Iron Man

As a movie buff (buff rhymes with muff) and a comic book reader (though I don't really know anything about the Marvel side of things) I can honestly say that Iron Man is the best comic book movie I've seen pretty much ever (except for Batman Begins). It was just great all around, for the most part at least.

Robert Downey, Jr. stars as billionaire weapons designer, Tony Stark. He's an arrogant chauvinist capitalist who witnesses his weapons in the hands of terrorists killing American soldiers. After being kidnapped by said terrorists and nearly killed but a piece of shrapnel in his heart, he is forced to build them a supermega rocket. But he doesn't. In stead, he makes a suit. A suit made of awesomeness and scrap metal which he uses to kick ass and bust up out of the cave of his imprisonment.

So, he gets back to America and turns his life around. But not really. He's still arrogant (what billionaire wouldn't be?) What he does attempt to do though is stop making weapons. Then blahdy blah blah... he becomes a super hero. But let's get to what I loved about it.

The action is exciting and very cool-looking and the humor is clever and funny but not distracting. John Favreau really did a great job writing and directing here.

The acting was awesome. Downey is great, and from what I hear, pretty dead on as Tony Stark. Everyone else does a good job as well, especially Jeff Bridges who I didn't even recognise the first time he was on screen. Samuel L. Jackson has a cameo after the credits where he plays himself, I mean Nick Furry, one-eyed Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. and procedes to give Marvel fanboys boners.

Iron Man went way above and beyond my expectations and left me anticipating the sequel and the forthcoming Avengers movie. And the best part is that it was just the beginning of what looks to be an awesome summer movie season. The Dark Knight, I'm looking at you!

9/10

NEW UPDATES ON THE WAY!!!!!!

For real, probably.

My Grandmother's Reaction to "No Country for Old Men"

"What? That's the end? Rewind it!"

after rewinding....

"So what did that mean? What was this movie called?"

Jumper

Let me say this first: I did not go to a theater and pay money to see this Jumper. I watched a bootleg hosted by Google Video.

Let me say this second: Jumper stinks. It's essentially a wish-fulfillment jerkoff fantasy for 14-year-old boys about a protagonist and antagonist that are both so ill-defined and morally ambiguous that there is no reason to give a fuck who wins. It's about a little psychopathic brat that lives a glamorous and consequence-free life and gets what he wants.

I'll start off with the protagonist, David Rice played by Anakin Skywalker. The movie starts with him narrating his childhood. Apparently, he was once and normal person, a "chump, just like you." He had an abusive relationship with his father and ran away from home once he discovered his powers. Now, you may be thinking "Oh, good for him!" but no, trust me, he's a prick. A prime example of this prickery would be a scene early in the film when you see him sitting in front of his TV in his swanky New York apartment when a news report about a flood killing people in some third-world country comes on. Now, when I saw this, I thought he was going to use his power to help those helpless people. Nope. He watches the report, smirks, and walks over to a closet where he keeps all his stolen money (neatly on shelves like it's fucking Missy Elliot's shoes), and pockets a few thousand dollars. Whether or not that little trick was deliberate or not, this humble review cannot say, but it's fucked up.

Meanwhile, while David is fucking around around the world - on top of the Sphinx, hanging off the minute hand of Big Ben, sucking his own cock off camera somewhere - an inexplicably shiny-white-haired Samuel L. Jackson is looking for him. Why? To kill him. Why? Because he's part if this vaguely religious group called the "Pallidins" dedicated to eradicating all the jumpers in the world. Why? Fuck if I know. The movie certainly doesn't try to justify it, or anything for that matter. The story is filled with scenes that just sort of turn into other scenes. Actions that just sort of happen, with no apparent motivation or influence or purpose. Everything just happens, for no reason. And the filmmakers obviously didn't feel it was necessary give any reasons. It's a mess (so is this review, don't you think?) and it ruins the film more than the emotionless acting and the already flimsy plot.

Boo.

Now, I understand that Jumper is based on a novel of the same name. I also understand that said novel is pretty good and that the film deviates so much from it, that the two are nearly unrecognizable as being related at all. So, if you feel so inclined, check out the book. But skip the film.

In closing, Jumper is a lazy, immature action movie styled and modeled to appeal to the lowest common denominator and 14-year-old boys. Its story is sloppy. Its action is shiny (as is SLJ's hair). And its characters are one dimensional douchebags.

Boo.

2/10

A Few Good Men

After a long hiatus due mostly to all of our research papers being due in English class this week, we are back and hopefully we will get some new reviews and thoughts on here for all 4 of our loyal fans out there.



"You want the truth?"

Tonight I watched the 1992 movie A Few Good Men on TNT. While I usually would not review a rated R movie that I saw on network TV, I am going to make an exception in this case just to make a much needed new post. First of all a quick plot summary: young hotshot JAG lawyer is assigned to a case involving the death of a marine in Guantanamo Bay. The accused are two other marines who claim that they were only following orders. The trial and events leading up to the trial ensue.

The thing that jumps out about the this movie is the amount of big name actors involved. With names like Cruise, Nicholson, Moore, Bacon, and Sutherland, this is a star-studded affair to say the least. And thats not even mentioning Kevin Pollack or a cameo from Cuba Gooding. With all of the talent in this movie, one would think that the acting would be lights out, but in my opinion it was hit or miss at best. Cruise progressed as the movie went along but was unspectacular until the court scene. Nicholson did a solid job in a role that did not require too much real talent. Cruise and Nicholson did have good chemistry on screen and were fun to watch when together. Moore gave a stoic unemotional performance and had little to no chemistry with the other actors. Bacon and Sutherland were decent, but nothing to write home about. Most of the other supporting acting was ho-hum, with the exception of little known Wolgang Bodison who played the role of Lance Cpl. Harold W. Dawson, one of the accused marines. I thought that he did a great job portraying his character and easily outperformed every big name actor in the movie.

The script in the movie was fairy well-written for the most part. It did its primary job of getting me interested in plot. However, the attempts at humor were pitiful and painful to watch. The court scene though is where the script really comes into its own. One of, if not the best written court cases that I have seen on screen. I really enjoyed the way it was paced and the quick wit used by Cruise's character. That was fun to watch.

Overall, this was an average movie. The acting was not what it should have been. The script was pretty good but not outstanding. I liked the plot of the movie even though it was predictable at times. The court scene and the plight of the accused marines saved this movie for me personally and made it somewhat enjoyable.

Overall Rating: 6.5/10

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH"

Heath Ledger dead at 28

Heath Ledger was found unresponsive in his apartment today and died shortly after, apparently of an accidental overdose of something.

Heath was in my opinion one of the best actors of our time. He was talented and not afraid to take challenging roles (i.e. Brokeback Mountain). Why is it that so many talented young people die before they make it to 30? I don't understand. A curse maybe? A conspiracy? I don't know.

It will be interesting to see what this does to "The Dark Knight." From what I understand, filming is complete and they are well into post-production with the release a good 6 months away.

For a more in depth and articulate article that does a much better job of saying what I'm trying to say, you can go here.

Our hearts go out to his family and child.

Cloverfield

It's not very often that a movie surprises and impresses me the way "Cloverfield" did. It happened with "No Country for Old Men," and I guess it happened with "Juno" (to a lesser extent), but with "Cloverfield," I was really just blown away. I can't remeber a movie built up with so much hype for so many months that actually delivered. This is the second best movie I've seen in years.

Now I'm done blowing it and I'll review the movie.

As far as direction and acting, I think it was very well done. Everything seemed very realistic and believable and I enjoyed watching every second of it. As for everything else, I've never seen such a clusterfuck of insanity, both in the events on screen and in the presentation. The shakey camera didn't bother me personally, but in the majority of reviews out there, it was mentioned to give audiences headaches and motion sickness, and in some cases go behind curtains and explode.

Go into this movie with an open mind and let yourself have fun. Unless you are a sourpuss, you should love it.

9/10