The Gnat: Fly on the Wall Reviews

Teeth

I'm back with a doozie of a film to review this horror, comedy, fem. fatale film is completely off the charts with how odd it is. Any film that in its standard description mentioned vagina dentata you know is going to be crazy, and this film is crazy, and crazy good.

This film jumps around between so many different genres. It has a brilliantly done strong female lead in the film with Jess Weixler who does a great job showing the range of emotions of her character as she finds about her problem. It also is a terribly dark comedy. I've seen some black comedies before, but nothing comes close to how dark this film ends up. The humor in the horror sections is just brilliant and some of the shots that Mitchell Lichtenstein use have an absurd humor in and of themselves. The horror sequences in this film are probably the most excruciating thing that I've ever sat through. I've seen some gorno types of films before, but nothing has made me cringe like this film. If you are a guy and can sit through this film without cringing, you have some serious issues.

The acting in this film is very good as well. The supporting roles are well done, especially some of the side male characters. The supporting female characters really are missing from this film with the mother being the largest one, and she doesn't get much screen time. However, when looking at the acting you have to look at Jess Weixler, the wide gamet of emotions that her character goes through is impressive, and even more impressive is how brilliantly she pulls them off. You feel for her character as well as fear it by the end of the film. She hits every emotion and facial expression to a tee.

The story is also brilliantly done. The fact that it uses so much dark humor and satire, especially when looking at the chastity group that Jess Wexlier's character is involved with and it doesn't miss on those dark jokes it is a difficult film to do. Add in the absurd story which could become nothing more then a joke, it works extremely well. It does feel a little absurd, but every aspect of the story is blended together so well that you really don't get taken out of the story because of a few absurd things.

Visually it is also extremely good. There are a few shots that are extremely gross and gory without being completely distasteful. They obviously come off as something that you wish weren't in the film, but they don't feel out of place in the film. And as I said before, the humor that Mitchell Lichtenstein uses in some of the shots is brilliant. One scene at the gynecologist office is just done brilliantly well and is very, very humorous to watch, especially when Jess Wexlier's character has to slide down on the chair.

Overall this film blends everything together perfectly and it doesn't jump to quickly to the expected ending, it simply lets the ending end the story without feeling the need to explain anything more about the character. I highly recommend this film for Wexlier's acting performance if nothing else, but the humor and horror and how everything works together makes this film deserve to be watched anyways.

Overall Grade: A

Story: A

Acting: A

Audio/Visual: A

__________________
"As I was walking up the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today,
I wish, I wish he'd go away."
-From Identity

Sounds like I should look for this one

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

8mm

This thriller hits the mark in creating an intense story, and it doesn't get bogged down in the need for action in a film to make it good. For the most part it is kept crisp and interesting, creating its intensity more around the depth and level of disturbing that the characters are instead of trying to use action, dark rooms, and jump scenes to create the tension.

The story itself is well done. The idea of a rich man paying for a potential snuff film is disturbing by all rights, and you know it is a real snuff film immediately (otherwise there isn't much of a story), but the whole idea of a snuff film and the depraved minds behind it is interesting. This story is made strong by the developed characters in it. Nicholas Cage character actually seems fairly human in the film, and some of the side characters, like the pornographer in L.A. and the shop keeper out there also end up being quite interesting characters as they are given a chance to develop within the story. Without the more then normal character development, the story would have been simply pedestrian.

The acting in the film was also strong. There really didn't seem to be any character that was developed out of place, and that the actor didn't fit well. Nicholas Cage actually works in this role playing the typical Nicholas Cage character. The somewhat bored sound of his voice works since his character isn't expected to act full of life and full of action. The other two characters I've mentioned are also strong, and the character of "The Machine" is really done as expected, but it is done well.

The one thing that I will knock in this film is the end scene. This film had done a good job of avoiding the cliche jump scenes and cliche fight scenes between the hero and the villain, but they end with one of them (there are some filler scenes after it, but nothing extremely important to the film). The film had worked up to that point with character development and a smart disturbing plot. They didn't need to put in the contrived ending that they used.

Overall this is a solid film. It is done, for the most part, in a crisp entertaining manner with only a few stumbles into becoming something that is cliche. The acting is solid, and while not always an easy film to watch the character development for, it is done much better in that area then most films.

Overall Grade: B
Story: B+
Acting: B+
Audio/Visual: B

Zombie Strippers!

This was sadly a disappointment as a film. It had great promise to be a good B horror/zombie film, but the director tried to be way to smart for his own good and came up with a film that was half B horror and half political crap that the director most likely thought was unique and refreshing but instead was very old and overdone.

The story starts off like many zombie films with a failed government experiment. Now, that doesn't found to political, but technically there is one scene before that. It is a fake news program where they are talking about how George W. Bush has continued to screw up everything, now it actually comes off sometimes in that news program as funny because of how impossibly absurd it is. But the director/writer (both the same person) decides to continue this Bush bashing, thinking that his setting of a zombie filled strip club is going to make it something unique, when instead his political ranting is so old and overdone that it basically kills the film and anything that it had going for it. The only commentary that the film gets right is the one about the cut throat world of stripping. And the only reason that I believe that to be true is because of some of what Diablo Cody had written about her experience in the Twin Cities as a stripper and how competitive and cut throat it was. However, even the existential pandering that the film does with strippers pretty quickly becomes overdone.

The B gore in this film is solid. The thought of a zombie stripping it quite disturbing, and it ends up being very disturbing in how it looks. And the absurdity of the gore and violence is on par with what a B horror movie should have in it. So it does have some humor in it simply because of the horror, which is what you would expect.

The acting is also very B in the film. The director tries to do too much with the dialog and when you have the talent that he has (like Jenna Jameson) you can't have smart and existential dialog because they can't deliver the lines that you want them to well at all and you just done buy it coming from them. This is a case, like Uwe Boll, where the director thinks that they are much better and smarter then they actually are, and they try and make a film that has potential as one thing into something that it isn't.

Overall this is a film that had potential, but because of the director stumbling over himself, it doesn't reach any of the B horror potential that it had. And it definitely doesn't reach the directors idea of a biting political satire that he was shooting for. It ends up feeling like propaganda, and obviously propaganda, more then anything else.

Overall Grade: D+
Story: D-
Acting: D
Audio/Visual: B-

The Happening

M. Night Shyamalan comes back into his genre of twists and turns and mystery and horror. However, after the first few minutes this film fails to deliver any of the twists, turns, and horror that should be expected. It comes in with an 'R' rating, but it doesn't take advantage of that fact.

The story starts off strong. The few scenes in New York City of the people losing control and dieing are very well done. Seeing them stab themselves in the neck of jump off of buildings is disturbing and somewhat scary. After that it settles into a very predictable storyline. The biggest problem with the story that was created was the very, very easy identification of characters that could not, would not, be killed in the film. Once you realize that you are following those characters around, there is no suspense. You know that they won't die, and that everyone around them will die. This is a pretty common problem in horror films, and if you know who is going to survive, there is no suspense around it. And from Shyamalan, you come to expect more in the line of twists and turns. The other problem is the ending of the film. It really ends three times. If it had ended on the first, immediately after the "happening" then it could have been a decent ending. If it had skipped the second ending, it could have worked with only the first and third endings. But all three together just drag on and the punch that is supposed to come with the last ending is completely lost.

With a horror film you also want to feel for the characters and be scared for them. Like I said, since you know that some won't die, it is much harder to feel scared for them. Add in the fact that they never really get to care about the characters, and it is just general indifference to them. Shyamalan tries to give them human qualaties and weaknesses, but they are so absurdly strong and rational in the face of danger that the extra "weaknesses" that he gives them don't really make you feel like there is something wrong with them. Zooey Daschanel's character's weaknesses is that she had dessert with some guy from work before the event happened, but it is quickly forgotten and forgiven by the cool rational mind, and it is really insignificant in comparision to what is going on. This shows up throughout the film. The level headedness of the poeople in Central Park or in the construction area is just absurd. The people seem to be watching mass suicide with a bored eye.

Visually this film disappoints as well. It is like a kiddie 'R' rated movie. I've seen PG-13 movies with as much blood and gore. When you have the license to make an 'R' rated film, you can't waste it like Shyamalan does. The more disturbing and violent the deaths are, and it helps the film. Especially if you have the guts to take care of some of the more important characters. You could argue that his deaths were Hitchcockian in nature, but they really don't do justice to Hitchcock. They are more simple, boring little deaths of people that you don't feel for at all, and you don't really care what is going on behind the door or hill or whatever, because the characters are such a disappointment.

Overall this is a pretty subpar film. I've only seen one Shyamalan film that I really like, Unbreakable, and I have yet to see The Sixth Sense, but from the rest of his work, the only one that I currently find at all enjoyable to watch is Lady in the Water otherwise Shyamalan has just ended up putting out predictable work. This film isn't without a few good parts, especially the first few scenes, but otherwise it really doesn't do much to excite or interest the viewer.

Overall Grade: D-
Story: D-
Acting: C
Audio/Visual: C

Thanks Gnut I was looking forward to seeing Zombie Strippers such a great name for a B horror

The Dark Knight

The sequel to Batman Begins is a strong film with very few misgivings about it. Christopher Nolan comes back with a very good and well directed installment to the Batman series which leaves the viewer thinking because they saw it and waiting for more.

What makes this film as strong as it is are the very good performances. Heath Ledger's performance will obviously be the most talked about, and for good reason as it is his second to last film, and that he did a very good job in the film. But I don't think that his performance was the only one what was very strong in this film. The Joker, no matter how good it was played, can't make the film. Gary Oldman did a very good job in his role as Gordon, being given a whole lot more screen time then in the first Batman. He displays a much better range of emotion and a lot is added to his character because of it. Bale does a good job in his role as well. He gives a performance with depth, and even though he isn't my favorite actor, he plays the emotions very well in this film. Aaron Eckhart does a good job as Harvey Dent. The change the he undergoes to become Two Face is a believable change. I think that one actor who will be overlooked often in his performance is Michael Caine. His character has more emotion and wisdom then the rest of the characters, and he doles it out not with some sometimes cheesy dialog or by beating people up but with simple looks of his eye.

The story in this one is very crisp. The Dark Knight does correctly what Spiderman 3 couldn't do as well, and that is tie multiple villains into the same story. Two Face and The Joker and both done very well and it more then just the very good performances. The Joker comes out of nowhere to be the bad guy, there isn't really any backstory ever developed on him. You think you get it twice when you hear about his scars, but it is a different story both times showing off more the insanity of his character then anything else. And the transformation of Harvey Dent is done very well. There is the idea that he had already shown off a level of duplicity when he was in I.A., so it is somewhat in his nature. Then the factors leading him over the edge seemed to be valid.

Visually this is a solid film. I don't know that Christopher Nolan has down directing action sequences completely yet, but they were a step up from Batman Begins. The film took place on a grand level, and it was definitely well shot. It, like the first one, kept in the dark a lot. The action and scenes, while always definable, often had their dark corners so that characters could arrive and disappear without much notice. And for the tone of the film, that worked very well.

Overall this is a very good installment to the new Batman series. It isn't a let down at all, and possibly steps it up some from the first one. There were, like in any film, points that were weaker, but overall it was very strong. The on thing that is going to come from this that is going to bug me will be the overuse of the line "Why so serious". By itself, in the trailers, I thought it was a very overrated line. Ledger's delivery of it wasn't anything special, especially in comparison to the rest of the role, andthat line only popped when it was in the context of the film and what he was saying. However, it is going to be the most quoted line from the film, and after only hearing it once or twice, it is going to bug me to no end.

Overall Grade: A
Acting: A
Story: A-
Audio/Visual: B+

The Senator Was Indiscreet

This 1940's political spoof delivers several good laughs and plays out in a fairly entertaining manner. It keeps its story simple while making the main character as convoluted as possible. Most political films now could take a look at this film as to how to make a good political film without forcing an agenda down the viewers throat.

This film is about a senator, who knows what party, who has a diary he has kept for thirty-five years chronicling the exploits of his colleagues and himself. He holds it over the party head in his attempt to run for president, but disaster strikes when the journal is stolen. George S. Kaufman's directorial debut, and from my understanding his only film, works on a lot of levels as a comedy poking fun at the absurdity of the politicians and the double dealing that goes on in politics. He does this while keeping the story very simple, which is nice as most political comedies become pretty convoluted, and this one just allows the jokes to pop without the audience having to catch some subtle jab at some current or former politician or some political party.

The acting in this film is solid. William Powell plays the lead role of the bumbling, diary keeping senator who wants to be president. He comes off very well in that role combining stupidity with being extremely full of himself and confident in his abilities to accomplish anything. The rest of the acting compliments him quite well. None of the other characters stick out as nicely as the senator, but they all support him very well.

Visually this film is somewhat interesting. In a little research before watching the film, I found out that Kaufman directed like he directed stage, with his eyes closed. So his directory of photography had to set up a lot of the shots while Kaufman focused on the sound to make sure that the characters were believable. The techniques used aren't anything out of the ordinary, but the fact that Kaufman put as little input into the shots as he did is somewhat interesting to me.

Overall this is a pretty fun film. It ideally would keep the jokes coming a little quicker then they did. A lot of them were word gags which are possible to miss, but they didn't need explaining. It was entertaining and a fun old film to watch.

Overall Grade: B
Story: B+
Acting: B
Audio/Visual: B

WarGames

This eighties film about technology is now purely an entertaining film to watch without, likely, any of the punch that it originally had because of the progression of technology. When it came out, this film was clearly meant to be seen as a warning when people looked at the Cold War and technology as compared to the human condition. Now, because technology has progressed differently, this film doesn't have as much of a punch to it.

The story is a pretty simple one, it is based off of the idea of the human condition, the ability to make decisions based on compassion, hope, and other human conditions as compared to the idea of the machine which sees everything as black and white. What sets off a potential world war three is a young computer nerd who triggers a game on a computer which just happens to be called "World Wide Thermonuclear War" or something along that line. He then has to convince the government that it wasn't intentional and try to figure out how to get the computer to stop playing the game. It seems a little hoakie now because of the technology and what it can do, but it was a pretty classic 80's and 70's look at future technology and a pretty standard warning about it.

I've heard complaints on it because of the fact that the technology doesn't hold up to current technology, which could be a valid excuse if it wasn't for the fact that current technology will barely hold up six months from now. When people judge a film on that, it seems like they aren't really paying attention to anything else going on in the film. And while this film isn't extremely profound in current society (it still can be seen as a valid warning), it does have some endearing elements to it. The technology shouldn't be the focus, as the director clearly wanted to focus on the human element and how humans think and work in comparison to the machine.

The acting in the film is decent. Matthew Broderick is decent in the lead role, and the supporting cast is generally what carries the film. None of the roles are extremely strong, but they all come off as entertaining and interesting characters, which is important for the film. It is really much more about the idea behind the film then the acting, but the actors do a solid job of getting the idea across, event without the performances being great, as the story does have some strength on its own.

Overall this is a film that needs to be enjoyed now on a simpler level then what people would look at it before. You can't read into the technology and ponder how unrealistic it is, otherwise you miss the entertainment value of the film, and the still valid message of the human condition and human emotions and how critical they are when reacting to any situation, even if it isn't starting World War III.

Overall Grade: B
Story: B+
Acting: C+
Audio/Visual: B

Thanks for your reviews Gnut

Cruel Intentions

This film is one of those films that is a guilty pleasure for me. I don't know that the story and acting are so amazing in it, but I like a little bit of a love story, and this one isn't put together like a typical romance film. It has characters that can be fairly unrealistic, but they are more human in some ways, just because they aren't nearly as stock as a classical romance film.

The performances of the characters don't blow you away. Ryan Phillipe is solid in his role as is Sarah Michelle Gellar, and otherwise, they are pretty average, but the diversity in the characters is what is nice. The difference between "The Bet", Cecelia, and the two main characters is great in how is plays out. Like I said, they might not always be the most realistic characters, but the diversity in them is what makes the film. If they were all stock characters, you really wouldn't end up feeling for "The Bet" in the end of the film, or Ryan Phillipe's character. But, they are, so there is some emotion wrapped up in it.

It also helps, for me, in this film, that I am somewhat of a romantic. The romance story that comes through is just convoluted and hurt enough at the end, that it causes the romantic in me to feel for it a little bit. The story complicates itself enough through the motives of the characters that it holds together better then most romance stories do. The complications in it aren't anything extremely far outside the realm of the general teenage film, but it does work together quiet nicely, and it does become entertaining to watch. The manipulation that takes place is interesting and in some ways worth seeing.

Overall it is probably more of a guilty pleasure film then anything, but I enjoy it alot. It comes in with a story that is just romantic and confusing enough for me to become ensorbed in it, and the diversity in the characters makes it quite entertaining.

Overall Grade: B
Story: B-
Acting: C
Audio/Visual: B+

Cruel intentions is one that i only now have started to like

The Spiderwick Chronicles

This kids fantasy story comes to life on the screen but doesn't live up to the expectation. The story comes from a series of books about a world of hobgoblins, faeries, trolls, etc. and you can tell it is from a book in the film. And that isn't a good thing. It seems to jump around at times not developing everything that it needs to.

The story moves pretty well through the film, it is set in a very limited amount of time, possibly two to three days at the most, but it seems like it needs more time then that to develop the characters. They force ideas about the characters on a viewer very quickly. The story also jumps around very quickly. It goes from one idea of how to win to the next at break neck speed. I haven't read the book, but I have to believe that they set it up a little bit better then they do in the film with at least slowing everything down with some description. It seems like a condensed version of a story that tries to leave in all the nice parts. But it doesn't work extremely well because without some more substance and development, the story doesn't work extremely well.

The acting in the film is decent. Two Freddie Highmores is interesting. He does a solid job in the film, but the character he is playing seems to act younger then the voice sounds. There is a little disconnect there. The acting of the sister is pretty good as well. All of the characters have the problem of needing to jump into the world of believe at a breakneck pace. The one character that I didn't like all that well was the mother. I don't think that she was given a fair shake in the writing, it seemed to be a pretty stereotypical character. And the portrayal of the character by Mary-Louise Parker just doesn't work all that well. It seems so forced, not only in adding her into the story, but her acting as well. Some of the side characters do a decent job, but no one really stands out.

Visually this film does a pretty good job. A lot of the time a film that realies so heavily on CGI will struggle if the CGI isn't done well. In this case it is done quite well, and it doesn't detract from the story. The ogre Mulgarath is done decently, but it is probably the weakest part of the CGI. The hobgoblin, faeries, goblins, etc. are otherwise done pretty well and worked into the scenes nicely. I guess that the Griffin isn't amazing either, he is better then Mulgarath, but not great. The larger the creature the harder to get done well, I guess.

Overall this isn't a bad film for kids. But if you enjoy the simpler fantasy story and you aren't a kid, it doesn't hold up to what it could have been. It isn't bad for a little mindless entertainment with some fun visuals and interesting CGI characters, but don't expect really anything more then that.

Overall Grade: C+
Story: D+
Acting: B-
Audio/Visual: B

Doom

This video game inspired movie works like so many of them and misses pulling off anything all that exciting. There is a problem inherent with video game films, and that is what may be a solid plot in a video game isn't a good plot in a film. They are just too different animals to be able to be meshed all that well.

The basic idea for the story is that an artifact is found which allows people on Earth to travel to Mars to a secret underground city. There is a research facility set up on that planet which eventually runs into a problem, which for better lack of terms, turns into a zombie problem. After that, the story consists basically of running around and shooting anything and everything that moves that isn't you, or related to you. It basically is a story that has been done before with Resident Evil and the one part of non-action story that it does have, is fairly quickly glossed over and never makes a real impact as to what is going on in the film. I didn't come into it expecting for it to have a good story, and I wasn't surprised.

Visually this film tries to do something "special" by having part of it shot as a video game. It is shot in the style of a first person shooter with the zombies, for lack of better term, jumping up and the person shooting them. This style fails pretty miserably. It looks very amateurish and just doesn't add anything to the story by being shot that way. It actually hinders the film as it looks like something that any kid with a camcorder would try and shoot, and probably already has shot. It works a little bit as an homage to the game, but not enough to make it worthwhile to have in the film. Otherwise the film is basically shot like any other horror film. They like lots of fairly cramped dark spaces where the monsters can jump out of and attack the people. It really doesn't add anything to the horror genre in how it was shot. It basically sticks to the same old conventions.

Acting in this film was very average as well. Dwayne Johnson and Karl Urban both do a decent job in their acting roles. They come off as action actors in the film that struggle at times, especially in Urban's case, with any scene that is more serious and emotional. Dwayne Johnson wasn't really given a chance to struggle as he wasn't given any of that sort of role, even though he has shown in some of his other films that he can do more then purely work on action films. The rest of the cast was pretty below average in their acting. The rest of the team that gets sent to Mars, which Johnson and Urban's characters are on, does a very poor job in their acting, and Rosamund Pike does a fine job playing Karl Urban's sister, but it isn't a role that surpasses the more then average acting found in this film.

Overall it is basically what I expected it to be. If you are looking for a very mindless action film to watch, this film can fit the bill. There is some decent action in parts to it. I can't really recommend the movie for anything more then that, and there are definitely better purely action films out there.

Overall Grade: D+
Story: D
Acting: C-
Audio/Visual: C-

I will give this a miss

Pineapple Express

I haven't always been a fan of Aptow films, 40 Year Old Virgin, and I wasn't so sure about this one as pot jokes can become pretty old pretty quickly, but this film works it perfectly. It blends pot jokes with a buddy film story and it is very humorous with a show stealing performance.

The biggest thing that I noted in this film is the performance by James Franco. He plays a drug dealer named Saul, and he plays it perfectly. His acting stones is much better then in Strange Wilderness and basically anything that he says or does is just hilarious. Seth Rogen plays the lead, but his character ends up being secondary in the humor in the film. He does a decent job, but Franco is just the amazing in his character. Danny McBride also steals some of the humor from Rogen in the film. McBride isn't as big a character as either Franco or Rogen's, so there is a lot of screen time without him, but for the most part he does a very good job in the time he has on the screen.

The story works out very well as well. Like I said in the intro, it isn't so much a pot comedy as it is a buddy film with pot as the contecting ingrediant for the buddies. In many ways it reminded me of Hot Fuzz where it takes another genre, pot or action films, and then makes a buddy film out of it. This allowed them to have a wider variety of jokes then purely making jokes about how stoned people are, etc. that generally go along with stoner films. The story stays very random in everything that it does, it can jump from one thing to another, but it doesn't lose track of the story, most everything progresses the story somehow. Seth Rogen's girlfriend in the film is a little bit out there, there isn't any real need for her, but she works in the film. They drop her from the story when it really doesn't matter anymore, and they drop her very well.

Visually this film was very solid. It had some pretty random cuts with just the fades and various cross cuts that they used. It worked well enough in that the odd ones were generally used for major cuts between time periods or even thoughts. It was a little interesting in the editing of the film for that reason, but nothing really detracted from what was going on the screen. It was basically just a fleeting thought that went along the lines of: "That isn't something you normally see."

Overall this is a good comedy film. It doesn't use overdone jokes to get its laughs and it doesn't only use pot jokes to make people laugh. This variety makes it a better comedy then a lot that have some out and even those that have some out that are R rated, see Semi-Pro.

Overall Grade: B+
Story: A-
Acting: B+
Audio/Visual: B

Bad Santa

Surprisingly funny for the type of comedy film that it was. Billy Bob Thorton does a surprisingly good job in the lead, a role that was really made for him, a boozing drunk permanently pissed off person.

The story was pretty expected for the type of film that it was. It had a couple of twists and turns in it with the character that Bernie Mac played, but it was generally a normal redemption story. It was just that the kid and Billy Bob Thorton's characters were both really good and fairly absurd and that made the film humorous. The sex, booze, and crotch jokes played out well, even though they are the expected type of joke. It was probably aided by the fact that Billy Bob Thorton made them believable. And the whole scheme was somewhat absurd, so there was humor in that by itself as compared to most crude comdies.

As I've said, Billy Bob Thorton plays the lead role very well. His counterparts in the crime are decent, but they aren't anything amazing. They have a few good lines, but play the typical sidekick type of character. The other character that does a good job is the kid, played by Brett Kelly. He is a fairly believable kid who is looking for any sort of father figure. He has some solid humorous parts as well, and the times where he and Thorton play off eachother works out really well. There aren't really any other characters that jump out all that well. Bernie Mac's character really does what is expected of him, and he isn't all that funny in the film.

Overall this is an above average crude comedy that has a good number of good laughs in it. With a different lead it would have been a dud, I can see it as the type of film that Will Ferrell would have done and ruined, but it got lucky with the right casting.

Overall Grade: B
Story: B-
Acting: B
Audio/Visual: B-

Prom Night

This horror film was one that I was hoping would be good but wasn't counting on being good because it has a PG-13 rating, and PG-13 horror films aren't generally all that great. However, it exceeded my expectations greatly by having some very good suspense that was more then the simple obviously set up jump scenes, and the fact that it had to be somewhat tame with the violence and language, it didn't hurt the film.

The story is a pretty typical one. An insane killer escapes from a maximum security insane asylum and returns to stalk and kill the object of his affection. In this case it is a highschool teacher who is returning to stalk a highschool senior (now) who he is obsessed with. Four years earlier he had killed her whole family while trying to track her down, including, unknown to him, her mother in front of her. So the creepy insane guy works better in this film as once in a while you hear about some teacher becoming obsessed with a student. It is obviously set around the prom which is an extravogent mess, but actually plays out decently well as a prom. Fortunately they took the prom setting out of a highschool gym or anything like that and put it into a nicer location that neither the stalker or stalkie were familiar with.

The strongest part of the film were the pseudo jump sequences. Only once or twice did it get sucked into the very typical jump sequence where they draw out the suspense and then as the music cresendos the killer jumps out and kills the victim. There were a couple of times were it did happen, but for the most part they kept the music set up to a minimum. They did a good job of varying the length on the deaths, and not showing the deaths of all the seemingly important characters who we'd gotten to know. That is another thing in the suspense that impressed me, they were willing to kill off some of the main characters in the film, people who didn't completely feel like side characters, and they kept on character like that alive, but not the one that you'd expect to have be alive.

The acting in the film was decent. There were a lot of younger actors and acresses, and they didn't do a great job all of the time, but the lead actress, Brittany Snow, does a solid job in the role. She does a good job acting scared, and mainly she just has to act like a normal teen would act. Yeah, she isn't technically a teen anymore, but she isn't all that far removed, and she does a good job at acting very teen like. The rest of the teens are pretty teen like as well, they don't always do a good job with the acting scared, or having to act in a more serious role, but for the prom scenes they are generally not to shabby.

Overall this is a good example of where horror should start to progress back towards. It doesn't set up its jumps like so many horror movies, and it uses suspense correctly instead of believing that only gore is horror. More films along this line wouldn't be bad, it has a solid classic horror feel to it.

Overall Grade: B
Acting: C+
Story: C+
Audio/Visual: B+

Tropic Thunder

This star studded comedy offers some huge laughs, but stumbles over its own political in correctness. You don't often see a film that combines an A-List cast like this one has and a story that is actually good. It provides a lot of laughs and is definitely worth the money to see it in theaters.

The cast in this film does a great job. Robert Downey Jr. and Tom Cruise steal the show with there characters, both of which aren't very recognizable as them. Robert Downey Jr. shows good range playing multiple roles as the same character. He does a very good job of acting like an actor who is acting out several different characters. Tom Cruise's character is a very over the top character. It definitely has a lot to add to the humor, but at some points in time it was a little grating to me. Jack Black doesn't step to far out of his normal roles playing his character. It is still a decently fresh character with some good lines, but it isn't anything nearly as out there as Robert Downey Jr.'s character. Ben Stiller is probably my least favorite character in this film. He steps out of his typical character he does in all films at times in this film, but then he quickly drops back into the hot headed idiot that he always ends up as. There are some other good appearances in the film, I liked Danny McBride as a secondary character, like he was in Pineapple Express.

The humor in this film is solid. There were a lot of references to other war films which were great. I noticed several to the film Platoon. The combination of action and humor made the humor in the film much better. They also did a solid job adding in some sex jokes and other jokes. The one type of joke that didn't work out nearly as well were the jokes about race, mental capacity, and to a lesser extent drugs. Those jokes just became too stereotypical. They were often insulting to watch even if it wasn't the type of person that you were. They didn't miss on all the jokes like that, but they tried to do a lot of them, and they missed on more then they should have. However, this film did have some huge laughs to it.

Overall this was a very solid comedy. I don't think it quiet lives up to Pineapple Express, but it has a lot of good laughs, and some very good cameo roles to it. I'd definitely recommend seeing it if you have already seen Pineapple Express.

Overall Grade: B+
Story: B
Acting: B
Audio/Visual: B+

The Nines

This existentialist film about the meaning of everything comes off decently well, but it doesn't really stretch ones thinking any further then several other, older existentialist films. Visually this film was done well and Ryan Reynolds did a fine job acting in it, but the story itself wasn't all that great.

The story was split into three parts entitled: "Prisoner", "Reality Television", and "Knowledge". The first part is fairly confusing as you try and figure out what it means when the term "The Nines" is used and why there are so many nines that show up. It has a decent storyline to the first part, but nothing extremely compelling as they needed to rely more on the suspense from the first section then they end up doing. The song number in the first part also seems to be fairly out of place. In the second section, "Reality Television", you start to gather more of an idea of what is happening, mainly from references to the first section, but again it doesn't really explain anything. In fact, I thin the film could have had basically the same message even if it hadn't had this second section. It does add another dimension to think about at the end, but the movie doesn't completely end in a way where the dimension of each character are specified quite well enough. The third section isn't all that much different from the first two. They use flashbacks between the first two and this one to basically explain what it means to be one of "The Nines" as well as a few other things about the differences in the chapters. It uses a video game reference to really explain the differences between the chapters, but it only somewhat works.

The acting in the film is solid. Ryan Reynolds does a good job with the role and characters that he has. The problem is they don't seem to be very different. The same with the characters played by Hope Davis and Melissa McCarthy. They are generally good characters, but there is really a need to have a little bit more variety, I feel, in the characters that they play, just because of the difference between the chapters of the film and the differences of the settings. There definitely is room for some carryover in the traits that they characters have, but not quite as many, especially from Davis and McCarthy, as there were.

Visually this is a solid film. I felt like the shots were very well done in this film almost giving it a surreal feel throughout the film, as it does drift into some surrealist elements at some points in time. There were also some very beautiful shots of the scenery in this film. It ended up deriving a lot of the feel of the film from the shots that were used.

Overall this is a solid example of an existential and metaphysical film that works pretty well. My main issue with it is that it touches on metaphors that have been done before, and it doesn't really take many risks outside of the predefined movie notion of both of the areas. There are better films like this out there, this one isn't bad, but there are better.

Overall Grade: C+
Story: C
Acting: B
Audio/Visual: B