The H-Bomb: Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an Extractor, someone who goes inside people’s dreams in order to steal their secrets and ideas. Naturally, his most frequent clients are shady corporate types looking to commit various kinds of industrial espionage. After his latest job gets bungled, Cobb is commissioned by a Japanese business man, Saito (Ken Watanabe) to perform an Inception. What is an inception? It’s the opposite of an extraction, of course. Instead of stealing someone’s idea, it’s the act of planting an idea into someone’s mind through a dream.

Most in Cobb’s line of work believe that inceptions are impossible, but not Cobb. Why? Because Cobb has performed one before. That’s just one of the many dark secrets of Cobb’s past that are buried inside his mind and his dreams. Another being a mysterious Brunette (Marion Cotillard) who constantly turns up in Cobb’s extractions as a threatening force. Who is she, and what is she to Cobb? Wait… I’m getting ahead of myself here.

The other members of Cobb’s extraction crew include Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), his icy right hand man, Eames (Tom Hardy), his forger- someone who can disguise himself to look like other people in a dream- and Ariadne (Ellen Page), an architect who designs the inside world of the dreams and the latest addition to Cobb’s crew. It’s during her recruitment that Cobb explains to her (and us) the rules of the dream world. First, never design a place in a dream based on your own memories, it will make it harder to establish what’s real and what isn’t. Second, if you die in a dream, you will simply wake up, but if you die when under sedation, you will sleep into an even deeper dream state from which you may never wake. Third, the background characters in a dream are the subconscious projections of the person having the dream, and if they find out there are outsiders inside the dream, they will attack and kill them.

Now, for the sake of not giving away spoilers, I won’t delve any further into the specific plot of the film. I’m also going to avoid any kind fancy critic talk and just say straight up, I fucking loved this movie! In this dire age of filmdom where it seems everything is either a remake, or a sequel, or a sequel of a remake, or a remake of a sequel, it is unspeakably refreshing to see a movie bursting at the seams with this kind of intelligence and imagination. It’s one of those films where I felt exhausted at the end of it… but in a good way.

Much like with his epic “The Dark Knight” (which is the BEST comic book film ever made, I don’t give a fuck what the being-contrary-to-sound-hip naysayers say), writer/director Christopher Nolan has cooked up another complex, cerebral film that is of course embraced by critics, and that is also palatable and exciting enough for typical moviegoers to enjoy. He manages to match the thrilling spectacle of both of his Batman films, and create a mindfuck that equals the intrigue of his breakout film, “Memento”. In my oh-so-humble view, I think he is one of the single most talented, intelligent filmmakers working today, and he could be the next Spielberg in how he makes movies that have both brains and Box Office muscle.

An interesting thing I noticed was how Nolan took two themes from his previous films and reversed them. “Memento” was about a man with a very rare form of amnesia, and in this film, the protagonist has memories that could potentially harm and destroy him. “Insomnia” was about a cop with said sleep disorder, while this film is about characters who, one could argue, sleep too much. Just something that occurred to me on the drive home from the theater.

If there’s one area that Nolan has truly grown as a visual director, it would be the action. He has finally learned how to shoot action scenes in a way that doesn’t just rely on quick cutting and shaky cam, though there was a notable improvement between “Batman Begins“ and “The Dark Knight“. The gunfights and chases are thrillingly shot, and there’s a sequence in a hotel hallway that I thought was truly fantastic. There’s also a scene set on a snowy slope that may conjure up fond memories of the old school James Bond films for some viewers.

Moving on to the performances, DiCaprio is terrific in this movie. He suffered the stigma of being a pretty boy after “Titanic”, but he has always been a gifted actor, and I would put this up there with “The Departed” as being one of my favorite performances of his. He plays a very complex, conflicted character with a painful past, who we learn more and more about as the movie progresses, and he hits every note just right. I won’t go out on a limb like I did with Sandra Bullock and say that he will win the Oscar for this, but I think he’ll certainly be nominated.

Nolan not only gave Leo a great character to chew on, but he’s also loaded the film with some top notch thespians who have emerged in recent years. Gordon-Levitt kills it as Cobb’s super cool number two. He actually makes a more convincing bad-ass than I thought he would. Page is very good in her sort of audience surrogate role, once again giving us her geeky, girl next door charm. Cillian Murphy, who plays the target of the inception, is given a number of great moments to shine, and he does, in spades. Watanabe and Cotillard I had trouble understanding in places, because of their accents, but they were both quite good as well.

Now on to my minor quibbles, which are indeed very minor, the first of which being the movie’s length. It’s very well paced, and there’s more than enough happening to hold interest throughout, but it is two and a half hours long, and towards the end, I was starting to feel its length. Again, it didn’t really hinder my enjoyment of the film, but it could have been tightened just a little. Another slight grievance is that, as stated, it’s a very complex film. A very complex film with a complex plot set in a world with very complex rules, almost too complex for it’s own good. If you don’t catch every single piece of information thrown your way, you could find yourself getting lost completely. Even if you do catch it all, you could find your brain getting twisted into a knot just trying to keep track and keep up with it all.

Again, these are very minor. At the end of the day, what we have with “Inception” is something that only pops up on the rarest of occasions, a popcorn movie with a brain. There are points where this will remind people of “The Matrix”, but this is truly its own film, and a far better one, in my view, at least. This is one that I definitely intend to go see again, and I can’t recommend it enough. If you’ve had enough of vampire-werewolf soap operas and talking toys, then I highly urge you to go check this one out.

***Need more Knight and Day images?  Click here.***

Knight and Day was a great action movie directed by James Mangold whose credits include: Girl Interrupted, 3:10 to Yuma, and Walk the Line. It was well balanced.  There were times were I was on the edge of my seat, cringing as every second rode out on the various action romps littered throughout the film. On the other hand, this movie had a great sense of humor to it that I really enjoyed.  I am not going to lie though, it was pretty much your average Indiana Jones kind of comedic feature, along the lines of chatting through a mine cart ride or a joke or two snuck in right before a death defying slow-motion “explosion evasion dive”.

Except for the occasional corny childhood dreams and sand frolicking moments and a specifically horribly done villain, the movie was fantastic. The action sequences were spectacular and I just wanted more and more of them. The locales were fantastic with Spain, Austria, USA and Jamaica on the dream vacation list.

Cameron Diaz plays June Havens, a woman who is just going through the airport process, trying to make it to her sister’s wedding. Through the tedious scanners and check-ins she has constant run-ins with a mystery man she can’t help but think is her prince charming. After a few comedic encounters, the man introduces himself as Roy Miller (Tom Cruise).  The pulse picks up as soon as June makes it onto a plane with him that, according to Miller, “wasn’t meant to be”.  The dialogue in the film is refreshing and the on screen chemistry between Cruise and Diaz shines through like the first sunshine after a rainstorm.

FBI Agent Fitzgerald played by Peter Sarsgaard was a pretty bland character but lent enough to the film to be considered the villain. He is after Miller and has the whole FBI to back him up…fools. Then there is the stupid, awkward stereotype Latin gangster, arms dealer, Antonio (Jordi Molla) who was probably as annoying as Jar Jar Binks. Truly it doesn’t get more generic and fake than him, and because of that he becomes more a distraction than a supplement to the film. I would get a sour-lame taste in my mouth every time he showed up, regardless which scene it was. I cannot go on without saying Cruise and Diaz both had minor moments within the film that were too cliché for words.

June and Roy must protect oddball Simon Feck (Paul Dune from Little Miss Sunshine) from Fitz and Antonio.  Think of the Indiana, Marion ,and Mutt trio from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull when June, Roy, and Simon are hauling ass, jumping, fighting, kicking, shooting, etc.  Except Simon is approximately eighty-five percent less helpful in everything he attempts.  But, this feeb has a super genius, young mind that developed a never ending power source and, duh, everyone wants it.

The movie moved at the perfect pace…to me. Of course everyone is going to have their own opinions on the matter. Throughout, the two heroes June and Roy are hunted down in plenty of eye popping  scenes one can only describe as visual  bliss. The story is straight, clear, and surprisingly, not sappy! I am weary of all the meaningful movies out with morals and values and cries with hugs.

It’s definitely worth watching, and I believe you will find it more refreshing than you think. Though it sounds like you have heard it done before in regards to the story or the characters, you may find yourself surprised.  Major props to James Mangold and writer Patrick O’Neil for creating such an amped-up-laugh-your-ass-off thrill fest!

Hardly “Carroll’s” Alice!

Swift shot:  Colorful and dark, a new twist on the Alice tales of “Lewis Carroll”.  My exposure to Alice in Wonderland is pretty slim, I saw the original Disney film when I was a kid and loved the Cheshire Cat and remember thinking Alice was a bit of a spoiled brat.  But, legends change with time – Burton does a good job keeping the primary elements intact.  The dynamic world of Underland, as it is supposed to be called, feels more alive than ever – but sadly the 3D effect had little to do with that phenomena and more with the powerful use of colors and characters.

Alice in Wonderland reminds us all what it is like to be yourself, reckless and free of the prohibitions placed on us by society – in a time when women were to be seen and not heard, and certainly never trusted, Alice soon finds herself torn in both reality and in Wonderland faced with the dilemma of not meeting up to everyone’s expectations of her.  What is a girl to do?  Even in her fantasy world she is falling short, as everyone keeps reminding her she is “the wrong Alice”.

What is it about?

The soon-to-be-twenty, Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) is bound for a garden party, a surprise affair set up so her secret admirer, Lord Hamish, may propose to her in front of all of their peers.  Hamish, whose foppish appearance screams of Alfred E. Newman all grown up essentially commands Alice to meet him under the gazebo so that he may claim her hand.  Asking isn’t something lords are accustomed to, especially not during Carroll’s day.   Alice, in a panic, darts off claiming she has seen a white rabbit and must find out where it is going.

Alice is quickly brought to a rabbit hole and, despite terrible nightmares wherein she falls down into a rabbit hole, peers into it and, wouldn’t ya know it – she falls into the hole.  Not too bright, this Alice.  When she falls through the hole, what you should get is an amazing 3D experience, but because everything is happening so fast, you will get special effects soup, as I call it.

The human eye can only focus on so many things at once, and with her dizzying descent into the hole, objects swish by her, and you, so fast – they get lost to the eye.  I imagine shedding the 3D specs might have helped. And, unless you need to see spears thrust at you later on in the movie, in a cheesy attempt to warrant 3D, just pass on the 3D stuff – I can’t emphasize that enough, as I wish I had NOT seen it in 3D at all.  If anything, it will detract from your overall immersion with the story – hardly the director’s intent.

Alice is soon encountering all manner of odd creature and, of course, just about everything can talk to her – and does.  She is not exactly welcomed with warmth, more apathy and suspicion that the white rabbit snagged the “wrong Alice”.  Alice doesn’t really think any of this is real, so she decides she might as well enjoy her stay in this odd dream land, constantly reminding her new “friends” that they don’t exist anyway.  She soon finds out how very real all of these characters are as she is relentlessly pursued by the Red Queen’s evil Knave, Stayne (played by an actor who is a blast from the past – so I won’t reveal it here).

Alice must battle with inner doubts about her principles outweighing the safety of her new friends, and she must prove to everyone that she is the right Alice.  She is to be a champion for a task so impossible, that not even her deceased father, the dreamer, could have imagined it for her.  But, as he used to tell her each night she woke from her little nightmares, nothing is impossible . . . certainly nothing is impossible in this Burton re-telling of Alice in Wonderland.

Why do I care?

So, why go see another Alice tale?  What makes this any different or any better than the countless other Wonderlands out there?  Quite simply, Tim Burton – he manages to create a masterful rendition of Alice in Wonderland using darker tones and subtle hints of the old classic Disney cartoon. The characters in Alice in Wonderland come alive due to the almost seamless special effects, whilst all the characters have something a tad “off” about them, they don’t seem unreal – more dreamlike.  A lucid dream that you wake up from knowing that the characters are real and you can call them up on some sort of imagination rolodex at your leisure.

Depp and Carter both become their respective other selves in a haunting fashion, it’s what I would expect from both of them – and they don’t disappoint.  Newcomer, Mia Wasikowska is simply the perfect choice for this new Alice, a bit bratty yet practical and determined to settle things her way, regardless of the expectations of others.  All of the characters will leave a little something in your heart before you slip off to sleep, and you will find yourself wondering what kind of magical characters are waiting for you, in your own personal Wonderland.   After all, impossible is just a word, and a dream is simply the way we defeat the impossible.

To say what I didn’t like about Alice in Wonderland would be a bit of a spoiler, so, let’s just say the end left a lot to be desired for how quickly things were assumed and wrapped up as though everyone was in Wonderland with Alice.  Still, I enjoyed the story and it was a more grown-up version of the Alice I remember from all those years ago.  I would highly recommend you venture down the rabbit hole and enjoy Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, today.

Swift note:  We managed to steal a new writer from across the pond who already screened Alice in Wonderland for our UK audience, but I wanted to reveal them both at the same time, to give you a chance to see a Yank’s perspective vs. a Brit’s.  So, please have a look at our newest member of the team, Krystal Sim’s offering of Burton’s Alice.

It’s where we create the ghosts

Swift shot: Mentally intriguing suspense mystery worthy of Hitchcock.  Coming off the success with The Departed and flexing his mental muscles a bit more, dabbling in subtle tones of darkness and despair, Marty delivers a fine film for those that miss the classic thrillers.  Shutter Island has a lot going on, and you need to pay attention to pry out the nuances of brilliance throughout.

The film opens with a rocky ferry ride to Ashecliffe Hospital, a kind of mental hospital with armed guards, a prison for the criminally insane – think Arkham Asylum meets The Rock.  U.S. Marshall Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio), witness to the most despicable scenes of World War II, is sent to the island in 1954 to locate a missing patient who seemingly vanished from her cell without a trace.  He is paired with a new partner, Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) who never leaves his side throughout the investigation.  The escaped mental patient, Rachel is cunning and deadly, but how did she manage to leave her cell?  Did she have help escaping?  Is there someone on the inside working against the investigation?

There are so many different themes in Shutter Island, and the intrigue and suspense are strangely believable, clues are given to the investigators and the audience as more pieces of the puzzle are revealed  – but these pieces just seem to add to the frustration.  Something dark and sinister is going on at Ashecliffe Hospital, with so many secrets, so many ghosts, too many lies and dark whispers creating traumatic nightmares making it impossible to discover the truth.

Why are the OSS (current CIA) and other federal agencies consulting with the staff?  What could macabre, diabolical geniuses do with limitless power?  What kind of traps could they set, and are they on the side of evil?  These are the questions you will continually find yourself churning in your head – just what is going on at Ashecliffe Hospital?

Incredibly well acted film, as you would expect from Marty Scorsese.  Cameos abounded in Shutter Island, and one in particular brought back some guttural personal feelings I haven’t had watching a film since Silence of the Lambs.  Shutter Island is full of ghosts, actors I thought had passed on, if not from the Earth, then clearly from the public arena.  Of course, for Scorsese, they were more than willing to make a dramatic return – much to my dark delight.

You will be entertained and you will be discussing this movie for months with your friends.  Why doesn’t this get five stars?  While the concept and delivery of the film were brilliant, I can’t say I didn’t find loopholes that left me mentally agitated afterward.  Most stories are like this, of course, because they are works of fiction, and I would have liked to see some more character impact from some of the cameos and a little less from other characters.  Can’t call this one flawless for that reason, and that reason alone – otherwise, an amazing piece of film that you must treat yourself to.

A dynamic dirge for the weary soul, for the travelers who live in violence and who understand its brutal, yet efficient, applications.  Things are never quite what they seem, and the music and memories of the past will remind you of a dark episode in your own lives perhaps – when justice and vengeance met at a cross-roads, and where the truth set you free.

The Princess and the Frog is the latest in a (very) long line of Disney Animated Classics.  This is the first hand-drawn Disney film since 2004, and it was well worth the wait.  Loosely based on the fairy tale “The Frog Prince”, “The Princess and the Frog” is set in the French Quarter of New Orleans in the 1920s during a jumpin’ Mardi Gras.

The story centers around Tiana (Anika Noni Rose), a hard-working waitress whose dream is to own a restaurant. When word gets out that Prince Naveen of Maldonia (Bruno Campos) is coming to town for the Mardi Gras celebration, several girls want to meet him.  Charlotte La Bouff (Jennifer Cody), Tiana’s best friend who is rich and spoiled, but surprisingly not obnoxious like certain other rich, spoiled celebutantes we know and love to loathe, certainly wants to grab the Prince’s attention.  But a sinister figure is also anxious to make the Prince’s acquaintance, Dr. Facilier (Keith David), an evil voodoo magician who is deeply in debt to “the other side”.

If you’ve seen the previews, you know that Prince Naveen is transformed into a frog, and as the fairy tale goes, can only be made human again if kissed by a Princess.  Since Tiana is not a Princess, when she attempts to break the spell, it results in her transformation as well.  What happens next bears a slight resemblance to “The Wizard of Oz”, as Naveen and Tiana share a magical journey into the bayou to find Mama Odie (Jenifer Lewis), a good voodoo priestess who can help turn them human again.  Along the way they meet Louis (Michael-Leon Wooley), an alligator with an appetite for jazz and Ray (Jim Cummings), a Cajun firefly who pines for his lost love Evangeline.

I felt that this movie had a slightly different tone to it than other classic Disney Princess films.  The same elements that make a great Disney film were there, but I think setting it in the roaring twenties and in New Orleans (versus across the pond – or swamp) really brought out some nuances that danced into a delightfully animated bayou foxtrot.

Some voodoo scenes may be a bit intense for the little ones.  Overall, this was a fantastic movie!  Great music, wonderful animation, and a heart-warming story.  Also featuring John Goodman as Charlotte’s father ‘Big Daddy’ La Bouff, The Princess and the Frog will make you laugh and it may make you cry but you can bet there will be a happily ever after.

“He can win an election, but can he run a country?”

Swift shot: Powerful, yet driven with emotions that many Americans just won’t grasp.  I don’t know much about Rugby, let me be frank about that, and I don’t much care for it – or rather, I didn’t until this film.  Invictus may very well have the same dramatic effect on Rugby interest that say, Top Gun had for navy applicants in the 80s.  Inspiring performance by Freeman, simply perfect and firing on all cylinders – Eastwood and Freeman both deserve the Academy Award for Merit for their efforts.

There has never been a national movement to disband an NFL team for their political symbolism – oh, sure certain mamby pamby PC groups keep trying to change the Redskins and the Chiefs to something less “offensive” – but never has anyone said disband the team, change their colors, their name, their players, their coaches etc. for all they symbolize.  The Raiders would be the first to go!

So, it is impossible for an American audience to find confluence with this film’s story.  It has been over a hundred years that you would have been arrested for flying the “wrong” flag or even singing the “wrong” national anthem.  So, it was amazing to watch Eastwood and Freeman enlighten the audience about building the unified, Rainbow Nation of South Africa post-apartheid through a sports movie.  Also, it was highly entertaining, motivating and thought-provoking!

Set in 1994, leading up to the 1995 Rugby World Cup, hosted in South Africa – following the release of the always inspirational Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) from 27 years of captivity by the Afrikaner government, Invictus dares you to believe that compassion and honor can outweigh anger and vengeance.  Mandela dares to ask more of his countrymen than they even believe possible, to forgive all transgressions.

The South African National Sports Council has put an issue on the table, what to do with the hated Springbok Rugby team, a source of racial and national divisiveness for a generation in South Africa.  Mandela himself was once a fan of all those teams opposing the “Green and Gold” Springbok team, and yet, he understood what the motion would mean for his nation – civil war.  Mandela seizes the opportunity to unify rather than divide his nation, as a punitive move to disband the, essentially, Afrikaner team would be seen as an attempt to anger the old-guard Afrikaner loyalists.  Rugby, as Freeman says through his Mandela mask, is not a political equation, rather a human equation.

How can the National Sports Council go against a man who lived in a cell smaller than most Eastern European sedans for twenty-seven years?!?   Quite simply, they can’t, and Mandela (or Madiba – a tribal title of honor) reminds them that to truly heal their nation, forgiveness must be the order of the day.

Mandela is an amazing figure for historians to tout as one of the bright moments of the late twentieth century, and Freeman wears his visage like a master craftsman.  At times, you will find yourself so wrapped up in his performance, you’ll forget he is just an actor – his performance is on par with Shawshank Redemption in that regard.

While this film centers around the sport of Rugby, it is by no means a sports-film.  If you are looking for a football or rugby movie this year, you won’t find one – come to think of it, I can’t name a single Rugby movie in my lifetime.  It was difficult to prevent myself from comparing Invictus to one of my favorite films as a child, Victory – at the time I was playing mid-fielder myself – so that film inspired me and, oddly enough, started my fascination with World-War II.

I imagine Invictus will draw thousands of people to wikipedia or google to learn more about Mandela, the Springbok Captain Francois (Matt Damon) and, at the very least, find out what the hell a Springbok is!  I kept thinking they were saying Springbug until the middle of the film.  To save you that agony, a Springbok is a type of antelope native to South Africa, and when the “All Blacks” make their appearance in the film, they are the New Zealand team – that will keep you from scratching your head (you’ll thank me later).  As for the ritual before a match, you are on your own there my friends.

Now for the bad stuff, Eastwood gets a few poor marks, namely allowing Matt Damon to slip in and out of accent, either go with it, or don’t – I still stand almost alone in praising Tom Cruise for not even feigning a German accent in Valkyrie (he, at least, didn’t appear wishy-washy).  When Damon is on, he drives the script, but when he is off – he misses the drop goal (first Rick Swift Rugby reference ever).

Another momentum killer is a scene involving a helicopter swooping in dramatically to show Mandela’s solidarity with the Green and Gold – whoever chose that music must have been related to a cast-member, because it was completely out of scope with the rest of the film – and a tad cheesy.  It had the effect of immediately launching me back into the theater and out of my imagination.

If passionate films about unification bore you, skip this one.  If watching a bunch of meatballs in shorts and socks up to their necks scrum disturbs you, better lateral pass.  But, if you want to be inspired, and you want to challenge yourself to be better than you not only think, but know that you are – run to theaters and enjoy this brief glimpse into the incredible mind of an amazing statesman who so loved his country that he became a fan of a team he once loathed.  God, I hope I don’t ever have to become a Raiders fan to save my nation – or we are doomed!

The Fantastic Mr. Fox is the newest film by the quirky director of hipster dramadies, Wes Anderson (The Royal Tenenbaums, Bottle Rocket). Not only is it one of his best to date, the film re-imagines what we have come to think of as a modern children’s animated movie.  Without an ounce of computer-generated imagery, Anderson is able to paint a portrait that is artistic, meticulously crafted and highly entertaining.

The story, which is co-authored by both Anderson and Noah Baumbach (The Squid and the Whale), is a take on a popular Roald Dahl children’s book. It centers on the antics of Mr. Fox, voiced by the ever charming George Clooney, and his zany clan of family and friends. They aim to take on a trio of agriculture businessmen in a theft that rivals anything Clooney pulled off in the three “Ocean” films. Well, almost.

If any of Dahl’s stories were to be Wes Anderson’s animated opus, it would have to be Fantastic Mr. Fox. Anderson is known for his portrayal of dysfunctional and odd-ball families and can peg their interactions spot on. Such a character-driven film is perfect in his hands.

There is also something to be said about the great voice work done on the film. Clooney is joined by an all-star cast that includes Meryl Streep as Mrs. Fox as well as Anderson staples Jason Shwartzman, Bill Murray, and Owen Wilson. The dialogue suits both the actors and the characters, combining to bring the furry creatures to life.

With all of that being said, the film would never have the impact it does without the animation technique used in it. Stop motion hasn’t been seen in a while, but it always seems to work. Remember A Nightmare before Christmas or the other Roald Dahl story, James and the Giant Peach? Fantastic Mr. Fox joins these films and even surpasses them in many ways to become what I consider to be one of the better animated films of the past decade.

Every movement of the characters has been crafted delicately and purposefully. While certain CGI films found movement and realism purely by accident, Anderson makes sure nothing has happened by chance. Even the gentle movement of facial fur in the wind is created shot by shot, moving the characters slightly in each frame. This love and care has clearly paid off.

As the film progresses, we learn more and more about Mr. Fox and his family until a fairly rich tableau of characters are presented. These include Ash, Mr. Fox’s son, the badger who fixes Mr. Fox’s plumbing, and Ash’s cousin, who happens to be a martial arts expert. They all come together to pull off one incredible heist.

If you have kids, take them to see this film. Drag them if you have to, because they’ll really appreciate it. It might also make you seem less creepy than if you were to go alone. If you don’t have kids, but revel in the nostalgia of the story and the buzz that comes along with any new Wes Anderson flick, then you should go too. Seeing it on the big screen is a great experience where you can really appreciate the details, so don’t wait for this one to come out on DVD.

The H-Bomb: Sandra Bullock gives her most impressive performance to date in this uplifting and surprisingly moving film about a teenage sports prodigy with a troubled past who is taken in by a well-meaning family and is given something people from his side of the tracks rarely get… the opportunity to make something of his life.

I’m a reasonably cynical person, and as such, I generally hate films about good, kind people with happy, uplifting endings. Why, you ask? Mainly because I never believe them for a second. I get especially cynical around the Holiday season, and am usually even more hostile to phony, syrupy, feel good movies. That’s why I found myself completely blind-sided by “The Blind Side”, an inspiring, entertaining film that I thoroughly enjoyed from beginning to end. A film that gave me characters that I really cared about, and a (true) story that I, for a change, did believe.

“The Blind Side” is about Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), a gigantic African American teenager from the ghetto who’s been drifting from one foster home to another for most of his life. The football coach of a private high school sees real potential in Oher and talks the school’s administrators into accepting him into the school. Nick-named “Big Mike” by everyone around him, it quickly becomes clear that he might not make the grade academically. In fact, early on, we’re led to believe that he’s a half wit. He isn’t; however, he’s just incredibly shy. As one character describes him, “He’s like an onion. You have to peel back the layers, one at a time.”

Despite attending this rather distinguished school, Michael is forced out of another foster home and spends his nights in the school gym. This is where he first draws the attention of Leigh Anne Tuohy (Sandra Bullock), an assertive but generous woman who offers to let him stay with her and her kind-hearted family. From here we see Michael bond with the Tuohys as they accept him as one of their own, and for the first time in his life, Michael finds himself with a home, and a family.

This film is a genuine crowd-pleaser through and through. It’s the kind of underdog prevails story that you’ve seen before, but as someone once said, “When it comes to making a good film, you don’t need to surprise people, you need to make them care.” And that’s exactly what director John Lee Hancock did, he makes the audience care about this big, awkward lug of a teenager. As we follow Michael through the story, both on the football field, and at home with the Tuohys, we really grow to like him, and want to see him succeed.

Don’t let the ads fool you, this isn’t really a sports movie. The scenes on the field actually take up very little screen time. Instead, it’s the story about how a young man is able to beat the odds with the help of the kindness of strangers. It’s also a film about the relationship that develops between an adoptive son and a mother, and about the basic goodness that exists in most people. On paper it all sounds like a cheesy, sappy, Robin Williams-esque suck-fest, but Hancock was able to keep things from falling into the realm of over-sentimental crap by injecting healthy doses of humor into the film.

Bullock is a delight as the tough-as-nails southern gal who is determined to see Michael make the most of his talents. The scene where she marches out onto the football field and  coaches him during practice is priceless. She really is terrific in this role. She’s so good, in fact, that some people might even be mentioning her name come Oscar time. I don’t think I’m overstating it at all, this is the best performance I’ve ever seen her give. Tim McGraw is solid as her easy going husband, Sean. He’s understated, but likable, and proves an effective foil to the assertive Bullock. Jae Head nearly steals the movie as the Tuohy’s young son, S.J., and Kathy Bates makes a welcome appearance late in the game as Michael’s private tutor. The real revelation, though, is Quinton Aaron as Michael. I don’t know who the hell this kid is, but he was the embodiment of “Big Mike” and played him to a T. I really hope to see more of him in the future.

Is there anything to complain about? Sure… if this movie weren’t based on a true story, I would think that the Tuohy family is a little too good to be true. The way they just take Michael in would’ve been too much for me to swallow, had this been a fictional story. But maybe that’s just my cynicism talking… another thing, my most common complaint, is that clocking in at over two hours, the film goes into overtime, and could’ve used some tightening at parts… but, no biggy.

In fact, the length really isn’t a problem at all, because, as stated earlier, the film pulls you into the story of young Michael Oher and makes you care about what happens to him. This is one of the very rare film going experiences I’ve had where the audience I saw it with applauded at the end, and I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t tempted to join in.

“Don’t you see the signs?”

Swift shot: Dynamic special effects dominate a terrible landscape of destruction and demise.   The characters gradually become compelling and the story is interesting; what you won’t find shoved down your throat is the conspiracy theorists rantings, it is addressed but not overdone - well played by the director.  There have been enough shows on Discovery and the History Channel postulating what might happen – this film shows you what WILL happen!  Ok, perhaps nothing will happen, but either way, this film can stand on its own as an impressive natural disaster thriller.

What do you grab as the embers burn around you?  What is the thing that defines you, what are you willing to let go of when the final bell tolls?  These are questions that will haunt you throughout Roland Emmerich‘s latest natural disaster epic, 2012.

I am assuming most know the Mayans predicted the end of all time to be December 21, 2012.  So, how will it all end, what will be the final stroke that does in humanity?  I won’t ruin it for you by giving it away (as there is a slight twist), but I will give you a hint. . . the human plan for survival is nothing incredibly novel.

The storyline centers around a broken family, struggling to come to terms with roles and identities undefined.  John Cusack plays Jackson Curtis, a small-time, albeit published author of a novel that swallowed his marriage.  He of course is broke and trying to prove to his now somewhat estranged children that he is still their father.  He wants to hate the new beau in his ex-wife’s life – and I wanted to hate him too – but he serves his purpose and is an honorable character.

On one of his “super dad” trips to Yellowstone Park, they happen across a drained out lake as some whackadoo (Woody Harrelson) observes his family get detained by the US Geological Department.  Of course they are advised to vacate the area but are never told why.  Jackson discovers the nut-job broadcasts a radio program from a trailer in Yellowstone – and at first he blows him off as another conspiracist freak.  But, what do you do when the freaks with the cardboard signs are right?

In a race to escape the end of the world, Jackson manages to gather his family, including his replacement, to a beyond top-secret escape plan set out of China.  In a twisted Bondesque setting, a secret international society will stop at nothing to protect the secret.  Flanked by sub-plots galore, reminiscent of Independence Day, the characters come across as a tad melodramatic – but not to the detriment of the audience.

What makes this film so interesting is speculating your own role in your family, your country, your very existence – when the stakes are nothing short of the entire Earth, what would you do to survive?  Would you sacrifice yourself so that others may live?  What values truly make us humans?  These questions are answered throughout the film.  I was incredibly entertained and compelled to follow the life-paths of these characters well after the final credits faded out.

If you wait to rent this one, shame on you, the special-effects alone demand you enjoy this in theaters.  I was amazed at how interactive the crowd was throughout this film.  I remember when I saw Independence Day, surrounded by fellow jarheads – and how we cheered as the Marine saved the day.

This film lets everyone play Marine!  See, worth isn’t measured by wealth or what color your nation’s flag is or what your medals say about you . . . it is measured by your actions regardless of personal danger.  Anyone can be a hero, it just takes a compassionate heart and the courage to stand up.

“My father was an exceptional man!”

British farce comedy at its finest, this is not pretentious and annoying like so so many other British scripts, you know the ones I mean – Four Weddings and a Funeral, the Bridget Jones series, anything starring Hugh Grant opposite another British lead.  This was a guy’s comedy, it is chock full of every type of humor imaginable, and while romance plays an integral part in the foolish farce, the real moments of comedy brilliance splash around in the gutter.

I love Alan Tudyk from 28 Days, Serenity and many more – always an impressive force on the screen, and while some would say he is over the top, his death scene in Serenity should surely shut his critics, soundly . . . up.  I am going to be sentenced to grammar hell for that sentence.  Am I giving you a headache yet?  Take some Valium, dear.  Peter Dinklage will stand out to many indie film lovers, he reminds me of a friend of mine from college – his acting style is classic and wonderful.  Probably the guy who gets the, “I can’t believe he committed to that” award goes to Andy Nyman – who really feces his fears.

The British cast may not appeal to many of my American friends, but you should recognize a few of the more memorable faces, and since this is Directed by Yoda – like it you will, or Miss Piggy will have to kick you – HIYA!  Yes, it was directed by Frank Oz, no relation to Dorothy.  And, yes, European actors tend not to come out of some Sneetch factory with their hair all perfect and their bodies toned.  Still, I think that is what makes the casting excellent, the characters could very easily exist – and, I am sure we all will recognize certain friends or family members in some of them.  Best of all with this script though, nothing unbelievable ever happens – so, be wary of the next funeral you attend.  And for God’s sake, have some couth, please.

If you don’t laugh at this one, I think you would fail my Frasier test.  That’s the one where I make a potential mate watch Frasier and if she doesn’t laugh at least twice in an episode – well, let’s just say she doesn’t get to meet mom.

Oh no, I see there is an American version of this film slotted to release in 2010 – please don’t muss it about, you Yank, Chris Rock!  Yes, I said Chris Rock (completely different comedic style), I am hopeful though; the new version will apparently retain the always inspirational Peter Dinklage who keeps the punch spiked throughout Frank Oz’ version.

If you can catch this sucker on cable, treat yourself on a day when you are taking things a little too seriously – it’ll make you smile.

If you catch this one on cable, watch it!