Our Idiot Brother (2011)

Ned (Paul Rudd) is a seemingly clueless idealist who must rely upon his three exasperated sisters (Emily Mortimer, Elizabeth Banks and Zooey Deschanel) for shelter and support after he's dumped by his fed-up girlfriend (Kathryn Hahn) and loses custody of his beloved dog, Willie Nelson. As he wreaks havoc on his sisters' lives, Ned's earnestness shines through until his siblings realize that family ties take priority over wealth and position.

Boom goes the dynamite. The summer of the comedy was thought to be over, but in the last week of summer releases, Our Idiot Brother crashes into the picture and ends up stealing the show from everyone else. I feel pretty confident in saying it’s the funniest movie of the summer, which I think says a lot considering the amount of laughs the summer cooked up. The trailers held back just how funny the film was going to be, and its laid back approach plus the addition of Paul Rudd going against the norm was the perfect recipe for success.  

The film has a message that would make the world a much better place if everybody followed it; if you learn to trust people, life will feel a whole lot brighter then yesterday. It’s a completely unrealistic approach that would never happen, but that’s where a lot of the comedy ends coming from. Due to Ned being such a nice guy, he unintentionally reveals a problem each sister was trying to avoid. Their reactions to these problems were funny yet heartfelt in ways that felt authentic. Their arcs appear pretty straight forward that is predictable in destination, but it’s the drive that is so god damn good. It never has any down time and keeps the pace flowing with a lot of laughs and a few scattered but effective dramatic tones that leave a lasting impact on the characters and their stories.

In what is arguably his first solo leading vehicle, Paul Rudd as Ned is just a whole lot of fun. Instead of the straight forward character approach you normally see out of Rudd, you get a laid back overly relaxed stoner of sorts that is just high on life. He lends his hand in every joke the film throws at you and hits just about every time. He ends up carrying a movie that is just full of a bunch of funny and recognizable names. His three sisters, Zooey Deschanel, Elizabeth Banks, and Emily Mortimer never get enough screen time to fully take advantage of their comedic chops, but feel like they did enough to keep the story going. It’s actually the minor characters that triumph over them which include Adam Scott, TJ Miller, Steve Coogan, and Rashida Jones. They are scene stealers that do a whole lot with very little. One of the best ensemble casts I have seen for a comedy since Anchorman. They all contributed in some way to enhance your experience with it.

Do not underestimate Our Idiot Brother. The film is much better than its trailer, its much funnier than almost everything that has come out so far, and it’s the comedy of the summer. It’s a shame that it will fly under the average moviegoer but is most deserving of your time. It feels entirely different then the raunchy wear infested comedies of the summer because it relies more on charming comedy rather than shock. If you want to have a great time, check out Our Idiot Brother and laugh away.

Overall Score: 8.5/10

Attack the Block (2011)

When aliens attack a South London neighborhood, a teen gang pulls together to protect their turf by any means necessary. But extraterrestrials prove far more formidable than anyone they ever jumped on the streets.

Alien invasion movies as of late have been quite disappointing. I Am Number Four sucked, Battle Los Angeles was unfortunately unforgettable after that awesome trailer and in films like Super 8 and Cowboys and Aliens, and the aliens were the worst parts of their respective films. The one thing all four had in common was a budget north of fifty million dollars. A lot of the time when a film has a bigger budget you tend to become a bit lazy in the storytelling and character development sections. The much smaller budget seems to be Attack the Blocks secret weapon. They took a cast of unknowns, used the CGI aliens effectively, and relied more on tension then full on action.

Attack the Block surprises you in a lot of ways. The alien invasion is front and center, but the entire film focuses on the small gang of kids that first encounter them. The small scale of film adds to its attractiveness. Why are these aliens here, why are they only in this “block” so to speak and how can you kill them? The way the film handles this feels entirely fresh and is a great change from the repetitive takeover scenarios we are accustomed too. I will take creativity every single time. The way they designed the aliens added a whole lot to the film. They have pitch black fur they leave them hidden away in scenes and are able to jump out and actually scare you at times. The only traces they leave for you to see are bright glowing green mouths that only add to their viciousness. It seems that some of the best CGI in films are when the films have to become creative with it because of that limited budget and this feels like the perfect example alongside District 9.  

The stars of the film are a group of unknown British teenagers that do a great job in establishing themselves so that you root for them despite the fact that they are bad. The film does a great job of displaying how their environment shaped them into these criminals, but at the same time showed the other side of how this affects them. They don’t want to be criminals, but they think it’s their only option. It’s not anything groundbreaking in film, but it was nice to see the film playing both sides of the situation at hand despite an alien invasion going on at the same time. The character to look out for is the gang leader Moses. John Boyega is the unknown cast in the lead, and seeing it as his first acting job, he did a great job and I expect a lot of big things out of him.

I walked into this film expecting to be disappointed because of my high expectations, but I came away feeling completely satisfied. It’s a lot less funny and a lot more tense then I thought it was going to be but because of that I felt surprised. It’s one of the best and most fun movies you will watch all year and if you’re a fan of Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz you’ll go gaga for this. It has Edgar Wright’s style written all over it. Whenever you get a chance to watch this, do it and don’t wait on it, it will be a guaranteed good time.

Overall Score: 9/10

Terri (2011)

 A poignant coming-of-age tale about Terri (Jacob Wysocki), an overweight orphan who, while struggling to find acceptance with his peers, forms an unlikely friendship with his vice principal (John C. Reilly). Turns out that both know all too well what it's really like to be alone, which makes them ideal companions for each other.

In the indie world, a coming of age teenage story is a dime a dozen. Every single year at least half a dozen of films with these similar young teenage plot points that all usually have the same feel and predictable plot point to it. Terri doesn’t stray too far off that predictable path but it decides to rely far more on developing quirky characters instead of a straight narrowed plot. It helps it be different and stand out from the rest of the pack and becomes a clear winner in the indie universe.

We are thrown into the high school years of Terri. He’s a fat, weird, pajama wearing kid who doesn’t appear to be fitting in with some of the kids at school. For many it’s a simple technique of connecting with the audience, but I never felt like we were similar, simply because he purposely seems to want to stand out. Maybe it’s because of his home-life, in which the film shows to you but never explains; it lets you fill in the blanks. Along the way, you meet Terri’s “friends” and you start to become really interested in this kid. Everything from his look and his choices are so weird that it becomes very interesting to watch him handle everyday life. All of this doesn’t span over a long period of time; its biggest strength is just throwing you into his life and essentially watching a normal two week span for him. It makes him feel authentic and the story may leave you feeling dissatisfied at first, but it’s something that lingers on and makes you ponder the sequence of events shown on screen. The life of Terri is far more entertaining than he believes it to be.

Completely unknown actor Jacob Wysocki plays the lead role and boy does he pull off a subtle but strong performance. He adds a lot of small subtle says in which he interacts with his world; its slow fully awesome. He could end up being an actor to watch if this is just the beginning for him. He seemed to work best when he had somebody to bounce off of and John C Reilly steps in and provides that. It’s a little crazy to think that the average movie watcher thinks John C Reilly is a comedic actor because the dude handles drama even better. He can be funny here, but he plays a more serious role than he appears. He kind of throws in a depressing funny that fits in well in this world of Terri’s. The two bounce of each other well and form one of the best duos on screen of the year. They alone are worth the watch. Some of the smaller roles that could have been forgettable end up genuinely adding to the film, which help the films pace feel smooth with very little wasted sequences.

Terri is a good small indie film that isn’t the strongest at times, but has such a rich cast of characters that they alone are worth a watch despite not having a normal story to follow. You wouldn’t end up missing a great film if you end up passing it by, but if you have the time and are interested, the film is satisfying.

Overall Score: 7/10

Fright Night (2011)

 This update of the 1985 horror comedy focuses more on terror than laughs when teen Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) suspects that his new neighbor, the sinister Jerry Dandrige (Colin Farrell), is a vampire, and turns to a self-styled vampire expert, Peter Vincent (David Tennant), for help. Las Vegas magician Vincent proves useless, and it's up to Charley to save his mom, Jane (Toni Collette), and girlfriend, Amy, from the seductive bloodsucker.

I must admit that despite hearing about how great the original Fright Night was from its cult following, I have never actually sat down and watched it.  From what I gather about this remake, it doesn’t add a whole lot of new changes, nor does it feel particularly necessary, but that doesn’t mean the update wasn’t a success. It is a well-made transition into a more modern environment that actually sends vampires back to their normal nightwalker ways. That automatically puts the film on the winning side in my book, but the way they handled the story and characters is what makes it such an enjoyable film.

What is usually a good setup for a story, when the ole neighbor may ends up being a psycho killer, works out really well. At first it builds some tension up pertaining to a few characters on whether Jerry is really a vampire, but somewhat quickly, (and thankfully!) they get most of the characters into the loop so they can get to the vampire hunting instead of playing ambiguously with something we already know.  It turns into a pretty straight forward classic vampire tale of man vs. human; all of it feels like a breath of fresh air. The mythology of vampires is narrowed down to their heyday, they are violent creatures that roam at night and sleep during the day. They have no reflections and must be invited before coming in. They are back into the creatures many of us sane people fell in love with. It has a few pacing problems, with some rushed set pieces and character arcs, but never does it feel slow. It movies quickly and it’s over right where you’d want it to be. The comedy is there, but the last thirty minutes or so it’s just pure horror that is light on scares but serious in tone. It’s a good change of direction from the first half of the film.

The biggest appeal the film has to offer is Collin Farrell as the vampire Jerry. He sort of went on a blockbuster phase in the early 2000s but since his turn in the film In Bruges, he turned it around and made all of us fall in love with him again. Here is cool, slick, and adds a subtle tenseness to the way he delivers his dialogue that makes you actually root for him to win. He looks to be having a blast with the character and I fucking was thrilled to be along for the ride. His counterpart Anton Yelchin, is never nearly as fun, but is a completely relatable character that you cannot help but like.  He plays a less cool version of Shia LeBeouf from Disturbia. The last and probably most hyped character is David Tennant as Peter Vincent. Many have buzzed about his role because he’s the Doctor from Doctor Who, but I simply did not see what was so fluffy about his role. It’s a pretty standard comic relief performance that never seemed to become hilarious. If you can impersonate anyone in the world, why would you choose Criss Angel and Russell Brand?

Fright Night never does anything to become an amazing film, but the countless things it doesn’t do is why it’s enjoyable. It’s a simple game of cat and mouse and only one will end up winning. There is no side arc, or unnecessary characters. It moves fast and keeps it accelerating the whole time. It’s a film that you should have had a lot of fun with, but quickly moves onto the next big movie.  

Overall Score: 7.5/10

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011)

Soon after moving in with her father (Guy Pearce) and his new girlfriend (Katie Holmes), young Sally Hurst (Bailee Madison) discovers she isn't alone in the house: strange creatures live there -- and they might not be as friendly as Sally thinks they are.

A horror film only really has to accomplish one thing for it to be considered a success and that is to scare you. If it can accomplish that it can be considered a solid addition into the genre; throw in a great story with the scares and it could end up becoming great. It’s a very straight forward genre that seems looked at on a very different scale than the rest of the film industry. Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark had good pre-release buzz and the brand recognition of Del Toro that got me excited, but when the credits rolled, all I could think to myself was disappointed excitement. I kept hoping the film would step up to another level but it seemed simply average and underwhelming in every way.  

The first scene jumps out at you. It has a classic horror film vibe with a very disturbing moment that gets you excited that this film will be kickass. From there, everything fails to match that opening moment. I expected it to be a classic haunted house film with a creature in the shadows, but instead we get the films biggest miss; the monsters themselves. They are little CGI guys that, from the minute are shown on screen, instantly ruin a part of your experience with the film. I want to laugh rather than scream at these things running around with forks, screwdrivers, and scissors. It will lose a lot of its audience at this moment, and the rest that stay hoping the scares get better are only setting themselves up to waste their time. It’s bland, boring and has a few breathe holding moments, but otherwise leaves you feeling glad the credits are rolling.

The protagonist characters tend to be the weakest part in horror films, and this doesn’t change that perception all that much. They take a strong actor in Guy Pearce and do their best to get you to hate him, which just isn’t possible. Bailee Madison, the films child protagonist, follows the guidelines on how to annoy you, and Katie Holmes for the first time in her entire career is the best thing about a film. Maybe it’s because she has imprinted a perception in us that’s she’s a terrible actress that I was surprised to see how likeable she was in such a terribly written character that she somewhat saved. Nothing groundbreaking, but a good stretch to respectability always has to start somewhere.

I have never seen the original film so I cannot comment on comparing the two but this new interpretation just seems to miss too much. It’s not that its horror didn’t care you, but it just didn’t seem to try. A lot of the film seems to be hinting at a much larger thing, but ends up being just these little CGI fucks that completely ruin what could have been a solid film. It has enough screams to recommend to a horror buff but if you’re looking for something tense, this isn’t it.

Overall Score: 5/10

Another Earth (2011)

 Shortly after a strange, Earth-like planet is discovered, gifted astrophysics student Rhoda Williams (Brit Marling) accidentally slams her car into the vehicle of John Burroughs (William Mapother), killing his family. After some time, Rhoda and John begin an unlikely romance. But Rhoda starts to wonder what would happen if she could actually visit the new planet.

It’s a strange path that Another Earth took to finally come into theaters for us to enjoy. They essentially grabbed a camera, walked around until they found a spot they enjoyed and filmed away and eventually came up with this final product. It’s amazing that a simple story can become so affected by adding one thing to its universe, a second earth, but it does. It takes this dynamic visual and ties it directly into its themes and messages, using the scientific element as a mere tool lurking in the background rather than it being the front and center focal point in the movie. In doing so, it creates a raw human piece that will be discussed all year long; it’s interesting; it’s gorgeous; it’s real; it’s worth your time.  

The story mainly focuses on an our leading lady, Rhoda, and the guilt she has inside of her that eventually draws her to the very man whose life she feels she destroyed. It’s intriguing to watch because we know who she is and what she has done, yet this man has no idea. When she’s around him you can feel the emotions flowing through her face and body, doing everything she can to hold it in. It’s never on the brink of hard to watch, but it does take its time to build up and slowly create a bond between these characters rather than trying to force one. It’s handled very well, and with the addition of this second earth, many questions come into play and the film feels content with giving you just enough information so you can answer it yourself. Its ambiguity on the character arcs and earth two are its greatest strength; some may complain at the lack of answers, but I also find it better when it’s left up to you.  

The surprising turn by first time actress Brit Marling is one that stands out a lot simply because she doesn’t have very much experience, yet essentially carries the film through subtle movements and responses. She never comes across as a fake actor, but rather a real character dealing with a crisis she has no idea how to solve. It’s good to watch. On the other side, recognizable face, but still much unknown William Mapother, plays the man who has lost it all and watching him go through that transformation of being totally dead to seeing some life pop back into him is a remarkable feat. The two turn in what are essentially the only roles in the film and make the movie work; they have a chemistry together that simply clicks and takes the film up a notch.

Another Earth is a small indie film with huge ambitions that surpasses them and more. It never truly hits you how well it really was until after its over, but I promise you if you want to go into a film that challenges you with a smart creative character piece on life, this film will be for you. It’s everything I wanted it to be and more. It’s a nice solid addition near the top of 2011 so far. Hopefully its unique scenario of the film grasps your attention because the characters will suck you in.  

Overall Score: 8.5/10

30 Minutes or Less (2011)

 Two small-town criminals planning a big-time bank heist wind up abducting pizza delivery driver Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) and forcing him to commit the robbery -- giving him a strict time limit to boot. To pull off the caper, Nick enlists the aid of a former buddy (Aziz Ansari). With the law, the crooks and the clock all breathing down their necks, the duo also try to patch up their troubled friendship in this frenetic action comedy.

The summer season has officially ended and it was filled with a ton of R-Rated comedy that were mostly well received and popular at the box office. It’s a trend that the first Hangover seemed to jumpstart and the movies are better for it. They tend to be fun enjoyable hilarious movies when you’re free to do whatever you want. Despite this high wave of momentum, 30 Minutes or Less just falls completely flat turning otherwise funny actors into boring and unlikeable cardboard cutouts. It’s a very disappointing end to an otherwise fun filled summer.  

The best thing I can say about the film is its short. Despite it being short though, it still felt dragged on a bit in many parts. A lot of scenarios that could have been funny just felt boring to watch because nothing is really happening. Sure there is a bomb strapped on to one characters chest, but when the character is completely unlikeable and uninteresting, you kind of want him to blow up and take the rest of the characters with him because they just don’t bring a whole lot to the film. It’s just very strange to have a pretty basic plotline already laid out and just to miss every single time is a feat inside itself that sort of deserves its own recognition. With the characters they threw on screen, they seemed to feel lost in what to do with them. Jesse Eisenberg needs to stick with dramas because he never leaves that genre even if its not, Aziz Ansari feels like he’s reading off his cue card, Danny McBride says fuck and expects you to laugh, and Nick Swardson acts like Nick Swardson and you just get a cast of boring characters doing boring things. It sucks to say, but they all were just unfunny in every way.

30 Minutes or Less is just a flat out terrible movie. There is no other way to put it, it’s just plain bad. Even someone who laughs easily would have a hard time being amused by this film. It’s something that should pass and go without being worthy of your time at all. It should be left alone. Only watch if it’s on accident and its 2am in the morning and you’re looking to go asleep.

Overall Score: 3.5/10

Final Destination 5 (2011)

 Death still isn't satisfied in the fifth installment of this cult horror franchise, setting out to claim the lives of shaken co-workers who cheated him when they heeded a colleague's premonition about an unstable suspension bridge.

This franchise has been heading into its deathbed ever since the first sequel was given the green light. Every film got progressively worse, and with the fourth installment throwing in the extra dimension, it looked like it was going to implode. Ironically, a franchise about death tracking down and finishing off its victim, has never been able to kill this tired series as we get the fifth installment in what will certainly not be the last. If they continue to be as creative with their kills as they do in this one, then I am all for them continuing to spit out these shitty sequels because they are entertaining to watch unlike those shitty torture porn Saw and Hostel movies.

The only thing that needs to be said about this “supposed” plot is that they seemingly decided to throw a new rule into the story that has never been mentioned before. You can now kill someone and take the time they have left, basically sacrificing them to satisfy deaths need. It truly amazes me how that brilliant concept from the first one just consistently gets changed. I’d just love to be in the background when Hollywood executives are discussing this type of shit because they can turn in some shitty ideas. This is isn’t as bad as the others, but it ends up not fucking following its own rules. It’s beyond laughable to the point where it can become enjoyable, which ends up being the films main attraction.

The deaths in the fourth movie were downright awful. The inclusion of 3D ended up making every death essentially the same, with a boring stick object impaling somebody and coming at you. They were boring. This time around they do something kind of unthinkable and actually surprise you with impressive intense deaths that end up unraveling in unexpected manners. It’s quite cool, it’s fun, and it moves at a brisk pace. It’s very unlike a Saw film where they stretch it out and make the character scream in agony; here they are presented in a comedic way that actually played out very nicely.

I somewhat unnecessarily want to point out the actors in the film. I know it doesn’t call for it, nor require it, and it’s mainly just a role to get your name out there and into the recognition pool, but it’s just beyond awful here. It’s some of the worst I have ever seen and I am positive you can make a nice drinking game out of it. Just another way to add fun to an already fun film. It featured some of the best kills of the entire franchise and if you’re into this genre, this film will satisfy for taste buds for the time being. Otherwise, you have no business watching this trash.

Overall Score: 5/10

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

 James Franco headlines the reboot of the immensely popular Planet of the Apes franchise, a prequel which boasts cutting-edge CGI effects and a gripping story set in modern-day San Francisco, where scientists are conducting genetic research on apes. The evolved primates, including Caesar (Andy Serkis), develop advanced intelligence and revolt against being used as lab rats, unleashing a war for dominion over Earth.

I have only seen the very first Planet of the Apes; it was years ago and outside of the main moments of that film, the rest has faded from my memory. So essentially, I felt like I was going in blind with this film. All I had in my head was that the apes I were about to see would be the ones that begin to turn the wheels on the revolution in the apes eventually taking over the world, hence its title Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The hype was incredible high, but I took my doubt into the theater. What I saw seemed revolutionary on one side, and completely ordinary on the other to come together to balance each other out to make a good enough film.

The story of the film seems broken down into three segments of the film, and most of it feels to go by a bit too fast. When Caesar is first brought onto the screen, he is so damn cute and extraordinary to see interact with the world around him. Seeing everyday objectives done by a chimp make them seem better than they actually are. This learning process seemed a bit quick though, jumping years ahead when we’ve only just met him. It was disappointing because it was where the film had the most potential to be great. The film wanted you to understand that Caesar and Will have a bond, but we never get to see that bond fully developed.  When the film throws Caesar into a facility filled with other chimps is where the WEAT comes into play. It’s not necessarily ground breaking material here, but the way they accomplished this is where the entire buzz for the film comes from. They take time with developing the relationships between Caesar and other apes to a level they never reached with Will. Ironically, the film starts to fizzle off when it gets to the Rise part of the film and they “riot” around San Francisco. Things just became ordinary. It was material I didn’t want to see nor cared to see. A lot of hard work ended up being left off on a sour note.

The buzz around the film is all starts and begins with Andy Serkis and his motion capture performance. It is great no doubt, but when it comes down to it, it’s simply because an “ape” is doing all of this rather than an actual man. It makes it seem so special because it’s something you don’t often see. That’s exactly why it’s worth a watch; nothing in the plot is great, but the special effects were good enough to make you feel like these were a bunch of actual apes beginning to take over. Switching over to the human performance, everybody else seems to phone it in. They feel it’s good enough to deliver lines and let the audience gawk at the apes on screen. Very disappointing from everyone involved. On a special spotlight, Draco Malfoy was just an awful actor, I know the script was just as terrible for him, but the way he delivers everything is just plain laughable. The dude is going to fade and die into nothingness.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a surprise hit that gets a lot of much deserved buzz but isn’t the ground breaking film a lot of bloggers seem to be posting. When you think a film will blow and are surprised it’s not, it doesn’t mean it’s great, it means it exceeded your expectations. It is a well-made film that has a bit of everything for every type of person, but its shortcomings prevent it from becoming the film it could have bee. It’s a prequel that wasn’t necessary needed, but good enough to watch. Film fans should all go and give it a go around, there will at least be something that grabs your attention.

Overall Score: 7.5/10

Warrior (2011)

The youngest son (Hardy) of an alcoholic former boxer (Nolte) returns home, where he's trained by his father for competition in a mixed martial arts tournament -- a path that puts the fighter on a collision corner with his older brother (Edgerton).

Last year it was The Fighter, the year before that it was Sugar, and the year before that one it was The Wrestler. It seems like you could run through every year and you’ll find that one standout drama that uses a sport as its introduction into far more powerful things. You can mark down Warrior as 2011’s entry because it is a truly phenomenal film that overcomes its clichéd story to make you care what happens to these characters and how they will overcome their scarred yet mysterious pasts. I’d go as far as saying the family relationships destroyed and created in this film outdo both those found in The Wrestler and The Fighter.

The film centers on two brothers, Tommy and Brendan Conlon. The two enter a MMA tournament hoping to win the big prize money for different reasons. Brendan’s story is very much out there. Most of what he is going through is conveyed on screen. He has lost his job, needs money to juggle the bills, and this the only way he feels he can help. His brother Tommy, his past is kept in the shadows, only going as far to reveal he was in the marines for years, but something changed that is eating him away from the inside. You can see that he’s lost and has nobody to turn to. There drunken father ripped them apart and the wounds seem too deep to heal. Through the MMA tournament, the film helps pit these two against each other, revealing more about their pasts as a family and making them have to face their problems through the ring. It sounds very cliché but the way the film handled it was nearly perfect. The last ten minutes of the film leave you emotionally exhausted from the huge journey these two brothers go through in such a short time. Your blood will be pumping from the first ding.

As far as the performances go, the standout without a doubt goes Tom Hardy. I loved him in Bronson, but once the credits rolled, I knew this was his best work yet. His tough as nails fighter is completely badass but his lost and lonely moments are where he shines the most. His final moments on screen are tear-jerk worthy. He becomes the character Tommy Conlon. His brother Brendan, played by last year’s breakout star, Joel Edgerton, is very much overshadowed by his more interesting written brother, but ends up turning a “been there done that” character into one you invest yourself in. You want everything to fall in order for him; He and Tom Hardy developed a bond that felt real by the time the film faded to black. In a much smaller role, Nick Nolte played the drunken father who tore their family apart. He’s sober now trying to be the man he wish he was all them years ago. It’s a sad role that Nolte delivers well. It helps to like him because we were only shown the one side of him, but watching him fall down and get back up again consistently is just a sad struggle to watch. Nolte deserves his credit.

Warrior is a MMA film that is not really an MMA film. Its fights were shot and looked really well, but were short in runtime. Most of the film is catered to its characters and it’s a lot better for it. It is one of the best films of the year, and I hope to see it get the same recognition The Fighter got because it was just as good as it. Remember to go out Sept 9^th to your local theater and check it out, it really is one of the better films of the year dominated by tremendous acting.  

Overall Score: 9/10

The Smurfs (2011)

 When wicked sorcerer Gargamel tries to capture them to use as talismans for his own evil magic, the peaceful blue Smurfs flee their woodland home, pass through a magic portal and find themselves stranded in New York City. Now, Papa Smurf, Smurfette and their clan turn to a young couple (Neil Patrick Harris and Jayma Mays) for help getting back home. Raja Gosnell directs an all-star cast that includes the voices of Jonathan Winters and Katy Perry.

I’m going to say it, The Smurfs was just as bad as it looked, just as stupid as it sounded and just as pointless as it was presented. Yet when the credits rolled, I knew I smurfing enjoyed it. The tiny little adorable blue guys and gal won me over. They were consistently funny, goofing around with each other and saying some of the cutest lines of dialogue and not one time did I ever roll my eyes getting annoyed with them, unlike some of the other CGI talking creatures placed into the real world. They incorporated them well in the world, and while it was still stupid, it was done in a manner that felt comfortable enough.

When the evil Gargamel finally finds the Smurfs village, they are forced to run and accidently get sucked through a vortex and are sent to New York City. Once there they must turn the moon blue so they can return to their home, but Gargamel follows them and disrupts their plans. It’s pretty straight forward from there. You’ll have an easy time knowing exactly how the story plays out, but the thing you won’t factor in is the amount of laughs it pulls out of you from both creative and completely stupid gags. It caught me by surprise. An example is when the Smurfs are mistaken for toys at the mall and a mad dash of customers scramble to buy them. It reminded me a lot of that rare toy every year around Christmas time that is always out of stock.  The weakness of the film comes straight from the non-Smurf related characters and scenarios. NPH and is pregnant wife are there to give the film a life lesson of family and believing in yourself, but it feels like the laziest part of the film.

The villain of the film Gargamel is played over the top by the very ugly Hank Azaria. He is purposely funny when he’s hanging with his cat (who is the films breakout CGI star btw) and unintentionally funny in everything else. He does and says some of the dumbest material that you can’t help but laugh and have a good time with him. Who knew the worst looking part of the film would wind up being one of its biggest strengths. The Smurf characters are voiced by a slew of celebrities who all seem to be having a good time. That dialogue you see featured in the trailer where they replace other words with Smurf doesn’t stick out so bad in the overall pace of the film. It flows with it and feels natural rather than forced, coming off far less annoying then you might have thought.

The Smurfs won me over, its as simple as that. I walked not expecting very much, but I surprisingly had a fun time with them. At a short run time of 80 minutes, it actually feels like it ends too soon because the time passes by fairly quickly. The Smurfs isn’t a great animated film by any means, but it’s not even as close as bad as it was predicted to be. For me it’s the surprise family-fun film of the summer that does just enough things right to make it fun. Give it a watch if you had any urge to watch it, you may be surprised at what you get.

*In regards to the 3D and animation, the color scheme of this movie is really bright, so it ended up actually having a pretty good 3D effect. It is the only movie so far this year where the 3D seemed to make my experience with the film more enjoyable. The Smurfs animation was also top notch work here. If you don't mind spending the extra cash, I;d recommend going 3D for this, but as always it is never truly necessary to enjoy the film.*

Overall Score: 6/10

Cowboys and Aliens (2011)

Scott Mitchell Rosenberg's graphic novel series leaps to the screen as amnesiac gunslinger Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig) stumbles into the Wild West town of Absolution, where he's confronted by potent enemy Col. Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford) and a terrifying problem: invading aliens. Aided by the lovely Ella (Olivia Wilde), Jake rallies a posse of the townspeople, Dolarhyde's minions and local Apache warriors to fight off the extraterrestrial threat.

The Western genre is riding a big wave of momentum; with True Grit and Rango earning huge dollars at the box office and even more on DVD and Blu-Ray, Cowboys and Aliens seemed to roll into theaters at the perfect time being a Western itself. Sadly the genre mash up with the introduction of aliens seemed to hamper what might have been a great western had it been the sole focus during its runtime. Instead we are just left with a tired and oversaturated alien invasion flick that will leave you thinking how much potential it ended up wasting. Disappointing, yet entertaining are the only thought that comes to mind.

The first 45 minutes or so is really well done; I’d even say it was great. Jake Lonergan awakens in the middle of the desert with a strange device strapped to his arm. Along come some bandits and he takes them out Bond style. Everything about this guy is a mystery that instantly hooks you in. It becomes even more appealing when he’s taken to jail for being a vicious criminal, then all hell breaks loose when alien ships attack and snatch people from the ground. The device triggers into a weapon and he’s able to destroy the ships in seconds. Who the hell is this guy? Where did he come from? It’s a great start creating an iconic character, but as the mystery unravels, things start to become exactly what you thought, giving a very anti-climactic feeling to the tale of Jake Lonergan.  That mystery unwinds due to its terrible mix in with science fiction elements. Outside of great looking effects and a very different appearance on the aliens, a lot of it feels messy, pointless, and cheesy. Nothing is really revealed about the aliens except a terrible reasoning for actually being here on earth and it still never gives you the full answers. It’s frustrating to watch because when they are riding on horseback, tracking the aliens back to their base across wide plains and canyons, it feels like your actually watching something special, but just about any time the aliens came on screen, all you get is rushed plot points. The aliens didn’t seem to have the big effect on the film as they would have hoped. With the way the characters first reacted, you’d thought this was just another common alien attack.  

Daniel Craig as Jake Lonergan is good. He says a lot without saying much, and adds a lot of intensity to the role and hides a mysterious past very well. He feels very similar to James Bond just dropped into a western setting. As for the rest of the cast, they are merely forgettable. They seemed to hire a lot of familiar faces, some big, some small, they aren’t given much time to do much of anything. They are either forced into the back ground or filled with a slew of clichés that you can instantly see coming the moment you meet them. This seemed to be one of the films biggest flaws. Outside of Daniel Craig, you didn’t care what would happen to any other character, which just makes some of the interactions with these characters seem bland and boring.

It’s hard to believe that a film that is actually entertaining can be such a major disappointment, but all that potential it built up pre-release is for nothing. It’s a very standard invasion flick that starts off special and just fizzles into a clichéd story and character paths. If you were originally pumped to see the film, try and get those expectations down because the only real way to walk out not feeling dissatisfied is walking in knowing that it’s nothing special. It’s just a fun little experiment that failed more than it succeeded.

Overall Score: 6.5/10