Crazy Town

I'm not a big horror movie fan.

Just putting that out there, letting you all know where I stand. For me, most horror is low-budget, poorly directed, and in it more for the gore factor rather than being a smart film that actually makes the audience think. If you're George Romero, you could make a non-mainstream, thought provoking horror film with your eyes closed, but most horror directors seem to not care so much about putting out quality product. Of course, there are exceptions, but for every Evil Dead or Dawn of the Dead are seemingly hundreds of titles similar to Open Graves. Now, this doesn't mean I write off horror as an inferior genre, but it usually means I don't often have a good first impression of horror films due out.

Maybe something's changed in me, but when I first saw the trailer for The Crazies, a remake of the original Romero film by director Breck Eisner, I was very excited. Here was a film that, from it's trailer, seemed to be smart, scary and most importantly sincere, which is a difficult trick to pull off when you're putting your characters in situations in which most of us may never find ourselves. My biggest concern was whether or not this film could live up to the amazing trailer, but I was confident enough to grab a rental and give the movie my time.

"And that's why you shouldn't play with matches."

The Crazies drops us in the small town of Ogden Marsh, Iowa. Ogden Marsh is one of those idyllic small towns where (sing it with me here) everybody knows you're naaaaame...

Ahem.

Let's move on.

Anyway, this town is also the kind of place where high school baseball is the talk of the town, and that's where all of Ogden Marsh, including the young local sheriff David Dutton (Timothy Olyphant), is when everything starts to go down the toilet. One of the locals gets it in his head that it's a good idea to carry a shotgun onto the field of play, and after a tense standoff, David is forced to shoot the man dead. But while your local newspaper might report that story like it's the end, this only proves to be the beginning of a small town's descent into madness, sickness, and murder.

It's a zombie! No, wait, it's not?? Awwwwww.....

One of the first things you notice about this film is how well the story is paced. There's no rush to force haphazard plot points onto you, as the movie calmly introduces you to characters, slowly feeding the story in a reasonable manner as to facilitate the audience's understanding. And these characters are all well thought-out people, not just soundbites or cliches. You learn to care about them, and when they get sick and change, that feeling sticks with you. This is immensely helped by the strong acting of not only the key performers, but many of the supporting cast. The only thing I've seen Olyphant was his small role in Scream 2, so that pretty much meant he was an unknown quantity for me. So how was I to know he'd be absolutely wonderful as the mild-mannered sheriff who is determined to lead he and his wife out of the madness that has consumed their town? Also strong is Radha Mitchell in what might be one of her better performances as David's wife and the town doctor who witnesses some of the early symptoms of the illness before it gets completely out of control. But the best performance of the cast might be British actor Joe Anderson as the Sheriff's deputy, who may or may not be infected over the course of the film. He's the kind of everyman you want to root for, even when it begins to become obvious that he's turning. And these are the main roles, not the great small roles by Brett Rickaby, Larry Cedar and Mike Hickman as characters who completely get into their performances in this sick community.

I don't think that new sitter is going to work out.

The movie is truly scary, blending just the right type of atmosphere with proper pacing and believable characters and making you believe that any small town could be THIS CLOSE to this actually happening. However, it's not really anything new. While it's not truly a zombie film, it's close enough, with the sick barely keeping enough coherence to make any of them unique. Sure, they don't eat people (at least that we see), but they still have some insatable urge to kill, and act accordingly. What's worse is that there isn't anything here that hasn't been covered in any previous similar movie. It's a classic "weapons-grade chemical gets into small-town water supply and chaos ensues" plotline, with only superior performances and higher production values making it better than most titles. though the film thankfully keeps the perspective on the town's few survivors and keeps out of the affairs of the military who try to contain the sickness and fail miserably. The insular storytelling works, but only barely makes up for the fact that there are no new ideas to make this title truly unique. This is hardly surprising with Eisner at the helm. Michael's son is hardly one to work with original material, with most of his existing work and future projects either being remakes or adaptations. This isn't to say he's not a good director, simply one in need of an original thought in his head, rather than one who can follow directions.

"So, do you want full service today, or just the death?"

The Crazies is a scary, smart, exciting and jaw-dropping film that has raised the bar for contemporary horror films. However, it's also derivitive, unoriginal and a little too formulaic in it's attempt to be a true modern classic like the aforementioned Evil Dead of Dawn of the Dead. With strong performances, superb effects and breathtaking story, it's good enough to be good, and that's good enough to worm itself into the year's top ten, at least for the time being. It's the new #9. Now you should be heading down to wherever you rent your films to check it out.

God of War IV

When I saw Avatar in the theaters last winter, I was greeted by a number of 3D trailers before the show. The long-awaited James Cameron film had revolutionized what had once been a cheap gimmick for movie theaters into a full-blown mainstream must-have, as seemingly every movie studio has rushed forward with their movie using 3D technology to wow and astound audiences. Already ten films released this year have used 3D technology in their release, from family films like How to Train Your Dragon, Toy Story 3 and Shrek Forever After to the much more mature Piranha 3-D, with a dozen more due to be released by year's end. 3D has become for the film industry what the e-book has become for the publishing world: a huge trend for the present with tons of good potential but also the chance to stunt industry growth with shoddy implementation.

Clash of the Titans caught a lot of flak when it was released in April for it's slipshod 3D conversion technology, and was panned by many critics (this seems to be a regular complaint for movies released in both 2D and 3D). In fact, director Louis Leterrier had approached the studio with ideas to make the film in 3D, but at the time it was considered too expensive and the technology too new. It wasn't until after Avatar's success that the studio took real interest in 3D, and pushed Leterrier to convert the film from the filmed 2D version. Despite positive opinions of the technology by the studio, the critics mostly panned the film, the basic agreement being that the film would have been good enough but for poorly-executed 3D and poorly-scripted action sequences, both thrown at the feet of Leterrier. The action scene snafu seems somewhat surprising for the French director who brought us The Transporter, but perhaps his talents in that field didn't quite translate to larger-scale scorpion battles.

Sam Worthington as Perseus

I however did not have that problem. In fact, when I rented the film last week I was quite content with the idea that I would not be seeing the movie in 3D, since I'm not quite convinced of the commercial application of the technology in more than a few different instances anyway. Alice in Wonderland didn't need 3D to be entertaining, and I was sure the same would be true here. Thankfully, I was not disappointed.

The story begins with the Greek Gods' disapproval of the rebellion by their creations. Humans, most notably soldiers of the city of Argos, have been desecrating temples and statues of the Gods, on the orders of the king and queen. Naturally, the Gods don't like this. Humans need to be put in their place, and Zeus (Liam Neeson), needing to feel loved by his creations, calls upon his brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes) to put the fear of the Gods in them. Hades does so, demanding Argos sacrifice one who the royal family dared to compare to the goddess Aphrodite, the princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos), or else face the wrath of the Kraken, a monster created by Hades and used by the Gods to defeat their forefathers, the Titans.

Monsters come in all sizes, and are ripe for killing

The only thing standing in their way? A recently orphaned fisherman who happens to be the illegitimate son of Zeus, named Perseus (Sam Worthington). Worthington's become the next big thing of late, starting with his starring role in last summer's Terminator: Salvation, continuing with Avatar and now headlining his own action movie. That success should continue with a number of movies scheduled for release in the near future, and now he's become the shining star of Australia, though that hardly comes with a guarantee for success (just ask Eric Bana). As the demigod Perseus, Worthington plays the role completely straight, showing a glaring hatred that he focuses on his enemies in this film, whether they be the Gods (whom he blames for the death of his family) or the creatures the Gods sire to put in his way. The journey to defeat the Kraken and Hades takes him on a journey across a world of Tolkienesque scale, facing creatures both familiar and not, against giant scorpions, hideous blind Stygian Witches and of course, the dread gorgon Medusa, who can turn her victims into solid stone statues.

Gemma Arterton as Io

Don't feel too bad for the obstacles thrown in Perseus's path, though, he has his allies. However, his allies are not all of the "good actor" variety. Easily the best performer in the group is Mads Mikkelsen as Draco, leader of Argos's Praetorian Guard. Bond fans may recognize Mikkelsen as Le Chiffre, the scarred villain from the recent Casino Royale, and Mikkelsen is quite good in Clash, especially in scenes where he helps train Perseus in his swordplay for the battles ahead. A dark and pessimistic character, Mikkelsen was perfectly cast. Also surprisingly good was Gemma Arterton as Io, a woman cursed by the gods to never age. This curse may not technically be the true curse on Io as postulated in Greek myth, but Arterton is still very good in her role as Perseus's romantic interest (also nowhere in Greek myth), and as the film's muse and guide.

Oh, Ray, why hast thou forsaken us?

It's a shame that those chosen to play the gods couldn't have put together better performances themselves. Neeson is over the top and campy as the golden-armored Zeus, and it's obvious he's not invested in the role here, he's just playing for a paycheck. Better but still not up to his usual quality of performance is Fiennes, who usually has a head for the good movies (Okay, The Avengers was an exception) doesn't put his best work forward here, merely playing a prototypical villain. It's a shame, because these two were the veteran actors that gave the film merit, and their halfhearted work didn't do anyone any good, if you don't take their accountants into consideration.

'

"Don't look, don't look, don't look, aw crap"

The story itself only loosely bases itself on the actual Greek myths (Translation: it doesn't follow the myths AT ALL) but is still easy to follow, and better if you're ignorant of the massive disparities between the source material and the final product. The story rarely takes a break to ponder itself, not surprising for a Leterrier film, and keeps the brisk pace up straight from beginning to end. It makes for a dumber story, surely, but keeping the focus more on the action than on the story seems to work for this director, I'd be surprised to see anything different.

Everybody loves a good old-fashioned sacrifice

It's just too bad the action element of the tale is so inconsistent. Despite a fabulous sequence depicting the fight between Perseus's merry men and Medusa, most of the  other action scenes are frantic and difficult to follow, with far too much close-up and things moving much too quickly to be followed. The special effects are wonderful, though, especially in the 2D sense. This was never a film that NEEDED 3D for it's effects to work, and seeing the lesser-dimensioned variation suits the graphical art better than forcing it to jump out at the viewer. It's too bad the film couldn't have been augmented by better acting performances, however, as that sort of thing might have taken the film from campy cult hit possibility to an epic tale.

With Clash of the Titans, we have a film that WANTS to be a bigger movie, but just can't seem to pull the trigger. I was able to ignore the mythic irregularities and enjoy the film for what it was, a popcorn film with outstanding special effects that you didn't miss by not seeing it in the theater. It certainly did not crack the 2010 Top 10, but for an action-oriented epic drama it wasn't bad. There are better options out there, to be sure, but this one isn't too big a risk if you'd like something to shut your brain off to.

Walk the Line

In Hollywood in 2010, it's safe to say that if you're headlining films that receive world-wide theater release, you're probably doing pretty well for yourself. If you're Denzel Washington, however, it must be somewhat disappointing to no longer command the same respect and box office draw you once owned. Seriously, despite being one of the most talented performers in the industry, his inability to pick quality projects has seemingly derailed his promising career. Not that awards and box office rankings are the epitome of career success, but they are a good source of the facts, and the facts are that not only has Washington not had a number one box office movie since 2007's American Gangster, he hasn't even been nominated for an Academy Award since winning his Best Actor Oscar for Training Day, all the way back in 2001. It's no secret that Man on Fire and The Manchurian Candidate were not especially well-received films, yet at least Denzel has never let his talent dim, his ability to command any scene he's in almost as inspiring as it was during his golden era.

Denzel hits on hard times

The Book of Eli came out early this year with almost no fanfare and in a bad spot, opening during the time when everyone was still rushing out to see Avatar and it seemed like no other movie mattered. It finished number two opening weekend, but fell quickly after that, not helped by mixed reviews and Avatar fever. It was destined to lie among the forgotten Denzel movies of the past few years. That's a shame, because I have it now ranked as my new #3 film of 2010, as shocking a placement for you as it was for me to find out how enjoyable this movie actually was, and not just resting on the laurels of it's lead actor's talents.

The breathtaking visuals are half the excellence in the film

That's not to say Denzel doesn't bring his A-Game. Throughout this story of a solitary man trekking westward through the nuclear wastelands that are all that's left of a post-apocalyptic North America, it's a one-man show through nearly the first third of the film, and Washington never loses the audience's attention whenever he's in the scene. It's just that he's not the only great thing about this movie. It's obvious from the opening scene of a slowly-dissolving forest that the look and atmosphere of this film is unlike many you may have seen; the dark gray clouds and seemingly odd sunlight that shines on the world, you feel as if this world is alien, something never seen before by human eyes. The directing is also surprisingly adept, especially coming from sibling directors Allen and Albert Hughes, who hadn't directed a major motion picture since 2001's From Hell. Taking the original story by versatile screenwriter Gary Whitta, the directors have managed to create a whole new world, populate it with survivors of a great war who barely manage to cling to their humanity in the face of unspeakable adversity.

Nothing screams "unfriendly" like a trenchcoat

The movie, as I said before, has Denzel's Eli traveling across what's left of the United States, traversing damaged highways, roads and cities, all the while showing adeptness at hunting, pathfinding and, when beset upon by bandits, personal defense. We soon discover that he is carrying a very precious artifact, an actual copy of the King James Bible, possibly the last in existence. After the bombs and the apocalypse, we learn, many of the survivors of these atrocities blamed the war on religion and sought to purge the holy book, utilizing book burnings and plain old fashioned desecration. Eli believes himself to be on a mission from God, meant to deliver this book safely to it's destination somewhere to the west. On the way, he encounters a small town ruled by the ruthless Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who by chance has been sending raiders and miscreants out into the wastes to bring back books, searching for just the kind of book that Eli is carrying in his pack. It's only a matter of time before paths cross...

Warning! Gratuitous Violence in Effect!

I was very excited to see a movie done in this post-apocalyptic setting. It's such a fascinating idea, not that we'll eventually bomb ourselves into the stone age, but the recovery from that traumatic experience. How would humanity as a whole react to this kind of setback? The innocent and just, hunted and assaulted by those anarchists who would take advantage of the new world. Irradiated drinking water. vast stretches of land where trees, buildings and cities that once stood are no more. Destroyed infrastructure. And, perhaps most unsettling, the lack of wild animals to hunt or soil to grow leading many down the path to cannibalism. I've always found it an interesting, if somewhat terrifying prospect, that humanity may one day head down this dark road. Or maybe I'm just overly excited at the prospect of playing Fallout: New Vegas by year's end, but either way, the setting was a big deal for me. Thankfully, no specifics are given to explain exactly why the war happened; We're simply plopped down here like so many survivors of the end times, and that works for me.

He still kinda looks like Count Dracula

The other reason I loved this movie so much is that finally - FINALLY - I've seen a movie where I actually thought the bad guy had proper brains, motive, smarts, and muscle to make himself a real danger to the protagonist, even advantages at times. Gary Oldman can chew scenery like a theatrical rottweiler, but the best things about his performance are what the script has his character doing, rather than what he brings to the part. Oldman'sapocalyptia, while Eli wants to bring the book west because he believes doing this will help spread God's word. That the movie perfectly walks the line between faith being used as a salve and a weapon is amazing, which even works for me, who follows no faith to speak of.
The odds are decidedly against Eli, alone but for his wits and skills, and occasionally he appears to be blessed, where he'll take a bullet to the back without getting hurt or escaping from a locked cell with an armed guard watching the door, or many such things. These seem a little out there on the oddity scale, as not all of it can be explained away rationally as an alternative to the idea of divine intervention. In this way the story gets a little far-fetched, but fortunately, don't hurt the flow of the story at all, simply makes it a little too fantastical to completely believe. The other problem I had was with the small town's ample resources. The place seems to somehow have plenty of fresh water and fuel, and while the water is explained satisfactorily, can anyone explain to me how proper fuel can exist in this type of place so that the bad guys who want to drive big trucks and motorcycles can do so? I know other movies in this setting have had vehicles that people drive, but unless they use some sort of alternative fuel, I can't believe it's gasoline they're filling their engines with 30 years after the fact.

No, this isn't what it looks like

The acting is mostly excellent, with Washington and Goldman raising the bar of what might have been expected of with a different cast. Jennifer Beals is also excellent as a blind concubine under Carnegie's control. There aren't many large roles in this movie, but plenty of good small roles, and a cast of Ray Stevenson, Michael Gambon, Tom Waits, Frances de la Tour, and Malcolm McDowell all do good jobs with their roles. The only one who could be considered a disappointment is Mila Kunis as Beals's daughter, a slave who ends up following Eli. Kunis has yet to show me any transformation in any of her roles, as they all remind me of Jackie Burkhart from That 70's Show. And she shows no deviation here. She's interesting only because it gives us a hero alongside Eli, but we didn't need that, it was a better David vs. Goliath story without the extra help.

Walking the roads

I never expected to like The Book of Eli as much as I did. It's a shame it was released when it was; if it had been released in the brief time between when Avatar and Inception had been in the theaters, it may have had a chance to do much more at the box office. Still, it hasn't been a total loss. The studio made their money back and then some, and when the movie was released on DVD, it was an excellent seller, meaning it hadn't been completely overlooked. And that's good, since this is a smart, fascinating film that has enough surprises to make you shriek and is smart enough to keep you interested until the final credits. It just goes to show, don't ever underestimate a Denzel Washington film.

The Manliest Review of the Year

In May 2008, the Sex and the City movie was released to record audiences around the globe. I was there opening night with my then-girlfriend who had indoctrinated me into the television show, which I actually liked despite early reservations that it was simply a woman's show. What I had learned watching the HBO series was that it was not just about women; women were the main protagonists, of course, but the show was about friendship, inner strength and trust, which are themes that don't necessarily belong to either sex, and smart characters helped grow the show out of it's early emotional limitations. Of course, the show is also about Jimmy Choos, man-hunting, and Vogue, which means that about 90% of the people who went to see this movie opening night were women, most of them weaned on the TV show that had begun airing ten years earlier. Though not a very good movie overall (lacking much of the quality of it's source material), because of this fanatical female following, it was the most successful R-rated comedy ever, and also most successful for a movie starring all women.

The Expendables experience has been kind of like that.

Statham, Stallone and Couture take on bad men

The film stands as a tribute to the old-style action films of the '80's and early '90's, and much like Sex, The Expendables is not a very good movie. It fails to make into my Top 10 based on it's mindlessness alone. However, I still had a good time, much like I did during a similar opening night two years earlier.

The movie starts off quickly, with the Expendables, a team of elite mercenaries led by Sylvester Stallone's Barney Ross, conduct a messy hostage rescue mission on a boat in the Gulf of Adan. The team, consisting of blades specialist Lee Christmas (Jason Statham), martial artist Yin Yang (Jet Li), sniper Gunnar Jensen (Dolph Lundgren), weapons specialist Hale Caesar (Terry Crews) and demolitions expert Toll Road (Randy Couture), successfully rescue the hostages in dramatic fashion, but afterwards Ross is forced to kick Jensen out of the group for his growing psychological problems. It's a bad sign if your buddies think you're too crazy to be a good mercenary, but any good viewer would doubt this is the last we've seen of Jensen. Not long after, the Expendables' former teammate and mission coordinator Tool (Mickey Rourke) comes to them with a job offer, calling it "hell and back". On the island of Vilena, in the Gulf of Mexico, a dictator by the name of General Garza has taken over and practically enslaved his own people, with the might of the island's military behind him. The mission is to eliminate Garza, but upon performing a reconnaissance mission of the island, Ross and Christmas discover that Garza is backed by former C.I.A. spook James Munroe (Eric Roberts) and his goons Paine (Steve Austin) and The Brit (Gary Daniels), determining that Munroe is the true target.

Rourke also performs as the teams' Swiss masseuse

As you can see just from the last paragraph, Stallone (who co-wrote and directed the film) searched high and low for the biggest cast of action stars he could find for this movie. Besides those mentioned, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared in cameo roles, and efforts were made to recruit Jean-Claude Van Dam, Wesley Snipes, Forest Whitaker, Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson, Steven Seagal, and Kurt Russell, though either disinterest or conflicting schedules kept them from the sets. The ensemble cast is barely that, however, as the movie mostly revolves around Stallone and Statham, with a little Lee and Lundgren thrown in for good measure. Stallone is as good as he's ever been as an actor (take that for what you will), but Statham remains something special even as his chosen genre lessens in importance by the year. Li, meanwhile is dry and uninteresting, only watchable when he's kicking things. 53-year-old Lundgren is only interesting in that he hasn't been on the big screen in years, though his character does do through some interesting transformation that the actor's talent can barely keep up with.

Stallone demands only the best cameos

Thankfully, the supporting cast is mostly talented, though given little to do in their roles. Although Eric Roberts joins an ever-growing line of bad 2010 movie villains with stupid decision-making and silly goals, the actor is at least good enough to make the role more fun than say, Jason Patric in The Losers or Patrick Wilson in The A-Team. His lackeys, played by Austin and Daniels, are serviceable for little more than their athletic prowess, as Austin is not at all different than his "Stone Cold" persona he put on for so many years as a performer in the WWE. I've never seen Daniels in anything, but to say the least his character was quite... British. Crews is a talented actor with little to do in this movie, his talents wasted on the small role he does his best to be present in. And while I'm sure Randy Couture is an intelligent, friendly guy, he has no business acting in anything that requires him to go on a monologue about cauliflower ear. Really, Randy? That's interesting, I'm just going to rest my eyes, but you just keep on talking. The cameo of Willis and Schwarzenegger along with Stallone is hilarious, with all three actors looking like they're having a ball delivering their lines. The three of them after all could be considered the three top action stars of the 80's, with billions earned between them. But the best of the best is by far Rourke, who once again shows the talent almost wasted from years of psychological issue and substance abuse. He's not in on any of the big action sequences or for much of the movie at all, but in his role he manages to be the heart of the movie, no small feat considering the amount of testosterone and explosions flowing through it.

Roberts and Austin dodge an attack by movie critics

And when stuff blows up in The Expendables, it BLOWS UP, big time. It's no secret that the explosions, violence and macho posturing is meant as the main attraction of the movie, as it goes over the top in this. When you compare it to other, relatively bloodless, action films released in this and previous years, the film feels even more out of time, and the viewer knows what it was like to sit in a theater in the '80's and watch their first Rambo flick. These effects are top shelf quality, with a reason for almost every blast and ricochet. The action sequences are actually well put together, if a little difficult to follow, especially the last sequence which takes place in the middle of the night.

(l-r) Stallone, Li, Couture, Crews, Statham

If there's a real problem with The Expendables, it's in relation to it's gender roles. The only two prominent female parts belong to Latin actress Gisele Itie and former Buffy the Vampire Slayer hottie Charisma Carpenter. Both add up to little more than damsels in distress, as Carpenter plays the ex-girlfriend of Statham's character who ends up in an abusive relationship, and Itie plays a revolutionary who hires the mercenaries and then must be rescued by them, instigating in a light romance with Ross (Which is just a little creepy since Stallone is seven years older than my father and Itie is a year younger than ME). It wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that there have been major female action stars who don't even make cameo appearances, such as Michelle Yeoh and Cynthia Rothrock. There's no doubt this is a boy's club, but even the tiniest extension to this branch of the genre would have been appreciated by the audience.

Nevertheless, The Expendables is a fun, independent and mindless source of entertainment, able to be enjoyed by action novices or experts alike, it's a rarity to see this many big names on one screen, even if several of them are a little long in the tooth. It's a film about friendship, making a difference and brotherhood, but also one in which men are blown up, burnt to a crisp, and decapitated in the most violent ways possible. For some (many, it seems), that is enough. It most certainly isn't for everybody. It's no Eat, Pray, Love, but when it makes that much at the box office, it doesn't have to be.

Losers Weepers

Okay, here's the story.

Your special forces team is on a top-secret covert mission working with the C.I.A. to take down some bad guys. When the mission is complete, your C.I.A. handlers betray you for knowing too much, committing an atrocity and blaming it on your team, forcing you all to go underground and on the run to try and find out who framed you and clear your name.

Okay, now raise your hand if you thought I was talking about The A-Team.

It's easy to draw comparisons between the famous 1980's show that was recently adapted into a big-screen blockbuster and The Losers, the unfortunately-named adaptation of the Vertigo Comics (DC's mature label) series of the same name. Both feature special forces teams betrayed by forces in their government. Both teams go on the run to try and clear their names. Both movies blow up a lot of ordinance. Both have a smoking-hot lead actress that's not afraid to fire of a missile launcher if she so desir... oh, wait. No, The Losers gets a point for that. One has to wonder, though, whether original comic creator Andy Diggle knew he was creating something of an A-Team clone when he set the book in motion back in 2003.

Saldana's a lethal weapon

There's no doubting the movie's strengths, however. The Losers, the best of the best of special forces teams, are sent down to Bolivia in tandem with the C.I.A. in order to take down a suspected terrorist. Led by Lt. Colonel Clay (Henry Dean Morgan), the team consists of hand-to-hand expert Roque (Idris Elba), hacker Jensen (Chris Evans), vehicle specialist Pooch (Columbus Short) and sniper Cougar (Oscar Jaenada). All the team has to do is call in a target for an aerial strike, but after they do so, they notice a large number of children on site. Rebuffed in their attempts to call off the strike, the team carries off a very risky rescue mission that successfully gets the children off base and into the extraction helicopter that was meant for the team. When that helicopter gets destroyed in an apparent retaliatory strike by the C.I.A. for disobeying orders, the team is blamed for the deaths and forced to go underground and try to find who set them up to try and get their lives back. While hiding out, they're discovered by the mysterious Aisha (Zoe Saldana), who offers them a chance, a slim one, to get back at the operative who betrayed them and let them get back to their lives.

"Another van? Can't we ride in a helicopter like The A-Team?"

The film doesn't have as much mayhem as The A-Team, but while nothing can take the place of watching someone attempt to fly a tank, it surely doesn't lack for action. Explosions abound, but by taking a more realistic route, the movie still has dozens of gunfights, espionage missions and deception to keep the average action fan happy, and strong character development with interesting character interaction go a long way to the creation of a quality film.

One of the more explosive scenes in the film

Morgan, probably still known more for his tragic role on Grey's Anatomy as the heart patient Denny Duquette than for Watchmen's anti-hero the Comedian, smolders and shines, especially in scenes involving Saldana and Elba. It's a huge step forward for him to be the main man, and he handles the situation admirably and professionally. Saldana has simply exploded onto the scene, with Star Trek and Avatar officially announcing her career ascendancy, and here she commands your attention every time she's on the screen. Elba may have trouble living up to his work as Stringer Bell on The Wire, but here he does a good job of putting that behind him as Clay's friend and also a pretty good source of the team's tension. Unlike Clay, who wants revenge, Roque simply wants his life back, and Elba pulls it off. Jaenada doesn't get much to do but shoot things from a distance; He has few lines and no background is ever supplied for him. In the comic he supposedly quiet because of trauma experienced in combat, but that's never explored in the film. Short is pretty good as Pooch, the only married member of the squad who's wife is at home, pregnant and close to her due date. Pooch desperately wants to be there for when his child is born. Short gets some good scenes and plays them well, especially in the humor department. But the true standout of the crew might be the geeky Jensen, played by Evans. The best example might be this scene, where Jensen infiltrates an office building to extract a tool they need to fight back against the C.I.A. The scene, interspersed with action and laughs, is a great use of the character, and he's got the most charisma with the audience of any of the characters. Also I must say this is the movie that has allayed my fears about Evans being cast as the new Captain America, as he manages to bulk up considerably from the seemingly skinny Fantastic Four days.

"That's right bitches; I got a crossbow!"

It's too bad that The Losers continues this season's tradition of bone-headed villains who are really no danger to the heroes of the tale. One can only wonder what would have happened if Jason Patric hadn't turned down the lead role in The FirmThe A-Team, which arrived in theaters a week later. Saldana, for instance. While still being a serious sex symbol for the guys watching, Saldana is also something for the ladies: a strong, female character who plays by her own rules and does things her way, which is a huge leap over Jennifer Beals' role in The A-Team. Also, though A-Team may have more name recognition, The Losers does a great job of letting the audience connect with and sympathize with these soldiers, Clay and Roque too but especially Pooch and Jensen, whose family connections are minor plot threads in the story.

Pooch battles depth perception

So yeah, I loved The Losers and director Sylvan White's efforts on his biggest production to date. So why if I think it's superior in ways to The A-Team do I have it situated as the new #7 when A-Team comfortably sits at #4? Frankly, despite the attempt at more realistic ideas, the story itself  reeks of cheap knock-off, when The A-Team has boasted this storyline for a much longer lifespan. Though A-Team's plot devices have holes you could sail a ship through, it never lets you dwell on the problems with the story like The Losers does. The A-Team may boast sequences that make no sense (cutting out the engine of your helicopter right before the heat-seeking missiles hit probably won't work and shouldn't be recommended for real-life pilots), but they invariably make the movie more exciting and fantastical, easier for the viewer to become lost in the fabric of the film. And while The Losers boasts a strong ensemble cast that can do drama and comedy, nobody was better at leading than Liam Neeson, nobody better at doing the undercover than Bradley Cooper, and nobody with quite the natural comedic timing of Sharlto Copley. Honestly, while The Losers deserved more attention than it got and barely squeaked by, The A-Team was the film I had the more fun watching.

Just don't forget about this film. Losers need love too.

Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Film

If you've seen me in person at all the past few months, I've probably mentioned Scott Pilgrim vs. the World to you. I first saw the trailer back when I saw The A-Team, and as you can imagine from the fact that I would constantly re-watch the trailers at home whenever I had a free moment, I've been looking forward to it ever since. What can I say? The trailers have been instant merriment, a quick pick-me-up during a dull moment. And so when I finally had the chance to see the whole damn thing this past Thursday, I was confident that it would easily stride atop of my movie rankings, or very close thereof. And having just completed the six-set graphic novel collection by Canadian cartoonist Bryan Lee O'Malley, I was even more excited, having already been drawn into the story of one young man's quest to defeat his new girlfriend's seven evil exes who are out to make her new boyfriend's life a living hell.

Of course, the movie wouldn't even be in existence if not for the pre-existing graphic novel. Published by Oni Press, the first volume of the Scott Pilgrim series, called Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Life, was released in August of 2004 and immediately the idea of adapting it into a movie was begun, with director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) brought in almost immediately. Though most of the story had yet to be committed to paper, O'Malley was very involved in the creation of the script, with several of his dialogue lines and plot bits making their way to the movie, and in return, several of the scripts used had influence in volumes 3 and 4 of the graphic novel.

The Gorgeous Mary Elizabeth Winstead

You'll notice that I say "graphic novel" and not "manga" in referring to Scott Pilgrim, though one could be forgiven for confusing this title with the latter. The books are designed not unlike those one would see in section of your local bookstore consigned to the popular Japanese import titles. Black and white, with rare color pages, big eyes, and exaggerated animations, it's not unlike many eastern titles on the market. O'Malley was in fact influenced by manga, but his style is really closer to, say, Chynna Clugston's Blue Monday than Tite Kubo's Bleach. It's got tons of western influence as well, and it's setting in frigid Canada already sets itself apart from most titles in general.

The Scott Pilgrim series starts out great and gets better with every volume, eventually winning Harvey and Eisner awards for their strong character development, funny dialogue, crazy action, and possibly most important, a believably developing relationship between Scott and the love of his life, Ramona Flowers. With such high standards for storytelling and with excellent trailers paving the way for what we expect to see the most entertaining film this year, can the truth live up even close to the hype? In an answer, no.

Scott Pilgrim Kicks Ass

The film starts strong, following closely to the story of the first volume of the graphic novel, the only title in the series finished before scripts had begun to be written. In it, Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a slacker and part-time bassist for the band Sex Bob-Omb (Names after the explosive Super Mario villain) with his friends Stephen Stills on guitar (Mark Webber), Kim Pine on drums (Alison Pill), and "Young" Neil who's their biggest fan boy (Johnny Simmons). The 23-year old Pilgrim has just begun dating a high-schooler, 17-year-old Knives Chau (Ellen Wong), with whom he likes spending time because this kind of relationship is "easy" for him, one year after a particularly break-up. He shares an apartment (and bed) with his gay friend Wallace Wells (Kieran Culkin) and for the time being, life seems easy. That changes when he sees a mysterious stranger in a dream, who eventually turns out to be the very real Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), an American who just moved to Toronto to start over and get away from her past. That past manifests itself as the League of Evil Exes, made up of seven evil people who blame Ramona for ruining their lives and seeking that she should never be involved with be taken out of the picture, ensuring Ramona could never be happy in a relationship. The various fight scenes (and actually, many other parts of the movie) are very much inspired by video games and music, creating a unique, and outrageous, way of pushing the story forward in a way that has never been done on the big screen before. So from the point that Matthew Patel (Satya Bhabha) crashes a battle of the bands meet to fight Scott on, our hero is constantly on the defensive, worried about from where the next attack may arrive.

L-R: Cera, Winstead, Simmons, Wong, Pill, Webber

The acting in the film is quite good, with several of the supporting roles cast able to almost perfectly embody the graphic novel's unique conceptions, especially Wong as the Scott-crazy high-schooler Knives and Culkin as the scene-stealing Wallace. Both actors manage to perfectly personify their roles and expand upon what's known from the comic. Pill, Webber and Simmons are good as the band-mates, though little is done with them. Anna Kendrick had not yet been nominated for her Oscar for Up in the Air when shooting of this film had begun but provides much spunk for her relatively small role, and Winstead takes a great opportunity and does a fantastic job with the lead role she's been given. It's almost unfortunate that Cera is the weakest link in this ensemble cast. He plays the nerd card right, but I'm beginning to wonder if there's much range in his performances, as he's pretty much playing a slightly-older version of his character from Arrested Development, albeit with fighting prowess. He just lacks a small part of Scott's personality, his utter devotion to Ramona, that detracts from his performance. And that's why it's a shame that the ensemble cast isn't given more of a chance to shine, like they are in the comics. It's a minor quibble, but more of Kim Pine or Envy Adams (Brie Larsen) would not have hurt the story, especially since it had been pared down to a scant 112 minutes. That's a LOT of character development cut out.

The League of Evil Exes

The exes are a good variety, with the personas mostly consistent with the books. Matthew Patel is exactly the same as his print version, not surprising since the entire story to that point is a slightly truncated copy of the first book. But skateboarder/action star Lucas Lee (Chris Evans) is much different from his character in the book, who wasn't even evil, just a sellout. Parenthood's Mae Whitman is good-but-not-great as the fourth evil ex, the lesbian half-ninja Roxy Richter. But the true standout of the exes is Brandon "Superman" Routh as Todd Ingram, rock star bassist, third evil ex, and the current boyfriend of Envy Adams, Scott's ex-girlfriend. Routh manages to convey humor in silent delivery. Never mind that the lines aren't ad-libbed (they appear exactly the same in the third volume) his delivery is perfect and who knew Routh could actually ACT?? His was a pleasant surprise, easily the best part of the movie. Too bad it was squarely in the middle, as Jason Schwartzman, while seemingly cast as the penultimate evil ex-boyfriend, doesn't stack up as a main villain as he should. Even worse, the Katayanagi twins, evil exes 5 and 6, are turned from robot-building geniuses into a pair of anonymous pop stars, with not a single line of dialogue between them. The castration of their roles was not only a side-effect of the movie entering production before the comic was finished, but apparently the lack of interest the filmmakers had in new evil characters by this point and rushed through them to get to Schwartzman. In fact, from about halfway through the Roxy Richter story onward, the movie feels a little forced. A shame that such potentially interesting characters are tossed aside like garbage.

Brandon Routh shows off his vegan psychic powers

And this leads to my ultimate gripes about the movie. It would be folly to exactly convert a good story like that in the Scott Pilgrim books directly into a film, because then you'd have a six-hour film and no matter how good a performance is, it rarely will keep an audience in the spirit for that long. However, so much was cut out of the stories that it practically makes the story somewhat unbelievable (okay, as unbelievable as a story involving quick-travel dimensions, mystic Indian warriors, psychic vegan rockers, lesbian half-ninjas, and enemies that explode into currency can be) over the course of the film. Lack of minor character development is one problem. Scott's previous relationships before Ramona, including those with Kim and Envy (whose breakup had a heavy toll for Scott) are barely mentioned. Kim has been reduced to a useless wise-cracker for whom the story at large has no meaning, and Envy had a much bigger role in the books, but in the movie that ends with Todd's defeat. Those characters, as well as Scott's old high-school friend Lisa Miller (who's completely cut out of the film adaptation) are major factors in the continual degradation of the Scott/Ramona relationship over the course of the book's story, replaced in the film by Ramona simply being tired of her past catching up to her, and Scott's fear that he'll lose Ramona. These things DO have impact in the books, but on a much smaller scale. But the biggest issue the film has may be it's time line. In the books, more than a year passes between the events of volumes 1 and 6. That's a lot of time for character, relationship and plot development. In the movies, this time is scaled down to a couple of WEEKS at most. It's one thing to speed up the pattern of ex-attacks, another thing to speed up a story to fit more snugly into film-length entertainment, but the ups and downs of Scott and Ramona's relationship is believable BECAUSE it takes place over so long a period of time. The wear and tear that exists between them is a result of small things over a length of time, not big things over the short term. And cutting the film short means Scott doesn't even get to do any of the major steps forward he performs in volume 4, such as successfully getting a job and moving in with Ramona. In all, the comic featured a realistic relationship during unrealistic scenarios. With the movie, the realism of the relationship is gone. And to add insult to injury by the end, we're led to believe that he'd be better off back with Knives than Ramona.

Big Hammer

So does that mean I didn't like Scott Pilgrim vs. the World? Oh, no, I liked it. I liked it A LOT. I had serious issues with the movie, mostly due to the graphic novel series still being so fresh in my mind, though the film had enough foibles of it's own. No, the excellent use of video game imagery to tell the story, outrageous humor, and the amazing acting from the ensemble cast, still puts it high on my chart for the year, even if it fell far short on expectations. I may not have loved it quite so much as I had been sure I would, but Scott Pilgrim vs. the World still ends up ranked at #5 on my top 10 list for the year.

That's right. I have a top 10 movies list.

Enjoy!

Aaarrrr, Matey!

When my parents bought the first home PC for me and my sister, I doubt they could have predicted quite how profound an effect it would have on me for years to come. Way back in what I want to say was the Christmas of '90 or '91, the first PC was ideal for of course working on our homework or checking out websites on it's state-of-the-art 56K modem (I'll hopefully never have to be without a cable modem from now on) but one of the coolest things about the new PC was that my parents had gotten a couple of games from a friend of the family loaded up for us to enjoy. One of them was Lucasarts' The Secret of Monkey Island. The irreverent, hilarious game from the mind of Ron Gilbert introduced me to the geeky but enthusiastic Guybrush Threepwood as he ventured to become a pirate, seduce the Governor of Melee Island, and defeat the evil Ghost Pirate LeChuck, in an adventure as cool and whimsical as it was challenging and hilarious. It's one of the games that influenced my gamer development, and certainly made me into one of the few dedicated adventure gamers out there, a medium that sadly few game companies take a serious stab at.

Not long after completing SMI, I was delighted to discover that a second game had been released in the series. Monkey Island 2, LeChuck's Revenge had been released a year after the first game. It would be the last Monkey Island game penned by Gilbert before he left Lucasarts (Though I wouldn't know that until years later) and it's still held today as not only the best Lucasarts adventure game, but one of the best adventure games EVER (and having played through pretty much the entire Lucasarts adventure game library, I can pretty much justify those assertions). So it was with great delight when I discovered that last month, about nineteen years after it was first released, Monkey Island 2 was getting the "Special Edition" treatment that SMI had gotten last summer when the latest addition to the series Tales of Monkey Island had been released. The game was completely remastered, with new graphics, new audio and voice-over work (voice technology for games didn't even exist when the game was first released) and a host of new features to attract new fans while pleasing those who had played long ago.

The game take place an unspecified amount of time after the end of the first game, with Guybrush landing himself on Scabb Island, home to pirates, sailors and rebels. Having amassed a large amount of wealth to his name, Guybrush is on a quest to find the legendary treasure of Big Whoop, located on some unnamed island in this fictional Caribbean. However, soon disaster strikes. The island's local thug, one pint-sized Largo Lagrande, robs Guybrush of all his money and riches. That's bad enough, but when Guybrush manages to build a voodoo doll of Largo to get back at the diminutive terror, he inadvertently sets plans in motion to resurrect the dread pirate LeChuck, who's reign of terror Guybrush had thought to have stopped for good in the last game. Apparently, the only thing Guybrush can do to stop it is to do what he had already been doing, find Big Whoop before LeChuck.

The game was well received at the time for a number of reasons, not the least of which were excellent artwork, streaming music that would alter to fit the specific scene seamlessly without pauses or breaks, and sharp, individual characters that don't feel like copy/paste jobs. A lot of work was put into the creation of this game, and it showed. Even now, though the graphics would look seriously pixellated on current machines, the art and music still feel cozy and attractive, all these years later.

Dialogue is funny and fresh, and it helps that the characters are well thought out, with motivations and reasons for the things they do. Interacting with characters using the dialogue trees was a delight, especially since there are no "wrong" answers that would prematurely end the game for you, so you can say the snarky thing just to be fun and still get the job done. Puzzles are also unique, with many of them involving you cheat (like in the game's spitting and drinking contests), others involving recipes (the voodoo doll), or sabotage (dumping a rat in a cold vichyssoise), meaning you don't have to do the same puzzle over and over again like you do in some games.

The Special Edition also comes with some great features, along with it's enhanced visuals and sound. The voice work is excellently done by the same team that voices the other games in the series, and the head trio of Dominic Armato (Guybrush), Alexandra Boyd (Elaine, the Governor) and Earn Boen (LeChuck) are all fantastic in their roles, and Phil Lamarr is also well cast in the small role of Captain Dread. The only disappointment in the voice casting was that of James Arnold Taylor as Largo, as instead of the vague piraty voice I was expecting, Largo sounded like he was hailing straight from Brooklyn, completely destroying the mood of the game when he was in the scene. It's a shame because Largo is a great character and to have him voiced so lessened that. He's not the only problem on audio, either. In a scene where Guybrush's parents come back from the dead to tell him an important message in song (yes, there was blunt force trauma involved, why do you ask?) the lyrics are sung off-tempo from the background music, the results of which are simply cringe-inducing.

These few gaffes are forgivable, though, compared to the wonder that is the rest of the game. The enhanced visuals are spectacular, and unlike the Special Edition for Secret, the character sprites actually look realistically within their environment, instead of looking like they were pasted in. The return of many favorite characters (Stan the Used Coffin salesman, the enigmatic Voodoo Lady) is supplemented by many new, cool ones (cartographer Wally B. Feed, Captain Kat Capsize), and one doesn't feel like any of these characters don't belong. The "Lite" mode that the original game shipped with, an easy mode for younger players, has been removed but has been replaced with a hint system to help stuck players along, and one of the coolest features that had been released in last year's special edition was being able to press one button to replace the new visuals and audio with the original 1991 graphics and music, for those nostalgic for the good old days.

Finally, the game has new features specifically for those of us who LOVE special features. Besides the unlockable concept art that can be opened up by solving puzzles and advancing through the game, there's also a "Commentary" mode, in which original creators Ron Gilbert, Dave Grossman and Tim Schafer run commentary on the game as you play it (optionally, of course, in case you don't want to miss your favorite part of the game) in MST3K style, with their silhouettes watching the action on screen. As far as I can tell, it's the first time all three have collaborated on anything having to do with the Monkey Island universe together since MI2's release way back in 1991, so it's a landmark event to say the least.

Having played the game on-and-off over and over since it's release so many moons ago, it was a no-brainer for me to pick the game up in S.E. form, but even if you haven't played the games before, I heartily recommend grabbing these Special Editions while they're available. At only $9.99 each, there's no reason not to give it a shot and see why so many people think Guybrush Threepwood is among the best video game characters of all time.