effects made more believable by the constant low quality of every aspect of the film. It looks amateur and almost appears to be a genuine snuff film for the sheer amateurishness of everyone involved. Frankly, I think people making actual snuff films would have more cinematic sophistication and have a little pride in their work.

Without any trepidation I can say that August Underground's Mordum is the worst film I have ever seen, but it isn't for the content. People with little money can make great films, like Primer. People with shocking content and an unusual story to tell can make gripping cinema, like A Serbian Film. People looking to just showcase gore can make any of the SAW films. The makers of all of those films, whether they are good or not, were trying to create films, movies, entertainment. If they wanted to shock, or wanted to scare, or wanted to entertain, or simply had a story to tell, they had intentions. August Underground's Mordum has nothing interesting to say, nothing worthwhile to see, and simply should not exist. Please don't watch it. And if you're curious as to just how bad it is, please don't purchase it. No one involved in this production should ever be inspired to make a movie ever again. I give this my worst rating in the history of my life: 1/2 stars.

.5 *'s out of *****

Movie Review: Inside (À l'intérieur)

This 2007 French film was recommended for me to watch because of my interest in justifying the artistic element of films notorious for their shocking content, as any of my regular readers can attest to. I went into it expecting your standard shocking content, a little story, and a number of yawns for myself. Instead I was treated to perhaps the best horror film I've seen since Audition.

Our protagonist Sarah, played by Alysson Paradis, is on the verge of going into labor, a few months after a car crash took away her husband. She's none too excited about it either, but appears to have a supporting circle of people including her mother and boss. On Christmas eve she goes home alone, planning to be induced in the morning, but our film's villain has other plans. Our villain for this picture, the unnamed monster portrayed by Béatrice Dalle, decides to stalk and attack the expecting mother. For an hour they play an oscillating game of cat and mouse with a myriad of pointy household objects, with guest appearances by local police and civilians. The acting by everyone in this small cast is capable, if not particularly noteworthy. The two main characters, Sarah and her attacker, are the best of the bunch, portraying their pain convincingly. Dalle in particular gives depth to her character with her guttural, almost child-like noises and cries.

The film is beautifully shot, with an emphasis on color and extended static shots. The use of angles and colors to evoke certain emotions and feelings in the audience is masterfully done, keeping you glued to the seat even when trying only to watch from the corner of your eye. The lighting, the cinematography, the angles, everything technical about this is great. The gore, something usually overlooked in exchange for great artistic direction, is absolutely convincing in this film. There was not one point at which I was taken out of the film by an obvious special effect. The audio effects are similarly well done, while the soundtrack is good, but not especially memorable, save for the closing scene. Surprisingly, the most convincing effects, for me at least, were the CGI scenes of a fetus in utero.

Inside may be using a pregnant protagonist as a gimmick to gain sympathy from the viewer, since we don't know enough about her to identify with her otherwise, but it isn't employed without purpose. Sarah's baby is an active plot point, arguably the focal point of the entire film. The symbolism of having the film take place on Christmas, as well as a slew of other symbolic elements, all come through clearly, adding to the effectiveness of all the hits to the psyche that this movie delivers.

Inside is one of the only movies I've ever seen to have me shifting uncomfortably in my seat, putting my hands over my mouth, turning my head, and wanting to close my eyes. Other films may have been more graphic, more violent, more sexual, more disgusting, but usually these things are used like a carnival sideshow. This film happens to be gorey, but not unnecessarily so. This movie is great. Great story, amazing atmosphere, real suspense without reliance on jump scares or cheap and excessive blood, and with a twist ending that'll hit you like a toaster to the cranium. 4.5 out of 5

****.5 out of *****

Movie Review: Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom

This film has garnered a reputation as among the most vile and wretched pieces of art ever put to film. A reputation hammered in by the infamous nature of its source material, as well as the grisly murder of the film's writer the same year it was released. Salò is based on The 120 Days of Sodom, or the School of Libertinism, by the Marquis de Sade, who you may be familiar with for having the word Sadism, or "the derivation of pleasure as a result of inflicting pain or watching pain inflicted on others," named directly after him.

This film was made in Italian, based on the writings of a Frenchman, and translated into English. Somewhere along the line I feel that something was lost in my understanding of the film. Periodically there were lines that were not subtitled, and though I got the gist of what was going on, I still feel I missed things that an Italian audience would not have, and for that I feel gypped.

There are no real characters in this film, just ideas given body. There are very few names used, usually just formal titles. The only characters given enough time to be considered protagonists are the leaders of this group of people that kidnap and rape and torture and murder people. The leader, referred to as the president, is cross-eyed and a completely detestable individual. In a movie about what Salò is about, he is able to transform himself as the most detestable of the lot. With the exception of Signora Castelli, a character played exceedingly forced, everyone else in the cast performs fine, but nothing to really write home about.

There sort of is a story, but if you've ever heard of Salò, you got it. There's no more depth or intricacy to the film than what it already is. Kidnapping, sexual abuse, murder, rape, torture, and it takes place in a castle of some sort in the Italian countryside. That's it. Those things happen. Furthermore, it takes 2 hours for those things to happen. The movie is supposed to be very unsettling, but for most of the film I was just bored. The gruesome scenes were good, by 70's standards at least, but they didn't make up for the film's reputation or long buildup. This film has no payoff.

On the other side of the coin, we have the movie's artistic direction, which is beautiful. Framing of the shots, sets, and cinematography are all beautifully done, and really wasted on this movie. The film's content may be ugly, but it is recorded in a style no different than one would employ in the most sophisticated of art films. Similarly, some beautiful piano and ambient period music is employed throughout the movie. The graceful audio well balances against the blunt actions it accompanies.

For a film with such a reputation, I'm disappointed. I've heard a lot of bad things about it, and while some of them were true, this film just doesn't hold up as a legendary shock film when compared to much of modern cinema. A Serbian Film is easily a better film, and several times more shocking than anything featured in Salò. The only good thing I gained from watching this movie is that I can now cross it off of my "Shocking films to review" list. If you're looking for something shocking by modern standards, skip it. Actually, I can't really give any reasons not to skip it, unless you want to be able to say that you have seen it. No endorsement here. 2 stars.

** out of *****

Oh what the fuck

"I had been busy with work/registering for school and your calls/voicemail REALLY rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry"

-Kathryn

Last text is from Wednesday night, the 19th. After a few days of silence I call on the 22nd, a Saturday. I get a hold of her and she says she'll call me back. She doesn't. 26 hours after that call I call again, once. Nothing. I call again 24 hours later, and again 48 hours later. She said she was having phone problems which is why I was leaving a voicemail. This apparently makes me creepy? Oh death's sweet embrace, where are you now?

"For every path you choose, there is another you must abandon, usually forever"

I've given up on Kathryn. We knew each other a short time, got relatively close, made plans, and then abandoned them. I don't know why she no longer wishes contact with me. We were planning what we'd do together, tonight, she was supposed to come tonight, but the last time she actually spoke to me was Wednesday night. I got through to her while she was at work a few days later, but just long enough for her to say she would call me back.

She didn't. And furthermore, she's not going to.

I don't mind being disliked, or loathed, or hated. Well, I mind it, it bothers me, but I'm used to it. I can handle it. After experiencing it enough times you start to adapt and deal. However, abandonment is something I cannot adjust to. I believe it stems from my childhood divorce issues. When someone just leaves, no reasoning, no contact, it hurts. Even when they're just acquaintances, when I'm just left without reason, it hurts. Jessica did this to me just last month. That still bothers me.

My day is shitty, the weather is cold, I'll be trying to review a movie later today. I don't expect my mood to recover.

Why? I'm only asking why.

How long has it been since I posted a personal update?

Months, at least.

My room has a heater now that my sister is off at her fancy college. Excuse me, her 2nd fancy college. I only was able to go to one crappy college. Then again, I didn't nag to get things. My father bought her a fridge for her dorm room. I don't know where she gets her sense of entitlement from. Since she's an hour or so away now, she won't be using her space heater. Spoils of war as far as I'm concerned.

Still single. Two prospects, both went kind of oblique at the last minute, with no real reason given. I hate that. I'm fine with being hated, but I want to know why. I find myself missing Katie, though not regretting anything.

I'm very lonely nowadays, even when I've seen my friends that day.

Shrink appointment tomorrow, thinking I'm likely to increase my anti-depressants slightly. Hopefully lunch with mum beforehand.

-B

2007's Catacombs is notable as a FEARnet original film, as well as being set in the infamous French catacombs. If you don't know what that is, go google it. You should. They're quite interesting, and much written about, despite this film's apparent belief that the catacombs are "Paris' dirty little secret." The film is also notable for featuring one time pop music starlet P!nk, real name Alecia Moore. She does about as well as you'd expect, but I'll get to that later. In a film set in one of the world's most beautiful cities, in the world's largest mass grave, what we must first evaluate is the cinematography and atmosphere.

It sucks.

That's not to say Paris or the catacombs aren't photogenic, just that this director chose to phone it in completely, when he could have just set up long still camera shots and had all of his cinematography for him. Instead, there were frantic quick moving shots, lots of blur, cheap fog effects, and awful lighting. The film's lighting is terrible, because this film takes place in an area that is often pitch black. Despite this, there was seemingly constant ambient lighting. It was very light ambient lighting, but any ambient lighting at all in a tunnel over 100 feet underground is suspect. This film represents a complete missed opportunity to do some creative work with sheer dark, very limited light, stark outside lighting for the external scenes, just constant missed opportunities.

Which leads me to the acting, which has one massive one in the role of Victoria, portrayed by Shannyn Sossamon, a favorite actress of mine. She does well, for the role she is given. The writing for her is stale and boring, but she sells it as well as she can, and does fairly well with it. Her sister, played by P!nk, does not. Granted the character is made to be hated, but having P!nk play her makes her especially detestable. Additionally, none of her music is featured in this film, despite numerous opportunities to do so. This is a surprising vacancy, but a welcome one. The addition of her music would have made this attempted horror film especially terrifying.

The villain is some goat mask wearing guy. I have no more information. Something was said about some anti-Christ cult, but it was all rather vague. Plus, he has maybe 10 minutes of screen time, hardly enough time to make yourself a memorable character, or lodge yourself in the minds of viewers. Wasted opportunity. The costume may have been good, but the shaky camera kept me from being able to tell. The gore, which was thrown in almost as an afterthought to make the film scarier, looks fake. A pathetic attempt to scare someone from an organization known as FEARnet.

There are more problems, more wasted opportunities, more stupid decisions, but I'm not here to pick the film apart piece by piece. I could, don't get me wrong. This film had a myriad of issues, but I'm not going to waste my time on this forgettable picture. It's a standard slasher, with a cool setting, but nothing more. If you like Shannyn Sossamon, she gives a good performance, but If you're craving her, just watch Wristcutters: A Love Story. And if you decide to watch the film, don't give up. Watch the whole thing. This film's absurd, hilarious ending, elevates it from a pathetic two stars, to a slightly more respectable two and one half.

**.5 out of *****

New Show Review: Bob's Burgers

Cartoons are a tricky thing. There is no winning formula to success, and sometimes an obvious recipe for failure becomes a record-breaking success that is beloved the world over. Matt Groening drew The Simpsons on the spot when asked to present his characters, out of sudden fear that they'd take away his creative control. He dare not risk his immensely popular "Life in Hell" bunnies, so he drew a family. Over 20 years later, it seems to be doing alright.

Conversely, there have been shows with all the ingredients, that bombed. A favorite of mine, The Critic, only lasted a few seasons and then faded into obscurity, despite an award winning team of writers and producers, as well as an all-star cast of voice actors. The Oblongs, a show starring some of my favorite voice actors and comedians (the Sklar brothers!) and featuring an opening theme song by my favorite band, They Might Be Giants, is one of my most hated cartoons ever, sitting just above the Veggie Tales. With Bob's Burgers, I'm facing a complicated situation. It's an incorporation of several elements I happen to love, but I would love them individually, pretty much anywhere.

Created by Loren Bouchard, a man who's career I've followed going all the way back to the old Squigglevision cartoons like Science Court and Dr. Katz, Bob's Burgers shares his unique view of animation, which has been varying degrees of realistic, this new show being one of the most realistic, despite its unusual proportions and movement. However, limitations such as realism have never hurt his ability to make the audience laugh. Home Movies, which I'd consider his best work, had some of the simplest and laziest looking character design I've ever seen in a cartoon, but the characters felt real, and the situations were human. Does Bob's Burgers measure up? Not yet, but it has potential to.

The all-star cast, immediately recognizable to any fan of modern adult cartoons, is what pulls this show together. I was already aware of H. Jon Benjamin, who shows some real range in this role, and Eugene Mirman's involvement, and they do well, but as the show went on I recognized almost the entire cast from previous roles in Home Movies, as well as Kristen Schaal from Aqua Teen Hunger Force, and Larry Murphy from Assy McGee. The writing is there, but it isn't perfect yet. The jokes need polish, as do the supporting cast, but I have confidence in the writing staff to improve as the show goes on. It is hard to say at this moment whether this will go anywhere, but I did laugh. I laughed more than I do at a current Simpsons or Family Guy episode, though that isn't saying much. As I said to Eugene Mirman in a recent email correspondence, at this juncture I am cautiously optimistic. Truly, I hope for the best.

Movie Review: Primer

I decided to begin my viewing of Primer with intense focus, being that the film is notorious for its extremely confusing plot. The plot becomes confusing about 35 minutes in. At least, that's where it begins. At about an hour into the film it starts to become exponentially more and more confusing. Then the film ends with calm piano and simplistic credits.

Primer was made for a budget of $7,000, a fact I was not aware of until after viewing the film. During viewing I had no idea. With the exception of the no-name cast and utter lack of special effects, a fact which enriches the film greatly, it is indistinguishable from a drama you would see in the theaters, in film quality. Were this film given a wide enough release to reach my area, I'd have seen it at least once, more likely 2 to 3 times, each time returning with friends to discuss the film's plot complexity with them.

I'm hesitant to discuss any of the film's plot for great fear of spoiling the intricacies of the plot to potential viewers. It was written with great skill, and the plot's chronological threads tie together in a story knot that as a writer myself I envy for its precision. It feels like the kind of writing gold that you do not encounter commonly in Hollywood, really. One must understand the ability to know how much work and sophistication went into it, and to acknowledge how difficult it truly is to create such a thing.

The cinematography is understated, but beautiful when utilized. There are many scenes that would have made equally intriguing posters (as seen above). I was impressed by how they used fairly uninteresting locations to evoke emotions of beauty, or anxiety. The pacing, the lighting, the 1990's world it feels pulled out of, everything is real to the viewer. It could be the low budget and unknown cast, but it feels too well done to have come out of sheer dumb luck. Despite all this, I have no complaints. Not a single complaint for the casting, the story, the pacing, the lighting, the score, or anything as grand and tangible as that. I do have a few disappointments though.

Shane Carruth (Aaron) and David Sullivan (Abe) both play their roles well, but they lack the confidence of experienced screen actors. They both feel capable in the roles, but at times hesitant to emote to what I feel is their full ability. Carruth I give a pass to because Primer was his baby, but Sullivan, who has continued his career in the business more than his fellow, could have been much more of everything. More angry, more frightened, more engaging, just more of everything. He does a fine job, but he could have done better.

My other disappointment, believe it or not, is that the film was not longer. At a run time of 77 minutes, the ending's suspenseful run through its last 15 feels closer to 5, and left me begging for a few more minutes, or an after the credits scene. My mind was racing, my eyes frantically searching the screen, and my desire left un-quenched when the credits rolled. A sequel feels like it would cheapen it, but there's so much left to say!

I can't agree with the poster's claim that "PRIMER is the headiest, most singular science-fiction movie since Kubrick made 2001," but it is among some of the best science fiction I've seen in the last decade, easily in the top 10. If you're looking for an intellectual thriller from a time travel angle, this is the one. 4 out of 5 stars

**** out of *****

Possible future Jack Black literature abominations

After the blissfully low opening of Black's latest insult to things I hold sacred in the form of the adaptation(?) of Gulliver's travels, I started to wonder, what other masterpieces of literature could Black adapt into a physical comedy? The possibles are many....

A Modest Proposal
Jack Black plays the titular Modest Proposalawitz, a man who inherits a bakery from a great uncle and is forced to turn it around and make it a profitable business again to restore honor to his family name. The local butcher shop recruits him to make custom meat pasties, but hi-jinks ensue when Black finds out the meat is coming from an unexpected source: the local maternity ward! Opposite Black is his romantic interest portrayed by pop sensation Lady Gaga who plays a struggling nurse working in the maternity ward trying to support her newborn son. Directed by Judd Apatow Rated PG-13.


The Old Man And The Sea
Black plays career fisherman Jack Oldman. He has fun with his other fisherman pals, portrayed by Kyle Glass and Adam Corolla, but when the friends have a few too many while out at sea and become lost, only Jack can save them. While out looking he catches the film's hook, a magical talking Marlin, voiced by Nick Jonas of The Jonas Brothers fame. Together they must conquer the water, rescue their friends, and learn the true meaning of friendship, and the true purpose of fishing along the way. Rated PG-13



Lolita
After a tragic accident takes his new wife from him, Humbert Humbert, played by Black, is left alone with his step-daughter Lolita. Though it starts rocky, Humbert helps her pursue her goal of being the sexiest pre-teen alive as she chases after the pre-teen miss America pageant. Along the paegant road they learn a few things about love, about family, and about themselves, and with an ending that will leave you wondering! Rated PG.