Movie Review: Safe House

Safe House is the story of Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds), a low level CIA guy stuck in a nowhere job and desperately wanting to get more involved. His chance comes when notorious traitor and expert spy Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington) is forced to surrender to the US Embassy in South Africa to elude being killed by a large, well-trained army of henchmen.

Taken to the safe house ran by Weston for safe-keeping, Frost proves to be highly sought-after. The well-trained CIA team finds itself under a well-co-ordinated attack. During the assault Frost convinces Weston that he will be killed while Frost is kept alive so Weston elects to try to take Frost back to the embassy.

Power plays in the CIA headquarters result in him being told to stay away from the embassy until a specified time. As he wheels around the city trying to keep Frost both under arrest and safe, it becomes obvious somebody within the CIA is leaking information.

As a side note, I had the who pegged within the first 10 minutes of the film, I thought it was that obvious...though later they throw some red herrings out that might let the unwary viewer begin to suspect someone else. It is a minor quibble...writing a solid Benedict Arnold into a story like this with concealed motivations and actions is very difficult.

By the time the final showdown is reached Weston has changed his goals completely. His use of a key phrase in the movie to respond to the CIA chief in his exit interview is pitch perfect.

The things I love about this movie are multitude. The villains are solid and believable. Unlike some action-adventure movies where the villains are incompetent buffoons who would seem incapable of defeating a well armed termite, these are very competent...as are the CIA team they take out at the safe house.

This matters. All too often, in order to make the ultimate hero of the piece seem stronger their allies are imbeciles who would be defeated in a battle versus snowmen in Death Valley in July. In this case they are quite talented, put up an expert defense and are overcome, thus leading to the villains being a credible threat.

Second, the characters of Frost and Weston are done well enough to draw you in. Though entertaining movies like this one are never hailed on Oscar night, the acting in it is excellent; you do not see Ryan Reynolds and Denzel Washington, you actually see Weston and Frost.

Third, the camera work was mostly well done. While there were moments of jump-cuts, close ups during fights, etc., for the most part we were actually allowed to see what was happening. When you go to an action movie and actually get to SEE the action it makes it much better.

I also liked the synergy of the name Weston. I instantly tagged it as being a reference to the titular star of Burn Notice, Michael Westen (Jefferey Donovan). It lent a certain fictional credibility to the idea a guy like Weston who had spent his entire CIA career in a low-profile, action less safe house could run, drive, shoot, and miracle his way to getting the bad guy, recovering the information, and surviving.

Of course, there also must be quibbles, so in the interest of fairness, there were a couple things I did not like about the movie. First of course would be those moments when they failed to let us see the action. Fewer than in many movies, they were still there.

Second would be a rather major one; the difference between the movie as previewed and the movie as executed.

In the scene in question Weston is on the ground as a train roars by. Frost holds a gun to his head as he cringes in fear. Each time Weston spouts a line, then fires the gun right next to his head, the concussive blast then disorienting Weston. The problem is the line in the previews and the line in the movie are so different it completely changes the focus of the movie.

In the movie Frost says, "I only kill professionals." Fair enough. Good reason for letting Weston off the hook in their world.

The problem lies here; in the preview the line is, "I WANT you to take me in." The clear inference is there is some reason Frost needs to be taken into secure intelligence community quarters. It implies he fires the shot to show Weston it is for his own purpose. This is reinforced by a moment in the previews where two CIA honchos are talking and one says, "A guy like Frost doesn't just walk into an American Embassy".*

Therefore, the expectation set by the previews of Frost having some ingenious purpose for willingly and intentionally being captured by the CIA is never fulfilled; it is a false premise and unfair to those paying attention.

Third, watching Weston go from never having fired a weapon to out-shooting crack commando teams was a bit of a jolt that threatened to pull me out of the moment, though ultimately the story was fun enough to make that no big deal and, after all, we do want our heroes to be capable as well.

With that aside, it was still a very entertaining, pretty action-packed, layered bit of film-making that was worth the price of admission. Hopefully I was able to give the gist of the story without giving away any of the spoilers.


*Not a direct quote, but pretty close

Movie Review: UnKnown

Recently I was offered a free ticket to a pre-screening of Unknown (2011). being a known movie buff to the point it is almost degenerate, I snapped at the opportunity.

I like Liam Neeson. Despite some horrific choices like Clash of the Titans (2010), he more regularly turns in fun, entertaining stuff like the ridiculous A-Team (2010), Taken (2008), and so forth.

So I was excited to see this one. He proved capable of an action role in Taken so at least had some credibility.

The movie starts a bit slowly with the arrival in Berlin of Dr. Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) and his wife Elizabeth Harris (January Jones). They get separated at the hotel when he realizes his briefcase is still in the taxi.

He hails another taxi to retrieve the briefcase, gets into an accident that creates gaps in his memory, and then the movie really begins.

When he remembers he is supposed to be at a conference and shows up, he encounters various problems. Having lost his wallet in the accident and having his passport in the lost briefcase, he cannot prove who he is.

The situation is exacerbated when his wife turns out to be married to someone else and both of them claim to have no idea who he is. A professor at the conference who invited him has never met him in person.

He begins to doubt who he is until, during an MRI, someone attempts to assassinate him.

The mystery of who he is and why his wife claims not to know him gets deeper as assassins begin seeking to kill him. Who is Martin Harris and why does nobody know who he is?

The movie moves along at a stiff pace, revealing bits and pieces and keeping you intrigued right up until the end. All the clues to the mystery are there if you know what to look for, though of course the real motives of a few key players are only revealed in hindsight.

There are a couple turns that you may or may not see coming, but it is a great ride getting there.

Along the way there are some fun performances, including the delightful Herr Ernst Jürgen (Bruno Ganz).

There is a major quibble with this movie, however. Director Jaume Collet-Serra fell prey to the idea that the best way to present action scenes is numerous tight cuts that make it impossible to tell what is happening.

You can tell someone hit someone, but not who did the hitting and who the grunting in pain. Cars appear from nowhere, there is no point of reference in chase scenes, and thus the action in an action movie is replaced by blank stares at other patrons and wondering who is winning the fight and how.

This is a trend that needs to stop. A chase scene where you cannot tell if the pursuer is 2" or 2 miles behind is a horrible scene. Stop it. Just...stop.

That aside, it is an enjoyable journey getting to the pleasing finale. This movie probably would be good to re-watch once knowing the ending to see all the little hints, but would probably lose its charm after that as the very things that make it entertaining would then be gone.

The slow reveal of why people do not know Smith is the story and very enjoyable at that.

Movie Review:Iron-Man 2

Comic books went through a massive change from their inception. Much early fare was basic escapist entertainment with outlandish story lines, fantastical feats of derring-do, and campy stories that delivered a high fun factor.

As the mood of the nation changed, so did the super hero comic. By the late 80s or early 90s it seemed many titles focused more on the personal, typically angst-driven problems of the titular hero with the action scenes providing the next beat in that story, almost secondary to the main point of the book.

In that period, when they were trying to be taken as a serious medium, they delved deeply into a variety of social issues and causes. For some, this was a wonderful thing. For others, they started to miss the fun factor that made the medium special.

That is not a criticism that can be leveled at Iron Man 2. The fun factor is high, the action sequences numerous and spectacular, the violence at near spaghetti western levels, and the scenery...just gorgeous.

Director Jon Favreau has a great eye for spectacular, eye-pleasing moments that border on the iconic, a sly sense of humor, and a talent for bringing out the best in his well-populated star list. Perhaps the moment that best displays this is the Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) in the donut.
From a story standpoint, Iron Man is excellent. The basic storyline is nothing spectacular, nor are any of the sub-plots taken individually...but when melded together they provide a very nice texture to frame an overall effect that has re-watchability.

Additionally, they show a knowledge of and respect for the fans of the comic book. This is shown by little things such as Stark using the phrase "war machine" in regards to the suit Rhoades (Don Cheadle) is wearing that had a brief run as its own comic titled War Machine. It was a very nice touch.

It is one reason the movie works on many levels. The non-comic fan gets a big, bold action-adventure. The comic fan gets to see little bits and pieces of the Marvel Universe on the big screen with homages to the "canon".

From a cinematography standpoint, I think most viewers can find many things to enjoy. The scenery...whether nature or the inhabitants...is often spectacular and easy on the eyes. (When Stark says of Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johannsen), "I want one", many viewers probably already had that thought when they saw the Ironettes).

If you go into this expecting Schindler's List you will deservedly be disappointed. But if you go in expecting one-liners, double-entendres, over-the top action, gorgeous visuals, and a lot of fun you will love it.

Of course, being me, I have to find SOMETHING I did not love about this movie; how, exactly, did the rather light-weighing Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) manage to haul around a suitcase containing a full Iron Man suit? How did Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) make and retain all his money if nothing he makes works?

Those, of course, are things that are irrelevant. Just roll with them.

On the other end of the spectrum are two nice surprises for fans of the Marvel Universe...one being the sighting of Captain America's shield and the other...well, stay through the end of the credits. Nice teaser to be found there.

If you like fun movies with beautiful people and high-octane action, great special effects and fun...this movie is a must-see.

The Weasel is full.

Movie Review: Edge of Darkness

For a while it looked like Mel Gibson had killed his movie career. Between movies found insensitive by some groups (really? Passion of the Christ? People feel they, as a modern group, are being called to account for a 2000 year old event because somebody made a movie based on the best documented source available? Perhaps some Persians should have been up in arms over 300 then...), drunk driving, and all around oddness. He kind of was becoming the Dennis Rodman of cinema.

Mix in the train wreck Apocalypto and you have a guy nobody really wants to see or hear from. This is not the same guy who made Lethal Weapon, Braveheart, The Patriot or even Paycheck.

Somewhere along the line he lost his cachet, and being somewhat up in years, his days as an action star seem somewhat behind him, yet an action-thriller was the entire marketing of Edge of Darkness.

It is unfortunate that the previews spoil one of the best "twists" in this fairly by-the-numbers action adventure yarn. There are a couple other minor surprises, but it mostly follows the film-by-numbers to the letter.

Not that it is a knock on it...Darkness is a rollicking good time with plenty of violence, intriguing characters, a mystery that, even if you figure it out the first time the villain and/or anti-heroes come on screen, is still fun to watch get where it is going.

When Emma Craven (Bojana Novakocik) is shot down in front of Detective Thomas Craven (Mel Gibson), it sets him on an investigation that will lead to the halls of Congress, the headquarters of major corporations, and points in between.

Along the way he has some fascinating interplay with Jedburgh (Ray Winstone), the mysterious enforcer-for-hire who takes an interest in preventing Craven from ever discovering the truth.

As the body count rises, it seems everyone who could help Craven turns up dead, yet he relentlessly draws closer and closer to finding out the truth of who was responsible for the death of his daughter. Can he find the answer before he is killed himself?

The answer is mildly surprising, but the trip is what is really entertaining.

If you like action-adventure movies, this is an excellent diversion for a few hours. Winstone is perfection in his role and is perhaps the most well-developed character along the way. If you are surprised that Senator Jim Pine is represented as a Republican you have no concept of the American political scene. If the bad guys being who they are surprises you...well, again, wake up and smell the smoke stacks, my friends.

In the end, it is an entertaining 1:48 and worth seeing on a matinee...or at least on Netflix.

Movie Review: Ninja Assassin

Please, do not misunderstand what I am about to say and think this movie was bloody. After all, this movie has a healthy dose of Ben Miles, whom you might remember from his role as Patrick in the British sitcom Coupling.

I mean, sure, the opening scene where Raizo (Rain) wipes out a gang for no apparent reason is pretty bloody, with severed arms, legs, heads, trunks, and just general spurts of blood fill the screen.

And then there is the bloody training scene.

And the random fight with the other ninja in the laundromat...that has lots of blood.

And the bloody eating scene.

And the other bloody training scene.

Oh, yeah, and then the scene where he is trying to sleep has the bloody feet.

And then there is that one training scene that is pretty bloody.

And of course his first assassination...that one is extremely bloody.

Oh, I almost forgot the other training scene...I guess it was pretty bloody too, now that I think about it.

And the scene where Raizo turns on his master...it is pretty bloody.

And the scene where he is in prison....that is blood-drenched as well.

Oh, and the final battle has more than its share of blood...


On the bright side, you are unlikely to get too lost in the uncomplicated plot. Raizo was going to be the perfect Ninja until Kiriko (Anna Sawai, Kylie Goldstein) shows him he has a heart. When she is killed by the clan, he decides to wreak vengeance on them.

Now that we have the plot out of the way, it is one fight scene after another.

Unfortunately, they went so heavily on the "Ninjas fight in shadows" theme that is becomes a series of flickering movements in the shadows followed by fountains of blood. At times you are not extremely sure if they really needed actors for this movie.

By the time it is over, you figure you have seen your share of blood for the decade, but still are unfulfilled if you thirst for a good fighting movie.

So-so story, few good lines of sight in combat scenes, and a pedestrian ending leave this one for the Netflix pile.

Movie Review:Surrogates

Lately there has been a plethora of movies dealing with ethical issues raised by what many anticipate will be the next generation of Sims-style games.

Sometimes, such as in I, Robot (2004) those concerns revolve around the rights "created life-forms" have. More recently, Gamer seemed from the trailers to revolve around the legitimacy of getting people from death row killed in pursuit of a game, though that is pure conjecture...friends warned me it had so many pornographic overtones they walked out and I took their advice and elected not to see it.

Be that as it may, Surrogates takes the concept to another level.

In this world, virtually every person stays at home, wirelessly controlling surrogate androids that go forth and take part in the world. This will free them from the dangers of disease, accidents, and even warfare as shown in one interesting scene where a soldier who has his surrogate "killed" simply receives another unit from a replacement supply along with a stern warning to be careful, because "these things aren't free".

Certainly, there are advantages to living real life entirely by remote control. You can choose how you look, don't have to suffer unpleasant side effects of deviant behavior...after all, if you murder a surrogate, it is just property damage, not actually taking a life...and so forth.

But there are consequences as well. Director Jonathan Mostow certainly allows plenty of time and returns repeatedly to scenes showing the emotional disconnect that comes from having no actual personal contact or interaction...a charge frequently leveled against serious players of Sims or Massively Multi-player Online games such as World of Warcraft and Everquest.

The movie starts with an episodic look at how Surrogates went from conception to something employed by the vast majority of people, though some people rebel at the concept and form Surrogate-free zones.

Soon it jumps into a look at a young man who goes to a club instead of an opera...only to be killed by real human Miles Strickland (Jack Noseworthy).

Greer (Bruce Willis) and his partner Peters (Radha Mitchell) must solve the murder which leads to a tangled web of deception as they discover someone has invented a weapon which makes it possible to kill the user by killing the surrogate.

More and more powerful forces try to keep Greer from accomplishing his mission until at the end he is faced with a choice; save the surrogates and allow dis-figured and disabled people to live "normal" lives or allow their destruction to force people to act on their own.

The movie is pretty entertaining, has a couple nice action set-pieces and may surprise you at a turn or two...though the clues are there to let you know what is coming.

It is pretty weird seeing the Surrogate version of Willis with the goofy hair and no wrinkles..in fact, at some point the distinct lack of wrinkles on the surrogates almost becomes a character itself.

Is the immersion in virtual and alternate reality worlds a negative thing? How far is too far? These are questions the movie will raise and have no doubt; the writers and director have an answer.

Movie Review: G.I.Joe:The The Rise of Cobra

For whatever reason, movies that spark the nostalgia of childhood always strike my fancy and rank high on my list of movies I am excited to see. Certainly the third installment in the Ice Age franchise was greatly anticipated, and Transformers: The Revenge of the Fallen ranked as must-see cinema for me.

The only reason GI Joe did not rank that was was because this franchise went off the rails in the previews. Whereas the comics I recall and the cartoon when I was able to watch it were more or less set in a "real physics" universe, albeit with A-Team like sparsity of casualties despite constant warfare and gunfire.

Yet in the pre-view they have the absolutely idiotic "Delta 6 Accelerator Suits" which allow them to dodge missiles. Whatever. It was at that moment this tent-pole wannabe franchise went off the rails for me.

I had very conflicted feelings about seeing it. I was going to hate the straying from the "feel" of the GI JOE lore but it did look like a pretty good action flick. Still, it is GI JOE and has a huge brand-name cast so off I went. I was totally prepared to hate this movie.

The flick starts bizarrely in 1641 Medieval France where James McCullen (David Murray) has been arrested by the French for selling weapons to their enemies. Thus the McCullen clan habit of arms dealing and selling weapons to both sides was established.

Click to modern day where General Hawk (Dennis Quaid) is watching a modern day McCullen (Christopher Eccleston) tell NATO of the nanomite warheads he has developed for no apparent reason.

This is one of the myriad of non-sensical plot holes you must ignore if you are to enjoy this movie. Why, exactly, the "peace-keeping" mission of NATO suddenly has them independently paying for Doomsday weapons is never addressed in any way, shape or form. Moving on, nothing to see here but the ripped, torn, bleeding carcass of a gazelle that wandered into a lion pride.

The task of transporting these warheads from Kurgystan or some such random country (see above plot hole comment; why a Scotsmen working for NATO has his lab there is...well...best not to think about it. You won't like the answer anyway.) is assigned to Duke (Channing Tatum) , Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) and their team of anonymous casualties.

Enter the forces of the Baroness (Sienna Miller) and Storm Shadow (Byung-Hun Lee) who try to seize the briefcase, only to be foiled by Scarlett (Rachel Nichols), Heavy Duty (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje), Snake Eyes (Ray Park) and some other Joe I cannot remember.

Yes, the characters are introduced so fast and in such large bunches that they are hard to remember...but I am okay with that as at least they were true to that part of the Joe lore. As well as all of them having nick-names, though why Duke is Duke and Ripcord Ripcord prior to becoming Joes is another intriguing mystery best left unexplored.

From there the story takes off. The scenes of exposition are few and far between and widely spaced between some rather intense set-piece action scenes, long chases, huge explosions, and the requisite and awesome Snake Eyes versus Storm Shadow one on one combats which should satisfy any fan of sword play...unless, of course, the viewer has seen the movies from which their fight scenes seem to be almost directly ported over.

It is an open question whether the heavy references in this movie to other movies are "tributes", "homages" or "plagiarism". For your intellectual integrity, do not compare the missile dodging scene to any other recent high profile movies based on toy franchises that had a massive city battle which saw missiles fired at two figures in full chase mode who then contort wildly to avoid them...

There were so many references to many famous movies. In fact, they cribbed so heavily from Black Hawk Down that instead of simply re-shooting scenes down to the same camera angles...they simply took footage from it as you see in the final credits.

In case it is not obvious, even after seeing it I am highly conflicted about this movie.

As a GI JOE movie, it blew great hairy chunks of monkey under arm pit sweat. The unworldly physics of the Accelerator suits, the stupidity of the nanomites and various "pistol that blows up a city block...no wait, it sniper-level hits just the intended target...no wait, it blows up 2 widely dispersed enemies and the entire wall behind them" weapons, the death of a major, major part of the JOE lore...these are major strikes against it.

Not to mention they use the tag line "GI JOE:A Real American Hero" even though it is deliberately an international task force based in Egypt. Oh, and the American President has a very thick, obvious, and not American accent.

At the same time, as an action movie this may have been even more adrenaline-pumped and action packed than Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen or even Live Free or Die Hard. The action scenes are long, packed, photographed well with very little of the annoying bouncing that has been all the rage lately. These are action scenes that are filmed so well you can actually, you know....see what is happening. That is outstanding.

But on the negative side are the repeat jokes and the bad acting. Example A: When Cobra attacks in the desert, the camels sense the under-the-surface invasion and react to it. When the Joes attack the Cobra base, the Polar Bear senses the under-the-surface invasion and reacts to it. Tit-for-tat, take that.

And the acting...oh, what happened? Way back when the abominable Punisher:Warzone was out, I complained about the cheesy, cartoon-like acting of Dominic West in the role of primary villain and how it really detracted from what was very nearly a really good Punisher movie.

Enter The Doctor (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who apparently disagrees with me. His walk, his gestures, his vocal inflections...until I looked up the credits I actually thought it was Dominic West. His cartoonish acting was extremely distracting. In his "homage" costume to Star Wars and Hellboy he decided to reference one of the more disappointing Comic Genre movies in recent memory? Why was this allowed?

Marlon Wayans is also pretty uneven, going from playing it straight and in the feel of most of the cast to getting in touch with his prat-fall Three Stooges homage side.

The change of heart Scarlett has is not sold particularly well either, but that is part of having perhaps too many sub-plots.

Ironically, I prefer my movies, even popcorn-fests such as this one, to have a variety of story-lines...provided the director takes the time to develop them and they make sense.

In this case, Director Stephen Sommers was so busy over-using the tired and true (not a typo) flashback device so often used to cover weak story-telling to actually develop current stories.

So in the end we have a real mish-mash. It is a great action flick with a couple real poor performances, interesting but not fascinating story, a nice twist that you may or may not see coming, and a curious (probable) death to a well-loved character and other abuses of the franchise that simultaneously manages to be great and horrific at the same time.

If you insist on your "GI Joe" lore matching the canon, save the 40 bucks a night at the movies will cost you. If you love action movies, go see it today. If you are indifferent...well, you might get distracted.

Movie Review: Transformers, Revenge of the Fallen

Many people hate the directing of Michael Bay. He uses a lot of explosions, high-energy set-pieces, sensuous camera angles, and so forth to cover for some shaky scripts. He has developed a style that falls enough into the realm of the auteur that he is even being mocked for it on You-tube.

On the other hand, with Bay you know what you are going to get and he seldom fails to deliver. In Transformers:Revenge of the Fallen he has the source material that fits his style. The original cartoon was never overly long on story line and plot but made up for it with a lot of high-octane action. Enter Michael Bay.

Revenge of the Fallen is everything you would expect. Action-packed, full of one-liners, full of plot holes and thoroughly enjoyable. It starts slowly, but once it gets going it doesn't slow down.

The plot is simple; Ancient Decepticon  "The Fallen" wants to return to power. To do that, the last Optimus must be slain. Once that happens, he will be freed to go to earth, find a machine that will kill the sun, and get that power for himself. Meanwhile, the knowledge of The Cube has been internalized by Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf).

So the Decepticons are chasing Sam who is being protected by Bumblebee and accompanied by Mikaela Banes (Megan Fox). Along the way, the specialized military task force has several battles with the Decepticons and the epic conclusion is a long-running battle that delivers everything you would expect from a Michael Bay flick: hot women, big guns, rapid cuts, numerous explosions, and a happy conclusion.

Along the way we encounter a lot of new Transformers that call back the glory days of the cartoon. We see Constructobots, Dinobots, and several others including a wise-cracking duo that get the best lines in the movie.

If you are looking for an intellectual, thought-provoking movie with something to say about today's society, skip this movie. But if you want an action-packed, fun filled action-adventure with a lot of combat, laughs, and fun, go see it. Twice.

Movie Review:Terminator Salvation

If you like sharp, well crafted dialogue with thoughtful, well developed plots, internal consistency, and movies with something deep and meaningful to say about the human condition....this movie may not be the right choice for you.

 On the other hand, if you like action-packed flicks with a surface-deep story and a lot of fun, punch your ticket it is time to go for a ride.

Terminator:Salvation is more about Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington) than it is John Connor (Christian Bale) even if the screen time slants slightly towards Bale. 

The movie is set in 2018. In keeping with the dark nature we have seen of the future in the other Terminator movies, it is a bleak world indeed. Standing buildings are a thing of the past, technology other than war machines has seriously regressed, and the humans are at war with the machines.

Somewhere in the ocean the leadership of the human resistance is on a submarine planning a technological attack on Skynet while John Connor is among the ground forces. Up pops Wright, a man who has no knowledge of Judgment Day or what happened to L.A., yet this causes no questions for people such as, "Where were you for the past 18 year?"

This highlights the intrinsic stupidity of the movie. That is a pretty basic question, yet it gets blown off. Another fine example of the lack of attention to detail would be the sequence where Wright hot-wires a car, Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin) says he doesn't know how to drive...then manages to steer the vehicle off-road down a ravine, through a complicated set-piece chase scene and ends with a perfect Rockford Files e-brake slide. Not bad for someone who "doesn't know how to drive".

Once you get past the internal logic holes, however, this movie is a lot of fun. It has the elements that made the first couple movies so enjoyable; out-gunned humans being chased by implacable, nigh-indestructible machines and having to find ways to stay alive long enough to figure out how to destroy the machine.

Along the way Wright has to figure out if he is human or machine. This journey is marked by key moments differentiating how other people perceive him.

The movie has some fantastic call-backs to some of the most memorable moments in the first couple movies and some nice cameos that should bring a smile to the face of anyone who likes the franchise.

Overall, it is an action-packed, enjoyable flick that moves the franchise forward and is worth the price of admission for those who are fans of the series. Oh, and if you liked Bale in the Batman series, check out his return to that voice during his "don't bomb Skynet" communique. That laugh alone is worth the price of admission.

Movie Review:The Spirit

Frank Miller is infatuated with color schemes of black and white with splashes of red. In The Spirit he uses these to great effect. As a director he has a great eye for stunning visuals and iconic moments. As a writer he has a wry, twisted sense of humor that translates well to the stylized movies he likes to put out.

The Spirit (Gabriel Macht) is a super-hero whose primary super-power is his ability to repeatedly come back from death. He acts as a sort of detective/spy for the police force while battling his arch-nemesis the Octopus (Samuel L. Jackson), a villain who has the same ability and a wicked sense of humor.

For example, the Octopus has a bizarre preoccupation with eggs. He also has a never-ending series of cloned minions (Louis Lombardi) that die with regularity only to come back with new names ending in -os; Pathos, ethos, Adios (the last one we see) and, after one long monologue about not getting egg on his face, he names his next minion Huevos...Spanish for egg.

The Octopus is trying to attain the blood of Heracles to make himself immortal. Silken Floss (Scarlett Johannsen) is is assistant trying to pay her way through college. Sand Saref (Eva Mendes) is tyring to attain Jason's Golden Fleece because it is shiny. The Spirit is trying to end crime in his city.

That is about it as far as story, which is fine. This is a pretty action-filled romp with occasional spots of humor and some outstanding visuals. If you like those sorts of movies, you will love The Spirit. 

Movie Review:The Transporter 3

Jason Statham is quietly building a very respectable action star resume. A lot of that comes from the Transporter series. 

They all have similarities. Statham plays Frank Martin, a former military special forces guy who works as a transporter. He gets details from people regarding weights, package sizes, and price. He shows up, picks up the package, and delivers it. No questions, no modifications to the deal, no problems.

Obviously he runs into enough problems to have made 3 movies. They are not intended to be realistic. However, if you like high-octane adventure stories with a lot of car chases (and in this case bike chases), improbable stunts that are eye-catching and pleasing, basic plots that give you a clear-cut bad guy and plenty of fun, then these movies should work very well for you.

Frank, as usual, relies on Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) to do the technical work and be his ace in the hole as he works to deliver the package. In a surprise to nobody in the audience, the package turns out to be the girl Valentina (Natalya Rudakova).

Frank drives maniacally to elude everyone chasing him, puts on a couple very entertaining martial arts shows, demonstrates the agility of his car, and saves the day.

The one quibble would be the mystery of the appearing window. Sure, the movie is not meant to be realistic. Nevertheless, there was still the glaring continuity error of the window Frank kicks out reappearing and disappearing during the gas station stop, only to reappear for good. 

*Sigh*.

When that is the biggest quibble...it was an entertaining flick. If you like action or car chases or bike chases, this movie will entertain you.

Movie Review: Quantum of Solace

The latest release in the James Bond franchise is a first; the first sequel in the entire run. It is a sequel to Casino Royale (2006). One thing about sequels...if you are going to do one, either use the same director or else use another director who has the same vision as you do.

Martin Campbell was a quite serviceable director. His action sequences were crisp and allowed you to have a sense of what was going on and why. Marc Forster clearly did not go to the same editing school.

Quantum of Solace starts out brilliantly. The opening sequence is innovative and fun, a definite visual treat for fans of special effects. The opening action sequence, however, was what really set the tone. 

In a high-octane car chase you are simply thrown into, Bond makes his harrowing way across a mountain into a town, wiping out numerous opponents on the way. Of course, you mostly have to realize it is his enemies who die in the various crashes because A) Bond ain't gonna die and B) you later see him walking around. 

The editing is atrocious. Remember the classic tracking shot in On the Waterfront that really set the standard for maintaining continuity in a shot, eclipsed only by Hitchcock's rope? This movie is the antithesis. Director Forster seems to think good action storytelling means hyper-active jump cuts, a pulsing, overriding sound track, and more rapid, jarring cuts.

At no point in this or, to be honest, any action scene do we really get an opportunity to sit back and enjoy what we are seeing. Again and again random arms are extended with guns, knives, or fists, bodies fall, and another 6 cuts are thrown across the screen.

Combine the rapid cutting with a bizarre, meandering story that is neither very complex nor easy to follow. Broken down, it goes something like this:

Camille (Olga Kurylenko) wants revenge on Bolivian dictator to be General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio) for raping her sister and mother and killing them along with her father. She intends to get to him through Quantum member Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric).

Greene is putting Medrano in power in order to make money selling water rights. He is keeping the CIA away by promising them the oil they think he has found.

Bond (Danile Craig) is using Greene to get to Vesper Lynd's (Eva Green) boyfriend. His name? I am not sure. I mean, he has less than 2 minutes of screen time at the end of the film, that come seemingly out of nowhere, one can only assume the information given to Bond by Greene? That is my best guess.

M (Judi Dench) is trying to figure out whether Quantum exists and if so who they are and whether she can trust Bond.

Enter explosions, car chases, foot chases, gunfire, a boat chase, more gunfire, more foot chases, death via oil (!), and approximately 12 billion cuts lasting 2 seconds or less to make you think you saw something.

Open memo to directors: shaky camera work, rapid cuts, and showing small snippets of action does not good storytelling make. In fact, it can take otherwise acceptable storytelling and turn it into a train wreck.

This movie had the potential to be really good. Instead, it turned into a barely comprehensible story full of meaningless deaths, pointless action, and little entertainment. Boo hiss, even with the abominable Moonraker as part of the conversation, this one is a serious contender for worst entry in the Bond franchise. Very disappointing. 

I know I keep coming back to it, but I cannot say it strongly enough; directors, if you are going to lure us in with promise of an action movie...let us SEE THE ACTION! 

Movie Review:Eagle Eye

If there is anything we have learned from movies like Terminator, I Robot, and so forth, it is that computers designed to make people happy will ultimately turn on the people and attempt to conquer/kill/make slaves of them.

If there is anything we have learned from movies such as Enemy of the State, The Handmaids' Tale, or 1984 it is that governments with access to surveillance technology will mis-use and abuse those powers.

If there is anything we have learned from a century of Hollywood it is that the industry is derivative.

Hence we have Eagle Eye (2008), the convergence of Terminator, I Robot, Enemy of the State, and 1984.

The movie starts by following Jerry Damon Shaw (Shia LaBeouf), a shiftless slacker who scams his co-workers out of small stakes at poker, hasn't seen his brother in a couple years, and refuses to accept money from his apparently well-off family even though he is behind on rent and overdrawn at the bank.

We also meet Rachel Holloman (Michelle Monaghan), a struggling single mother sending off her son Sam (Cameron Boyce) to Washington DC on a band tour.

Together the two of them are manipulated into a series of set-piece action bits that are highly entertaining. At one point, in a field in the middle of nowhere, falling electrical powerlines create the danger in a scene eerily reminiscent of the famous crop-duster scene in North by Northwest. Oddly, one thing never resolved is how a computer could force those power lines to snap and fall...but if you are going to investigate plot holes, this movie is the wrong one for you.

Instead, it is a glitzy, fast-paced, adrenaline packed thrill fest with a mild shock as to who the villain is and why Jerry and Damon are the victims.

Meanwhile, they are being chased by Agent Thomas Morgan (Billy Bob Thornton), a sharp minded yet ineffectual pursuer who is always one step behind. In the big finale he provides the opportunity and motivation for Jerry to make the last-second save to keep the entire command structure of the U.S. from being killed using a rather clever bomb designed to combine Sam's trombone with a diamond necklace worn by Rachel.

The movie is entertaining and will leave you smiling. Sure, it takes the bounds of reality and believability and stretches them like Homer Simpson's all-you-can-eat pants...but that is beside the point. It is designed to critique the Patriot Act and over the top government surveillance while providing an entertaining action flick. It delivers on that premise in spades.

The acting is very well done, particularly by Billy Bob Thornton. He tends to take some quirky roles in off-beat movies...Bad Santa, Sling Blade, Bandits...and yet he can deliver in a serious role such as this one. LaBeouf is generally entertaining if somewhat one-note in his delivery and Monaghan, despite some cheesy lines, delivered on what she had to work with.

With the exception of the first chase scene the photography was excellent. In fact, my biggest quibble with the movie was the use of many jump cuts to create tension rather than showing what was going on. I thought that section was very poorly edited. They made up for it later with some spectacular shots so all is forgiven.

If you are a fan of the Action genre, take a look, you will like this movie.

Movie Review:Max Payne

Time and time again people think bringing video games to the big screen. Typically they try to emulate part of what made a video game famous. Sometimes this works well, though still not getting past the level of forgettable...say, Doom. Other times it makes you want to gouge out your eyes with an ice pick in a vain attempt to rid yourself of the heinousness of what you subjected yourself to; Super Mario Brothers comes to mind. Most fall somewhere in between.

Max Payne (2008) makes Super Mario Brothers look like great cinema. From the horrific acting to the bizarre, meandering, non-sensical storyline (or lack thereof) to the predictable climax, this movie is a mess.

Shot in dark tones, it strives for the film noir feel. It wants to be gritty, dirty and violent. It comes out dreary, depressing and full of head cheese.

Payne follows the story of Detective Max Payne (Mark Wahlberg), stuck in the Cold Case division of homicide 3 years after the murder of his wife and baby. He lost everything, including his will to live and his partner.

Events lead him to discover clues to the case, though each clue is accompanied by the death of someone he was in contact with, thus making him appear guilty of murdering his former partner, a random girl he meets at a party, a guy from the company his wife worked at, and retroactively, his wife.

In some weak, derivative action sequences he gets the file with the info, goes to where a drug gone awry is manufactured, kills lots of people, then kills the "surprise" villain.

The action sequence in the club is the best part of the movie. It is also a fine opportunity to refill your popcorn tub and soda...because it is not very good.

The best part is a slow-motion sequence (possibly lifted direct from the game) in which Payne does a back flip to shoot a guy in the head with his shotgun. Meanwhile, his assailant...a highly trained soldier wielding a fully automatic machine gun...misses him by a good 10'. Whatever.

In short, if you are a fan of badly acted, poorly shot movies with weak scripts and bad action sequences, this movie is for you. Conversely, if movies with tacked-on Norse mythology, shaky motives, boring action sequences, and counter-intuitive actions by vital characters are not your thing, just see Hitman...not a great video game movie, but exponentially better than this steaming pile of monkey droppings.