Disarm and a Leg: Jeremy Renner Learns to Love the Bomb in “The Hurt Locker”

“The Hurt Locker’s” official defines its title as this: In Iraq, it is soldier vernacular to speak of explosions as sending you to “the hurt locker.” Whatever that means. I guess I didn’t get a lot of what was going on in “The Hurt Locker” the season’s critically acclaimed and potential Oscar contender. The film is gritty and does make you feel like you are a part of the bomb squad in Bagdad, but other than that I’m not so sure I enjoyed myself. Maybe you’re not supposed to enjoy yourself. I’m not sure anyone should enjoy being at war. Of course that is until we’re introduced to Sgt. William James (Jeremy Renner) who seems to be obsessed with Iraq War active duty. He’s a bomb disarming expert and gets off on dismantling bombs.

While I overall, didn’t quite love “The Hurt Locker” I’m going to emphasis its positive qualities. The movie is undoubtedly well directed. First of all, you’d never imagine a woman was behind the camera, but low and behold Kathryn Bigelow can make “guy movies” just as well as guys. With all those explosions you’d think Michael Bay was around somewhere, but luckily he is not. I don’t want to seem too impressed just because a female could direct such a gritty, shaky war action film but rather that woman would direct such a film. While there are female directors out there, they seem too preoccupied with chick flicks or romances and other sappy stuff, here there’s none of that. In fact besides Kate from “Lost” there’s nary a female character in sight. Hopefully Bigelow will join her male comrades in the Best Director category next year.

The acting in “The Hurt Locker” also ranks high up there. It’s possible Jeremy Renner could see his name on Oscar ballots come March. His character is pretty interesting in that he really only knows how to operate in stressful situations. Once his tour of duty is over he ends up going back to Iraq because diffusing bombs is all he really knows how to do. His relationship with a young Iraqi boy is pretty touching and it adds some emotional weight to a film that is mostly shootings and explosions. Although I'm not quite sure I get a later plot development that involves whether the boy has been killed or not.

And that’s where the film just leaves me feeling a little hollow. The film does a great job of making you feel like you’re there (mostly thanks to DP Barry Ackroyd who also made you feel like you were aboard a highjacked airplane in “United 93”). But plot wise, I’m not so sure I cared very much about what was going on. Don get me wrong, some of the bomb disarming sequences were pretty tense, but other than those scenes I can’t really say I was all that involved. And scripter Mark Boal literally introduces us to characters and then kills them off before you get a chance to remember their name. If you blink you might miss Ralph Fiennes or Guy Pearce. Oops spoiler alert!

I’m not saying “The Hurt Locker” is a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination, it just wasn’t my thing. In fact, watching it I sort of had the same reaction to last year’s “Slumdog Millionaire.” Afterwards, I was simply unmoved. Of course I’ve grown to like that film a lot more and I’m sure in time I will appreciate “The Hurt Locker.” Just not today. GRADE: C+

Forest Hump: Beautiful and Disturbing, “Antichrist” is Not For All Tastes

The opening sequence of Lars von Trier’s “Antichrist” is shot in beautiful, stark black and white. It’s shot in slow motion. There is no dialogue and we only hear a piece from Handel’s ‘Rinaldo.’ A man and woman are having graphic intercourse. If you’re not sure they’re actually doing it maybe the close up of penetration will ease your mind. Meanwhile the couple’s young son crawls out of his crib and falls from an opened window to his death, just as mommy is having the orgasm to end all orgasms. Distraught over their guilt, the couple retreat to a lonely cabin in the woods where they proceed to mount each other to help heal their grief. The woman is outright loony and man, a psychologist of sorts, is trying to help her. In the meantime they have strange occurrences with falling acorns, talking animals, and graphic genital mutilation. I’ll pretty much see any type of movie which includes weird art house flicks that feature graphic sexual violence. Hopefully that doesn’t say anything too negative about me. I’ll just call it open-minded.

I haven’t seen any of Dutch director Las von Trier’s other movies, but I do know that he was one of the pioneers in the Dogme 95 film movement in the early 1990s. so you know right away that when you see one of his films you’re not exactly going to get a broad Hollywood treatment. “Antichrist” is being described mostly as an art house “torture porn” horror movie that is sort of true since it contains overtly graphic shots that seem to be there just to cause shock. I want to call this a horror film mostly because I believe von Trier is trying to frighten the viewer with stark and potent images, which he does pretty well. Supposedly a few people fainted during screenings at the Cannes Film Festival. I didn’t faint during the movie, but I will say that if you’re not expecting graphic images, you’re in for either a treat or complete and utter repugnance.

It seems the general consensus is that the film is all about “man” and “woman.” The film only has two actors Willem Dafoe credited as He and Charlotte Gainsbourg credited as She. After the beautifully and purposely shot opening sequence which is known as the “prologue,” the couple retreat to Eden a summer cabin in the middle of the woods. She is rattled with guilt, understandably since she saw her son walking around while she was in ecstasy. He wants to “cure” her guilt and depression instead of working through it like normal people do. Meanwhile strange things start happening and by the end of the movie She will drill a hole through His leg and a lock on a dead weight and she will do something very painful to herself. Oh and did I mention the talking animals.

This is movie is weird with a capital W, but it’s also strangely fascinating. It’s a movie you can’t simply take your eyes off of even when the graphic violence (this flick is unrated if you were curious) is almost painful to watch. Ok it really isn’t mostly because I’m completely desensitized to cinema violence. I still don’t get how someone could faint watching this, but I digress. I don’t really “get” what von Trier is trying to say, but there are many many interpretations floating around the web. Most complain that the film is misogynistic which is a completely valid argument. While Gainsbourg’s character is just a tad irrational, (and the ridiculousness that her husband is trying to “cure” her grief) her performance is extremely heart wrenching, not to mention physically and emotionally demanding.

I have to give credit to von Trier for making a complete bizarre film that is simply too interesting to ignore. I may not really get it, but I enjoyed it. I don’t think it’s really a movie you should enjoy, but I also liked “Funny Games” so there. It’s certainly not everyone’s cup of tea (apparently so because there were only the two of us in the entire theater). If “Antichrist” is playing on one of the nineteen screens near you, and you have the courage to check it out, please do. But if you faint, don’t say I didn’t warn you. GRADE: B

The Curious Case of Button, Button: Director Richard Kelly Continues to Think Outside “The Box”

If you go and see "The Box" make sure you’re prepared to see the weirdest movie you’re likely to see. (Of course, if you go see "Antichrist" then it’ll probably be the second weirdest movie you’re likely to see). Director Richard Kelly who continues to make offbeat (read: strange) sci-fi-type movies. I wasn’t so much a fan of his cult classic "Donnie Darko" but a lot of people are. I didn’t’ have the pleasure (fortunately? Unfortunately?) of seeing his "Southland Tales" so I can’t very well comment on that flick. And that brings us to "The Box" a strange mix of mystery thriller and science fiction. Some of it works some of it doesn’t. And believe me, if you don’t really know what you’re getting into, you might as well walk out of the theater before you walk in. Wait, huh?

"The Box" is really loosely based on the short story "Button, Button" by Richard Matheson. That story, while very short, presents the reader with a fascinating moral dilemma. A strange man offers a married couple an interesting opportunity. He gives them a button. If they push the button two things will happen. They will receive $50,000 and someone they don’t know will die. The wife and husband are in financial woes. The husband doesn’t want to do it and the wife does. Eventually the woman pushes the button only to find out that her husband was just killed in a car accident. After she gets $50,000 from her husband’s life insurance policy the man who delivered the button insists that the woman never truly knew her husband.

Richard Matheson does deliver a more interesting moral story in just a few pages, but Kelly does manage to create a film that is simply fascinating from start to finish. The film begins normally as we’re introduced to Norma and Arthur Lewis (Cameron Diaz and James Marsden). The film takes place in 1976 and Kelly gets the time period perfectly (love that retro wallpaper). They’re awoken early in the morning by a knock at the door. A box is at their doorstep. Inside is a button. Later in the day a strange man named Mr. Steward with a nasty facial disfigurement comes to the door and explains the button to Norma. Like the original source if Norma pushes the button she’ll receive a million dollars and someone who she doesn’t know will die. Since the film differs greatly from the story, I will tell you that Arthur does not die (of course that assumes that she pushes the button).

Most people will find the first half the film to be enjoyable. Kelly gives the film a terrific look. There’s a glow to most scenes which I found beautiful. The performances are realistic and the button situation is utterly fascinating. I found a particular characterization pretty interesting. Norma is missing several toes on one of her feet from a freak accident when she was younger. Arthur works for NASA and is working on a special prosthesis to prevent her from limping. But in true Richard Kelly fashion he introduces us to utter weirdness before he even attempts to let us know what’s going on. The physical disfigurements reminded me of David Cronenberg. And the strange things that happen to the main characters is right out of a David Lynch movie. If you admire either of those two filmmakers you’re bound to find something to enjoy in the box.

Overall I enjoyed watching "The Box." Of course what starts out as an interesting yet simple story turns sort of convoluted and preposterous (I’m sure Kelly himself doesn’t quite understand what’s going on). However, I never found the movie to be boring. I enjoyed the weirdness. I enjoyed the performances. And I really enjoyed the Bernard Herrmann inspired score by members of the band Arcade Fire and musician Owen Pallett. If you’re not used to seeing "weird" movies that present you with strange characters and an even stranger mystery, then you should step outside of the box and see this bizarre flick. GRADE: B

Monster Bash: Spike Jonze Captures the Innocence of Childhood in “Where the Wild Things Are”

“Where the Wild Things Are” is director Spike Jonze’s first film since he made the brilliant Adaptation. back in 2002 and only his third overall feature. Few film directors have established such a wonderful cinematic style in such few films. Jonze makes a family appropriate film made for adults about a lonely yet wild boy who wanders off to a place where he imagines he’s the ruler of land of hairy beasts. The beasts don’t eat him but rather the king of land. This isn’t the first time this year we’ve gotten a family-friendly story about a young child with a strong imagination. You can make comparisons to the stop-motion flick “Coraline” which itself was a sort of reworking of an Alice in Wonderland type story. It featured a lot of imagination but little emotional payoff. “Where the Wild Things Are” delivers both in spades.

One thing we can notice about “Where the Wild Things Are” right off the bat is how it’s told pretty much exclusively from a child’s point of view. The shakey camera is more than to invoke possible nausea from those who are prone to that sort of thing, but rather to reflect the rambunctious personality of our main character Max (wonderfully played by Max Records who for some reason seems like he could be Ellen Page’s younger brother). We open with him in his wolf costume roughhousing with his dog. Look at how Jonze never really places his camera much higher than Max. We get lots of low angles. We’re always looking up. And see how all the adult characters are credited as Mom (Catherine Keener) and the Boyfriend (Mark Ruffalo) and the Teacher (Steve Mouzakis).

Max is a lonely little boy who feels left out especially when his sister’s friends crush the snow fort he spent so much time building. In one of his animalistic tantrums he bites his mother and runs off where he gets into a boat and sails off to find adventure. He soon comes across a group of monsters the “wild things” of the title whom he befriends. The group is made up of a few very distinct personalities. We get Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini), Ira (Forest Whitaker), Judith (Catherine O’Hara), Douglas (Chris Cooper), Alexander (Paul Dano), The Bull (Michael Berry Jr.) and KW (Lauren Ambrose). It’s actually pretty fascinating how well cast these voice actors are. They nail their characters perfectly. The beasts look to be the traditional “guy in a suit” style with a fascinating combo of animatronics and CGI. Jim Henson’s Creature Shop did an awesome job as always.

It’s interesting how Max stumbles upon these creatures and we, like him, don’t quite know what their deal is. Are they mean? Are they nice? Where do they come from? We quickly learn they’re mostly friendly although a few of them had expressed interest in eating little Max. Having read the children’s book way back in second grade, I was pretty sure that wasn’t happening. There seems to be some tension amongst the group mostly between Carol and KW. We get to learn their story and even Max learns that everyone has problems whether you’re human or a wild animal living in the woods. Yeah we get a “message” that has a lot to do with family but Jonze (who co-wrote with Away We Go scribe Dave Eggers) doesn’t force any sappy message down our throats. And a lot of time the creatures expressive faces tell us all we need to know.

“Where the Wild Things Are” is a beautiful film and made me yearn to be a child again. It achieves an intimacy yet it feels large than life. It’s punctuated with wonderful songs provided by Karen Orzolek and composer Carter Burwell’s great score which accompany the film’s gorgeous photography. It’s got Jonze’s trademark weirdness and those adults who enjoyed “Being John Malkovich” and “Adaptation.” are sure to get something out of Spike’s third go round. GRADE: B+

Entertainment Weekly Still Really Likes Me

Check out my picture as Pee Wee Herman on EW.com.

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20310838_20315890_22,00.html

And here I am as Jigsaw from 'Saw:'

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20310838_20315890_8,00.html

Make Room for Daddy: “The Stepfather” Remake is a Competent Enough Thriller

“The Stepfather” is not a very original movie. Of course it doesn’t help that it’s based on a little-seen 1987 thriller of the same name about a murderous man (played superbly by Lost’s Terry O’Quinn) who seeks out widows and divorcees and is willing to kill in order to form the “perfect family” (The movie was based on mass murderer John List who killed his entire family and fled and wasn't caught until eighteen years later). The first film was a product of it’s time. The Regan Era was in full swing. Things were more conservative and there was this ideal family life that many people strived for. And here came this little suspense flick about a guy who goes around killing his own family when they don’t live up to his perfect standards of living. Times have changed a lot in twenty two years and while divorce rates are at an all time high and the idea of “marriage” is being questioned everyday, I’m not sure this new “Stepfather” has much to say. But it is a fun little movie that is breezy, easily digestible and fun.

We’re introduced to a bearded man who appears to be changing his physical appearance in front of the bathroom mirror. He takes a shower, puts on a suit goes down stairs and makes himself some breakfast and walks out the front door with his luggage. Oh and there is a murdered woman and children laying on the floor. This guy, now known as David Harris (Dylan Walsh from TV’s “Nip/Tuck”) makes a move on divorcee Susan Harding (Sela Ward). Susan has three kids and has had a rocky divorce. Six months later she’s in love with David and they’re engaged to be married. Susan’s oldest and troublemaker son Michael (Penn Badgley from TV’s “Gossip Girl’) who has returned from his stint at a military school is a little suspicious of his mom’s new love interest. Of course David seems like the ideal father. He loves his wife and her kids and can’t wait to be a truly close family. Except for the fact that his a murdering psychopath.

Most of the film’s suspense comes from David’s attempts to make sure no one finds out his real identity. Everyone seems suspicious including a noisy cat lady neighbor, Susan’s ex-husband and even her own sister, whom David works for at her real estate business. When he refuses to give her his personal information for payroll, he up and quits because he says that the job’s not suited to him. The crazy cat lady tries to warn Susan because she thinks he looks like a guy she saw on America’s Most Wanted. Let’s just say she ends up at the bottom of her basement steps.

Anyone who’s iffy about seeing this movie because of its PG-13 rating should be told that while the film doesn’t really feature much graphic violence (and neither did the original R-rated film, save for a few bloody moments) it does have some brutal moments that are surely inappropriate for 13 year olds. I still think that it seems crazy to rate any movie that features a serial murder PG-13, but I realize the dreaded R rating vastly limits the film’s audience. I wouldn’t call this a “watered down” version of the original the way the recent and dreadful “Prom Night” was. That film was directed by Nelson McCormick who also helmed this new film. McCormick makes writer J.S. Cardone’s script work for the most part, but it’s riddled with things you’ve seen before and characters do things because the script says they should and not because someone would do them in real life.

Like the original “stepfather” the film’s main draw is in its lead performance. I enjoyed seeing Walsh breakout from his role as Sean McNamara on Nip/Tuck. He plays nice really well and he plays psychotic really well. It was a fun Jekyll and Hyde-type performance that was probably better than a film like this really deserves. He was charming when he needed to be and creepy when he needed to be. Good job.

There are much better films than “The Stepfather” and yet there are much worse films. I think this falls somewhere in the middle. Anyone who’s seen the first film (which was finally released for the first time on DVD on October 19th) should check that out watch this new one if they’re intrigued. If you want to be really scared at the movies you should see “Paranormal Activity” but if you want something lighter but still fun, do daddy proud and see “The Stepfather.” GRADE: B

In the Bedroom: If You Don’t Want to Be Scared Don’t See “Paranormal Activity”

“Paranormal Activity” is a hyped movie that is actually worth being hyped. I’m going to be honest and say that I seriously had trouble sleeping the night after seeing this movie. Every time I woke up during the night it was difficult to fall back to sleep. There are so many stark and disturbing images in “Paranormal Activity” they’re most likely going to stay with you for days. I’m sure by now you’ve seen all the ads for this movie which have been touting that you should DEMAND IT to be shown in your local multiplex. It’s a cheaply (it cost $11,000) yet expertly made horror flick with an unusual marketing strategy. Paramount who bought the distribution rights said if the film’s website reached one million demands it would release the film nationwide. It was a marketing ploy that was unique, pretentious and dare I say ingenious.

“Paranormal Activity” is really scary. It’s being compared mostly to “the Blair Witch Project” because it’s shot by the actors with Hi-Def video cameras in a low budget, cinéma vérité style. You know what that means? Shaky cinematography that will most likely make those who puked during “Blair Witch” do the same here. Of course there have been plenty of films like it since the 1999 horror phenom ("Cloverfield," "Quarantine"), so we should all be used to this type of film by now. Also, this new film doesn’t tout the movie as being based on any true story and doesn’t dupe you into thinking it’s real. That was Blair Witch’s trick. There are no credits in “Paranormal Activity.” Not even end credits. It’s a bizarre move that works for this film.

So what the heck is this must see flick all about anyways? We’re introduced to a young couple. There’s Micah (Micha Sloat) and Katie (Katie Featherston) who have been together for about three years and have just moved into a nice, modern-looking home. It’s not a creepy place at all. They’ve been noticing some strange disturbances in the house and therefore Micah makes the decision to buy a fancy camera to try to capture any paranormal activity. Like I said the film is the footage that is shot mostly by Micah and some instances Katie. It turns out Katie has had paranormal incidents happen to her throughout her life and that whatever it is roaming their house at night is after her. They invite a psychic over (Mark Fredrichs) who deals with ghosts but isn’t prepared for what he believes is a demonic presence in the home. Katie is scared and gets more scared as the film goes on. Micah, being the typical alpha male, feels the need to protect Katie. That’s all fine and dandy, but you certainly don’t want to piss off a demon.

The film builds and builds and builds. It piles dread on top of dread. It’s claustrophobic (the movie never leaves the house) and creepy. The film alternates between what I call the “daytime scenes” in which Micah and Katie discuss the goings on and we seem them interact as a couple in distress, and the “nighttime scenes” in which we see footage of Micah and Katie sleeping. Micah has set up a tripod and set his camera to record in night vision throughout the night. These are where the film really grabs a hold of you. Each evening something stranger and more disturbing happens, which I refuse to describe for you. Let’s just say things start to escalate tremendously as the film progresses. I believe this couple as real people. The acting is as good as a film like this requires. They seem like real people. They do things real people would do. They do smart things and they do really stupid things.

I said the film was made for about $11,000. There are no real special effects, which is surprising because the film does show much than “Blair Witch” project and yet it remains totally believable and realistic and that’s why the film is so powerful. According to imdb fourteen people worked on the film (not including the handful of actors who appear in the movie). The director Oren Peli also produced, wrote and edited the film. There is no music; the film’s scary sound design is the score. You will see images that will stay in your head for a while.

“Paranormal Activity” is a haunting film that is a guaranteed fright. I’d be lying if I said at least one part literally made me jump out of my seat. And I’m not talking about the hairy spider that makes a brief cameo. This is an innovative and smart film that deserves to be seen, if you dare. GRADE: A-

The Price is Right: Michael Moore’s At It Again with “Capitalism: A Love Story”

I’m going to get this out of the way right now. My knowledge of capitalism is limited to that when I go to Best Buy to buy movies that is capitalism. You see I was a Communications major in college and instead of being productive and taking, oh I don’t know, a useful class like Economy I was busy taking The Cinema of Alfred Hitchcock. Not that you can’t learn a lot from the movies. And that brings me to what this review is about. Everyone’s (and by everyone I mean liberals) favorite muckraker Michael Moore’s latest film is about how capitalism in our American society is evil and how it benefits the rich (ie corporations) and negatively affects the poor (ie Hurricane Katrina victims). Say what you want about Moore he makes entertaining movies.

Of course taking his side always makes his movies more entertaining. And since I’m mostly on his side. (I wouldn’t call myself a Michael Moore fanatic by any means, but I find the information in his films to be interesting and of importance, although I know that it’s not always 100% the truth). I enjoyed “Capitalism A Love Story” mostly because he uses lots of vintage film clips, memorable music scores and oodles of stock footage. The opening credits of the film show various bank robbers caught on security cameras. Its pretty cool that he can make a statement so quickly without saying a word. I gather that he’s going to proclaim capitalism as an evil thing that makes people resort to robbery as a means of minimalist survival. I think I’m right.

The usual Michael Moore antics are firmly in place. As the film progresses he shows how the corporations received so much bailout money to help the ailing economy and yet these people in high up positions used the money to give their executives bonuses. We’d like our money back please. Moore storms the various banks’ headquarters in New York City where he’s confronted by security guards (who are probably only making minimum wage anyways). Moore uses humor to make a lot of his points and that’s a good thing. Humor is something that makes us human and if we can laugh at a serious situation maybe more people would be willing to listen. I mean his last film, Sicko, which dealt with the health care crisis in this country was one of his funniest films and yet it had touching moments that brought tears to your eyes. The same thing here.

Moore interviews many people. There are people whose homes were pretty much stolen away from them by their banks because they couldn’t afford their mortgage payments. I am not a homeowner but I know that foreclosure is not a word you want to hear. He even talks about how major companies take out life insurance policies on its employees so that when they die, the company makes thousands or even millions of dollars. (Don’t believe me? Go to http://www.deadpeasants.biz/) That’s messed up if you ask me. Moore gives us the ins and outs of capitalism and how it has changed throughout US history. It seemed to be working just fine after World War II and he basically blames Ronald Regan for everything that has happened economically through today. At least he has confidence that our new president Barack Obama will help out and bring the necessary changes to our failing financial system.

“Capitalism: A Love Story” is a funny film and it’s a sad film. And I would call it an important film. I don’t care what side of the political fence you are on or whether you can for Michael Moore’s silly tricks. This guy is a filmmaker first and foremost and continues to makes some of the most interesting and entertaining documentaries out there. Love him or hate him Moore is never boring. “Capitalism” doesn’t come close to reaching the power and importance of his masterpiece “Bowling for Columbine” but it’s a relevant film that dares to ask the tough questions. Help stimulate the economy and see it. GRADE: B

Liar Liar: Ricky Gervais Can’t Handle the Truth in “The Invention of Lying”

“The Invention of Lying” is probably one of the more intelligent and socially aware comedies you’re likely to see this year. The film takes place in a world where no one has developed the ability to tell a lie. Everything anyone says is the truth. There is no modesty or flattery. People can’t even make up stories, which means that when you go to a movie in this world, you end up watching a lecture about some fragment of history. People are completely blunt in this world. If a woman thinks a man is ugly she tell him to his face. If a man thinks a woman is fat he’ll tell her to her face. Of course, for Mark Bellison (a Ricky Gervais-type character played by Ricky Gervais) this is not the ideal way to live and one day he figures out that if he says something that is not true, anyone will believe it.

The film opens up as Mark is meeting Anna (Jennifer Garner, who’s wonderful here) for a blind date. She’s frank with him and says it took her a while to open the front door because she was, uh, playing with herself. She also says that she’s not really into Mark and thinks he’s not attractive and that he’s fat. Later on at the dinner table she talks to her mother on the phone and says that she won’t be sleeping with Mark after dinner. She says she has no interest in him romantically because she needs an attractive man with good genes to have children with. Pretty blunt right?

The next day at work Mark’s secretary (Tina Fey) informs him that he’s going to get fired. Mark works for Lecture Films where he “writes movies” about historical events. Of course he gets the boring century of the 1300s where not much exciting happened. His jerk co-worker Brad played by a perfectly cast Rob Lowe frankly says how much Mark’s movies suck. And on top of it, it turns out Mark does get fired. And now he wont have money for rent, so his landlord says if he doesn’t give him $800 for rent, he’ll be thrown out.

Mark goes to the bank to withdraw all that he has left from his savings account, which is only $300. The teller informs him that their computers are down and that if he knows how much is in his account she’ll just give him the money. Somewhere in his brain synapses start firing and he blurts out $800. The computers come right back up and even though it says there’s only $300 in his account the teller takes his lie for the truth and hands over all the dough. Mark instantly sees this as the opportunity of a lifetime and even tests his new invention by telling a complete stranger on the street that if she doesn’t have sex with him right away the world is going to end.

“The Invention of Lying,” which was co-written and co-directed by Gervais and Matthew Robinson, is one of those high concept comedies that start off as silly and funny and actually end up being pretty profound and intelligent. And in fact they make a pretty bold statement in the film because in this world of the truth, there is no religion. When Mark’s mother is sick in the hospital, the nurses and doctors overhear him telling her that if she dies there’s a wonderful world waiting for her and the next day Mark becomes a Jesus-like figure where pretty much the entire human race wants to know what happens after you die. A scene, in which he reveals ten truths told to him by some guy in the sky, is played wonderfully. It’s something you just have to see.
“The Invention of Lying” is a smart comedy that is funny and pretty profound. It has a lot to say without ever sounding preachy and it has romantic elements without ever being cheesy and it has funny scenes without ever seeming desperate for a laugh. Gervais was tailor-made for this role and if you’re a big fan of his you’d be doing yourself a favor by seeing this film. And that’s the truth. GRADE: B+

Brain Food: “Zombieland” is a Smart and Amusing Zombie Comedy

Let’s get the comparisons out of the way first. “Zombieland” can easily be written off as a dumbed-down, pop culture savvy reworking of England’s “Shaun of the Dead.” “Shaun of the Dead” worked so well because it was really able to find a great tone between horror and comedy and saw the comical potential when it came to zombies. “zombieland” while yes technically a comedy with zombies, is nothing like “Shaun of the Dead” in style or execution. It finds its own groove and it is clever and humorous and a complete joy to sit through (as joyous as a movie with gory zombie violence can be).

“Zombieland” takes place, I believe, in the present day world. A horrible virus has broken out which turns people into scary, ravaging beasts in search of human flesh. And like all zombie mythology, if you’re bitten you’ll become one as well. Most of the human population has died off and the world is pretty much a vast wasteland. There are abandoned vehicles and homes all over. Grocery stores are empty except for the random food items not claimed by survivors.

We’re introduced to Columbus (played by always reliably awkward Jesse Eisneberg) who’s a young college student from Ohio. He’s never really been too close with his family, but after the outbreak started he decided to travel back home to see whether his parents are zombie-free. So he’s on the road all by himself and he’s created a set of rules for surviving in Zombieland. One rule for instance, is cardio. You must be fit and quick as it’s the slow, obese people who were wiped out first. Another rules is to beware of bathrooms, because the zombies always seem to attack when you’re most vulnerable. He makes a new rule when he meets up with roughneck Tallahassee (a wonderful Woody Harrelson). He’s from Florida (If you haven’t figured out by now, the characters refer to themselves as the place where they’re from, pretty ingenious). Tallahassee, while reluctant to team up with this young geeky kid, teaches him how to enjoy the little things in life (ie: Twinkies).

These two guys soon meet up with a pair of equally tough sisters played by Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin. These girls are hard asses and though Tallahasse and Columbus for a loop when they con them into stealing their vehicle and weapons. The weapons consist of the likes of hedge clippers and pickaxes and baseball bats. Eventually this strange foursome bands together in the hopes of riding out the zombie epidemic and trying desperately to survive. Part of this plan includes holding up in a mansion owned by a celebrity of which I will not name (just go to imdb, you cheater). This sequence contains probably one of the best cameos of recent memory and not just because of who this person is, but how writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick handle it.

And this brings me to the fact that these two writers, who haven’t really done too much and first time feature director Ruben Fleischer have crafted a remarkable enjoyable and smart movie. This is a flick that finds just the right tone. It’s scary when it needs to be scary and funny when it needs to be funny. It even has some heart. Will the viriginal Columbus core with Emma Stone’s Wichita? You’ll have to see it to find out. And like all well-made comedies, it has its brain right where it should be. This is not a movie you have to turn your mind off to enjoy. Look at the way Fleischer incorporates Columbus survival rules into the film. It’s well done and hilarious.

“Zombieland” was an extremely pleasant surprise. It comes just at the perfect moment in time. In this day and age with the state of things politically and economically, it’s great to just get away. But it’s even better to escape into an “escapist” movie that isn’t just dumb. It’s smart and entertaining. Zombieland is a kick-ass ride. GRADE: A-

The Evolution of Freddy Krueger: Appreciating the “Nightmare” Films in Anticipation of the Remake/Reboot/Prequel

By the time 1984 rolled around horror movie audiences were very familiar with the slasher genre. Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees had been around for a few years. There had been three Halloween movies, although Myers took vacation time for Part III. There had been four Friday the 13th films. Also audiences were familiar with Leatherface, the Prowler, the Miner from “My Bloody Valentine,” the Driller Killer, the killer from “Prom Night,” etc. I’m almost surprised A Nightmare on Elm Street was even a success. But actually it came at the perfect time. In the six years since “Halloween” started the subgenre, slasher movies were becoming tedious, cheap and horrible. It needed a boost and Freddy Krueger was the only one who could do it.

Horror master Wes Craven was sort of ingenious in creating boogeyman Freddy Krueger for several reasons. First of all, not only did he give this character lines of dialogue, but he made him funny and scary. Granted he doesn’t really have funny lines in the original film, but you know he was just itching for some wisecracks. Freddy remains one of the few slashers who actually talk and while he’s been give more and more lines as the film series have progressed, it is trademark wit that makes Freddy stand out amongst the Jasons and Michael Myers out there. He gave him a trademark look and weapon: his wonderful homemade knife glove, which still is one of horror films’ most recognizable images. Also, Craven created a character that simply can’t be killed. When Jason gets killed a million times in his films the audience never really believes that this guy should still be around. But with Freddy, who exists in the dreams of his teenage victims can simply just live forever.

Wes Craven’s original film “A Nightmare on Elm Street” remains one of the best and important films in the slasher genre and currently stands as my 25th favorite movie of all time (although “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare,” like it or not, is still my favorite of the series). It has many iconic images which includes one of the most memorable murder scenes in horror history. I dare you to watch the scene in which Tina is clawed, thrown out of her bed, and dragged up the wall and onto the ceiling, only to fall back to her bed in a bloody mess. The scene is frightening, disorienting and a pioneering moment in slasher history. And we all remember the bathtub scene, Johnny Depp emerging from his bed as a pool of blood and Freddy rising from Nancy’s mother’s bed.

The many sequels were, not surprisingly less memorable, but fun nonetheless. “A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge” remains one of the strangest and controversial of all the sequels. Quickly dubbed the “gay Freddy movie” by its fans and detractors, it features Freddy’s attempt to possess the body of an effeminate teenage boy and kill teenagers in the real world, rather than in their dreams. Wes Craven had nothing to do with this one, but did return as co-writer for “A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3: Dream Warriors.” It stars a young Patricia Arquette who’s committed to a mental hospital with fellow teenagers who are all dreaming of Freddy. Freddy’s trademark one-liners made themselves apparent here: “Welcome to primetime, bitch!” These wisecracks were pushed into overdrive in “A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 4: The Dream Master.” This film still remains the franchise’s most profitable even though its director was ironically Renny “Cutthroat Island” Harlin. The film featured great production values, slick cinematography and plenty of Freddy wit. Its dream sequences were very elaborate. This is the one where the girl from “Just the Ten of Us” is turned into a cockroach. The series started nose-diving with “A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child” which featured Freddy using the heroine’s unborn child’s dream to kill the local teenagers. This one shows Freddy as a baby. Ugh. New Line Cinema reluctantly greenlit “Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare” as an opportunity to kill off everyone’s favorite scarred child murderer. Apparently someone thought that working as an assistant production manager on Part 1 made director Rachel Talalay capable enough to direct this fifth sequel, (ok, relax, she produced the other sequels, but still come on, she sucks!) which had its ending sequence shown in gloriously cheesy 3D. The story this time around was a muddled mess and attempted to show a lot of Freddy’s backstory. You're not hallucinating; that is Alice Cooper as Freddy's abusive father. It also features Freddy at his “funniest.” He shows up as the Wicked Witch of the West for crying out loud and kills a kid in a video game. This is the worst of the series and an embarrassment for all involved. Thankfully, Craven returned for part 7: the wonderfully clever “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare.” The film brilliantly took place in the “real world” and had the fictional Freddy haunt the Nightmare films’ cast and crew members. It was pretty ahead of its time but unfortunately audiences didn’t turn out for this postmodern gem because after 10 years of Freddy Krueger movies people just didn’t care anymore. Ironically, the equally clever and tongue-in-cheek horror flick “Scream,” released just two years later (directed by Craven), went on to become a massive critical and financial hit. And of course, the less said about “Freddy vs. Jason” the better.

So that brings me to the point of all of this Freddy talk and that is a remake is in production and is slated for release next April. Robert Englund, who I can’t believe I’ve failed to mention this whole time, won’t be returning as Krueger as this reboot will be seen as completely fresh. Oscar nominee and former child star has been Jackie Earle Haley will be taking on the iconic role and when you watch this amazing teaser trailer for the new film, maybe you’ll actually find it to be scary and decent looking. As a fan of this series I can honestly say I’m intrigued by this film and I encourage you to find it interesting as well. Even though there seem to be more remakes than original films coming out of Hollywood, I’m not really against it. It seems like they want to make Freddy Krueger scary again. Remakes, while always mostly unnecessary, are always fun and exciting commodities. Yes they are just products to be devoured by fans who are willing to give up their hard earned dough, but frankly I wouldn’t it have it any other way.

Nightmare 1: A, Freddy's Revenge: B, Dream Warriors: B+, Dream Master: B, Dream Child: C+, Freddy's Dead: D, New Nightmare, A+, FvJ: D. Check out the teaser trailer for 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' (2010) below:

Derby Fully Loaded: Drew Barrymore’s Roller Derby Drama “Whip It” Almost Skates Towards Victory

“Whip It” is one of those “triumph” in the end movies, in which a young person goes against their parents’ wishes and proves that their love of a particular sport or activity was worth all his or her secrecy. The plot is nothing new and technically the way the story is told is nothing new, but the actors certainly lift it above standard underdog story. Unfortunately this is going to be just considered “Juno on skates” and while in some ways it is (it’s quirky, weird, funny and hip) it’s not nearly as well written or directed. And I’m okay with that. Drew Barrymore makes a nice debut and while she’s no Alfred Hitchcock, and seriously who is, she brings enough to the table to have a warm and enjoyable enough time.

I’m going to be honest and say that I was super psyched for this movie. I watched the trailer over and over and it gave me chills. It was so happy and fun and colorful. I couldn’t wait to see Ellen Page’s next performance (although I’m starting to worry that she might be typecast as the quirky rebel girl). And then I saw the movie and while I liked it, I have to say on the whole I felt slightly disappointed. But it’s totally my fault and not the movie’s. it’s sort of like when I built up “Slumdog Millionaire.” I was really excited and then I saw the movie and I was like, seriously what’s the big freakin’ deal?

“Whip It” takes place in a small town in Texas. Seventeen year old Bliss’ (Page who is wonderful of course) mother forces her to participate in sexist beauty pageants because frankly I guess that’s all there is for girls to do in small town Texas. However, one day she sees a few “alternative-looking” girls on rollerskates. It turns out they’re in a Roller Derby league and it piques Bliss’ interest. She goes to see a bout with her best friend Pash (Alia Shawkat from ‘Arrested Development’) and is instantly transfixed. She’s encouraged to try out for the league and although she’s underage (you have to be 21) she does it anyways. She goes from falling over in her Barbie skates to being one of the best members on her team (yeah right).

Bliss doesn’t tell her folks that she’s participating in roller derby, because she assumes they “won’t understand,” which is probably a correct assessment. Her mother Brooke, played by the always reliable Marcia Gay Harden, participated in beauty pageants as a young girl and has passed down her unattainable dream to Bliss, who doesn’t even want it. Her dad, played by Daniel Stern, (who apparently has been hiding under a rock or something) is just portrayed as a typical Texan goofball. Bliss’ parents are nice enough but nowhere near as sympathetic as Juno’s dad and stepmom were in “Juno.”

And that brings me to the best part of the film and that is Bliss’ fellow teammates. We get SNL’s Kristen Wiig who is reliable. She’s more serious than we normally see her, but still fun. Quentin Tarantino’s favorite stunt lady Zoe Bell shows up as does rapper Eve. Barrymore shows up as the team’s funniest member who always seems to be getting punched in the face. It makes sense that Barrymore would play this role because its small enough for her to fulfill her directorial duties but potent enough to be remembered. Andrew Wilson is Razor, the team’s headbanded coach. And last but not least, Juliet Lewis shows up as the team’s nemesis.

Unfortunately while the roller derby scenes are fun and full of energy (and don’t worry the film does a decent job of showing us how the game is played) it gets bogged down by an unnecessary romance element that grinds the film’s fun momentum to a halt. Bliss catches the eye of a weird rock singer and she falls for him and they have a little fling. Of course I’m sure he’d love to hear that by the film’s end he’s unkowningly committed statutory rape. Fun huh?

“Whip It” has familiar story elements (writer Shauna Cross adapted the film from her novel) which you’ve seen dozens of times before, but I’m willing to state that the winning cast does a great job of making it all worth it. This is a fun effort from Barrymore. I’m interested to see what else she has up her sleeves. The film’s look is simple and isn’t particularly flashy. I’ll call it competent. The real reason to see the film is Ellen Page who always manages to make a film even better than it should be. While this is really just Juno-lite, it offers enough fun for a recommendation. GRADE: B-

The Seventeen Year Bitch: “Jennifer’s Body” is Not Another Teen Movie

“Jennifer’s Body” is not a movie I can recommend to everyone. Writer/former stripper Diablo Cody, who tries her hand at the teen horror genre, weaves a strange tale of female rage against the machine (the machine here is boys). If you liked Juno, you’ll find something to like here, which mostly includes Cody’s trademark cool and hip dialogue (“move on dot org” is so this year’s “honest to blog”). And if you crossed Juno’s post-modern coolness with that of last years indie cult horror hit “Teeth” in which a teenage girl’s vagina is equipped with a nasty and angry set of jaws, you can pretty get a vague understanding of what “Jennifer’s Body” is like. It’s certainly original, in terms of the horror genre, but I’m not even really sure I’d even call it a horror film. It seems like a really really really dark comedy. Think “Juno” with teeth in her genitalia.

“Jennifer’s Body” is a movie made by women. Like I said Oscar winner Diablo Cody is behind the words and director Karyn Kusama is behind the lens. I guess you could call the film a feminist look at high school. What we get is the story of two best girlfriends. One is Needy, who is played by Amanda Seyfried. She’s slightly nerdy, but cool enough to get by. She has an equally goofy yet charming boyfriend. She’s hardly on the lower ranks of the popularity echelon. Although maybe she’s a little needy, for lack of a better word. What she needs is her best friend Jennifer (the perfectly cast Megan Fox who expands on her I’m the pretty girl image from the “Transformers” role) who is the popular/hot girl who all guys go gaga for and all the girls want to be like. Frankly I don’t believe it because Jennifer is in the colorguard and frankly they’re never the most popular girls in school. Although Jennifer is the popular hot chick, she’s not really mean nor nasty. That is until she’s taken away by the members of an indie rock band called Low Shoulder, headlined by actor Adam Brody who will always be known to me as Seth Cohen from “The OC.” They take her away in a van after the bar where they’re playing burns to the ground, along with some of the town’s citizens. And when Jennifer returns, she’s not really the same person. Like all teenage girls, she’s boy crazy, but now she’s boy hungry. Jennifer quickly gobbles up a jock in the woods behind he school and Needy is curious as to why the male population at school seems to be dwindling.

If I heard this premise and didn’t know who was writing it, I would almost without hesitation not give it another look. I’d think it was a story guaranteed to wind up in the DVD bargain bin at your favorite local megastore. For some reason, Cody’s flashy writing and nose for clever dialogue is really what keeps this thing a float. And that is why I see this film more as a comedy than straight out horror. Yeah this thing is violent and has buckets of blood, but I’m not sure I’d say any of it was particularly scary. But I’m ok with that. Because as long as you can read it as a metaphor for high school and all things adolescence then it works. The performances here work, mostly because what the actors have coming out of their mouths are witty and fun. We see the film mostly through Needy’s eyes, not Jennifer’s, and it is her who we identify. It’s odd that she seems almost just as infatuated with Jennifer as all the boys in the school are, and we’re to wonder what exactly her character’s desires lay.

I wouldn’t really call this a boys are bad movie, in that I should be offended because its about a girl who kills boys, but rather a movie that has the guts to be horrific and yet sternly funny. In fact I see it more of a spoof of high school clichés more than anything else. Everyone knew that “mean, bitchy girl” in high school, and this movie dares to ask the question. What if that mean, bitchy girl was actually evil evil, not high school evil? It’s just like eleven years ago when the movie “The Faculty” answered the question, what if your teachers really were aliens?

So yes, I recommend this movie and while it’s certainly weird and different, and occasionally sloppy in its plotting (why does Needy seem to gain some sort of ESP power?), I think it’s clever dialogue and dark humor is what is really on display here. If you thought Juno was too hip for its own good then you’ll probably find this film a slog to sit through, but if you’re prepared to see what an indie rock band is willing to do to become famous, you should do yourself a favor and check out “Jennifer’s Body.” GRADE: B

Theta Die: “Sorority Row” is a Campy Ode to Classic 80s Slashers

You simply can’t take a movie like “Sorority Row” seriously. I mean the movie opens and we see a pajama party taking place in a sorority house in which co-eds bare their butts while jumping on a trampoline. Actually this first shot is pretty impressive. I didn’t notice a single cut for a few minutes. Was this a “Touch of Evil” homage? Who knows. What I do know, is that if you’re a fan of any horror film that was made in the 80s you’re bound to find something in “Sorority Row” to love.

The film is based on “The House on Sorority Row” which was released way back in 1983, but since I was merely a new born back then, I was unable to experience it in theaters. So now we have an updated version which sort of plays like “Gossip Girl” meets “I Know What You Did Last Summer.” It’s about a stupid prank that goes horribly awry. It appears that a guy cheated on one of the Theta Pi sisters. And if you cheat on one Theta you cheat on every Theta. So they decide to teach this dude a lesson and the girl who he cheated on, Megan (Audrina Patridge), pretends to die from a pill that she was given. They decide to cover up the crime and drive out to the middle of nowhere. The sisters look for “sharp rocks to cut up the body” meanwhile, Garett (Matt O'Leary)the tool that’s being punk'd, whips out a tire iron and stabs Megan in the chest, which you guessed it, kills her for real. So they decide to cover up the crime for real, and in true horror movie fashion, the story flash forwards “8 months later.”

Cassidy (Briana Evigan) is the one sister, and inevitable ‘final girl,’ who has a conscience and never really wanted to go along with the cover up. We also have my personal favorite character Jessica (played with bitchy perfection by Leah Pipes) who is the blonde sorority president who is the Queen Bee. She’s given the best lines and she delivers them with skanky finesse. Unfortunately we also get Rumar Willis who basically is horrible as the sister who just can’t deal with the stress and has to cry every five minutes. Why she doesn’t get killed off first, I’ll never know. And Korean-American actress Jamie Chung adds the necessary diversity to the strictly all white cast.

So if you haven’t guessed by now, after eight months, someone knows these girls’ “secret” and is going to kill them off one by one. It’s finally slasher time! We get a wine bottle down a throat and lots of slashings by way of a pimped out tire iron. I have to praise director Stewart Hendler, who, even though this is his first feature film, seems to know the genre pretty well. He stays close to nearly every cliché and frankly I wouldn’t have it any other way. If you want to see an original horror film unlike anything you’ve ever seen before, “Sorority Row” is not the movie for you. It retains the cheesy yet classic elements of slasher movies of 80s past. Think: "Prom Night," "My Bloody Valentine," "Graduation Day," "The Initiation," etc.

This is not “torture porn” which seems to have been the focus for horror films of the past few years, but a genuinely fun slasher movie complete with hooded killer. Some of the dialogue, while at times painfully bad, can actually be pretty witty at times. Like I said Ms. Pipes luckily gets the best lines. So yeah, I mean this isn’t classic cinema by any means. This isn’t “Citizen Kane,” it’s not even “Halloween” but like the recent campy thrill ride “The Final Destination,” “Sorority Row” is destined to be another cult horror classic that will be rewatched over and over again by horror movie fans for years to come. GRADE: B

PS – Carrie Fisher is simply awesome as Theta Pi's house mother. She wields a mean shotgun and she totally deserved her own shoutout. Ms. Fisher I salute you.