Cinematard Central

Best of 2011 Sorted By Genre

2012-01-05T03:17:00.000-05:00

This List is based on the movies that I saw last year, as you can see at the bottom there a good amount of movies I need to see to make a better, "Best of 2011 Sorted By Genre"

Action: Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Animation: Rango
Comic Book: X-Men: First Class
Comedy: 50/50
Drama: The Help
Epic/ Historical: The Conspirator
Fantasy: Hugo
Musical: The Muppets
Sci-Fi: Super 8
Sports: Moneyball

Horrible Mentions: Captain America: The First Avenger, Drive, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Source Code, Thor, Warrior

Movies I Haven’t Seen Yet: The Adventures of Tintin, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Like Crazy, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Tree of Life, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, War Horse

What to Watch Over the Holidays

2011-12-17T19:19:00.000-05:00

Dear movie fans,

I want to start off by saying, “all good things have to come to the end.” With an opening like that you might be thinking I have to quite or even give up on this blog. Well, that’s not the case at all. Let’s just say my access to free movie watching has be terminated, yes my friends I have lost my job at my local movie theater. Hopefully this minor setback won’t suppress my passion for movies and filmmaking. I will try my best to keep my fellow film fans up to date on movie related news. As far as my movie reviews go, again I will try my best to keep them up to date. I won’t be able to literally watch every movie now, unless I pay an arm and leg for them. On the positive side I can now get some real use out of my “AMC Stubs” card, and really rack up rewards. I’m not paid to promote “AMC Stubs” card anymore but I personally think it’s a good rewards card if you frequently watch movies at an AMC theater.

With that being said what movie shall I spend my money on over the holidays? There is so many coming out that pique my interest, which I’m looking forward to. This weekend, December 16, 2011, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows and Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, both look promising. The Wednesday before Christmas on the 21st of December, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Adventures of Tintin come out. Both of these films will most likely be seen again around award season, as in the Oscars. I should have my Oscar predictions posted shortly after the nominations are announced. We Bought a Zoo comes out the Friday before Christmas on the 23th; personally it looks alright. Moving on to Christmas Day, a few movies come out and to tell you the truth none of them are really that “Christmassy.” The ones I would watch would be War Horse because of its potential Oscar buzz and The Darkest Hour, for its Sci-Fi themes. Feel free to tell me in the comment bellow what movies you might see over the holidays.

Review: The Muppets

2011-12-08T02:06:00.001-05:00

IMDb

Title: The Muppets

Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures

Director: James Bobin

Writer(s): Jason Segel, Nicholas Stoller,

Staring: Amy Adams, Jason Segel, Chris Cooper, and The Muppets

MPAA Rating: Rated Rated PG for some mild rude humor.

Running Time: 103 min

Synopsis: With the help of three fans, The Muppets must reunite to save their old theater from a greedy oil tycoon.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 92% (Fresh), Audience: 91% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 76 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 80 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B+

My Review

Source Material: The charters were based on Jim Henson creations, but the story was original.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The action comes to you in the from of slapstick, witch is hilarious.

Comedy Elements: Good old comedy, some is corny and others that are just down right funny.

Dramatic Elements: There is some real good dramatic parts, even thought a lot of them played out via musical style, but it was still good.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Old school VFX. Good old puppets shine bright in this film, wait a minute, I mean Muppets.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 9: Add a lovable and musical friendly actress (Amy Adams) to a comic genus (Jason Segel) to an classic "puppet" act and you get gold. I know some people thought the movie 'breaking the fourth plane" was used to much. Personally, The Muppet knowing they are in a movie or that they are "puppets" is part of who they are, that's what makes it funny.

Art Direction: 8.5: I can only imagine the ingenuity the filmmaker have to come up with to make a good amount of "puppets" to come to life and be believable characters.

Cinematography: 8.5: I bet that it a challenge to shoot everything basically waste up especially on the Muppets, well because the puppeteers cant be in the shoot. It always amazes me to see an film shot with majority puppets if all.

Direction: 9: The film flowed nicely. You could see the amount of passion in the filmmaking. A great film coming from a guy behind "Flight of the Conchords"

Editing: 8.5: Very good job like I said before the film was very well paced.

Screenplay: 9: This film has a really good story. I wish every film was mad with the same passion as Jason Segel, there would be many more great film.

Sound and Music: 10: I want to buy this soundtrack so bad. not only did it have great classic song The Muppets are known for but good original ones too.

VFX: 8: Who cares about computer, when you have real life taking frog, pig, bear, and gonzo. Its the Muppet get excited for some fine puppetry.

Overall: 9: I can say I enjoy this movie tremendously, and hope you do to. I think kids will like this film even though its not animated, maybe not the real young ones. Honestly, the adults may enjoy it more because we grew up on The Muppets. I highly recommend this film to everyone.

Review: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

2011-12-08T01:15:00.001-05:00

IMDb

Title: The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

Distributor: Summit Entertainment

Director: Bill Condon

Writer(s): Melissa Rosenberg (screenplay), Stephenie Meyer (novel)

Staring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner

MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for disturbing images, violence, sexuality/partial nudity and some thematic elements

Running Time: 117 min

Synopsis: The Quileute's close in on expecting parents Edward and Bella, whose unborn child poses a threat to the Wolf Pack and the towns people of Forks..

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 26% (Rotten), Top Critics: 27% (Rotten), Audience: 69% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 45 out of 100, Users: 4.5 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 46out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: NA

My Review

Source Material: Based on the book written by Stephenie Meyer with the same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The last ten to fifteen minutes get somewhat intense but the rest of the film is very melodramatic.

Comedy Elements: Some funny one liners from side charters.

Dramatic Elements: This movie has layer and layer of melodramatic moments.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: There is going to some sci-fi elements when dealing with "vampires" and "werewolf" but nothing to fancy that excites those parts of the brain

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 4: Honestly the side character are better actor then main three. Out of the main three I see Robert Pattinson getting prestige awards some day cause I have seen him in better roles. Out of the entire cast the one the deserves an award, not necessarily for her character in Twilight, is Anna Kendrick cause she is fantastic in just about everything.

Art Direction: 3: The only part I enjoy art wise about this film is it transformation from bright happy wedding to gloomy horror, personally that was the only redeeming factor to this film.

Cinematography: 3.5: I didn't really see much that excited me visually.

Direction: 1: The pacing of this film was slow. I felt like the filmmakers spent at least thirty to forty-five minutes on the wedding/ honey-moon scenes.

Editing: 2: I don't think the filmmaker know what the phrase "cut away the fat." Like I said before I think they should have spent less time on the wedding/ honey moon stuff. I understand that's what the women want but come one, move along.

Screenplay: 3: Can I say loop hole. I have discussed a few difference option that could have worked better than was in the film

Sound and Music: 5: The music was sadly one of the best parts of the film, for me.

VFX: 1: One word terrible. You know this to be a fact when even the fans say, "I didn't like the special effects."

Overall: 3: I'm way late on this review, with that being said, fans of all ages have already seen like a million times. Just look at the box office numbers. This review was more or less to get my opinion out there. Watch with cation though cause this film has caused people to pass out and even go into seizures.

Immortals Review

2011-11-13T23:41:00.001-05:00

IMDb

Title: Immortals

Distributor: Relativity Media

Director: Joe Johnston

Writer(s): Charley Parlapanides, Vlas Parlapanides

Staring: Henry Cavill, Mickey Rourke, Freida Pinto, Luke Evans, Isabel Lucas, John Hurt

MPAA Rating: Rated R for sequences of strong bloody violence, and a scene of sexuality.

Running Time: 110 min

Synopsis: Eons after the Gods won their mythic struggle against the Titans, a new evil threatens the land. Mad with power, King Hyperion has declared war against humanity...

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 38% (Rotten), Top Critics: 25% (Fresh), Audience: 75% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 48 out of 100, Users: 7.2 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 55 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: C- Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Based on on the Greek myths of Theseus and the Minotaur and the Titanomachy.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: Honestly I wish the film had more of a epic feeling to it. Yes it has has some good action sequence but personally over all it fell a little short.

Comedy Elements: There was no real comic relief, no one really to break the tension and seriousness. I remember a few cheesy line and stark comments. NO GOOD SIDE-KICK

Dramatic Elements: This film was mainly action driven but with that being there was a good amount of dramatic scenes which personally slowed the film down.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Greek mythology = high fantasy now days...so yes VFX were used.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 7: Over All the actors put forth a good performance. When you exam this film the only real seasoned actors are Mickey Rourke and John Hurt. Mickey Rourke was a decent "bad guy" but I felt like he was board or didn't really care about his character. John Hurt was really good mentor type character, but not much screen time. I also enjoyed the beautiful Freida Pinto but her role and every other side charters role were weak.

Art Direction: 8: I liked the fact this film didn't portray the gods as "aged in wisdom" it was interesting to see them portrayed as heroic 20 or 30 somethings. I also like the compare and contrast between the different "groups" Immortals vs Greeks (Theseus) vs Cretans (Hyperion).

Cinematography: 6.5: I thought it could have been better. Personally I think Zack Snyder captures the "slow-motion / speed-up" effect better.

Direction: 6.5: With being an action film I thought the film moved slower than what I was wanting it to. I guess I was hopping for a 300 pace since it was shot with the same style.

Editing: 7: It was well edited but like everything else it kind of feel short.

Screenplay: 6: I love Greek mythology and lore, they make good stories, so how can you take a good heroic character like Theseus and basically screw it up. Maybe it was the director's fault for not driving the story he is know for visually awesome movies with weak stories. Come on dude Greek mythology is epic so tell a story that matches.

Sound and Music: 7: Over all it was good but again not up to par.

VFX: 8: Like I said with the art direction on this film its beautiful. Good VFX all around...the gods smile upon this work. I thought the 3-D was weak though.

Overall: 7: Personally I had a fairly good time watching this film. I love the action sequence especially the ones with gods...I enjoyed the "bad-ass" feel of the gods over the "aged in wisdom" Like I mention before. Personally after seeing it I don't feel one hundred present recommending it a friend to see at a theater, main because it not worth a full ticket price. Go on haft price day or wait and rent it on DVD.

Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

2011-07-22T17:57:00.005-04:00

IMDb

Title: Captain America: The First Avenger

Distributor: Marvel Studios

Director: Joe Johnston

Writer(s): Christopher Markus (screenplay), Stephen McFeely (screenplay)

Staring: Chris Evans, Hayley Atwell, Sebastian Stan, Tommy Lee Jones, Hugo Weaving, Dominic Cooper, Stanley Tucci

MPAA Rating:Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action

Running Time: 125 min

Synopsis: After being deemed unfit for military service, Steve Rogers volunteers for a top secret research project that turns him into Captain America, a superhero dedicated to defending America's ideals.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 71% (Fresh), Top Critics: 75% (Fresh), Audience: 86% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 67 out of 100, Users: 8.5 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 67 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: N/A Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on the Comic Book series with same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: This film is for the most part action pack. What I liked over this movie and other action movies is the action was well choreographed. When I watched let say Transformers 3 sometime there was to much going on but in this movie there seem to be a balance of action and drama.

Comedy Elements: There is quite a bit of one liners and homages to original Captain America. Both of these aspects of the film ease some of "war-like" tension. Some may argue that its to campy and light hearted but I think it makes it fun and entertaining. I'm guess there is more movie going people that are looking for fun and entertaining films over a artsy-fartsy films.

Dramatic Elements: There is some emotional scene but personally I think there where on the week side. Don't get me wrong the actors were awesome...I'm will to say perfect casting.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Another comic book movie in the books.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 7.5: Chris Evans is the go to guy if you ever want a superhero. With that being said I'm all right with him being both John Storm and Steve Rogers After seeing the film I came to the conclusion that Chris Evan is to Captain America that Christopher Reeves is Superman. I know Marvel would like to reboot Fantastic Four once they get there right back from Twentieth Century Fox. Therefore casting a person that will basically make us for get about Chris Evan's Human Torch. Anywho lest talk about the other fantastic actors in this film. Hugo Weaving in my opinion is in the top five actors who make an awesome bad guy...I think its the voice. "Mr. Anderson" lol A Matrix reference. It was great seeing Tommy Lee Jones being awesome again. Don't even get me started on the beautiful Hayley Atwell.

Art Direction: 8: This film is basically a period peace...Time period WWII...Captain America = Well America and Red Skull = Nazi Germany/ Hitler. I believe that atmosphere was portrayed in this film very well. In a friend of mines review of this very same movie he made a valid point. In a round about way the high-tech weapons that Hydra (Red skull's followers) used was obvious no match for the weapons of the time, therefore disconnecting with the 1940's.

Cinematography: 8: Because the action sequences were so well done the over all the film's cinematography was good, if not better than good. Not really much more to say on that topic just have to see to believe it.

Direction: 7: The pace was decent, there were some slower parts. I see Joe Johnston work as average if not slightly above average. When you got a guy who is mainly known for film such Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, Jumanji, and Jurassic Park III, would you worry that he might screw up...He did a decent job but I thinking it might have turned out slightly better under other direction.

Editing: 8: There are some cool montages that show off the bad ass-ness of Captain America

Screenplay: 8: The villain was a bit weak I think the story could have benefited from using more Red Skull, besides that it was good.

Sound and Music: 7.5: Good, had some campy music in the middle that was fun and light heart.

VFX: 8.5: Most of the film seemed liked it was done with practical effect except for the obvious like the transformation scene. Witch is a very good thing.

Overall: 8: I'm sure if your a fan you already scene it and if you haven't your in line right now, or at least have plane to see it. But if your waiting for this cinematard to make recommendation...then I say see it. its a good action movie that fairly entertaining, and it also a comic book movie.

Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

2011-07-19T02:30:00.004-04:00

IMDb

Title: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2

Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures

Director: David Yates

Writer(s): Steve Kloves (screenplay), J.K. Rowling (novel)

Staring: Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson

MPAA Rating:Rated PG-13 for some sequences of intense action violence and frightening images.

Running Time: 130 min

Synopsis: The final chapter begins as Harry, Ron, and Hermione continue their quest of finding and destroying the Dark Lord's three remaining Horcruxes.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 97% (Fresh), Top Critics: 100% (Fresh), Audience: 93% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 87 out of 100, Users: 8.4 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 84 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: A

My Review

Source Material: Based on Book with same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: There is a good amount of action, lets just say a good amount of the film is a battle sequence. A full blown war break out at Hogwarts. We finally get to see some bad ass wizard encounters, that just makes you smile.

Comedy Elements: This is a darker film but that Harry Potter humor and light heartiness isn't completely gone. Meaning you will get a good couple of laughs.

Dramatic Elements: Man a live there are a few sequence that might just make you cry especially if your a "fanboy" of the books. These scenes are cinematically beautiful.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: If you don't know by now that Harry Potter takes place in a high fantasy wizarding world then you mostly live under a rock or your just not in touch with any popular culture at all. Either way this film has a bunch of visual effect to achieve the magic from Harry's world, that us Muggles don't understand.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 8: The performance were great overall. There was some highlighted character this time around that was nice to see for a chance. Notably, Minerva McGonagall played by Maggie Smith has an awesome battle with Snape. I think I enjoy the adult actor performance sometime over the now teen actors. I absolutely adore the performance that comes from Ralph Fiennes, and Alan Rickman. I' m not sure who else could have been a better Dark Lord, Ray Fiennes is such a great antagonist. Alan Rickman voice scream Snape, but this film we see the real Snape.

Art Direction: 9: The film is straight up beautiful...I hope to see Oscar nomination.

Cinematography: 9: Like I said before this film is an action film. With that being said the filming of the action is not horrible like we saw with Transformers a few weeks ago. Also so many different emotion were sparked with the cinematography alone, it was fantastic.

Direction: 8: I was never board and the film seemed to flow smoothly. David Yates did a good job in my opinion.

Editing: 8: I would basically say the same I did for directing for the editing.

Screenplay: 8.5: Lets talk a bit about adaption. The average length of a screenplay is somewhere between 90 pages to 120 pages. Keeping in mind that one page of a screenplay is about one minute of screen time. The book had 759 pages which equals 759 minutes or 12 hours and 40mins. That would be one long movie...how about two 120min moives pulse or minus 30mins, meaning a screenplay with over 200pages, that's a little more manageable don't you think. So with that being said some stuff has to be cut. To a "fanboy" these cuts usually ruin the film complete, making claims like,"They forgot this...didn't explain that...WTF" To someone who hasn't read the books, confusion maybe in order but they get over it quickly. This is how I tend to approach adaption film. 1. Did the filmmakers hit the main plot points and premise I remember from the source material? 2. Dose the added material for cinematic effect add to the over story, therefore making a more exciting movie? 3. Dose the content of the film have good literary structure? 4. Was there good character development? 5. Did I enjoy the film as much as I did the book?

Sound and Music: 9: I love the score as much as the other Harry Potter film. Music just add another depth of emotion.

VFX: 10: The magic was brought to life again but this time better than ever. I see VFX award or two coming out of this film.

Overall: 8.5: Sorry I spent sooooo much time in the screenplay section but I know the worst part of every Harry Potter film or another film with a huge fan base is what the filmmaker choose to leave out of the film. Overall the film is great and I think all Potter fan will enjoy it. I'm sure most of anybody has seen it. I didn't get a chance to watch until Monday after it opening...so this review is a bit old news. I suggest watching Part 1 then watch Part 2 while Part 1 is still fresh in your head.

Review: Transformers: Dark of the Moon

2011-06-30T05:36:00.005-04:00

IMDb

Title: Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Distributor: Paramount Pictures

Director: Michael Bay

Writer(s): Ehren Kruger

Staring: Shia LaBeouf, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Josh Duhamel, Patrick Dempsey, Frances McDormand, Voices: Peter Cullen, Hugo Weaving, Leonard Nimoy

MPAA Rating:PG-13 for intense prolonged sequences of sci-fi action violence, mayhem and destruction, and for language, some sexuality and innuendo

Running Time: 157 min

Synopsis: The Autobots learn of a Cybertronian spacecraft hidden on the Moon, and race against the Decepticons to reach it and to learn its secrets

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 36% (Rotten), Top Critics: 26% (Rotten), Audience: 90% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 42 out of 100, Users: 6.1 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 47 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: C Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on Hasbro toys

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: An awesome but awful amount of action. There is a lot of action its a Michael Bay film. With every Michael Bay film there at least 100 explosions. Some scene are visual simulating and are pretty cool but after sometime it becomes a bit boring.

Comedy Elements: One liners and small amount of comic relief, insert Sam's parents. I don't think the filmmaker where focusing on comedy this go around, because it more or less a war film.

Dramatic Elements: Most if not all the actors need acting lessons...not really...but I'm not to far off...but again its a Michael Bay film. The film tried some dramatic scenes by using slow motion and "sappy" music.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Umm...Giant Robots fighting over high-tech technology. If that's not Sci-Fi, then I don't know what is...just kidding. Got to love Giant Robots

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 6: A teen-heart throb, a underwear model, a Hollywood hunk, and "McDreamy" come together in a movie about fighting robots. Add it all up and what do you get...the best movie ever...that's sarcasm. It not the worst acting in the world but if it didn't have some amazing voice actors like Leonard Nimoy it would be very close.

Art Direction: 7: Most of the film looked good from a art point of view. not the prettiest film but good enough for a summer movie.

Cinematography: 6.5: In an action film action needs to be captured and be smooth. This is one of the better films from Michael Bay that achieves this aspect. There was still some shaky cam and moments that you don't know what is going on but action and explosions

Direction: 6.5: If you can't tell already I'm not that big on Michael Bay films. As far as this film goes, It has high octane action but in places its slow and boring...these moment where when the film was trying on drama...but it a Michael Bay film.

Editing: 7: I did like that the filmmaker made a decision to use a slow motion for "cool-action-sequence" but too much of anything is bad including slow motion.

Screenplay: 5: The story for me was very weak...I don't expect good storytelling out of an action pact summer blockbuster, but there was so many plot holes I need a shovel to fill them (Brock can I us yours) sorry folk that's was a inside joke...but if your looking for story forget about it.

Sound and Music: 8: I think all the Transformers movies have had one thing going for them and that is sound mixing/editing and music.

VFX: 8: The visual effect was good as usual..its also another thing that I can get behind on a Transformers movie.

Overall: 6.5: Action + VFX + Robots + Michael Bay - Story = Transformers. Even though I may seem to be harsh against this film it is arguably the best Transformers movie to date.

X-Men: First Class: Review

2011-06-03T15:59:00.010-04:00

IMDb

Title: X-Men: First Class

Distributor: 20th Century Fox

Director: Matthew Vaughn

Writer(s): Ashley Miller (screenplay), Zack Stentz (screenplay)

Staring: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Kevin Bacon, Rose Byrne, Jennifer Lawrence

MPAA Rating: PG -13

Running Time: 132 min

Synopsis: In 1963, Charles Xavier starts up a school and later a team, for humans with superhuman abilities. Among them is Erik Lensherr, his best friend... and future archenemy.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 70% (Fresh), Top Critics: 86% (Fresh), Audience: 88% (Like It)

Metacritic: Critics: 65 out of 100, Users: 8.0 out of 10

MRQE Metric: 76 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: B Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based off Marvel comic book with the same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: This movie has a good balance between action and drama. Personally, I didn't want to leave my seat because I felt I miss something awesome but nature did call. The action on screen was well done.

Comedy Elements: A good bit of the humor was thrown into the film for the die hard comic book fans cause there is a good amount of cameos and references to the x-men universe, either from the comic book or from the previous four x-men films. If your reading this and saying "great I never read a x-men comic ever in my life" don't worry the film took that into consideration.

Dramatic Elements: This film maybe a heavy action/adventure story. But there is some awesome dramatic scenes, most of them take place between Charles (Professor X) and Erik (Magneto).

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: This is one of the many comic book movies coming out this summer, so expect "cool" VFX shots for even "cool" superpowers. Personally some of the VFX shots are campy and a bit funny, but it is a comic book movie and the atmosphere is pose to be light and a bit humorous.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: 8.5: Two guys you have to look out for Jamse McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. I willing to bet a lot of people are in the same boat I'm in when it comes to Jamse McAvoy, and that is he has been basically loved, and or respected ever since his appearance as Mr. Tumnus in Narnia. McAvoy has but out some solid performance: Atonement and The Conspirator. As far as Michael Fassbender goes he was fantastic in this role. His roles in 300 and Inglourious Basterds don't realy stand out in my mind, but that because they were smaller roles.

Art Direction: 8: This film is not only a comic book movie but also somewhat a period film as it dose take place in the 60's during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The art and clothing do match the time period to a degree, but this film was made in the 2010's so it has some modern edge to as well. This aspect I think can be seen in the suits. The suits represent the old school blue and yellow spandex suits but with modern twist.

Cinematography: 8: The good thing about this film was during the action scene the camera wasn't shaky. There were some notable scene were cool camera effect were use. One that stood out in my mind was the beast transformation which was done in a POV style.

Direction: 8: The film had a decent pace. A friend of mine said he only look at his watch once to check time, but then at the same time, another friend was on the edge of her seat the entire time.

Editing: 7.5: The editing was good, expect for the "training montage." I didn't like it because the filmmakers where trying to achieve a comic book panel type look. In my opinion this style of editing can a bit confusing to the average movie going audience.

Screenplay:7.5: The story for this film is great, but the liberties they took on the film will piss hardcore X-Men fans aka "fanboys" off. When it comes to film continuity this film works to a degree, if you look at from the prospective that its similar to Star Trek (2009) or Batman Begins. Besides those minor facts the story was fantastic, the cameo were fantastic as well.

Sound and Music: 8.5: The music was good

VFX: 7: I though it was kind of weak...or campy. Lets just say its a bit silly, not silly as in looking bad like old school caymation but silly as how they used it. But then there are some spots that are awesome.

Overall: 8: This movie is good. For being a person who doesn't pay for movies often because I work at a movie theater, I would say it was well worth my 9$ admission. As a X-men movie it runs up next to the first two X-men movies. I give it two thumbs up and what not. Happy movie watching.

Review: Thor

2011-05-06T02:49:00.005-04:00

IMDb

Title: Thor

Distributor: Paramount Pictures

Director: Kenneth Branagh

Writer(s): Ashley Miller (screenplay), Zack Stentz (screenplay)

Staring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård

MPAA Rating: PG -13

Running Time: 114 min

Synopsis: The powerful but arrogant warrior Thor is cast out of the fantastic realm of Asgard and sent to live amongst humans on Earth, where he soon becomes one of their finest defenders.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 83% (Fresh), Top Critics: 73% (Fresh), Audience: 95% (Want to See It)

Metacritic: Critics: 58 out of 100, Users: NA out of 10 (No votes yet)

MRQE Metric: 67 out of 100

Yahoo Movies: Critics: No Rating At This Time Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based off Marvel comic book with the same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: I saw a good amount of entertaining fights. Most of them where on a "epic" level while some fell short. But over all the action in the film was good.

Comedy Elements: Humor is one of the stronger aspects of this film. I think when it comes to comic book movies there need to be a good amount of humor so it grounds the characters it into our reality. This film did a good job of doing just that. A feat that was harder because it a story of "gods" duking it out for the fate of man.

Dramatic Elements: I think there was a good amount of superficial drama, or lack of a better word some love dove scene that didn't work for me. Don't get me wrong the actors did fantastic but love is deeper than admiration of the male physique.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: A lot of farfetched ideas but believable. This movie is based off a comic book. This comic book drew inspiration from Norse Mythology using many characteristics of their deities to from a superhero in this case the god of thunder, Thor.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: Most of the actors in this film where fairly new to the sliver screen. If you remember the open scene of Star Trek (2009) then you may recall seeing Chris Hemsworth (Thor) portraying George Kirk, Capitan Kirks father. Tom Hiddleston (Loki) comes from television. Stellan Skarsgård was in the Pirates movie as Bootstrap Bill. I believe that these actors captured the heart of these characters and did a very good job portraying them. I also enjoy seeing some damn good actors in there as well. Do I have to mention, Anthony Hopkins, its pretty much a given.

Art Direction: B+: I like the costume design the most. It felt real and not the campy spandex that is given to us in the comic book, witch is fantastic. I saw a good correlation to color scheme between the civilization clothing and the armor. I think the rendering of Asgard was cool and a bit awe aspiring

Cinematography: B: I'm glad the most of fight scene weren't Micheal Bay-ish, meaning it was easy to follow, good work camera men.

Direction: B: The film had a decent pace. The scene that took place in Asgard where good but lasted maybe a bit to long but then again I feel like the end was here by no time. But I will bring up that the pace of the movie was fantastic for a summer blockbuster.

Editing: B+: I liked the back and forth aspect of the movie.

Screenplay: B+: Not being a avid comic book reader I don't have a fully understanding if this film lined up well with the basic story of Thor from the comic. As far as a good story it was good, good conflict, great antagonist, good character development.

Sound and Music: B: I enjoyed it. It was simple but I think it works.

VFX: B: The environments and sci-fi elements had good VFX, Asgard turned out fantastic in my opinion. It may not be Oscar worthy but I think they filmmakers did a good job.

Overall: B+: I believe you should give this film a shot. It may not satisfy your needs of being an awesome aesthetically pleasing art piece but its one "epic" movie and quite entertaining. I understand going to a movie isn't economy friendly with gas, ticket, and concession price being ridiculously high, but I think you should take the gamble and enjoy yourself for at least. I guess we will see how this compares to the other comic book movies coming out this summer, Thor was a good start to my summer movie season.

Graphics In Movies vs. Video Games

2011-04-09T19:47:00.002-04:00

I'm by far a film fan. My favorite type of film usually come from the genres of Sci-Fi and Fantasy films. With this being said I have seen my far share of special effect (SFX) everything from claymation to computer generated images (CGI). From being a well seasoned Sci-Fi and Fantasy film fan I can say that film graphics is getting better every day, but is it really getting better? I mean yes we have break through in cimea graphic with movies like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Avatar, but that all they are major break through. It seems these film of these caliber take about five years to be made if not longer. So what I'm saying is these breakthrough take quite a bit of time to make. Once one of these new technology is created it seems it takes a good decade or more to find a new and better invention in computer graphics when it come to film. The new craze is 3-D and most of these movies are animated film made for children. Don't get me wrong I like animated film especially Pixar films but I would like to see story made for for big people, like in video games. This were I segway into the graphics of video games. I believe that these graphic are really innovative. I'm not much of a gamer but I have dappled in games such as World of Warcraft and Civilization 5 witch has awesome graphics. I know these game also take years to make but unlike movies a new engine is invented for very new game. Were getting to point were video game such as Crysis and Crysis 2 have such good graphics they have been rumored to crash NASA computers. In my opinion that pretty damn good. Why can't we use the technology that NVIDIA and other computer graphics companies are developing in movies and use the crappy cartoon animation for children in video game. I'm just saying video games are mainly for kids right.

Sucker Punch Review

2011-03-26T21:54:00.006-04:00

IMDb

Title: Sucker Punch
Distributor: Warner Bros.
Director: Zach Snyder
Writer(s): Zack Snyder (screenplay), Steve Shibuya (screenplay)
Staring: Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens, Jamie Chung
MPAA Rating: PG -13 for thematic material involving sexuality, violence and combat sequences, and for language
Running Time: 109 min
Synopsis: A young girl (Baby Doll) is locked away in a mental asylum by her wicked stepfather where she will undergo a lobotomy in 5 days time. Faced with unimaginable odds, she retreats to fantastical world in her imagination where she and four other female inmates at the asylum plot to escape the facility. The lines between reality and fantasy blur as Baby Doll and her companions battle various creatures and enemies to retrieve the 5 items they need that will allow them to break free from their captors before it's too late

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 19% (Rotten), Top Critics: 11% (Rotten), Audience: 65% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 36 out of 100, Users: 6.7 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 37 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C- Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Original work from the mind of Steve Shibuya and Zach Snyder

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The film has some good action scene that will excite many guys because you have five beautiful women welding swords and fire arms to defeat Samurai's, Nazi's, Orcs, and Dragons, every guys dream.

Comedy Elements: Not really that humors but some things become humors because the dialogue was very cheese in parts. More less it was "this is so ridiculous I got to laugh"

Dramatic Elements: Hard to pick-up on anything but the action...so I'm going to say No on drama.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: It's a fantasy but in a "it all happening in their mind" type of way. The way it was edited together the fantasy world over lap and it sometime become hard to determine whose head where in.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: C+: The acting was good but the writing mainly the dialouge was horrible. So horrible that you feel obligated to laugh at how dumb the words coming out of the actors mouths.

Art Direction: B+: Personally being a geek I noticed a heavily influenced art style from Japanese Anime including a hint of 1950's fashion. I think this to styles messed very well.

Cinematography: C+: Zack Snyder films have the same formula with the who slowing/ speeding up time to capture those awesomely cool action moves.

Direction: B:The film had a decent pace and feel to it...the film is definitely a Zack Snyder film.

Editing: B: I always thought something was missing in the story but maybe that was what they eliminated from the book not necessarily the editors fault. Over all I think it was a decent film from a editing stand point.

Screenplay: D-: The story was very week. first its a simple story which doesn't always mean better. Also the character were hard to connect with on a personal level, meaning I didn't relate to any character.

Sound and Music: A: I enjoyed the sound track, most of the songs had good beat and arises a good emotional cues, even though they emotions weren't being reflected in the actor performance.

VFX: B-: Graphically this film did a good job...ditto the comments I said about the art direction.

Overall: C: This film is saddly going to be a major disappointment to those who wanted to go to see it. I recommended watching it on Netflix. or rent it from a DVD 's

My Oscar Pick 2010

2011-02-27T03:54:00.002-05:00

Best Picture

“Black Swan” Mike Medavoy, Brian Oliver and Scott Franklin, Producers

“The Fighter” David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman and Mark Wahlberg, Producers

“Inception” Emma Thomas and Christopher Nolan, Producers

“The Kids Are All Right” Gary Gilbert, Jeffrey Levy-Hinte and Celine Rattray, Producers

“The King's Speech” Iain Canning, Emile Sherman and Gareth Unwin, Producers

“127 Hours” Christian Colson, Danny Boyle and John Smithson, Producers

“The Social Network” Scott Rudin, Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca and Ceán Chaffin, Producers

“Toy Story 3” Darla K. Anderson, Producer

“True Grit” Scott Rudin, Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, Producers

“Winter's Bone" Anne Rosellini and Alix Madigan-Yorkin, Producers

Actor in a Leading Role

Javier Bardem in “Biutiful”

Jeff Bridges in “True Grit”

Jesse Eisenberg in “The Social Network”

Colin Firth in “The King's Speech”

James Franco in “127 Hours”

Actor in a Supporting Role

Christian Bale in “The Fighter”

John Hawkes in “Winter's Bone”

Jeremy Renner in “The Town”

Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right”

Geoffrey Rush in “The King's Speech”

Actress in a Leading Role

Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right”

Nicole Kidman in “Rabbit Hole”

Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter's Bone”

Natalie Portman in “Black Swan”

Michelle Williams in “Blue Valentine”

Actress in a Supporting Role

Amy Adams in “The Fighter”

Helena Bonham Carter in “The King's Speech”

Melissa Leo in “The Fighter”

Hailee Steinfeld in “True Grit”

Jacki Weaver in “Animal Kingdom”

Animated Feature Film

“How to Train Your Dragon” Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois

“The Illusionist” Sylvain Chomet

“Toy Story 3” Lee Unkrich

Art Direction

“Alice in Wonderland” Production Design: Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Karen O'Hara

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1” Production Design: Stuart Craig; Set Decoration: Stephenie McMillan

“Inception” Production Design: Guy Hendrix Dyas; Set Decoration: Larry Dias and Doug Mowat

“The King's Speech” Production Design: Eve Stewart; Set Decoration: Judy Farr

“True Grit” Production Design: Jess Gonchor; Set Decoration: Nancy Haigh

Cinematography

“Black Swan” Matthew Libatique

“Inception” Wally Pfister

“The King's Speech” Danny Cohen

“The Social Network” Jeff Cronenweth

“True Grit” Roger Deakins

Costume Design

“Alice in Wonderland” Colleen Atwood

“I Am Love” Antonella Cannarozzi

“The King's Speech” Jenny Beavan

“The Tempest” Sandy Powell

“True Grit” Mary Zophres

Directing

“Black Swan” Darren Aronofsky

“The Fighter” David O. Russell

“The King's Speech” Tom Hooper

“The Social Network” David Fincher

“True Grit” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen

Documentary (Feature)

“Exit through the Gift Shop” Banksy and Jaimie D'Cruz

“Gasland” Josh Fox and Trish Adlesic

“Inside Job” Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs

“Restrepo” Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger

“Waste Land” Lucy Walker and Angus Aynsley

Documentary (Short Subject)

“Killing in the Name” Jed Rothstein

“Poster Girl” Sara Nesson and Mitchell W. Block

“Strangers No More” Karen Goodman and Kirk Simon

“Sun Come Up” Jennifer Redfearn and Tim Metzger

“The Warriors of Qiugang” Ruby Yang and Thomas Lennon

Film Editing

“Black Swan” Andrew Weisblum

“The Fighter” Pamela Martin

“The King's Speech” Tariq Anwar

“127 Hours” Jon Harris

“The Social Network” Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter

Foreign Language Film

“Biutiful” Mexico

“Dogtooth” Greece

“In a Better World” Denmark

“Incendies” Canada

“Outside the Law (Hors-la-loi)” Algeria

Makeup

“Barney's Version” Adrien Morot

“The Way Back” Edouard F. Henriques, Gregory Funk and Yolanda Toussieng

“The Wolfman” Rick Baker and Dave Elsey

Music (Original Score)

“How to Train Your Dragon” John Powell

“Inception” Hans Zimmer

“The King's Speech” Alexandre Desplat

“127 Hours” A.R. Rahman

“The Social Network” Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross

Music (Original Song)

“Coming Home” from “Country Strong” Music and Lyric by Tom Douglas, Troy Verges and Hillary Lindsey

“I See the Light” from “Tangled” Music by Alan Menken Lyric by Glenn Slater

“If I Rise” from “127 Hours” Music by A.R. Rahman Lyric by Dido and Rollo Armstrong

“We Belong Together” from “Toy Story 3" Music and Lyric by Randy Newman

Short Film (Animated)

“Day & Night” Teddy Newton

“The Gruffalo” Jakob Schuh and Max Lang

“Let's Pollute” Geefwee Boedoe

“The Lost Thing” Shaun Tan and Andrew Ruhemann

“Madagascar, carnet de voyage (Madagascar, a Journey Diary)” Bastien Dubois

Short Film (Live Action)

“The Confession” Tanel Toom

“The Crush” Michael Creagh

“God of Love” Luke Matheny

“Na Wewe” Ivan Goldschmidt

“Wish 143” Ian Barnes and Samantha Waite

Sound Editing

“Inception” Richard King

“Toy Story 3” Tom Myers and Michael Silvers

“Tron: Legacy” Gwendolyn Yates Whittle and Addison Teague

“True Grit” Skip Lievsay and Craig Berkey

“Unstoppable” Mark P. Stoeckinger

Sound Mixing

“Inception” Lora Hirschberg, Gary A. Rizzo and Ed Novick

“The King's Speech” Paul Hamblin, Martin Jensen and John Midgley

“Salt” Jeffrey J. Haboush, Greg P. Russell, Scott Millan and William Sarokin

“The Social Network” Ren Klyce, David Parker, Michael Semanick and Mark Weingarten

“True Grit” Skip Lievsay, Craig Berkey, Greg Orloff and Peter F. Kurland

Visual Effects

“Alice in Wonderland” Ken Ralston, David Schaub, Carey Villegas and Sean Phillips

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1” Tim Burke, John Richardson, Christian Manz and Nicolas Aithadi

“Hereafter” Michael Owens, Bryan Grill, Stephan Trojansky and Joe Farrell

“Inception” Paul Franklin, Chris Corbould, Andrew Lockley and Peter Bebb

“Iron Man 2” Janek Sirrs, Ben Snow, Ged Wright and Daniel Sudick

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

“127 Hours” Screenplay by Danny Boyle & Simon Beaufoy

“The Social Network” Screenplay by Aaron Sorkin

“Toy Story 3” Screenplay by Michael Arndt; Story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich

“True Grit” Written for the screen by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen

“Winter's Bone” Adapted for the screen by Debra Granik & Anne Rosellini

Writing (Original Screenplay)

“Another Year” Written by Mike Leigh

“The Fighter” Screenplay by Scott Silver and Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson; Story by Keith Dorrington & Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson

“Inception” Written by Christopher Nolan

“The Kids Are All Right” Written by Lisa Cholodenko & Stuart Blumberg

“The King's Speech” Screenplay by David Seidler

Review: I Am Number Four

2011-02-20T01:24:00.006-05:00

IMDb

Title: I Am Number Four
Distributor: DreamWorks SKG
Director: D.J. Caruso
Writer(s): Alfred Gough (screenplay), Miles Millar (screenplay

Staring: Alex Pettyfer, Timothy Olyphant, Teresa Palmer, Dianna Agron, Callan McAuliffe
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, and for language
Running Time:
Synopsis: John is an extraordinary teen, masking his true identity and passing as a typical high school student to elude a deadly enemy seeking to destroy him. Three like him have already been killed ... he is Number Four..

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 27% (Rotten), Top Critics: 19% (Rotten), Audience: 74% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 35 out of 100, Users: 5.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 49 out of 100
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C- Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on book with the same title written by Pittacus Lore (James Frey and Jobie Hughes)

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The basic "Micheal Bay" action movie we all have either grown to hate or love. Personally, his formula in this movie fits to a degree.

Comedy Elements: This area was really lacking there could have been more. This guys is in a sci-fi movie there could have been some funny reference to other alien type movies. Making pop culture reference grounds you into the reality of the real world. It also brings comedy to the film.

Dramatic Elements: I will explain this more in the acting section but it was very "Twilight" esk, meaning very melodramatic without any substance.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: For being a Sci-Fi film the CGI and mythology was very weak to say the lest. Visually it belong on the CW ranking behind Smallville and Supernatural.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: D+: Very weak acting. I understand that the filmmakers were trying to appeal to Twilight crowd but did they have to emulate the acting style as well?

Art Direction: C: Most of the movie happens at night or around night fall. The effect were dark and dingy and not very appealing.

Cinematography: C: Average at best the movie seemed poorly lite maybe that's because it spouse to be night time or something.

Direction: B: I thin it had decent pace for what it was worth like I said before it would work on television among Smallville and Supernatural. Maybe it should have been a mini series or episodic.

Editing: B: I always thought something was missing in the story but maybe that was what they eliminated from the book not necessarily the editors fault. Over all I think it was a decent film from a editing stand point.

Screenplay: C: The mythology was very weak. There was too many question left unanswered...answers are probably in the book. I would think when you adapted a book into a screenplay you not only please the fan but you include important details. Since I never have read the book I don't fully understand what going on. I keep on equating this movie to Smallville and Supernatural but these two show have ten times better mythology.

Sound and Music: B:The sound track fits I will say it again CW material.

VFX: C-: Very weak could have been a lot better.

Overall: C: I would say this film was around the decent markers on the scale of "Lame as Hell" to "!@#* Amazing" It has it entertaining moments that work for the average movie going audience that loves tv shows like Smallville or Supernatural. But climatically it very flawed. You may think I am tearing this movie apart saying it sucks well it this retrospect it kind of does. But you may want to wait for this one to come on DVD and or catch it on Netflix for "free"

Review: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

2010-08-15T10:38:00.005-04:00

IMDb

Title: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
Distributor: Legendary Pictures (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Director: Edgar Wright
Writer(s): Michael Bacal (screenplay), Edgar Wright (screenplay), Bryan Lee O'Malley (Oni Press graphic novels)
Staring: Michael Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Ellen Wong, Chris Evans, Brie Larson, Mae Whitman, Brandon Routh, Jason Schwartzman
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for stylized violence, sexual content, language and drug references.
Running Time: 112 min
Synopsis: Scott Pilgrim must defeat his new girlfriend's seven evil exes in order to win her heart.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 80% (Fresh), Top Critics: 79% (Fresh), RT Community: 82% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 68 out of 100, Users: 8.8 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 72: (31.2% A, 41.2% B, 19.7% C, 6.9% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B+ Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on a series of graphic novels written by Bryan Lee O'Malley

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The action is fun. Scott Pilgrim proves that cartoon-ish action can happen in real life. What I'm getting at is there was a lot of onomatopoeia used. So much so it kind of remind of the Batman from the fifties staring Adam West. But that was the point.

Comedy Elements: For me and my gamer friends it was pretty much not stop laughter. But I don't thank you have to be a gamer to get the references cause most of them come from old school gaming systems like the NES.

Dramatic Elements: Even thought this film is driven on comedy and ridiculousness, it still had some decent dramatic parts.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: With been a graphic novel based movie there is some Sci-Fi and fantasy elements that add to the spectacularness of the film.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: This film has a fairly young cast, but there was also some talent mixed among them. Look at some of these actors: Chris Evans, who is the new go to guy for any and all, comic book, graphic novel, superhero based movie, Jason Schwartzman who is great in pretty much everything, Michael Cera, the type-cast awkward teenager, Mae Whitman, known for being the voice of Katara from Avatar: The Lastr Airbender.

Art Direction: A: The style of the film had a since of "coolness" because of the costumes and such.

Cinematography: A: I though it was interesting how they filmed it, so by the end of the film you believed that the reality of a video game could be the reality of the real world. Which, is perfect cause that's how Scott Pilgrim perceives his world .

Direction: A: I have been pleased with Edgar Wright films up to this point. He seem to know what he is doing, so I quote: "stick to what you know" As far as the pacing and what not, I never felt board once. It was the complete opposite.

Editing: A: Do you remember Ang Less's Hulk and how they tried to cut the film so it read like a comic book, and failed. Well, Scott Pilgrim is the opposite of that, it reads like a comic book but doesn't suck. It also reads like a video game. The video game theme was very common through out every aspect of the film. .

Screenplay: A: The theme was obviously nostalgic video games meets modern pop punk meets superheroes; a perfect movie for nerds and geeks alike, but the story combines all those aspect perfectly that a larger audience will like the film.

Sound and Music: A: I felt the soundtrack was like, "name that video game theme." but I okay with that cause the music fits the over all theme.

VFX: B+: It wasn't Oscar worthy but it contribute to the films awesomeness.

Overall: A-: This film was one of the most entertaining film film in my life. It may not win best picture but it a awesomely fun film. I highly recommend this film. It saddens me this film inst going to do as well at the box office as it should. I cant believe a film that rank way less critically has done better at the box office, that film is The Expendables. I say lets rally up and spread the word around that Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is a good film so next week it can get those numbers it deserves

UPDATE: The Avengers

2010-07-27T06:02:00.004-04:00

This is the Updated list based off the the info from Comic Con 2010. See the video over at /film

Founding Members

Ant-Man (Dr. Henry "Hank" Jonathan Pym): Contenders:Adrien Brody, Nathan Fillion, Wishes: Michael C. Hall
Hulk (Dr. Robert Bruce Banner): Mark Ruffalo
Iron Man (Anthony "Tony" Stark): Robert Downey Jr.
Thor (Dr. Donald Blake) : Chris Hemsworth
Wasp (Janet van "Dyne" Pym ): Contenders: Eva Longoria Parker Wishes: Natalie Portman, Alyssa Milano, Mila Kunis

Recruits

Black Widow (Natalia Alianovna Romanova) : Scarlett Johansson
Captain America (Steven Rogers): Chris Evans
Hawkeye (Clinton Francis Barton) : Jeremy Renner
Nick Fury: Samuel L. Jackson

Directores

2010-07-27T05:13:00.002-04:00

Top 5 All Time Favorite Directors/Filmmakers

1. Tim Burton
2. David Fincher
3. Christopher Nolan
4. Robert Rodríguez
5. M. Night Shyamalan

Top 5 All Time Favorite Indie Directors/Filmmakers

1. Wes Anderson
2. Darren Aronofsky
3. Jason Reitman
4. Steven Soderbergh
5. Gus Van Sant

Top 5 All Time Favorite Blockbuster Directors/Filmmakers

1. James Cameron
2. Peter Jackson
3. George Lucas
4. Steven Spielberg
5. Robert Zemeckis

Top 5 All Time Favorite "Nerdy" Directors/Filmmakers

1. J.J Abrams
2. Kevin Smith
3. Zack Snyder
4. Matthew Vaughn
5. Andy and Larry Wachowski

Review: Inception

2010-07-22T18:42:00.002-04:00

IMDb

Title: Inception
Distributor: Legendary Pictures (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer(s): Christopher Nolan (written by))
Staring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Dileep Rao, Cillian Murphy, Tom Berenger, Marion Cotillard
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and action throughout.
Running Time: 148 min
Synopsis: In a world where technology exists to enter the human mind through dream invasion, a highly skilled thief is given a final chance at redemption which involves executing his toughest job till date, Inception.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 86% (Fresh), Top Critics: 78% (Fresh), RT Community: 93% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 75 out of 100, Users: 8.5 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 84: (53.9% A, 31.4% B, 12.6% C, 0.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B+ Users: A-

My Review

This review comes to you after watching the film twice. I heard that one needs to watch it at least three times to get the full vision of the film. I leaning towards the idea that you do need many viewings to pick up on subtle details you didn't see the first time. With that being said here is my review...

Source Material: Original screenplay

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: This film isn't the next summer blockbuster action film with said action heroism. Even thought its not the action film of the summer, it does have a lot of great action sequences

Comedy Elements: Its not a comedy by far, but it has some cleaver one liners to lighten up the mood a bit.

Dramatic Elements: Personally, I think the dramatic moments were great. I liked how the different relationships between each character played out on screen.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: The world built by Noland is awesome. Personally I think the use of partial fx and vfx is flawless, or at least basically flawless.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: A-: Let state that for most people Leonardo DiCaprio is either the best actor on the plant or they hate him with a passion, it seem the middle ground is few and far between. I say that because I am one of the few that make up the middle ground, for me he is hit or miss, in Inception he is a hit. I also like the other castings. Both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page have made a pretty good career already, this film is defiantly going to strengthen them.

Art Direction: A+: I cant believe how many loction they used on this film, one more beautiful than the next. Even the studio sets where good.

Cinematography: A+: I think Christopher Nolan has a cinematographers mind when he makes his films cause he pull off innovative camera shots, Inception is no exception. This film had a rich color plate and awesome effects, I will talk about that latter.

Direction: A: Christopher Nolan is by far in my top five directors of all time, maybe even tom three. With that being said he delivers once again. This film is pushing three hours, I never once looked at my watch to see how much longer do we have. From what I have read on this film up to this point it seems, most say the biggest fault is its lengthen, and that they should cut some stuff out, but I disagree.

Editing: A: The cuts between reality and dream states mix perfectly, by the time you get to the end of the film you second guess yourself on what was real and what was a dream, which I think was done on purpose. Can you say brilliant?

Screenplay: A: What can I say the concepts in this film are very interesting and mostly true. I basically would say the same for the screenplay as I do for editing.

Sound and Music: A+: The score adds emotions to the film like it should. In some parts of the film I felt more excited because of the score.

VFX: A+: The blend of partial fx and vfx is flawless, or at least basically flawless. I said this above but its true. The only time you know a computer was used was when laws of physics where broken.

Overall: A:You may need to see a couple of time to fully understand it but it a a great movie. In my opinion a movie that make you think and discuse the film after words is a great film, which this film does. I recommend that you see this one in theaters, even with the ridiculous prices.

Review: The Last Airbender

2010-07-02T17:16:00.004-04:00

IMDb

Title: The Last Airbender
Distributor: Nickelodeon Movies (Paramount Pictures)
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Writer(s): M. Night Shyamalan (written by)
Staring: Noah Ringer, Dev Patel, Nicola Peltz,Jackson Rathbone, Shaun Toub, Aasif Mandvi, Cliff Curtis, Seychelle Gabriel
MPAA Rating: Rated PG for fantasy action violence.
Running Time: 103 min
Synopsis: The story follows the adventures of Aang, a young successor to a long line of Avatars, who must put his childhood ways aside and stop the Fire Nation from enslaving the Water, Earth and Air nations.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 09% (Rotten), Top Critics: 07% (Rotten), RT Community: 65% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 20 out of 100, Users: 2.8 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 37: (23.0% A, 15.3% B, 15.3% C, 15.3% D, and 30.7% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: D+ Users: C+

My Review

Source Material: Based on Nickelodeon's Avatar: The Last Airbender.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: The showcasing of the different martial arts forms was great, there could have been more, but as an action film it not too bad.

Comedy Elements: Sokka character bring a lot of slap stick and physical comedy in the television version while the film had some, it was missing quite a bit.

Dramatic Elements: Can you say epic fail, most of the failure comes from bad acting.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Elemental Bending, and other Asian culture/ folklore, descend visual effects.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: C-: The acting well, wasn't that great. I think most of the bad acting comes from the fact the cast was young in there careers. Out of the "child" actors the only ones I recognized was Jackson Rathbone, known for portraying Jasper Hale in The Twilight Saga, and Dev Patel from Slumdog Millionaire. The adult actors also only did okay, the best acting came from Shaun Toub who play Iroh. To top it all off the best acting in the entire movie came from the girl who played Princess Yue, Seychelle Gabriel. So we have established the acting wasn't the greatest well neither was the dialog, exhibit A, “We need to show them that we believe in our beliefs as much as they believe in their beliefs” There were many lines like this one, were one word would get repeated.

Art Direction: B-: Awesome location, with beautiful sites for the different nations.

Cinematography: B-: There were some really cool scenes that capture the different martial arts showcased in this film. Some of the scene brought me back to The Matirx days.

Direction: C: M. Night Shyamalan is one of the director in my top five favorites directors. I know people will raze me for liking him and his films, cause the general public started to jump ship after The Village and even more so with the Happening. Now with The Last Airbender, it seems the only people on the ship are M. Night Shyamalan and minute amount of fans. I think he did a good job directing the movie but the film didn't turn out that good.

Editing: D+: Very slow pacing, the 103 min movie felt a lot longer. the cut between scenes seemed a bit random, and out of place. I thought there were to many montage type of scenes.

Screenplay: C-: The mythology and story from the television show is great, some where along the line it was ruined. Personally I thought the story had too much childish behavior written into. Aang is spouse to be a bit childish but full grown adults, WTF. Seriously, this is one of the lines from an adult, "Those kids where earthbending and hitting us with small rocks in the head, that hurts. These words were uttered in a winy manner, just like a child. I do understand that the film was mad for kids but it doesn't have to be that extreme

Sound and Music: C: Midorcer like everything else.

VFX: B-: Probably, the best thing about this movie.

Overall: C-:Fan will be disappointed to some level cause it doesn't live to to the television show.

The Picture Box

2010-06-27T23:40:00.005-04:00

The Picture Box

A co-worker and friend of mine is trying very hard to get his small student film to the high school section of the Heartland Film Festival, which takes place in Indianapolis, Indian. If you're a connoisseur of films and the art of filmmaking, like myself, then you may enjoy this emotional silent film that showcases how precious our memories become to us over time. As a friend and a fellow filmmaker I fully support this film, and I hope you do too.

Review: The A-TEAM

2010-06-15T05:17:00.003-04:00

IMDb

Title: The A-TEAM
Distributor: Dune Entertainment (20th Century Fox)
Director: Joe Carnahan
Writer(s): Joe Carnahan(written by), Brian Bloom(written by), Skip Woods(written by), Frank Lupo(television series "The A-Team"), Stephen J. Cannell(television series "The A-Team"))
Staring: Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Jessica Biel, Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson, Sharlto Copley, Patrick Wilson
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of action and violence throughout, language and smoking.
Running Time: NA
Synopsis: A group of Iraq War veterans looks to clear their name with the U.S. military, who suspect the four men of committing a crime for which they were framed.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 52% (Rotten), Top Critics: 47% (Rotten), RT Community: 87% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 47 out of 100, Users: 8.0 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 57: (7.4% A, 38.5% B, 38.2% C, 13.6% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C+ Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on the television show with the same name.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: This is very well done action movie. In place it seem a little over the top, but really by the end you fell like you had a good ride.

Comedy Elements: Great one liners, and I'm guessing a lot of lines from the television show

Dramatic Elements: This film is driven mainly by action and comedy.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: No space or science type stuff, but there was a good use of fire and partial special FX.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: A-: From what I have heard each character made a great effort at portraying there television counterparts. Liam Neeson was by far the best actor on screen but everyone did a good job even the UFC fighter Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson. Sharlto Copley is making a pretty good name for himself with this film and District 9.

Art Direction: B-: It could have been a bit better. It had the right stuff for a good summer movie.

Cinematography: B+: This was a good action movie. Usually with action movies the quality of cinematography goes down cause the whole movie is shaky cam, not in this case, well not as much anyways.

Direction: B+: The pace was nice, I never felt board or confused. As for the directors style well, it more on the "dick-flick" side of things, which I like. For those of you who don't know, this is the same guy who did Smokin' Aces

Editing: B+: There was take on a technique I have seen in many other film that I really like where as the character tells the plan it happens.

Screenplay: B: There was big jumps in story, aging wise, but nobodies seems to age. From the opening scene/ introduction scene to the percent there is a 6 year 80 mission gap. Then there is another gap of 6 mouths (time spent in prison).

Sound and Music: B: I liked the sound track, it work for that type of movie.

VFX: B: Like I said before there was a good use of Special FX rather than Visual FX, either way it passed as a good job in my book.

Overall: B+: Its a very good guy summer movie. But I have a filling that 40-50 some will enjoy it too cause, from what I have heard the actors do a good job matching the originals.

Review: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

2010-05-31T06:12:00.012-04:00

IMDb

Title: Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures
Director: Mike Newell
Writer(s): Boaz Yakin(screenplay), Doug Miro ( screenplay), Carlo Bernard (screenplay) Jordan Mechner (screen story) Jordan Mechner (video game series "Prince of Persia")
Staring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemma Arterton, Ben Kingsley
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action.
Running Time: 116 min
Synopsis: Based on the video game, which follows an adventurous prince who teams up with a rival princess to stop an angry ruler from unleashing a sandstorm that could destroy the world.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 39% (Rotten), Top Critics: 23% (Rotten), RT Community: 73% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 49 out of 100, Users: 8.4 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 52: (0.0% A, 26.4% B, 54.4% C, 16.8% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C+ Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on the video game.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: There is a lot of action sequence most of them using the same parkour tricks, but from what I have been told its an homage to the video game.

Comedy Elements: Cheesy factor +1, most of the joke where a bit on the cheesy side but at the same time kind of witty.

Dramatic Elements: There were quite a few moments the film tried to take a breather from the action with a drama kiss but it was usually interrupt by the bad guys.

Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: The film incorporated some bending of time aspects, hence the title of the film, The Sands of Time.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B-: Let say I have seen better from Jake Gyllenhaal, he wasn't bad there just was something missing from his performance. This is the only second time I have seen Gemma Arterton in a film, so Iam going to say, "So far so good"

Art Direction: A-: For the most part Jerry Bruckheimer production have decent art direction this film hold up to those standards.

Cinematography: B+: The fighting choreography was great, From what I hear shooting this isn't the easiest, so I give a small token of kudos to the filmmakers on this one.

Direction: B: I only known Mike Newell's work from Harry Potter, so from that standpoint he has improved in my opinion.

Editing: B+: With all the parkour stunts and fast pace action I think they asembem it in away we as an adiance didnt lose the brilliantly crafted fighting choreography. I say the same to the editing team as I did to the filmmakers, kudoes.

Screenplay: C: In my opinion the weakest element to this film was its story, one there where some holes in the story, that I would classify as a continuity issue. I already mentioned how cheesy the dialogue was. Well, even thought it was kind of witty, not to many people laugh at the jokes sadly. That maybe to bad writing?

Sound and Music: B: There was a decent score.

VFX: C+: I think I would have enjoy the film if the FX were 50% better. They were go but not that good.

Overall: B-: Its one of those popcorn summer movies, that you could take most of the family to, little kids would be board, hence my use of the word "most". I say it was a fairly decent movie, yes it has some cinematic flaws but it is entertaining.

Review: Robin Hood

2010-05-19T05:48:00.005-04:00

IMDb

Title: Robin Hood
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Director: Ridley Scott
Writer(s): Brian Helgeland (screenplay), Brian Helgeland (story), and Ethan Reiff (story)& Cyrus Voris (story)
Staring: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong, Oscar Isaac, Mark Addy, Matthew Macfadyen, Kevin Durand, Scott Grimes, and Alan Doyle
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for violence including intense sequences of warfare, and some sexual content.
Running Time: 140 min
Synopsis: The story of an archer in the army of Richard Coeur de Lion who fights against the Norman invaders and becomes the legendary hero known as Robin Hood.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 44% (Rotten), Top Critics: 42% (Rotten), RT Community: 65% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 53 out of 100, Users: 5.9 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 57: (7.2% A, 31.6% B, 45.6% C, 14.6% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Characters based on the Robin Hood legend and folklore.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: Lets just say it had action but it was very weak and a bit boring in parts.
Comedy Elements: There were some cutesy line but I wasn't laughing much during the film.
Dramatic Elements: The film main drive was drama, but again it was a bit weak
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Beside the already legendary aspect of Robin Hood.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: The acting was good only because the starring roll were cast with Academy Award Winning Actors. But even the other charters did a good job.
Art Direction: B+: I think the costuming was the best part of the art in the film. I think period films always win when come to costuming.
Cinematography: B: The Cinematographer made some inserting choices that worked for the film.
Direction: C+: For The most part I like most if not all of Ridley Scott's work. Film likes Gladiator usually squeak into my top ten all time favorites. Ridley Scott slightly missed the mark on this one, mainly because their was major pacing issues.
Editing: C+: I can see how most of the people I talk to say the film was hard to follow and kind of boring, cause it somewhat a bad editing job. There's quite a few times it switches back in forth.
Screenplay: B: I enjoined the fact the story was "historically" based but at the same time holds up the legend aspect of it. I also like how it was more of a story of how Robin Hood became Robin Hood rather than the classic story of a man stealing from the rich and giving from the poor.
Sound and Music: B: It was one of the better scores I have heard in awhile.
VFX: B: I think the partial effect were great and the stunt teams did a good job.

Overall: B: The true defection of a film with mixed reviews, your either going to like it like myself but there also going quite a few who lean toward, "its boring" I can't recommend it as a must go see but fanboys of that time period, should like the film. Just because I liked it dosent mean you will.

Review: Kick-Ass

2010-04-19T01:13:00.007-04:00

IMDb

Title: Kick-Ass
Distributor: Lionsgate
Director: Matthew Vaughn
Writer(s): Jane Goldman(screenplay) & Matthew Vaughn(screenplay)
Staring: Aaron Johnson, Evan Peters, Clark Duke, Lyndsy Fonseca, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Mark Strong, Chloe Moretz, Nicolas Cage
MPAA Rating: Rated R for strong brutal violence throughout, pervasive language, sexual content, nudity and some drug use - some involving children
Running Time: 117 min
Synopsis: Dave Lizewski is an unnoticed high school student and comic book fan who one day decides to become a super-hero, even though he has no powers, training or meaningful reason to do so.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 78% (Fresh), Top Critics: 76% (Fresh), RT Community: 92% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 67 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 72: (29.6% A, 43.8% B, 20.6% C, 5.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based on comic book series written by Mark Millar and illustrated by John Romita, Jr

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: A lot of stylized fighting aka kicking ass.
Comedy Elements: There are a good amount of reference to comic books and pop culture. The brutality of the fights were funny to the guys in the crowed.
Dramatic Elements: Just high school drama.
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Anything that would fit into a comic book realm.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: The line deliverance was great. As far as performance there were not to bad since most of the cast are all newish to the business
Art Direction: B+: I think the costuming was the best part of the art in the film.
Cinematography: A-: Action sequence were great. The film makers experimented with cool techniques and they worked beautifully
Direction: A: Were looking at a fairly new director here, who has some pretty awesome producing credits with films like Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. I liking Matthew Vaughn more and more. How did he do on this film, well Kick Ass (some pun attended).
Editing: A: The transitions in the film were sweet. I liked how the editing paired very nicely with the cinematography.
Screenplay: B: The story seem to be pretty solid, from what I have heard from my friends who read the comic is its fairly close to the book.
Sound and Music: A: The sound track was great, it to fit the on screen action.
VFX: A: I personally want to say kudos to all who did there own stunts on this film, it was one of the better action movies with real kick ass fighting in, that I liked. Therefore, I also have to give props to the stunt guys also case they made everyone else look bad ass.

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Superheros
Moral of the Story: Standing up form someone could pay off in the end.
Take Home: The most Kick Ass movie ever.

Overall: A-: Its deferentially a good guys movie Comic book nerd should also like it. But its also a pretty funny movie, but it rated R so its not for everyone, duh.

Review: Clash of the Titans

2010-04-03T03:58:00.008-04:00

IMDb

Title: Clash of the Titans
Distributor: Legendary Pictures (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Director: Louis Leterrier
Writer(s): Travis Beacham (screenplay), Phil Hay (screenplay), Matt Manfredi (screenplay), and Beverley Cross (1981 screenplay)
Staring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief sensuality.
Running Time: 118 min
Synopsis: The mortal son of the god Zeus embarks on a perilous journey to stop the underworld and its minions from spreading their evil to Earth as well as the heavens.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 31% (Rotten), Top Critics: 33% (Rotten), RT Community: 53% (rotten)
Metacritic: Critics: 40 out of 100, Users: 5.4 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 44: (0.0% A, 29.3% B, 28.1% C, 34.6% D, and 7.8% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C+ Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Based on the 1981 film Clash of the Titans written by Beverley Cross. The original film is based off a Greek mythological story about Perseus and Andromeda.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: There a lot of "Fantasy Action" so sword play and what not, but it wasn't as epic as I wanted it to be / expected it to be.
Comedy Elements: I think I could count the "jokes" of the film on one hand.
Dramatic Elements: There are a lot of daddy issues, but no highly dramatic scenes.
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: It's Greek Mythology so its chalk full of VFX

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B-: A friend / co-worker told me, "I cant get over the fact Liam Neeson is playing Zeus" I replied with, "But Liam Neeson is a god." It sad but true the best acting comes from the main gods from the film Liam Neeson as Zeus and Ralph Fiennes as Hades. Everyone else was decent the only person I think was a bit off when it comes to acting chops is Sam Worthington. He maybe on the up rise right now with Avatar but he is mediocre at best. When he gave the "let get ready for battle men" speech I wasn't convinced to fight, like I would have been in another movie.
Art Direction: B+: I did like the authentic feel of the film. Greece during the Golden Ages
Cinematography: B-: It could have been better. There were a lot of shots I liked very much so, mainly the action ones. Also bad use of 3-D there could have been really cool parts but there wasn't...i guess nothing will ever live up to Avatar for a while.
Direction: A: We have seen Louis Leterrier work before in the films Unleashed, Transporter 2, The Incredible Hulk. I personally liked both Transporter 2 and The Incredible Hulk. Clash of the Titans seem to me that it didn't do his name justice.
Editing: B-: There were some scene that confused me.
Screenplay: C: It veered to far from the original story. There where some parts I was like, "you could have left that out completely but fans of the old movie will hate you for it" Big key element I would have liked to seen but were cut: Better use of Acrisius/Calibos character, use Andromeda as the love interest and not Io, and the use of Bubo.
Sound and Music: A: The score was good all around, some piece of the music fit beautifully with the action happening on screen.
VFX: A: The open story about the gods over throwing of the titans was the best use of graphics and visual effect to tell a story via stars, cause most of our constellations do tell of stories from Greek mythology including this one. Very nice touch. The film carries this greatness of VFX in other parts of the film also like the Kraken

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Men vs Beast and Men vs God
Moral of the Story: Good defeats evil.
Take Home: Greek mythology is close to my heart

Overall: B: Its a good guy movie. its a decent action movie, it an okay sword and sandal movie, so maybe consider seeing it at least once.

Review:Alice in Wonderland

2010-03-08T22:57:00.002-05:00

IMDb

Title: Alice in Wonderland
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures
Director: Tim Burton
Writer(s): Linda Woolverton (screenplay), Lewis Carroll (books)
Staring: Mia Wasikowska, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Matt Lucas, Stephen Fry, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman
MPAA Rating: Rated PG for fantasy action/violence involving scary images and situations, and for a smoking caterpillar.
Running Time: 108 min
Synopsis: 19-year-old Alice returns to the magical world from her childhood adventure, where she reunites with her old friends and learns of her true destiny: to end the Red Queen's reign of terror.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 53% (Rotten), Top Critics: 61% (Fresh), RT Community: 74% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 53 out of 100, Users: 5.9 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 60: (10.6% A, 36.7% B, 39.0% C, 12.9% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Based on Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There by Lewis Carroll. I haven't read the books so I don't know how it hold up to the source material but because I know how Tim Burton treats source material I am guessing its perrty close.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: There a lot of "Fantasy Action" so sword play and what not.
Comedy Elements: There are some cleaver line said from the Hatter that can be quite funny.
Dramatic Elements: Enriched with drama and back-story.
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: One of the first fantasy so yes there is a good amount of VFX type shoots.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: A: I loved the cast, I know being a Tim Burton film were going to see Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter but the other cast members were just as great.
Art Direction: A+: Very beautiful, Seeing that magical world come to life was awesome. If I am not mistaking Tim Burton did some art direction project on his earlier films, so I expect the best.
Cinematography: A: The Cinematography complimented the art direction like in every Tim Burton film. I think is was beautiful and magnificent.
Direction: A: This film surely has the Tim Burton style, some pacing issues like near the begging it dragged a bit and near the end it was too fast the final battle was lacking length.
Editing: B: It was cut together well but like I said before there was some pacing issues.
Screenplay: A-: I think the story highlights the wonderfulness of both Alice stories while at the same time holding its own as an "original" story.
Sound and Music: A: Finally a film with a score. It seem all the films I enjoyed watching over the past couple of months have been flooded with music from mediocre sound tracks.
VFX: A: There was a good mixture of live action and animation, both of which blend together to create a pretty flawless Underland (Wonderland).

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Innocents, Ignorance, Betrayal
Moral of the Story: Good defeats evil.
Take Home: Following the white rabbit could lead to a wondrous adventure.

Overall: A-: Visually it was amazing. The other elements of the film hold up to be good also, I say see it once if not twice (once in 2-D and once in 3-D)

Review Shutter Island

2010-02-28T23:27:00.006-05:00

IMDb

Title: Shutter Island
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Director: Martin Scorsese
Writer(s): Laeta Kalogridis (screenplay), Dennis Lehane (novel)
Staring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo
MPAA Rating: Rated R for disturbing violent content, language and some nudity.
Running Time: 138 min
Synopsis: Drama is set in 1954, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels is investigating the disappearance of a murderess who escaped from a hospital for the criminally insane and is presumed to be hiding on the remote Shutter Island. .

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 66% (Fresh), Top Critics: 62% (Fresh), RT Community: 87% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 62 out of 100, Users: 7.1 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 71: (26.3% A, 46.3% B, 20.9% C, 5.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Baed on a book with the same title by author Dennis Lehane

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: There are some action sequence but this film is more dramatically driven.
Comedy Elements: Maybe a few cleaver lines but not much of a comedy.
Dramatic Elements: Highly dramatic with great acting
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Some dream sequence have some neat effects but that about it.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: A-: The acting was very believable and Leonardo DiCaprio dose a good job even thought I am not a fan of his work generally.
Art Direction: B+: The art direction it was a very colorful movie, which contrasted the dark content. I have to say great make-up
Cinematography: A-: They had some very cool shoots, with a good amount of verity
Direction: A: The movie felt a little long but over all Martin Scorsese knows what he is doing for sure.
Editing: B: It was cut together in away that kept you thinking, and on the edge of your seat.
Screenplay: B: It was a decent story. most people will guess the plot twist but it dose a very good job going back and fouth on the guessing game.
Sound and Music: B: Brought an effect dark felling to the film
VFX: B: Some of the dream sequence where neat...but it's the make up that take the cake...great make-up

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: "Crazy is a normal thing here"
Moral of the Story: The mind is a beautiful thing to waste.
Take Home: Maybe I should get a physic test, just kidding, but really I may be crazy.

Overall: A-: I enjoyed this movie, I think you should give a chance.

Review Cop Out

2010-02-28T22:43:00.004-05:00

IMDb

Title: Cop Out
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures Fox
Director: Kevin Smith
Writer(s): Robb Cullen (written by) & Mark Cullen (written by)
Staring: Bruce Willis, Tracy Morgan
MPAA Rating: Rated R for pervasive language including sexual references, violence and brief sexuality.
Running Time: 107 min
Synopsis: A comedy about a veteran NYPD cop whose rare baseball card is stolen. Since it's his only hope to pay for his daughter's upcoming wedding, he recruits his partner to track down the thief, a memorabilia-obsessed gangster.

What Others Are Saying?

Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 20% (Rotten), Top Critics: 21% (Rotten), RT Community: 63% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 32 out of 100, Users: 4.0 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 37: (0.0% A, 10.2% B, 46.7% C, 31.5% D, and 11.5% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C Users: B

My Review

Source Material: Original screenplay written by brothers Mark and Robb Cullen

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: With being a comedy about cops their is some action sequence but they more slapsticky cause the comedy aspect of the film.
Comedy Elements: There are a few one-liners that got the whole theater laughing but these happen mainly in the opening credits .
Dramatic Elements: Umm not so much, they actually make fun of melodramatic moments in movies.
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: No shiney Sci-fi elements this time.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B-: The strongest actor was Bruce Wills but the strongest comedic performer was Sean William Scott. Tracy Morgan wast as annoy as he usually is in movies. There some great one liners, and pop culture references
Art Direction: C-: Nothing too fancy here
Cinematography: C-: Agian nothing too fancy here
Direction: B: Kevin Smith is very good at asembling a good comdey, this was good but there was some chemistry missing. Maybe that because he not using his normal comic players
Editing: C: Nothing special
Screenplay: B: The story wasn't half bad, a bit cliche but it work for a comedy
Sound and Music: C: I wasn't the biggest fan
VFX: NA not enough to commit on

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Friendship, "A Couple of Dicks"
Moral of the Story: Friends stick up for each other together even in the hard times, I got your back
Take Home: A couple of laughs, that's about it.

Overall: C: Even thought I liked this film for it comedy aspects it relay suck every else.

REVIEW: Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief

2010-02-14T01:38:00.006-05:00

IMDb

Title: Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Director: Chris Columbus
Writer(s): Craig Titley (screenplay), Rick Riordan (novel)
Staring: Logan Lerman, Brandon T. Jackson, Alexandra Daddario, Jake Abel, Sean Bean, Pierce Brosnan, Kevin McKidd
MPAA Rating: Rated PG for action violence and peril, some scary images and suggestive material, and mild language.
Running Time: 119 min
Synopsis: A teenager discovers he's the descendant of a Greek god and sets out on an adventure to settle an on-going battle between the gods.

What Others Are Saying?

At The Movies: A.O. Scott: NA, Michael Phillips: NA
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 48% (Rotten), Top Critics: 35% (Rotten), RT Community: 69% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 48 out of 100, Users: 6.7 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 50: (0.0% A, 25.8% B, 54.1% C, 18.0% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: C+ Users: A-

My Review

Source Material: Based off a book with the same title written by Rick Riordan. How does it match up to the book? I just started to reading the book cause I enjoyed the movie. So far the biggest difference I saw between the book and movies is Percy Jackson age. In the book he is twelve and in the movie he's a junior higher, if not older.

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: Its an adventure so Percy and his friends are away in a state of peril, which lead to many action sequence
Comedy Elements: Being a kiddish type film it has some cheesy line and some decent slapstick.
Dramatic Elements: The drama comes mainly from the fact that all the demigods come from broken homes aka "daddy issues" and "abandonment" I think these iusse may hit home with the youth today, especially with the divorce rate rising daily.
Sci-Fi / Fantasy Elements: Well, we are dealing with Greek mythology so yes it jammed packed with all kinds of sci-fi/ fantasy elements.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: I think the children actors did a fine job since most of them it there first acting job especially on the big screen. I like there were some big named actors to play small roles and cameos. It helped to balance out the amature actors. As far as the dialogue it did get a bit cheesy but I am willing to bet that's because it meant for a younger audience.
Art Direction: B: High fantasy movies like this one shine in the artistic categorizes. some of the different worlds they had to create like The Underworld were cool and beautiful in away.
Cinematography: B+: This film capture the fun qualities of an adventure. This was done mainly in the fact that the action sequence where shot properly.
Direction: B: It has that child friendly style that Chris Columbus has mastered in films like Home Alone and the first two Harry Potters. But I will give him props on know how to do put together a fun adventure that both kids and adults can enjoy...This is the man who wrote the Goonies, can you say CLASSIC.
Editing: B: The film was easy to follow, no real unique editing style.
Screenplay: B: The story was good but I maybe saying that out of bias toward being a huge fan of mythology especially Greek mythology.
Sound and Music: C: I am going to say it was way to cliche, example some says "If you see my dad on the highway to hell kick his ass for me" cue in Highway to Hell music by AC/DC.
VFX: B+: It has the same wow factor that the first Harry Potter's had. After seeing Avatar its going to take a lot to blows me out of the water with its visual effects. But at the same time this is the first movie that is VFX based that I have seen since Avatar, which is like comparing apples and oranges, you just can't do it.

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Friendship, Coming of Age
Moral of the Story: Always strive to do the right thing.
Take Home: Always stand-up for what you believe in even if others don't agree with you.

Overall: B+: Even with my bias to Greek mythology it's a good movie. I hope it get an enough money to finish the rest of the books. The first movie excited my interest.

Review: The Book of Eli

2010-01-25T22:35:00.005-05:00

IMDb

Title: The Book of Eli
Distributor: Alcon Entertainment (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Director: Albert Hughes, Allen Hughes
Writer(s): Gary Whitta (written by)
Staring: Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis
MPAA Rating: Rated R for some brutal violence and language.
Running Time: 118 min
Synopsis: A post-apocalyptic tale, in which a lone man fights his way across America in order to protect a sacred book that holds the secrets to saving humankind.

What Others Are Saying?

At The Movies: A.O. Scott: Skip It, Michael Phillips: See It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 45% (Rotten), Top Critics: 50% (Rotten), RT Community: 82% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 53 out of 100, Users: 7.8 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 55: (5.0% A, 40.1% B, 34.9% C, 15.3% D, and 4.4% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: NA

My Review

Source Material: Written by Gary Whitta

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements: This film is fairly action pack with some pretty cool hand-to-hand combat scene with Denzel Washington in a lack of better terms kicking ass.
Comedy Elements: The comedy in this film come primary from the raw brutality of some of the scenes, Schadenfreude, pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.
Dramatic Elements: There are a few moment between Denzel Washington and Mila Kunis characters but nothing that impacting. The film is mainly action based.
Sci-Fi Elements: There are some sci- fi element only because this film takes place in a post-apocalyptic world. How we live has adapted to our surroundings therefore bring some sci-fi elements.

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue: B+: Gary Oldman is by far the strongest actor on screen, with Denzel Washington being a close second. Mila Kunis is eye candy with some acting talent. So overall the acting wasn't that bad.
Art Direction: B: The new post-apocalyptic is believe which is always a good thing which may point more toward the effect team, than the art department, either way it was decent.
Cinematography: B: The one thing that I noticed was this film was one of those few films that knew how to capture action on film without it being to shaky.
Direction: B: It seem co-direction movies have a slightly better advantage and that shows in this film. The pace of the film was good, not to long but maybe a bit short, on the fact they could explained some things better...(read on in screenplay section)
Editing: B: The film was easy to follow, no real unique editing style.
Screenplay: C+: I mention in the direction section about the lack of story to explain some of the mysterious things like the power of the book during this post-apocalyptic time, and what cause the world to turn out the way it is in the film.
Sound and Music: B-: I enjoy the score.
VFX: B+: There were more particle effects that CGI effects which in a film like this it worked better than most VFX movies.

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes: Religious, Betrayal, Hope
Moral of the Story: Strive for determination, and always finish race even if your last.
Take Home: Diligence will get you far in life.

Overall: B: This seem like is going to be one of those movies you either going to like it, mainly because of the action or you going to hate it because of the holes in the story. Personal I recommend it because I liked I but its hard to tell.

NEW: Review Template

2010-01-25T15:20:00.004-05:00

IMDb

Title:
Distributor:
Director:
Writer(s):
Staring:
MPAA Rating:
Running Time:
Synopsis:

What Others Are Saying?

At The Movies:
Rotten Tomatoes:
Metacritic Critics:
MRQE Metric:
Yahoo Movies:

My Review

Source Material:

Entertaining Value:

Action Elements:
Comedy Elements:
Dramatic Elements:

Cinematic Value:

Acting and Dialogue:
Art Direction:
Cinematography:
Direction:
Editing:
Screenplay:
Sound and Music:
VFX:

Moral and Ethical Value:

Themes:
Moral of the Story:
Take Home:

Overall:

Review: To Save A Life

2010-01-25T13:31:00.006-05:00

Powered by IMDB

Title: To Save A Life
Distributor: New Song Pictures (Samuel Goldwyn Films)
Director: Brian Baugh
Writer(s): Jim Britts (written by)
Staring: Randy Wayne, Deja Kreutzberg, Joshua Weigel, Steven Crowder, Sean Michael, Bubba Lewis, Kim Hidalgo
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for mature thematic elements involving teen suicide, teen drinking, some drug content, disturbing images and sexuality.
Running Time:
Synopsis: After a childhood friend's death, Jake Taylor, an all-star athlete must change his life - and sacrifice his dreams to save the lives of others.

Other Reviews

Critics:

Roger Ebert: NA
Michael Phillips: NA
EW: NA

Other Sites:

At The Movies: NA
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 27% (Rotten), Top Critics: 20% (Rotten), RT Community: 88% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 17 out of 100, Users: 8.1 out of 10
MRQE Metric: NA
Yahoo Movies: Critics: NA Users: A

My Review

Source Material: Written by Jim Britts

Acting and Dialogue: B-: Randy Wayne who portrays the protagonist Jake Taylor in the film is puts up a good performance, probably the best out the entire cast. A close second would have to be the guy who played the youth-pastor, Joshua Weigel. Not only did he reminded me of my youth-pastor but he created a believable charismatic youth leader that young people will be willing to follow and trust. The character that was the most unbelievable was Jake's girlfriend, Amy. The actress who play her, Deja Kreutzberg, but way to much melodramatic acting into her role.

Art Direction: C: Shot from a teenagers perspective so alto of hallways and house backdrops, and church since this was a Christian based film. But nothing to get excited about.

Cinematography: B-: The cinematography was fairly decent. it had some shot and light that were interesting and cool but over all just like the art direction not to exciting.

Direction: B-: This film does have a "after school special" feel, and that it's main weakness, well besides the fact that the general audience will call it "too preachy" because of it Christian based storyline. Besides these negatives I think the new comer director, Brian Baugh did a decent job, yeah it may have been slow in parts to some people, but that to be expected.

Screenplay: C+: The main criticism of this film is the fact that it is a Christian base story. I don't know why people get so offended by Christian movies but don't care about another movie with another religion. If we were to replace the Christian message and undertone in this film with another religion's message and undertones would the story be good? I am going to say yes because this film highlights some pretty heavy stuff that happens in teenage life today. That's the positive things about the story, were as the negative thing shine a way different light. The bad supporting characters, acting wise, and the "after school special" feel overshadowed the positive things in this film.

Sound and Music: C+: Hmm, there was some inspirational music from the sound track, but that common for a movie with Christian undertones.

VFX: C: Dramatically driven, little to no visual effects.

Overall: C+: If I was a youth-pastor I would take my youth-group because the film brings out some very valid points that teenager need to hear. I challenge all teens to see this film just on the fact that it dose highlight things that are very possible in their life's, especially in today's society. As an over film it going to do horrible cinematically, as I highlight above but do decent at the box office especially in small "Christian" based towns. Film is subjective.

UPDATE Prediction / Contenders

2010-01-17T01:32:00.002-05:00

After the BFCA Critic Choice Awards this weekend I here by Update my prediction / contenders. Anything highlighted in red won an award at the BFCA Critic Choice Awards.

Best Picture

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Up In The Air
3. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Inglourious Basterds
3. Avatar

Actor in a Leading Role

Statistically

1. George Clooney, Up in the Air
2. Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker
3. Colin Firth, A Single Man

My Picks At This Point

1. George Clooney, Up in the Air
2. Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker
3. Daniel Day-Lewis, Nine

Actor in a Supporting Role

Statistically

1. Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds
2. Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
3. Christian McKay, Me and Orson Welles

My Picks At This Point

1. Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Actress in a Leading Role

Statistically

1. Carey Mulligan, An Education
2. Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia (She Tie with Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side)

My Picks At This Point

1. Carey Mulligan, An Education
2. Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

Actress in a Supporting Role

Statistically

1. Mo'Nique, Precious
2. Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air

My Picks At This Point

1. Mo'Nique, Precious

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

Statistically

1. Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air
2. Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach, Fantastic Mr. Fox

My Picks At This Point

1. Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air
2. Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach, Fantastic Mr. Fox

Writing (Original Screenplay)

Statistically

1. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds
2. Joel & Ethan Coen, A Serious Man
3. Scott Neustadtler & Michael H. Weber, (500) Days of Summer

My Picks At This Point

1. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds
2. Scott Neustadtler & Michael H. Weber, (500) Days of Summer

Directing

Statistically

1. Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
2. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
2. James Cameron, Avatar
3. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds

Film Editing

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar

My Picks At This Point

1. Avatar
2. The Hurt Locker
3. Inglorious Basterds
4. Star Trek
Wild Card: (500) Days of Summer

Cinematography

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. The White Ribbon
3. Nine

My Picks At This Point

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar
3. Nine
Wild Card: Inglorious Basterds

Visual Effects

Statistically

1. Avatar
2. Star Trek

My Picks At This Point

1. Avatar
2. Star Trek
3. 2012
Wild Card: District 9

Art Direction

Statistically

1. Avatar
2. Nine
3. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. Inglourious Basterds
2. Nine
3. Avatar

Costume Design

Statistically

1. The Young Victoria
2. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. The Young Victoria
2. Inglourious Basterds
3. Nine

Makeup

My Picks At This Point

1. District 9
2. Avatar

Sound Editing

My Picks At This Point

1. Star Trek
2. Avatar
3. The Hurt Locker

Sound Mixing

My Picks At This Point

1. Star Trek
2. Avatar
3. The Hurt Locker

Music (Score)

Statistically

1. Michael Glacchino, Up

My Picks At This Point

1. Michael Glacchino, Up

Music (Song)

Statistically

1. Crazy Heart
2. Nine

My Picks At This Point

1. Crazy Heart
2. Nine

Animated Feature Film

Statistically

1. Up
2. Fantastic Mr. Fox

My Picks At This Point

1. Up
2. Fantastic Mr. Fox
3. Coraline
Wild Card: Ponyo

Short Film (Animated)

TBD

Documentary Feature

Statistically

1. The Cove
2. Anvil! The Story of Anvil

My Picks At This Point

1. The Cove
2. Anvil! The Story of Anvil

Documentary Short

TBD

Foreign Language Film

Statistically

1. Sin Nombre
2. Summer Hours
3. The White Ribbon

My Picks At This Point

1. Sin Nombre
2. Summer Hours
3. The White Ribbon

Short Film (Live Action)

TBD

Award Season: Rules To My Pool Game

2010-01-07T03:54:00.003-05:00

1. Ballot: Print or Create a copy of the ballot of nominations for 2010 Academy Awards once they are announced.

2. Ranks: Give a ranking between 1 and "n" with "n" being the number of nomination in a category ... your #1 pick should be the film you think will win in said category.

3. Scoring: The top six categories (Best Picture, Actor in a Leading Role, Actor in a Supporting Role, Actress in a Leading Role, Actress in a Supporting Role and Directing) are worth 10 points. Every other category with five nomination or more are worth 5 points and any category with three nominations or less are only worth 1 point.

4. Keeping Score: If your #1 pick wins in a category then full points are received. For example, if in the Best Picture category your #1 pick wins Best Picture then you will receive 10 points. If your # 1 pick doesn't win then your score will change by negative one point per rank your off. For example, if in the Best Picture category your #2 pick wins Best Picture then you will receive 9 points... your #3 pick winning would equal 8 points and so on. Tiebreakers will be determined on who guess the most right.

5. Winnings: Whoever has the highest score at the end of the night get all the money in the pot. You can have any set number of "buy-in" ranging from candy to 20 bucks as long as you have fun. Because when it all said and done were all winners right.

Award Season CONTENDERS

2010-01-07T02:36:00.004-05:00

Over at incontention.com they have there own list of CONTENDERS. I was inspired to do my own list but with a slightly different spin.

Best Picture

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Up In The Air
3. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. Inglourious Basterds
2. The Hurt Locker
3. Avatar

Actor in a Leading Role

Statistically

1. George Clooney, Up in the Air
2. Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker
3. Colin Firth, A Single Man

My Picks At This Point

1. George Clooney, Up in the Air
2. Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker
3. Daniel Day-Lewis, Nine

Actor in a Supporting Role

Statistically

1. Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds
2. Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
3. Christian McKay, Me and Orson Welles

My Picks At This Point

1. Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Actress in a Leading Role

Statistically

1. Carey Mulligan, An Education
2. Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

My Picks At This Point

1. Carey Mulligan, An Education
2. Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

Actress in a Supporting Role

Statistically

1. Mo'Nique, Precious
2. Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air

My Picks At This Point

1. Mo'Nique, Precious

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

Statistically

1. Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air
2. Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach, Fantastic Mr. Fox

My Picks At This Point

1. Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air
2. Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach, Fantastic Mr. Fox

Writing (Original Screenplay)

Statistically

1. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds
2. Joel & Ethan Coen, A Serious Man
3. Scott Neustadtler & Michael H. Weber, (500) Days of Summer

My Picks At This Point

1. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds
2. Scott Neustadtler & Michael H. Weber, (500) Days of Summer

Directing

Statistically

1. Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
2. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
2. James Cameron, Avatar
3. Quentin Tarantino, Inglorious Basterds

Film Editing

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar

My Picks At This Point

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar
3. Inglorious Basterds
4. Star Trek
Wild Card: (500) Days of Summer

Cinematography

Statistically

1. The Hurt Locker
2. The White Ribbon
3. Nine

My Picks At This Point

1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar
3. Nine
Wild Card: Inglorious Basterds

Visual Effects

Statistically

1. Avatar
2. Star Trek

My Picks At This Point

1. Avatar
2. Star Trek
3. 2012
Wild Card: District 9

Art Direction

Statistically

1. Avatar
2. Nine
3. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. Inglourious Basterds
2. Nine
3. Avatar

Costume Design

Statistically

1. The Young Victoria
2. Inglourious Basterds

My Picks At This Point

1. The Young Victoria
2. Inglourious Basterds
3. Nine

Makeup

My Picks At This Point

1. District 9
2. Avatar

Sound Editing

My Picks At This Point

1. Star Trek
2. Avatar
3. The Hurt Locker

Sound Mixing

My Picks At This Point

1. Star Trek
2. Avatar
3. The Hurt Locker

Music (Score)

Statistically

1. Michael Glacchino, Up

My Picks At This Point

1. Michael Glacchino, Up

Music (Song)

Statistically

1. Crazy Heart
2. Nine

My Picks At This Point

1. Nine
2. Crazy Heart

Animated Feature Film

Statistically

1. Up
2. Fantastic Mr. Fox

My Picks At This Point

1. Up
2. Fantastic Mr. Fox
3. Coraline
Wild Card: Ponyo

Short Film (Animated)

TBD

Documentary Feature

Statistically

1. The Cove
2. Anvil! The Story of Anvil

My Picks At This Point

1. The Cove
2. Anvil! The Story of Anvil

Documentary Short

TBD

Foreign Language Film

Statistically

1. Sin Nombre
2. Summer Hours
3. The White Ribbon

My Picks At This Point

1. Sin Nombre
2. Summer Hours
3. The White Ribbon

Short Film (Live Action)

TBD

Disney Merger With Marvel

2010-01-02T14:33:00.005-05:00

I can't be original about this story but I can pass on the news and share with you these link:

www.getthebigpicture.net
www.slashfilm.com
www.themovieblog.com

If you read these articles from the above links you will find out that Marvel merged with Disney and they payed a pretty penny (4.3 Billion dollars). So dose this mean a Disneyfied Marve? not necessarily...I am paraphrasing here but Disney said let the good people at Marvel do what they do because if its not broke then don't fix it.

The Importance of Plot

2009-12-30T16:24:00.005-05:00

The human race have been passing stories down orally from the being of time. We see the survival of these stories in all the classic mythologies: Biblical, Celtic, Egyptian, Greco-Roman, or Nores. Storytelling is apart of who we are as a people. If you travel back to grade school or even high school you may remember filling out those stupid plot charts: Conflict, Rising Action, Climax, Falling Action, and Resolution. We all know from this model that every story follows a pattern. The key is to find that pattern. Those pattern can be broken down into even more categories. It's hard to determining how may basic plots lines there are. They ranging from 1 to 36. I will be using many different source to back up my points. I want to share these with you so the next time you watch a movie and says it has no plot well it fits one of these:

From: http://www.ipl.org/div/farq/plotFARQ.html

1 Plot:

Attempts to find the number of basic plots in literature cannot be resolved any more tightly than to describe a single basic plot. Foster-Harris claims that all plots stem from conflict. He describes this in terms of what the main character feels: "I have an inner conflict of emotions, feelings.... What, in any case, can I do to resolve the inner problems?" (p. 30-31) This is in accord with the canonical view that the basic elements of plot revolve around a problem dealt with in sequence: "Exposition - Rising Action - Climax - Falling Action - Denouement". (Such description of plot can be found in many places, including: Holman, C. Hugh and William Harmon. A Handbook to Literature. 6th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co, 1992.) Foster-Harris’ main argument is for 3 Plots (which are contained within this one), described below.

3 Plots:

Foster-Harris. The Basic Patterns of Plot. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1959. Foster-Harris contends that there are three basic patterns of plot (p. 66):

"’Type A, happy ending’"; Foster-Harris argues that the "Type A" pattern results when the central character (which he calls the "I-nitial" character) makes a sacrifice (a decision that seems logically "wrong") for the sake of another.
"’Type B, unhappy ending’"; this pattern follows when the "I-nitial" character does what seems logically "right" and thus fails to make the needed sacrifice.
"’Type C,’ the literary plot, in which, no matter whether we start from the happy or the unhappy fork, proceeding backwards we arrive inevitably at the question, where we stop to wail." This pattern requires more explanation (Foster-Harris devotes a chapter to the literary plot.) In short, the "literary plot" is one that does not hinge upon decision, but fate; in it, the critical event takes place at the beginning of the story rather than the end. What follows from that event is inevitable, often tragedy. (This in fact coincides with the classical Greek notion of tragedy, which is that such events are fated and inexorable.)

7 Plots

7 basic plots as remembered from second grade by IPL volunteer librarian Jessamyn West:

[wo]man vs. nature
[wo]man vs. man
[wo]man vs. the environment
[wo]man vs. machines/technology
[wo]man vs. the supernatural
[wo]man vs. self
[wo]man vs. god/religion

20 Plots:

Tobias, Ronald B. 20 Master Plots. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books, 1993. (ISBN 0-89879-595-8)This book proposes twenty basic plots:

Quest
Adventure
Pursuit
Rescue
Escape
Revenge
The Riddle
Rivalry
Underdog
Temptation
Metamorphosis
Transformation
Maturation
Love
Forbidden Love
Sacrifice
Discovery
Wretched Excess
Ascension
Descension.

36 Plots

Polti, Georges. The Thirty-Six Dramatic Situations. trans. Lucille Ray.

Polti claims to be trying to reconstruct the 36 plots that Goethe alleges someone named [Carlo] Gozzi came up with. (In the following list, the words in parentheses are our annotations to try to explain some of the less helpful titles.):

Supplication (in which the Supplicant must beg something from Power in authority)
Deliverance
Crime Pursued by Vengeance
Vengeance taken for kindred upon kindred
Pursuit
Disaster
Falling Prey to Cruelty of Misfortune
Revolt
Daring Enterprise
Abduction
The Enigma (temptation or a riddle)
Obtaining
Enmity of Kinsmen
Rivalry of Kinsmen
Murderous Adultery
Madness
Fatal Imprudence
Involuntary Crimes of Love (example: discovery that one has married one’s mother, sister, etc.)
Slaying of a Kinsman Unrecognized
Self-Sacrificing for an Ideal
Self-Sacrifice for Kindred
All Sacrificed for Passion
Necessity of Sacrificing Loved Ones
Rivalry of Superior and Inferior
Adultery
Crimes of Love
Discovery of the Dishonor of a Loved One
Obstacles to Love
An Enemy Loved
Ambition
Conflict with a God
Mistaken Jealousy
Erroneous Judgement
Remorse
Recovery of a Lost One
Loss of Loved Ones

Other Sources:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_seven_original_stories
http://fiction-plots-pacing.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_seven_basic_plots
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2366/what-are-the-seven-basic-literary-plots
http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/writers/the-8-basic-storylines/t.41020557/

Genre: Sword and Sandall Flims / Greco-Roman Mythology

2009-12-30T01:49:00.002-05:00

Genre: "Sword and sandal films, or pepla (singular peplum) are a class of Italian-made adventure or fantasy films that have subjects set in Biblical or classical antiquity, often with contrived plots based very loosely on mythology or Greco-Roman history, or the surrounding cultures of the same era (Egyptians, Assyrians, Etruscans, Minoans), etc...." (Wikipedia)

Like: I love the epic scope of the film. For me period films bring a real scene of pretend and fantasy. also most of the films in this genre are based of some sort of mythology. Mythological stories ask those deep question of what it means to be human, which is very thought provking

Dislike: Sometime films in this genre can get way to action pack and lose story. Also if the VFX are bad or cheesy then it ruins the film quality...which happen more then what you think.

My Top Films In This Genre (alphabetical order):

300
Alexander
Clash of the Titans (1981)
Gladiator
Jason and the Argonauts
King Arthur
Odyssey, The
Troy

The Future of Comic Book Movies:

Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
Clash of the Titans (2010)
Centurion

Directors:

Ridley Scott
Oliver Stone
Wolfgang Petersen
Desmond Davis
Donald Chaffey
Andrei Konchalovsky

Review: AVATAR

2009-12-22T15:43:00.003-05:00

Powered by IMDB

Title: Avatar
Distributor: Twentieth Century-Fox
Director: James Cameron
Writer(s): James Cameron (written by)
Staring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang, Michelle Rodriguez, Giovanni Ribisi, Joel Moore
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking.
Running Time: 162 min (2 hr and 42 min)
Synopsis: A paraplegic marine dispatched to the planet Pandora on a unique mission becomes torn between following his orders and protecting the world he feels is his home.

Other Reviews

Critics:

Roger Ebert: 4 Stars
Michael Phillips: 3 Stars
EW: Owen Gleiberman: B

Other Sites:

At The Movies: A.O. Scott: See Itt, Michael Phillips: See It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 84% (Fresh), Top Critics: 94% (Fresh), RT Community: 91% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 83 out of 100, Users: 8.6 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 75: (37.0% A, 36.1% B, 22.9% C, 3.5% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: A- Users: A

My Review

Source Material: Written and Directed by James Cameron

Acting and Dialogue: A-: Sam Worthington has prove himself to be a good action star and a thespian at the same time. In this film he showcase a good blend of kick ass and raw acting talent. The others actor bring good performance also. The only negative thing in the film is some of the dialogue, like every great sic-fi it has moments of cheesiness.

Art Direction: A+: I see an Oscar nomination if not a win, one most beautiful film in my life.

Cinematography: A+: Again I see this film being a top contender at the Oscars in this category. There was a great number of camera shot that were magnificent and beautiful.

Direction: A: James Cameron is one of few director that knows how to shoot action sequence properly. As far as flow goes it was good even with the film being almost three hours.

Screenplay: B+: I heard that Avatar resembles "Dancing with the Wolves" when come to the story, but I wouldn't know since I haven't seen that movie. I thought the the story was fine it flowed with the film.

Sound and Music: A: I love how they incorporated African music into the score. The score matched the epic feel of the film and did a good job captivating the wide verity of emotions through out the film.

VFX: A++: Sorry about my French here, but it was Fucking Amazing. Absolutely Amazing. It is for sure going to win the Oscar for Best Visual Effects. Side Note: The 3-D IMAX experience adds a great deal to the film...It add layers upon layers to an already spectacular world. In my book Pandora and the creatures that live there are as real as can be.

Overall: A+: One of best film I have ever seen in my life. I recommend to all and if you have a IMAX theater near you go see there because it's worth the extra money...You may think it has a weak story but at least go see it to admire it for its VFX beauty.

2009 Great Fall Movies By Genre

2009-12-21T01:43:00.002-05:00

ACTION:
Dick Flick (Guy Films): Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

ANIMATION: 9, The Mr Fantastic Fox

COMEDY: Zombieland
Black / Dark Comedy: The Men Who Stare At Goats, Up In The Air

DRAMA: The Blind Side, Brothers

FANTASY: Where The Wild Things Are

INDIES: Whip It, Up In The Air

SCIENCE FICTION (Sci-Fi): Pandorum, Avatar

2010 Movies By Studio

2009-12-21T01:09:00.003-05:00

Disney

Alice in Wonderland

Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time

Toy Story 3

Tron Legacy

Fox

Percy Jackson & the Olympians: the Lightning Thief
The Chronicles of Narnia: the Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Lionsgate

Kick-Ass

Paramount / Dramworks

Iron Man 2
The Last Airbender
The Lovely Bones

Sony (Columbia) / Screen Gems

Legion
The Social Network
The Green Hornet

Summit Entertainment

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Universal

The Wolfman
Robin Hood

Warner Bros / Legendary Pictures /

New Line Cinema

Book of Eli

Clash of the Titans

Inception
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

Indie

Youth in Revolt

Creation

Calling all Avengers

2009-12-19T23:01:00.004-05:00

This would be my cast if I was casting the Avengers movie. This is my own response to my post called The Avengers

Founding Members

Ant-Man (Dr. Henry "Hank" Jonathan Pym): Michael C. Hall

Hulk (Dr. Robert Bruce Banner) : Edward Norton

Iron Man (Anthony "Tony" Stark) : Robert Downey Jr.

Thor (Dr. Donald Blake) : Chris Hemsworth

Wasp (Janet van "Dyne" Pym ) : Natalie Portman

Recruits

Black Panther ( T'Challa) : Djimon Hounsou

Black Widow (Natalia Alianovna Romanova) :Milla Jovovich

Captain America (Steven Rogers) : Sam Worthington

Hawkeye (Clinton Francis Barton) : Jeremy Renner

Ms. Marvel (Carol Danvers): Ali Larter

Nick Fury: Samuel L. Jackson

Scarlet Witch (Wanda Maximoff) : Eva Green

Vision (Victor Shade): CGI / Voiced: Doug Jones

War Machine (James Rupert "Rhodey" Rhodes) : Don Cheadle

The Avengers

2009-11-28T04:21:00.006-05:00

Let's Talk about the Avenger Movie coming in 2012. There is a lot of news and speculations too who is playing who. I want to boil it down and get your thoughts on the subject. I complied a list of founding members and popular recruits who are known for being on The Avengers Team.

Founding Members

Ant-Man (Dr. Henry "Hank" Jonathan Pym) : Wishes: Patrick Wilson, Michael C. Hall
Hulk (Dr. Robert Bruce Banner) : Edward Norton / Lou Ferrigno (Voice)
Iron Man (Anthony "Tony" Stark) : Robert Downey Jr.
Thor (Dr. Donald Blake) : Chris Hemsworth
Wasp (Janet van "Dyne" Pym ) : Contenders: Eva Longoria Parker Wishes: Natalie Portman, Alyssa Milano, Mila Kunis

Recruits

Black Panther ( T'Challa) : Contenders: Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje Wishes: Djimon Hounsou
Black Widow (Natalia Alianovna Romanova) : Scarlett Johansson Wishes: Milla Jovovich
Captain America (Steven Rogers) : Contenders: Leonardo DiCaprio, Matthew McConaughey
Hawkeye (Clinton Francis Barton) : Contenders: Jeremy Renner Wishes: Jensen Ackles
Ms. Marvel (Carol Danvers): Wishes: Ali Larter
Namor the Sub-Mariner (Namor McKenzie) : Contenders: David Boreanaz
Nick Fury: Samuel L. Jackson
Scarlet Witch (Wanda Maximoff) : Contenders: Helena Mattsson Wishes: Eva Green, Scarlett Johansson
Vision (Victor Shade): CGI Voiced Wishes: Billy Crudup, Doug Jones
War Machine (James Rupert "Rhodey" Rhodes) : Don Cheadle

Review: The Men Who Stare at Goats

2009-11-09T01:05:00.005-05:00

Powered by IMDB

Title: The Men Who Stare at Goats
Distributor: BBC Films
Director: Grant Heslov
Writer(s): Peter Straughan (screenplay)Jon Ronson (book)
Staring: George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Jeff Bridges, Kevin Spacey
MPAA Rating: Rated R for language, some drug content and brief nudity.
Running Time: 93 min (1 hr and 33 min)
Synopsis: A reporter in Iraq might just have the story of a lifetime when he meets Lyn Cassady, a guy who claims to be a former member of the U.S. Army's First Earth Battalion, a unit that employs paranormal powers in their missions.

Other Reviews

Critics:

Roger Ebert: 2 ½ Stars
Michael Phillips: NA Stars
EW: Owen Gleiberman: F

Other Sites:

At The Movies: A.O. Scott: Skip It, Michael Phillips: Skip It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 58% (Rotten), Top Critics: 41% (Rotten), RT Community: 65% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 54 out of 100, Users: 4.0 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 61: (10.% A, 42.6% B, 35.0% C, 9.3% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B- Users: C

My Review

Source Material: Based on the book of the same title by author Jon Ronson, an account of Ronson's investigation of attempts by US military forces to use psychic powers.

Acting and Dialogue: A-: For me the acting was good but then agian some bias comes into play because both Ewan McGregor and Kevin Spacey are by far in my top ten favorite actors.

Art Direction: C: Comedy Bland meaning this film was made for laughs and not necessarily for art.

Cinematography: C: I do like some of the different shoots used, but It too also follows the Comedy Bland style of filmmaking.

Direction: B-: It has a fun atmosphere and I think that comes from an actor turn filmmaker director, seen here.

Screenplay: B+: The story is a good one, I think some of the execution failed but most of the pop culture reference worked, well if your a Star Wars Fan. Personally the funnier lines were the clueless nature of Ewan McGregor character toward the Jedi terminology., why? Well, he play a character from the Star Wars universe for three movies know as Obi-Wan Kenobi, who is a Jedi. So LOL.

Sound and Music: B: Very Representative of the time period and content of the film.

VFX: B-: Very minor VFX were used to creat the different "powers" but nothing to extravagant.

Overall: B-: For me it works for a Comedy because I am a Star wars fan, but for the general public it won't. I think that's the case because it not a Judd Apatow style of humor.

Disney's A Christmas Carol

2009-11-09T00:04:00.005-05:00

Powered by IMDB

Title: Disney's A Christmas Carol
Distributor: ImageMovers (Walt Disney Pictures)
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Writer(s): Charles Dickens (novel) Robert Zemeckis (screenplay)
Staring: Jim Carrey
MPAA Rating: Rated PG for scary sequences and images.
Running Time: 96 min (1 hr and 36 min)
Synopsis: An animated retelling of Charles Dickens classic novel about a Victorian-era miser taken on a journey of self-redemption, courtesy of several mysterious Christmas apparitions.

Other Reviews

Critics:

Roger Ebert: 4 Stars
Michael Phillips: 2 ½ Stars
EW: Owen Gleiberman: A

Other Sites:

At The Movies: A.O. Scott: See It, Michael Phillips: Rent It
Rotten Tomatoes: T-Meter: 54% (Rotten), Top Critics: 44% (Rotten), RT Community: 83% (Fresh)
Metacritic: Critics: 55 out of 100, Users: 7.9 out of 10
MRQE Metric: 66: (21.2% A, 34.4% B, 39.2% C, 4.8% D, and 0.0% F)
Yahoo Movies: Critics: B- Users: B+

My Review

Source Material: Based on 2009 film adaptation of Charles Dickens' 1843 story of the same name.

Acting and Dialogue: B+: Jim Carrey didn't pull off a Tom Hanks in The Polar Express, for those of you who don't know Robert Zemeckis also directed that film also. When I first watched The Polar Express the only person I knew was Tom Hanks was the conductor but with this film I knew every person was Jim Carry so it became to much Carrey in parts.

Art Direction: A: The colors in the animation made it very believable world even thought it was made in a computer.

Cinematography: A+: I think watching the film in 3-D helped the cinematography. It add that "I am living it now" experiences, especially the flying scenes. It might as well been snowing in the theater because again the 3-D gave it that look. Now If I take the 3-d out of the picture it still holds its own in the world of cinematography. Meaning it more of a ghost story set around Christmas time, and the the film maintains that creepy atmosphere throughout.

Direction: A: The direction was good It was directed by a well know guy and this is his third film using this technology. So it seem to run smoothly from beginning to end.

Screenplay: C+: It's not that the story is crappy or even the source material. Form what I can gather it is a spot on adaption. But for me what brings down the quality is the fact that it was a story that has been adapted way tom many times.

Sound and Music: D: Christmas Music gets old fast. The only time of the year it is good for is the week of Christmas. But the score was decent.

VFX: A+: I am a big fan of motion capture and Robert Zemeckis work with it.

Overall: B-: I did enjoy the film overall, even with the faults. One thing I have to say why was this movie released in early November why not late November or early December if not Christmas week. The only thing I see as a explanation is Avatar and the IMAX screenings in December. Either way it is a Christmas type of movies so why not a release date closer to Christmas.

Genre: Comic Book Movies/ Video Game Movies

2009-10-18T21:27:00.005-04:00

Genre: films that are adaptations of comic books or video games, and those films whose characters originated in those comics or video games. (Wikipedia)

Like: These movies give me a good fix for my Fantasy and Sci-Fi "addiction" that and most comic book/ video game characters are kick-ass.

Dislike: A lot time these movie stick too close to the comic book/video game and make a cheey and child-ish version.

Websites Top's:

AFI
Comic Book Movie
IGN
Filmsite
IMDb
Maxim
Rotten Tomatoes
Wikipedia: Films Considered the Greatest Ever

My Top Films In This Genre (alphabetical order):

Graphic Novel

300
A History of Violence
From Hell
Hellboy
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
Road to Perdition, The
Sin City
V for Vendetta
Wanted
Watchmen

Superhero

Batman (1989)
Batman Begins
Dark Knight, The
Incredible Hulk, The
Iron Man
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
Superman Returns
X2: X-Men United
X-Men

Video Game

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within
Hitman
In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
Mortal Kombat
Resident Evil
Silent Hill
Stay Alive
Super Mario Bros.
Tron

The Future of Comic Book Movies:

Marvel

Deadpool
Iron Man 2
Kick-Ass
Spider-Man 4
The Avengers
The First Avenger: Captain America
Thor
Venom
Wolverine 2

D.C.

Green Lantern, The
Jonah Hex
Lobo
Untitled next Batman film

Dark Horse

Conan
Hellboy 3
Sin City 2
Sin City 3
Umbrella Academy, The

Video Game

BioShock
Gears of War
God of War
Halo
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time
Resident Evil: Afterlife

Directors:

Sam Rami
Bryan Singer
Christopher Nolan
Zack Snyder
Tim Burton