Zookeeper

Synopsis:
No plot. Just a bunch of talking animals.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“I would rather lie on a bed of nails watching Dr Doolittle for a week than see a single reel of Zookeeper again." - Philip French

My Review:
Unless your a 6-year-old child there is no reason to see this movie. Kevin James is an absolute waste of talent. He's a funny guy who has settled for horrible scripts and going-nowhere roles. He might as well star in the next "Air Bud" movie (it's the one in the bargain bin at Walmart with the dog that plays sports).

Rating:
2 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Suck master supreme.

Green Lantern

Synopsis:
An alien crashes on Earth and picks Ryan Reynolds to be the newest member to the Green Lantern team.  At the same time, a great evil descends upon the universe.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
"Green Lantern is a moronic superhero. Ryan Reynolds is too cool to play such a lame character. There...I said it." - Bob Grimm -

My Review:
Oh where to begin on the giant mess of a movie.  Should I start with how the great talents of Ryan Reynolds have been completely squandered?  Maybe I should focus on how the script reads like it was written by a 4-year-old?  Then again I could talk about how the movie feels fake, two-dimensional (oh the irony) and is duller than a butter knife.  Hopefully you get my point.  That every single aspect of this movie is tragically flawed.

Ryan Reynolds is a great actor.  He was on my list of up-and-comers a long time ago.  It's just too bad his agent has been picking stink bombs for him.  He's like Ben Affleck but has good looks, great acting skills, strong comedic timing and onscreen charm.  Ok, so he's the opposite of Ben Affleck.  And for all of you people who love Ben Affleck and want me to lay off of him, just go back and watch Reindeer Games again.

Another odd thing about this movie is that it was directed by the guy who did Casino Royale.  I don't get it.  Why would you take someone known for gritty, dark, character story driven films and give them a superhero movie.  Did we not learn our lesson from the last Superman movie?  Or the Hulk movie with Eric Bana?  Or Batman and Robin?  The list goes on and on.  You think Hollywood would go with what they know instead of risking their financial futures on a potentially risky director. 

And the script, oh the script.  You could make a drinking game out of how many times the word 'fear' is used.  The audience gets beaten over the head with constant over explanation and back story.  We're comic book nerds, we don't need the back story.  Give us a good story, not a thorough one.  And what is the deal with the fact that the Green Lantern can materialize anything he can think of and then the only thing he can come up with are airplanes and a giant fist?  The alien should have chosen someone more creative on Earth.  Jeez.

Rating:
3 out of 10

Suck Scale:
You know how Paralax sucks the souls right out of their bodies?  Same experience for me watching the film.

Super 8

Synopsis:
JJ Abrams hides the plot from us again and I'm not going to spoil it for you.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“Despite the complete chaos, Super 8's conclusion somehow felt anti-climactic, a blunt and barbaric cinematic shock-and-awe campaign when what had come before it had been handled with the precision of a surgical SEAL team strike." - Brandon Fibbs -

My Review:
Let's start with love/hate relationship with J.J. Abrams.  I love you for creating Lost.  I hate you for the ending.  I love you for the Star Trek reboot.  I hate you for the Cloverfield ending.  But let's honest, there's definitely more to love than to hate.

What I mean by that is that J.J. Abrams is single-handedly bringing back the movie and TV industry.  I look forward to his movies.  He's the opposite of M. Night.  J.J. keeps getting better and M. Night keeps getting worse (don't make me review The Devil again to prove my point).   J.J. has brought us excitement, mystery, suspense, thrills and movies and shows we can talk about until the of time.

Enough about him, let's talk about this movie.  I like to call this movie E.T with blood.  It has a lot of the kid-friendly themes as E.T.  We care about the kids and we enjoy following them as they progress through the movie.  The dialogue is sharp and witty and the story moves at a good pace.  As far as cinema fair goes, it's pretty standard and old school.  It has a clear beginning, middle and end.  The only real problem I had with this movie was the end.  It was too anti-climatic and cheesy.  And it didn't have to be.  What a waste of potential.  I think J.J. should let someone else write his endings for him.  Someone like Andrew Kevin Walker (see Se7en).

Rating:
7.5 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Beginning didn't suck.  Middle didn't suck.  Ending teetered on sucking.

X-Men: First Class

Synopsis:
Meet Professor Xavier and Magneto when they were wee lads.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“Instead of being all about people discovering or earning their new powers, X-Men: First Class is all about the relationships. And it is a much better movie for it.” – Tim Martain -

My Review:
We all wanted to like the X-Men movies.  It was supposed to be the movie franchise that quenched the insatiable thirst of fan boys everywhere.  But the X-Men movies were mediocre at best.  But we wanted them to be good so we lied to ourselves and told ourselves they were better than they actually were.  Well, now we no longer have to lie to ourselves, because this X-Men movie captures the story, excitement and kick-ass'd-ness that we were hungry for.

We know it's going to be a great movie based on two things we see in the first 10 minutes.  A darker theme and Kevin Bacon.  You know how Ben Affleck ruins every movie he's in?  Kevin Bacon does the opposite.  No one would even know what "Wild Things" was if Bacon wasn't in the flick.  It's not like Nev Campbell had the big name star power to draw the audiences.  Also "Stir of Echoes", need I say more?

Back to the movie at hand, this X-Men is darker, has a great story and ties into the other movie like a shoe lace.  The Cuban missile crisis is also an unlikely but great backdrop for the story.  The only compliant I have is that they killed Darwin too fast.  I would love to see an origin movie for him (even if it is straight to DVD).

Rating:
8 out of 10

Suck Scale:
You know how X-Men 3 sucked.  Well, this doesn't.

Bridesmaids

Synopsis:
Annie's best friend is getting married.  Now she's trying to make everything perfect for her big day.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“The funniest movie of the year. Unlike 'Hangover,' the film doesn't rely on sexism, homophobia and racial epithets to hit a punch line." – Clay Cane -

My Review:
The opening scene is instantly uncomfortable, shocking, odd and funny.  It does a great job at setting the tone for the rest of the movie.  I honestly didn't know what to expect from this movie.  I thought it was just going to be a female version of The Hangover.  I was surprised to find that it is its own movie.  It had its own style, its own comedic timing and was ten times better than The Hanover 2.  Kristin Wigg is perfect in the role and has genius comedic timing (too bad she can't save SNL).

The directing is surprising good along with the production value.  Most movies that star SNL actors have the budget of a porno and the production value of...well...a porno.  And the acting of...you get the point.  Bridemaids is well acted, well written and has plenty of clever and fresh humor.  And that's all I'm really looking for out of a comedy.

Rating:
9 out of 10

Suck Scale:
The opposite of suck.

Kung Fu Panda 2

Synopsis:
A panda who knows Kung Fu battles an evil Peacock.  Honestly, h0w intricate did you think the plot was going to be?

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“Another knockout combination of vibrant animation, energetic action and nifty jokes.” – Jason Best -

My Review:
The first movie is a fun romp, fueled by Jack Black's clever sophomoric humor.  The same can be said for the sequel.  Although not ground-breaking, it is entertaining.  And this time around the writers put a little more emotion in it.  It's amazing what you can feel for an animated character.  Toy Story 3 is the greatest example of how you can have emotions for animated pixels.  Kung Fu Panda comes in at a close second.

The animation is beautiful.  The blades of grass sway in the gentle breezes, smoldering iron steams up the dark night.   I love the fact that the environment is not realistic, but more fantastic and whimsical, filled with bright colors and a clear sense of style.

I'm not saying the movie isn't without faults.  Sometimes Jack's overacting becomes annoying.  And Dustin Hoffman is a worst voice actor than DeNiro is a comedy actor (see Little Fockers).  Overall, a solid family movie for kids under 12.

Rating:
7 out of 10

Suck Scale:
More joy than suck.

DVD Review - Vanishing on 7th Street

Synopsis:
Without explanation, if you are shrouded in darkness you disappear forever.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“...the shadow-puppet apocalypse exists outside of explanations, or indeed logic of any kind. So does Vanishing on 7th Street." – Shaun Gandert -

My Review:
Before I get into my preview, I would just like to say that Hayden Christensen has done it again.  He has ruined another movie.  If he continues ruining movies he will soon catch up the master himself, Ben Affleck.  Hayden single-handedly destroyed Star Wars which is a feat unto itself.  But let's not forget the other movies that had potential that he sucked the life out of: Jumper, Awake and Takers.  His best role to date is the paperboy "In The Mouth of Madness".

So I have to say, the premise to this film is absolutely engrossing.  Out of nowhere, the lights go out across the world and everyone in darkness suddenly vanishing, living behind their clothes.  What a great concept!  So the first 10 minutes and the flash backs that show this event are spectacular.   But past that, all we get is a lot of pointless chatter to fill the time and then an ending so infuriating you end of wishing you never sat through the other 90 minutes.

Rating:
4 out of 10

Suck Scale:
First 10 minutes don't suck.  Then it's all down hill from there.

The Hangover: Part II

Synopsis:
The exact same as the first movie but add Thailand, a monkey and more shock value.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“At least it's not in 3D.” – Rob Vaux  -

My Review:
There's not really a reason to review this movie because it's the exact same movie as the first one.  The bad part is that it's not as good as the first movie.  The first movie was fresh, exciting, unpredictable and funny.  The second movie is stale, relies too heavily on shock and falls flat.  A bigger budget may be to blame.  My Hangover movie doesn't need car chases, shootouts, or helicopters.  It just the guys stumbling around trying to figure out what happen to them the night before.

The movie also relies too heavily on shock value.  Low brow shock value.  Shock value that is uncreative and unclever (if that's a word).  The first movie seem better written and better performed.  The sequel seems like a good Saturday Night skit that goes way too long.  The acting is good, the leads take command of their roles, but when the monkey steals the scene, something is wrong (nice jacket by the way).  The directing is better than a straight-to-DVD but still up-and-coming.   As a last note the movie could have used some more women in it.  It seemed a little heavy on the sausage. 

Rating:
5 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Compared to the first movie it sucked big time.  On its own it wouldn't have seemed to suck as bad.

Priest

Synopsis:
It’s like Legion: a crappy story, horrid dialogue and more cheesy than a block of Velvetta stuffed with ricotta.  But without the angels.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“The God of Aborted Franchises will be pleased.” – Keith Uhlich -

My Review:
It’s not a good thing when you’d rather watch a Uwe Boll film than a Scott Stewart flick.  I was scouring the floor of the movie theater trying to find an unpopped kernel of popcorn to slit my wrists with.  And that’s really bad considering the run time of this movie is less than 90 minutes.  I have no idea how this film didn’t go straight to the sci-fi channel.  But I kind of doubt that sci-fi would even pick it up.  MegaGatorShark is a hundred time more entertaining (and has a higher production value).

You know how Firefly took sci-fi and injected a bit of Western into it, making it unique and fun.  Well, it doesn’t work with every sci-fi concept. Priest is the mix of Blade Runner scenery, Catholic themes, Vampires, and the Wild West.  Individually, all great things.  But this director mixed them all together like a little kid mixing sodas into a suicide drink.  All you end up with is a glass full of crap that no one wants.  That’s Priest.

Oh why oh why didn’t they do a Preacher movie instead?

Rating:
1 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Major suckage.

Thor

Synopsis:

A lot like Superman 2 where our hero loses his powers and we get to watch to  comedic antics of a man who until previously had god-like powers eat at Denny’s.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“Entertaining and instantly forgettable.” – John Beifuss -

My Review:
Look, I wanted to like it.  I’m a fan of comic book movies.  There has been several hits that I have enjoyed including (but not limited to):
Batman, Scott Pilgrim, Blade, The Crow, Hellboy, Ghost World, Sin City, 300, Kick-Ass.

But let’s not forget that there have been several really, really bad comic book movies too:
Howard the Duck, Fantasic Four, Daredevil, Catwoman, Dick Tracy, TMNT, The Punisher, Shazaam, Steel

But there’s a huge gray area:
Hulk, Watchmen, Spider-Man, X-Men, Iron Man, Road to Perdition, History  of Violence.

Unfortunately, Thor falls into this gray area category for me.  The writer and director had a difficult task in front them.  They had to take a comic book hero that does not have the mass appeal of Superman, Batman, Spider-Man and the like.  It would be like trying to make an Aquaman or a Green Lantern movie (we’ll see how that works out).  And to me it felt like two completely different movies which neither one quite worked for me.

Let’s start with the director, Kenneth Branagh, best known for bringing Shakespeare to the big screen.  Think about the last great Branagh movie you liked that wasn’t based on a classic novel.  That’s what I thought.  So red flag number one, poor director choice.

Next let’s evaluate our star, Chris Hemsworth.  Name your favorite movie (not TV show) that he has starred in.  That’s what I thought.  I’m not saying he did a bad job, but he’s no Christian Bale.  And come Natalie Portman, are you that desperate for work.

So all and all it was a slightly entertaining film with some light chuckles and hammer smashed faces.  But it wasn’t enough to make me jump with joy.  Of course, I’m an extremely jaded movie watcher, so what do I know.

Note:  Does anyone else feel like these movies are just infomercials for the Avengers movie?

Rating:
4 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Sucks like a leech on an open wound.

The Fast Five

Synopsis:
The same plot as the other four Fast and Furious movies.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“It's big, loud, dumb, over-the-top and mostly substanceless. But it works, perhaps better than ever before.” – Matt Neal -

My Review:
I don't always want to cry at an aging couple reliving their teenage romance.  I don't always want to see a documentary about how we are destroying the ice caps.  I don't always want to see a foreign film with subtitles, mimes and a ending where everyone dies.   Sometimes when I go to the movies I just want to be entertained.  And in that regard, The Fast Five delivers.

You get a little bit of everything in this film.  Some comedy, some drama, and a whole lot of action.  You get to see Vin fight The Rock.  You get explosions, heist and car races.   Also, the girls in the film are drop-dead beautiful.  Come on now, what more do you want out of  action movie?  Arnold?  I don't think so.

I'm not saying the dialogue is anything great but it doesn't matter.  The whole movie could have been shot without a word of dialogue and you would still have a full understanding of the story.  It's kind of like McDonald's.  The menu doesn't need words when the pictures of the food are there.  Just point.

So to summarize, if you want a brainless action flick, see it.  If your girlfriend/wife wants a date night, do not see it.

Rating:
8.5 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Not enough time between action scenes for this film to suck.

Screm 4

Synopsis:
Ghostface is back and no one is safe from his killing spree.  Also, see synopsis for Scream, Scream 2 and Scream 3 since they all have the same plot.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“You know a movie franchise has lost its pop culture clout when it goes from creating the most popular Halloween accessory to successfully tracing the arc of Courteney Cox and David Arquette's failed marriage.” – Mike Ward -

My Review:
So let's take a moment and look at director Wes Craven's earlier films:
- Last House on the Left
- The Hills Have Eyes
- Swamp Thing
- The People Under the Stairs
- A Nightmare on Elm Street
- The Serpent and the Rainbow

Now take a look at the more recent films:
- Vampire in Brooklyn
- Music of the Heart
- Red Eye
- Paris, Je T'aime
- My Soul to Take

Do you see the pattern.  The first half are iconic films that for the most part have withstood the test of time.  The second half are films you wouldn't buy our of the Walmart bargain bin.  Wes Craven's has fallen faster than the Dow Jones Industrial Average.  His wit is about as sharp as a butter knife, about as on point as drunken monkey with a bow-and-arrow and about as insightful as a high school stoner telling everyone how stars really just flecks of salt that God has cast over the night sky.  His time has come and gone.  And now it is time for him to be gone.

That's not to say that Scream 4 isn't an entertaining movie.  The funniest part about the film is how it makes fun of itself.  But "Scary Movie" has already done that.   When the Wayans write a better spoof movie than your sequel, you know something is terribly wrong. 

So Wes, open up some film camps and help train the next generation on how to make a movie.  Then maybe instead of rebooting mediocre originals we can begin to create some new classics.

Rating:
5 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Entertaining, but still pretty sucky.

Insidious

Synopsis:
A family moves into a new house and their son accidentally falls and suddenly goes into a deep coma.  Shortly after, a series of frightening events happen and the family scrambles to understand the deeper meaning of the boy’s coma.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“If there's a complaint to be made about Insidious, it's that the film's second half is unable to live up to the impossibly high standards set by the first half.” – James B. -

My Review:
I have to review this movie in two parts.  The first half of the movie is absolutely genius.  It has jarring sounds, jump-out-of-your seat terror and good old-fashioned haunted house tactics.  The first half is nearly perfect in every way.  Now the second half, that’s a different story.  Still jumpy in parts, but the story takes a turn that is more ridiculous than Orphan, Identity and The Others combined.  And the special effects seem like they were done by the Edmond North drama club.  Come on now.   It's like the directors ran out of movie half way through.

That’s not the say this movie isn’t worth watching.  It borrows its playbook from “Poltergeist”, one of the greatest horror movies of all time.  It also plays out a lot like “The Messengers” and “Boogey Man”.  Come to think of it though those are two movies you probably haven’t seen.  Probably the best part of the movie wass the audience.  They were really into it.  One teenager literally jumped out of his seat and cried out laughingly, I don’t want to watch this anymore.  Everyone laughed.  That’s what makes a great movie, when you can feel the tension in the crowd around you.

So it was a good time, a perfect first half and a low budget ending.

Rating:
6 out of 10

Suck Scale:
You get what you expect.

DVD Review: Black Swan

Synopsis:
A ballerina feels the pressure of becoming the lead and we get to go on the journey of her mental breakdown.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“Fantastically deranged at all times, Darren Aronofsky's ballet psycho-melodrama is a glittering, crackling, outrageously pickable scab of a film.” – Peter Bradshaw -

My Review:
Darren does it again.  He takes a job that children dream of becoming and make it as vile and disgusting as possible so that no child will ever want to become that thing.  Case in point, “The Wrestler”.  After watching that film, no one will want to become a wrestler for fear of living alone in a trailer with a daughter who hates you.  Not to mention your how ugly, mangled and useless your body will become.  How about becoming a scientist like Hugh Jackman in “The Fountain”?  Where you can become so engulfed in your work that you neglect everyone around and live in the constant guilt of neglecting your wife and only realizing it after she dies of cancer and it’s too late.  And now, Ballet.  After watching Black Swan, why would any little girl want to become a ballerina.  I think Darren visits playgrounds and asks kids what they want to be when they grow up just to get his next movie idea.  So be prepared for Darren Aronofsky’s “The Firefighter”, following by “The Cowboy”.   I’m sure he’ll ruin those childhood dreams as well.

I’m not saying the movie is bad, I’m just saying it’s depressing.  This is one of those movies that I enjoyed but that I would not recommend for others to see.  It’s not a pop or typical Hollywood fare.  It’s definitely not a date movie. 

But it is raw and it will make you think.  And it is well directed and well acted.  So if you’re in the mood for some dark and eccentric, give it a rental.  If you are looking for a romantic, chick-flick, stay away.  Stay far, far away.

Rating:
8 out of 10

Suck Scale:
You’ll probably think it sucks, but I liked it.

DVD Review: Tron Legacy

Synopsis:
Sam Flynn accidentally ends up inside a computer world and runs into his dad and a special girl.  Now they must find a way out before the portal closes.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“TRON: Legacy is shallow but beautiful, thrilling but unsatisfying.” – Tim Martain -

My Review:
This movie can be wrapped in 3 simple words: “Style over substance”.  If you want to watch a two-hour long, awesome music video set to some great techno music than Tron is for you.  If you are looking for an engaging and intelligent Sci-Fi thriller than sorry, try Source Code.  Tron is the kind of movie that you might find playing in the background of an underground techno club. 

Don’t get me wrong, there are some action sequences scattered throughout the movie that are breathtaking and unbelievable.  But then you’ve got to sit through the incoherent hippie banter of Jeff Bridges.  It’s a love/hate relationship.  It’s a lot like the remake of Speed Racer.  We had such high hopes that the directors of the Matrix were going to make this spectacular special effects extravaganza.  Then they did make that but they forgot to put a story in there somewhere.  Tron is the same way.  Let’s hope the sequel focuses more on the potentially great story line.

Rating:
7 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Story sucks, visuals are unbeatable.

DVD Review: Little Fockers

Synopsis:
The family is back together again for another round of dysfunctional family shenanigans.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
“...to quote from Twitter: 'I bet the Robert DeNiro of 'Taxi Driver' would shoot the Robert DeNiro of 'Little Fockers.' “ –Susan Granger -

My Review:
I enjoyed the first Focker movie.  It was fresh and fun, with some witty jokes and great slapstick moments.  The second film was alright.  Still fresh and fun but the jokes not as gut-busting as the original.  And now the third film, a complete waste of time not worth a dollar rental at Red Box.  Do you see where this is going?  If they make a fourth movie, I may protest its release as an abomination to film and cinema world.  This movie is so bad I might just add it to the list of movie posters located at the top of this site.  It’s actually so bad that I don’t want to waste my time reviewing it much more.

Rating:
2 out of 10

Suck Scale:
The nearly complete embodiment of a sucky movie

Source Code

Synopsis:
Captain Colter Stevens continuously relives an 8-minute span of time aboard an bomb-strapped train to find out who the bombeteer is.

Favorite one-line review from a different critic:
"Think Quantum Leap meets Groundhog day with intense action and nail biting suspense." - Chuck the Movieguy-

My Review:
The only thing I don't like about this movie is its name: Source Code.  In my mind it instantly conjures up an image of a computer programmer.  I half expected the movie to play out like Tron and Hackers.  I was wrong.  If Alfred Hitchcock made a sci-fi movie, it would play out something like this movie.  A great set of characters who are for once given a little bit of depth and personality (which is extremely rare these days).  And as a bonus treat you get a great, original story (which is also rare these days).  Another treat is that the movie requires a little bit of thought, which I personally enjoy.  And to top it off a solid ending.  It's everything I look for in a movie. 

What I'm most happy about is that even though the plot was similar to Speed, it wasn't Speed.  To summarize, I enjoyed it, some won't.  But I would recommend it if you enjoyed Inception, Paycheck, Next, Minority Report, Primer or Donnie Darko.

Rating:
9 out of 10

Suck Scale:
Didn't suck at all

Sucker Punch

Imagine the combination of "Kill Bill", "The Matrix" and "Girl Interrupted".  One of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong.  Can you guess which one?   It's "Girl Interrupted".  I get using girls that look like the group the Pussycat Dolls shooting assault rifles and displaying full on "Girl Power" like steroid-injected Spice Girls.  But come on, spare us the emotionally drama of girls in a psychiatric ward.  If I wanted drama in my action movie I'd watch Ang Lee's "The Hulk" (undeniably one of the worst movie of all time).

 I just have to wonder what the director was thinking when he wrote the script and even more importantly what the executives were thinking when they green-lighted this.  Don't get me wrong, I think the director Zack Snyder is one of the greatest directors of his generation.  With "300", "Watchmen" and "Dawn of the Dead" under his belt, he has a little slack to make a bad movie.  But he better watch it, he's on the razor's edge with me now. 

I'm not saying that "Sucker Punch" is the worst movie ever made.  1/3 of it is actually highly entertaining and exciting.  It's just a couple of small changes could have made it a great movie.  And I hate to see that waste of potential.  I guarantee you a lot of people aren't going to get the movie, especially since Zack unnecessarily put this odd, middle layer into the movie where the girls aren't in the asylum but instead are in a bordello.  That's was confusing with no payoff.  It was like he added another dream layer just to compete with "Inception". 

All and all, entertaining and mind-numbingly dramatic for with no purpose. 

Rating:
6.5 out of 10

Suck Scale:
 Would have sucked had it not been for some kick-ass action sequences

Rango

Witty, nutty and odd with a hint of the eccentric, which is just what  Johnny Depp does best.   Rango is the combination of his greatest characters.  Like Hunter S. Thompson, he narrates his every thought.  And like the Mad Hatter, he's intellectually delusional.  And finally, like Willy Wonka, he's social awkward.

Rango isn't your typical kiddie animation.  In fact, I wouldn't recommend it for kids under the age of 10.  The story is all over the place but basically just borrows its ideas for the vast collection of Western classics.  There are dark and surreal moments and light and fun moments which make an entertaining tapestry of awe.  And where the overall storyline shows some weakness, the animation and voice-acting more than make up for it.  This is by far one of the most interesting and detailed animations that I've ever seen.

So if you're in the mood for something a little different, I would recommend giving Rango a try.  But if your a movie buff or a western buff, then you have to see it. 

Rating: 8.5 out of 10

Battle: Los Angeles

Sometimes the director doesn't flush out and make a character interesting.  And when that happens, you just don't care if a character dies or not because you aren't rooting for them to live.  That's how I feel about Los Angeles.  Every time a building exploded or a city block caught on fire I was like, eh, well, that street probably needed cleaning up anyway.  Lost Angeles is just such a dirty, vile city full of scumbags and deviants.  To stay in the same vein, will the sequel be Battle: Detroit.  The movie will open with a desolate, wasteland and you won't know if the aliens had already attacked or not.

Back to the movie.  It was alright.  If you can imagine a person filming their son playing a war video game with aliens while the camera shakes for two hours becuase he doesn't have a tri-pod, that's a lot like this film.  The acting is above par but the dialague is atrocious.  Think the opposite of King's Speech.

Overall, mindlessly entertaining and will hold off the loud, sci-fi fans for a couple of months until Transformers comes out.  Rating: 6 out of 10.

Limitless

You should know the concept by now.  A slacker gets a mysterious pill that unlocks the full potential of his brain.  Gret premise, good execution, weak ending.  I have to say though that this is one of the most visually interesting movies I've seen in a while.   I sat through the opening credits going, "How the hell did they do that?".  That's a saying a lot for me.  I am not easily impressed by special effects.  This blew my mind though.

The story is definitely well written.  Brad Cooper did a phenomal job acting in it as well.  Robert DeNiro was a waste.  I haven't seen acting that bad since "Little Fockers" (which was just a couple of months ago).  It's just too bad the ending was just okay.  It didn't suck, but it wasn't great.  And it could have been great.

All and all I would recommend this film to general public.  Rating: 8 out of 10.