I've been a big Luc Besson fan since I saw The Professional in the theater over 10 years ago. Which is the best action film this side of Die Hard, incredible action scenes mixed with a beautiful story and characters you fall in love with. When The Fifth Element came out a few years later, he was cemented as one of my all time favorites. He's been pretty hit-and-miss since then, my wife and I are the only ones I know of that enjoyed The Messenger; his kid's flick Arthur and the Incredibles has a few good moments, but a lot of bad ones as well. In that time he's also become the Jerry Bruckheimer of French films, constantly producing high-quality action films.

I was excited to see the trailer for Angel-A, it looked like Besson was getting back to his roots; low-key action-drama, with two-characters in Paris, filmed in startling black & white. The film came and went pretty quickly in theaters, never playing anywhere near us, and I'd read nothing but bad or mediocre reviews for it. But when it came out on DVD I had to see it immediately, simply for Besson.

Jamel Debbouze, the one armed guy from Amelie, (and he really only has one arm,) plays the lead character of Andre. When we meet him, he's being threatened by some low-level thugs, he's got a problem, he owes a lot of money to a really bad guy. This is a fairly typical beginning for an action film, but after that it goes where no film I've ever seen before. And isn't that the important thing? Something original, most movies I feel like I've seen it all before; when something truly different comes along, most people don't enjoy it.

Andre has a few days to get the money together, with no prospect of getting out of the country and no way to come up with the money, he decides to commit suicide. He says a quick prayer before he jumps off of one of Paris' many beautiful bridges; suddenly a beautiful girl appears on the bridge next to him. She leaps into the water, and his mission turns from suicide to rescue. He drags this beautiful, bleached-blond, long-legged creature from the water. They instantly hit it off in a quirky, bickering sort-of-way. He asks her what a beautiful girl like her could possibly be so sad about? And before he knows it, she's offered to follow him around, doing whatever he wants.

But from the start, she's in control and is soon fixing his life in surprising ways; she digs up loads of money and more importantly the respect he feels he deserves. They fall in love in an unconventional way; with powers way-beyond-their-control ready to tear them apart. It's fairly obvious who this girl is, and she comes right out and tells Andre' about halfway through the film, but I'll play devil's advocate and not give it away.

Now Angel-A is nowhere near the perfection that The Professional aka Leon is. But it's a film well worth seeing, if you're into Luc Besson films or ones that are outside of the norm. It's a gorgeous film, you really couldn't do much better than Besson's B&W photography of Paris. The two leads are very charismatic, and have a great chemistry together. Rie Rasmussen, who I'm guessing is usually a model, is an Amazonian vision as Angel-A. The film gets a little cheesy towards the end, but that's my only minor complaint. Otherwise it's a very fun, cool ride.

I really didn't have much hope for this straight-to-Showtime horror film, but after a strong intro I expected something decent. And it held up for a while, but a nonsense ending with a lame twist ruined it.

Reeker starts out pretty typically with a group of young folks headed into the desert for a huge party. There's the over-the-top party-guy, his buddy a more likable version, the up-for-anything-girl, the stuck-up girl, and they added one new twist, a blind guy, who is basically defined by being blind, seriously that's all anybody says to him and that's all he seems to talk about. There's drug dealer is after them, because the party-guy stole a batch of E off him right before they left. Michael Ironside, who deserves far better than this film, shows up for a few minutes as a traveler who's lost his wife.

They head into the desert, where of course their car breaks down. They come across an abandoned hotel and are left with no choice but to stay the night. There's one good moment at the beginning of their night, which made me think this might be a better film, when the blind guy goes into a room because he hears something, and there's this creepy undead-girl looking at him. There seems to be a bunch of undead around, but they leave the kids alone, which was sort of a nice change, because it added a sense of mystery to it all, but the reasoning at the end ruins it.

Then the Reeker comes a calling. He starts to kill the group off, they know when he's near, because he smells like death. His make-up is pretty good, but other than that he doesn't offer much, he doesn't kill anybody in any unique ways and doesn't seem to have any kind of back story. I didn't care about him and I didn't care about those he was killing. Besides the short opening and one semi-creepy moment at the beginning, the film had nothing left to offer. Don't bother unless you're a huge horror fan.

Over the years Woody Allen has grown on me. I think you have to be a little older and wiser to truly appreciate his films. The younger me couldn't get into them, because they're mostly talking, no stylish camera-work or editing, just straight-forward, more old fashion type filmmaking.

Manhattan is usually considered his second best film after Annie Hall, which is my favorite Woody Allen film, but I had never seen Manhattan all the way through. When I found the DVD in the discount bin for $5, I couldn't resist.

The plot is extremely similar to Annie Hall, to a lot of his films really; Woody is a middle-age-man dissatisfied with New York writer life, dating women completely out of his league. In this case it's a 17-year-old Mariel Hemingway, who acts older than her age, but it's still a Lolita type situation. He meets Diane Keaton, who is having an affair with his married best friend. They have much more in common and start to have a more real-world type relationship.

Manhattan isn't as full of laughs as Annie Hall, it's almost more of a drama, but retains a lot of that dry Woody Allen humor. I loved the black and white photography, the opening few minutes of the film, may be the best scene in any of his films. (See it below.)

I'll continue to make my way through Allen's films, there are about 10 to 15 that I still haven't seen. He's been doing some really interesting films as of late, stuff far different than what he's known for; Scoop and Match Point are both really worth seeing. It's great to see him continue to evolve as an artist.

I'd heard this was the best horror novel of 2006, and been wanting to read it since; I finally got around to it and it was definitely worth the wait. This the probably the most intense book I've ever read, a real page-turner. Usually I read a chapter or two of a book a night before I go to sleep. But I couldn't stop thinking about this book while I was reading it, and did a rare thing, and read it during the day. Finishing it in a couple of days, instead of the usual couple of weeks.

The book is about a group of young adults trekking into the jungle to look for one of the guy's brother, whose been missing for a few days, following a girl to some remote ruins. Deep into the jungle they go, finding a small village whose residents try to scare them away. The group stumble across a small hill covered in beautiful foliage, surrounded by a clearing in the vegetation. Once they make a move towards the hill, the villagers turn from trying to chase them off, to forcing them to stay there.

They find some tents at the top of the hill, along with some other signs of recent activity, but they are unable to find any people. Things start to go from bad to horrible really quickly. People are badly injured, they've brought no supplies, the villagers threaten them with death if they try to leave and there is a mysterious force far worse than anything else they're faced with.

The book takes us inside each of the characters heads as they deal with their horrendous situation. Some of them are expecting to be rescued, some trying to figure their own way out, and some waiting around to die. I won't ruin what the mysterious force is if you haven't read the book, but I expect it to work for some people who are more willing to suspended their disbelief; but if you like realism, this isn't the book for you.

Of course a movie is already in the works. The first teaser trailer is below. I expect that they'll get the events mostly right, but without being able to see into the character's minds, the effect can't possibly be the same. I expect those who've read the book will enjoy the movie more, knowing what's going on in the characters head. The situation is enough to make a good horror film out of, if they do it right; it could be great or hokey, most likely somewhere in between. I hope it's half the film that A Simple Plan is, the movie based off of author's Scott Smith's first book.

I can't believe I hadn't seen this movie before! An 80's teen-romantic-comedy starring John Cusack, it really couldn't be much more up my alley. My only excuse is that I confused the film with Hot Pursuit, another 80's Cusack romantic-comedy where he travels long distances for the love of a girl. I've seen Hot Pursuit a few times, it's an okay film, nothing too memorable about it.

I was at my wife's mother's house and she had The Sure Thing up on her shelf, I took it down, read the back and noticed that Rob Reiner directed it. I was sure I'd seen all his films, especially his 80's ones, when he was at the top of his game, but the plot sounded just different enough from Hot Pursuit that I realized I hadn't. I immediately had to remedy that problem.

Cusack plays Gib, a freshman at an Ivy League school, with hopes to become a great writer. He's a real smart ass, who doesn't take his classes seriously. His carelessness annoys Alison (Daphne Zuniga) a straight-laced-lass is on the path to be a lawyer. Gib's friend Lance, played by a still full-head-of-haired Anthony Edwards, chose the party route and is living it up at a sunny California school. He sends Gib a letter promising him a "Sure Thing" in a sexy blond, if he heads out there for Christmas break.

This being a movie, Gib and Alison soon end up in the same car pool ride across the States. In a small funny role Tim Robbins plays the owner of the car, who soon kicks the couple out for ruining his trip. Gib and Alison are forced to hitch-hike the rest of the way. Along the way they move from loathing to acceptance, to an unspoken love, with the film ending in typical romantic-comedy fashion; lies, betrayal and finally ultimate love.

The Sure Thing is not a classic by any means. I might have had some more affection for it if I'd seen it in my youth; but seeing it now, it offered nothing special. Cusack does his usual smart-ass-but-likable thing, he makes the film worth watching. But I probably won't bother with it again unless I run across it on cable.

I like seeing movies this way. Wicker Park came out a few years back, I sort of remembered the trailer, something about a girl disappearing, but hadn't heard anybody ever say anything about it; so I went in to it really fresh. I hate knowing too much about a movie before I see it.

It's not a great film, but it's a fairly interesting one. When we meet Mathew, played by the underrated Josh Hartnett, he seems to have his life together. He's got a good job and a pretty fiancee, but when a mysterious girl passes through, his life is thrown into disarray; he stalks this unknown woman, lies to his fiancee and skips a business trip. What unveils is that this girl was once the great love of his life and the strange reasons why she disappeared.

The film is structured very nicely. The mystery is unraveled at a satisfying pace. The film jumps back and forth in time, but it's always understood where the characters are. It seems like films that have this many twists and turns get lost themselves, making it uninteresting or unsatisfying in the end. It was also nice to see a mystery about something besides murder, it's all about love and the complications that it can cause.

It's a good little film if you're in the mood for something slightly offbeat.

I believe that the first Die Hard is a perfect action film. The one that all other action films should aim for when trying to be great. The sequels not-so-much. Part 2 & 3 are both okay, they'd be mostly forgettable and not re-watchable if they didn't continue the adventures of John McClane. So I was completely surprised when Live Free or Die Hard proved to be an action film that could actually stand up on its own.

Like most people I was pretty skeptical when I heard they were making another Die Hard. I didn't want to see another weak flick tarnishing the reputation of the first. I didn't bother to see it in theaters, but my interest was piqued when I heard good reviews coming back.

This time McClane has to take on some hacker terrorists after they take down the entire country's computer system. The always reliable Timothy Olyphant, proves to be a worthy advisory. Maggie Q kicks some ass as his girlfriend/sidekick; the best scene in the film is when she and McClane go head-to-head in the bowels of a electrical plant. I thought that Justin Long would bring down the film as the comic-side-kick, and he did a slight bit, but the screenwriters do a good job of not making him too annoying, and actually useful by continuing to come up with reasons for McClane to keep him around.

But the real reason the film works is the action. There are some genuinely inventive and exciting action scenes. From shoot-outs, car chases and hand-to-hand combat, they continue to up the action, until McClane is literally hanging off the side of a hovering jet. Director Len Wisemen, of Underworld fame, does a wonderful job of bringing the series into the 21st century. I would be interested in seeing another sequel if he's behind the camera. Otherwise, this film proves to be a nice bookend for the series.

When I saw the trailer for You Kill Me, I thought "Oh no, not another mobster getting in touch with his feelings film." After The Sopranos set the bar, no other film or show should even bother. But with the great cast and underrated director John Dahl (Red Rock West, Rounders) at the helm, I figured I'd give it a chance.

This film does exactly what I thought it would do. I've seen the style a hundred times before; dry, dark humor, mixed with violence, with an underlying sense of wittiness. The story was predictable; hitman Frank, played by Ben Kingsley, who was once unstoppable is going through a down period, because he's unhappy and an alcoholic.

He's sent to San Francisco by his mobster cousin to recover and become the old Frank. While there he meets the woman of his dreams, Tea Leoni, who makes him happy enough to kill again; and only in movie-land, doesn't have a problem with him being a hitman, because he's a good guy. Luke Wilson lends some comedy as Frank's AA sponsor. Meanwhile everything with the mobster family is falling apart in Buffalo. That was the most original part of the film, that much of it takes place in Buffalo, and that there is enough going on that constitutes a mob war. (Besides Buffalo 66, I don't think I've ever seen another film that's placed there.)

Overall it's not a bad film, just an unoriginal one. The performances are all good. The filmmaking is at a high-level. But it offered nothing new to the genre, every moment seemed scripted from another film of the type. Check out the far better Sexy Beast if you're looking to see Ben Kingsley play a gangster.

We watched this at Grandma's since we'd seen every other available kids movie 100 times. I think this if the first time I'd watched this film all the way through. I've seen it and it's sequels in parts many times on cable, but since I was too old for it when it originally came out, I don't think I ever bothered.

It's not bad for a kids movie. It's part of the series of Home Alone clones that John Hughes wrote and produced during the 90's; where kids, babies and/or animals beat up on mentally-challenged bad guys in slapsticky ways.

The story concerns a family of five accidentally adopting a st. bernard puppy,;the Type-A father wants the dog gone as soon as possible, but when no one comes to claim the dog, they're stuck with it as it outgrows and destroys their house. And of course some evil veterinarian and his bumbling henchmen have a nefarious and pointless plot to separate the dog from it's family; which the kids and dog foil in a "hilarious" fashion.

The usually funny Charles Grodin (what happened to him?) and the go to for "straight-man" mom Bonnie Hunt, make it worthwhile. It was fun to see David Duchovny, Oliver Platt, and Stanley Tucci show up in small roles. The obvious jokes are funny if you're watching from a kid's perspective. The filmmaking is at least competent, not grating in any manner. A decent way to waste 90 minutes.

I don't claim to be a huge David Lynch fan. I've really enjoyed some of his films; Elephant Man, Wild at Heart and Blue Velvet in particular. I remember seeing Lost Highway in the theater about 10 years ago, when I was really starting to get into cinema, and I was absolutely loving the film, the style and the weirdness was perfect, until it came to the very end and the film left no explanation for what had just happened. I felt betrayed. I'd never seen a film where there wasn't a wrap-up of sorts. I don't think I've seen it since, but I vividly remember many scenes from the film, which is a testament to his filmmaking abilities. It's about time for a re-watch.

I saw Mulholland Dr. a few years later and even though it was a stranger film than Lost Highway, making even less sense, I came out of there loving it, because I understood Lynch's work better and could appreciate abstract cinema more.

Going into Inland Empire I knew it would be a challenge to make it through. Three hours of any film is a long time, you've really got to earn it to make a film that long. Three hours of David Lynch shooting on DV was going to be even tougher.

I sat through the first 10 minutes with my jaw dropped in disbelief. There were people with blurred heads talking about god-knows-what, a scary looking couple speaking in Polish I think, then a weird sitcom-like-show with people sitting around in giant rabbit head's while a laugh-track goes off in the background. Finally we get to Laura Dern's character and it started to make a little bit of sense.

She's an actress, whose gotten a role in a film with a strange history. Apparently, they tried to make it before, but both the lead actors died before it could be finished. Justin Theroux is Dern's costar, he's notorious for hooking up with the actresses he works with. Dern's husband, warns him that he'll kill him if they sleep together. Which of course they do. I was starting to get into the film, it was definitely Lynch, but I could make sense of it and the story was starting to intrigue me.

But then about 80 minutes into the film it started to get weird again. I had no clue who anybody was, or what the hell they were talking about. There was some cool imagery, but you couldn't piece it together in any logical way. That's when I started fast-forwarding through the film, I knew I couldn't put up with it for another two hours. And it made about as much sense in fast-motion as it did at normal speed. I kept hoping it would go back to the story that I was getting into, but from what I could tell it never really did.

Only David Lynch could get me to write this much, without even sitting through his whole film. He's an extremely unique talent. Way out there beyond anybody else's work that I've seen. I'm sure there are some film artists, working on the fringes, that begin to match his weirdness, but they don't get distribution.

I'll be there for his next film, but I hope it's more along the lines of Mulholland Dr. or Blue Velvet, weird, but not completely illogical.

I enjoy Chris Rock's comedy, I think he's one of the funniest guys around at the moment. I was interested in seeing what he could do behind the camera as well. I Think I Love My Wife starts off really well, with a lot of energy and wit. I found myself cracking up at the many truths about married life.

When the beautiful Kerry Washington shows up to tempt him at his weakest moment, despite it being a movie cliche, I thought that film was headed in the right direction. But when Kerry's character kept getting needier, almost to the point of stalking him, the film started to lose me. I couldn't see a single guy wanting to stay with this girl, let alone a married guy, who wants to do the right thing.

The film wraps up in a nice, predictable way, until the last few minutes of the film, where they inexplicably break into song; like something out of a different movie. It's not a bad film, the moments it is hitting its stride, is really worth checking out, and the bad moments don't ruin the film on the whole. Chris Rock shows some potential as a director, with this decent romantic-comedy from a guy's perspective.

When I was growing up, the neighbor's kid, who was a couple years older than me, was a huge horror film fan. He had posters on the wall for a couple of the Friday the 13th films, and I was completely fascinated by them. From those images and what he told me about the films, I was able to terrify myself. I became a fan of Jason, years before I was able to see the films for myself. Even now the Friday the 13th series remains my favorite horror film series, over Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween and anything more recent like the Saw films.

Every so often I'll watch through them again. I watched parts 1-4 again before Halloween, and was finally getting around to part 5. I don't know if I'll bother with part 6-9, they start to get pretty intolerable after this one, though I may check out Freddy vs. Jason again, I haven't seen it since it was in the theaters.

I think Part V: A New Beginning is probably the third best in the series, after the original, and The Final Chapter. The film opens with Tommy, played by Corey Feldman, who killed Jason in part IV, seeing him reborn, thanks to a couple of yokels who've decide to dig him up. Smash-cut to a grown-up Tommy on the way to a half-way house for loony-kids. He's become a bit messed-up, since Jason chopped up his mommy and sister, before he himself cut off Jason's head.


The characters here are pretty stock; there's the couple who can't get enough sex, the nerdy guy who wants to get with the slightly less nerdy, but cute girl, the sass-talking-black-kid, an 80's punk-chick, the doctor, the sexy-nurse, the rage-filled-psycho and the clueless-fat-guy. The psycho kills the fat guy with an ax, within about 10 minutes of the Tommy showing up, so he gets to witness another brutal slaying.

Soon the kids are getting bumped off one by one, for most of the film we don't get to see who is doing it, but Tommy keeps seeing Jason everywhere. Leading to the questions; is he just crazy, is he killing these kids, or is Jason really back from the grave? And I think that bit of mystery makes A New Beginning a little more interesting than some of the other films, where Jason magically comes back again and again. In this film, there's an actual real-world explanation for all the murders.

The death scenes in this film are pretty stock for the series, nothing really stands out, but they're not bad. I think fans miss seeing Jason himself do it, so that's why this film may not be held as high. But on the plus side, it contains the best nudity of all the films. If you watch Part 1 through 5, skipping the crappy part 3, you're getting the best of the series, and the bulk of the "important" storyline.

Like most boys I've been a huge James Bond fan for much of my life. I grew up in the Roger Moore era, with Live and Let Die being my favorite Bond film for a long time. I re-watch his Bond films now, and they're terrible, he's way too hammy in them. Connery of course is the man, his movies, despite being older, hold up much better than Moore's. When Pierce Brosnan took over in Goldeneye, I fell in love with the series again. But again the films quickly devolved into brainless action flicks, with little of the charm of the old ones.

I was ready for a new Bond. I saw Casino Royale when it was originally released and fell in love yet again. Daniel Craig's Bond was much more methodical, he acts the way you would expect a professional killer to act. It's not a perfect film by any means, but it just might be the best Bond film to date.

I like that the action scenes are more grounded in reality; Bond actually seems to feel pain. He loves the women, but seems to have a little more respect for them, actually treating them like people. I'm excited to see where they take the Bond series with Craig. I hope that they keep his harsh edge, and the more realistic action scenes. I'm afraid that we'll soon be back at another The World is Not Enough, which I couldn't stomach more than once.

I heard about Welcome to the Jungle around a year ago, when it was playing some film festivals. It sounded intriguing and I made a mental note to see it when it was released. I'd completely forgotten about it when I notice the cover to the left on the shelf at Blockbuster. My first thought was, "What's this cheesy film?" a second passed by before an excited "Oh, yeah! I wanted to see this." forced my hand to pick it up.

The film starts with a blurb about the true story of Michael Rockefeller; how he was the richest and most famous person to ever go missing. We then go to the first-person P.O.V. of two Australian girls meeting outside an airport, they're old friends, but haven't seen each other in a while. They meet a couple of American guys who end up as their boyfriends. One of the guy's has heard a rumor about the spotting of Rockefeller in the jungles of New Guinea. Looking for some adventure and possible fame and fortune, the couples set off to search for him.

The entire film is captured first-person, ala The Blair Witch Project. What starts off as a light-hearted adventure, descends into bloody madness. There's been a bit of comparison to the Cannibal Holocaust, which is obviously influential, but it's not a straight remake, as some have claimed. Holocaust which is the most famous cannibal film of all time, started the whole concept of a documentary crew capturing their own deaths, but much of the film's footage is obviously third-party, ruining some of the effect.

Welcome to the Jungle sticks to that concept and there's hardly a false moment. They start in Australia, having some fun; they plan their trip; they arrive in New Guinea, run into a little trouble with some roadside militia, before trekking into the dense jungle. The dread of the film is built quite nicely, what starts as some innocent fun begins to slowly spiral downwards. The couples start to grate on each other's nerves, one couple is serious about their destination, the other wants to stay up late and party. Things reach a head, when the party guy steals a human skull from a native shrine. The couples split up soon after; each meeting with a gruesome fate.

While not a perfect film; it is an interesting and notable one. The mostly-amateur actors do a good, believable job. The film pulls off the tough concept of having to have the camera running for all the key moments, there were only a couple of spots where I couldn't buy into what was going on. The cannibals don't show up till the end, the film keeps them mostly hidden, adding to the suspense. The gore is pretty disturbing, which makes your imagination run wild with what happened to those who ran into the cannibals previously. One of the girl's fates is especially memorable, very reminiscent of the most famous death from Holocaust.

I'd highly recommend this film for anybody with an interest in horror films. Jonathan Hensleigh has written some big budget Hollywood stuff, and directed the remake of The Punisher shows off a whole new side; it seems like the extremely low-budget freed his creativeness. This film stuck with me for a few days following, which is really saying something, most films I start to forget the moment they end.

I'm not a huge fan of plainly dramatic films, unless they're really well done, I can't get into them. I'd heard good things about Sherrybaby, specifically Maggie Gyllenhaal's performance, so I thought my wife and I would give it a chance.

The film is about Sherry getting released on parole for stealing to provide her heroin addiction. She's lost, really doesn't have a clue about how to get back to a normal life. The only thing that even attracts her towards it, is her young daughter, which she wants to be with more than anything in the world. Her brother and his wife have basically adopted the girl, and it's tough for Sherry to gain any trust in them, so she can become a part of their life again.

has maybe his best performance as Sherry's new boyfriend, the first person to trust her and somebody she can lean on when things get tough. First time feature writer/director Laurie Maggie's performance is pretty incredible, she completely embodies this young woman on the edge, she's believable every step of the way. The rest of the actors hold up pretty well against her, the entire film feels pretty true to life. Danny Trejo has maybe his best performance as Sherry's new boyfriend, he's the first person to trust her and somebody for her to lean on when things get rough. First time writer/director Laurie Collyer shows some promise.

In my opinion this is the best movie of the year. (Of what I've seen up to this point.) It was emotionally engaging, gorgeously photographed, and extremely well acted; really top-notch in all filmmaking aspects. Sean Penn has stepped it up as a filmmaker, and I'm excited to see what he'll do as a director in the future. That's not the way I felt after his last two films; The Pledge and The Crossing Guard.

I think the main thing holding it back from being universally loved, is that not everyone can relate to Christopher McCandless. I've read and heard quite a few people calling him an idiot, and writing it off there. Which, I can sort of agree with on his being so unprepared to go into the Alaskan wilderness; but his journey up to that point, I completely respect.

When I was in my early twenties, I too wanted to drop out of society, travel the world and see what it brings. Really learn about who I am. And part of me still regrets not doing that before I had responsibilities that tied me down. I wouldn't have gone so far as to throw away all my money and then ultimately go into wild Alaska with little more than a sleeping bag and a .22 rifle.

But watching his travels around the U.S., meeting all kinds of different people and picking up work where you could, really got me going. I haven't had a chance to read the Jon Krakauer novel yet, but I plan to now that I loved the movie so much. I want to know more about his adventure.

One of my favorite aspects of the film was that Penn and crew shot on location in most of the places that Christopher went. After the film is over, you feel like you've taken a journey across the country. It's all beautifully captured in a documentary style, so it's like you're right there with him on his journey of self-discovery.

Emile Hirsch is wonderful a Christopher, he's completely believable, a star-making performance. And it was great to see some veteran actors show up in the supporting roles, I especially liked Catherine Keener as the old hippie who becomes a surrogate mother for Christopher. Vince Vaughn is fun in his small role as a farmer who employs him for a short time. William Hurt and Marcia Gay Harden are devastating as his normal-seeming, but abusive parents.

Eddie Vedder's score is beautiful; it's a bit invasive at times, that's my only real complaint about the film, that Penn leaned on it for some of the emotional impact; but for the most part it plays with the film perfectly. Into the Wild is an all around wonderful film.

Jamie Kennedy is pretty hit or miss; sometimes he can be absolutely hilarious, other times he's a complete flop. So it's no surprise that this flick is all over the place. I probably wouldn't have even bothered, if my friend who loves cheesy comedies hadn't come over to watch it with me. Making fun of it, made it worth watching.

The opening 10 - 15 minutes are definitely the best part of the film. The kids who play the little breakdancers, perform well and are all pretty funny. When Kennedy wakes up from his coma, his still living in the 80's schtick, placed in current times is fairly comical for a while.

But really, it's a one joke film, and it gets tired after a while. Maria Menounos, who I believe is a reporter on Access Hollywood, couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. Every scene she's in, is drug down. Michael Rosenbaum, best known for Smallville, really hams it up, and is entertaining as the cheesy, bad guy.

If you're really desperate for a comedy or a big fan of the 80's and/or breakdancing it might be worth checking out. But if you're looking for any amount of quality, don't bother. You're better off watching Breakin' again, for some better dancing and the unintentional comedy.

I saw this in the theater with my little brother during Christmas when I was 12 and loved it, thought it was absolutely hilarious, with just about the right amount of action. To this day it remains a bit of a guilty pleasure. When I saw a three pack of Arnold DVDs in Costco with Kindergarten Cop and Junior, I couldn't resist. I'm a huge Arnold Schwarzennegger fan, they were three of just a few of his films I don't own. (By the way check out my collection of Arnold's one-liners.)

I was having a brainless afternoon with the wife, it had been at least 7 or 8 years since I'd seen it, so I had to pop it in. I still remember almost every line in the film. Despite being undeniably 80's, it actually holds up fairly well. Arnold and Danny Devito have a good chemistry together, they make the film worth watching. Otherwise, it's fairly standard 80's comedy-action stuff, not up to snuff with director Ivan Reitman's 80's classic Ghostbusters.

They play a set of genetically engineered twins, Arnold being the intended outcome, he got to live the highest quality life; while his rejected twin was dropped off in an orphanage, left to fend for himself, finally turning to a life of crime. Arnold plays a fish-out-of-water, never having spent any time in normal society, which leads to much of the comedy in the first half. I love the scene when he's singing "Yakity Yak" at the top of his lungs on the plane, "I've never heard rock n' roll before."

This was the film that proved that Arnold has some comedy chops. He went on to do two more comedies with Reitman, the aforementioned Kindergarten Cop and Junior, but this is the peak of their work together.

My wife and I saw the trailer for the French film The Valet and thought it looked pretty funny. The set-up is so Hollywoodish that I'm sure they've already got a remake in the works.

An extremely rich man is having an affair with a supermodel. When his wife sees a picture of them together in the tabloids, he insists that the guy in the background is the one dating her. Background guy is a lonely valet, who was just rejected by the love of his life. For some cash he agrees to pretend to date the supermodel, going so far as to letting her move in with him. And the wackiness ensues.

The Valet is a quick and brainless watch, even for those who might hate subtitles. The French women are beautiful, there are cool cars, and Paris provides the background, so there's always something to look at. It's pretty standard romantic-comedy fair; all kinds of lies going on about who really said what and who's really with who, people constantly running into the people they don't want to see at the wrong time, and so forth. It certainly doesn't try to break any new ground, but it provides some laughs.

Mostly it made me want to see directer Francis Verber's film The Dinner Game, which I heard good things about, and sounds a little more edgy and thoughtful than this one.

I absolutely adore Wes Anderson's films. He's right there at the top of my list of favorite directors. I've heard people complain that he doesn't change, but honestly that's one of the things I like about him. I know exactly what I'm going to get when I watch his films.

Amazing photography, with an attention to detail unlike no other, you get the feeling he scrutinizes every inch of the frame; and I appreciate that artistry. Along with that is his set design, it looks real and unreal at the same time, functional, but beautiful. His writing is very unique, every character has their own cadence, it's witty and comical, but doesn't beg for attention the way some writers do. And he always gets the best out of his cast, Luke and Owen Wilson never feel like real characters anywhere but his films. Bill Murray in Rushmore, just might be my all time favorite piece of acting.

So there was no doubt in my mind that I was going to like The Darjeeling Limited. I was a little worried, because I didn't totally love The Life Aquatic, though it's grown on me in subsequent viewings, I thought just maybe Wes had grown a little too full of himself. In Darjeeling he's toned down the style just a little bit, it's obviously still his film, but he allows his actors just a smidgen more freedom. Another big thing, is that much more of the film takes place outdoors, he gets away from the colorful, quirky backgrounds, and lets a little more real life in.

I totally bought, Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzman, and Adrien Brody as brothers, each of them is great in their own way, the way they function together feels like they've been dealing with each other their whole lives. Their family is broken, but they're still family and they want to make it work. I love Schwartzman's line about "Would they be friends in real life, if they weren't brothers?" It is so true, especially for anybody that's had any kind of family drama. The train is it's own character and I was sad when they had to leave it; but the events that follow forces them to grow together.

Wes mixes comedy and drama perfectly, neither ever feels forced, they evolve naturally from each other. Because sometimes all you can do is laugh, when things get bad. Darjeeling is more immediately likable than The Life Aquatic, but isn't quite on the level with his first three films. I like that it shows some growth in his art, but it keeps with signature style, something I hope he never loses. I can't wait to see what he does next.

This was my second favorite film of 2006. (After Children of Men.) I was watching it for the second time, and it remained an incredible film. Everything from top to bottom is just about perfect.

The cast is amazing, Ivana Baquero stands out as Ofelia, she brings us into this magical world and makes us believe in it. Sergi López is devastating as Captain Vidal, a horrible, but fully truthful villain. The make-up and effects are top-notch, not for one second did they take me out of the film. Guilermo del Toro has created a masterpiece for the ages; he is simply one of the top filmmakers working today.

I was completely entranced from the moment Ofelia and her pregnant mother enter the forest to stay with her new stepfather. This magical world that she's possible the princess of, takes her out of the horrible world that surrounds her. Are her adventures real or simply an imaginative escape? It's left up to the audience to decide.

I like that del Toro jumps back and forth from serious films like this one to the comic book films Hellboy and Blade II. It shows that he wants to have fun, but also likes to make some serious art. If you haven't seen it, I'd also highly recommend The Devil's Backbone, it's along the same lines. A young boy trapped in an orphanage during the Spanish Civil War, discovers a mystery that involves the ghost of a fellow orphan, it's dramatic, but retains that horror genre edge.

I DVR'd this movie because I knew it was an 80's horror flick that I'd never seen. I was pleasantly surprised when Stuart Gordon's name popped up as the director. Despite him being one of the better horror filmmakers of the last 20 years, it had escaped me that he made this film. My expectations went up a bit; thankfully they were met.

The film starts with a dysfunctional family driving into a nasty storm. When the car breaks down, the abusive-father and wicked-stepmother drag their little girl to a scary looking mansion hidden in the woods. There's a wonderful scene here where the stepmother throws the girl's teddy away when she's being scared and slowing them down, the girl imagines teddy coming back to life, huge and nasty looking, then tearing her parents to pieces. A delicious piece of dark comedy!

From there it gets weirder. When they get into the house they find an eccentric old couple with rooms full of creepy looking ceramic dolls, which the mad-scientisty-husband has made. Soon a couple of 80's English punk-rock chicks show up with a chubby American guy. More fodder for the dolls.

Once night falls everyone retires to their own rooms. Strange things start to go bump-in-the-night and the little girl witnesses one of the punk-rock chicks being attacked by a few nasty looking dolls, with sharp teeth. Waking them up, her horrible parents force her to go back to bed. Ignoring their order, she finds an ally in the chubby guy and wanders the house looking for the punk's remains.

More people get bumped off all in the right order and in satisfying ways. The dolls are genuinely creepy. Gordon and team did a wonderful job mixing stop-motion, puppetry and actors thrashing about with dolls on them. The film is purposely funny in many scenes; because how can you take a film about killer dolls seriously? But also gory and creepy. Just my kind of film.

I'm sorry that I didn't find this film when I was a kid, because it probably would have left a large impression on me. And I'm happy, because it also probably would have also scared the shit out of me.

• Teddy rips the parents a new one.

I got to see this wonderful short film at the No Dance Film Festival in 2003 when my own short film eRATicate premiered at Tromadance. I was instantly struck by it's unique blend of Dr. Seuss rhyming and Tim Burton set design. The film has a perfect voice-over from beginning to end; beautiful photography, inventive set and costume design, and a wonderfully dark sense of humor. Writer/Director Peyton Reed has created a classic short.

Now years later, something sparked its memory in my brain, and I instantly had to check YouTube to see if had been uploaded. It was wonderful to see Evelyn again, even if it didn't live up to my first viewing on a big screen with an adoring audience.

It also gave me a chance to look at what Peyton Reed has created since. He's done another short film, called A Tale of Bad Luck, which sounds promising, but I was unable to find anywhere online. Sadly there appears to be no feature film in his near future, I'd love to see what he could do with one. But I did come across a show called What It's Like Being Alone that's only shown in Canada. It's a stop-motion-animated, macabre-comedy about a group of weird little orphan's. I haven't had a chance to watch many of the episodes yet, but I plan on going through them all in the future. Below is the opening of the first show, the rest can be found on YouTube.

This was the second time I've seen Ratatouille. I don't have a lot to say about it. It's a wonderful film about someone making their dreams come true. Pixar does their typically amazing thing. Brad Bird is by far my favorite animation director, though I prefer both The Incredibles and my all-time favorite animated film The Iron Giant, to this one. It's good to have another top quality film for my son to watch over and over again, and not drive me insane in the process.

The Wendell Baker Story starts off with a lot of promise. Written, directed (co-directed by Andrew Wilson) and starring Luke Wilson; it's a film about a low-level con-artist who gets by on his charm and wit, which is limited compared to what he believes. The first act of the film itself is full of charm, fun dialogue, it's fast-moving, and well made; and had me believing that the critics were wrong and that Luke had created a wonderful film.

But once Wendell is busted and sent to prison the film starts to lose a lot of that charm, he loses his edge and the film loses its. Once Wendell is parolled and sent to a crooked old-folks home, run by Owen Wilson, much of what the film had originally going for it has disappeared. Owen's character aims to set-up Wendell to take the fall for his misdeeds. While Wendell is soley-focused on rekindling his relationship with Eva Mendes, whose taken up with Will Ferrell in a fun, small role.

Two of the old guys played by Harry Dean Stanton and Seymour Cassel, like Wendell and try to warn him and get him to help save their fellow seniors; have a lot of fun with their roles. But Owen and Eddie Griffin as the bad guys seem to be mailing-it-in, and they drag the film down. The artistic quality of the film drops in quality as well.

It almost seems like two different films spliced together. If the whole film had matched the first thirty minutes, it could have been something special.

Being a big fan of Stephen King, I'm surprised it took me this long to get to the first book of The Gunslinger series. One thing that took me this long, was that King recently published the last book in the series. Over the years I heard that Kind had no real idea of when he'd finish. Being the kind of guy I am, I just can't start something, unless I know there's an ending.

The story involves The Gunslinger chasing The Man in Black across a desert. Not knowing too much about the series, I'm not sure if this is Earth far into the future, after a holocaust has wiped out much of our population, which is my guess; or if it's another planet all together. The Gungslinger is some sort of mystical Samurai with a gun, and he's chasing The Man in Black for unknown reasons, but he also has some sort of magical powers about him.

It's a very fun and easy read. Though you're left in the dark as too much of what's really going on, which isn't a problem knowing there are six more books to fill out this world. Knowing how King writes (read On Writing), I don't think he himself had much of an idea of where this was all leading. I'm greatly looking forward to finishing the rest of the books.