49 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(03/01/06 11:26pm)
The premise of "Transamerica" is Sabrina Osbourne's ("Desperate Housewives" Felicity Huffman) need to tie up the loose ends left over from her life as a man before her sexual re-assignment surgery. Sabrina or "Bree" as she calls herself, thinks she has all her affairs in order until she gets a call from a troubled teen claiming to be the son of Stanley, the man she was in her past. This sets in motion the cross country road trip from which the film derives it's play on words title. \nAs the film follows Osbourne and her son from New York, where she bails him out of jail, to California where she hopes to arrive in time for her surgery, we are given a window into the emotional, and physical elements of her sexual identity and her struggle to adapt to the unexpected possibility of parenthood.\nThe casting of "Transamerica" is well done and the actors succeed in making the film an emotionally believable character exploration. Huffman, who is usually known for portraying a "traditional" housewife and mother, succeeds in this unusual role. It is perhaps a testament to Huffman's range and ability to truly embody her roles that she bears almost no similarity to her TV persona. This is, however, disappointing because the film could have been much more enjoyable if Osbourne had any hint of "Housewive" Lynette's witty playfulness. \nInstead, she is depressed and stuffy, which makes sense for the plot as it is something she must overcome to some degree in order to embrace life, yet it makes much of the film painfully uncomfortable to watch. \nKevin Zegers' (the "Air Bud" movies) performance as her son Toby exudes the raw teenage energy needed to contrast Huffman's character. While Huffman has been "living still" (she is not "out" about her transsexuality and is ultra conservative and feminine in her manor and dress), Toby is a teenage runaway, prostitute and drug user. Zeger's performance is strong and he and Huffman have nice acting chemistry together.\n"Transamerica's" plot is not what I expected, after the limited advertising I viewed before going to see the film. It is not an Oprah book club, feel good type drama about an estranged parent and child who overcome traumas of the past while bonding during a montage. While this is good, in that "Transamerica" is instead a more realistic and layered story, it is also bad in that a happy bonding montage would have given the film a much needed high note. \nMuch of the film's tension is generated by Osbourne's hesitation to reveal to Toby that she is his father. But this simple story line, regarding accepting herself before she can be accepted by others, is complicated and cloudy, much as it would be in real life. My main complaint about "Transamerica" is that while it is well done, it doesn't really say anything new and so it is neither thought provoking nor enjoyable to watch.
(02/09/06 5:00am)
Reviews make no secret of the fact that "When a Stranger Calls" is based on the well known urban legend about the baby-sitter, harassed by obscene phone calls to the point that she has the police trace the location of the caller. Finally the sitter learns that the caller is inside the house (it should also be noted that this is a remake of a well liked 1979 horror flick). The hope one should reasonably be able to hold out when going to a film like this, is the story is going to be told in a way that is creative and engaging. Ideally, the known story will be presented from unexpected or under explored angles. Unfortunately, this is not the case for "When a Stranger Calls." \nThe majority of the film is devoted to leading baby-sitter, Jill Johnson (Camilla Belle), slowly discovering what audiences have known all along. While this creates great suspense, as it is meant to do, the tension it builds is not followed by enough action to satisfy the need created by the slow build up. \nThe groundwork for all the scares is set up too far in advance and highlighted too clearly. The consequence is nothing is ever as scary as it would be if there were ever any actual surprises or if the clues were enigmatic enough to make you wonder if what you think is going to happen is actually going to happen. \nOn the upside, the house in which Jill is terrorized is pretty awesome and also sufficiently threatening, which makes the film increasingly more watchable. If it had been a choice, I would have skipped the film and paid my eight bucks to explore the house. Also, it can be said that Belle's ("The Ballad of Jack and Rose") acting, while certainly not stunning, is only painful to watch when she attempts to interact with other characters face to face. She is certainly adequate when it comes to being frightened by the chilling voice on the phone. Belle does succeed, however, if just by a hair, in being likable enough to keep you invested in her survival through the whole film. \n After all the bad things I've said about "When a Stranger Calls," I feel I should note that the theater where I saw it was packed with young, high-school-aged girls, screaming their heads off at every poorly executed twist of the plot. This means some people will find the movie scary. This also gives some other people one more reason not to go see this in theaters.
(02/08/06 5:11pm)
Reviews make no secret of the fact that "When a Stranger Calls" is based on the well known urban legend about the baby-sitter, harassed by obscene phone calls to the point that she has the police trace the location of the caller. Finally the sitter learns that the caller is inside the house (it should also be noted that this is a remake of a well liked 1979 horror flick). The hope one should reasonably be able to hold out when going to a film like this, is the story is going to be told in a way that is creative and engaging. Ideally, the known story will be presented from unexpected or under explored angles. Unfortunately, this is not the case for "When a Stranger Calls." \nThe majority of the film is devoted to leading baby-sitter, Jill Johnson (Camilla Belle), slowly discovering what audiences have known all along. While this creates great suspense, as it is meant to do, the tension it builds is not followed by enough action to satisfy the need created by the slow build up. \nThe groundwork for all the scares is set up too far in advance and highlighted too clearly. The consequence is nothing is ever as scary as it would be if there were ever any actual surprises or if the clues were enigmatic enough to make you wonder if what you think is going to happen is actually going to happen. \nOn the upside, the house in which Jill is terrorized is pretty awesome and also sufficiently threatening, which makes the film increasingly more watchable. If it had been a choice, I would have skipped the film and paid my eight bucks to explore the house. Also, it can be said that Belle's ("The Ballad of Jack and Rose") acting, while certainly not stunning, is only painful to watch when she attempts to interact with other characters face to face. She is certainly adequate when it comes to being frightened by the chilling voice on the phone. Belle does succeed, however, if just by a hair, in being likable enough to keep you invested in her survival through the whole film. \n After all the bad things I've said about "When a Stranger Calls," I feel I should note that the theater where I saw it was packed with young, high-school-aged girls, screaming their heads off at every poorly executed twist of the plot. This means some people will find the movie scary. This also gives some other people one more reason not to go see this in theaters.
(01/26/06 5:00am)
This tale of moral bankruptcy gives us a window into the world of a private, international and illegal arms dealer, Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage). The Ukrainian born, American Yuri is good at his chosen profession, and it has allowed him to rise above the poverty of his youth. He sells indiscriminately to anyone with the ability to pay and Yuri's only concern is for himself and his family. He attempts to keep his trophy wife relatively in the dark as to the true source of the income that allows her and their young son to live more than comfortably. \nIn the film Orlov's brother, Vitaly (Jared Leto) briefly joins his business, but unlike Yuri, the "evil" results of their dealings weigh heavy on his conscience. Yuri is craftily maneuvering to keep his business strong, while being perused by Interpol agent Jack Valentine (Ethan Hawke). \nDespite being a tour de force in style, this film is not all that exciting. It starts off fairly promisingly, showing the Machiavellian aspect of Yuri's life, however, this part of the film resembles a typical, but entertaining, crime story in which it is easy to root for the "bad guys," as they just barely outwit law enforcement. \nThe film's tone shifts, however, and Yuri becomes rather difficult to sympathize with as the film succeeds in showing us (in case we were unaware) what bad arms dealers are. This, of course, is the point of the film and it is hammered home hard. While there is nothing wrong with a film with a message, "Lord of War" feels more like a statement about an aspect of world affairs than a story.\nAlso quite disappointing is that each of the three major actors in the film seems to be reprising previous roles. That is to say, it is clear why each was cast, and none of them do anything terribly groundbreaking. \nWe have seen Cage as a bad man in a cool suit before ("Face Off"). We have seen Ethan Hawke trying to uphold the law ("Training Day") and we have certainly already learned that Jared Leto + drugs = bad times ("Requiem for a Dream"). So it is not surprising that Cage and Leto each do really well in their roles. \nAs a narrator (voice-over is prevalent through out the film), Cage carries off the dialogue that is often trying just a little too hard to be cool and just barely manages not to be over the top. As for Hawke, his role is minimal and while he clearly brought his a game to the set, a lesser actor would have sufficed.\nOn the up side, if you like looking at guns, the film delivers. It is packed with piles upon piles of firearms. If you are purchasing "Lord of War" I recommend that you splurge on the two disk special edition, which you will find amply endowed with special features. Included on the second disc is information about different types of assault weapons, as well as an ample supply of the usual featurettes, trailers, deleted scenes and director's commentary. There is also a segment on the real international arms trade, which carries on the depressing and informative message that this film throws at us.
(01/26/06 12:45am)
This tale of moral bankruptcy gives us a window into the world of a private, international and illegal arms dealer, Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage). The Ukrainian born, American Yuri is good at his chosen profession, and it has allowed him to rise above the poverty of his youth. He sells indiscriminately to anyone with the ability to pay and Yuri's only concern is for himself and his family. He attempts to keep his trophy wife relatively in the dark as to the true source of the income that allows her and their young son to live more than comfortably. \nIn the film Orlov's brother, Vitaly (Jared Leto) briefly joins his business, but unlike Yuri, the "evil" results of their dealings weigh heavy on his conscience. Yuri is craftily maneuvering to keep his business strong, while being perused by Interpol agent Jack Valentine (Ethan Hawke). \nDespite being a tour de force in style, this film is not all that exciting. It starts off fairly promisingly, showing the Machiavellian aspect of Yuri's life, however, this part of the film resembles a typical, but entertaining, crime story in which it is easy to root for the "bad guys," as they just barely outwit law enforcement. \nThe film's tone shifts, however, and Yuri becomes rather difficult to sympathize with as the film succeeds in showing us (in case we were unaware) what bad arms dealers are. This, of course, is the point of the film and it is hammered home hard. While there is nothing wrong with a film with a message, "Lord of War" feels more like a statement about an aspect of world affairs than a story.\nAlso quite disappointing is that each of the three major actors in the film seems to be reprising previous roles. That is to say, it is clear why each was cast, and none of them do anything terribly groundbreaking. \nWe have seen Cage as a bad man in a cool suit before ("Face Off"). We have seen Ethan Hawke trying to uphold the law ("Training Day") and we have certainly already learned that Jared Leto + drugs = bad times ("Requiem for a Dream"). So it is not surprising that Cage and Leto each do really well in their roles. \nAs a narrator (voice-over is prevalent through out the film), Cage carries off the dialogue that is often trying just a little too hard to be cool and just barely manages not to be over the top. As for Hawke, his role is minimal and while he clearly brought his a game to the set, a lesser actor would have sufficed.\nOn the up side, if you like looking at guns, the film delivers. It is packed with piles upon piles of firearms. If you are purchasing "Lord of War" I recommend that you splurge on the two disk special edition, which you will find amply endowed with special features. Included on the second disc is information about different types of assault weapons, as well as an ample supply of the usual featurettes, trailers, deleted scenes and director's commentary. There is also a segment on the real international arms trade, which carries on the depressing and informative message that this film throws at us.
(01/19/06 5:00am)
There are several things that make "Red Eye" worth watching, most of all is actor Cillian Murphy ("28 Days Later", "Batman Begins"). Murphy is one of the more interesting up-and-coming actors and is perfectly cast as the appropriately named Jackson Rippner. In the film, Rippner psychologically and physically terrorizes the film's protagonist, Lisa Reisert, played by Rachel McAdams ("Wedding Crashers", "The Notebook"), while attempting to use her in the implementation of a sinister plot. \nDespite playing a single-layered bad guy, the Irish (he plays an American in the film) actor's strong performance, combined with his powerful charisma and unusual, jarring appearance (he manages to be attractive, yet also ghastly), will keep you fully engaged throughout the film. Playing across from him, McAdams' pretty and personable, yet emotionally scarred and withholding character, comes across with the balance required to inspire both empathy and likability. \nIn addition to being well-cast, "Red Eye" is enjoyable because it makes an unusual and welcome use of its setting. The limited space and special circumstances that come from having a large part of the film take place on airplane are optimally taken advantage of. The in-air struggle between Rippner and Reisert is interesting because they spend much of their time seated side by side. Because of this, their struggle is rather isolated, leaving the encounter between Rippner and Reisert intensely intimate, something few thrillers that are not about family-based conflicts manage to achieve. \nEven though the film would fall into the thriller genre, rather than a slasher movie, "Red Eye" is recognizably a Wes Craven ("A Nightmare on Elm Street") film. Craven has tapped into his strengths as a director and chose a script embedded with "Scream"-like elements, specifically when it comes to Rachel McAdams' character's struggle to overcome victimization. \nThe DVD includes the typical making of featurette, gag reel and a director's commentary that might be exciting to Craven's fans. Unfortunately, despite its talented contributors and good use of space, "Red Eye" is largely formulaic, predictable and thin. The film feels a little too much like one of those generic and forgettable thrillers of the early '90s. It's not likely this is going to be anybody's favorite movie, not because there is much wrong with it, but because there are so many more creative and surprising thrillers for the picking. But for what it is, "Red Eye" is defiantly entertaining.
(01/19/06 2:07am)
There are several things that make "Red Eye" worth watching, most of all is actor Cillian Murphy ("28 Days Later", "Batman Begins"). Murphy is one of the more interesting up-and-coming actors and is perfectly cast as the appropriately named Jackson Rippner. In the film, Rippner psychologically and physically terrorizes the film's protagonist, Lisa Reisert, played by Rachel McAdams ("Wedding Crashers", "The Notebook"), while attempting to use her in the implementation of a sinister plot. \nDespite playing a single-layered bad guy, the Irish (he plays an American in the film) actor's strong performance, combined with his powerful charisma and unusual, jarring appearance (he manages to be attractive, yet also ghastly), will keep you fully engaged throughout the film. Playing across from him, McAdams' pretty and personable, yet emotionally scarred and withholding character, comes across with the balance required to inspire both empathy and likability. \nIn addition to being well-cast, "Red Eye" is enjoyable because it makes an unusual and welcome use of its setting. The limited space and special circumstances that come from having a large part of the film take place on airplane are optimally taken advantage of. The in-air struggle between Rippner and Reisert is interesting because they spend much of their time seated side by side. Because of this, their struggle is rather isolated, leaving the encounter between Rippner and Reisert intensely intimate, something few thrillers that are not about family-based conflicts manage to achieve. \nEven though the film would fall into the thriller genre, rather than a slasher movie, "Red Eye" is recognizably a Wes Craven ("A Nightmare on Elm Street") film. Craven has tapped into his strengths as a director and chose a script embedded with "Scream"-like elements, specifically when it comes to Rachel McAdams' character's struggle to overcome victimization. \nThe DVD includes the typical making of featurette, gag reel and a director's commentary that might be exciting to Craven's fans. Unfortunately, despite its talented contributors and good use of space, "Red Eye" is largely formulaic, predictable and thin. The film feels a little too much like one of those generic and forgettable thrillers of the early '90s. It's not likely this is going to be anybody's favorite movie, not because there is much wrong with it, but because there are so many more creative and surprising thrillers for the picking. But for what it is, "Red Eye" is defiantly entertaining.
(11/10/05 5:00am)
As most of us already know, "work sucks." It's because we know this that we appreciate "Office Space." It seems when it came out six years ago, "Office Space" was underviewed but word spread and by now most people recognize it for what it is. This film is hilarious -- implausible but hilarious -- because it manages to resonate with anyone who has ever worked or contemplated the possibility of ending up in an office. Peter (Ron Livingston) is frustrated with his life, especially his painfully monotonous and frustrating job at Initech Corporation. It's gotten so bad that he claims every day is the worst day of his life and he's about to snap. But he accidentally acquires a new carefree perspective as he and two coworkers seek a profitable revenge on the way of life that has made them miserable. He hooks up with a frustrated waitress played by Jennifer Aniston. Stephen Root also stars in the film in a role that really gave the whole movie that extra push towards comedic greatness.\nHaving become and remained popular, it seems it was only a matter of time before a special edition was released, something with a little more than the nearly bare-bones original edition offered. This "Special Edition with Flair!" includes an "Office Space" retrospective with Mike Judge, who wrote and directed the film and a few deleted scenes as well as DVD-rom content. It's not much, but it's somewhat entertaining. The packaging leaves something to be desired, it's not that there is anything wrong with it so much as that in my opinion "Office Space" deserved a little more than a cardboard slipcover. The first time I bought a DVD packaged with one of these I was dully impressed, but my respect for "Office Space" yearns for something a bit more creative. \nAs far as package inserts go you get the standard scene index card and a few "Office Space" themed coupons. For only a few extra bucks one can acquire an extra special edition that comes packaged in a large box containing a coffee mug and mouse pad, among other things handy for use in your own office, I suppose. This film (old or new version) deserves a spot on the shelf, as it can hold its own next to other masterful work-themed comedies, such as BBC's "The Office," and cheer up anyone after a bad day at work.
(11/10/05 1:54am)
As most of us already know, "work sucks." It's because we know this that we appreciate "Office Space." It seems when it came out six years ago, "Office Space" was underviewed but word spread and by now most people recognize it for what it is. This film is hilarious -- implausible but hilarious -- because it manages to resonate with anyone who has ever worked or contemplated the possibility of ending up in an office. Peter (Ron Livingston) is frustrated with his life, especially his painfully monotonous and frustrating job at Initech Corporation. It's gotten so bad that he claims every day is the worst day of his life and he's about to snap. But he accidentally acquires a new carefree perspective as he and two coworkers seek a profitable revenge on the way of life that has made them miserable. He hooks up with a frustrated waitress played by Jennifer Aniston. Stephen Root also stars in the film in a role that really gave the whole movie that extra push towards comedic greatness.\nHaving become and remained popular, it seems it was only a matter of time before a special edition was released, something with a little more than the nearly bare-bones original edition offered. This "Special Edition with Flair!" includes an "Office Space" retrospective with Mike Judge, who wrote and directed the film and a few deleted scenes as well as DVD-rom content. It's not much, but it's somewhat entertaining. The packaging leaves something to be desired, it's not that there is anything wrong with it so much as that in my opinion "Office Space" deserved a little more than a cardboard slipcover. The first time I bought a DVD packaged with one of these I was dully impressed, but my respect for "Office Space" yearns for something a bit more creative. \nAs far as package inserts go you get the standard scene index card and a few "Office Space" themed coupons. For only a few extra bucks one can acquire an extra special edition that comes packaged in a large box containing a coffee mug and mouse pad, among other things handy for use in your own office, I suppose. This film (old or new version) deserves a spot on the shelf, as it can hold its own next to other masterful work-themed comedies, such as BBC's "The Office," and cheer up anyone after a bad day at work.
(11/03/05 5:00am)
I applaud the people responsible for the "House of Wax" DVD. Many times I have criticized DVDs that include few special features but I say that in this case to be sparing is good. They could have been even less generous in what they chose to include. The several "making of" type featurettes supply some insight into the horror effects and set design. The gag reel is boring, but not when you compare it to the far less entertaining feature in which the four biggest stars of the film sit together on a sofa watching and commenting on random footage of themselves during the production. It is as if you, the audience, are supposed to think you are watching them candidly hang out, or maybe even to feel as if you are hanging out with them, but they aren't fooling anyone. \nOf course, as many of you have surely guessed, "they aren't fooling anyone" could easily describe much of the film. The problem with having Paris Hilton as a member of the cast is not just that her acting power is limited. When Hilton is onscreen it is impossible to be absorbed in the story or to suspend any of your disbelief. In contrast, Elisha Cuthbert makes a fine protagonist, probably the best post-"Scream" horror movie girl so far. Chad Michael Murray and the rest of the cast provide adequate support. The death scenes in which many of them must ultimately participate are not particularly spectacular, but are at least playfully conceived. The ridiculous plot of "House of Wax" (loosely motivated by Vincent Price's "House of Wax") consists of a few clichés and stock horror elements, which in this case happily include the struggle between good and "evil" twins, a creepy truck driver and, of course, a scary house. It has a climax that looks like it belongs in a Jerry Bruckheimer film and would almost be exhilarating if it weren't so implausible. \nWhile the film is not extremely worthwhile it's just entertaining enough that it will not leave you wishing you got back the portion of your life spent watching it. However, if you buy the DVD you may find yourself wishing you had your $15 back, as "House of Wax" is not likely to inspire many repeat viewings.
(11/03/05 1:54am)
I applaud the people responsible for the "House of Wax" DVD. Many times I have criticized DVDs that include few special features but I say that in this case to be sparing is good. They could have been even less generous in what they chose to include. The several "making of" type featurettes supply some insight into the horror effects and set design. The gag reel is boring, but not when you compare it to the far less entertaining feature in which the four biggest stars of the film sit together on a sofa watching and commenting on random footage of themselves during the production. It is as if you, the audience, are supposed to think you are watching them candidly hang out, or maybe even to feel as if you are hanging out with them, but they aren't fooling anyone. \nOf course, as many of you have surely guessed, "they aren't fooling anyone" could easily describe much of the film. The problem with having Paris Hilton as a member of the cast is not just that her acting power is limited. When Hilton is onscreen it is impossible to be absorbed in the story or to suspend any of your disbelief. In contrast, Elisha Cuthbert makes a fine protagonist, probably the best post-"Scream" horror movie girl so far. Chad Michael Murray and the rest of the cast provide adequate support. The death scenes in which many of them must ultimately participate are not particularly spectacular, but are at least playfully conceived. The ridiculous plot of "House of Wax" (loosely motivated by Vincent Price's "House of Wax") consists of a few clichés and stock horror elements, which in this case happily include the struggle between good and "evil" twins, a creepy truck driver and, of course, a scary house. It has a climax that looks like it belongs in a Jerry Bruckheimer film and would almost be exhilarating if it weren't so implausible. \nWhile the film is not extremely worthwhile it's just entertaining enough that it will not leave you wishing you got back the portion of your life spent watching it. However, if you buy the DVD you may find yourself wishing you had your $15 back, as "House of Wax" is not likely to inspire many repeat viewings.
(09/29/05 4:00am)
"Flightplan" opens with Jodie Foster looking freaked out as only Jodie Foster can. Think "Panic Room," but with intensity. From its launching sequence on, I was happily engaged by "Flightplan," until the last third of the film, which left me less than thrilled.\nInitially I was impressed with how quickly the movie draws audiences into the unsteady mind of the protagonist, Kyle Pratt (Jodie Foster). Pratt's husband has unexpectedly died, so she and her young daughter, Julia, are returning to America from Germany in order to bury him and live with Pratt's parents while they embark on the difficult healing process. It quickly becomes evident that Pratt's viewpoint is somewhat unreliable, that she is confused, perhaps even delusional in her grief-stricken state. Pratt and her family have been residing in Germany because of her work as an engineer, and she and Julia are flying on an impressively large aircraft she had a hand in designing. But Pratt's life takes another turn for the worse when six-year-old Julia vanishes while her mother is napping. Pratt frantically attempts to locate her little girl, but her efforts are impeded by the captain and crew who think she is overreacting or maybe even deranged.\nFoster plays her role well -- she is convincingly maternal and frantic as well as a believable strong, successful female character. The role of Kyle Pratt feels like it could have been written with Foster in mind. All the acting is decent, if not better. The best performance (aside from Foster's) comes from Peter Sarsgaard (now starring in "The Skeleton Key"), who plays one of Pratt's fellow passengers, Carson. Sarsgaard, who has an interesting sort of charisma, has had more interesting but smaller roles in "Garden State" and "Kinsey." \nI don't want to give away the plot by explaining what made the late part of the film suck so badly, so all I'm going to say about it is that it was disappointingly uninventive. Its handling of racial tensions was troubling and there was one sequence that went on far too long and should have been subtitled "Jodie Foster is so amazing." \nIn these days of Hollywood's post-9/11 cashing-in, there are plenty of "terror in the skies" type movies hitting the theatres. Despite my issues with the direction the film takes, I admit the in-air action of "Flightplan" was more gripping than "Red Eye"(though I'll take a movie starring Cillian Murphy over one with Jodie Foster any day, and anyway "Red Eye" is a little better overall). But ultimately, I would have been more satisfied re-watching "Con-Air"
(09/29/05 12:23am)
"Flightplan" opens with Jodie Foster looking freaked out as only Jodie Foster can. Think "Panic Room," but with intensity. From its launching sequence on, I was happily engaged by "Flightplan," until the last third of the film, which left me less than thrilled.\nInitially I was impressed with how quickly the movie draws audiences into the unsteady mind of the protagonist, Kyle Pratt (Jodie Foster). Pratt's husband has unexpectedly died, so she and her young daughter, Julia, are returning to America from Germany in order to bury him and live with Pratt's parents while they embark on the difficult healing process. It quickly becomes evident that Pratt's viewpoint is somewhat unreliable, that she is confused, perhaps even delusional in her grief-stricken state. Pratt and her family have been residing in Germany because of her work as an engineer, and she and Julia are flying on an impressively large aircraft she had a hand in designing. But Pratt's life takes another turn for the worse when six-year-old Julia vanishes while her mother is napping. Pratt frantically attempts to locate her little girl, but her efforts are impeded by the captain and crew who think she is overreacting or maybe even deranged.\nFoster plays her role well -- she is convincingly maternal and frantic as well as a believable strong, successful female character. The role of Kyle Pratt feels like it could have been written with Foster in mind. All the acting is decent, if not better. The best performance (aside from Foster's) comes from Peter Sarsgaard (now starring in "The Skeleton Key"), who plays one of Pratt's fellow passengers, Carson. Sarsgaard, who has an interesting sort of charisma, has had more interesting but smaller roles in "Garden State" and "Kinsey." \nI don't want to give away the plot by explaining what made the late part of the film suck so badly, so all I'm going to say about it is that it was disappointingly uninventive. Its handling of racial tensions was troubling and there was one sequence that went on far too long and should have been subtitled "Jodie Foster is so amazing." \nIn these days of Hollywood's post-9/11 cashing-in, there are plenty of "terror in the skies" type movies hitting the theatres. Despite my issues with the direction the film takes, I admit the in-air action of "Flightplan" was more gripping than "Red Eye"(though I'll take a movie starring Cillian Murphy over one with Jodie Foster any day, and anyway "Red Eye" is a little better overall). But ultimately, I would have been more satisfied re-watching "Con-Air"
(09/15/05 4:00am)
It's hard to imagine there are many who haven't seen "Toy Story." Even though it was ten years ago that it first hit theaters, it has never really dropped out of sight. Maybe this is because it is credited as having raised the bar for cartoon movies with its 3D computer animation, or maybe "Toy Story" has staying power because it is just as pleasing to me now as it was when I was eleven years old, that is to say, it is truly a film for all ages. "Toy Story" manages not to sacrifice its appeal to one demographic for the other.\nBuilding on the suspicions long harbored or at least wishfully entertained by small children -- that toys are secretly alive -- "Toy Story" lets us into the world of one boy, Andy's bedroom, where Andy's old favorite toy, Woody the Cowboy, shows jealousy toward a new toy, space traveler Buzz Lightyear. This leads to an adventure that takes them away from Andy and his room, and into the perilous outside world. Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks) displays a real and complex humanity, deeper than that of most Disney cartoon characters. Buzz, who goes through an identity crisis and manages to be both irritating and endearing, is perfectly voiced by Tim Allen. The cast of supporting toys are also quite good, especially the timid dinosaur Rex, voiced by Wallace Shaun. Songs in the film provided by Randy Newman are sentimental and warm. Some people might be intrigued to learn that one of writing credits goes to Joss Whedon (Creator of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" whose upcoming film "Serenity" is interestingly in light of "Toy Story," but also, perhaps tragically, about cowboy space travelers).\nI have seen special edition two-disc sets with more exciting packaging, but in all fairness, the box they come in is not deceptive as to the amount and quality of special features contained on the discs. There is some cool stuff: deleted scenes, mini-documentaries and storyboards. But some of it, like the "claw" game that comes on the second disc, feels a little desperate and filler-like. The question I ask of any DVD re-release is whether the new version is significantly better than the first, if it is worth it for someone who already owns the first version to buy the second or if re-releasing the film is purely a ploy to sucker people into buying something they already own. I fear this set is the latter. That said, I'm totally happy to now own the movie (for the first time) and if you have never seen "Toy Story" go out and get it right away, you won't be sorry.
(09/15/05 3:29am)
It's hard to imagine there are many who haven't seen "Toy Story." Even though it was ten years ago that it first hit theaters, it has never really dropped out of sight. Maybe this is because it is credited as having raised the bar for cartoon movies with its 3D computer animation, or maybe "Toy Story" has staying power because it is just as pleasing to me now as it was when I was eleven years old, that is to say, it is truly a film for all ages. "Toy Story" manages not to sacrifice its appeal to one demographic for the other.\nBuilding on the suspicions long harbored or at least wishfully entertained by small children -- that toys are secretly alive -- "Toy Story" lets us into the world of one boy, Andy's bedroom, where Andy's old favorite toy, Woody the Cowboy, shows jealousy toward a new toy, space traveler Buzz Lightyear. This leads to an adventure that takes them away from Andy and his room, and into the perilous outside world. Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks) displays a real and complex humanity, deeper than that of most Disney cartoon characters. Buzz, who goes through an identity crisis and manages to be both irritating and endearing, is perfectly voiced by Tim Allen. The cast of supporting toys are also quite good, especially the timid dinosaur Rex, voiced by Wallace Shaun. Songs in the film provided by Randy Newman are sentimental and warm. Some people might be intrigued to learn that one of writing credits goes to Joss Whedon (Creator of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" whose upcoming film "Serenity" is interestingly in light of "Toy Story," but also, perhaps tragically, about cowboy space travelers).\nI have seen special edition two-disc sets with more exciting packaging, but in all fairness, the box they come in is not deceptive as to the amount and quality of special features contained on the discs. There is some cool stuff: deleted scenes, mini-documentaries and storyboards. But some of it, like the "claw" game that comes on the second disc, feels a little desperate and filler-like. The question I ask of any DVD re-release is whether the new version is significantly better than the first, if it is worth it for someone who already owns the first version to buy the second or if re-releasing the film is purely a ploy to sucker people into buying something they already own. I fear this set is the latter. That said, I'm totally happy to now own the movie (for the first time) and if you have never seen "Toy Story" go out and get it right away, you won't be sorry.
(08/04/05 4:00am)
"Sky High" is surprisingly good. It is the tale of Will Stronghold (Michael Angarano), the son of not just any two, but the two most super superheroes in the world. Will is a freshman at the school for future heroes and sidekicks. In addition to the typical social problems that come with the transition into high school, Will must deal with the "sky high" expectations of everyone around him and the apparent probability that he might not be able to meet them. Will's mother can fly, his father is so strong he is almost indestructible, and these two things combined should make Will the most super kid at school. But Will has a problem: he may have failed to inherit any powers from his parents.\nBecause it is a "kid's movie" not based on a well-loved book or animated by Pixar, I went into "Sky High" prepared for it to hurt. But I did not write it off, because in addition to it starring Kurt Russell and Kelly Preston (as Will's parents) and Bruce Campbell and it is set in a school equivalent to Xavier's mutant academy. I grew up in the time of "Clueless" and "Scream," I (and I know there are others like me) am starved for a decent high school movie. "Sky High" is full of colorful characters and a story that, while ultimately predictable and sugary sweet, branches in several directions, making it feel entertaining and full. Its great fun to see the kids using their powers, which are well done, as the film is not stingy with the special effects and also doesn't take itself too seriously. Actually, "Sky High" is quite funny at times. The only big disappointments are that it feels too immature to satisfy teenagers and the main villain is the weakest area of the plot. \nWill Stronghold is played by an actual geeky kid, (rather than a thinly disguised, hot 25-year-old as is so often the case in stories about high schoolers), which lends authenticity to the character and makes him more relatable to younger audiences. Like most of the young actors in the film, Michael Angarano is believable, that is to say, they seem like real kids which is most important. Commander Stronghold's school nemesis, played by newcomer Stephen Strait, stands out as being reminiscent of Heath Ledger in "10 Things I Hate About You." Adult cast members Russell and Kelly are fully adequate if not particularly interesting in their roles. Fans of Campbell may be disappointed considering his role is less than pivotal. \n"Sky High" is the rare kind of film that a family can truly enjoy together. I hesitate to recommend it to any random college student, as it truly has the most to offer a younger audience, but honestly I had a good time with it.
(08/04/05 2:26am)
"Sky High" is surprisingly good. It is the tale of Will Stronghold (Michael Angarano), the son of not just any two, but the two most super superheroes in the world. Will is a freshman at the school for future heroes and sidekicks. In addition to the typical social problems that come with the transition into high school, Will must deal with the "sky high" expectations of everyone around him and the apparent probability that he might not be able to meet them. Will's mother can fly, his father is so strong he is almost indestructible, and these two things combined should make Will the most super kid at school. But Will has a problem: he may have failed to inherit any powers from his parents.\nBecause it is a "kid's movie" not based on a well-loved book or animated by Pixar, I went into "Sky High" prepared for it to hurt. But I did not write it off, because in addition to it starring Kurt Russell and Kelly Preston (as Will's parents) and Bruce Campbell and it is set in a school equivalent to Xavier's mutant academy. I grew up in the time of "Clueless" and "Scream," I (and I know there are others like me) am starved for a decent high school movie. "Sky High" is full of colorful characters and a story that, while ultimately predictable and sugary sweet, branches in several directions, making it feel entertaining and full. Its great fun to see the kids using their powers, which are well done, as the film is not stingy with the special effects and also doesn't take itself too seriously. Actually, "Sky High" is quite funny at times. The only big disappointments are that it feels too immature to satisfy teenagers and the main villain is the weakest area of the plot. \nWill Stronghold is played by an actual geeky kid, (rather than a thinly disguised, hot 25-year-old as is so often the case in stories about high schoolers), which lends authenticity to the character and makes him more relatable to younger audiences. Like most of the young actors in the film, Michael Angarano is believable, that is to say, they seem like real kids which is most important. Commander Stronghold's school nemesis, played by newcomer Stephen Strait, stands out as being reminiscent of Heath Ledger in "10 Things I Hate About You." Adult cast members Russell and Kelly are fully adequate if not particularly interesting in their roles. Fans of Campbell may be disappointed considering his role is less than pivotal. \n"Sky High" is the rare kind of film that a family can truly enjoy together. I hesitate to recommend it to any random college student, as it truly has the most to offer a younger audience, but honestly I had a good time with it.
(05/26/05 4:00am)
Team America: World Police" is a movie about a small group with a cool lair that is hidden inside of Mt. Rushmore. As the title implies, they take it upon themselves to police the whole world. They are good at fighting terror, but often leave the cities they visit in ruins. When terrorists kill one of the team members, they must recruit a new member who can help them stop a massive terrorist plot. \nSome movies are offensive and hilarious -- in my opinion that is a good thing. Sadly this film is not nearly as funny or clever as it aims to be or as its creators' (Trey Parker and Matt Stone) hit TV show, "South Park." However, the overall feel of the production is quite similar to "South Park." Many of the voices are done by Trey Parker and will be familiar to fans of the show. Excitingly, the cast of "Team America" is entirely made up of marionettes.\nAlthough the movie is a post 9/11 story about America's relationship to the rest of the world and the war on terrorism, the use of puppets doesn't seem to have a symbolic reasoning. Instead it is done, as explained by the filmmakers on one of the special features that comes on the DVD, as an experiment with an unusual way of "animating" a film. While the film appears to poke fun at American imperialism, it ultimately celebrates it. Along the way it bashes big budget action movies and celebrity activism. \nThe special features mostly focus on what goes into making a movie with puppets. It was impressive to see behind-the-scenes footage of the puppeteers at work. I especially enjoyed the mini-documentary about the construction of the sets. There are a variety of detailed sets which simulate both indoor and outdoor locations all over the world, all built to accommodate the two-foot-tall puppets. They are so fantastic I wish I could go and play around on them. Among several other mini-documentaries on the filmmaking process there is a feature on the pyrotechnics at work in the film. The special features also include storyboards and deleted scenes.\nMany people liked "Team America," but I can only recommend it as a good rental for people who enjoyed the film when it was in theaters (thought I suspect it would have been cooler on a big screen) or who are as into puppeteering as the John Cusack character in "Being John Malkovich" (a good movie which I am in no way comparing to "Team America"). I found "Team America" to be disappointingly unfunny.
(05/25/05 8:01pm)
Team America: World Police" is a movie about a small group with a cool lair that is hidden inside of Mt. Rushmore. As the title implies, they take it upon themselves to police the whole world. They are good at fighting terror, but often leave the cities they visit in ruins. When terrorists kill one of the team members, they must recruit a new member who can help them stop a massive terrorist plot. \nSome movies are offensive and hilarious -- in my opinion that is a good thing. Sadly this film is not nearly as funny or clever as it aims to be or as its creators' (Trey Parker and Matt Stone) hit TV show, "South Park." However, the overall feel of the production is quite similar to "South Park." Many of the voices are done by Trey Parker and will be familiar to fans of the show. Excitingly, the cast of "Team America" is entirely made up of marionettes.\nAlthough the movie is a post 9/11 story about America's relationship to the rest of the world and the war on terrorism, the use of puppets doesn't seem to have a symbolic reasoning. Instead it is done, as explained by the filmmakers on one of the special features that comes on the DVD, as an experiment with an unusual way of "animating" a film. While the film appears to poke fun at American imperialism, it ultimately celebrates it. Along the way it bashes big budget action movies and celebrity activism. \nThe special features mostly focus on what goes into making a movie with puppets. It was impressive to see behind-the-scenes footage of the puppeteers at work. I especially enjoyed the mini-documentary about the construction of the sets. There are a variety of detailed sets which simulate both indoor and outdoor locations all over the world, all built to accommodate the two-foot-tall puppets. They are so fantastic I wish I could go and play around on them. Among several other mini-documentaries on the filmmaking process there is a feature on the pyrotechnics at work in the film. The special features also include storyboards and deleted scenes.\nMany people liked "Team America," but I can only recommend it as a good rental for people who enjoyed the film when it was in theaters (thought I suspect it would have been cooler on a big screen) or who are as into puppeteering as the John Cusack character in "Being John Malkovich" (a good movie which I am in no way comparing to "Team America"). I found "Team America" to be disappointingly unfunny.
(04/28/05 4:00am)
I had certain hopes going into "A Lot Like Love" and I thought that they were at least somewhat reasonable. I looked forward to the possibility that it would be cute and funny with an endearing enough plot that it might join the ranks of worthwhile romantic comedies, at least as a temporary, fringe member of the group. After all, it does combine story elements from "When Harry Met Sally" and features Ashton Kutcher -- who I am fond of in spite of many things. \n"A Lot Like Love" is the story of how Oliver Martin (Ashton Kutcher) and Emily Friehl (Amanda Peet) come briefly in and out of each other's lives several times over a 6-year period, as they head toward the realization that they are be meant to be together.\nThe story begins with Oliver being unexpectedly joined in an airplane bathroom by a stranger. The stranger is, of course, Emily. After their encounter in the skies, Oliver wants to get to know Emily, but she insists that it was a one-time thing. Obviously, she could not be more wrong. In the years that follow, Oliver attempts to transform himself from the dork he starts out as into an attractive, successful businessman. Emily works on subduing her many personal problems and vices. Fate and mutual desperation bring them back to each other from time to time for more awkward "friends with benefits" experiences. \nAs a romance, the movie's main failure is that the relationship between Oliver and Emily just isn't inspiring. You just never get the sense that they are really match each other. As Oliver ages into a more confident man it is hard to see why he still carries a torch for Emily. Although Emily's dress style changes over the years, she always seems to be a strung-out wreck. Then again, Amanda Peet always seems this way to me, and I thought it was a bad move to cast her as Kutcher's love interest. \nThere are some good things about the movie: the undeniably adorable scene in which Oliver serenades Emily in an attempt to win her heart, the late '90s pop radio songs that really take you back and several genuinely funny moments. Still, the plot feels cluttered. It tries to be a love story and a story about trying to find what you are meant to do with your adult life at the same time. The dialogue is an attempt at cleverness but comes off as contrived, and the little twists of the plot aren't surprising or as significant as the characters make them out to be. "A Lot Like Love" is a disappointment -- too awkward and flat to be a good date movie and not funny enough to see as a comedy.