Upcoming Movies

Sequels: For Better or For Worse
(in mostly chronological order)
(italicized means TBD)
New York, I Love You
Ong Bak 2: The Beginning
Saw VI
Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
Twilight: New Moon
Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakuel
Iron Man 2
Sex and the City 2
Shrek Forever After
Toy Story 3
Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore
Hairspray 2
Step Up 3
Resident Evil: Afterlife
Halloween 3D
Tron Legacy
Underworld 4
Spiderman 4
The Hangover 2
Kung Fu Panda: The Kaboom of Doom
Cars 2
Happy Feet 2
Madagascar 3
Rashomon 2010
District 13 Ultimatum (Sequel to D-13)
Beverly Hills Cop 4
XXX: The Return of Xander Cage
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Remakes?
Nightmare on Elmstreet
The Karate Kid
Piranha 3D
Footloose
Red Dawn
Poltergeist
Robocop
Aladin (live action Aladdin)
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Animated non musical)

Hairy Plotter

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince is, in the fashion of all Harry Potter movies, a mere continuation of the previous film. David Yate's exceptional eye for the beautification of the simple pulls the audience into another two and a half hour story that may never lose it's power, yet somehow never gains any.
Starting right off where the 5th movie left us, this latest installment can best be described as "a filler." The movie starts out with large explosions and plenty of frightened people, and ends just the same. There is little escalation of excitement from the beginning to the end. In this way, this film is becomes merely a bridge to get from the 5th movie to the 6th.
Because most of the people with whom I shared the auditorium midnight on opening day had already read the books, we were able to laugh at the smallest of hints relating to the book. That is, when we saw the armchair in the torn up house of Professor Slughorn, we all knew what would happen next. Surprisingly, Kloves' latest adaptation stays very true to the book, even if the book does exceed 600 pages. While many of the larger more important events were scaled down to fit the 2.5 hour limit, nearly each enticing moment of the book can be found within the movie.
As for the cinematic aesthetics of the film, Yate's does what he did for the 5th film to a greater level in this 6th film. The beautiful, half-desaturated, crisp image that fills the large screen of the theater is pure eye candy. Each sweeping tracking camera move is beautifully achieved (if with a little help from a computer). The score, by Nicholas Hooper, is simple at times, but elegant. Bringing back the quidditch game required the reuse of John Williams theme, a theme we've not heard since the third movie. It was a delightful return to a beautiful score, with a passionate embrace of the new themes from the 5th film.
If all else in this film is truly as delightful as I have described, then I must ruin it with a critique of the acting. While Michael Gambon and Jim Broadbent pull off their characters wonderfully, I can't help but feel Daniel Radcliff's un-enigmatic approach to his main character puts a damper on most of the story. Emma Watson does well, but the true uplift was Rupert Grint, whose portrayal of Ron Weasley was quite perfect.
On the whole, the film was a visually stunning one, and possibly the best addition to the Harry Potter series despite the unnecessary extension of the love quarrel between Hermione and Ron.

Unnecessary Existence: S. Darko

It should come as no surprise, to fans and filmmakers alike, that the much un-anticipated sequel to Donnie Darko has fared negatively. Were it not for the deplorably numerous and parasitic references to the original and a fifty percent similar title, this film would be a unrecognizable, straight to DVD, low budget-teen-trash picture promoting itself as ‘Donnie Darko Sequel!’

Perhaps an alternatively apt introduction would articulate director Chris Fisher’s complete and blatant disregard for the source material and those of us the love it. Bragging about YouTube death threats on the DVD commentary and laughing at his IMDB defenders is a surefire way to let people you know you enjoyed desecrating their film. And had it not been for the money hungry, lets-sap-whatever-we-can from a box office failure turn $10 million dollar DVD return, then said desecration of a dark, teenage cult thriller puzzle film would not be the topic of this writing.

Where Richard Kelly’s film succeeded, Fisher’s film becomes cheap imitation. Despite attempts to add to the dark and mysterious lore, newfound elements in the shape of meteoric tessaracts and a glowing feather go unexplained and unwarranted. Images that stood fascinating and relevant in the first become shameless references dependent on established connections to the story.

The story itself is a near retelling of the first, of course, the second time around it is strained for new directions, muddled with plagiarism, and inherently unsuccessful at capturing the confused, innocent, and insecure tone of its predecessor. Where namesake Donnie’s teenage escapades developed a troubled youth, Samantha’s expose nothing but writer’s block and immature vies at attracting an alternative audience.

If this film had been asked for, then perhaps it could have succeeded. But it was not. And now it has not. This, a revelation that should come as no surprise to a film that lacks of originality and forethought, should be kept in mind before the third installment continues on its path.

The Movies

Moving Pictures. Film. The Cinema. By any name or connotation they all refer the same thing. And this thing, if it can indeed be encapsulated by the word "thing," is a large part of my life. Perhaps too much. Perhaps not.

Either way, the content to follow will likely rear its head as un ugly amalgamtion of social commentary, film reviews, critiques, news, and anything else of relevance.

Prologue

As all great films do, we'd like to introduce our subject and goals first:

• Films are the subject.
• To accurately and pointedly give our thoughts on the films we see and review,
• To present new, mostly undiscovered films to you,
• And to give thoughtful interpretations of said films are our goals.

Hopefully we have some very distinct reviews to give, not simple reproductions of major film critics, nor basic outlines of the "natural" review.
Thanks for checking us out!