Perhaps my opinion stems from my love of Tarantino’s work so far, but Inglourious Basterds was easily the best film I’ve seen this year.

Inglourious Basterds

Starring: Brad Pitt, Diane Kruger, B.J. Novak, Sam Levine (“Freaks and Geeks” represent!), Christoph Waltz, and many more.

Rated: R (for violence, language, a brief (but hilarious) sex scene, and lots of Nazi-killin’.

IMDb Rating: 8.3
RottenTomatoes: 82%

The film is told in the standard five chapter plot that viewers have come to expect from Tarantino (see: Kill Bill). It begins in the Nazi-occupied French countryside, where a dairy farmer must choose between the safety of his family and revealing the whereabouts of a missing Jewish family.

From there, the film flash-forwards four years to 1944, to the last struggles of the war. Aldo Raine, played by the continually surprising Brad Pitt, gathers a team of very angry Jewish Americans to show the Nazis just how angry they are. There is some excellent violence, and, of course, the by turns funny and grave dialogue that audiences have come to love.

The film definitely kept me guessing. Just when I was busting a gut laughing, someone would be killed off, or a tense scene would be cut with something funny and I couldn’t help but laugh. I loved that I was never really settled into the movie. Another thing that I loved was that this film featured two very strong female characters.

The movie’s greatest strength was the acting. I mentioned that Brad Pitt was great, but Diane Kruger, who played a turncoat actress named Bridget Von Hammersmark, surprised me as well. She spoke German through much of the film, and when she switched to English she maintained a beautifully subtle accent. Not only is she stunning, her acting was remarkable. Even director Eli Roth, who plays the vengeful “Bear Jew,” was not as awful as I predicted!

But the actor who stole the show was Christoph Waltz as the “Jew Hunter” Hans Lander. He is the lead villain, not Hilter as I initially thought. He played the role brilliantly: frightening, perceptive, ironic, sardonic, and even humorous. He toyed with almost everyone in the movie, but in the end got what was coming to him. He won the best actor award at Cannes Film Festival this year. Expect him to earn a nomination, if not win, for Best Supporting Actor at the Oscars.

A great film, and one that I will surely be adding to my collection when it is released on DVD. I may even go to the theater to watch it again. It’s well worth the price of admission and then some.

The original Boondock Saints is something of a cult classic. It bombed in theaters, but has since gained a considerable following, mostly for its dark comedy. The sequel has long been in the works, and finally some information will be made available to the fans at Comic Con this year.

In addition to the film’s stars, CC will be premiering the trailer. The film’s promoters issued this press release about the film:

The following talent will be available at Comic-Con for press junket
style interviews from 10am to 1pm on Saturday, July 25th at the Westin
Hotel.

Talent in attendance:

* Troy Duffy (writer/director)
* Billy Connolly (Noah ‘Il Duce’ McManus)
* Norman Reedus (Murphy McManus)
* Sean Patrick Flannery (Connor McManus)
* Julie Benz (Eunice Bloom)
* Clifton Collins, Jr. (Romeo)
* David Della Rocco (Rocco)

Additionally, at 3:30 pm, they will be holding a panel discussion which
will feature the world premiere of the film’s trailer.

I tried to see this film at the midnight showing, but a score of nerds beat me to it. The line wrapped around my local cinema, and many kids and young adults were wearing Potter-esque costumes. So, I had to wait until the evening to see the movie, and people were still dressed up. While some aspects of the movie were disappointing, on the whole I really enjoyed it.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Rated: PG (I strongly suggest that young children not be taken to this film because of a scene described below…Spoilers Ahead!)

Starring: The usual cast of Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, (the lovely) Emily Watson, (the brilliant) Alan Rickman, (the acceptable) Michael Gambon, and an assortment of various British actors in lesser roles.

IMDb Rating: 8.2

There are three intertwining plotlines in the book: Harry and Dumbledore’s journey through various memories involving Tom Riddle and their search for the Horcruxes, Draco and Snape’s missions, and the mystery surrounding the moniker, “The Half-Blood Prince.” While I felt that the first two plots were sufficiently portrayed in the film, the final one, from which the film derived its name, seemed as though it was merely an afterthought. There was no mystery, no build-up, and it didn’t even really fit into the film very well, especially the big reveal at the end.

That said, I did enjoy this movie. The acting, especially, was great. Tom Felton, who played Draco Malfoy, really impressed me this time around. Before, he was simply the school bully, a brat with no real reason to be the jerk that he was. Here, there is plenty of motivation for him to be moody and withdrawn, and he portrays Draco with such burden and doubt that it can even be seen in his eyes. This is the first time I’ve really noticed Felton’s acting as anything other than annoying. He did a terrific job.

Another delight was Alan Rickman as Severus Snape. Not since the first film has he really been given a chance to shine as the character, and here, while he doesn’t say a whole lot, his face is simply stricken with grief over what he must do in order to save the Muggle and Wizarding worlds. And, of course, the rest of the cast was good, with notable turns by Evanna Lynch as the brilliant Luna Lovegood, and the appearance of my favorite characters Lupin and Tonks.

While there were some strange pauses in the movie (which I can only attribute to poor editing or direction), this is quite a funny film. But the film is also an emotional roller coaster, dragging the audience down into the darkest depths of Harry’s life. I mentioned in the film outline that this film is rated PG, and I sincerely believe that was a mistake, an attempt by the industry to lure in more ticket sales through unsuspecting parents bringing their younger children.

One scene in particular shows Harry forcing Dumbledore to drink an obviously painful potion to the last drop, while Dumbledore begs him to stop, almost to the point of death. It was an incredibly emotional and traumatizing scene, and the young children in the audience could be heard gasping and crying. I might have shed a few tears myself…

On the whole, if you can forgive the wonky plot and the strange pacing of the film, this is a great addition to the series. It really paves the way for the film, The Deathly Hallows, which has been split into two parts. Since The Deathly Hallows was my least favorite book, I imagine I won’t like the films much either. But hopefully they suprise me.

Bad week for showbiz, eh? First Ed McMahon passed away at 86, and today we get the tragic news that Farrah Fawcet passed away after a long battle with cancer. She was best known as the California blond from the show “Charlie’s Angels,” and long-time love of Ryan O’Neil.

But the big shocker was the death of pop superstar Michael Jackson. He was, at one time, the biggest star in the world, with hit after hit such with both his childhood band The Jackson Five, and as a solo artist. After a series of bizarre scandals and an even more bizarre existance, his life was cut short at 50.

Mr. Todd is something of a legend in the horror genre, but I recently learned that he is also popular in the Star Trek circles as Worf’s brother! He will be attending Motor City Comic Con this year, and Villaintech hopes to get the opportunity to meet him.

The towering, 6’5 actor has appeared in films such as Platoon, The Crow, Night of the Living Dead (1990 remake), and the Final Destination series. He is best known for his turn as the frighteningly stone-faced supernatural murderer in Candyman.

I loved Tony in Candyman, and one of the first horror films I ever viewed, Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh. While the sequel is far inferior to its predecessor, the backstory concerning The Candyman is compelling and utterly tragic. With his deep voice and haunted dark eyes, Tony Todd is an interesting part of the horror genre, and one that I hope to meet while I attend the Convention.

His Wikipedia Entry.

I’ve said it before, and I’m not afraid to say it again: I love kids’ movies. I especially love kids’ movies that are aware that adults are watching, too.

Monsters VS. Aliens

Starring: Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, Stephen Colbert, Rainn Wilson, Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Kiefer Sutherland, and the fantastic Seth Rogan.

Rated: PG

IMDb Rating: 7.3
RottenTomatoes: 70%

Sample Review:

[The voice cast] really delivered funny line after funny line throughout this. In what other movie do you get shout-outs to “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and “Beverly Hills Cop” in the same frame. “Monsters vs. Aliens” might be a better time capsule of kitsch than an actual movie.

The 80’s references alone are worth the watch. A pair of teens are having a make-out session in a Trans Am, overlooking the vast city lights, listening to Journey’s “Two Hearts.” I couldn’t help but chuckle aloud, and other older people in the audience could be heard frequently laughing.

Plot-wise, the story isn’t brilliant. A woman named Susan (Witherspoon), is struck on the head by a meteor the day of her wedding to selfish weatherman Derrick (Rudd). A green substance in the meteor makes Susan grow to a monstrous size, and she is scooped up by the government, locked up in a cell, and renamed “Ginormica.”

There, she meets a colorful group of monsters:

The Missing Link – Voiced by my favorite illusionist Will Arnett, is something of a ladies’ monster.
Dr. Cockroach – A mad scientist who was formed in a scenario resembling something from The Fly.
Insectosaurus – A giant, nonverbal grub.
B.O.B. – The crowd (and my) favorite. Seth Rogan gives B.O.B., a giggly blob of acidic goo, a very cuddly and confused personality. Since he has no brain or identity, he’s constantly confusing himself with others in the group, hence he develops quite a crush on Derrick.

With some fantastic voice work, and some fun pop culture references, this is a movie that is great if you’re in the mood for a light-hearted film or one that you can watch with the kids and still enjoy.

A bearded and bespectacled Egon Spengler chatted with MTV News regarding some very interesting aspects of the new Ghostbusters film, including casting and directing. Ghostbusters 3 is currently in the script-writing stage.

Ramis promised that all the old core players will take part in the updated version, including Bill Murray (Dr. Peter Venkman) and Dan Aykroyd (Dr. Raymond Stantz), who co-wrote the original films. “We’re all going to be in it in different kinds of roles,” Ramis said. “We’re going to be the sage mentors. There are going to be young Ghostbusters.”

As of now, no decisions have been made about just who those new Ghostbusters will be. But with Judd Apatow signed on as a producer, the Internet has been buzzing with gossip that comedians from his cinematic universe, such as Paul Rudd and Seth Rogen, will join in.

At the moment, Ramis is waiting on a first draft of the script, which is being penned by Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky, two writer/producers on “The Office,” who also wrote “Year One.” “Gene and Lee, both of whom I mentored, are now writing the new ‘Ghostbusters,’ ” Ramis said. “I’m consulting with them, as is Dan Aykroyd and [original director] Ivan Reitman.

“Bill Murray is just waiting for the truckload of money to arrive to get him out of his office,” Ramis joked.

After taking a jab at his old friend, Ramis assured us that Murray is definitely “in,” even though the two haven’t communicated directly about the project. “I haven’t talked to him about it,” Ramis said. “I want to talk to him about it eventually. I think we just need a script, because he’s the thorniest of the group.”

At this point, it’s unknown who will direct the movie, as Ivan Reitman and Harold Ramis, who is 63, have not expressed interest.

I have been excited for this project for a long while. Because of the talent circling the script, there’s a good chance that it won’t completely suck.

Many eyes, whether it be on fan message boards or beyond the Internet, have been intently focused upon the new Star Trek movie hitting theaters on May 8th. After a several year hiatus succeeding the 10th film Star Trek: Nemesis, J.J. Abrams (producer of Cloverfield) decided to pick up this everlasting franchise and is boldly going where no one has gone before with Star Trek.

Across various communities online there has been a great deal of positive feed back regarding this movie—hopefully it won’t be a disappointment. Abrams is trying to accomplish something very difficult because it isn’t often one can take completely new actors and actresses and convey the feeling the original stars produced. I’m relatively positive about this.

Apparently, Leonard Nimoy (actor who played the original Spock for those of you who don’t know) is rumored to be apart of this movie somehow. Which is definitely exciting!

I’ll keep everyone updated on this movie, and when it comes out I’ll definitely make a review!

Let us celebrate my fellow Trekkie fans!

The Japanese action/horror/comedy/epic Battle Royale is set for a Hollywood remake to be released in 2011. Here’s my advice to Hollywood: don’t screw this up.

Plot:

Sure, the plotline is a little far-fetched. A group of high schoolers are selected by random lottery to battle to the death on a highly monitored island. Their deaths are punishment for the millions of rebellious Japanese teenagers, a warning to their peers.

What made the original believable was that the movie didn’t really delve into the plot so much as hint at it with some screen text and a bit of exposition. Hollywood would do well to remember that sometimes subtlety is best.

Characters:

The film is primarily character driven, which is what most fans will be looking for. Battle Royale thrives on fleshing out many characters in a short span of time, making the audience understand the kids and their reasons for why they die. Short flashbacks to the characters’ lives are interesting tidbits and help further the plot without feeling heavy-handed.

The most important characters should be played by talented young actors. I am thinking kids like Anton Yelchin, Emily Browning, and Jamie Bell, instead of the mindless Hollywood choices like Hilary Duff or Zach Effron. This might help give the film more credentials.

Violence/Subversive Themes:

We know that American movies don’t shy away from violence, which is a relief. Brutal, creative death may be the one thing that can be assured for the remake. However, it is important that the movie remembers to include the more unsavory aspects of the film, including flashbacks to child molestation, suicide, and a present time attempted rape. The movie should be gritty, raw, and in keeping with the original.

I can’t say for sure that I’m looking forward to the remake, but if they heed my advice I’ll be first in line.

So the advertisements looked awesome. I wasn’t sure what to expect. And I’m still not sure what to think.

Watchmen

Starring: Billy Crudup, Jackie Earle Haley, Malin Ackerman, Javier—I mean, Jeffery Dean Morgan, Carla Gugino, Matthew Goode, and Patrick “The Ass” Wilson.

Rated R: Graphic violence, big blue appendages, and an amazing two minute sex scene set to Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah.”

IMDb Rating: 8.3 (Top 250: #132)
RottenTomatoes: 65% Fresh

Sample Review:

…a strange and gorgeous beast indeed, not without problems, a mesmerizing epic folly of the sort hardly anyone attempts any more. It is absolutely sick with ambition…

This was my favorite review because it truly encapsulated my feelings on this movie. I had not fully read the graphic novel before going to see the film, so I was simply mesmerized by the awkward pacing and interjections of random characters throughout.

It wasn’t until hours after seeing the film that I took another look at the book, and I was amazed how sincerely accurate it was. Snyder literally translated the comics, frame for frame at some points, to the screen. Where my feelings for the movie had been mixed before, I found myself respecting his efforts. The movie is still far from perfect, but it certainly becomes more enjoyable if the viewer is familiar with the source material.

But this is also where I have a problem with the movie. It’s three hours long. Obviously much of the movie-going audience hasn’t read the Watchmen series. So why would Snyder make a film so devotionally geared toward fanboys and fangirls? It’s equally surprising that the film earned top spot at the box office this weekend. Such a grand, three hour epic based on amoral superheroes doesn’t seem like the type of fare to compete with “Medea Goes to Jail.”

The saving grace of this strangely plotted, unevenly paced movie is that the characters are all interesting, each being flawed in some way. Rorschach, played brilliantly by former child actor Jackie Earle Haley, is perhaps the best feature. At times dryly humorous and downright insane, this heroic psychopath unites the film’s occasionally flimsy storyline. Patrick Wilson, and his amazing butt, also does a good job as the square, nerdy Nite Owl II.

Dr. Manhattan is an interesting character, as well. At first, I was put off by the big, buff, blue giant and his soft, effeminate voice. But he eventually grew on me, in part because he suffers from a bad case of the emo. If I were an indestructible human, I don’t think I would be nearly that sad all the time.

I was extremely disappointed in the female lead, Silk Spectre II. Malin Ackerman is horrid in this movie. She can’t act. Perhaps she does well as eye candy, apart from her humongous mole, but she really needs to learn how to deliver lines properly. She was even more distracting than Dr. Manhattan’s exposed smurfy genitals.

The film is an extremely faithful adaptation of the beloved graphic novel, and is definitely worth seeing. I might have to watch it again, just to fully appreciate it.

Michael McKean, Christopher Guest, and Harry Shearer, who have been playing music together since 1978 and are the comedic masterminds behind This is Spinal Tap, Best in Show, and A Mighty Wind, are touring 30 American cities next month.

I have always been a fan of Christopher Guest’s comedy. He focuses on instantly recognizable characters, and employs some of the funniest people in Hollywood.

What’s interesting about this tour is that they’re touting it as, “Unwigged and Unplugged,” which is reminiscent of Kiss without the makeup. They’re playing mostly acoustic renditions, with some selections from A Mighty Wind and a few other collaborations thrown in. I’ll try and score some tickets to the Fox Theater in D-town, and give a full report if I can.

Here is a complete listing of cities they’ll be visiting. And here are a few songs that just might be featured on the tour:

I love music so much. It’s such a deeply influential part of my existence that I don’t think I could live without it. Not just musicals, where the characters sing out the plot and stage big dance numbers. I’m talking about movies that center around the theme of music, and that are fueled by a love of it. These are some of my favorite films that celebrate music.

5.) Empire Records – A great little movie from 1995 that stars of group of virtual unknowns at the time. Of those unknowns were Renee Zellweger and Liv Tyler, two girls who work at an independent record store that is threatened by a huge music chain. It is filled with quirky performances and a terrific soundtrack from the 80s and early 90s. Hey, it’s Rex Manning Day!

4.) This Is Spinal Tap – A hilarious send-up of over the top stage shows and rock and roll antics. The film that launched the long and glorious career of comedic director Christopher Guest, seen here cranking up the knob to eleven.

3.) Cherish – An independent film from 2002, this film stars Robin Tunney as a shut-in who continually calls in to her favorite radio station to request weird pop tunes. She’s framed for hitting, and killing, an officer with her car, and is put under house arrest. Her ankle bracelet technician, played by the awesomely strange and wonderful Tim Blake Nelson (of O Brother, Where Art Thou?), finds himself drawn to this unusual woman. Love this movie, fantastic soundtrack that includes Hall and Oates, Animotion, and Tom Petty.

2.) Once – The little movie that could. It took home the Best Original Song Academy Award last year for the beautiful gem, “Falling Slowly.” A heartbreaking movie, it concerns the lives of two poor people living and breathing music as they attempt to struggle through their feelings for one another.

1.) Almost Famous – My favorite because it truly embraces rock and roll. It is funny, sad, sweet, and intelligent. Kate Hudson as Penny Lane would describe my life if I had been a beautiful, carefree girl in the 70s. I would be a free spirit, following my favorite band across the country, just to hear them play.

Where Inkheart was clearly intended for kids, this film falls more into the “art” category than “children’s.” It is truly a breathtaking spectacle.

Coraline

Starring: Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Keith David, Jennifer Saunders, Dawn French, Ian McShane, and the PC guy from those Mac commercials.

Rated: PG

IMDb Rating – 8.5
RottenTomatoes – 88%

Sample Review –

Coraline is strange and bizarre and undeniably beautiful.

I think that is what sets this movie apart from anything I have seen in a long while. It is beautiful. The whole film feels so hand-crafted, each individual piece so lovingly wrought, that despite the films lagging pace, the visual feast more than makes up for it. Slow moments in the film allowed to me study the backdrop, the tiny stitches in the characters, the effectiveness of the voice acting.

Let me just say that Dakota Fanning is perhaps one of the greatest actresses of our generation. I know that’s tough to plunk down, but this girl was astounding in her younger years, and is promising to be even better in the coming ones. Her voice work in this movie is nothing short of amazing. The whole while I was watching, I was also listening, too. I just couldn’t believe that she voiced the character of Coraline. Though I knew it was Dakota, the voice was so expressive and interesting that it didn’t sound anything like what I imagined. Great work. Teri Hatcher also did a great job, which was unexpected.

As you watch the film, keep an eye on the elements surrounding the characters. There are bugs, mice, moving pictures, flowers that rustle in the breeze. It all comes to life on the screen.

I am not going to spoil the film’s plot, because it is better to just go and see it for yourself. If you can see it in 3-D, I highly recommend it. Your eyes will thank you.

I realize that this is an Americanized version of a Korean horror film. However, that does not excuse the film’s adoption of a different, and exponentially lamer, ending. What could have been a great little ghost story jumped aboard the Shamalamawagon.

Warning: A few spoilers, but nothing too specific.

The Uninvited

Starring: Emily Browning, David Strathairn (hubba^2), and Elizabeth Banks.

Rated: PG-13

IMDb Rating: 6.4
RottenTomatoes: 34% Rotten

Sample Review:

The ending annoyed me so much that it nearly erased my memory of anything worthwhile earlier in the film.

The horror genre needs to shape up. How many years has it been since The Sixth Sense came out? How fast has M. Night’s career gone down the drain? Why do filmmakers still insist on trotting out the same boring plot devices and twist endings?

The Uninvited has a lot going for it. It’s a relatively small cast, all very competent. Emily Browning is a hauntingly beautiful young actress with a lot of talent. Even Elizabeth Banks is good in her role as the would-be evil stepmonster. The atmosphere is creepy; a lonely beachside home where a pair of sisters lost their ailing mother to a fire.

The younger sister, Anna, cannot remember the details of the fire. She has been in a mental institution for 10 months trying to decipher dreams she’s had, and to explain the deep cuts on her wrists. They appear to be self-inflicted. Her counselor tells her that it is safe for her to return home to “finish what she started.”

She returns home to find that her father has married her mother’s nurse. In every scene where the nurse, Rachel, is alone with Anna, her words are threatening, even the music reflects this. The score is perhaps one of the only truly great aspects of the movie. At times it is somber, others nonexistant, especially when the tension is at its peak.

Soon, Anna begins to see visions, including the charred corpse of her mother, and three young children who seem to have been dead quite a while. These are all very creepy, and the tension mounts throughout the film.

I would say that this is a film worth watching if you can forgive the resolution. I had a hard time forgiving it because I think it went the easy way out. Still, the atmosphere, acting, and concept are good, and worth catching on Netflix one gloomy afternoon. It might deliver a few scares…

Greetings! My name is Donny Winter and I am gratified to be a part of this wondrous site as a new contributing writer! I write about many different things so I am not just going to huddle in the small corner of the Japanese Giant Monster world—even though I probably will write a good deal about said world.

I figured I would introduce myself as a writer here with a genre that I am very passionate about, that being Japanese Giant Monsters.

What do you think about when you hear the term ‘Japanese Giant Monster’? Well most of us in our modern culture, mainly comparing this fascinating genre of entertainment to our more futuristic entertainment industry, frown upon the shabby special effects and low-grade CGI displayed in the various films. Currently, society is more focused upon how cool or awesome a movie looks without observing the symbolism contained behind the delightful exterior of dazzling special effects.

A popular example of a Japanese icon that is often degraded for these flaws is the atomically created dinosaur originally named ‘Gojira’, a great beast that was first featured in the box office hit 1954 movie, Gojira. This was later translated to ‘Godzilla’ during the movie’s American debut later in 1956. While it is still a popular film and a golden stamp for the Japanese Film Industry, Godzilla is more than often looked down upon for its suitmation (an actor portraying Godzilla in a rubber suit) and overall eye-catching material when compared to modern Hollywood-esque box office hits. But in all reality, is that what movies are all about? Flabbergasting CGI that blows an audience away like the newest Star Wars Trilogy? Or is there something deeper that possesses a greater meaning to the audience?

The answer is ‘no’. To the Japanese Film Industry, Godzilla was more than just a box office hit and a splendid horror film. The movie’s depth and symbolism is what made it the true timeless masterpiece. For whoever has not seen the film, the basic plot revolves around a giant beast (Godzilla) that was spawned by nuclear radiation during World War II in the South Pacific—who inadvertently decided to wreak havoc upon Japan.

While the movie is wonderfully proportioned for the time in which it was created, it still pales greatly in comparison to our more modern cinema. Despite that minor set back, what makes this film a shining beacon that still beams today is its symbolism. The main concept Toho Co. Ltd. (the creators of Godzilla) wanted to convey was how destructive and terrible the war had been. Not to mention, how badly the Japanese feared nuclear weapons and their effects upon the environment.

That is what I feel this movie is remembered for, the dark and powerful emotion it conveyed. People don’t need to be knocked off their seats by blazing laser beams and ‘big bang’ related explosions; sometimes all it takes is a deep symbolic meaning to adequately convey a point.

From time to time I enjoy watching movies aimed at kids. Though I’ve never read the book, I decided to give Inkheart a try. I’m an adult and even I could figure that film out. I can’t imagine what a five year old, who has just learned to stop picking their nose in public, might make of it.

Inkheart

Starring – Brendan Fraser (Really? REALLY?), Helen Mirren, Andy Serkis, Paul Bettany, Eliza Bennett, Jim Broadbent.

Rated – PG

IMDb Rating – 6.7
RottenTomatoes – 37% Rotten

Sample Review:

This folklore-filled children’s story about the love of literature is disappointing because of its poor execution.

I would call this review accurate. There were several qualities to be admired about the film: the cinematography, the sets, the imaginative idea. This is all squandered by a pointless and convoluted script and a duller than dull leading man.

As I mentioned, I haven’t read the book. I have to wonder whether it is as scattered and unfocused as the film ultimately turned out to be. We begin with narration, which we don’t hear again, concerning a father (Fraser) reading to his infant daughter Maggie while her mother looks on. Flash-forward to a van driving through what I imagine to be Germany (?). The mother is absent, the daughter is twelve or thirteen, and Brendan Fraser has some horrid hair plugs. Seriously, that crap is distracting; it’s almost as bad as his acting.

The father is searching for a book entitled Inkheart, though it isn’t clear why. We discover later that it is because he is a Silvertongue, one with the power to make the written word come to life. Interesting concept, as “silvertongue” usually holds a negative connotation as someone who can lie very well. He can read, but he can’t control what part of the book happens. For every person or thing that comes out of the book, a person has to go into it. Hence why the mother is missing; he accidentally read her into the book, and he has been searching for the out of print copies ever since.

Too much happens before we’re introduced to the conflict that the audience ends up playing catch-up the entire time. In addition to that, the characters are traveling all over the place for unknown reasons. From Germany (?), they drive to Italy to meet the aunt that Maggie has never known. She is played by Helen Mirren, who shows some good comedic timing.

From there, the baddies are introduced. They’re a band of thieves from the book Inkheart, originally “read out” by Fraser when he lost his wife. Paul Bettany plays a guy called Dustfinger who can wield fire with his hands. Admittedly, he’s kind of cool, albeit a conflicted character that suffers from inopportune bouts of cowardice. The real bad guy is Andy Serkis, completely free of make-up and special effects. And let me tell you, that man is absolutely horrifying. They have employed a replacement Silvertongue who has a stutter, so characters have been read out of the books stamped with ink still on their faces. So they kidnap Brendan Fraser and his daughter so that he will do their bidding.

Scattered amidst this confusion are characters and creatures from other well-known works including The Wizard of Oz, Arabian Nights, and Peter Pan. Great concept, except that it’s all handled so sloppily that they’re nothing more than set pieces.

I wish I could go into more detail about the movie, but there’s simply too much packed into two hours to reiterate. Too many characters, too many settings, too much! Even the actors seem confused. I can’t imagine this movie keeping the attention of children for the first half hour, let alone the full running time.

It was recently announced that producer and star Drew Barrymore is going to reunite the gang for a third Charlie’s Angels movie. I am a little stoked. But what would the movie be without Creepy Thin Man?

You see, I have a soft spot for the Charlie’s Angels franchise. A.) I love women who kick butt and B.) it helped resurrect the career of my favorite actor, playing one of the coolest supporting characters ever.

He’s a mute assassin with a bitchin’ haircut and a swordcane. It doesn’t get much more pulp than that. And fans of the character just might get their wish to see him back in action in the third film.

After a press conference for her latest romantic comedy, He’s Just Not That Into You, Saturday in Beverly Hills, Calif., producer Nancy Juvonen stayed to hang out with SciFi Wire, brainstorming Charlie’s 3 ideas. The following Q&A features edited excerpts of that interview:

And would you bring back Crispin Glover as the Thin Man again?

Juvonen: Isn’t he the best, Crispin? (umm yes he is) I’m with you, so I feel like I’m going to think about it.

He should hook up with Drew’s Angel, because that’s where it was going at the end of the last one.

Juvonen: Remember that? I know. That was so fun. But then he fell off and he had killed Seamus O’Grady, Justin Theroux.

Well, McG has gone on record saying he’s not dead, so that’s cool.

Juvonen: The Thin Man almost could never die. Is he alive in the first place? I’m not even sure. It’s going to be hard to say how the sword went through him and then pierced Seamus O’Grady.

Oh, it missed all the vitals.

Juvonen: Look at you. We should take off right from there. I think we could get away with anything, but I feel like you know what you love, but I think you also have to make some turns there. I think there’s a great challenge in “Do you want to take over the universe or ruin the world?” It’s sort of not practical so much. Bond goes into remote countries. 24′s in a remote country. It’s sort of: What’s the next great foil? I think that with Drew’s character, she fell in love with the villain. If you think about, “Oh, you could do that,” we’ve kind of like done, done, done [everything]. We did a lot in the first one and gazillions in the second one.

I like her energy and nerdy enthusiasm for the movie. Even though the film isn’t really necessary, and Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle was pretty horrible, I know quite a few people would be interested in seeing another.

Source.

The Academy Award nominees have been announced. Here are my reactions.

Best Actor:

Richard Jenkins (The Visitor) – This nomination really surprised me. I’ve always thought he was a fun, recognizable character actor, but I hadn’t realized that he had finally been given a starring role, and one that would take him to the top of the ballot.

Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon) – Another guy I’m surprised to see on the list. I’ve yet to see Frost/Nixon, but it’s up there on my list to watch in the near future. He’s always intrigued me, and looks to be damned good in this film.

Sean Penn (Milk) – Milk was, indeed, a good film, and his performance was certainly a departure from the dour, too-serious roles he’s taken in the past few years.

Brad Pitt (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) – This felt like a wasted nomination. He wasn’t that good. In fact, his performance was very similar to Interview with the Vampire: somber, plodding, and monotone. While I like both films, Brad just didn’t deserve a nod. (Now for 12 Monkeys, that nomination was well deserved. He was completely, and awesomely, insane.)

Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler) – If there is any justice in the Academy, Mickey will take it this year. This was the best performance by an actor I’ve seen in any film of 2008. I thought his face might be a bit on the distracting side, but he managed to overcome everything and draw me directly into the movie.

Best Actress:

Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married) – Love her. She can be fun, spunky, serious, all the while maintaining a bit of class and grace. She’s sort of a…Natalie Wood of this generation.

Angelina Jolie (Changeling) – Seriously? She’d better be thanking Clint Eastwood for being an amazing director, because she would have been pretty craptacular on her own. He was sadly skipped in almost every category for Gran Turino, and that was a crime; it deserved far more credit.

Melissa Leo (Frozen River) – No comment, as I’ve yet to see this film.

Meryl Streep (Doubt) – She is an American classic, and this nomination is entirely deserved. Instead of portraying Sister Aloysius as a hell-bent villain, she enriches the character with layers of guilt, suspicion, and regretful determination, rendering her utterly human.

Kate Winslet (The Reader) – I like her, but I think people are giving her too much credit by calling her “underrated.” She’ll win an Oscar one of these years, but I’m not sure it should be this year.

Supporting Actor/Actress:

I’m going to safely call Heath Ledger the winner in the male category. It’s difficult to argue with me, I think, since he is unable to make any more films and he was robbed of his Oscar for Brokeback Mountain. Sometimes it’s about politics, but he was also brilliant and captivating as The Joker.

The actress category is a little tougher, as there were some outstanding performances. I am going to guess that Marissa Tomei might be a worthy contender, considering she would actually earn this Oscar for an, indeed, stellar performance, as opposed to her crackpot win for My Cousin Vinny.

Best Picture:

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – Why is this on the nomination list at all? It’s a long-ass movie with horrible CGI and some very wooden acting by Brad Pitt. Some of the supporting characters are laughable. If anyone should be recognized for anything it’s Cate Blanchett for looking drop dead gorgeous throughout.

Frost/Nixon – Have yet to see it, but Ron Howard usually directs some compelling films. Might be a contender.

Milk – Good film, and a biopic, which usually adds to the probability of a win. I just don’t think it’s had nearly the impact that it claims.

The Reader – A slow burn. I really liked this film, but it is not considered the best of the list by most.

Slumdog Millionaire – Critics of this film (citizens of Mumbai, Salman Rushdie) claim that it depicts India in an unflattering light, and that it is a bit too far fetched. However, the film is original, well paced, the acting (especially by the children) is fantastic. It is, despite a bleak beginning, a hopeful tale of love and family. I fell in love with this movie, and can certainly see it taking home Best Picture.

So Villaintechnicians, Halloween is right around the corner. What have you done to get into the spooky mood? Some of you have probably spent time picking out costumes, others buying bulk candy and creepy decorations for your lawns. Me? I’ve been watching scary movies.

I love them. And, from time to time, I enjoy revisiting the scary films that I haven’t seen in a while, just to judge if they withstand the test of time. Poltergeist, the movie that helped spark my irrational fear of clowns, definitely lives up to the hype that it has received as one of the scariest movies of all-time.

The film tells the story of a suburban family who occupy one of the father’s (played by a hilarious Craig T. Nelson) pre-fabricated homes that he sells. It is located in a neighborhood that is comprised of many homes that look exactly alike, all built upon a (what they believe to be) relocated cemetery.

Soon, strange occurrences, such as breaking glass and moving furniture, begin to shake up the mother (played by JoBeth Williams). Little Carol Anne disappears, and the film follows the family as they attempt to reclaim their little girl from the spirits who have abducted her.

Sadly, the sequels lacked the scares and perfect timing that made the first one so magically frightening. Everything is just campier and silly, including the possessed tequila worm in Poltergeist II, and the idiotic addition of the “mirror people” in the very sub-par Poltergeist III.

But the truly creepy thing about this trilogy is the chain of mysterious deaths surrounding it. The Poltergeist Curse claimed the lives of several of the films’ actors, including the adorable Heather O’Rourke, the beautiful little girl who portrayed young Carol Anne in all three films.

I enjoyed re-watching the trilogy, but the first film is undeniably superior. For your viewing pleasure, here are my top five favorite scary moments from the original Poltergeist:

5.) The Chairs
4.) Carol Anne’s Rescue
3.) Crawling Steak/Peeling Flesh
2.) The Clown (I know a certain reader will agree with me on this one.)

And the number one moment that creeped me out, the one that sends chills down my spine every time I watch it, despite its low-key nature, is…

1.) Tangina’s Monologue

This is a comedy for young teenagers. Remember this, because the advertising and trailers, especially the blue backlit poster of a young, monster-headed Rainn Wilson, marketed The Rocker in the vein of R-rated comedies such as The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up. It is anything but.

“The Rocker”

Rated: PG-13

Starring: Rainn Wilson (The Schrutinator!), Christina Applegate, Teddy Geiger, Josh Gad, and Emma Stone.

IMDb Rating: 6.1
RottenTomatoes: 36% Rotten (Ouch.)

Sample Review:

It’s totally predictable, but if you’ve ever nursed a rock-star fantasy at any age, it’s impossible to hate this. And the three kids are really good.

Yes, this movie is predictiable, but I wouldn’t necessarily say the three kids are “really good.” Teddy Geiger plays the emo lead of a floundering garage band that is sorely in need of a drummer in order to play their big prom gig. His fat, curly headed keyboardist just so happens to be related to the former drummer of the Guns & Roses-esque band Vesuvius.

Robert Fishman, also known as Fish (Wilson), has not drummed in 20 years, due to the volatile break up he had with his band as they moved on to bigger, better things. Left in their wake, Fish takes on corporate jobs while struggling to keep his long hair and rocker image, and living daily with the reminder that his friends abandoned him, and the music, for fame and fortune. Confronted with this new opportunity to be in a working band again, Fish decides to join his nephew’s high school band, A.D.D.

A semi-successful prom performance and a naked drumming YouTube video later, and these kids are a hit. Here is where the movie takes a turn into Disney channel follow-your-dreams crap. Fame, touring, and a music video are dumped into their laps, seemingly without reason. What’s worse, their parents consent to let three underage kids tour with Fish…obviously not a good idea, considering his propensity for drinking heavily and being utterly irresponsible.

Don’t get me wrong, it was a fun hour and a half, so I can’t really fault the film. There are a few heartfelt and inspirational moments, but all of them pale in comparison to the similar yet superior School of Rock. Dwight…er…Rainn is acceptable in his role. He got a few chuckles out of me. But I felt that his character was sorely out of his element in a feel good teen movie. This guy should have been the center of a film worthy of the title: a filthy raunch-fest with a heart of gold. This movie was a few good boobies and beers short of awesome, and the character of poor Fish got the Vesuvius treatment because of it.

Two bright spots of the film are Emma Stone and Josh Gad. Emma is an alumni of one of the funniest movies of last year, Superbad. Here she’s not given as much to work with, but she is still enjoyable as the “post-modern…punk…girl” bassist whose untamable red hair and decidedly atypical music video looks get the best of her. Gad, who was one of the more memorable minor characters in the movie 21, again plays the hopeless nerd, this time behind a keyboard (where he obviously belongs).

But perhaps my greatest complaint about the film is the music. The movie is called The Rocker for Bono’s sake. These kids should have been playing some hardcore power tabs and actually rocking! Instead, their whiney little lead singer writes sad ballads and whips them out in Coldplay-ish arrangements, mid-tempo filler complete with sappy keyboard parts. I would expect a longtime rock dude like Fish to knock some sense into these kids and introduce them to some actual rock and roll music, inject some Dio or Rolling Stones into their sad Top 40 lives.

The Rocker? This movie should have been called The Soft Rocker. Or maybe The Adult Contemporary Artist.