THE AVIATOR

Director: Martin Scorsese (Goodfellas, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Last Temptation of Christ)
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, Kate Beckinsdale, Alan Alda

This biopic of Howard Hugh's early career is a beautiful and strange piece of cinema. Martin Scorsese is at the peak of his game visually as the film is filled lush and intriguing cinematography. The rest of his direction is not quite up to the level of his masterpieces, however. Scorsese's most recent film, Gangs of New York was another beautiful, albeit flawed film. This film is better. Just as beautiful, but better designed and better acted. Scorsese seems to be at his best when he focuses on the beautiful moments rather than trying to force the moments into a larger plot. This film does that better than Gangs, but not quite up to the level of Goodfellas, or Taxi Driver. There is little larger thematic material in this film. It's simply the story of a strange and brilliant man. Hughs built an empire out of planes and movies. He was a playboy, a test pilot, a businessman, and a freakish recluse all at once. The biggest downside of this film is the pitiful ending. It's wonderful and strange throughout, and then it just suddenly ends on a random note. There is no climax. That makes it difficult to create a story arc, although this one slogs through nicely until that point. Despite its flaws, this is still a very good film. One of the year's best no less.

Standouts: Very good direction with some nice art direction thrown in.
Blowouts: Good, but never seems to come together into anything meaningful.

Grade: A-

OPEN WATER

Director: Chris Kentis (Grind)
Starring: Blanchard Ryan, Daniel Travis


"Inspired" by true events, this low budget film tells the story of two scuba divers accidentally abandoned in the middle of the ocean. Due to the shear incompentance of the diving company, the divers are simply forgotten as the boat speeds to port. They then face not only the terror of their impending death, but a pack of peckish sharks. This is a great idea, and to a degree the film is succesful. For instance, despite showing little more than two people floating in the ocean for 45 minutes, the movie is never boring. Unfortunately, it never quite captures the terror of the situation (although a few moments in the pitch black of night come awfully close). This could have been another Blair Witch Project, but alas, it fell just a bit short. Still very intriguing, and shudder-worthy.

Standouts: A la Blair Witch Project, simple filmmaking works when trying to scare.
Blowouts: I have no doubt this won't be nearly as enjoyable on repeat viewings.

Grade: B

THE ALAMO

Director: John Lee Hancock (The Rookie)
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Billy Bob Thornton, Jason Patric, Patrick Wilson

Despite an attempt to tell the "gritty truth" about the heros of the Alamo, here we end up with a broad, sappy movie on par with the Ted Turner Civil War films (Gods and Generals, etc). Daniel Boone in this film admits his inadequacies, Jim Bowie is holed up with pneumonia, and Sam Houston briefly is hawking land parcels to the rich in Washington DC. I guess that's better than John Wayne's folk tale Daniel Boone in a previous incarnation of Alamo story. There is mention given to the whole slavery thing, but it's mere lip service. Sadly, I learned nothing from this film - neither historical, nor emotional. That's bad news for an historical epic.

Standouts: I applaud them for the 'attempt' to get it historically accurate.
Blowouts: In the end this is a somewhat inane, mundane piece of work.

Grade: C+

DODGEBALL:

Director: Rawson Marshall Thurber (No major film work)
Starring: Vince Vaughn, Christine Taylor, Ben Stiller

There are a lot of things in this film that I find conceptually funny, but that don't really pan out on the screen (a random pirate character, Ben Stiller's buff (and short) villian, etc). There was also what I consider my most hilarious moment of 2004 - when ESPN 8 ("The Ocho") began broadcasting the dodgeball tournament. The production of the film was sloppy, with minimal character and plot development. It's not a good movie, but it does have a few laugh out loud moments.

Standouts: A stupidly fun movie. It'll be nice on TV when you have 30 minutes to kill.
Blowouts: They really could have tried harder. Seems like a throwaway production.

Grade: C

OCEAN'S TWELVE

Director: Steven Soderbergh (Traffic, Out of Sight, Sex Lies and Videotape, Ocean's Eleven)
Starring: Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Catherine Zeta Jones, Matt Damon, Julia Roberts, more

Sequels generally suck for 2 main reasons. First only good movies get sequels made, so in comparison the sequal is unlikely to be as good. Such was Ocean's Eleven and Twelve, a good movie and a less good movie. There's no doubt that it's very difficult to make a good movie in the first place. There's a chemistry that often exists between actors, and character, and production teams that can't easily be reproduced. To a degree, such is Ocean's Twelve. There is still obvious chemistry between the actors, but the lack of interesting moments in this film kill any potential chemistry between the characters. Second, sequels often suck because movie-makers always seem to think that there has to be more in the sequel than in the original. More explosions, more passion, more eye-candy, more blah, blah, blah. This is almost always wrong. Trying to provide more in one area usually ends up taking away from another area and turning the movie into much, much less. Unfortunately, a sequel also suffers from a perception problem by the audience. If it's not better than the original, or at least quite nearly as good, it will seem much worse by comparison.

This film is not as good as the original. As such, it occasionally even seems to be much worse. The story does suffer a bit from trying to do more than Ocean's Eleven, but mostly it's just not as interesting a script in the details. Lost is much of the simple interactions between the characters which is what made the first film so entertaining - the witty reparte if you will. Nonetheless, if the film is taken on its own, there is still much to like.

Standouts: Hard to argue with the movie stars assembled. You can't not like these guys.
Blowouts: The script had its moments, but it also had a wipeout or two.

Grade: B+

BEFORE SUNSET

Director: Richard Linklater (Before Sunrise, Dazed and Confused, The School of Rock)
Starring: Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy

Not having had the benefit of seeing Before Sunrise I had to take this film on its own rather than as a matching bookend to that film. The structure of the story allowed for this, but I'm nonetheless convinced that the predecessor film is necessary to truly enjoy this one. The two films: First, as young adults, an American and a French girl meet and fall in love in Vienna. They promise to meet again in 6 months, but we never find out if they do. In this film, it's years later and the two meet again (but not as they had planned in Vienna), discuss what happened with their lives, and fall in love yet again. Here we get a sense of the passion these two felt years before, but without my having seen it, I don't think it came across as purely as it would otherwise. Certainly the passion of these lovers was evident this time around, but it seemed strange not knowing their history when it's all they could talk about. Despite this it is an interesting film, creative and well acted. My last concern is that while it is intriguing to watch to people really fall in love (as opposed to most absurd movie love), it's also a little annoying. I don't love these people. I like them, sure, but I don't love them. I'll assume my grade might change a bit once I see the original film, but for now ...

Standouts: The dialog. Simply great dialog. The tone. The central idea of the film.
Blowouts: I was a little annoyed by the characters after a while.

Grade: B

THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK

Director: David Twohy (Pitch Black, writing credits for The Fugitive, Waterworld, more)
Starring: Vin Diesel, Colm Feore, Thandie Newton, Judi Dench

Wow! Awful! Vin Diesel cannot act. Beyond that, he's not even action-star material. His weak chin, and body that looks like it wants to be chubby, make him kind of silly as a tough guy. Beyond that, this movie was pretty bad even without Vin. It's one of those films where things happen quickly one right after another, but you don't really care about any of them. Beyond that, this movie had a scene where Vin outran a deadly 1000 degree sunrise. That's right - he *outran* the sunrise. Beyond that, the writing, and art design of the film were appaling. The "Necromongers" ran around the galaxy just being evil, looking like a goth rock band, using 10-foot-tall swords to kill people when they could have been using ray guns (the idiots). This movie sucked. As a final note, Judi Dench made a few strange appearances. She is a quality actress. Why was she here? I can only guess the answer is "lots of money". Regardless, her presence did nothing but mekely reemphasize the abundant badness throughout.

Standouts: I can't think of any right now ...
Blowouts: Simply too many to list in this short space. An awful movie. Atrocious.

Grade: D

THE TERMINAL

Director: Steven Spielberg (More hits than I can list ...)
Starring: Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta Jones, Stanley Tucci

A few years ago Tom Hanks held together "Cast Away" despite not having any significant dialogue for nearly an hour. Here he tries again, although with somewhat less success. In the former film, Hanks was trapped on a desert island, fighting for survival, and it was fascinating. In this film he's a traveler from some silly-sounding made-up country, trapped in JFK airport for months due to a series of beauracratic mishaps. It's not nearly as interesting. The two main problems with this film are the excess of absurdity and the lack of compelling moments. This schmuck from Eastern Europe convinces a hot stewardess who he meets only a few times to fall in love with him? Absurd. This schmuck from Eastern Europe tries to get a job at Sbarro? Boring. Yes, there is thematic material here about Immigrants' status in America, but it's very poorly done. Hanks character isn't even an immigrant! He's just some guy visiting the US. Despite all of the these problems, Speilberg and Hanks still have enough talent to create interest with the weakest material. A pretty bad movie is turned into a pretty decent movie entirely due to them.

Standouts: Tom Hanks, a great, compelling movie star. Cutsie direction by Spielberg.
Blowouts: That same cutsie direction tended to get annoying after a while.

Grade: B

FINDING NEVERLAND

Director: Marc Forster (Monster's Ball)
Starring: Johnny Depp, Kate Winslett, Freddie Highmoor, Julie Christie, more

A la the "Polar Express" we have yet another film about the power of fantasy. This one was better put together, although nowhere near as magical. Johnny Depp gives a fine, subdued performance as J. M. Barrie, the author of Peter Pan. Here amid troubles in his own marriage he befriends a lonely widow and her 4 young children. Out of these relationships comes his love letter to the child's imagination, "Peter Pan". It's a simple, straightforward tale, where Barie befriends the children and helps them through their problems with the power of make-believe. This purity of form and character is important to the success of a film about the purity of imagination. It's a pleasant and enjoyable film, and although the entire story is about the power of imagination confronting the sorrows of real life, I don't think it does a particularly good job of educating the viewer on the true separation. It's a bit of a fantastical take on the power of fantasy, if you will. Quite a good film, but not great.

Standouts: One of those 'solid across the board' type of films.
Blowouts: I have minor complaints with the thematic material. Nothing significant.

Grade: A-

THE POLAR EXPRESS

Director: Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump, Back to the Future, Contact, Cast Away, more)
Starring: voices of Tom Hanks, Nona Gaye, Daryl Sabara, more

Not since Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" earlier in the year have I seen a film of such high highs, and such low lows. Parts of this movie are simply spectacular - the sorts of things that we might end up watching every Christmas for the next 50 years. This movie is about Christmas, by the way, and childhood. There are absolutely marvelous visual spectacles in this film. Eclipsing Shrek in many ways, this is easily one the best uses of computer animation to date. As with "The Incredibles" seen yesterday, the animation still has trouble with humans, however. Shrek still wins there. This is one fantastically beautiful movie no doubt about it. It's also surprisingly, and intriguingly dark in places. It's a wonderful ride that I could have confidently labeled a 'classic' film were it not for a few MAJOR problems. #1) This film occasionally loses sight of its timeless story and tries to co-opt some of the silliness in Shrek. Absurdly misplaced in this wonderous film, Steven Tyler of Aerosmith briefly appears as a singing elf at the end of the movie. Goddamn awful, that's what that is. #2) Too many action sequences. The first action sequence is just plain fun. By the fourth, I realize they couldn't figure out what else to do except plug in another action sequence. #3) The film didn't know if it was a musical or not. We start off with a fun (if off key) song about hot chocolate. Then we get only one more complete song the rest of the way. This movie should have plain and simply been a musical. No doubt about it. #4) That other complete song sucked. With the rest of the film backed by classics Christmas songs, plus the fun hot chocolate song, the main musical number was trite crap. Blah. #5) The movie's chief message was dumb. The point of the film was to believe in things even if you can't prove them. That Santa Claus (and by default God) can't be seen, but they're still there. Realize that I view this as a morally offensive bit of thematic material. Now with all of this negativity against this movie, how could I have claimed this to be nearly a classic. You'll have to see the visuals, and mysterious dark tone, and the strange wonderment of it all to appreciate it. What's more, I believe in the power of the imagination, just not the power of self delusion - it's a fine line that I think this movie crossed. So far, this is both the most wonderful, and the most disappointing film of 2004. Of course, it's only disappointing because it was so wonderful in the first place.

Standouts: Animation, direction, tone, art, strange timeless story.
Blowouts: Steven ... freaking ... Tyler? What were you thinking Zemekis?

Grade: A

THE INCREDIBLES

Director: Brad Bird (The Iron Giant)
Starring: voices of Craig T. Nelson, Holly Hunter, Samuel L. Jackson, Jason Lee

This year's Pixar blockbuster, The Incredibles is the first of their computer-generated films to feel unique since the original Toy Story. The art is unique (and quite good), the story is unique, the characters are even a notch more original than those in the the other films. This is the story of a family of superheros forced to give up hero work for boring day jobs and a middle class lifestyle. Then, of course, a nemesis arises and they are forced to come out of retirement. The art deserves special mention in this film. With the exception of the Shrek films this is as good as computer-animation gets. Unfortunately like in most other computer animation, the characters here still manage to look creepy and flat. Thematically, I started to like the notion the story had about living up to your abilities, then I realized where it was going with it. American kids (very broadly and relatively) have acquired a culture of laziness and not acheiving that this film is attempting to counter. Kudos for that. Unfortunately, this movie goes well past the notion of personal ambition and into the realm of Ayn Rand-like self-indulgence. Let me explain: This superhero family didn't have to work to acheive anything, they just had to be themselves. They are superheros, after all. I mean, the real worth in acheivement is that's it's difficult to do. That's why it's important. The story wasn't really about struggling to achieve your best, tho. It was about how there are truly exceptional supermen in this world and that the mass of humanity should, well, kinda worship them. It's rather thinly veiled Ayn Rand arrogance to a tee. Despite my hatred of the wacko cult of selfishness that is Objectivism, I must admit that this was still a good film. To get off track here, is there a more stupid name for a Philosophy than 'objectivism'? I mean, that nutjob religion has nothing to do with objectivity and everything to do with remaining as much like a two year old as you can, for as long as you can.

Standouts: The script. Some of the characters. The animation.
Blowouts: The Ayn Randness that was thematically pervasive throughout.

Grade: B+

SAVED (DVD)

Director: Brian Danelly (no major film work)
Starring: Jena Malone, Mandy Moore, Macauley Culkin

This is about as entertaining and enjoyable as teen comedies get. It is vaguely formulaic as it's centered on a clique of girls ruled by the most snobbish, dictatorial girl in school, and the various outcasts periodically trying to get in, or get out of that group. It's much better than the formula though. Most importantly, it takes the formula and gives a serious twist before it even begins. You see, these teenagers aren't in public school, they're in a small baptist school where popularity translates into saving the most souls, and most loudly praising the word. The queen bee, as it were, is Mandy Moore - the most soul-savingest of the bunch. On one hand this film was really enjoyable to watch, funny, and interesting. On another, it was rather obvious in its treatment of religion (and this is coming from an atheist). Rather than somehow touch truths about how religion funnels societal outcasts into it's arms, or how religion often (like a cult) desperately pushes its adherants into isolation and ignorance of the greater world, this film says things like: Gays are okay since god made 'em, or it's not right to hate teenage mothers. Okay, maybe I'm being far too harsh on this teenage flick... Like I said, I must admit that it was funny, interesting, and far better than the average teen comedy.

Standouts: Not quite Clueless good (in terms of teenage flicks), but solid in many ways. Blowouts: Obvious lessons learned: "Gay's are okay." Thanks, Hollywood.

Grade: B

THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW (DVD)

Director: Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, The Patriot, The 13th Floor)
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Jake Gyllenhaal, Emmy Rossum

Not since "Chaos Theory" led Dinosaurs to eat people in Jurassic Park have I seen Hollywood so massively mess up its science. Actually, this film's take on the Atlantic current's effect on global client far outstrips the scientific bullshit in JP. You see, according to The Day After Tomorrow global warming is going to cause a massive week-long storm that will wipe out the northern hemisphere any day now. Okay, so the science is hokey, that can be excusable - Jurassic Park was a rather wonderful film. This, however, is not. In fact, it's just plain insipid. Other than a few cool scenes where Los Angeles and New York get wiped out (by the climate? Yep.), the rest of the film has a "sort of watchable while I do my laundry" vibe to it.

Standouts: It was neat watching cities get pummeled. That's about it.
Blowouts: The script was awful. Hollywood at its worst.

Grade: C-

THE FOG OF WAR (DVD)

Director: Errol Morris (Gates of Heaven, The Thin Blue Line, Fast Cheap and Out of Control)
Starring: Documentary

This documentary is nothing more than a long (yet timely and massively intriguing) interview with Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense during the bulk of the Vietnam war. McNamara, in addition to being a genuinely interesting person, has a great deal to tell us about that American morass that was Vietnam. Quite wonderfully, he also has much to tell us about his history before the Vietnam war - which provides even more insight into that dreadful conflict. The movie is timely (rather obviously) due to the current situation in Iraq. This film doesn't need Iraq to be a success, however. There is a great deal to learn here, but it's interesting that no matter how much information you get about the Vietnam war, there always seem to be more questions raised. McNamara knows this, and so will the viewer after seeing this film.

Standouts: Robert McNamara.
Blowouts: Simplicity of the film worked well. Not much to really call out.

Grade: A-

BAADASSSSS! (DVD)

Director: Mario Van Peebles (New Jack City, long active acting career)
Starring: Mario Van Peebles, Joy Bryant, Klheo Thomas, more

This film by Mario Van Peebles about his father's obsessive creation of the first independent black movie was quite good. Although Mario may not be a particularly gifted director, his screenplay was so full of interesting characters and situations that he may not have needed to do much more than he did. It's just plain interesting to know that Mario lost his virginity at 13 in a sex scene in his father's movie. It's interesting to see how his father put his whole financial self on the line for an independent film. Sweet Sweetback's Baad Assss Song may not have been a very good movie, but it was the very first movie with strong black characters kicking some whitey ass - and that's probably worthwhile. This tale of its creation might even be more worthwhile. An engaging film from beginning to end.

Standouts: Solid film in most every aspect.
Blowouts: Not much to pick on.

Grade: A-

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND (DVD)

Director: Michel Gondry (French short director, musical films, etc)
Starring: Jim Carrey, Kate Winslett, Elijah Wood, Kirsten Dunst, Tom Wilkinson

Although I find this to be a flawed movie, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is an attempt at film-making so significantly different form the norm that it deserves far more discussion than I will give it here. Another kooky, twisted tale by screenwriter Charlie Kaufmann, this is the story of a couple who literally erase each other from their memories after a failed relationship only to find that they still love each other - even though they don't even know each other anymore. Perhaps the most appealing aspect of the film is the nearly surreal stylistic elements. A slow downer plot is juxtaposed with hyperactive and radical visual editing, as the film flips from one dreamscape memory to another, creating a thoroughly unique visual canvas. It's not nearly as accurately dreamlike as the work of David Lynch, but it's interesting in its own right. The twisted conundrums of love and loss are nicely mixed in the plot, but the great downer for the film is that the characters are, well, unremarkable. Oh, they tried to make them interesting, but it just didn't work. I was somewhat intrigued by their love, but by no means completely drawn in. Also uninteresting was a side plot involving a doctor/secretary affair where the memories were also erased. The movie obviously needed some sort of side plot to help set-off the main story, but this one only partially worked. All told this was an interesting and, in many ways, superb attempt at creating something unique and thoughtful. Kudos for that. On the other hand, my problem with Kauffman's writing is that he tries to write about human conditions, but it almost never feels even vaguely organic. A tale of love just shouldn't be this cold and unnatural.

Standouts: Quirky, unique script construction. Post-modern posterchild.
Blowouts: Quirky, unique script fell flat when trying to talk about love.

Grade: B+

LADDER 49

Director: Jay Russell (My Dog Skip, Tuck Everlasting, End of the Line)
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, John Travolta, Jacinda Barrett, more

An almost sickeningly sweet homage to your local fireman, Ladder 49 manages to pull off its syrupy message due to some quality acting. Joaquin Phoenix does an excellent job portraying a nice, dumb guy who puts out fires, and saves people, and then dies. The movie simply had a bad plot, and it could have been nauseating to watch: While Joaquin is trapped in a fire (soon to die), we watch a montage of all of the sweet, sappy moments in his fire-fighting life. It's strange that the birth of his children doesn't flash before his eyes when he's facing certain death, but that drinking with his fire buddies does. However, I suppose it can be excused since the writers did need to force some sort of a structured plot on his flashbacks. Yes, this is sappy. From another viewpoint, though, it's also pretty entertaining. Fires are just cool, there's no way around it. A pretty bad script, but some fine acting and engaging action equals a solid Hollywood picture.

Standouts: Sweet story.
Blowouts: Overly sweet story.

Grade: B-

SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW

Director: Kerry Conran (debut)
Starring: Gwyneth Paltrow, Jude Law, Giovanni Ribisi, Michael Gambon

A 1930's comic book serial comes to life with some astounding visuals. It's most unfortunate that there is no acting to speak of. It's even more unfortunate that there's not even a plot to speak of. There's just a 1930's comic book serial coming to life ... with astounding visuals. The art design is exquisite and quite intriguing to watch. The devotion to an old form is impeccable, if strange. Everything else takes a back seat, or is simply not to be found. The lack of any worthwhile writing severely hurts the film. The incredible visuals make it worth seeing, however.

Standouts: Massively inventive art design and unique tone throughout.
Blowouts: Nothing to really sink your teeth into. Light fare, yet attractive.

Grade: B

DOGVILLE (DVD)

Director: Lars Von Trier (Breaking the Waves, Europa, much more, leading member of Dogme 95)
Starring: Nicole Kidman, Lauren Bacall, Paul Bettany, more

How about a bad 3 hour parable for ya? (Just what anyone wants for Christmas.) This film was remarkably interesting to watch for 30 or 45 minutes with its bare suggestive set and moody lighting. The town of Dogville, you see, was nothing more than painted outlines of a streets and houses on a sound stage with a door or wall or bed or desk here and there suggesting function. It was an interesting set, with an interesting cast, with interesting visuals, and you hope these people are going to do interesting things. They do for a while. Then I simply began to feel that the parable being told was simply absurd, that it didn't relate to humanity, that it was inaccurate. That would seem to be the death of any parable - and the fact that it's 3 hours long. Good god. Some interesting things to watch, and much that disappointed.

Standouts: An attempt at creative storytelling.
Blowouts: Pompous and boring as all get out.

Grade: C+

SPARTAN (DVD)

Director: David Mamet (Spanish Prisoner, The Winslow Boy, one of the most notable writers in US)
Starring: Val Kilmer, Derek Luke

I often find David Mamet's dialogue stilted and obtuse. I also find that good acting turns that stilted dialogue into something special (please see Glengarry Glenross if you haven't already). I mean, who can argue that Shakespeare's dialogue wasn't also stilted and obtuse, and few would argue that his stories didn't turn out pretty well. Here Mamet turns a lame-brained special agent movie into a Greek tragedy merely with his dialogue - and a few solid bits of plot construction. At it's heart, though, the plot was nothing more than a Secret Service agent trying to find the President's daughter who has been unknowingly kidnapped by an international sex slave ring. I mean that's just absolutely absurd and awful, just terrible - but somehow Mamet makes it more. Where at first glance we see only Val Kilmer shooting bad guys, we soon see kings plotting against their own children and the Spartan soldiers of everyday society learning to be more than simple "worker bees" for their kings. I'm surprised, but this was quite a good movie.

Standouts: Wonderful script. Fine acting job by Val Kilmer.
Blowouts: Nothing really missed too badly.

Grade: B+

HIDALGO (DVD)

Director: Joe Johnson (October Sky, Jumanji, Honey I Shrunk the Kids, The Rocketeer)
Starring: Viggo Mortenson, Zuliekha Robinson, Omar Sharif, Adam Alexi-Malle

Hidalgo was a surprisingly robust and enjoyable little Hollywood picture about a horse race in Arabia. In a nutshell: An American cowboy riding a tamed mustang beats a bevy of blueblood Arabian horses at their own game. I.e. The American everyman mutt beats foreign aristocracy. Yeah, that's one overdone theme if ever there was (Horatio Alger was writing this stuff 100 years ago), but it's still valuable. What's more this film had enough other interesting aspects (the cowboy's Sioux blood, the 3000 mile race across the desert itself) to overcome the basic theme. Unfortunately, the Hollywood studio execs also put in a silly love interest side story that only roughly fits in to the main plot. Fortunately Omar Sharif is interesting even as a silly Arabian Emir. This was a pretty darn decent popcorn flick.

Standouts: Solid acting and not as dumb as Hollywood usually behaves.
Blowouts: Still has some silly Hollywood conventions.

Grade: B-

COFFEE AND CIGARETTES (DVD)

Director: Jim Jarmusch (Stranger than Paradise, Mystery Train, more)
Starring: ensemble cast in vignettes

Ah, Jim Jarmusch. So true to his art. So doggedly condescending to mainstream audiences. So dedicated to offbeat independent filmmaking. So full of crap. Coffee and Cigarettes is a short series of vignettes, little conversations over coffee ... and cigarettes. Many are pointedly useless absurdities masquerading as art, such as the Jack and Meg White discussing Nikola Tesla. One is simply great, with Steve Coogan discovering he is the distant cousin of Alfred Molina, but that greatness is entirely due to the fantastic presence of the two actors. Mostly this film was an expensive and unfulfilling ego project. Although that sounds bad, it's not really meant to be. Many times ego projects are originally derived from noble goals. This movie fails, but at least it tried to do something, even if that something was nothing more than "something different".

Standouts: An attempt at a new kind of movie. Vignettes of My Dinner with Andre.
Blowouts: A failed attempt at a new kind of movie.

Grade: C+

KINSEY

Director: Bill Condon (The Others, Gods and Monsters)
Starring: Liam Neeson, Laura Linney, Chris O'Donnell, Peter Sarsgaard

Here we have a sort of a sexed-up "A Beautiful Mind", with it's weirdo professor making it big. It turns out that that can be quite a lot, though. Although not as compelling as Russell Crowe's schitzophrenic professor in Beautiful Mind, Liam Neeson as the sex researcher Alfred Kinsey is interesting if not as introspective. Neeson very much loses himself in the role - there is no more that you can ask. His performance was borderline Oscar-worthy. If this is a good year, no nod. If a weak one, Liam my find himself a nomination. The film itself is also interesting, although it left me feeling somewhat short-shrifted. Sex is such an overwhelming topic, that I simply expected more than I got from this film. Apparently, sex is good and fun, Puritanism is bad, and no one should get hurt due to it. However, defining those gray borders where pain supercedes pleasure is a little too difficult for this film. Kinsey homosexually cheats on his wife, and after crying a bit, we find out how happy she is when the same man lays her (with her husband's knowledge). Apparently, free love must be the answer to mankind's sexual morass, huh? Yep, that is a lame argument if ever there was. Dispite this, there was still much to enjoy and a fair amount to learn. Laura Linney also gave an excellent portrait of Kinsey's wife. Her performance was nearly the match of Neeson's.

Standouts: Liam Neeson, Laura Linney, acting in general.
Blowouts: Some silly thematic material. Free love anyone?

Grade: B+

GARDEN STATE

Director: Zach Braff (no major film work)
Starring: Zach Braff, Natalie Portman, Peter Sarsgaard

This is a young person movie - in good ways and in bad. It's a pretty darn funny account of a numb young man finally returning home after running away to Los Angeles. Our early-twenties hero finally begins to confront his confused childhood and take the first real steps into maturity. He finds love. Unfortunately, he also spends a lot of the movie partying with his old high school friends. Yes, this film is frankly adolescent in its theme and plot. I'm quite sure that this adolescent view point was why the Hollywood powers-that-be deemed the film worthy of a national release. And, as expected, these areas of the movie were also the weakest. The film was at it's best, though, when it lost its desire to be cool - and it did do this at times. It's unfortunate that there weren't enough of the moments to rate it really highly. There were enough, and enough youthful exuberance, to rate it well, however. Not much to love in this film, but a fair amount to enjoy.

Standouts: Interesting, quirky storyline.
Blowouts: It's a kid's flick. Tried far too hard to be hip.

Grade: B+

SIDEWAYS

Director: Alexander Payne (Election, About Schmidt, Citizen Ruth)
Starring: Paul Giamatti, Thomas Hayden Church, Virginia Madsen, Sandra Oh

Paul Giamatti and (of all people) Thomas Hayden Church give two superb performances as middle-aged buddies gone wine tasting. I can see both receiving Oscar nods for their portrayals. Giamatti is a junior high english teacher with a novel that won't get published. He's divorced and depressed and knows failure more clearly than he knows anything else in his life. Church is (comically) a small time actor with some past roles in recurring TV series and commercial work. He is also terrified of his impending wedding at the end of the week. For whatever reason he must also chase women. It's who he is. These two hop around southern California's wine country until they find some girls. Prior to this point the film is rather drab and uninteresting, but when the relationships between the two couples begins to break down, we see the genius of the writer. It takes great skill and great confidence to write drably simply to set mood and pacing, and in many ways that's just what the author does up to this point. Then we see that all of these lows were very much by design and we can then achieve even higher highs. The changes in atmosphere aside, this is an incredibly unique film throughout. We learn much about the particulars of wine. Much more importantly, we learn much about the particulars of these people. There are emotional realities in this film that I've never seen so well done before. There is also a great deal of humor, and loss and love, and sadness and joy. An intentionally small, but excellent film. It may not live on as a classic, but it might just. It's that good. Regardless, it's one of the best movies of the year without a doubt.

Standouts: Tremendously good script. Two characters never before seen on film.
Blowouts: Not much to note. This was an excellent film. One of the best, if not the best film of 2004.

Grade: A+

MARIA FULL OF GRACE

Director: Joshua Marston (no major film work)
Starring: Catalina Moreno, Patricia Rae, Guilied Lopez, more

This was a straightforward yet engrossing account of the life of a Columbian drug mule, both brutal and touching. Pregnant, with little money and a bleak future, Maria swallows 62 pellets of cocaine and flies to New York in the hopes of, well, anything different than what she has. This film very clearly shows the reality of the situation. These mules are not flashy drug dealers. They are not bad people. They are just young girls and boys in a bad place, desperate for something - anything. A compelling little film that should be seen.

Standouts: A small, simple and engrossing story well done.
Blowouts: Ocassional scenes only barely add to the total.

Grade: A-

COLLATERAL

Director: Michael Mann (The Insider, Ali, long career in production, writing, direction)
Starring: Tom Cruise, Jamie Foxx, Jada Pinkett Smith

Occasionally okay, rarely) the Hollywood studios will send out a surprising little action film, or drama tucked in among their big-budget over-marketed event movies. This is one of those surprising movies. Most surprising of all is that it starred Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx and yet was still tastefully marketed the masses. In fact, I saw very little advertising for this film at all. After seeing it, I know why: It was a silly action movie that was done extraordinarily well where Tom Cruise is a bad guy. That's not how you market a star, so market it they didn't. Jamie Foxx is a cab driver, Tom Cruise is a killer. And while the killer forces the cabby to drive him around as he kills people, it's amazing this doesn't turn into a buddy picture ... No, I'm surprised to say that Tom Cruise is a very effective cold blooded killer, and even more surprised to say that Jamie Foxx is a real goddamn actor. These are two excellent performances. The direction was fine enough, but now to the bad part: The film broke during my screening, so I don't know how it ended. That should temper this review, no? Well, what I saw was really quite good. A- After finally seeing the ending on video, I can see that the film as a whole was not quite as good as I had hoped. What was an absolutely excellent film up until the "climax", but became only quite good after the silly shoot em up ending. Dammit. Still, I highly respect most of the movie.

Standouts: Astounding visuals and acting. LA at night ... gorgeous.
Blowouts: Bad shoot-em-up Hollywood ending.

Grade: A-

RAY

Director: Taylor Hackford (An Officer and a Gentleman, The Devil's Advocate, more)
Starring: Jamie Foxx, Kerry Washington, Regina King, Clifton Powell, more

This film biography of Ray Charles is notable for one reason: The excellent performance by Jamie Foxx as the blind soul singer. Other than this role, the film is remarkably average across the board. The writing is so-so, leaning heavily toward sappy melodrama. The direction is also uneven, with scenes of Ray Charles' early childhood reeking of "made-for-TV". The film ran a half hour too long. But Foxx ... wow. It wouldn't nearly be enough for me to say that I didn't think that Foxx had it in him. Despite a fine performance in ALI, I wasn't sure if he even had Hollywood Squares in him. He personally turned a remarkably average film into a gripping melodrama with his excellent performance. He may not have done a fantastic job of revealing the character's inner self, but it was by no means a poor effort at soul-searching. Every other aspect of the actor's craft was simply exceptional. I enjoyed this film immensely and anticipate Foxx (deservedly) getting an Oscar nomination for his effort.

Standouts: Astounding Jaime Foxx portrayal of Ray Charles. Top notch!
Blowouts: Flashback sequences were silly as all get out, sugar.

Grade: A-

MONSIEUR IBRAHIM (DVD)

Director: Francois Dupeyron (notable French film director, writer)
Starring: Omar Sharif, Pierre Bolanger

Omar Sharif was an absolutely terrific actor. I say "was" because he's always been an actor of the past for me, as I'd not seen him in a new production prior to this film. I know him only from his Lawrence of Arabia and Dr. Zhivago days. Here, however, he holds together a sad and delightful French film about a lost Jewish boy and the quiet, but astonishing old Arab shopkeeper who adopts him (played by Omar of course). It is gloriously French in every way, dramatic and sensuous, but Omar's calm presence manages to temper all of this, resulting in a sweet, reaffirming little film that I enjoyed much.

Standouts: Slow serenity caught on film. Nice direction capturing its peaceful essence.
Blowouts: Not terribly engrossing. Sadly, it will be a forgettable film.

Grade: B+

THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES

Director: Walter Salles (notable career in Brazilian/international cinema)
Starring: Gael Garcia Bernal, Rodrigo de la Serna

An excellent chronicle of a journey Che Guevara took with his best friend through the whole of South America as a youth, this film was (amazingly) not an advertisement for communism. It was a powerful argument for aiding the dowtrodden and cast-aways in society. I am not a communist, not even close, and this film still appealed to me greatly. It's the story of a rich man, with a rich girlfriend, and a rich life, learning to feel for others more than he feels for himself - learning empathy, and learning to act on that empathy. Those are two important steps that few people ever take. What's more, it clearly shows the truth that travel is the straightest path to breaking down fear and erroneous preconceptions of other cultures and peoples. Beyond the story, the acting of the two main characters (Gael Garcia Bernal as Che and Rodrigo De La Serna as his friend) was suberb. Both actors were gripping on the screen. My only major complaint is the occasionally plain screenplay. The flim's climax has Che leaving a party held by doctors and swimming the Amazon river to be with a colony of lepers on the far shore (leaving the bourgeois to be with the downtrodden). While perhaps not an awful metaphor, it was still obvious and sappy enough for me to sigh loudly in the theater. Despite this, this is still one of the better films of the year. Probably not Oscar-worthy though.

Standouts: Fun script. Truly excellent acting: Gael Garcia Bernal, Rodrigo de la Serna.
Blowouts: It's about a communist. Hard to take that seriously.

Grade: A-

SECRET WINDOW (DVD)

Director: David Koepp (Stir of Echoes, number of notable writing credits)
Starring: Johnny Depp, John Turturo, Maria Bello, Timothy Hutton

Johnny Depp again proves his worth, this time turning a flavorless film into something palatable. What started life as an obvious little Stephen King short story, ended up on screen as an obvious little Stephen King short story - although with a charming and compelling lead character. The plot in a nutshell: Johnny Depp is a writer who's wife has left him for another man ... and then the killings start. If you haven't figured out that Johnny's the one doing the killing in the first 10 minutes, well, I can't help you. This should have been a awful movie, but Mr. Depp, along with John Turturo, as a moderately interesting character creation by the writer, managed to pull this film from the mud and carry it on their shoulders. Moderately enjoyable all told.

Standouts: An all around nice little throw away of a movie.
Blowouts: There was nothing - nothing - extraordinary about this film.

Grade: B-

HELLBOY (DVD)

Director: Guillermo del Toro (Blade II, Mimic)
Starring: Ron Perlman, John Hurt, Selma Blair

Just like the TV series retreads which are so common these days (see Starsky and Hutch above), another overpopulated genre today is the comic book movie. Oh, occasionally there's a winner like Spider Man 2, but most are entirely unremarkable. This one falls much closer to that "ho-hum" end of the scale. The problem is almost always lackadaisical writing, and this is no exception. Rather than bothering to create real characters, the writers give us only showy drawings of characters, like the pictures in the comic books they're born from - a few broad, bright strokes on a flat page. I will admit that sometimes these character cartoons are moderately interesting, like the Hellboy "super-hero" in this movie. He's a cigar-chomping, gun-toting Imp from Hell raised to fight paranormal crime by the US government ... and that's pretty cool. In the end, though, that's just not enough to make up for the second-rate plot. Not too much to this movie, and what there was was usually just broad and shoddily put together. It was occasionally enjoyable, but often forgettable.

Standouts: Interesting enough idea, the whole graphic "novel" thing.
Blowouts: Still nothing more than kid stuff.

Grade: C

STARSKY AND HUTCH (DVD)

Director: Todd Phillips (Old School, Road Trip)
Starring: Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Snoop Dogg

Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson in yet another pitiful attempt to transform an old (and bad) TV series into a quick buck. My first reaction was: Wow, did this movie ever suck. There were (possibly) a half dozen moderately funny moments. Unfortunately, there were many times more not-so-funny moments. In retrospect, however, this flick might have a pale life left for itself on TBS re-runs. I will admit that I occasionally do enjoy watching movies like 'Necessary Roughness' on a Sunday when I'm bored. Maybe I'll enjoy watching this then too. The sad thing, though, is that's the best that this might have going for it. Of course, being compared in any fashion whatsoever to a 1980s Scott Bakula and Sinbad football movie is probably not a good sign.

Standouts: Ben and Owen. I likes 'em. They're cute.
Blowouts: Another Goddamn remake of a bad TV show? Come on!

Grade: C-

THE BOURNE SUPREMACY

Director: Paul Greengrass (The Theory of Flight, Bloody Sunday)
Starring: Matt Damon, Franka Potente, Brian Cox, Julia Stiles, Joan Allen

This second chapter of the Robert Ludlum spy series was a hyperactive and jerky film, but still had a fair amount worth recommending. It's unfortunate that the director chose to film this picture in the choppy visual and pacing style that he did. I found no good use for this choice and was massively annoyed by it. Rather than pausing even slightly to learn about these characters anywhere in the story, we had nothing but jumpy scenes and massively annoying cut after cut after cut. I think this guy thought he was shooting an episode of Law and Order - and while those may be viewed as "artsy" visuals for the small screen, in the land of films it's just poorly done. However, despite these concerns, this film still had a solid base. The acting was excellent for an action movie. Matt Damon was exceptional in the lead as an amnesiac super-spy trying to uncover his own past (there's a sentence I never would have imagined I'd ever write). The surrounding players were also well done. While I was seriously distracted by the hyperkinetic visual editing, I will admit that it probably heightened the peril of the thunderous action sequences. They were hard to follow, but I really did feel part of the action. All in all, I liked the original Bourne flick better than this sequel. This was certainly a solid effort, but it remains one of those movies where I'll be hard-pressed to remember the plot after a week.

Standouts: Kinetic action. Interesting direction. Matt Damon.
Blowouts: Overly kinetic action ... almost nauseating kinetic action.

Grade: B

SPIDERMAN 2

Director: Sam Raimi (Spiderman, A Simple Plan, The Gift, Evil Dead series, TV work)
Starring: Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Alfred Molina, James Franco

Wow! Sam Raimi (with some astounding writing by Michael Chabon) has crafted an excellent film that takes the comic book genre to its peak. With a nod to the outstanding visual achievement of the first Batman picture, this is far and away the best super-hero movie to date. Somehow a little teenage comic book was transformed into an operatic saga that will likely be one of the best pictures of the year. The story by Michael Chabon (and others) was filled to the brim with excitement and despair and adventure. Too many blockbuster screenplays consider the story just connective tissue from one action sequence to another. This screenplay knows that the action sequences exist only to heighten the emotional center of the story. Raimi's direction met the challenge set by this excellent writing with enough delightful and interesting moments to fill a summer's worth of Hollywood blockbusters. Of particular note was Alfred Molina's villain, Doc Oc, an evil genius with mechanical arms grafted to his body. This character was a complicated and terrifying combination of excellent acting and spectacular visual effects. The CGI were impressive in this film, but I still find many flaws with their excessive use in this movie (as in most others). This is a minor complaint when compared to the impressive story, however. Undoubtedly one of the better films of the year.

Standouts: Exellent script. Solid direction.
Blowouts: Not much to pick on. Well done all around.

Grade: A

FAHRENHEIT 9/11

Director: Michael Moore (Roger and Me, Bowling for Columbine, The Big One)
Starring: Documentary

While never rising to the level of his most recent film Bowling for Columbine in any aspect, this Michael Moore documentary is still a compelling and interesting success in its own right. I came into the film hearing many descriptions condemning it as sheer propaganda, and whether I happened to agree with the political viewpoints or not, that is what I expected. Surprisingly, it wasn't quite at the level that criticism indicated. Fox News, Al Franken and others every day give weaker, more propaganda-filled diatribes than does this film. It did, perhaps, over-dramaticize some rather unfounded conspiracy theories. Again, however, this should be considered in relation to the absurdities daily coming out of the mouths of other braying self-baptized political pundits. In terms of film-making it again was not quite at the same level as Moore's near masterpieces Roger and Me or Bowling for Columbine, but it is still head and shoulders above nearly all other documentaries. Michael Moore understands the motion picture medium and is very good director. In terms of the editorial argument, this movie does not quite reach the levels of those films either. Moore is at his best when he shows the real world effects of the larger issue with intimate human stories and when he sardonically protests them with his confrontational tactics. In this film we briefly see Moore attempting to recruit the children of Congressmen into the army to wickedly humorous effect, but too often this movie relied on voice-overs of various topics rather than these more interesting and pointed episodes. Regardless, there were still more exceptional images in this film than 99% of other documentaries. A good documentary is polarizing. It should shock the viewer with images of under-discussed tragedies. This is a good documentary and Michael Moore remains one of the best documentarian film-maker ever.

Standouts: Excellent direction. Well crafted design of film.
Blowouts: Too much narration by Moore, rather than clever episodes.

Grade: B+

SHREK 2

Director: A. Adamson, K. Asbury, C. Vernon (Shrek)
Starring: voices of Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Antonio Banderas, Jennifer Saunders, more

The original shrek was a huge step forward in the arena of computer animation with its astounding visuals. What's more, it did a great job of redefining the classic children's tale and was well executed in almost every other facet of film-making. Shrek 2 is an excellent film, but doesn't quite live up to the standards of the first. At least it doesn't surpass the first in any area. The computer animation was still impressive, but this sequel falls prey to the common problem of most sequels: filling the movie with more stuff in each frame. In most sequels this often materializes as BIGGER PROBLEMS and BIGGER EXPLOSIONS, here it's usually just more computer-generated eye candy on screen. Beyond this relatively minor point, however, the writers by and large did a very good job of creating a new unique plot. Here we see some interesting thematic material like change versus stasis in love, and it's well done. Jennifer Saunders as the fairy godmother did was truly exceptional.

Standouts: Almost every aspect of the film was well done.
Blowouts: Not much to pick on.

Grade: A-

SUPER-SIZE ME

Director: Morgan Spurlock (no major film work)
Starring: Documentary

All the talk of this year's Sundance film festival, Super Size Me is a (positively enraging) little film nominally about how corporate greed once again wins out over morality in the selling of a dangerous product. I say "nominally" because this documentary doesn't really get to that level of discourse on the subject. It just humorously shows a silly dude eating nothing but McDonald's for a month. The intent is clear, though, and the effects are frightening. This movie was rather obviously intended as an editorial to rouse the rabble (and it does) rather than to enlighten. Since the movie is smart enough to know what it's doing, it doesn't bother taking weak swipes at the more difficult topics, but focuses on the root level. Luckily the topic is so obviously offensive that it still succeeds in lambasting the fast food companies. As a film, unfortunately, Super Size Me is remarkably average. There's no doubt that this is an early attempt at filmmaking by the director/star, with little to please the eye or spirit. The point remains, however, that this movie pointedly disgusts the viewer when you see the effects of McDonalds products on the human body (and that's a good thing). We see the narrator gaining 25 lbs in a month while his liver nearly explodes - and it's scary. I'm pissed at McDonalds after seeing this movie, so the film has done its job. Maybe not great art, but a great bit of editorial.

Standouts: It got McDonalds to discontinue their SuperSize portions. Kudos.
Blowouts: Very average production and filming values. Nothing more than an editorial.

Grade: B

HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN

Director: Alfonso Cuaron (Y Tu Mama Tambien, Great Expectations, A Little Princess)
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson & most of the best English actors currently available.

Flying in the face of the mass of critics here, I found this to be the least enjoyable Potter movie to date (albeit only marginally). I still think its a wonderful movie with much to recommend it. With Chris Columbus no longer directing the films (replaced by Alonso Cuaron of Y Tu Mama Tambien fame) this movie takes a sharp turn toward magnificent, albeit dark, visuals that far surpass the previous films. Also excellent was the acting. New actors David Thewlis as Professor Lupin, Gary Oldman as Sirius Black and Emma Thompson as Professor Trelawney were all standouts (and this is among the extraordinary group of returning actors such as Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman and Robbie Coltrane). Michael Gambon does not hold a candle to the imposing presence of the late Richard Harris as Dumbledore, but he is serviceable. So, this movie is quite good: It has extraordinary visuals, a gripping plot, excellent acting ... How can I rate it below the previous films? What's missing is the magic. Instead of the joyous magical place where we would smile even in the midst of terrifying sequences, we get a contemporary mass of hipster teenagers and a pacing that pushes the plot along too quickly. Every kid in this movie looks like they just walked out of a rave club. I mean *every* kid. Real children aren't anywhere near this hip. More importantly, this is in a thematic universe pointedly about being an outcast child! I have no idea what the director was thinking, but this was plainly a very bad decision. As with the book, I also found the plot itself to be weaker (although this is in comparison to the other supremely delightful stories about boy Potter). This installment makes use of a very flimsy time-travel twist to neatly solve everything in the end. For some reason it's never mentioned why they don't use this time travel to solve their problems in the other stories. I wonder why? Blah, weak writing. However, as I said, there was very much else that was simply excellent in this film. The series remains magnificent.

Standouts: Gorgeous visuals, intense tone to film. I.e. Very good direction.
Blowouts: A couple of silly attempts to lead Harry Potter into the hipster realm. Plot holes.

Grade: A-

VAN HELSING

Director: Stephen Sommers (The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, Deep Rising)
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Kate Beckinsdale, Richard Roxburgh, David Wenham

For five minutes at the start of this film, I had moderately high hopes for this monster flick. The opening scene was a beautifully shot black and white homage to the Frankenstein pictures. Then the real Van Helsing began and my hopes faded to oblivion. First off, Hugh Jackman seemed a bit too good to be in this movie. Kate Beckinsdale, however, was entirely in her element (pure shameless suck). I still have hope for her, but so far she's shown me nothing but awful character after awful character. I won't bother describing the plot, especially since I really don't want to relive it ever again. The final tally: Really bad script, utterly unremarkable bad guy (Richard Roxburgh as Dracula), not funny, possibly some of the worst use of CGI I've yet seen, Hugh Jackman decent, Kate Beckinsdale decent (mostly due to the camera consistently framing her oh-so-tight butt). This movie shot for whimsical, but landed solidly at annoying.

Standouts: Some slim entertainment value and a really good first scene.
Blowouts: The script – just awful. Simply awful.

Grade: D

TROY

Director: Wolfgang Peterson (Das Boot, The Perfect Storm, Outbreak, Air Force One)
Starring: Brad Pitt, Eric Bana, Orlando Bloom, Brendan Gleeson, more

An epic? More like an epic piece of crap, thanks to the hollywood-ization of this classic. In this Iliad, Brad Pitt walks around naked a great deal of the time, barring his ripped abs and monster pecs. In this Iliad, Achilles dies saving his one true love from the hands of the evil king Agamemnon. In this Iliad, Helen is an annoying club chick. There's this one thing that saves this film, though: The rest of the Iliad. Even the crap-meisters who created this affront couldn't get past the fact that this remains one of the greatest stories ever told. Some of the supporting actors (some mind you) gave fine performances much more in line with the actual story. Peter O'Tool as King Priam and especially Sean Bean as Odysseus were the standouts. The epic nature of the Iliad manages to save the craptastic director's butt in this film.

Standouts: Some of the actors. Vague entertainment value.
Blowouts: Awful Hollywood reworking of a classic tale.

Grade: C+

KILL BILL 2

Director: Quenton Tarantino (Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, Kill Bill 1)
Starring: Uma Thurman, David Carradine, Lucy Lui, Daryl Hannah, Michael Madsen, more

I thought that the first part of this story, released last year, was a visually stunning, albeit flawed film. After seeing this excellent conclusion, I understand much better the form and structure of the first half. I also think that the flaws in the design of Kill Bill 1 were greater than I had originally assumed. This movie would have worked much better as a single (although long) film. This second half, as was the first, continued as a series of distinct chapters dedicated to various film styles. While that may not sound like much, it was exceptionally well done throughout. This part of the film was different in one major way, however. While the first film played as one giant series of swordfights, this section had a much more interesting plot, and contained truly exceptional dialog - always a mark of a good Quenton Tarrentino movie. There really was very little fighting in this film. There was however, absolutely electric screen time by David Carradine. How this actor from out of nowhere was so riveting on screen is simply a mystery to me. I've never before been so interested in someone making a sandwich as I was watching Carradine in this film. The downside to this film lay in it's ending. I think that the director missed an excellent opportunity to make an important (and adult) statement against the very notion of revenge. Unfortunately, Quenton Tarrentino must not yet agree with me. Even more unfortunately,the ending didn't even achieve a comic book climax. The director was going for some form of anticlimax I just can't grasp. This is a relatively minor complaint taken against the great success of the rest of the film, however.

Standouts: Unique direction and enjoyable moments.
Blowouts: Worked wonderfully as a visceral excercise, but there's little else to the story.

Grade: A-

THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST

Director: Mel Gibson (Braveheart, The Man Without a Face, you might know him as an actor ...)
Starring: James Caviezel, Maia Morganstern, Hristo Shopov, Hristo Jivkov, more

Mel Gibson's talk-show-fodder/religious-pain-spectacle was both more and much less than I hoped. More, in that it really was a beautifully shot, masterfully directed visual work of art. There were a few truly spectacular shots and a consistently high quality to the visuals throughout. There are better, more beautiful art movies each year, but this film will undoubtedly rate among the highest cadre in 2004. The film was also emotionally significant. I certainly felt a few crescendos of powerful emotional awareness on my part. Unfortunately, there were a number of negative aspects to the film as well. As a story, I didn't find it well constructed. Mel strangely focused (almost exclusively) on the pain and suffering of Jesus and gave mere lip service to the resurrection. You should note that the important Christian holiday is Easter, not Good Friday, and rightly so. The film really was barbarically intent on the pain. I could accept this if the pain was there for a reason within the story. I didn't find the reason. Also, I should note, the film was certainly anti-Semitic. I'm not convinced that it was designed as propaganda (that Mel himself meant for it to be an anti Jew film), but the results were there nonetheless. That's a dangerous and rather unnecessary place to go considering the story. In the end this is a movie of high highs, and low lows. I understand that it arouses some passion in our current society - in some ways unjustly, in others understandably. Regardless of those aspects, the film itself is notable, successful in many ways, but with major flaws nonetheless. The highs are high enough to warrant a good grade, however.

Standouts: Impressive emotional highs.
Blowouts: Blatant anti-semitism. Horribly messed up veil in the temple metaphor in bible. When Christ dies, the veil is torn in the temple. Therefore, people now have a direct connection with god. Mel ignored this metaphor and instead showed the temple cracking and demolishing. I.e. It looked like god hated the Jews and was showing how wrong they were. Blah blah blah.

Grade: A-