Dinner for Schmucks

**1/2 stars

Is witty randomness in a comedy funny or just plain random? That is the question I had to ask myself after Jay Roach's Dinner for Schmucks, a adaptation of the french film Le dîner de Cons. Paul Rudd and Steve Carrell offer their predictably comfortable chemistry, just comfortable enough where humor is expected, but too comfortable enough where it all becomes a bit too familiar. Carrell plays Barry, a mentally unstable alter ego of Rain Man who spends his days creating portraits out of dead mice. Rudd plays it safe with his go-to-persona as the likeable guy who dislikes everything and is forced to make a decision between his career and his personal life. But he only has to do that until the script hits the third act and lets him get everything anyways. I did catch myself laughing more than once at the film's stylishly crafted climatic dinner scene, but in the end, the result is a mixed bag.

Salt

** stars

A movie based off an original screenplay doesn’t necessarily make it original. The latest bad-ass-chick-spy-flick starring Angelina Jolie rips off so many other movies that it actually comes off as if it were trying to be something new. After an intriguing first act, Salt gets bogged down in ridiculous action sequences and bombastic twists, ultimately leaving viewers coldly unsatisfied. While I still admire Jolie’s hard-hitting performance, I can’t help but wonder why she chose a story about a character that’s been done so many times before. She’s already proven to everyone that she’s the biggest female action star in the world. Next time, remember that audiences deserve more than just reassurance.

M. Night Shyamalan: To Be Continued...

It’s been almost three weeks since The Last Airbender was released. My emotions have cooled.

When the film was released, I stated in an article (about the hatred critics have towards Shyamalan) that I was considering giving up film criticism forever. While I’m still pondering my future, I figured it would only be fair to have a follow up to that article because I did state a quote from Roger Ebert, “Your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you,” as a way to express my anger towards the universal pan of The Last Airbender, even though I still found the film to be a disappointment.

I realized after I published that article that my emotions had rattled my intellect quite a bit. But I still stand by remarks for a few definitive reasons.

In my original article, I stated that the 3D was a major reason why the film was a failure. This is still true. I went to see it again in 2D and it was a much better visual experience. However, I did take the time to analyze what I had heard from others and why many felt that Shyamalan failed as a writer.

I’ll admit: Shyamalan ultimately failed. I probably noticed it more than most because I am still such a huge fan of his. The man used to be considered one of the stronger storytellers in the business, but like many filmmakers, he has become lost in his own world. This happens to many who helm such a big project.

For example, when Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain fell apart after budget concerns, he disappeared to China for weeks. He later resurfaced, and in my mind fully succeeded. Shyamalan on the other hand seemed unable to balance his parts in so many aspects of the film (writing, producing, directing, and even marketing) that he forgot to tell the story he was supposed to tell.

As a director, Shyamalan was still able to bring his visual wizardry to the screen. And while I can understand that the first hour of the film can be hard to get through, I still enjoyed the third act. Combining James Newton Howard’s intriguing score (and Shyamalan owes a lot to this man for creating some of the best soundtracks of the past decade) and Industrial Light and Magic’s fantastic visual effects gave the film an acceptable finish.

In this day and age, moviegoers are lucky to see even a handful of memorable films. Especially in 2010, which is one of the worst years for movies ever. The Last Airbender may be a disappointment, but I think the reason why I gave it somewhat of a passing grade was because it was trying to be something different.

I think it’s wrong for critics to pan a filmmaker in such degrading ways because it becomes more about rants for journalism sakes rather than how someone individually feels. While there is certainly nothing wrong about trashing a film, it’s how you trash it that makes all the difference.

In Michael Bay’s case, you’re supposed to trash his films. He expects you too. So do it in a way that adds to that notion. In Shyamalan’s case, it’s as though people are on a mission to see him fail. I can’t even tell people I’m a Shyamalan fan half the time because I’m looked down upon before I even open my mouth. Yet it seems people have forgotten about Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, which (for me, anyways) is close to the worst movie of all time.

So you can calm down about your hatred towards this movie, because a sequel is probably not going to happen. While it’s grossed an acceptable $100+, you were able to piss and moan enough that Paramount has probably gotten the message. Feel better now?

Maybe after writing this second article, my emotions are back. You'll find out for sure in article number three.

Inception

**** stars

Thank you Inception, for reviving the movie industry.

Before this visually exhilarating masterpiece, this year of movies was dead on arrival. Not only will this film take your dreams and show them to you, it feels almost guaranteed that no other film will come close to matching Inception’s emotional complexity, at least this year anyway. This is the movie event of the moment, the most satisfying film of the year, and an instant classic of the sci-fi genre. It’s James Bond plus The Matrix, with a pinch of Stanley Kubrick, and thrown into a blender controlled by Christopher Nolan.

Leonardo Dicaprio amazes me. He’s been on an absolute roll (including this year’s Shutter Island) and there’s no stopping him here as Dom Cobbs, a professional subconscious extractor who steals peoples dreams by breaking into them. During the dream state, the mind is at its most vulnerable, and Cobb has nearly perfected his skilled thief ability. However, he is running from his past after a job in corporate espionage turned him into an international fugitive. Losing his wife in the process, Mal (played remarkably by Marion Cotillard), Cobb must take one final job to get his life back.

Alright, that’s the basics. Well, then again, there are no basics when it comes to Inception. Whether or not you understand the plot is irrelevant. There are dozens of scenarios going on at once, and it is the viewer’s choice to decide which one they want to follow. It doesn’t matter which one. They all have one hell of a payoff. You could follow Cobb’s tragic story of losing his loved one. You can take the journey with Cobb and his dream team of specialists where instead of pulling off a heist to steal an idea, their task is to plant one in someone else’s mind (aka Inception). Or even follow the layers of a dream and how the deeper you go, the more dangerous it becomes of ever coming out of one.

There has always been a beauty to Christopher Nolan’s screenplays. There is more to see than meets the eye. There is more to feel than meets the heart. There is more to dream than meets the mind. Inception sneaks into your thoughts and ignores any request of extraction.

Dicaprio and Cotillard are on fire, and with the combination of them and an A-list cast including Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Michael Caine, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy, Tom Berenger and Tom Hardy, there’s a certain maturity to this film that moviegoers these days can only seem to dream of. Luckily for us, the dream is real. If someone told me that there was a film out there that could possibly reach the blockbuster heights of The Dark Knight, I’d say that only Christopher Nolan would be able to do it. He may have just done it. Maybe I’ll know for sure after a necessary second or third viewing.

In the words of my friend Vincent Pisacane, “Inception saves the summer from all the shitastic shit that came out before it.” Amen, Vince. Amen.

The Last Airbender Reaction: This Critic Has Had Enough of Critics

I never thought I’d see the day where I’d consider giving up film criticism…

Forever.

Today may be the day.

One of my all time heroes, Roger Ebert, once said, “Your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you.” I have lived by this quote ever since I discovered it back in high school (I even used it as my senior yearbook quote). I have been reviewing movies since I was 13 years old. I am now 21. I was planning on reviewing movies forever.

But things change.

Because it is in this quote by Roger Ebert that has for the first time, failed me. This is directly linked to the outlandish and irresponsible bashing towards M. Night Shyamalan’s newest film, The Last Airbender.

First and foremost, let’s get the obvious stuff out of the way. The movie is being viewed as a disappointment. And it certainly is. The editing is choppy, the acting and writing are stiff, and it feels very rushed. While I still found it entertaining enough to give it a positive review, I understand why this film has been negatively received.

That is not the issue here. The issue is HOW it’s being negatively received. In all my years of reviewing and loving movies, I have never seen such clear and blatant hatred towards one filmmaker (you’ve been impeached Michael Bay). The saddest part? It doesn’t even seem to be about his movies anymore. It’s becoming personal.

This is not a film critic’s job. A critic’s job requires him or her to look at a film, ANY FILM, from a clear and objective viewpoint. Everyone knows my hatred towards Michael Bay, (and yes I enter his films cautiously), but I’m always optimistic that he may surprise me. As for M. Night, I have and always will be a big fan. While I’m sad to see him underperform again, he does not deserve the hatred that has now been injected into his bloodstream.

“Your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you” is a quote about trusting your own judgment. Who cares what anyone else thinks? If you have an emotional connection to a movie, then it’s your responsibility to honor that when your intellect is having trouble keeping up. For example, when I first saw Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain, I couldn’t figure it all out, but I knew it was one of the most emotional experiences I’ve ever had watching a film.

In regards to The Last Airbender, (EVEN BEFORE THE MOVIE WAS EVEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC!) there has already been a universal agreement that this is “the death knell to Shyamalan’s career” (James Berardinelli from ReelViews). That “he is an idiot” (Matt Pais from Metromix.com). That “M. Night can ruin the world” (Jordan Hoffman from UGO). Even Roger Ebert, one of the fathers of film criticism, collapses under his own words. Ebert hates 3-D. And yes, he’s right, the 3-D is awful here. But he also took away a whole star from Toy Story 3 because of the 3-D, so he seemed ready to jump on Airbender before even viewing it. Why didn’t you see it in 2-D? Or were you too excited to jump all over the 3-D because you knew it would be a more interesting piece of journalism?

In fact, I could even use a quote from his review from The Happening, which he liked and gave three stars, to describe how I feel about The Last Airbender. “I suspect I'll be in the minority in praising this film. It will be described as empty, uneventful, meandering. But for some, it will weave a spell.” You forgot about us some this time around, Mr. Ebert.

He’s not alone. Everyone’s jumping on the bandwagon. It happened in 2008 with The Happening, in 2006 with Lady in the Water, and in 2004 with The Village. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen someone change their mind about Shyamalan just because everyone seems to shit on him.

Therefore, I conclude with what I started with: Has the emotions of critics confused their intellect? Are they automatically built to search for the negative and block out the positive in a Shyamalan film? Am I the only who found the third act of the film to be a rousing, visually stimulating action spectacle?

It’s completely acceptable to hate the movie. Go ahead. It’s your right as a moviegoer. But it’s not cool to do it for coolness sake. It’s cool to remember that Shyamalan has made some great movies. And that hopefully one-day, when everyone gets over being a critic, they’ll remember what it was like to be a moviegoer. If this onslaught continues, I will be forced to depart from the critic inside me and join the latter. I fell in love with this profession because I love the movies. I would hate to become the person that would make someone feel the way I feel today.

After all, your emotions will never lie to you.

The Last Airbender

**1/2 stars

I can't tell you how long I've waited for this movie. It always felt as if it were in the distant future. Now that it's in the past, I can relax, and say this objectively: While it is a disappointment, it's still an entertaining movie.

But I'm sure there will be people who are even more disappointed then I am. I've always had to defend myself when people have told me that the only reason why I want to see (or will like) The Last Airbender is because it's an M. Night Shyamalan film. I respond with a simple answer: yes. And to no surprise, I found The Last Airbender to be a visually absorbing, high-spirited fantasy epic.

However, I know I will probably in the minority on this one, because it definitely feels like a Shyamalan movie. He has always been a better director than a screenwriter, and the movie takes a while to find the right groove. Once it's found, the movie kicks in to high gear with a beautifully staged battle sequence.

Based off the hugely successful Nickelodeon Anime Series, The Last Airbender tells the story of four nations made up of four different elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water), where the Fire Nation has declared war and only the last remaining airbender (played by newcomer Noah Ringer) can stop them from destroying mankind. The criticism this film has received for its controversial casting (having white actors play parts that were originally of Asian decent) went from legitimate to downright frustrating. I think there was a mistake somewhere, but it's certainly no reason to boycott a movie unless of course it was the filmmaker's intention to purposely piss people off. Maybe that's why Jesse McCartney was replaced with Slumdog Millionaire's Dev Patel.

At 103 minutes, The Last Airbender never really has the time to naturally unfold all four elements. The film tends to rush in order to stay faithful to the series's first season, but it's satisfying as a Shyamalan fan to know that my expectations were somewhat met. I implore people to see the film in 2-D, because the 3-D conversion almost ruined everything. When that's the case, I know that the movie itself is not to blame.

How The Last Airbender Can Become a Big Hit

Is Shyamalan Ready To Get Back On Top?

For all those who know me, I am a big M. Night Shyamalan fan. However, I am realistic enough to admit that the man has fallen into a rut in terms of critically acclaimed hits. No matter how much I think The Happening is completely misunderstood, I digress, and look to the future.

So here we are, only a few days away before Shyamalan unleashes his $150 million fantasy epic The Last Airbender, based off the hugely successful Nickelodeon Anime Series about four nations made up of four different elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water), where the Fire Nation has declared War and only the last remaining airbender (played by newcomer Noah Ringer) can stop them from destroying mankind. Including a marketing cost of $130, the movie is already $280 million in the red.

But that's nothing new. Avatar's production cost came close to $300 million, Iron Man 2, Robin Hood, Alice in Wonderland, and Toy Story 3 are all north of $200 million. However, this is Shyamalan's first attempt at tackling non-original source material with a franchise kicker to boot. When all is said and done, the man needs his movie to deliver.

It's facing tough competition, too. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse opens one day earlier, meaning the movie will have to be critically well-received in order to climb past it.

Is it possible? Can The Last Airbender somehow beat Eclipse? The answer is no, only for the weekend though. As history has shown us, Twilight tends to stumble in its second weekend, mostly because all the fans have already tasted their sustenance. So if Shyamalan pulls it off (and early word of mouth has been positive), we could see it proclaim the #1 spot in its second weekend. It's certainly a long shot, but in a summer movie season that has only been saved by Toy Story 3, anything is possible.

With a PG rating, a visually astounding trailer, and a fresh adaptation, there is a chance that M. Night Shyamalan will be tasting victory for the first time in years.

Toy Story 3 destroys Jonah Hex, rakes in $110 million

.............SUCCESS!.. ........FAIL.............

It's no surprise that Toy Story 3 hit #1 and Jonah Hex hit rock bottom. The Pixar smash took in an estimated $110 million on its opening weekend, while Jonah Hex collapsed due to its incoherency with an atrocious $5 million gross.

It neither is or isn't Megan Fox's fault that the movie bombed. It bombed because everything about it sucked. No offense to Josh Brolin, who tries his best, but the movie is 72 minutes of combined visual effect footage, thrown in with Brolin narrating as Hex to remind the viewer that they are not watching an incomplete film.

As for Toy Story 3, the reviewed movie so far this year, look for this blockbuster smash to be one of the highest grossing movies of 2010, including a surefire nomination for Best Picture. Better yet, we may be looking at the front-runner.

Toy Story 3

**** stars

I was 7 years old when the original Toy Story came out in 1995.

Therefore, I was 11 when the sequel came out in 1999.

I am now 21 years old, having just graduated college exactly one month ago, and just experienced Toy Story 3 for the first time.

And I will forever say this: Toy Story 3 is more than genius. It is more than a movie. It is a return to your childhood for infinity and beyond, all within a smooth running time of 109 minutes. Call me premature, overemotional, or even illogical, but Pixar’s Toy Story 3 is one of the greatest sequels of all time, one of the greatest animated movies of all time, and far and away the best film so far this year.

Not only does the third chapter in one of the greatest of all franchises match (and perhaps exceed) its predecessors, it has even changed my views on sequels. Some work, some don’t. But Toy Story 3 is the nail in the coffin in the debate that as long as you have a captivating story with characters an audience cares about, sequels can forever work.

So too bad for you Iron Man 2, you can go to hell Sex and the City 2, and no one cares about you anymore Shrek Forever After, as we have reached the movie that has saved the year of 2010.

Pixar makes the most important decision of its life by sticking to its roots. They know that Toy Story was their first baby and to only justify it would be to stick to that audience. Therefore, we see Woody (Tom Hanks), Buzz (Tim Allen), and the rest of Andy’s toys struggling with the idea that Andy is moving off to college and that the day they’ve been worrying about for so long has been finally bestowed upon them: their play days appear to be over forever. So when they are mistakenly thrown into the garbage instead of the attic by Andy’s mom, the toys think they’re ditched and decide to find a new life for themselves.

The exception is Woody (who Andy wants to take to college with him) who decides to first save his friends from extinction before making the big move. After being saved from the dump, the toys find themselves donated to Sunnyside, a day care that looks like toy heaven at first glance, but behind the curtain it is an evil dictatorship ruled by Lotso (meaning Lots-o’-Huggin’) a pink and evil toy. After experiencing toy hell, the toys learn that Andy’s attic may not be so bad after all.

So leave it to Pixar to save the day once again. Leave it to Pixar to return true movie magic to the big screen on an annual basis. Leave it to Pixar to remind adults of their childhood (and for this, I am eternally grateful). Toy Story 3 mixes all the right emotions to create a nostalgic, natural high even time travel cannot provide. When all is said and done, you will be reminded of the message these movies have successfully conveyed to all of us:

You’ve got a friend in me.

Splice

** stars

Splice could have been one of the coolest movies of the summer. Its premise is timely and controversial, it has a solid cast and crew (starring Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley and produced by Guillermo del Toro), and its buzz was quietly hot. Instead, the film becomes too weird for its own good and fails to deliver what it promises.

Brody and Polley star as Elsa and Clive, married scientists who are on the verge of a groundbreaking experiment by splicing together human and animal DNA new create a new organism. To their surprise and completely rebellious towards their moral ethics, it works. They decide to name it Dren (the unimaginative idea of spelling Nerd backwards), as it begins to grow into a deformed female infant and later becoming close to the form of human.

Conveniently for the plot, Elsa and Clive are unable to get pregnant, which is why they decide to keep it as their own and ignore the road to publicity. Time passes and things change, and the couple eventually leads themselves down a path of self-destruction.

While I admire the idea of what Splice tries to do (the psychological repercussions of their actions), it falls victim to unnecessary scenes of awkwardness, including some of the most ridiculous sex scenes I've seen since the remake of The Hill Have Eyes. To the point where I would suggest a disclaimer before the opening credits stating: A long shower is needed after the viewing of this film.

I never like to dis on a film when it tries to go there. Usually, I admire the guts it takes to make a film stand out (regardless of the subject matter), so long as the film stays true to itself. Unfortunately, Splice commits the sins of being weird for the sake of being weird, as if being weird is the controversy itself.

Get Him to the Greek

***1/2 stars

Get Him to the Greek, the sequel/spin-off to 2008’s hilarious Forgetting Sarah Marshall is the first film of the summer that truly lives up to its hype. It won’t set any records, and minus P. Diddy’s breakout role it will hardly be remembered as anything groundbreaking, but there’s nothing wrong with a movie that delivers exactly what you are promised: non-stop laughter in every way possible.

When Jonah Hill first hit it big as a lead actor in Superbad, I knew it was the birth of a comedic movie star. However, I was a bit skeptical as to how he would be able to break out of that kind of character. Instead, Hill embraces it, and is full-force funny as Aaron Green, a record company intern who is hired to get rock legend Aldo Snow (Russell Brand reprising his role from Forgetting Sarah Marshall) from London to Los Angeles in 72 hours for the ultimate comeback concert.

The catch? Aldo Snow has suffered public scrutiny after releasing an album many of which have call the worst of all time. But Aaron has hope in the artist, and promises his boss Sergio Roma (P. Diddy playing a wilder version of himself in quite possibly the funniest supporting turn since Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder) that the man will deliver. So Aaron and Aldo go on an adventure consisting of sex, drugs, rock and roll, and everything in between. In other words, leave the kids at home. This one is for your inner party animal. Or outer. Your choice.

Fast-paced, appropriately rude, and mind-blowingly hilarious, Get Him to the Greek achieves the goal of balancing the raunchy and delivering the comedic goods thanks to another top-notch job by director Nicholas Stoller. Finally, this summer movie season is showing signs of life.

The Month of May: What the Hell Happened?

Gross so far: $280 million

Budget: $200 million

Rotten Tomatoes: 74%

Gross so far: $86 million

Budget: $200 million

Rotten Tomatoes: 44%

Gross so far: $146 million

Budget: $165 million

Rotten Tomatoes: 52%

Gross so far: $37 million

Budget: $200 million

Rotten Tomatoes: 40%

Gross so far: $51 million

Budget: $100 million

Rotten Tomatoes: 17%

CONSENSUS: FAIL

For anyone who knows me, May is one of my favorite months of the year. The summer movie season begins and audiences are thrown into the world of blockbusters. There is usually one film that sticks out as one of the summer’s best. In 2008, there was Iron Man. Last year was Star Trek.

This year, there’s…

Uh…

Um…

Bueller?

Iron Man 2 is acceptable but nowhere near the heights of the first. Robin Hood is barely escaping bankruptcy. People don’t seem to care about Shrek Forever After. Prince of Persia is in theaters and it still doesn’t seem to make sense. Sex and the City 2 lost half its audience because its marketing campaign failed to realize that you need more than just a sequel to be successful. You need to sell a story. Because of this, I’ve only seen two movies all month, and only one midnight premiere. Iron Man 2 and Robin Hood. As it is now June, I must look back and ask, what the hell happened?

Maybe I was busy graduating college or working more hours. Maybe it’s because I moved back home to New Hampshire from Boston. Or maybe, for the first time in my movie-going experience, it’s because I just don’t want to see anything that's been offered to me.

This is a rare occurrence, because I am always game for the movies regardless of what it is. But I think it’s time I finally say that I am not the same moviegoer I once was. I’m losing hope in the blockbuster genre, as this summer we have eleven sequels (up from nine last year and seven the year before), God knows how many pointless remakes/adaptations (Robin Hood, The Karate Kid, The A-Team, etc.), and several projects that once looked promising but now have fallen victim to mediocrity (I don’t want to say it, but I’m becoming skeptical of Toy Story 3, mostly because of sequel fatigue). Is it bad that the next movie I’m looking forward to the most right now is a horror film starring Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley called Splice?

I would recommend Get Him to the Greek, the funniest movie of 2010 so far. For those wanting an Apatow-fix, this one supplies the rare feeling of satisfaction.

Attendance is down and universal crowd-pleasers are becoming extinct. When will Hollywood redeem itself? Other than my personal interest in seeing The Last Airbender (mainly because I’m the last remaining M. Night Shyamalan fan), I never thought I would be so vulnerable to put all of my hopes for this summer of movies on one film. One film that will make or break my decision of whether or not this is (so far anyway), the worst summer of movies I’ve ever been apart of.

Did you hear that, Inception?

Robin Hood

**1/2 stars

In Robin Hood’s case, he should be honored that Sir Ridley Scott, Russell Crowe, and company would tell his life story. In Robin Hood the movie’s case, consider itself lucky that it’s one of the only few offerings this summer that is neither 3-D or a sequel. Because while it is an adaptation of a famous story, the sole compliment I can give is that the good manages to outweigh the bad. Like Iron Man 2, I guess in this day and age it’s the best you can hope for.

And that’s too bad, considering the enormous talent behind this $200 million epic. Russell Crowe is in full Gladiator mode as the legendary hero, shuffling between accents that tend to remind the audience of the genre’s glory days. The film begins in the crusades, as Robin and his mismatched group of musketeers fight with King Richard. After the King’s death, he takes to himself to find his own destiny. He heads off to Nottingham to discover his family history and to rediscover whatever life he has left.

Enter Maid Marian, played with witty experience by Cate Blanchett. However, this is not the Maid Marian we’ve come to know. Blanchett plays her as if she belongs in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. While it’s certainly a refreshing characteristic over a helpless woman, it would have been to nice to have more sensibility to the lead character’s relationship, rather than continuously acting all noble, noble, noble.

This Robin Hood is more of a prequel than an origin story, and more of a gritty action picture than a soaring epic. I suspect audiences will leave the theater wondering if they saw a version of Robin Hood or a generic Crusade epic from the director of Gladiator. This Robin Hood hardly steals from the rich and gives to the poor, and relies heavily on action sequences. I never hated Robin Hood. In fact, I rather enjoyed it. But in order to be called an accomplishment, the film is missing a key attribute: memorable.

Iron Man 2

*** stars

In this day and age of blockbusters, coming out of a comic-book sequel feeling as though the good outweighed the bad is probably the best you could ask for. That is what Jon Favreau’s sequel to the 2008 critical and commercial smash, Iron Man 2, delivers.

The still newly A-lister Robert Downey Jr. takes the rubble off the film’s rustic action overtones and creates an unavoidable charm in the eccentric Tony Stark. This time around, Stark has successfully privatized world peace with Iron Man, but is facing pressure to turn over the Iron Man suit technology to the United States Government. Stark refuses, and continues to get off on the rush of the superhero. Still in love with him but hates him at the same time Pepper Pots (Gwyneth Paltrow) has been named CEO of Stark Industries under Stark’s supervision.

Tony is having trouble keeping the single act going, and his friend Lt. Col. James ‘Rhodey’ Rhodes (Don Cheadle, taking over Terrence Howard’s role) has decided to take things into his own hands. He takes the suit from Stark and brings it to the government. Now Stark is facing pressure from everyone, including a Russian scientist Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) who claims that Stark was responsible for the death of his father (and some other mass murderer mumbo jumbo).

Iron Man 2 is all play and barely any work. There is hardly a moment of dullness, but it is hard not to spot the elephant in the room that is the mediocrity in the film’s risk-taking. Favreau and company play it safe and deliver what they know will sell. While that is all find and dandy, it would have been nice if they kept it to one person. Downey’s Tony Stark is the most interesting character in the marvel universe. In fact, he’s the only one that outshines his superhero. Whenever he’s putting the suit on, it’s as though the anticipation is more about when he will take it off than what he will actually do with it.

Same goes for the new rush of characters. Scarlett Johansson is beautiful as Stark’s new assistant Natalie Rushman, Sam Rockwell is fitting as Stark’s rival Justin Hammer, and Samuel L. Jackson provides his own presence as Nick Fury, whose first priority is to remind the audience that an Avengers movie will be made sometime soon.

I really don’t have much negativity to talk about. Expectations have been met and its $128 million opening weekend has solidified its supporters. While I can’t say it’s the movie of the summer, when Stark says, “It’s good to be back,” it’s hard not to agree with him.

Kick-Ass

*** stars

It's nice to know that there are filmmakers out there like Matthew Vaughn who are willing to take some big risks with their features. And it's no surprise to me that his latest film Kick-Ass matches those expectations. However, I was surprised that it did hardly anything else but that. This is a fun, over-the-top, and stylistically violent film that has moments of greatness until it outstays its welcome.

At 127-minutes, it was hard to tell exactly where this film was going around the 90-minute mark. This is a story of an ordinary high-school "geek" named Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson), one who likes comic books and dreams about the idea of becoming one. While I wish that there were more to this character than the "geek" stereotype (example: spends his Friday nights alone in his room jerking it to his teacher), it's certainly the perfect person you want to see become a superhero. One day, he ponders this idea, and does just that. He buys a cheap green and yellow costume online (that appropriately channels a rejected blue man's group costume) and hits the streets ready to tackle some crime. When he musters up the courage to approach some punks stealing a car, he nobly tries to stop them.

Then he gets stabbed.

Great way to introduce your hero, wouldn't you say?

Fortunately for Dave, he survives the ordeal and is willing to answer the call once again. This time he's much more successful. After taking down some thugs in a parking lot in front of a group of spectators, his actions are taken to the Internet where he becomes the biggest online sensation ever. He's on top of the world. That is until other superheroes decide to join in.

Meet the characters who steal the movie. Hit-girl (played by Chloe Moretz, who you might recognize as the little sister from 500 Days of Summer) is a pre-teen murdering machine, trained by her psycho, revenge-seeking father Damon Macready, aka Big Daddy. Nicholas Cage is in top form here as the wicked father, showing off his genius in a supporting role. Hit-girl and Big Daddy decide to bring Kick-Ass along for some, well, ass-kicking. They must stop an evil mob boss named Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong) and his nerdy son Chris, aka Red Mist, from taking them down. Christopher Mintz-Please (in case you steal need the damn reference, it's McLovin from Superbad) fits the character perfectly.

The plot is pretty standard in the world of comic-book movies, but it's the style and ultra-funny action scenes from Matthew Vaughn that makes Kick-Ass one hell of an entertaining ride. I'll admit my disappointment in the film's disguise of breaking Hollywood rules, by succeeding in its violence but becoming dependent on the conventions of a third-act script. When I saw the theatrical trailer for this film, I was excited that it looked like it was willing to go there. The film itself went there for the first 90-minutes, but it came crawling back in need of a conclusion.

Reviews For Movies In Theaters Now

Clash of the Titans
** stars

There is nothing about this Clash of the Titans remake that is really necessary. The script is formulaic, the visuals are sub-par, and the 3-D is strictly a gimmick. This is probably stuff you already know, so take it or leave it. If you're a moviegoer in need a summer movie fix, Clash of the Titans is a mild sedative. If you're a moviegoer who cringes at the thought of 3-D, side-effects include a hangover.



The Runaways
*** stars

About 20 twenty minutes into The Runaways, I kind of had the idea of where the movie was going. This is a by-the-numbers movie about the beginning of a band's formation, their journey to the top, and or course, their inevitable downfall. However, the film demands a sudden urgency thanks to strong performances by Dakota Fanning (portraying Cherie Currie) and Kristen Stewart (Joan Jett), and the absolute scene-stealing Michael Shannon.

The Ghost Writer
**** Stars

Roman Polanski may be involved in a low point in his personal life, but as a filmmaker, the man is still at the top of his game with The Ghost Writer, an intelligently taut and excitingly written political thriller. Ewan McGregor is perfectly cast as the ghost writer who will write the memoirs for former UK Prime Minister Adam Lang (Pierce Brosnan). After dominating British politics, Lang has retired with his wife in the United States. The character McGregor portrays has one job, to help him finish his book. Instead, he gets involved with a scandal Lang has been tied to. Eventually, it comes to a point where no one is safe, and the memoir's that involve highly sensitive material gets in the wrong hands. As a movie, The Ghost Writer is chalked full of wildly suspenseful scenes. It goes from a good movie to a great movie in the second half, turning into a powerful movie that is a relevant statement of uncovering secrets in order to do what's right. You can rule out Polanksi the person if you are repulsed by his personal life, but don't rule out Polanski the filmmaker just yet. This is the best film of the year so far.

Hot Tub Time Machine
*** Stars

As far as farces go, Hot Tub Time Machine ranks close to the top in terms of ridiculousness. As far as comedies ago, it’s not on par with The Hangover, but it’s worthy enough to be considered as the best hot tub movie ever made (whatever that means). In other words, it’s pretty damn funny. I love a movie with a premise that’s really out there, but I hate it when the movie feels they have to explain how the concept works. For example, did anyone really care how Phil Connors relived Groundhog Day over and over? No, it would have ruined the movie. So don’t expect Hot Tube Time Machine to waste it’s time on the scientific exploration of how the four main characters are accidentally sent back to 1986 by a hot tub time machine. Yes, it’s exactly what you’re thinking: the best title for a movie since Snakes on a Plane.

How to Train Your Dragon

***1/2 Stars

The most refreshing and surprisingly wonderful film of the early year belongs to How to Train Your Dragon, DreamWorks finest animated film since the original Shrek. Believe it or not, Dragon is as much a fine drama as it is comedy. It never surrenders to cheap laughs or potty humor. It's always nice to watch a fantasy film that remains faithful to the world it lives in and doesn't reduce itself to pop-culture references.

The story begins with an epic battle between vikings (the good guys) and dragons (the bad guys) through the eyes of the most notable viking's son Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) who one day dreams of becoming a true viking by killing a dragon. Unfortunately for Hiccup, he doesn't have the muscles or training to become one. However, he does get lucky during the opening battle by shooting down the most feared dragon of them all, the Night Fury. Too bad for him, no one was watching.

After the battle, Hiccup wonders through the forest, frustrated that no one believes his accomplishment. As he's walking, he finds the dragon he shot down without half of his tail, thus making it unable for him to fly. Too good of a person to kill it, Hiccup forms a connection with the dragon. He calls him "Toothless," because when he doesn't attack something, he hides his teeth. Hiccup decides to help the wounded creature by building it an artificial tail. The more he helps, the more Toothless trusts him.

Back in town, Hiccup's father Stoick (Gerald Butler) tells him he's ready for Dragon training. Hiccup takes what he's learned from his secret lessons with Toothless and applies it to his training, making him the best in school and a local hero amongst the vikings.

The title for the film, How to Train Your Dragon, seems to be both a literal and metaphorical statement, one that actually creates an emotional and political message of understanding in regards to a two-sided battle and the bonds these characters create simply by listening to each other. The relationship between Hiccup and his dragon is a beautifully executed one, which comes from a great screenplay based off Cressida Cowell's novel. I saw it in 2-D, and it was this good. 3-D must be on a whole other level. Either way you choose to see it, all that's important is that you simply choose to see it.