The Illusionist Review

Rating: 4/5

Have you ever seen something and hated it? I mean really, really hated it? Not something like The Last Airbender that you know you're gonna dislike, but something that you have hope for, like I did with Transformers 2 and Kick-Ass. When I first saw The Illusionist, I jumped on the hate train. I'm glad I got off.

The Illusionist is the story of an aging French magician, constantly traveling and constantly alone. He tries his best to stay afloat, but with the dawn of the 60's and all that came with it, the magician slowly is becoming irrelevant. After a gig in the Scottish highlands, he meets a young girl, Alice, who is fascinated and amazed by the magician's act and decides to follow him on his travels.

What follows is a series of scenes that are range from funny to beautiful, but are all melancholy. The movie is almost sickeningly upsetting and emotional in some parts. Like I said, at first I despised this movie because I thought it was too sad. All I saw was a poor, aging vaudevillian who was taken advantage of at every turn. But as I thought about it I realized that that's not all this movie is.

In traditional opera and theater, the clown or the fool is often a magician, as well as a tragic character. The same can be said here. The magician in the movie is thanked once, and doesn't have any friends or family. However, in his travels he brings joy to people. To the scots, Alice, his pet rabbit, in the end he gives them something that they need to continue their lives. That is the beauty of the story.

Just like Triplets of Belleville, the hand drawn animation is gorgeous and unique. The sound design is also of note. Everything that moves has a sound and sounds like the object should sound. I thought this kind of production was impossible outside of Studio Ghibli, but I'm glad I was mistaken.

If you're in the mood for something unlike anything else out there, and you're tough enough to stand the overwhelming melancholy, treat yourself to The Illusionist. It's a beautiful story told beautifully. It's not nearly as good as Toy Story, but it's worth your time.

Somewhere Review

Rating: 2.5/5

Depression is not an easy thing to make it through. You could be the most powerful person in the world, and not be able to make a change. Why? Because when you are depressed, you're stuck in a rut. It's happened to both me and people I know, so trust me. It's not that you can't do what you want, it's that you don't want to.

Johnny Marco (Stephen Dorff) is a Russell Crowe level actor living in Hollywood's Chateau Marmont Hotel. He has one hanger-on friend (Chris Pontius), and a stream of fast cars and pretty women to keep him occupied. When his young daughter Cleo (Elle Fanning) is dropped suddenly into his life, Johnny, sees an opportunity to make a human connection and improve himself.

The character of Johnny Marco is depressed, that's no doubt. He drives his Ferrari aimlessly, he sleeps a lot, and when he has twin strippers, he barely pays attention. However, the performances of both Johnny and Cleo are never really brought up to anything outstanding. The direction is not as good as other Sofia Coppola movies, and to be honest, it's pretty boring.

Now, Somewhere does present an interesting portrait of depression. Considering that Coppola herself lived in a series of hotels as a child and that her dad was never around, I understand where she's trying to come from. The story never comes together though, and is more of a character study. For me personally, this doesn't work. The movie never gets anywhere, it just stays in the middle of nowhere. Your call.

True Grit Review

Rating: 5/5

Out of all the movies I watch, I really have a soft spot for westerns. High Noon, Tombstone, Shane, I love that stuff. Hell, I've played Red Dead Redemption while listening to Ennio Morricone, and I'd probably wear cowboy boots if I had them. I'm not sure what it is, I just love westerns. In recent years, the western genre has been hit and miss. There's stuff like Appaloosa which is awesome, and stuff like 3:10 to Yuma which is eh. True Grit is directed by the Coen brothers, and therefore, it's awesome.

Marshall Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) is a drunken, chain-smoking old lawman who's seen better years. Rooster is hired by a young Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) to hunt down Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), the man who killed her father. On their way, Mattie and Rooster are joined by Texas Ranger La Boef (Matt Damon), and hijinks ensue.

The Coen Brothers are two of my favorite writer-directors, and they certainly don't disappoint here. The dialogue is fantastic, the direction flawless, and the dark humor very funny. Seriously, I've never seen the John Wayne movie, but it can't be as well directed or written as this.

What really makes the movie is the performances. Jeff Bridges, while sometimes hard to understand, is in top form as Rooster, and is just as badass as ever while still being hilarious. Matt Damon is lovable as the slightly foolish La Boef, and Josh Brolin is great as the lowlife scumball Tom Chaney. The most notable performance however, is Hailee Steinfeld. I can't believe this is her first movie. There are vets who can't act as well as she does here.

Overall, True Grit is a great addition to the western genre, as well as the Coen filmography. It is both worth your time and your money.

127 Hours Review

Rating: 5/5

Once, someone tried to argue to me the brilliance of Danny Boyle by talking about the fact that he apparently stands while filming and never sits. That is not a sign of a good director, it's the sign of someone with a lot of stamina. Anyway, my point is that I have mixed opinions about the films of Danny Boyle. His movies range from pretty stupid (28 Days Later), to great (Slumdog Millionaire). Thankfully this is in the latter category.

Aron Ralston (James Franco) is a mountaineering and canyon enthusiast. He periodically goes out on his own, and explores caves and crevices and the like. On one trip, he forgets to bring his swiss army knife, and to leave a note on where he's going. While climbing down a canyon wall, Ralston slips and dislodges a rock, which traps his arm. He then examines his life, and decides to live, no matter what it takes.

127 Hours does something that I haven't seen at all this year. It holds an entire story that's just one guy and a rock. And it does it extremely well. James Franco is superb as Aron, and the claustrophobic cinematography is both gorgeous and terrifying. Seriously, I was so glad it wasn't me in between the rock and the hard place when I was watching this thing.

What's really amazing about the story is just the incredible will to live we see in Ralston. This guy doesn't care if he has to slice all of his limbs off, as long as he can make it back to the people and places he loves. That said, let me address the amputation scene. No, I do not understand why it had people fainting and vomiting. I've seen way gorier (wiki Cannibal Holocaust and Frontier(s).), but this scene is still pretty disturbing. After you've been trhough so much with the guy, you really can feel his pain, and no matter what freaky horror movies are out there, watching a guy snap his tendon is pretty gnarly.

127 Hours is an awesome movie that tells an amazing story in an amazing way. My only complaint is that A.R. Rahman's music is out of place and doesn't fit the mood. The most effective scenes are when there is no music and it's just Franco alone. I say see it, see it, see it.

Black Swan Review

Rating: 5/5

Darren Aronofsky is truly one of the best directors of the new generation. I've never seen Pi or Requiem for a Dream, but The Wrestler is amazing and The Fountain is really underrated. Trust me, if you want to enjoy The Fountain sit down and say "this is gonna be weird" before turning on the movie. Anyway, this is Black Swan, the best thriller I've seen all year.

Nina (Natalie Portman) is a sheltered, immature ballet dancer for the New York ballet. She gets the dream role of swan queen in swan lake, but there's a problem. You see, in many productions of swan lake, the same dancer is both the innocent, virginal white swan and the evil, lustful black swan. Nina has no trouble being perfect as the white swan, but to her director (Vincent Cassel)'s chagrin, she just can't dance the black. Enter Lily (Mila Kunis), who parties, sleeps around, is an overall wild child, and can dance the black swan perfectly. From these two characters spins a truly terrifying drop into insanity.

The first thing I have to mention is how absolutely gorgeous this movie is. The cinematography, the set design, the women and the costumes are all beautiful. Directing-wise it's perfect, and writing wise it's even better. I have never so scared watching a ballerina as I was during some of these scenes. Natalie Portman absolutely deserves best actress for her portrayal of a woman under mind-crushing pressure. Vincent Cassel deserves at least a nomination for supporting actor, and wow, Mila Kunis actually acts in this. Seriously, it's her best performance ever.

What really sucks you into Black Swan however is the atmosphere. It feels like the ballet is a world unto itself. There are numerous parts where you don't know what exactly you are watching, and like I said earlier, it's absolutely terrifying at parts.

Now, before I end this review I have to address the subject of objectification. Yes, it is true that this movie has a lesbian scene. However, unlike what some people think, it is not there for no reason and people who like that scene are not chauvinistic pigs. The lesbian scene has really interesting symbolism in the plot, is an important scene for character development on Portman's part, and yes, it is hot. That scene is not the only reason to go see the movie, and it is definitely not there to lure horny teenagers in.

See, if Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis were constantly topless and there were unnecessary shots of their tuchuses, that would be exploitation of sexuality, and objectification of the two women. It would also mean the movie was way worse. Thankfully that isn't the case in either sense. We don't get a porno, we get a magnificently constructed, beautifully terrifying film that you cannot miss.

The Fighter Review

Rating: 3/5


The thing about boxing movies is that most of them are the same. They're about a funny accented middle class shlub who finally realizes their potential but has to deal with their personal and/or family problems. And there's always a big title fight coming up. Some movies, like Rocky and Raging Bull, are classics, partly because they did it first. Others like Cinderella Man and this movie don't reach the heights of the others, not just because they came later.

Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) is a quiet, shy, and introverted young toughie from Lowell, Massachusetts. His motormouth brother Dickie (Christian Bale) used to be somewhat of a local hero, and even went up against the then famous "Sugar Ray" Leonard. However, Dickie got addicted to crack, and decided to start shoving his dreams on little Micky. Along with a crazy mom and sisters, Micky is the one who sits in the corner while everyone says "right, Micky?" When Charlene, an inspirational bartender, enters Micky's life, he decides that he needs to do well in the ring, with or without Dickie.

Like most movie I find bland, The Fighter is based on a true story. I say bland because with a simple google search can tell you everything you need to know about the story. So, anyone with internet access can find out the end. But for a movie like this, you don't need to know the end, because it's a boxing movie! Anyway, overall, The Fighter is just ok. Mark Wahlberg is, well, Mark Wahlberg, and as usual is flat. Christian Bale on the other hand performs one of his best performances ever as Dickie. He really steals the show. The rest of the cast is fine and gets their job done.

The writing and the directing is where the problem really lies. It's boring, and we don't get invested in Micky at all. I literally found myself wanting to see more of the supporting cast than the main character. There's just no emotion put into anything. The movie wants to be Rocky too badly, and it's shot like a TV movie so it doesn't succeed very well.

From all this critique, you might wonder why I gave The Fighter 3 stars. To this I say: because it's entertaining and harmless. While I wouldn't want to see the movie again, I enjoyed it. Your call.

Tron: Legacy Review

Rating: 4/5

Once the rumors for this movie started popping up, people, including myself, were excited. I was also worried because if you've ever seen the original Tron, you'll know that it's not exactly a classic. But all of a sudden, cool stuff happened. Legacy was going to use Avatar's 3D, and Daft Punk was doing the soundtrack! Suddenly, I wasn't scared. Let's see if I should've been.

Sam Flynn is the son of Kevin Flynn, hero of the original Tron. His father disappeared in 1989, so Sam has had over 20 years to grow up on his own. He's 27 and he's more than a little wild with his dad's old company. However, this makes sense, because Sam had no mother to take care of him, and was distant from his grandparents. He just never grew up. Anyway, Sam is trying to find clues about his dad's disappearance, and accidentally fires up the same laser that transported his dad into the game world. From then on, Sam is in the "Grid," and has to free an entire digital world, not just his digital daddy.

Tron: Legacy is one of the few sequels that doesn't have much to live up to. The original Tron was a box office bust that was criticized for having great effects but a weak story. This is a fair criticism, because a movie, like a video game, cannot simply stand up on how pretty it looks. For every Avatar there has to be an Alice in Wonderland, if you know what I mean. In my opinion the original Tron had a lot of great ideas that it didn't bother touching on and focused too much on the wandering through the computer lands than it did characters or plot.

Legacy tries to handle action, story, characters, and effects, and succeeds pretty well. The story ranges from meh to cool, and thankfully never gets too silly or boring. While the characters aren't particularly developed and some are next to useless Michael Sheen, everyone does a fine job with what they're given. The action, while far between, is pretty badass and never disappointed me.

Now, what you really want to hear about is the CGI and the music. Let me tell you that they are the best parts of the film. The CGI is beyond gorgeous, with extremely smooth animations and a slick, modern look. This is helped by the 3D, which makes everything so unholily clear that I almost (almost) felt like I was there a couple of times. CLU 2.0 looks great, and to be honest I didn't even realize he was CGI until I noticed something weird about his eyes. Daft Punk proves they can conduct beautiful and epic classical music as well as awesome and futuristic techno, and their score really brings the movie to being an experience more than popcorn entertainment.

Tron: Legacy is definitely better than its predecessor, and is one of the few really fun movies I've seen all year. It's competently acted, written and directed, has the best effects and 3D I've seen since Avatar, and probably has the best soundtrack of the year. I'm not sure I'll see it again immediately, but I did enjoy it. Now, is it great? No. Overall this movie is a solid B+. I say see it, but before I conclude this 6th paragraph, let me mention something. Like with Avatar, people have crawled out of the woodwork saying that because the story isn't great, the whole movie is terrible and should be shunned and its creators murdered for not meeting these fanboys' standards. Just remember this: Tron: Legacy is not a movie meant to move you, touch you, or change the way you look at the world. It is a movie meant to take you into a world where computer programs laugh and die just like us, and motorcycles shoot lasers that turn into walls. It's meant to show you a spectacle and for you to say "wow that's cool." Remember that, and I'm sure you'll enjoy Tron: Legacy.

I Love You Phillip Morris Review

Rating: 4/5

I am proud to say that I have gay friends. I hang out with my gay friends like I hang out with my straight friends, and I don't mind any of their "quirks" or whatever. That is part of the reason I liked this movie so much.

Steven Russell is a person with a lot of issues. He was abandoned by his real mother, he never fit in as a kid, and he lives an extremely mundane and boring life. One day everything changes when Russell is in a car crash. From that moment on he realizes his latent homosexuality and moves to Florida. Unfortunately, Russell finds that being gay can get very expensive, so he does what most people would: he becomes a con man.

Eventually, Russell's escapades catch up with him and he goes to prison. There, he meets young, soft-spoken Phillip Morris, and it's love at first sight. From that moment on, Russell decides he will do anything to be with Phillip and you guessed it, hijinks ensue.

Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor are both fantastic in their respective roles. Both actors are charming, natural, funny, and sympathetic. The writing maintains tone and a good pace, and the directing is overall solid. There are gay moments, funny moments, dramatic moments, sad moments, and flat-out touching moments, but overal they create one beautifully told, fun story.

Is this movie deserving of best picture? No. Will either actor even get nominated? Probably not. However, is it worth your money? Absolutely. Out of all the crap I've sat through this year, I Love You Phillip Morris is one of the few that manages to distinguish itself while sailing above stuff like Kick-Ass and Last Airbender. I highly recommend it.

Tangled Review

Rating: 4/5

I can't believe it. Tangled is Disney's 50th animated feature. I can't believe it. Only 50? I thought there were waaaay more. I guess not counting Song of the South counts for two. Anyway, let's jump into the big D's 50th animated film, Tangled.

Flynn Ryder is a scoundrel, no two buts about it. He lies, cheats, betrays, and sure as hell steals. Rapunzel has been locked in a tower by her crazy "mom" for the last 18 years. Oh yeah, and Rapunzel has magic hair that keeps her "mom" young, and her "mom" is an evil old woman who stole Rapunzel from her true parents, the king and queen. Anyway, Flynn hides himself in Rapunzel's tower, but she takes his stolen treasure, and promises to only return it if he takes her to see the world. He agrees, and hijinks ensue.

When I first sat down in the theatre, I didn't know what to expect from this movie. When Rapunzel and her evil kidnapper start singing, I thought I was in trouble. I was wrong. Ignoring the bland and not very good musical numbers, Tangled is a heartfelt, funny, and very entertaining movie. It's not a classic by any means, but let's just say I was pleasantly surprised.

Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi are very good and very funny in their roles, as is whoever played the evil mother. The writing is fast, snappy, and funny. Even though I can see that Disney wanted to go back to basics for the big 5-0, Tangled is pretty different. It's not a spunky princess who realizes the error of her ways and becomes the good wife, it's the opposite. Instead of 2D it's 3D animation, and the movie has no parental deaths.

That said, the death of the main villain is one of the most violent I've seen in a Disney movie since Clayton got strangled in front of us in Tarzan. This just shows that the movie does not treat its audience like sheltered little scaredy-cats, and that a little traumatization is ok every now and then. Overall, without the songs I would've loved Tangled. With them, I just liked it a lot. See it.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 Review

Rating: 3/5

There truly has never been a franchise like Harry Potter. Seven full-length books turned into eight feature films that have been released over the past 10 years, all with one cast telling one story. After part two of this epic finale, the story won't just be ending, but the franchise will as well.

Harry Potter 7 Part One features everyone's favorite boy wizard still on the hunt for the thing that will destroy Voldemort forever. The Death Eaters are on the move, family members are hurt, and in all this is the end of puberty.

Yes, the obnoxious girl troubles that took up 99.9 percent of the last movie are still there, but thankfully not as prominent. However, this time David Yates focuses on the whining of the three main characters. Instead of moving on, there are several scenes simply dedicated to developing characters everyone already knows and loves.

My main problem with both this movie and all the HP's since HP4 has been Ray Fiennes as Voldemort. He talks like an effeminate man with a whole in his throat and just overall isn't threatening to me. He just talks about killing Harry and barely shows his noseless face in real action. Speaking of that, the action scenes here are pretty good. Instead of just having Death Eaters blow crap up, they're really organized now and attack like they are truly dangerous.

The cinematography is quite good, the acting is the same as usual, the writing is good, Emma Watson is still very pretty, but for some reason, the special effects haven't improved since the second one. Dobby and Kreacher look EXACTLY THE SAME as they did in their respective first appearances. Anyway, while this isn't the worst Harry Potter (HP6 takes that one), it's definitely not the best either (that's HP3). As someone who's read the books and seen every movie, I'm kind of tired of it. Go see it just to complete the saga.

Unstoppable Review

Rating: 1/5

Tony and Ridley Scott are brothers, directors, and complete opposites. Ridley uses an excess of slow-motion, swords, and Russel Crowe, but can tell a story well and has a good track record. Tony uses an excess of explosions, vengeance, and cannot tell a story without action, and has an ok track record. If you don't get what I'm saying, let me put it like this: Ridley directed Alien and Gladiator, and Tony directed Top Gun and Beverly Hills Cop 2.

Denzel Washington and Chris Pine are Denzel Washington and Will Colson respectively, two train yard workers in southern Pennsylvania. After another worker makes a careless blunder, an unmanned train full of hazardous chemicals is let loose, and it is gaining speed and heading towards a highly populated area. And you guessed it, Will and Denzel are the only ones who can stop it.

The story is the first problem. Tony Scott needs action, and it is basically impossible to make pulse-pounding action with a TRAIN. The acting is boring, Denzel plays an unbelievable Mr. Miyagi of trains, and Chris Pine looks like he's embarrassed to be in it. The script is unbelievable......y awful. I don't understand why they hired who they did, because they did not do a good job. Sublots make no sense, characters are idiotic stereotypes, and somehow the news knows all the personal information about everybody in the movie.

Overall, besides some pretty intense train scenes at the end, Unstoppable sucks. It's badly written, miscast, mis-crewed, and BORING. Seriously, I almost fell asleep. Don't give this movie money, because the way everything is a franchise now, I really don't want to see an "Unstoppable Part II: The Revenge."

Monsters Review

Rating: 4/5

I'd like you imagine something for me. Imagine yourself in one of those funky walkthrough zoos. Imagine you're walking through one of the exhibits with your friends, family, a tour guide, whatever. Now imagine that you hear a noise. The noise gets louder, and trees begin to move. You look up and see a hundred foot tall creature, with octopus-like tentacles and a mysterious glow in its center. Whatever it is, it's like nothing on earth. You don't move, and the creature might notice you, but it barely gives you any attention, and moves on. This isn't an invasion, or a radioactive beast from Japan. This is an animal in nature.

Moving on, in the near future, NASA sent a probe to a moon of Pluto, and it brought something back. Six years later, the north half of Mexico is "the infected zone," and whatever NASA brought back has made itself at home. America quickly built a wall to keep the infection out, leaving Mexico to its own devices. Andrew Kaulder is a journalist instructed to bring his boss' daughter back to the U.S. After a series of setbacks, the two have to cross through the infected zone in order to get home.

First things first: despite the title, this is not a monster movie. It is for this reason that a lot of people will not like it. Another reason is that the creatures themselves don't do a lot of destroying. However, saying this movie sucks because the two main characters are annoying and the monsters aren't "monstrous" enough is an argument one kind of person will use: fanboys. The reason for this is because fanboys of alien movies like District 9 and...Alien need to have human-esque aliens, or at least threatening ones. These aliens look nothing like humans, and don't attack anyone unless attacked first. As a result, most negative reviews are fanboy reviews, so please, ignore them.

Anyway, director Gareth Edwards makes a shockingly unique and interesting portrayal of alien life forms. The squiddy things in this movie are not intelligent, nor are they hostile. They simply are life from another planet. Edwards asks us to imagine what it would be like if those yak things the Tusken Raiders ride on in Star Wars roamed the earth instead of Jawas. These aliens are animals, plain and simple, and we refuse to adapt to them.

What this movie really is is a romantic drama with aliens. Both Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able are very convincing and act/look like normal people would. The effects of the rarely seen (which adds to the mystery) monsters are also good, especially considering one guy did it by himself. The script is a bit slow at times, but knows where it's going and what it wants to be. The only problem I had was the ending. It takes place immediately after a fascinating and beautiful scene, and is lackluster. Overall, if you can find this movie near you and you're willing to not see it as a fanboy or with one, go see Monsters.

Megamind Review

Rating: 3/5

You know, thinking about Superman, he doesn't do much. To be honest he's a bit of an arrogant jerk who does nothing except keep the status quo in check. Superman doesn't fight the LRA in Sierra Leone, or try and find Osama Bin Laden, or save the environment from catastrophe, or try to cure diseases. That said, let's dive into Megamind.

Megamind is a flashy supervillain who likes 80's hits and is constantly in conflict with Metro Man, the hero of his city. One day, a plan mysteriously goes right, and Megamind kills his superhero. Suddenly, the big-brained villain has no purpose. He sets out and creates a new hero. However, Megamind's new hope decides that being evil is more fun, and Megamind has to step up to the plate.

This movie is interesting in two ways. One, it asks the audience the question: are supervillains bad, or were they just bullied by the heroes in school? Two: what does a villain do after they take over the world? Play Call of Duty all day? Both concepts however are undermined by the script, which doesn't trust itself or its audience and aims very kiddie.

Despite the slapstick and the humor of Megamind's mispronunciations, there is stuff for us old folk. For example, a very funny Marlon Brando from the first Superman movie parody, and some good old fashioned violence. Overall, Megamind isn't great, it's not as good as Despicable Me, but not terrible. It just is what it is, but it aims to low.

Due Date Review

Rating: 2/5


I would really like to tell you that Due Date is super funny, is as memorable as The Hangover, and that you should go see it. However, if I did, I would go to hell for lying.

Robert Downey jr. is Peter Highmam, an architect trying to get back to LA so he can see the birth of his child. After an incident with aspiring actor and professional eccentric Ethan Tremblay, (Zach Galifanakis), Peter ends up on the no fly list and has to hitch a ride with Zach across the country, and of course, hijinks ensue.

Now, this SHOULD be the part where I say the funny parts, but again, I'd rather not go to hell. This movie is just not funny. At all. Ever. It's almost at Date Movie level, but I wouldn't go that far. The script is boring, uninteresting, and has no good jokes or funny situation. I'm honestly confused at some of the gags, because I have no idea who would find them funny. What's funny about car crashes? Or adultery? Or animal abuse? The script doesn't even try!

The actors try to make the best of it, but RDJ is a completely unlikable dick, and Galifanakis comes off more as pathetic than funny.

Overall, I'm surprised this movie isn't starring an SNL star and a Baldwin who isn't Alec. Go see Machete if you can find it, or Megamind, but don't see Due Date. It just isn't good.

The Town Review

Rating: 3/5

This movie took me forever see, and I was bombarded up until now with positive reviews from critics and friends alike. To be honest, I was pretty exited about it. So, I finally saw it. And....it was ok.

Ben Affleck directs as well as stars as Doug McCray, a Bostonion bank robber who just wants to make it. One day, he and his crew rob a bank, and take the manager, Claire, as a hostage. To play it safe, Doug's crew has him follow Claire to make sure she doesn't bust them. And wouldn't you know it, they fall for each other.

On the other side is Jon Hamm AKA the coolest guy ever as FBI agent Frawley, who is trying to catch the robbers. The performances are....mixed. Ben Affleck and Jeremy Renner especially are good, and Jon Hamm portrays a very serious, not messing around guy very well. However, Rebecca Hall is kind of flat as claire, and Blake Lively chews the scenery in every scene she's in, even her sex scene.

The directing is impressive, but the script falters in a few places, and leaves some big holes. For example, if Doug is known to be the son of a bank robber who hangs out with other bank robbers, how does he not have a tail on him? Either way, I didn't love The Town enough to recommend it, and I didn't hate it enough to shout stay away. This is your call.

The Social Network Review

Rating: 3.5/5

I never really thought about Mark Zuckerberg. I am glad he invented facebook, and obviously I'm writing this on facebook, but I never thought about his story. Well, I saw The Social Network in a sweaty Las Vegas theatre and here's my impression.

Mark Zuckerberg is a socially awkward computer whiz at Harvard in 2003. After getting in trouble for causing the Harvard network to crash and being propositioned by three other students to create a Harvard-based dating website, Mark gets an idea. This idea is "The Facebook," an exclusive website for students, that basically takes the social experience of school and puts it online.

What follows then is a series of events that all lead up to Zuckerberg being sued by various people, including his best friend. Let me get one thing straight, I enjoyed this movie. I didn't love it though. Remember, this is all opinion. For me, nothing really stood out as excellent or impressive. The script was the best part overall, and the dialogue was good, but not great.

How's the acting? Good, actually. Jesse Eisenberg continues to prove he's a better actor than Michael Cera, Justin Timberlake continues to make up for N'Sync, and wow is Andrew Garfield skinny. Armie Hammer is also great, playing two roles as twins. On the other side of things, David Fincher isn't exactly in top form here. In my opinion, he works best on dark, super violent stuff like Se7en and Fight Club, not dramas like this or Benjamin Button.

Overall, The Social Network is far from the best movie of the year, and I wouldn't vote for it in the Oscars, but I think it's worth seeing. It's most unique feature is the fact that this movie is made for people my age and in my generation, and doesn't talk down to them or tease their intelligence. There should be more movies like this in that respect.

RED Review

Rating: 4/5

I bet that whenever Bruce Willis hears about a new character in a comic book or a novel or something that's described as a bald, aging badass with a penchant for one-liners, he just smiles and waits for the call. Because he'll play that character eventually, we all know it's just a matter of time.

Frank Moses is a retired CIA agent, who is well, bored with it. His only interesting activity is talking to his financial lady, Sarah. One night, a team of assassins go after Frank, and some of his friends. As you might guess, it doesn't go well. So, Frank has to get his retired and extremely dangerous (ha-HA, I see watcha did there) buddies and find out why someone wants them dead.

Now, how's the directing? It's just ok. The editing also is weirdly choppy at times, and probably could've been a little more precise if you catch my drift. Scriptwise it's quick, snappy, and well paced. The lines are funny, the characters are all well developed, and it never loses its place.

The acting is, well what'd you expect from Morgan Freeman, Bruce Willis, Karl Urban, John Malkovich and Helen Mirren?? They all play their parts perfectly, especially Helen Mirren and Malkovich, who are both hilarious. The action is very well done, and to be honest you really can't get much cooler than Helen Mirren with a machine gun or John Malkovich batting grenades like baseballs.

Beyond all the action, the movie really does give you a sense that Frank's civilian life is what the life of Demolition Man or Commando would look like in the future. They even show off the retired old Russian villain, which is insanely funny. Overall, Red is extremely entertaining, very smart and very, very funny. I enjoyed it a great deal, and so should you. Check it out.

Jackass 3-D Review

Rating: 3/5

Hi, my name is Jess Linde and this is a review of Jackass 3D.

I know people on both sides of the Jackass border. I know people who love it and watch it all the time. I also know people who hate it and refuse to talk about it at all. I've always been in the middle. I never watched the show and I haven't seen the first two movies, so keep that in mind.

Now first of all, the 3D actually works in terms of depth and clarity. A lot of the skits I feel like wouldn't have been as interesting without the added visual flair. Unfortunately, (or fortunately depending on your taste) this also means that every penis and every turd is in glorious high definition.

Now, onto the sketches. I'm a teenager, so when a friend of mine gets hit in the crotch or falls off of his chair, I'm gonna laugh. When Johnny Knoxville gets rammed by a buffalo, I'll laugh. When a group of dwarves have a bar fight complete with dwarf cops and dwarf paramedics, you bet I'll laugh.

That all said, I can see why I'd enjoy watching Jackass more as a syndicated show than I did watching this movie. Maybe it's because I'm not a hardcore fan, but I can't really handle watching sketch after sketch after sketch. Either way, I laughed at many points during Jackass 3D, and even though I can't really justify spending $15.75, I recommend it. For the guys.

Catfish Review

Rating: 3/5

I know someone who has been tricked in an online relationship. It was a pretty upsetting experience for them. Catfish examines what you do if you take the relationship into your own hands, and don't like what you find.

Yanev "Nev" Shulman is a photographer in New York. He shares an office with his brother, Ariel, and his friend, Henry, who are filmmakers. When one of Nev's photos is turned into a painting by a supposed 8-year-old prodigy, he slowly gets involved with the girl, Abby, and her family, supposedly a family of artistic, beautiful people.

To the audience, the story sounds ridiculous. However, Nev, Ariel, and Henry fall for it, hook line and sinker. It's truly fascinating to see a person who seems perfectly rational and smart to go so far into something with someone he's never met.

Now of course, there is a twist at the end. It isn't scary. It isn't "a feeling you can't shake for days." And no, it doesn't turn out to be a super intelligent catfish. To be honest, the twist is a really fascinating look into human reactionary nature, and it's also kind of sad. Overall, Catfish isn't great, or mind blowing, it's just decent. I recommend it, but whatevs.

My Soul To Take Review

Rating: 1/5

For those of you who don't know, Wes Craven invented and directed A Nightmare on Elm Street, as well as Scream 1-3. And hey, Scream 4 comes out next year! If you're excited, that's good, but whatever you do, DO NOT go see My Soul to Take. It will destroy your desire to see Scream 4, and make you forget about Nightmare.

"Bug" (I don't remember his real name) is one of seven children born on the night the Riverton Ripper, a "mass murderer" who killed a mind blowing 7 people was killed. As it turns out, he's also the Ripper's son. Apparently, the ripper had multiple personalities, and each one went into one of the various children. But wait, they didn't find his body.....never mind forget that he's dead.

This movie takes place in a magical land known as Riverton, Massachusetts, where cops instinctively know to check for knife wounds when a body is determined to have fallen off a bridge. A land where serial killers outright shout their name and go "blaaaah!!" A land where people get stabbed, and there's no tear in their clothes, and after a person is clearly lifted and has their brain crunched or something, sending blood everywhere, their body is spotless.

Riverton's magical attributes also include 16 year olds who are so desperate for a blow job that they chase people through the woods, and puns that make you want to cut your ears off. In all seriousness, this movie has continuity errors up the wazoo, DREADFUL dialogue, DREADFUL acting, DREADFUL directing, and DREADFUL camerawork. Also, the worst 3D conversion I've ever seen, like ever. Also, there's some sort of weird social revolution in the highschool subplot involving a girl named Fang (really) and a blind kid. It's clearly been a looooong time since Wes Craven went to high school.

Overall, this movie is pretty damn horrendous. Why isn't it 1/2 a star? Why am I going to recommend it? Because it's the best comedy of the year. Wait until it's not in 3D and on DVD, then rent it for a good laugh.