Behind the scene images here.

Limacher Low Down: The Kids Are All Right gives a greater insight to the nuclear family of the 21st Century, or at least that was the attempt. The movie tried to blend a good mix of comedy and drama, but it didn’t come across that way – in fact, to me, it was more like a tale of two movies. Sure, it had funny parts, but by the time the credits started rolling I was left pondering what the fuck was THAT? The movie had this great build up only to let me down more than when they opened Al Capone’s Vault! (Anyone remember that?) The acting was good; the story helped define the characters, but there was something about how it ended that just makes me wonder . . . why?

The Kids Are All Right begins with us meeting the family, the Lesbian Couple of Nic (Anette Benning) and Jules (Julianne Moore) and their two kids Joni (Mia Wasikowska) and Laser (Josh Hutcherson). Yes, Laser.  We quickly learn that much like every family they all have their quirks, but they stick together through everything. Laser wants to learn the identity of the man who donated the sperm that his mother, Jules, was inseminated with. It just so happens that Nic was inseminated with the same donor’s sperm a few years before to have Joni. Joni being 18 is of legal age to attempt to locate the man, but is reluctant to at first. Enter Paul (Mark Ruffalo) who is a successful small business owner and somewhat of a womanizer as well. Paul receives a call from the sperm bank and agrees to talk to the person who is seeking him out.

Joni quickly calls Paul and sets up a meeting for Laser and herself to their potential father. The cliche questions from the test-tube children get asked, and there are a few awkward moments between the kids and their donor father. The kids quickly start to enjoy the company, but agree that their moms can NEVER find out. Guess what?  After a unique scene between the mothers and son, the moms find out that Joni and Laser actually met Paul. The moms agree that they too want to meet Paul and see the man whose sperm they used to have their children – insert obvious turkey baster dinner humor here.

The family all convenes and we learn more about each person from one of the more humorous scenes in the movie. Nic seems to be more reserved about Paul, but Jules really takes to him and that leads us into the roller coaster that is the rest of the film. The story takes a turn when Jules, who has just started her own landscaping architecture company, agrees to come and work on Paul’s recently acquired house. One thing leads to another and Paul and Jules become attracted to each other and start a torrid love affair that no one knows about. This all seems to beg the question of “when did this turn into ‘Chasing Amy’?”

And, all that leads to the end of the film where all the possible questions could be answered, but still left me frustrated and wondering why the film-makers built such a strong foundation only to have everything collapse at the end. I enjoyed the first half of the movie and then got really let down with the conclusion. I will say that the movie had a great amount of upside, and the trailer really grabbed my attention and made me want to see this but at the end of the movie I was just left questioning so many aspects. The humor came quick and dies out way too soon, and the drama seemed a little over the top at times as well. The movie might be great for some, but not for all and I fit in with the latter!

The H-Bomb: Larry Gopnick (Michael Stuhlbarg) is a mild-mannered Jewish physics professor who has been having it rough lately. In fact, to say he’s been having it rough is a bit of an understatement. To put it more accurately, Larry’s life is systematically going to shit around him. He’s being simultaneously bribed and blackmailed by a student who got an “unsatisfactory” grade in his class. His dysfunctional brother (Richard Kind) lives in his house and is always getting in trouble with the law. He’s having a property line dispute with his redneck neighbor. His son is getting stoned and listening to Jefferson Airplane when he should be studying Hebrew for his Bar mitzvah. He’s up for tenure at his university, but someone has been sending the tenure committee libelous letters about him. And, to top it all off, his wife is divorcing him for another man and wants him to move out of the house. Poor Larry, what can we say? When it rains, it pours.

The Coen Bros.’ resume is a mixed bag for me. Most of the time the critics will almost unanimously declare their movies brilliant, and in many cases, I’ll agree (“O’ Brother, Where Art Thou?”, “Fargo”, “Barton Fink”, “No Country For Old Men” are all great films). Sometimes though, I’ll see a movie of their’s being praised up the ass, and when I finally get to watch it, I’ll think to myself, “There’s a bad case of ’The Emperor’s New Clothes’ going around here.”

As far as I’m concerned, that’s entirely the case with “A Serious Man.” Many consider it their latest masterpiece, but I do not. This one is more on par with “The Man Who Wasn’t There” and “Burn After Reading”. It features many colorful characters such as Rabbis, Lawyers, Doctors, Jewish Housewives, a number of scenes that range from interesting to amusing, and the Coens drawing from their own experiences growing up in a Jewish household in the 60’s suburban mid-west, which gives the film an authenticity. It has the Coen Bros.’ signature flair for dark comedy, and it’s never dull and often entertaining. But sadly, at the end it just didn’t add up to much.

When the closing titles abruptly came up, my first thought was “Huh?” and my second was, “What was the point?” It does seem to be making some point about life in general and how you have to take the good with the bad and how it has its ups and downs… okay… and? It’s as though the Brothers Coen made this movie simply to amuse themselves by seeing how all the pretentious, art film types will scratch their heads as they ponder its “meaning.” If that’s the case, then wouldn’t the film ultimately be meaningless?

Or maybe that is the point. That the movie’s meaning is meaningless, and thus saying that life itself is meaningless and that bad things happen to good people for no reason and… ah fuck, I’m walking right in to that trap. The films’ prologue, set in 1800’s Europe with dialogue spoken in Yiddish, is seemingly disconnected from the rest of the movie and only adds another layer of confusion.

And another thing, the Coens are Jewish, and in a sense I can admire their ability to poke fun at their own. But the film is filled to the brim with so many Jewish stereotypes, most of which are shown in a truly unflattering light, that I can’t help but think that if this movie were made by a gentile, many of the critics who have praised it would instead be calling it one of the most offensive, anti-Semitic pieces of crap ever made. In other words, if Mel Gibson had directed this film, the overall critical reaction I think would have been considerably different.

That aside, “A Serious Man” is not a total wash. Far from it, in fact. As I said, the Coens’ oddball sense of humor is very much present here, Roger Deakins’ cinematography is as lush and gorgeous as ever, and the actors are very enjoyable in their various quirky roles. There is a lot to like and admire here, I just wish that when the Coens were stuffing their film with all the eccentricities they could imagine, that they had remembered to include a discernible point. “A Serious Man” is far from their most inspired work. It’s worth a rent, but nothing more than that.

Needs Salt!

Behind the scenes stuff here

Swift shot: Average, not spectacular, not as clever nor coy as Director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck believes.  Under-cooked, left me wanting more, made me pine for Europe – but a film needs more substance to stand out as better than decent.  Doubt it will leave a mark.

Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie star in this postcard of Europe, set against an intriguing international game of cat and mouse with a sly, albeit, somewhat predictable end-game.  Depp stars as Frank Tupelo, an American tourist who lives on spy novels and has recently faced a personal tragedy in the U.S.  Determined to leave those memories behind, he visits Europe and happens to be on the wrong, or right, train headed from Paris to Venice where he meets Elise Ward (Jolie).

She is on orders from her lover, Alexander, whose last communique with her was to pick someone on the train that looks like Andre to throw the authorities off his track.  See, Alexander has done something really stupid, he stole 2.4 billion dollars from a vicious gangster, Reginald Shaw (Steven Berkoff) and both Interpol and Shaw want him for different reasons.  One thing no one knows is what Alexander looks like, so picking The Man With One Red Shoe (for those familiar) he hopes to keep the pursuers at bay and keep tabs on Elise from a safe vantage point, essentially baiting the mouse trap with some other cheese, hapless Frank.

Depp and Jolie manage to feed off of each other fairly well, but because they are such big stars, at times the back and forth had no real emotion.  I have to say, Depp pulled his weight better than Jolie, who at times looked like a little girl playing pretend, not acting.  I think she is a fine actress, her performance in Changeling still impresses the hell out of me, so maybe this role just wasn’t for her.  Acting is a fine art, as is casting, too much spice in the sauce and no one wants to eat the meal, Depp and Jolie are gonna put butts in seats, and the story is fine but not spliced together to create an overall great film.

The film has a nice romantic feel to it overall, nothing too over-the-top, it was getting close a few times but not quite roll your eyes hoaky romance, subtle enough to be obvious that the director’s intent was to place you in a romantic setting without rubbing your nose in it.  But, where the film really flat-lined was in the overall cohesion of the characters.  Bits and pieces were tossed into the pot, but, you don’t get a beautiful meal, it’s like a good meal that needs a little more seasoning.

If you are really into Jolie or Depp or absolutely love international mysteries, check this one out, but if you are wanting to see a great film and really want your money’s worth, I say rent this one in a few months.  The cinematography is grandiose at times, but the film won’t suffer anything being viewed on the small screen.

Another romantic comedy as we know it…

+++Click here for more images+++

The H-Bomb: After a young married couple is killed in a car accident, their best friends, Holly (Katherine Heigl) and Messer (Josh Duhamel), themselves an ex-item, are shocked to learn that they have been named as the guardians for the couple’s year old daughter, Sophie. Holly is an ambitious small business owner with plans of expanding it. Messer is a carefree, womanizing type who is very content with living the bachelor‘s life. Neither one thinks they have room in their lives to care for and raise a baby.

However, after several unsuccessful attempts to unload Sophie off on the deceased couple’s relatives, Holly and Messer decide to give this whole parenting thing a shot. They move into the couple’s house, while agreeing to sleep in separate rooms, and go through the trials and tribulations of taking care of an infant. Eventually, surprise-surprise, they actually start to enjoy being parents, despite what a pain in the rectum it can be sometimes, and even more surprisingly, they start to develop feelings for each other… wow, I really didn‘t see any of that coming.

I know it‘s difficult to establish a tone in print, but I really hope my sarcasm in the previous sentence is coming through because I am laying it on pretty thick. “Life as We Know It” is yet another assembly line piece of fluff that the Hollywood Rom-Com factory churns out every year by the dozens. We’ve seen it before, and we’ll see it again. Its every move, every turn in the plot, and even many of its jokes, can be seen coming from miles away. But, it’s not the job of a romantic comedy to surprise us. It’s job is to make us like the two blandly attractive leads enough that we want to see them get together in the end and to make us laugh along the way. Does it accomplish these two goals? Well, yes… to some extent.

Watching these two bumble and stumble their way through sudden parenthood is consistently amusing, with a few laugh out loud moments tossed in here and there, like when Messer recruits a cab driver as a babysitter, which brings about disastrous results. Others, like a loaded diaper, spit up carrots, and other typical baby gags, provide some chuckles. Showing how frustrating (and infuriating) being a parent to an infant can be is something this movie does very well. In fact, if there’s something I took away from this, it’s that parenthood is not for me.

Baby raising antics aside, there’s also a group of eccentric neighbors, including a stereotypical fat obnoxious house wife and a stereotypical well-kempt gay couple that add to the enjoyable-if-unremarkable laughs. My favorite from the oddball supporting cast would have to be the stuffy-yet-neurotic social worker who drops in on the new parents from time to time. In a weird way she’s kind of an audience surrogate in that she wants to see this strange new family succeed as much as we do. She even cries when it looks like Holly and Messer may be done for good.

A main problem I had with this flick was the basic premise. Now “The Switch” was pretty tough to swallow, but this even outdoes that. Am I really supposed to believe that the ill-fated married couple would make their best friends the Godparents to their daughter without even bothering to tell them, or more importantly, ASK them? Puh-Lease!!! There are also moments of drama throughout the picture, mainly concerning Messer and his reluctance to take on the responsibility of being a father, that are effective and believable, but they’re ultimately undermined in a way by the film’s sheer predictability and the knowledge that, at the end, everything will be okay.

I know many Internet reviewers despise Katherine Heigl and the many rom-coms she‘s appeared in, but being that I haven’t seen any of her prior films, I have no baggage with her, and therefore, I actually liked her in the film. I thought that she and Duhamel had real chemistry and made a believable couple, especially during the excruciating moments when they‘re both trying to cope with the screaming kid. Who knew you could sooth an infant to sleep with a Radiohead song?

Underrated actor Josh Lucas pops up a few times as the baby’s nice guy pediatrician and “other man” love interest for Heigl. He’s solid enough, but like Patrick Wilson in “The Switch”, Lucas is too good an actor to waste in these “other man” roles. The main source for enjoyment here is, of course, the rugrat herself, Sophie. She spits, and shits, and pisses, and pukes, all for our amusement. And for the most part, it works. She’s adorable.

“Life as We Know It” is the kind of movie you go to if there’s absolutely nothing better playing. It’s easy enough to watch, but overall entirely insignificant, and definitely not worth going out of your way to see.

An epic battle between good and evil… with owls.

\\\Click here for images and a hoo’s hoo of the voice actors///

The H-Bomb: Two young owl brothers, Soren and Kludd, are out stretching their wings one night when they get kidnapped by a group of owls known as the Pure Ones. The Pure Ones are assembling orphaned (abducted) owls to form an army and take over the world. Kludd accepts his new home among the Pure Ones and finds himself being groomed to be a soldier in their growing army. Soren, on the other hand, is chosen to become a picker, who collects owl pellets, or owl vomit, if you will, which the evil Pure Ones are stocking up on to make a weapon… yeah, yeah, I know, just go with it.

Soren, along with a female owl named Gylfie, a fellow picker he just befriended, escapes from the Pure Ones “orphanage” and flies out to find the mythical island of Ga’Hoole, home to a group of noble owl warriors that he only heard about in the bedtime stories his father told him. Well, turns out, the legends are true, as Soren teams up with the owls of Ga’Hoole in order to stop the Pure Ones’ plan for world domination. Only problem is, Soren will have to face his own brother in battle.

“Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole” is based on a series of popular children’s books, and ultimately, the film will appeal to children, and children only. The strongest aspect of this film, by far, is the animation, which is lush, lifelike, and truly spectacular. The animation is particularly stunning in 3-D. However, breathtaking animation will only carry a movie so far. At some point, the story has to take over, and sadly, that’s where “Legend of the Guardians” falls short.

Aside from the amazing visuals, the movie just bored me. The plot is a big, unoriginal so what, the characters are, for the most part, entirely uninteresting, the film is, with the exception of a few sporadic moments, completely devoid of humor, and during the owl battle scenes, it’s difficult to tell who from who… or hoo from hoo, as the case may be.

The vocal cast is an all star line up of British and Australian actors, including; Helen Mirren, Sam Neill, Geoffrey Rush, Hugo Weaving, Abby Cornish, Richard Roxburgh, Jim Sturgess, and Anthony LaPaglia, among others. Hell, even Leigh Whannell of “Saw” fame can be heard in there. These are all gifted thespians (well, except for Whannell), but to be honest, when listening to them, I spent more time trying to figure out whose voice it was I was hearing than I did following the plot, which again, was amazingly dull and uninspired.

Bearing in mind that this really isn’t my cup of tea, that the animation is incredible, and that the movie’s target audience, kids, seemed to enjoy it at the screening I attended, I really can’t in good conscience pan the film. It’s a perfectly okay film for what it is… a family film… which again, is not my thing, at all. Children will certainly like it, but the parents accompanying them will most likely spend the bulk of the picture glancing at their watches, tapping their feet, and waiting for the end credits to come up.

Speaking of the end credits, I was really thrown through a loop when the first credit came up and I saw that the film was directed by Zack Snyder. I thought, “Wait a minute, that Zack Snyder??? The same Zack Snyder who made movies of such resounding awesomeness as ’Watchmen’, ’300’, and the ’Dawn of the Dead’ remake?” Well… sadly, yes, that Zack Snyder. He is really one of the last people in the world of filmmaking I ever expected to see attached to a project like this. I really am curious (and bewildered) as to what attracted him to it. But, at the end of the day, what can I say… we all got bills to pay, and I guess Zack Snyder is no exception.

Explore all the links to experience, Assistant Editor David Limacher’s wild trip to Wizard World Comic-Con 2010, in Chicago!

***Click here for more images***

“Ramona and Beezus” is based on the book series by Beverly Cleary.  I know I read these books when I was in elementary school, but I don’t really remember them much.  I do remember that Ramona was a rambunctious little girl with a very active imagination.

Ramona Quimby (Joey King) is a creative little girl, who has an older sister Beatrice (Selena Gomez).  (When Ramona was small, she couldn’t say Beatrice’s name, so she called her Beezus, which stuck as her nickname.)  Ramona and Beezus also have a baby sister, Roberta (can you tell by the character’s names that these books were written in the 50s and 60s??).  Ramona, Beezus, and Roberta live in Washington with their parents Robert (John Corbett) and Dorothy (Bridget Moynahan).  Also part of the family is Aunt Bea (Ginnifer Goodwin), whose high-school boyfriend Hobart (Josh Duhamel) is back in town and wants to get back together with Bea.

Everything is peachy keen in the Quimby house, until Mr. Quimby loses his job and the family faces the possibility of losing their home, forcing them to move to another town.  Ramona comes up with some fantastic yet harebrained ideas to try to save their house, including selling delicious lemonade, offering delicious car washes (that of course, ends in disaster), and auditioning for a commercial.

Even though she means well, Ramona is always in trouble in school.  Mrs. Meacham (Sandra Oh) is her exasperated teacher who has to deal with Ramona and her far-fetched ideas.  I’ve got to give Ramona credit, she tries really hard!

What I liked: when Ramona would imagine fantastic things in her mind, we the viewers saw them on the movie screen.  I thought that was a nice visual touch.  The story flowed well, and I have no complaints about the dialogue or the acting.

What I didn’t like:  overall, the movie was kind of hokey, but that’s to be expected.  In this day and age, it was kind of unusual but nice to see a nuclear family doing family things with their neighbors!!  Anyway, there’s nothing wrong with a happy ending, is there??

Warning:  there was one sad part.  Parents may have to explain the concept of “pet heaven” to their children after watching this movie.  I thought that part of the movie was handled well though.  The girls dealt with it and accepted it.

I thought for the lead role, Joey King’s performance was more than decent.  A few scenes were just so-so but overall she gave a pretty strong performance.  I think she has potential.  I enjoyed the interaction between the sisters.  I think both actresses performed those scenes well.

“Ramona and Beezus” isn’t the greatest flick ever, but it certainly isn’t the worst.  Don’t go to the theatre expecting much and you will enjoy it for what it is.

Three reviews to choose from!

For an up and coming critic from the Windy City – just click Limacher or on Jacob’s pic.

Or a no-nonsense mom about town –  just click Starshine or Bella’s pic. 

Finally, for an uber cynic - just click H-Man or on Edward’s

Who got it right?  Let the battle commence!

Sex and the City in the Middle East – excuse me, that’s “The New Middle East”.

***Want more Sex?  Click the image above***

Carrie and the girls are back for another adventure. It’s been two years since we’ve left Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker), Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte York (Kristin Davis) and Miranda Hobbs (Cynthia Nixon). If you’ll recall, the first “Sex and the City” movie ended with Carrie and John (aka Big) (Chris Noth) marrying, Samantha moving back to New York from Los Angeles, Charlotte giving birth to her and Harry’s (Evan Handler) daughter Rose, and Miranda reuniting with her estranged husband (cause he cheated!! but he felt real bad about it) Steve (David Eigenberg).

Since then, apparently everything’s been going swimmingly!! Now the girls and their families are gathering for the wedding of Carrie’s best gay friend Stanford Blatch (Willie Garson) to Charlotte’s best gay friend Anthony Maratino (Mario Cantone). Fans of the series will recall that Stanford and Anthony were once mortal enemies, but now they are in love (I guess hate sometimes DOES give way to love??) and about to be married in an over-the-top ceremony, complete with Liza Minelli as the wedding officiator.

A few days later, on Carrie and Big’s two-year anniversary, Carrie realizes that their marriage has lost its sparkle when Big’s anniversary gift to her leaves her feeling disappointed. Meanwhile, Miranda is unhappy at her job and yearns to spend more time with her family, and Charlotte can’t handle her unruly two-year old who cries constantly.  Now everything’s not so peaches and cream, is it? Of course not, otherwise there wouldn’t be a movie!!!

When Samantha is offered an all-expenses paid trip to Abu Dhabi, naturally the girls come along to take a break from their troubles. They fly first class (they even have their own cubicles!! Just as if they worked in an office!!) and stay in, well, basically, a palace. Between their own fancy cars, personal butlers, and surrounded by all that decadence, what more can these girls ask for?? But of course, a bit of the real world seeps in as Carrie reads a particularly scathing review of her book. That’s when everything goes askew.

And oh yeah, did I mention that Aidan (John Corbett) returns? The other love of Carrie’s life shows up in the desert (imagine that – it MUST mean something, right??) to further complicate Carrie’s life. I know many of my girlfriends think Carrie should have ended up with Aidan (I disagree, I think Big was her “lobster”) and will be very happy to see Aidan back in Carrie’s life.

What I liked:

Hello!! Who wouldn’t want an all-expenses paid trip to Abu Dhabi?? Since that will never happen to me, it was fun to see what it would be like in the movie (even though the movie was actually filmed in Morocco due to its racy nature, which is a big no no in the Muslim country). I also thought this movie was lighter than the first one, as it lacked the drama of being left at the alter and the infidelity. Of course, Samantha stole the show with her excessive efforts to trick her body into being younger as well as her sheer outrageousness.

What I didn’t like:

During the wedding reception at the beginning of the movie, Liza Minelli performed that awful song “Single Ladies”. I seriously wished I would go temporarily deaf. No offense to Ms. Minelli, but that has got to be one of the worse songs ever. I was praying for my torture to be over. I also felt that Big’s unconventional “idea” about his and Carrie’s marriage was just wrong. It made me a little angry, and I’m not married (not even close). And, for a movie titled “Sex and the City 2” there really wasn’t much sex going on. (I’m just saying!!). Oh and the clothes. Sometimes they were nice. Other times….what were the costume designers thinking?

Fun, light-hearted fare that fans of the series will enjoy. No, this won’t change the world but hey, it’s good for some laughs.