Poll Results - Favorite Film Trilogy

Which is your favorite film trilogy?

Star Wars (episodes IV-VI) 22%
Back to the Future 16%
Lord of the Rings 12%
The Matrix 9%
Indiana Jones 6%
Star Wars (episodes I-III) 3%
Shrek 3%
Pirates of the Caribbean 3%
Other 22%

Write-in nominations:
The Bourne Trilogy
The Man With No Name Trilogy
X-Men Trilogy
Scream Trilogy
Ocean's Trilogy

Review - 10,000 BC

Roland Emmerich's latest epic, 10,000 BC, is the perfect example of everything that is wrong with Hollywood. It is undeniable proof that a monster budget and CGI effects are not what makes a great film.
It tries to be 300, Spartacus, and Apocalypto all rolled into one but the only thing really worth noting about BC is its impressive Planet Earth-style camerawork. Emmerich does manage to construct a beautiful world of tundras and deserts, of Xerxes-wannabe gods and stone paintings, of giant ostriches and fierce sabertooth tigers, who evidently speak to human beings. However, beyond the designs-- this film offers almost nothing of value.
The story itself is not completely implausible. It's just boring, consisting of a hunter whose girlfriend is kidnapped, essentially and his quest to rescue her. There is really no character development except that which allows him to fulfill the numerous prophecies narrated at the beginning of the movie.
The film is so boring and its audience so detached that Emmerich actually feels it necessary to cut back to the village prophet in nearly every scene for no purpose that I could see other than to show the audience how it should feel were this movie effectively scripted, directed or acted. Also, the "old mother" as she is called delivers a last minute plot contrivance that makes absolutely no sense but enables our obligatory happy ending. 10,000 BC is nice to look at, but not worth watching. Mel Gibson did everything better with Apocalypto.

Screenshot - - - The Graduate

Because sometimes a picture can say it all...

Franchise Review - Batman

Batman: The Movie (Leslie H. Martinson, 1966) - The movie adaptation of the classic, cheesy Adam West television series, this movie crams three of the later movie's villains into one action packed film. In light of recent films, it is interesting to see Batman reduced to the essentials: a spandex suit, a loyal sidekick, and the occasional Pow! and Kaboom! The only Batman to be intentionally funny, Adam West's performance is sublimely campy and, in many ways, a parody of the entire genre. For those more interested in Batman's "damaged psyche," as Dr. Meridian will later call it, this film doesn't carry nearly the emotional resonance of its successors but it does pack in the puns and remains supremely entertaining.
Batman (Tim Burton, 1989) - The first of Tim Burton's Batman outings established the real character of Batman, a billionaire playboy who masquerades at night as an avenger-- the Dark Knight., by combining elements of action, noir and horror. It's inspired casting has made it one of the most loved comic book movies of all time. Jack Nicholson's portrayal of the Joker was so wonderfully balanced between homicidal and joyful that it almost seemed as if this was his film. Burton also succeeds tremendously by making the city of Gotham as dark, foreboding and oppressive as its always seemed it should be. Unfortunately, the relationship between Bruce Wayne and Vicki Vale is one of the most forced relationships in the history of film. They lack any chemistry but even more damning, they just aren't interesting together. Batman's really the only superhero without an instantly identifiable lady by his side but Burton certainly could have done a better job of fleshing out the Bruce Wayne character and giving him even a temporary lady friend for this film. The film probably wouldn't have been that memorable without Nicholson's inspired, sadistic performance but it really works because it cuts to the heart of Batman. His suit is relatively simple and his weapons pretty mundane and that allows his conflict to show through.
Batman Returns (Tim Burton, 1992) - Tim Burton outdid himself with Batman Returns proving that everything could be improved upon, even the most successful aspects of the original Batman. The macabre, somewhat bizarre world of Returns builds upon the established city of Gotham and injects it with a little more personality. Similarly, Batman himself is updated a little bit more, showing a bit more range of emotions and definitely getting flashier. The film's biggest weakness is the lack of character arc for Batman and Bruce Wayne himself. We don't see much of a change from the second film except that his gadgets are a bit more developed. Conversely, the best part of this film is it'd villains. No one would have expected for Burton to be able to top Nicholson's Joker but Michelle Pfeiffer and Danny DeVito rise to the occasion as Catwoman and The Penguin, respectively. Pfeiffer is a stunning Catwoman, dressed head to toe in sleek, black stitched leather. Her Selena Kyle is a fully realized character, unlike the cardboard villains that would later appear. Furthermore, her "relationship" with Batman is one of the most believable in the entire franchise. How could he not be entranced with her fractured, tortured soul that rivals his own. Similarly, Danny DeVito's Penguin is not only visually interesting but his backstory makes you not entirely sure you want to root against him. The action is also ramped up in Returns, which makes the film both entertaining and thought provoking and one of the best of the series.
Batman Forever (Joel Schumacher, 1995) - Joel Schumacher is often looked upon as the man who ruined Batman. Schumacher fans say he is the man that returned Batman to his comic origins. However, Batman doesn't work on screen as a balance between comedy and drama, at least not here. The film is just a little bit too over the top, specifically the performances of Jim Carrey as the Riddler, Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face and Chris O'Donnell as Robin. The film is not entirely unwatchable though; it just doesn't manage to successfully merge Batman as tortured avenger and Batman as campy superhero. There can't really be any type of cohesiveness between a scene where Robin's family plunges to their deaths and a scene where he does the laundry martial arts-style. The one bright spot of the film is the introduction of Dr. Chase Meridian, played by Nicole Kidman, who falls in love with both Bruce Wayne and Batman and puts them both through some rigorous psychological manipulation. She is, without a doubt, the bright spot in a lengthy line of lackluster ladies who long to enter the Batcave. The entire film is just a little bit too stylized to be a complete success but it does manage to maintain a little bit of the Burton magazine.
Batman and Robin (Joel Schumacher, 1997) - Batman and Robin was just simply not good. It's script was terrible and it's villains forgettable or worse, annoying. The introduction of Batgirl (Alicia Silverstone) made the movie even more complicated and pointless than Forever threatened to be. Terribly miscast, except for Clooney as Batman, terribly acted with terrible exposition and storytelling. Schumacher should be embarrassed for this entry into the Batman canon. He should also be thankful that he didn't singlehandedly destroy the franchise thanks to Nolan's unique vision.
Catwoman (Pitof, 2004) - Like it or not, it is part of the franchise. Spin-offs count. Unfortunately, Catwoman is the worst bastardization of a popular character that Hollywood has ever seen. Halle Berry defines a new level of terrible as the feline anti-hero, a level only exceeded by this film's horrendous script. Eartha Kitt, Michelle Pfeiffer and every other woman who has played Catwoman must have nearly died (if they hadn't already) when they found out that the best Pitof's Catwoman had to go up against was a corrupt cosmetics company. Pitof's camerawork is actually very adept. Catwoman is a beautiful film, except for the terrible Catwoman costume. Everything else, though, is utter crap.
Batman Begins (Christopher Nolan, 2005) - Batman Begins rebooted and reinvented the franchise by making Batman serious again. His distinguishing feature has always been his internal conflict and Nolan and Bale took advantage of that. Furthermore, they explained away a lot of the contrivances of former films and introduced an entirely new villain (to the big screen, at least). Nolan's Gotham is even darker, even creepier, even more foreboding than it used to be and the casting of Batman is finally spot-on for both Bruce Wayne and his alter-ego. As Batman, Bale's raspy voice filled with anger rationally strikes fear into the criminals he apprehends. Also, he has the physical build to pull off the look of Batman. It's as Wayne, though, that he excels. Bale is the only actor to convincingly pull off the billionaire playboy in Bruce Wayne. He is young enough and naive enough for the audience to believe his becoming Batman. From every angle, Christian Bale is Batman. In fact, the entire cast is spectacular and really grounds the film. Nolan proves that he knows what he is doing by giving Batman fans everything that Burton and Schumacher missed. Finally, he gives us an in-depth look at Batman's origins. Finally, we see a Batman grounded in reality in all of its gritty, dark and atmospheric glory. Best of all, we finally see an educated, introspective look at Batman's psyche in a way that isn't forced or contrite but rather organic and necessary for his character to work. Batman Begins is the first film to truly understand Batman. It transcends the superhero genre by being not only entertaining but relevant and supremely well-made.
The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008) - Of course, this is all speculation as the film hasn't been released yet but The Dark Knight looks to have the potential to dethrone all of the former Batman movies as King of the franchise. Nolan and Bale made Batman relevant and unsettling again with Begins and judging from the trailer they are going to complete his transformation by making this next film genuinely horrifying. Heath Ledger's Joker is certainly an update to Nicholson's, not necessarily better but definitely different and more scary. If this film lives up to the hype and what we have seen so far, there is no doubt it will far exceed the popularity of any film that came before it. Check out the trailer by clicking on the picture below.

The real question, of course, is who is the best Batman? From Adam West to Christian Bale, it's the question that plagues Batman fans. In a battle royale to end all, here are the combatants.


Adam West
Michael Keaton
Val Kilmer
George Clooney

Christian Bale

My pick? It's a difficult decision for me because I think that George Clooney was the ideal Batman and was also a really good Bruce Wayne. However, he was in the absolute worst incarnation of a Batman film ever. Christian Bale is amazing as Batman and is also perfect for Bruce Wayne (although his is certainly a different character than Clooney's). Thus, it comes down to how the character is written and portrayed. I love Clooney's take on the Dark Knight but he wasn't given a real chance to shine in Batman and Robin. Bale on the other hand not only played the character perfectly but did so in a great movie.
In my opinion, he takes the prize as the ultimate Batman.

Feature - Top 10 Torture Scenes

1. Audition (Takashi Miike, 1999) - Needles in the Eye
She sticks needles all over his body, including his eyeballs and then she gleefully removes his foot with only a wire--as she says "you can't go anywhere without feet!"
2. Saw 2 (Darren Lynn Bousman, 2005) - The Needle Pit
Most of the saw movie traps were fairly routine but the needle pit throws everyone for a loop, especially when Amanda is thrown into it...
3. Casino Royale (Martin Campbell, 2006) - The Wet Rope
Kudos to James Bond for managing to come out of a torture scene looking even cooler than before. Kudos to Campbell for making a scene that is genuinely unsettling but also humorous.
4. Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson, 2004) - The Flogging
This whole movie was like one giant torture scene but the bits of flesh flying at the camera during the flogging scene really sent it over the edge.
5. V for Vendetta (James McTeigue, 2005)- The Head Shaving
One of the few scenes on this list where the torture is more psychological than physical, the shadow-shrouded, faceless man who tortures Evey engenders absolute disgust in the audience...but then there's that little twist and everything changes.
6. Misery (Rob Reiner, 1990) - The 'Hobbling'
"God, I love you" she says after crushing his ankles to make sure he doesn't leave her. One of the best movie moments ever.
7. Marathon Man (John Schlesinger, 1976) - The Root Canal
"Is it safe?" the doctor asks repeatedly as he digs his tools into Hoffman's cavity. Who needs anesthetic?
8. Cannibal Holocaust (Ruggero Deodato, 1980) - The Shishkabob
Sticks in orifices and cannibalism? certainly not high entertainment.
9. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Tobe Hopper, 1974) - The Family Dinner
Nothing beats sitting down at the table with the deformed hillbillies who want to kill you and then being served mashed up bits of your friends.
10. The Last King of Scotland (Kevin MacDonald, 2006)- Just Hanging Around
In the final moments of the film, Idi Amin's treachery is finally revealed in one of the only violent scenes in the movie. Nicholas Gerrigan is hung on coathangers by his nipples as punishment for betraying the Ugandan dictator. This gives us only a glimpse of what was to come under Amin's reign.

Review - 30 Days of Night

Vampires used to be scary and sexy, sometimes animal-like. Regretfully, vampires have been relegated to cheap thrills in modern movies-- victorian metrosexuals with more need for elegance and social fineries than blood. The biggest problem with 30 Days of Night is that director David Slade can't seem to decide how to portray them. At times, they are the calculating and brilliantly evil monsters of early vampire lore, especially Danny Huston's Marlow whose stony, cunning stare is more frightening than anything else within the film and whose nihilistic monologues provide a philosophical undertone for the entire film. However, his underlings act like bastard amalgamations of zombies and vampires, savagely attacking anything that moves and displaying no evidence of maliciousness or shrewdness. It is a small misstep that is easily overlooked because Slade finally manages to make vampires scary again.
Additionally, the brilliant premise of the film-- the northernmost Alaskan town, Barrow, in which night lasts for thirty days-- throws a rather interesting wrench into vampire mythology. With no threat of the sun rising in the morning, the vampires are able to feast for thirty days straight providing no relief for their victims. Much of the film's potential was bound up in this concept, which created the possibility of an incredibly claustrophobic film. Indeed the film's best moments show the survivors holed up in an attic, hiding from the vampires. Unfortunately, we are shown only the briefest effects of their cabin fever. The story chooses rather to focus on the blockbuster-action appeal of the vampires, resulting in several scenes which are far too predictable although enjoyable, particularly one where the local 'mountain man' rescues Hartnett's character by quite literally plowing through a crowd of vampires.
Hartnett turns out to be one of the film's best surprises. Initially, he is hard to accept as the small town's sheriff and the movie's hero but he proves himself to be an accomplished actor capable of pulling off the balance of humility and courage that makes his character work.
He is joined by Melissa George, as his estranged wife. She has been stranded in Barrow which is fortunate because she is the only other character besides Hartnett who has any sense of competence. Together, the two manage to sell a love story despite the the gnashing teeth and spraying arcs of carnage that are so abundant once the massacres begin.
The final 'character' to help sell the film is the town of Barrow itself. Slade pulls a page from Fincher's book, making the environment more of a character than many of the actual people within the film. Not only are the peculiarities of the town essential to the plot, they provide a striking foil to the dark tone of the movie. For horror fans, there is something intensely satisfying about seeing the the snow-covered grounds of Barrow soaked with the blood of its inhabitants. Barrow is also the townspeople's saving grace. As Sherriff Eben (Hartnett) says, "There's a reason we live here-- because no one else can." The townspeople have no choice but to hope that this is true as they are dragged from their homes and splayed open in the street.
There are several very strong scenes within the film. In one, a woman captured by the vampires is forced to walk through the streets crying for help in an effort to lure the refugees from their hiding places. It is one of the more difficult scenes to watch as Eben must either watch her be torn apart or betray the survivors 'position. Slade has the good sense to put his characters in several morally ambiguous situations, a choice which lends strength to each character's development.
Furthermore, Slade's visual palette is astounding. The muted, whitewashed landscaped of Barrow and the brilliant hues of the flowing blood provide an ironically beautiful visual composition and his close camera work leverages the simmering tension that builds throughout the film. He falls apart a little bit during action sequences, relying too much on quick camera cuts and excessive violence and gore to sell the scenes. He clearly is not a believer in 'less is more.' The film would have been greatly helped by a director with the same philosophies as, say Alfred Hitchcock, who excelled in creating genuinely terrifying scenes without showing any blood or mutilation. Obviously, blood is an essential part of any vampire film but one can't help but feel that Slade uses the gore and violence as a crutch, appealing to his audiences voyeuristic tendencies. It works for movies like Saw and Hostel but this film is just a little too smart for such obvious deceptions.
Unfortunately, the film loses much of its power after the initial premise is developed and devolves into a fairly conventional monster movie. The vampires dart from shadow to shadow, just fast enough to not be seen until Slade wants you to witness their lurching, robotic movements and the survivors display the typical, trite reactions to an unexpected massacre without the burden of character development or backstory. Luckily, the film's conventionality does not rob it of its entertainment value. Despite its attempts to become a blockbuster, 30 Days of Night remains incredibly watchable and even thought-provoking in some cases. Its final moments and Hartnett's final sacrifices, while a little too neat and cinematic for my tastes, more than adequately close out the film. There are a hundred things I would have liked to have seen added to this film-- a thousand directions the story could have gone-- the story that they decided to tell was only one option. However, Slade does some impressive things with what he has and creates a film that may usher in a vampire renaissance, much like Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later did for zombie films.

Review - Once

Once has been pretty much universally acclaimed since its release. It's been called the greatest love story of our time and won an Academy Award for its musical composition. It has been praised by Steven Spielberg and Roger Ebert among others. That said, I found it to be a boring, pretentious exercise in mediocrity. A film that doesn't name its characters, features almost no dialogue and tells the majority of the story, and by that I mean all of it, through song is certainly an interesting experiment with some merit. The songs are vibrant and inventive but there is little more worth noting. The story feels rushed and while I understand that the emotions at the center of the story are what is really important, I can't help but feel cheated that i didn't get to know more.
The films major strengths lie in its defiance of romantic conventions. Not once do the characters get together. Yet, their romance has been touted as one of the most genuine in recent films despite being painstakingly platonic. Additionally, the low-fi camerawork, sometimes a mark of independent films, seems simply to be shoddy workmanship in this film.
The movie is noteworthy because it succeeds in translating real, human emotions to film and is actually able to show the redemptive power of music. That's the ultimate theme of this movie, redemption in a variety of forms. Despite the fact that these characters don't end up together in the end, they still find redemption in each other and in their music and the fact that their salvation translates so magically to the screen is a real credit to director John Carney and its lead performers.
Ultimately though, the film feels like a fumbling attempt that tries too hard to be different. It is an ostentatious, pompous, bloated piece of work that is only not identifiable as such because of its unfamiliarity.