Deja Vu

Tony Scott is the only director that could have made this film a good one. His unique style of choppy, fast-paced editing made this film extremely entertaining. Any other director would have turned this film into another version of Time Cop (which is on my top 25 list of the worst movies ever made). Denzel also helped make this film good by brining his effortless acting abilities to the film.

The plot was unique even though time travel has been done over and over again. Tony Scott was able to bring some unique twists into the story that kept my attention through the whole film. Although not particularily complex or thought-provoking, the time travel was introduced to take a rather bland plot and spice it up.

Val Kilmer was used like an extra in this film. Is his career done altogether? He hasn't been a star in a blockbuster since "The Saint", 10 long years ago. Adam Goldberg did a great job in the film providing the much needed comic relief to Denzel's dry style.

All and all, great directing, great acting, and a entertaining story.

Rating: 8 out of 10

Casino Royale

Other than the first black-and-white scene and the opening credits, I thought the new bond was superb. Daniel Craig did a great job of stepping into the role. In my humble opinion, he was a far better Bond than Peirce Brosnan (although I have to give Golden Eye the props it deserves). And when I say better, I mean he is a better actor. Brosnan was just too clean and to pop to fit the rough and suave Bond role.

I do have a couple of negative comments about Craig. He walks funny. He walks like a male model on a Project Runway. He also makes funny expressions with his lips. It reminds me a lot of Ben Stiller in Zoolander. Other than that though, he plays out the dialogue and action sequences very well.

Great directing and great script. Better title than "Casino Royale with Cheese".

Rating: 9 out of 10.

Happy Feet

This is a great movie for the kids. I mean, how could you go wrong? It has adorable penguins singing and dancing to a cornucopia of different pop music classics. I can tell you one thing, this isn't a movie that I would want in the house. I couldn't imagine how torturous it would be to have to hear these over and over and over again. Barney was bad enough, The Wiggles even worse, but this would drive me to absolute madness.

One of the interesting things for me were the topics the movie addressed. From social acceptance, stereotyping, environmentalism, utilizing your creative abilities, dissent and going against the norm. This movie was cram packed with various moral and social issues. It was a stark contrast; on one side you had brainless dancing and cuteness and on the another you had an intellectual feast. One thing I know for sure, this movie just inspired millions of kids to grow up to be environmentalist. Which isn't a bad thing, but it probably won't help the push for more oil drilling in Alaska.

All and all, an alright movie. Great for the kids, so-so for the adults.

Rating: 3 out of 10All and all, an alright movie. Great for the kids, so-so for the adults.

Rating: 3 out of 10

Let's Go to Prison

This movie is just like The Shawshank Redemption except it doesn't have good writing, good acting, good directing, moments of true inspiration, and isn't enjoyable in the least bit. The only use this movie could ever serve is for Frat parties where everyone has to drink when there is a reference to prison sex.

And all of that is very disappointing since it was directed by a man bordering on genius: Bob Odenkirk who gave us Mr. Show and was a pivotal writer in the early showcase of Conan O'Brian. The man is a comedic genius but I guess his talents should be reserved to writing and not to directing.

Overall, this movie was harder to stomach than eating broken glass.

Rating: 1.5 out of 10

Borat

$110,000,000, need I say more? I bet no one was expecting this little mockumentary to cash in. The fact that so many people are seeing this movie is a true testament that a well-done, socially insightful, witty, and well-written independent film can make it in America. I hope this inspires the studios to take a risk on more non-Hollywood formula films. I hear they have already signed on for another film with one of Sacha's other characters from his HBO show.

Warning: this movie is highly offensive, about as unpolitically correct as you can get, and as shocking as they come. It is also at the same time very insightful, socially poignant, and extremely on-spot. If you can't identify satire and sarcasm, then this isn't the right movie for you. Definitely not for the young and impressionable. But Sacha definitely shows that we still have a ways to go in addressing racism, homophobia, and sexism. It shaming and embarrassing how some of the non-suspecting Americas react and speak to what Sacha approaches them with. I enjoyed the film because it is a clear reminder how absurd and ignorant it is to single out race, gender, sexual orientation, and the such and how much we as a society have compartmentalized ourselves into our own small boxes.

I don't think I've ever simultaneously winched and laughed so much while sitting through a film before. Other than maybe South Park: The Movie and Team America: World Police.

Rating: 9 out of 10.

Saw III

Saw III is almost identical in every way to Saw II. So whatever you thought of Saw II, is what you're going to think of Saw III. Same director, same cast, same writer. For all I know they just pieced together some edited out footage from Saw II and slapped a new title on it.

I thought Saw II was mildly entertaining. Basically the Saw movies, much like the Final Destination series, is just an excuse for a dark writer to find creative ways to kill people. Saw III was no exception, but at least it had more a spine running through the movie to keep it together. Centralizing on one character's journey through redemption was much more entertaining than with Saw II, throwing a bunch of people in a house and slowing killing them all off. So that made the film more captivating.

My surprise with the Saw series has always been the well done script and the acting. The biggest disappointment has been the directing. Although the first two films had decent directing, this third installment was hideous. And I can't figure out why since the director was the same for Saw II. Maybe it wasn't so much the directing as the sound folly. Though the crunching and the munching of bones was disturbing, it didn't seem to be well-blended into the flow and motion of the camera work. Sound folly is very important in modern day horror flicks, so I something I can't place my finger on is missing from this film which left me with an incomplete feeling.

Listen, you don't really need a review of this movie. You know what kind of movie to expect, and it delivers on just that.

Rating: 7 out of 10