A Film with an Unfortunate Title

Made in 2008 as a remake of a Korean smash hit, “My Sassy Girl” has one of the most misdirecting and vomit-inducing titles I have ever heard. I'm not going to type it out again. It's from the same director as “My Big Fat Greek Wedding,” the cover looks about the same as “I Could Never Be Your Woman,” and it's shelved with the comedies at the rental store. This is not a comedy, nor is it anything like “My Big Fat Greek Wedding” or “I Could Never Be Your Woman.” This film is a beautiful and thought-provoking work of art. So although Elisha Cuthbert (“24”) and Jesse Bradford (“Bring it On”) both give impressive performances in this film, the credit really should go to Eric Schmidt and Anita Brandt Burgoyne, the director of photography and editor, respectively. Every frame of this movie is breath-takingly gorgeous and genius. Don't worry about the images on the back of the dvd case – Anita B. Burgoyne obviously hadn't gotten to them yet.

The film's teaser makes the plot sound like a stupid soap opera about a typical, predictable, career-oriented guy who falls for a mysterious, yet controlling and extroverted girl. But that's really not even the plot. See, there's a reason why Jordan (Cuthbert) is treating Charlie (Bradford) with such a structured unpredictability. It's not that she's really that demanding – it's that she's trying to make this work the way she thinks it's destined to be. Charlie doesn't understand what she's trying to do or why and she won't explain and just constantly gets him in trouble but he loves her anyway. It's so beautiful how much he cares for her – from the first time they met and he carries her home from the subway station because she blacked out. Everyone tells him to stand up for himself and refuse to submit to her, but he's not submitting to her – he's submitting to his love for her. Charlie understands that she's struggling with something and wants more than anything to be there for her in any way he can. These characters are so profound and sympathetic: your heart rejoices and aches with them – you identify with them. You really have to watch this movie to see how it resolves. I was worried about a tacky ending, but it wasn't abrupt or contrived at all. I rarely cry at movies but honestly, if my mom hadn't come down to watch the end of the movie with me, I probably would have cried.

As I briefly mentioned earlier, this film is beautiful. The subway station is all high-contrast and blues and greens. The park scenes have softer whites and oranges. I wish the world was that vivid. There are lots of circling tracking shots and when zooming, the camera often moves very quickly – giving the film a very unique feel. One of my favorite sequences is in the park when Jordan makes Charlie walk down to the other end of an extremely long walkway because she wants to know if he can hear her all the way down there. Once he gets there and turns around, the camera itself backs all the way up to Jordan without a track – probably just a mounted steady cam. Obviously the coloring is the best part of the editing, but my other favorite piece is when the lightening bolt that hits the tree really isn't lightening but superimposed electric arrows. There are so many brilliant shots where the composition in depth is absolutely intriguing – like in the opening sequence with the long shot from across the street of little Charlie offering his seat on a bench to an elderly woman against a brick wall.

There are a few funny moments in this film but they are purely circumstantial, just seeing how Jordan's ridiculousness clashes with Charlie's expectations. It's not like the movie is trying to be a comedy. It isn't really trying to be a drama either. I mean, there is a music soundtrack in the film, but not always in the expected places where a typical drama would have it. It does not follow the rules of clichéd film. It's not even necessarily a romance. It's just a story about two unique people and their subsequently unique experience together and apart. I would not describe Charlie as “straightlaced” as the teaser states and I definitely would not describe Jordan as “sassy” or even in the possession of Charlie (to account for 'my'). But she is indeed a girl (can't say the same for a certain minor character in a bar). I really want to see the Korean version now and then ask one of my Korean friends for a better translation of “Yeopgijeogin geunyeo." By the way, Jordan has a great wardrobe. Grades: =] & =O

~Sarah Wason

Grade key:

| [ (so bad I had to close my eyes.)

=[.. (caused drooling out of lack of interest/lack of intelligent content)

=( (made me sad that I saw it)

=\ (made me concerned for those involved in production)

=| (so generic that I have no significant comment)

=] (I enjoyed it. It often made me smile without feeling shame or brain decay or it made me think.)

=D (it made me laugh... this is not difficult – I laugh at many things)

=O (made my proverbial jaw drop. Blown away by some prominent aspect.)

Sherlock Holmes

I have a theory, and it goes like this: Robert Downey Jr. + movie = instant entertainment. The man is a gold mine. Downey Jr. has become the white Will Smith. One can only hope that they will star together in a summer blockbuster down the line (take notes, Hollywood).

When I heard there was a movie in the works about Sherlock Holmes, I was pumped. I could barely hold in my excitement. Then I heard that Robert Downey Jr. was playing Sherlock Holmes (I still wet my bed thinking about it) and then the trailer came out and boy did I put that thing on repeat like it was Beyonce's "Single Ladies." And then I heard it was being directed by Guy Ritchie. Whoa! Red flag! The last movie I saw made by Guy Ritchie was "Rocknrolla." Check it out, great movie (if you like cracked-out snorefests bubbling in awful ideas and a plot that would make "Lost" producers go "huh?") But, being the savvy movie-goer I am, I decided to check it out anyways. And honestly, I wasn't disappointed.

If anyone out there has read any Sherlock Holmes stories, (don't worry if you haven't, that doesn't make you an uneducated nincompoop or anything. Seriously, it doesnt), the movie will feel like you have just stepped back into the book, like you never put it down. This isn't an origins story - Holmes and Watson are already friends, solved lots of mysteries that would make Scooby-Doo jealous and have a sweet little bromance thing going. They just solved a big mystery, concerning a certain Lord Blackwood who has killed a bunch of girls using black magic. They catch him in the act and send him to the noose. A few days later though, Blackwood rises from the dead and Holmes is called in to solve the case (again.)

If you haven't already guessed, I love Robert Downey Jr. He is the main selling point of this movie. The man steps into Holmes's shoes like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote him in. Downey creates a character much like Johnny Depp created for "Pirates of the Carribbean." Instantly memorable and a delight to watch while he interacts with the world around him.

Prepare for a lot of deducing, Holmes style. Prepare for witty dialogue and some of the best special effects this year. Slow-motion explosions somehow never get old. Prepare for clues that in retrospect seem obvious, but only if you were actually Sherlock Holmes could you spot them before they've been solved for you.

The storyline is a little convoluted at times and the movie doesn't have an incredible amount of re-watch value, but it's good to see Robert Downey Jr. doing what he does best: convincing me that he is someone else. Oh and Jude Law as Watson and Rachel McAdams as femme fatale Irene Adler ain't so bad either.

3 out of 4 stars

-Christopher O'Connell

It's Complicated

"It's Complicated" is written and directed by Nancy Meyers. It stars Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, and Alec Baldwin.

This movie comes from the romantic comedy factory known as Nancy Meyers. It's basically all she does and she makes a living off it. This time around she uses the ever popular love triangle as the plot piece for her newest endeavor. Jane and Jake have been divorced for 10 years. Jane (Meryl Streep) is still single and Jake (Alec Baldwin) is married to the younger woman he cheated on Jane with. After 10 years they decide it might be a good idea to have an affair...since Jane did have Jake first. The two of them most likely have made better decisions in their lives. Throw in Jane's architect, Adam (Steve Martin) who Jane becomes romantically involved with for a time and you have "It's Complicated."

The strong points of this movie can be summed up in two words...Meryl Streep. If it weren't for her I would have never gone to see the movie....especially after all the mediocre to horrible reviews it has gotten. She is, as I have said before, probably the greatest actress currently working in Hollywood. Meryl Streep can do absolutely any role that she is given. She is great here, but not as good as she was as Julia Child in "Julie & Julia." That was just amazing and I bet she'll get an Oscar nomination for it. Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin are also good to watch. They both have pretty good chemistry with Meryl Streep...although I gotta say nothing beats her and Clint Eastwood in "The Bridges of Madison County." Steve Martin also wasn't used to his fullest potential. His character just was not that interesting. So basically "It's Complicated" has three great actors trying to work with a mediocre script.

The movie is a bit too long and toward the end it just seemed to drag on. The movie was not as funny as I had hoped. There are definitely some funny lines, they are just very infrequent. This movie had the potential to be a very smart, funny, ensemble comedy. I personally blame Nancy Meyers for this not being the result...the also great cast of "What Women Want" got a better script out of her. But in Nancy Meyers's defense, Meryl Streep and Steve Martin's characters smoking pot is really funny and probably the highlight of the movie...not quite sure what that says about the movie.

The movie wasn't horrible...it also wasn't great like it should have and could have been. The three main actors are very talented and have impressive resumes and I know they are funnier than this movie would lead many movie-goers to believe. The script, besides a few funny scenes/lines was pretty weak. "Julie and Julia" was actually the funnier Meryl Streep movie. This movie doesn't need to be seen in theaters...unless you love the cast or something...but at the very least it's worth a rental...and if you end up hating it...then so what - it only cost you a dollar. 2 out of 4 stars.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Twilight - New Moon

So...I've been meaning to put up this post for a while now, but I guess better late than never. My name is Alexis and this is my first attempt at a movie review, so please don't compare me with the movie review experts, Joe and Chris O. A little about myself: I LOVE watching all sorts of movies (except horror movies!) and I have read the "Twilight" books, so I knew what I was getting into when I went to go see "New Moon."
So here is a little recap of the plot of "Twilight: New Moon." Warning - there are a few spoilers, but I realize if you haven't already seen the movies, you probably never will, so there's no harm. Here it goes. Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) in the previous movie, fall in love despite Bella finding out that Edward is a vampire (wow surprising). They go through the common ups and downs and eventually Bella almost gets killed by another vampire and Edward saves her blah blah blah..."New Moon" begins with Bella waking up on her birthday after having a nightmare about being her grandmother. It's after this that the audience really sees Edward - the wind blowing in his hair and rock music in the background causes either a cry of delight or a cry of pain in the tackiness of it all. Later Edward invites Bella to the Cullen's house to celebrate her birthday where she accidentally cuts herself and nearly gets attacked by Jasper, Edwards adoptive brother. After all this, Edward leaves Bella and tells her he doesn't love her anymore which leads to Bella having extreme depression. Later Bella gets to know Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), which is the source of the Team Edward vs. Team Jacob controversy, which is pretty much a contest over which guy is hotter, even though one is pasty and gross and the other looks like a five year old with a six pack...but anyways. Jacob Black is a Native American boy who lives on a reservation near Bella. They become friends over fixing a pair of motorcycles and slowly Bella becomes less depressed with Jacob's company. However, then Jacob becomes "sick" and doesn't want to hang out with Bella anymore, which then leads to Bella guessing that Jake is a werewolf (which is the natural opposite of the Vampire...go figure) and that she is being hunted by a vampire that wants revenge for Edward killing her mate in the previous movie. Then, Bella wanting a thrill, goes cliff-diving and almost drowns. After being saved by Jacob, she is visited by Edward's sister, Alice, who tells her that Edward is going to kill himself because he thinks she is dead. They race off and try to save Edward from exposing his sparkliness (vampires sparkle in sunlight) to the public and subsequent execution by the Vampire royal family, the Volturi. He almost succeeds (Edward shirtless = puking in mouth) but Bella saves him. However they are forced to meet the royal family and Edward is made to promise to change Bella into a vampire else the family will kill her/change her themselves. At last comes the end of the movie where Edward proposes to Bella and the audience squeals in delight. All is happy and good except for the threatening Jacob who is heartbroken over his loss of Bella to Edward.
So all and all, this movie was crap. Although there was about one believable part in the entire movie, Bella's depression, the rest was extremely tacky and, at points, painful. Also the fact that Jacob Black was shirtless for the majority of the movie makes me believe that most of the brain power for the script was put towards how often Jacob could have his shirt off instead of actual acting. The movie was pretty close to the book, but again the Team Edward vs. Team Jacob was extremely annoying. I'd say if you want to to have fun watching the movie, you are too late. Opening night was the closest you will ever get to an enjoyable experience with that movie (the people are AMAZING!) otherwise wait 10 years and buy it for 25 cents at a yard sale or read the book.

1 out of 4 stars

-Alexis Cupp

Up in the Air

"Up in the Air" is directed by Jason Reitman ("Thank You For Smoking" and "Juno"). It stars George Clooney ("Ocean's Eleven"), Vera Farmiga ("The Departed"), Anna Kendrick, and Jason Bateman (TV's "Arrested Development" and "Juno"). J.K Simmons and Zach Galifianakis both have small, but very funny parts.

George Clooney is Ryan Bingham, a man who has no real relationships with anyone. He spends the majority of his life flying to various parts of the country firing people. Since he travels so much, his frequent flyer miles are a pretty big thing for him. His company then makes the decision to fire people via video chats, to save time and money on flights, hotels etc. Jason Bateman plays the boss, Craig Gregory and Anna Kendrick is Natalie Keener, the girl who proposed the idea of firing people via the internet...just a fun fact in case people were wondering and didn't feel like IMDBing the movie. This doesn't sit well with Ryan since it would completely change his lifestyle which currently includes several one night stands with Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga)...since apparently having an elite status with airlines, hotels, etc is a turn on. That's the general idea of the movie...I won't ruin the end for people and stuff...

Well, George Clooney is George Clooney. Honestly, that should be enough said. He is a great actor and people know it and that's why he is the star of so many movies. He is great as the lead actor in "Up in the Air," which really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. George Clooney had great chemistry with the other cast members. That's always a good thing when watching a movie. The chemistry comes across mainly with his female co-stars as they are in most scenes with him. Vera Farmiga is convincing as George Clooney's female counterpart in the world of frequent flying. I haven't seen Anna Kendrick in anything besides this, but she is a very good actress and plays the role of a young woman in the business world, questioning George Clooney's character's lifestyle well. The nature of the movie required that everyone (at least the main cast members) be capable of doing comedy and drama. Everyone comes through on this one. They all are convincing in their characters and were lucky enough to be given a great script to work with. The dialogue flows well and is just smart and funny when it needs to be. The movie is also well-paced and doesn't really drag, except for a little bit when Ryan is at his sister's wedding. When you first watch the movie you may think it's predictable...but ultimately you would be wrong...unless you have the natural ability to sense what is going to happen in a movie.

"Up in the Air" is a lot more than a comedy and a lot more than just a drama. It's a great combination of the two. It's not powerful like "Precious" or "Invictus" or something, but there is just a lot more substance to it then most movies these days. There are some hilarious lines and funny scenes dealing with people's reactions to being fired. The movie also deals with relationships and just things that people deem as important in life. I've got to say I am very impressed by Jason Reitman. He's a young director and makes great movies. This movie is a follow up to "Juno," which I love and think is a great, funny movie. "Up in the Air" however is even better as it has a great cast and is just more mature and intelligently written and executed.

The movie looks great. Lots of scenes out of focus, great reaction shots from people and closeups/unique angles are used at times. And aerial shots, for me anyway are always a good thing...and given the type of movie this is it works out great.

I thought this was a great movie. One of the best of the year and it has gotten several Golden Globe nominations and I hear that it will probably be nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars. Who knows if it will win. They have been a lot of great movies this year...especially recently because of Oscar season. 4 out of 4 stars...People should see it...if you like George Clooney or any member of the cast, Jason Reitman movies, or well made movies in general. Go see a matinee...given the quality of this movie a matinee is a great deal...or you could wait til next year sometime and rent it, but come on, why do that when you can watch it on the big screen during Oscar season?

-Joseph Sbrilli

The Blind Side

"The Blind Side" is directed by John Lee Hancock. It stars Sandra Bullock, Tim McGraw, Quinton Aaron, and Kathy Bates.

Well, I know nothing about football so this entire movie was news to me. It is in, fact, a true story, having been adapted from the book, "The Blind Side: Evolution of the Game." It's about Michael Oher, the offensive lineman (I actually have absolutely no clue what that is) for the Baltimore Ravens (recently found out they were a team). He's had a hard life. He's poor and uneducated. His father left him and his mother is addicted to drugs so Michael is removed from her care. He goes through several foster homes, running away from each of them. He starts going to a private school, but has a very low IQ. A rich southern family, the Tuohys (Sandra Bullock and Tim McGraw play Leigh Ann and Sean Tuohy. The actors who play the kids really do not matter because this is Sandra Bullock's movie and no one elses) take him in and eventually adopt Michael. Michael begins to bring his grades up with the help of his tutor, Miss Sue (Kathy Bates) and becomes quite the football player. This leads to several schools trying to recruit them. The rest is history...yeah I know that's a cliche but I'm getting tired of explaining the plot...

Like I said, this is definitely Sandra Bullock's movie. And let me thank Julia Roberts so much for not taking the lead role in this movie...it most likely wouldn't have ended well. So Sandra Bullock playing a rich white woman isn't really a huge stretch of the imagination. But this time she does it with a southern accent. I don't know much about accents, but in my opinion she did a great job and stayed consistent throughout the movie. She is a great lead actress and she shines in this movie. Her interactions with Tim McGraw and Quinton Aaron all seems legitimately real. She genuinely loves Michael and will do anything to better his life. Besides "The Blind Side," I've only seen her in "Miss Congeniality" and "The Proposal," so I have very little to compare her too. But in "The Blind Side" she proves that she can be just as convincing in a drama as she is in a comedy. Quinton Aaron hadn't done a whole lot of acting before this movie, but he is very good here. A change is evident in the movie and he progresses with his life. I am pretty indifferent to Tim McGraw and he is pretty much just here so that Sandra Bullock has someone to talk to. Kathy Bates is another great actress and I got really excited more than halfway through the movie when I remembered that she was in it. Her role here as Miss Sue is nowhere near as great or memorable as her Oscar-winning role as Annie Wilkes in "Misery," but few roles are, because she was amazing in "Misery" and everyone should see it. In "The Blind Side" she is only in a few scenes, but they're great and she has some good comic relief. She's one of those people who I always enjoy seeing even if only in a small role.

I just found out that John Lee Hancock also wrote the script. It always impresses me when the same person is able to write and direct a movie. The script was good and actually didn't feel cheesy or anything. And no awful pieces of dialogue have been etched in my memory for all eternity.

Narration is used well in this movie...not much more I can say about that. It isn't overused and is mostly saved for a little bit near the beginning and at the end. Also, some real footage of the actual Michael Oher is used, which was a nice addition to the movie. Throughout the movie there are flashbacks to when Michael was taken away from his mother. These are very brief and flash up on the screen, but add to the emotion impact of the story.

There really is not a legitimate bad thing I can say about this movie. Although at times the score makes the scene feel overly, unrealistically dramatic. It feels a tad forced, but it's not a huge problem. Also, Michael's life turning around happened awfully fast in the movie...but I guess the assumption is that in real life things happened at a normal pace.

So yes, I loved this movie. Sandra Bullock was great and it was very well acted and paced and everything. Sandra Bullock's got herself a Golden Globe nomination (actually 2...one from "The Proposal") so who knows, she could be a surprise nominee for Best Actress at the Oscars. Although if that happens, she won't win, but it would just be fun for her to be nominated. Basically, admit that there is something about Sandra Bullock you like and go out and see the movie...or wait 4 months and rent it for a dollar...either way, see it...one of my favorites from the year, just not Best Picture material. 3 out of 4 stars.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Avatar 3-D

This is the movie of the decade. James Cameron's comeback, twelve years after directing the highest grossing film of all time, and boy, is it the most beautiful thing I have ever seen. "Avatar" is the most hyped and expensive movie to date (estimates put the cost at about half a billion) and it delivers on every promise that Cameron made. I can only hope that it makes a profit so Cameron can get started on a sequel.

Some undetermined amount of years in the future, humans have discovered another planet called Pandora. It's a jungle planet full of wild animals that have an unusual amount of very sharp teeth. Pandora is also home to a race of ten-foot-tall cat people called the Na'vi. Imagine a regular person, make him realy tall, color him blue with blue tiger stripes, give him cat-like features, and then give him a ponytail that has tentacles in it (I'll explain later). The humans, not government-controlled, mind you, but corporation-controlled, have found a certain substance called unobtanium (the least creative part of the movie - what kind of name is that?) which is incredibly valuable back on Earth. Sadly, the mineral they want occurs in very high amounts underneath the Na'vi's home, a giant tree.

This is where the title of the movie comes in. The Avatar program allows humans to sit in MRI machines and wake up inside a Na'vi that the company grew specifically for them. They are meant to go out and communicate with the natives and eventually convince them to move away from their home so the company can start digging. This is the backstory that has to be gleaned out of the first 13 hours of the movie (it is a long movie, not meant for those with weak bladders i.e. me). The movie is told through the point of view of ex-marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), whose brother was the next candidate for an avatar. His brother was killed by a mugger back on Earth, so the company chooses Jake to replace him, since his genetics were compatible with the Na'vi they grew for his brother (they're twins). Jake, in his avatar body, comes into contact with the Na'vi, and becomes the "chosen one." The Na'vi train him to be like them. Jake learns that the ponytail tentacles of the Na'vi connect to the animals of the world, binding them one to the other. Everything on Pandora is connected by Pandora's version of Gaia, called Eywa .The Na'vi begin to trust him as one of their own and he becomes the company's only hope for a diplomatic solution. Jake soon discovers he has more in common with the Na'vi than his own kind.

Do you remember that dream, that seemed so utterly real that you were sure it was reality, for even just a brief moment? "Avatar" was James Camerons dream. It was the daydream that he acted out with his toys and that Hollywood allowed him to create. More importantly, it became Jake Sully's dream. Sully is a paraplegic and every time he enters his avatar, he has that feeling of freedom again, freedom of life, freedom of movement. This is the dream that when you woke up you cried a little because it wasn't real, but for that brief moment, it was.

The visuals in this movie will blow you away. I was lucky enough to see it in 3-D and if you don't want to fork over the extra cash for that, shame on you. Every animal is brilliantly realized, every plant, and every Na'vi. I can openly admit that without the visuals, this movie would be an hour too long, but every second I was on Pandora, I believed it was real. My mind wanted me to think I was bored but my eyes were too busy taking in all the sights to care.

You may see a Best Picture nod for "Avatar." It's not going to win it though. Without a doubt, it will win the Best Visuals award, maybe even Best Director. The cast is largly newcomers (Sam Worthington only breaking into American cinema with "Terminator: Salvation" earlier this year). They do well, but look for Sigourney Weaver's trademark tough girl and the antagonist Stephen Lang's native hating Colonel Quaritch.

This movie is the biggest thing I have ever seen and is as close as you can come to the word "epic." The final battle reminded me of my childhood, where I had huge wars with my action figures and I always wanted to see something on that scale in the movies. Well, here it is. This is that movie. Get out your $13.50, go to the bathroom before it starts, and prepare for the greatest adventure you could ever dream of.

3 and a half out of four stars

-Christopher O'Connell

Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire

"Precious" (I'm sticking with the short title for the rest of the review) was directed by Lee Daniels. It stars Mo'Nique, Mariah Carey, Lenny Kravitz, Sherri Shepherd, and Paula Patton. This is the first movie for Gabourey Sidibe.

"Precious" is based off the book "Push," by Saphire. It's not a true story. The movie is set in Harlem, New York. Claireece "Precious" Jones (Gabourney Sidibe) is a obese, 16-year old black girl who is pretty uneducated and is pregnant with her second child, as a result of being raped by her father. She has a verbally and physically abusive mother (Mo'Nique). She is given the opportunity to enroll into an alternative school. Her teacher, Blu Rain (Paula Patton) and her social worker, Ms. Weiss (Mariah Carey) both help in her efforts to turn her life around and make it a little better for Precious and her two kids.

Acting is definitely the highlight of the movie. All of the actors give fantastic, powerful performances. Gabourey Sidibe is wonderful as the lead character, who provides a lot of narration. This was a great part of the movie because everything is from her point of view. She is so convincing as a girl struggling with a broken, abusive household and very limited education. Her character is a great main character that I felt sympathy for - she just seemed like a real person. Her interactions with Mo'Nique, Mariah Carey, and Paula Patton were great and also varied depending on the characters, but worked so well with the film. I definitely think Gabourey Sidibe has a shot at getting nominated for Best Actress, because her performance is amazing and one of the best I've seen this year. Mo'Nique, who I have never seen in anything before this, but rumor has it she is a comedienne, is also great in this movie. Completely the opposite of her normal persona, what ever that is. She definitely has a Oscar nomination coming her way, too. Her role as an abusive mother shows a great range and is also convincing and horrific. I don't feel like talking about every single cast member, but trust me: everyone gives amazing performances and it is a pleasure to watch them work. They are a huge part in making this movie one of the best of the year.

Cinematography is another very strong part of the movie. There are lots of close-ups and some great editing and fade-outs into the next scene. Lighting is used very effectively to make it look like it's the 1980s. It's a lot less refined than many movies these days. There are a lot of parts that are out of focus and the scenes in Precious's house are especially dimly lit. This adds to the depressing tone of those scenes and reflects Precious' life at the time. There is some brighter lighting used when Precious is having fantasies about her life being better. There also are some great shots, like one looking down a spiral staircase as well as general good camera movement moving around various scenes. Overall it's very visually appealing and just adds to emotion and the quality of the movie.

The movie is incredibly powerful. There is sympathy for Precious and just shock and disgust for her mother. The movie definitely starts out sad, but is pretty inspirational and shows that horrible, unpleasant circumstances don't have to dictate the outcome of your life. You can definitely better yourself and improve your life. It's a great story that shows a variety of emotions. This includes a couple funny lines that are thrown in. It adds a more realistic feel to the story, as the brief lighthearted comments fit in perfectly with the exceptionally well-written script. I wasn't sure where to add this so I'll do it here: there are a few flashbacks of past events in Precious' life. These comes out occasionally as she talks to people and such. It works out well and is a good technique to use.

I'm pretty impressed that this is only the second movie that Lee Daniels has directed. I think everyone should be as impressed as I am. He made a heck of movie. Every single thing that makes a great movie a great movie is here...I'm not lying - it really is.

Great movie, any problems that I could find with this movie would just be me being really difficult and picky. It's a great movie. The acting is phenomenal, the lighting and camera work adds visual appeal and emotion to the movie. This is all tied together with a great script. "Precious" will definitely get a Best Picture nomination. If it doesn't there is something seriously wrong with people. So go see it now...like this second...it's amazing...one of the best movies that I have seen this year...and I've seen about 35 in theaters...so I have a lot to compare it to. 4 stars out of 4.

-Joseph Sbrilli

The Princess and the Frog

"The Princess and the Frog" is directed by Ron Clements and John Musker ("The Little Mermaid and "Aladdin.") It stars the voices of Anika Noni Rose ("Dreamgirls"), Oprah Winfrey, John Goodman, and others...these are just the most famous and/or recognizable people in the cast.

The movie is semi-based off of the book, "The Frog Prince." In this version we have Tiana, the ninth Disney princess and the first black Disney princess...in the Walt Disney Company's defense, it only took 72 years for this to occur. She lives in New Orleans, Louisiana and works as a waitress trying to raise money to open up the restaurant that her late father dreamed of. Through completely unforeseeable circumstances she becomes a frog and goes through a heck of a lot to become an actual person again. This, of course, would involve a prince, some voodoo and other magical occurrences. Yes, there is slightly more to the plot, but it would be tiring for me to explain it all in minute detail...and Disney's movies really aren't all that complicated.

First of all, and for me most importantly, "The Princess and the Frog" is animated in the traditional, hand-drawn, 2-D style. I'm not sure everyone can even comprehend how amazing this is. Walt Disney Pictures for whatever reason decided that it would be a good idea to stop making hand drawn, animated movies. The last one was 5 years ago when "Home on the Range" came out which really wasn't that good, but back then I wasn't smart enough to realize it. Luckily someone over there realized that was a really awful idea to stop using that type of animation. Disney's newest hand-drawn animated outing looks fantastic. It is basically what most people expect from a Disney movie and fits right in with the likes of "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves," "Cinderella," "The Little Mermaid," "Beauty and the Beast," etc.

The voice cast is great. Anika Noni Rose was a really good choice for the lead character. This probably is going to sound strange, but she sounds like a Disney princess. And she has a great singing voice, which she proved in "Dreamgirls." I'm glad that Disney likes to use John Goodman in their movies occasionally, because I love listening to him. He has a distinctive voice that works out so well in animated movies. Throwing Oprah Winfrey into the mix really doesn't hurt...her voice is not as distinctive....but trust me, she is in this movie and gets the job done.

Randy Newman composed the score and the songs for this movie. He has previously worked on several Pixar movies, such as "Toy Story" and "Monsters, Inc." True, the songs that he has written and performed in Pixar movies are more memorable than what is in "The Princess and the Frog." But, I happen to love Randy Newman and he does have some very catchy songs in this movie and they just fit the overall tone and energy of the movie so well. Music is often a key part in Disney movies and this one is no exception.

"The Princess and the Frog" is more or less the same as all the other princess/fairy tale movies that Disney has released over the past 7 decades. No new ground is really covered, which is fine because these are family movies and Disney can get away with those sort of things. Something tells me this movie didn't require a whole lot of thought that hadn't already been used elsewhere in a Disney movie.

There also are some drawn-out scenes, like most movies. And a couple unnecessary and/or just kind of annoying scenes. It's really not worth going into them...just trust me...they are there... But then again I'm probably not the target audience for this type of movie...so I'm assuming most people wouldn't be bothered by this and sometimes I just enjoy complaining about things.

Finally, a Disney movie (not made my Pixar) that is worthy of the Walt Disney name. The animation is great and I'm glad Disney went back to their roots, for at least one more time. The songs are catchy (Randy Newman has done better) and the voice cast is great. Not an original approach to or type of movie, but thoroughly enjoyable, nonetheless. 3 out of 4 stars.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Invictus

"Invictus" is the latest film to be produced and directed by Clint Eastwood (who, generally speaking, makes great movies.) He is currently 79 and is still making unbelievable, quality films. "Invictus" stars Morgan Freeman - his third collaboration with Clint Eastwood ("Unforgiven and "Million Dollar Baby" were the first two). Matt Damon co-stars along with several other people you have probably never heard of in your life.

It's South Africa, circa 1995. Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman, if you couldn't guess) is finally out of prison and has been elected president of South Africa (for those who are completely unaware). As it turns out, Nelson Mandela is quite a huge fan of rugby and uses the 1995 World Cup as a way to unite his country after years of apartheid. Matt Damon plays Francois Pienarr, the captain of the rugby team.

Well, Morgan Freeman is in this movie, no lie. I love this man, mainly because he is an amazing actor. He apparently was born to play Nelson Mandela. It is both uncanny and ridiculous how seamlessly Morgan Freeman slipped into the role of leader and president of South Africa. His voice is fantastic, so of course, he narrates a little bit of this movie, which makes me, and I'm assuming most Americans, so happy. The inflection and power of his voice and acting, just in general, is fantastic. He has a great command of the screen. So I am guessing he will get an Oscar nomination because the Academy loves when great actors play real people. This isn't to say that Matt Damon isn't also great, because he is. He has great chemistry with Morgan Freeman. Over the years he has proven himself to be a versatile actor. Just watch "Invictus" and "The Informant!" from earlier this year and you will see the range that he possesses as an actor. He also puts on quite the South African accent in this movie. Both actors were perfect choices for the movie and added to my overall enjoyment.

I love cinematography in movies so I'll talk about that for a bit. Overall, there are some great shots in this movie, lots of tracking shots, close-ups as we see reactions from people, and aerial shots of buildings an such. Another really exciting thing for me is that Clint Eastwood and the cast and crew physically flew to South Africa while filming a movie that takes place...in South Africa! It's fantastic and the way things should be. We get a look at the poor areas of the country as well as some government buildings and the rugby stadium and such. All of this adds to the visual appeal of the movie. If you are going to watch a movie, it mind as well be great to look at. In that regard, Clint Eastwood came through once again. Yeah, I am kind of biased because I am a huge fan of that man and his movies, but whatever...Oh, and this doesn't have to do with cinematography, but I'll put it here anyway. This movie also has lots of African music on it's soundtrack (just in case you forget where it's set) and adds an authentic quality to "Invictus" and fits well in several scenes.

The movie as a whole is pretty powerful, which is great. Movies should always try to get an emotional response from the audience because otherwise there really is no point in spending the 6-12 bucks to see it in theaters or spend over 2 hours watching it. It's amazing that Nelson Mandela was able to forgive the people who imprisoned him for 27 years and become president of South Africa. That strong leadership quality and immense positive character is incredibly present in this film. Also present is the idea that a country can be unified even after years of terrible turmoil.

In case you don't know, I loved this movie. I thought it was very well made/acted/etc. There were a couple things that kept me from giving it a perfect rating. It is a little too long. The last scene in particular where they are in the rugby playoffs feels a little drawn out, especially for those like me, who are really confused by rugby to begin with. Also, in the last scene some slow motion is used and it just seems too cliché and cheesy for a movie of such high quality. A couple characters annoyed me as well - like Francois' girlfriend and one of the women that works for Nelson Mandela. Also, its kind of hard to explain, I guess you have to see it, but a couple scenes seemed like they switched too quickly and the editing just didn't feel completely natural and fluid.

Clint Eastwood follows last year's "Changeling" and "Gran Torino," with "Invictus." Eastwood's latest movie is pretty powerful and boasts great performances by its two leads. It also looks fantastic. It is definitely going to be getting some Oscar recognition, or at least nominations. It would have been even better if it were edited down slightly and if the feel of the ending was more realistic. 3 1/2 out of 4 stars...I would recommend it to fans of Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon, or well-made movies in general. I think most people would be impressed by this movie...or at least enjoy it.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Fantastic Mr. Fox

I don't believe I've seen a stop motion film since the last time I was able to catch Wallace and Gromit on TV. Big studios tend to shy away from the ancient form of stop motion and pump their dollars into things like Pixar and Dreamwork Animation (aka the kid down the street from Pixar who is way jealous because Pixar is ten times more awesome than he is and stole his girlfriend.) Stop motion is a lost art to be sure. So when I heard there was a film coming out using stop motion, naturally I had to check it out.

"Fantastic Mr. Fox" stars some guy by the name of George Clooney, and some woman by the name of Meryl Streep, and some other guy named Bill Murray. All pretty no-name actors. I certainly have never heard of them. Mr. Fox is a professional bird hunter. He breaks into farms and steals whatever things a fox might enjoy from the farmers' storehouses. Unfortunately, because his wife gets pregnant, he promises to give up his dangerous life and become a newspaper correspondent.

If that sounds like a boring life, it's because it is. Mr. Fox can't stand it and if you want a decent plot, everyone knew the director couldn't stand it either. He decides to get back into the game and plan one huge raid on the three farms in the area. But Fox robs from the wrong men. The farmers get kinda peeved that animals are taking their food and start destroying the entire countryside, attempting to kill Fox and his friends. Fox has to figure out a way to stop the farmers and save his nephew that is being held captive by them.

Fantastic? eh, no. Weird? most definitley. This is an odd tale. Amusing, with incredible voicework, but not much substance. It wasn't as funny as it could have been, and replacing the F-word with cuss "are you cussing with me right now?" is only funny the first few times. Not if it's used for every other line. The movie is just an odd film. Nothing special, except for maybe the animation, and certainly nothing new.

Grade: 2 out of 4 stars

-Christopher O'Connell

Christmas Vacation: A Quick Review

I love everything about this movie. It's a wonderful Christmas movie and is, as far as I'm concerned, one of the funniest movies that any human being has ever made. Chevy Chase once again heads the cast as Clark Griswald in the third "Vacation" movie. I've only seen this one and "Vacation" (aka the first one), but rumor has it that "Christmas Vacation" is the funniest. Joining Chevy Chase are Beverly D'Angelo, Randy Quaid and several other hilarious cast members. Chevy Chase gets hit in the face with the attic ladder and a wooden plank (multiple times), the Griswald's get their Christmas tree in the middle of nowhere, and Clark Griswald attempts to put up thousands of Christmas lights. These situations are just really funny to me. The same can be said for a cat being lit on fire under a couch and senile Aunt Bethany pretty much doing anything. Cousin Eddie and his hill-billy family arriving via their RV is also good for a lot of laughs. If you haven't seen this movie you should watch it very soon. I usually don't like comedies because so many are just stupid and not funny - but this one's hilarious, especially watching it with other people...and the opening song played during the credits is actually really catchy.

-Joseph Sbrilli

The Final Destination: A Quick Review

"The Final Destination" is the fourth (and supposedly last...we'll see) movie in the fun-filled, blood and gore filled "Final Destination" franchise. These movies are all pretty dumb (alright that is actually a huge understatement...but I did see the first 2 before seeing this one) and follow the exact same plot structure: a teenager has a premonition about a disaster that's going to occur (this one has a massive wreck at a race track). He then saves a handful of people from being destroyed. The people that survived then start to die in the order they were sitting at the race track. The young people try and break the chain of death by saving people from their supposed fate...which really does not end well for anyone and tons of people are killed in unbelievably violent (and really unlucky) ways that result in lots of blood and sometimes impalements or being crushed. Man, I pretty much just ruined the movie for everyone....oh well. There is so much gasoline in this movie that it's ridiculous...so of course that leads to even more deaths. Um...the acting is awful the script is awful. There really are no redeeming qualities - except the deaths were kinda entertaining...I did laugh at most of them. This one is exactly the same as the first 3...just so much worse because the plot is just milked for absolutely all it's worth. And having more people die in this one than in the other three really doesn't help. With that being said Michael Bay managed to make a worse movie. By the end of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" I felt like I had been metaphorically violated many times. At least "The Final Destination" was only 82 minutes...but my IQ must have dropped at least a little after watching it.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Girl, Interrupted: A Quick Review

"Girl, Interrupted" is based off a memoir by Susanna Kaysen (meaning that it's a true story). She spent about a year and a half in a mental hospital in Massachusetts in the late 1960s and was diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder. The book came out in 1993. Six years later James Mangold came around to direct a movie version of the book. He also directed "Walk the Line" and "3:10 to Yuma", both great movies so I was happy to find out he had directed "Girl, Interrupted."

The camera shots and lighting in the movie just work very well in setting a serious tone for the movie as well as making it look visual appealing with some nice tracking shots and shots down the halls of the hospital with lots of depth. The movie follows the book pretty well. Some scenes were omitted from the movie and others have been added. Also, the end of the movie is a lot different then the ending in the book. The book ending was much better, but I would never have known this fun fact had I not read the book first.

The casting in the movie is great. Winona Ryder is the lead. I have never been bowled over by any of her performances before and am pretty indifferent to her as an actress, but she is pretty good in this movie as the lead. Angelina Jolie stole the movie though, and the Oscar for Best Supporting actress, playing Lisa, a sociopath. Say what you may about Angelina Jolie and her thing with Brad Pitt and adopting half of Africa and popping out a couple of her own, but she is in fact a great actress. Don't watch "Wanted" though...that movie would not prove the point that I just made. Watch her in "Girl, Interrupted" and "Changeling" and you will see the range this woman has as an actress and the emotion she is able to pack into a character. She also definitely got the more interesting role in "Girl, Interrupted," so Winona Ryder shouldn't be blamed. Whoopi Goldberg also shows up as the head nurse and she is great. Many know her as a comedienne or that black woman on "The View" and possibly from such wonderful movies as "Sister Act" or "Sister Act 2: Back to the Habit." She is extremely capable at doing drama though, too ("Ghost" was a great example of her doing the ever popular drama-comedy mix...another great Whoopi Goldberg performance). The emotion that she brings to the nurse character is great and she worked very well with Winona Ryder, Angelina Jolie and the rest of the cast and just seemed like a good fit.

The movie overall was good and I would recommend it as a rental to people...A great cast and a great director being involved in the adaptation of a very good book just seems like a good idea.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Airplane!: A Quick Review

Just watch it. It's been called one of the greatest comedies of all time and everyone should see it once and form their own opinions on it. It is a disaster movie spoof that takes place on a plane. Yep, that's why it was named what it was named. Lots of people on the plane are getting food poisoning - including the pilots, so one of the passengers has to land the plane. It's a fun time had by all, especially with Leslie Nielsen as a doctor on a plane...just please don't call him Shirley. The two main characters actually really annoyed me as well as another guy who is ridiculously annoying and unfunny...but that doesn't stop the movie from being funny. I happen to find a white woman singing R-E-S-P-E-C-T to a black man, Barbara Billingsley speaking jive to a couple black men, a flashback where a soldier in a hospital in convinced he's Ethel Merman ("I am serious and don't call me Shirley"), as well as several other great lines/scenes hilarious. Sure, there's some not so great lines, but nobody's perfect. However, "The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!" is the funnier movie. There is just no way to contradict that statement. It's faster-paced, the one-liners come fast and furious, there's hilarious physical comedy, and there's more Leslie Nielsen...and Priscilla Presley, George Kennedy, Ricardo Montalbon, and O.J. Simpson - the same team made both movies. After reviewing "Airplane!" I really want to watch "The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!"...I'm a little bit happier knowing that movie exists.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Space Cowboys: A Quick Review

"Space Cowboys," which came out in 2000, both stars and was directed by Clint Eastwood. He certainly is at home behind as well as in front of the camera. If you have read any of my other Clint Eastwood movie reviews you know my opinion of the film maker. He is joined in "Space Cowboys" by Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, and James Garner. Marcia Gay Harden and James Cromwell also co-star. Clint Eastwood plays an engineer who, about 40 years previously, had helped to develop a satellite. The satellite is about to crash and no one knows how to deal with it because the technology is so old. This is where Clint Eastwood and his friends come to help. They were part of the team involved...not just senior citizens selected at random. Some people at NASA feel that the four guys are too old to be going into space to fix a satellite...but that a huge falsehood. Alright, they are kind of old, but that's not the point. The four actors are fantastic and talented and work very well together. The movie has great characters that interact well with each other and makes for a good mix of drama with a little comedy thrown in. The movie is a bit long but is, for the most part, engaging - especially towards the end which is pretty intense. I liked the final scene a lot, too...once I stopped being confused. So I definitely felt like I got my money's worth out of the movie...I just can't resist Clint Eastwood movies in the 5 dollar bin at Wal-Mart. Watch it if you're a fan of Clint Eastwood...or if you're not because you really should be.

-Joseph Sbrilli

The Boat That Rocked (aka Pirate Radio)

"The Boat That Rocked" is written and directed by Richard Curtis. Someone decided to change the name of the movie to "Pirate Radio" which was a really dumb idea since the original title was way better. The movie starts Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Bill Nighy, Rhys Ifans, and Nick Frost.

The movie takes place in the 1960s. British radio stations won't play rock and roll. So a group of musical pirates, as it were, set to the high seas and start their own radio station on a boat so all the wonderful English people can get some of that old-time rock and roll. The English government doesn't take too kindly to this and tries to shut the radio station down.

This is based of a true story - one which I know nothing about since the events of the movie were all news to me.

The actors are good, but I didn't think the characters were extremely likable. The guys on the boat drink, smoke, do drugs, and have promiscuous relations whenever a woman is on the boat. Oh yeah, and they also play music. There's really no sympathy for these characters, but I guess for this kind of movie there's no need for stuff like that. The actors had some good lines that got a good laugh, and then others that made me wonder if the writer had just typed random sentences and hoped that they would be funny...which who knows, it could have happened. Some of my favorite scenes were actually between the really serious British people who were trying to get rid of the pirate radio station. Watching stuffy people is just amusing to me, I guess.

The soundtrack to the movie is one of best parts of the movie. Throughout the movie there are song by artists such as The Who, The Beach Boys, Cat Stevens, The Supremes, The Kinks, Jimi Hendrix, and numerous other great people/groups. Listing them all would just be really tiring. The songs fit the tone of the movie perfectly and just made sense because it was 1960s music in a movie taking place in the 1960s. People should really consider buying this soundtrack for its sheer variety and entertainment value.

The cinematography is the other best part of the movie. Some frames of the movie had parts of the picture blurred. This visually looked very good and was a good approach to some scenes. Also, the camera "rocked" up and down as it was filming scenes on the boat in case people watching the movie forget the majority of the movie takes place on a boat. Reaction shots from characters as well as just good camera movement are also evident. So the movie looked great is the main point of this paragraph.

The movie was way too long and I thought the end was awful. Toward the end the film makers decided to go all "Titanic" on us. This caught me by surprise since it was previously a comedy. The ending didn't really make sense and seemed forced and ridiculous. I won't ruin the ending...but yeah...didn't really like it...then again I kind of lost interest by then because it started to drag.

Sountrack and cinematography made the movie for me. Both were great...and that's where the movie gets 2 stars of 4 from me. I was in a really bad mood when I was watching this so that may have had something to do with me not liking it that much...who knows...but still....a good 20 minutes could have been cut and some lines changed and it would have been better...so yeah...seeing it once was enough for me...

-Joseph Sbrilli

Coming to America: A Quick Review

"Coming to America" has a great cast. This includes Eddie Murphy (before he started making awful family movies for which he should be ashamed) and Arsenio Hall. Both actors portray about half the characters in the movie since they are that talented. James Earl Jones, with the greatest voice in the history of the world (besides Morgan Freeman, who sadly is not in this movie), John Amos, and Samuel L. Jackson also show up for the fun. Yes, that man is somewhere in every movie ever made. Eddie Murphy plays a prince in some random African country. It's that time of life where he gets thrown into an arranged marriage. He doesn't want an arranged marriage and decides to find a wife on his own. And everyone knows the greatest wives come from Queens, New York. So Eddie Murphy and Arsenio Hall haul their tuchuses off to New York City and pretend to be poor and stuff, looking for the woman of Eddie Murphy's dreams. The movie is too long. It's pushing 2 hours, but the script doesn't really warrant the length of the movie. By the end it gets kinda tiresome. Some stuff could have been cut out - like awful lines and drawn-out scenes. There are definitely some funny parts, though. The cast helps and John Landis directing it didn't hurt. I wouldn't buy it. But it's good to see at least once...it's not bad at all.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Jurassic Park: A Quick Review

"Jurassic Park" was directed by Steven Spielberg, has a score by John Williams and features great special effects. All three of those elements are key in order for "Jurassic Park" to be a success (oh yeah, and maybe a good script somewhere in there), which it definitely is. Great cast: Sam Neill, Laura Dern, and Richard Attenborough. Great supporting actors: Wayne Knight and Samuel L. Jackson (who it's always wonderful to see show up randomly in pretty much every movie in the past 20 years). So in this great movie known as "Jurassic Park" these none too smart scientists decide to not only clone a bunch of dinosaurs from DNA they found but also throw them all into an amusement park of sorts...which is just such a bad idea on a variety of levels, but it leads to an intensely entertaining movie. In case you forget the movie is intense, John Williams's score will jog your memory. Honestly the movie is worth seeing just for the scene with the dinosaurs in the kitchen trying to find those stupid kids. And we learn from this movie that dinosaurs indeed were capable of opening large metal doors with complicated handles, way back when. Those aforementioned kids, however, are horribly annoying - as is the annoying young man in the beginning. They really serve no purpose whatsoever and add nothing to the story. The adult cast could have replaced them in their scenes...unless Steven Spielberg wanted us to have simpathy for the young people. I kind of would have preferred they just get eaten...and while the dinosaurs were at it they could eat Jeff Goldblum too because, oh my goodness, that man was annoying to watch and listen to for more than 8 seconds. Now that that's out of the way the special effects in this movie are so amazing. They are way better than the awful special effects that film makers decide to use now (ahhh George Lucas!). They actually look realistic. The dinosaurs were made using a combination of computer generated images and animatronics. And the end result is spectacular. So yeah, it's a great science fiction/action movie. The main cast work well together and everything and Samuel L. Jackson made me really happy and Wayne Knight had some funny scenes. 1993 was apparently a very good year for Steven Spielberg and his bank account since "Jurassic Park" and "Schindler's List" both were released. See it!...then learn to love Steven Spielberg if you don't already.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Catch Me If You Can: A Quick Review

Steven Spielberg's "Catch Me If You Can" was visually stunning and generally just a really fun, entertaining movie all the way through. This came out in 2002, a whole 6 years before Steven Spielberg and George Lucas decided to completely destroy Indiana Jones and leave him writhing in pain (although I still love Steven Spielberg - anyone who directed "Jaws," the "Indiana Jones" trilogy, "Schindler's List," "Saving Private Ryan," etc is great by me...so I blame George Lucas and his unhealthy obsession with computer generated effects and ruining franchises). Well anyway, the cast of "Catch Me If You Can" is amazing and includes the likes of Leonardo DiCaprio (who is actually a really good actor - I'm just a little indifferent toward him), Tom Hanks (who is one of my favorite actors and one of the best actors of the past 20 years or so), Christopher Walken, Amy Adams, and Martin Sheen. Most know the story but here goes anyway: Leonardo DiCaprio plays Frank Abagnale Jr., a brilliant con artist who made millions of dollars by pretending to be a doctor, pilot, and lawyer. This was all done before he turned 19, which is why I referred to him as a brilliant con artist instead of just a normal one who takes a while to learn his "trade" (this movie is based off a true story by the way, for those who didn't see/read that on the poster above). Then Tom Hanks comes in as the FBI man, Carl Hanratty who tries for a few years to catch Abagnale...if he can. The movie starts in 1964 and finishes up 3 years later with a little bit of switching back and forth from the past to the present. This works well for the movie and helps get a look at how the events unfold. Leonardo DiCaprio is convincing as Abagnale and is great at faking various jobs as well as having some good on screen chemistry (although different kinds) with Christopher Walken (Frank Abagnale Sr.), Tom Hanks, and Amy Adams. The music is fantastic, which is what I personally have come to expect from John Williams who composes the scores for all Steven Spielberg movies. It fits the comedic/dramatic tones of the movie extremely well. The cinematography is great to look at as well, having some portions of a scene out of focus, close ups of characters, and just general very fluid, wonderful camera work. This was done by Janusz Kaminski (one of the few reasons why "Funny People" wasn't a terrible movie), who is a great cinematographer, just look at all the other movies that he worked on with Steven Spielberg. The movie suceeds at being at times very serious while never forgetting to throw a fair amount of humor in there. The dialogue is great and good thing too, because wasting this cast and crew would have been a terrible thing. "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan" won Steven Spielberg a combined 3 Academy Awards and are such great, powerful movies, destined to become classic. But don't let that take away from "Catch Me if You Can" which proves that as of 2002 Steven Spielberg could still round up a great group of people to work with and make a memorable film.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Mystic River: A Quick Review

"Mystic River," released in 2003, was directed by one of the greatest American film makers, Clint Eastwood. The cast is fantastic: Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Kevin Bacon, Laurence Fishburne, Marcia Gay Harden, and Laura Linney. Combine these two things with a great story/script and we get one of the best movies of the decade, in my opinion anyway. The movie takes place in Boston. Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, and Kevin Bacon play Jimmy, Dave, and Sean, respectively. They were childhood friends and then years later Jimmy's daughter is killed. Dave is accused of the murder and Sean is the main cop on the case. The movie has a great cast of characters. Every actor gives a highly powerful, memorable performance which makes the movie so great to watch. Besides the great acting the plot is just an engaging mystery. It's really a fun time when you watch a movie and the actors are actually capable of acting and portraying believable characters and the screenwriters are capable of doing what their job title implies. Being the great director and Hollywood icon that Clint Eastwood is, the movie looks great and is just very well put together. The movie is over 2 hours long which usually means I stop paying attention and get antsy and really confused. But for the most part that didn't happen. Although I gotta say, it took me forever to figure out who played who in the movie. My memory really is a sad thing. So basically I loved this movie. I love the all-star cast. I love Clint Eastwood. It wasn't dragged out so much that I was angry by the end - like some movies we no longer talk about because as far as I am concerned they never happened. So rent it! Buy it for $5 at Wal-Mart. Watch it online. Do something to see it. Clint Eastwood's still cranking out great movies even into his 70s and it's a wonderful thing... This man pretty much destroys the movie efforts of most directors nowadays, many half his age, but less than half his ability. Although if you are expecting Clint Eastwood to sing in the end credits you will be disappointed as that does not occur.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Cast Away: A Quick Review

"Cast Away" is the last movie that Robert Zemeckis directed before he went crazy and became obsessed with making motion capture movies ("The Polar Express," "Beowulf," and "A Christmas Carol"). This is really a shame because before this he made some great, normal movies such as "Back to the Future, "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," and a certain Academy Award winner and one of the best movies of the 1990s...or ever: "Forrest Gump." "Cast Away" was released at the end of 2000. Earlier that year Robert Zemeckis's "What Lies Beneath" with Michelle Pfeiffer and Harrison Ford was released. The movie was actually a pretty good supernatural thriller. The beginning was a little slow but the end was pretty intense. And Michelle Pfeiffer and Harrison Ford are just great actors to begin with. Okay, back to "Cast Away," which starred Tom Hanks, and Helen Hunt showed up at the beginning and the end. I'm assuming you all know the plot but I'll give a brief synopsis anyway: Chuck Noland (Tom Hanks) works for FedEx and is dating Kelly Frears (Helen Hunt). While on a plane with several other employees they fly into a storm the plane crashes into the water and Chuck ends up on an island for four years. If you are going to watch just one actor carry almost an entire movie completely on his own, it might as well be Tom Hanks. The man is just a great actor having done comedy. drama, and whatever is in between...He spends about an hour and a half of the movie on an island by himself. The result is anything but boring. Tom Hanks plays the character so well as he tries to fend for himself on the island and deals with being stranded alone for four years and "befriending" a volleyball he calls Wilson. Although he doesn't talk a whole lot, plenty happens on the island as the years pass and it is entertaining to see and it is no surprise that Tom Hanks got an Oscar nomination for his role. Helen Hunt is also great, but she is in hardly any scenes. Although the movie is pushing 2 1/2 hours, the pacing is perfect and every scene feels like there was at least a little point to it being there. Throughout the whole movie there is just a lot of great film making in general, which is what I have come to expect from Robert Zemeckis. So if you have already seen it, great - and if not then by all means rent it because it's worth the time and money...if only for a great Tom Hanks performance.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Rat Race: A Quick Review

This movie stars the likes of John Cleese, Jon Lovitz, Whoopi Goldberg, Rowan Atkinson, Cuba Gooding Jr., etc (aka some really funny individuals). So the assumption is that if "Rat Race" is not funny then it's not the cast's fault...it's the writer's. Lucky this is actually a very funny movie thanks to the great cast and some hilarious scenes. It may just be me but I thought the scenes with the bus full of Lucille Ball impersonators, Jon Lovitz's character and his family stealing Hitler's car, and Kathy Bates as "the squirrel woman" were hilarious. The plot is definitely not original, but these actors and the funny script make it work. There are also a handful of just really dumb scenes in the movie like any scene involving that stupid cow. A couple scenes could have been completely omitted and most people probably would not have missed them at all. The ending is really awful though...I don't really understand why someone thought it would be a good idea to end with a Smash Mouth concert trying to raise money for the hungry of the world. So great cast, but not a great movie. Definitely funny though and just generally enjoyable...Wayne Knight also had a hilarious small part as an ambulance driver and Rowan Atkinson playing an Italian tourist - that was just really fun for me. And remember...you should have just bought the squirrel...

-Joseph Sbrilli

Who Framed Roger Rabbit: A Quick Review

The main thing that I wondered as I was watching "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" was why in the world would a woman ever marry a rabbit. I just don't understand the logic behind this. The movie is great though. It came out in 1988, during the period of time before Robert Zemeckis went crazy and decided to only make motion capture movies...which look nice...but he should seriously consider going back to making normal movies like "Back to the Future," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," "Forrest Gump," etc. Even in these he was still able to use tons of special effects. I've decided that cartoon characters coexisting with live characters in a movie is one of the coolest things a person can hope to do in movies. The special effects in the movie are great and the interaction between the actors (mostly Bob Hoskins and Christopher Lloyd) and the cartoons actually feels normal. Also, "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" is the only time in the history of the world that Disney characters and Warner Brothers characters have been in the same movie...which I find really interesting. The movie is a great combination of comedy mixed with a mystery...since Roger Rabbit is indeed framed for murder...the title of the movie isn't a lie. Great acting (from the actors and the voice-over actors), great script, and groundbreaking special effects are just a few of the several reasons why "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" has become regarded as classic.

-Joseph Sbrilli

Friday the 13th (2009): A Quick Review

The original "Friday the 13th" from 1980 wasn't a great movie. It was camp-y, simple, predictable, and more violent than genuinely scary. But at the very least it was an entertaining 1980s slasher movie...which spawned so many sequels it's ridiculous. The new "Friday the 13th" is a combination of the first four movies in the series. The result is nowhere as good as the original. The original made a little bit of sense...this new one does not....at all. Who the heck would continue going to Camp Crystal Lake after Jason Vorhees (and his mother) has hacked, dismembered, or otherwise violently killed every single person to set foot near the camp in the last twenty-nine years? The answer: the unbelievably stupid teenagers in the newest incarnation of the movie franchise. They were all so unbelievably annoying and really should have kept their clothes on...once they come off it's mere seconds before they are bloody and dying...just a fun little fact about horror movies. Almost every single person is unlikeable/drunk/high/making awful decisions/etc. Just about everyone dies...oops...sorry, I ruined the movie. And by the way, the beginning of this movie ruins the original...so see the original first. The plot is pretty non-existent, most of the cast is awful, and the music at times just got me in a bad mood. So yeah, it's your typical slasher movie...not a horror movie...a slasher. There is a difference - slashers are just violent and bloody whereas horror movies actually have a plot and characters that lead to genuine scares and suspense. These are often psychological or a little demonic depending on the movie. So quite honestly if you are thinking to yourself "I want to watch a horror movie. Why don't I rent the new "Friday the 13th." Don't do it (unless it only costs you a dollar)...rent "Psycho," "The Exorcist," "Jaws," "The Shining," "Poltergeist," etc. It will be a better use of your money and "Psycho" may be the greatest movie ever made because Alfred Hitchcock is an amazing director...hmm kind of got off track from the movie actually being reviewed...But the main point of this review is that there is no legitimate reason to see this movie because it is awful and of course Michael Bay would produce it.

-Joseph Sbrilli

The Shining: A Quick Review

First of all, I have not read Stephen King's "The Shining" (I have started it...but have yet to finish it) and Stephen King did not like Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of his novel (several aspects have been changed in the film version). So judging the movie just as a movie, and not an adaption of a book, "The Shining" is great and one of the best horror movies that I have seen. The reason for this is the great cast led by Jack Nicholson, who is fantastic as usual and someone with whom you would never want to be snowed in at a hotel in Colorado... The rest of the cast includes Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd (the reason you do not know who the heck this is is because he made this movie, then a TV movie - yep, one of those, then quit acting to become a teacher and was essentially never heard from in Hollywood ever again), and Scatman Crothers.

Everyone's acting is great in this movie and just adds to the suspense and intensity. The music score in "The Shining" is amazing as well (the same cannot be said for the score in "Carrie" which was awful and ruined a potentially really good movie). The score adds something to every scene and the movie most likely would not have been as scary without it. It fits with all the scenes so well. Would the shower scene in "Psycho" be as famous without the amazing score by Bernard Hermann? Would "Jaws" be "Jaws" without John Williams's score?...the answer is no...don't even argue with me.

Finally, the camera angles in this movie are great and I love talking about them. We start off with beautiful aerial shots of snowy Colorado then throughout the movie there are plenty of great tracking shots and just really well set of scenes. You really need to experience this movie for yourself...plenty of suspense, horror, fun things like that...although a couple scenes I felt didn't have a point and the ending really confused me...that may just be me...I have issues following things...short term memory loss. So yeah...watch it and love it and make sure you are never alone with anyone like Jack Torrence (Jack Nicholson) unless you have a baseball bat...

-Joseph Sbrilli

Gran Torino: A Quick Review

In case there is any doubt in people’s minds, I love Clint Eastwood. This includes him as both an actor and as a director. Last year's “Gran Torino” was a great vehicle for the man. He played Walt Kowalski, a Korean War veteran, recently widowed, who doesn’t like his Asian neighbors (and the whole kid-trying-to-steal-his-1972-Ford-Gran-Torino doesn’t help matters). Walt then goes on to teach the young man the error of his ways and actually gets involved with gangs and such. Clint Eastwood is the best part of the entire movie. He is a great actor and every scene with him is fantastic. He threatens people with guns and growls from his front porch. It is pretty great. The man just has unbelievable screen presence...as he has had for about 50 or so years now. The Asian actors on the other hand can’t really act, but in their defense: for almost all of them this was their first movie. The writing in places gets a bit sketchy, but overall a very good movie...I thought Clint Eastwood’s other 2008 movie “Changeling,” with Angelina Jolie, was the better movie (just a bit too long and a little slow at parts). The ending to the movie is great...without it the movie would have basically had no point. So everyone should rent it...it's only a dollar at the Redbox at Hannaford so there really is no excuse not to...and chances are "Gran Torino" is better than whatever movie you were planning on renting in the first place. And if you ever wanted to hear Clint Eastwood sing (don't anyone try to deny it)...then this is the movie for you...Mr. Eastwood does so during the ending credits.

-Joseph Sbrilli