Behind The Films

THE WOLFMAN (15)
Directed By: Joe Johnston

Starring: Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt and Hugo Weaving

Reviewer: Andrew Gaudion

Were-Wolves are a common creature featured in many classic horror films. But for every Wolf Man (1941, which this version is a remake of), there is a New Moon, and for every American Werewolf in London, there is a Teen Wolf Too. The 1941 Universal Horror Classic original is the film that started it all. That movie, although obviously dated now, was brimming with atmosphere and would’ve been the scariest thing around back in the day. It is a movie that will never be forgotten by horror and movie buffs alike. So how does this new version fair to the Lon Chaney Classic?

I am quite a fan of the original Universal Horror classics and was looking forward to this movie with the utmost levels of anticipation. But due to the films many delays, my confidence and expectations were some what knocked down. Everyone who has been following this film will know the development hell that the movie went through. Universal announced the remake of The Wolfman in 2006, with horror fan Benicio Del Toro already attached to star. But the four year journey to its release has been more than eventful. Originally scheduled for a late 2008 release, the movie had to be pushed back to early 2009 when the first director Mark Romanek (director of the creepy Robin Williams drama, One Hour Photo) dropped out months before principal photography was set to begin. Joe Johnston, maestro behind Jumanji and Jurassic Park 3, jumped in to keep the film on track. The script was rewritten when Johnston came onboard and was just about complete to stick to the films schedule. But the movie was pushed back a whole year from February 2009 to February 2010 when test screenings proved rather disappointing and reshoots were needed. If that wasn’t enough, original score composer Danny Elfman left the project to be replaced by the rather less experienced Paul Haslinger, only for the studio to decide to go back to Elfman’s original score after it fitted with the new cut of the film. That decision was only made official barely a month before the film was released. All this can kill a film before it has seen the light of day, but The Wolfman has struggled on, and has emerged in the moonlight. And it’s really rather good.

To say this is better or worse than the 1941 original would be unfair to both of the films. In essence, there are two completely different beasts. This movie widens the atmosphere and adds modern day production value and updates the horror for a more modern audience. The film is very respectful of its ancestor in many ways including keeping the character names and the opening gypsy poem, which featured strongly in the Chaney version. The story has changed, and for the better. Lawrence Talbot (Del Toro) returns home after the mysterious death of his brother whose mutilated remains were found on the Moors. Whilst Lawrence tries to figure out how his brother died, he starts to fall in love with his brother’s fiancée Gwen (played sensitively by the beautiful Blunt) and tries to rebuild his relationship with his father (the ever dependable Hopkins). But whilst he investigates, Lawrence is attacked by a frightening wolf-like creature and escapes with his life, only to face the curse which reveals itself in the moonlight. Lawrence, with the aid of Gwen, tries to find a way to rid himself of the curse, but also uncovers a dark secret close to home. If all that wasn’t enough, he is being pursued by the towns people and the police lead by Scotland Yard inspector Aberline (the brilliant Weaving), who are out to kill him on sight. The story allows the characters to become more dimensional and achieve a much better crafted character arc along with applying more emotional depth to the gory proceedings. But it is the story structure that is the biggest flaw of this film. The build-up until Lawrence’s first transformation is slow-burning, cranking up some tension but not enough to keep the audience from thinking, ‘is he gunna change yet?’ The troublesome script development is also present in the films climax. Due to the fairly, but not hugely noticeable, tone difference, you can’t help thinking that the two final showdowns were merely favourite parts from two different scripts which were stuck together despite not entirely fitting atmosphere wise. This is a shame because in the films build up it establishes a strong Gothic feel (supported by Elfman’s score and the brilliant cinematography from Shelly Johnson).

But where the story delivers is in the Wolfman carnage. And boy does it come by the bucket load. The gore levels should easily appeal to modern horror audiences, limbs fly, heads roll and guts spill. But what is more impressive than the gore levels is the actual design of the Wolfman. Rick Baker (famous for the best werewolf transformation ever in An American Werewolf in London) sticks very close to the original design of the Lon Chaney make-up. That is the best way that the film could and does respect the original classic. Joe Johnston made a wise decision to trust Baker’s design and sticking mainly with practical effects, with the occasional CGI adjustment on the transformation. The other CGI elements are quite dodgy (bear and deer, say no more) but they don’t distract you greatly from the film. But Baker’s make up is brilliant and Del Toro maintains emotion and inner turmoil of his character even in wolf form through his dark brooding eyes.

The rest of the cast are more than capable for their roles. Anthony Hopkins is as good as ever in the role of Lord Talbot, who we are never too sure if we can fully trust. Emily Blunt gives sensitivity and a heart to the violent proceedings. Hugo Weaving makes a great impression in his short screen time (another cut of the film may have given him more, we may never know) delivering his lines with relish and professionalism.

For what this film went through, this is probably the best result that the studio and the director could get out of it. It is hard to say whether a better film could’ve come out of this if things had been different. The climax is really the biggest let down of this movie and the scripts structure which was more than likely a consequence of the troubled production. It would be interesting to see what the other cuts of the movie are like, and how different they may be in tone to the final product (that’s the art of editing for you). But this is the closest a Universal horror film has come to matching the quality of its heyday (I enjoyed Van Helsing, but the atmosphere just wasn’t there for the most part). It is a very enjoyable night at the cinema, which should fulfil your expectations, despite concerns you may have as a result of the troubled production, thanks to a great cast and technical team behind the camera!

Rating: 3.5/5

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

Directed By: Terry Gilliam

Starring: Christopher Plummer, Heath Ledger, Lily Cole, with Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell

Reviewer: Eric Smigiel


Terry Gilliam has never had that much success in the America’s or even that much success as a profitable filmmaker.  Yet, his films still find a way to get made as he has ideas to share and more stories to tell.  The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus goes back to the likes of his earlier films, which is a step in the right direction.  It touches on ideas previously touched on in The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and a personal favorite, Brazil.  Gilliam – back to the basics. This review will attempt to demonstrate the worlds created by Gilliam and his team as well as the overall look of the film.


First of all, his use of wide-angle lenses is used prevalently throughout the film.  It gives the film a grander, and somewhat more delusional and deliriously twisted perception of the films’ realities.  Since the story follows a group of rag-tag circus travelers, the wide-angle lens makes them seem all that much more odd.  For instance, one of the circus folk is a midget(Verne Troyer) and the angling of the camera along with the wide-angle lens makes him look a little more imposing, or a little more twisted… depending on the mood of the scene. They also can help accentuate an actors facial expressions, or make something look a little more in your face.  Instead of having a flat look to the flat theatre screen, you have a bubbled more round look.  A sort of 3-D without the 3-D glasses.


The coolest aspect about the film is when the main character Tony(Heath Ledger) jumps into a magic mirror that enters a gateway to your imagination through the main man that runs the show, Dr. Parnassus(Christopher Plummer).  On the other side, Tony looks like what he wants to look like.  If he takes a woman with him, he looks like their dream man… whether it’s Johnny Depp, Colin Farrel or Jude Law.  The main reason this was done from a filmmaking aspect is because Heath Ledger passed away before he could film the scenes on the other side of the mirror.  Getting the other actors to play Tony works better as the imaginative worlds he enters are very grand, colorful, and an overall change of scenery.  Why not change the look of the man that goes through to that different looking world?


The worlds the film brings to life are truly spectacular.  A favorite in particular is when Tony(as Ledger) runs into the mirror as he’s being chased by three men.  Everyone’s imagination comes together to create a land that looks like the backdrops in The Wizard of Oz, complete with rolling hills, grass that is sectioned off in squares, lush with trees, and soft-looking clouds in the sky.  A bright paradise.  Tony sees a Forbes-esque paper blow by the landscape.  A wealthy man is pictured.  It’s Jude Law.  Since he’s being chased by the three men, he decides to look like the man on the Forbes-esque paper.  Also in this landscape are thousand foot tall ladders that start on the land, heading up into the clouds.  He makes a run for the ladder climbing high up as the men follow up.  This is taking him nowhere.  Tony kicks the rungs of the ladder causing it to snap in half all the way down, also causing the men to fall off.  Seeing that he may get away faster from the men through this higher vantage point, he uses the left and right “legs” of the ladder as stilts to swing across this land.  Some pretty trippy stuff indeed!  But, that’s what we all come to expect when we see a film by Terry Gilliam.  And the visuals – while reminding me of other films – are still truly something I’ve never seen before as original happenings occur within them.  Another treat is seeing a desert land that is separated with a pyramid and a body of water.  On one side of the pyramid it is day and on the other side it is night.  Then, the desert quickly falls off and is a vast body of water.


The story itself features the Doctor making a deal with the devil, and through Gilliam’s story techniques it is told in the most hypnotic way possible.  The Imaginarium of Doctor Parassus also features what one may call an unhappy ending.  Slightly bittersweet.  As the midget and the doctor put on a puppet show, a young boy asks, “Does it have a happy ending?”  The midget responds, “We can’t guarantee that.”


Rating: 3/5

(500) Days of Summer
Directed By: Marc Webb

Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt & Zooey Deschanel

Reviewer: Andrew Gaudion

“This is a story of Boy Meets Girl, but you should know up front, this is not a love story,” the narrator bluntly informs us at the start of this charming and seriously original rom-com that’s okay to like! From the opening montage, in which the voiceover kicks in, we know this isn’t going to be your traditional rom-com, despite the good looking leads. What we get is so much more.

The story follows Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character Tom Hanson and his relationship with the beautiful and quirky Summer Finn (Deschanel). As noted by the title, Summer is in Tom’s life for 500 days, and the film shows us these days through a fractured timeline. At one moment we are on day one, next 384, and then 488. The fractured timeline manages to show the antithesis to the early, glory days of the relationship to the areas where it deteriorates with Tom becoming very depressed, for example one minute it’ll be showing a wondrous dance routine all cheery and wide-eyed, then it’ll cut to Tom looking glum with dark sunken eyes. But the film manages to maintain the narrative arc and keeps the story focused and structured in a weird way as the contrasts to the certain points of the relationship help both the comedy and developing the story and the characters. That is one of the greatest techniques of film; we can view a normal life but skip all the nitty gritty parts and move forwards or backwards in time to have a clearer retrospective on events, which is what we get from this movie.

What is brilliant about this story is that it focuses entirely on the bloke’s experience and prospective, as where more traditional rom-com’s seem to be more focused on or in the favour of the female protagonist. But no not here, which makes this movie instantly accessible to the male demographic than other rom-coms maybe. Particularly late teenaged boys and post-adolescent men can relate to the main character here, so effortlessly played by Gordon-Levitt. We feel his every emotion, we cringe at every awkward moment, we are there with him as he revels in the joy and perks of the relationship (particularly in the brilliantly silly song and dance routine) and we are there where all his thoughts and dreams are shattered (an excellent sequence involving a split-screen showing expectations next to reality is a prime example). But the most important factor is that we never get annoyed with him, we remain sympathetic throughout. If he was played by anyone else, he well could’ve been irritating. Gordon-Levitt shows amazing talent here, only glimpsed at in his previous movies, such as 10 Things I Hate About You. Here he is given the chance to carry a film on his own merits; his Golden Globe nomination was well deserved. Zooey Deschanel is more than capable for the role of the kooky Summer, who generally becomes slightly irritating nearer the end but maintains a sweet-natured spirit. It would be nice to see her take on a different role and show some versatility as she has done this role to death (see Yes Man, Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Elf), time will tell but she does seem to be a one-character actress at this moment in time.

The supporting cast supply a few laughs, mostly from Geoffrey Arend and Matthew Gray Gubler as Tom’s loyal best mates. Chloe Moretz as Tom’s strangely wise sister is very precocious and quite irritating but her lack of screen time is welcomed! Otherwise this movie works on the sole relationship of its two leads, and they do have amazing chemistry. The tender moments are genuine and the arguments crackle with emotion. Deschanel and Gordon-Levitt have wonderful chemistry and that is ever so important for a film that relies on the two leads as much as this one does. Everything rides on the relationship of the two characters, and thankfully it rides very smoothly.

Director Marc Webb doesn’t only focus all the detail on the relationship of the two leads. He takes apart the script and devotes himself to showing every subtle little detail here and there. Be it the changing climate on the days number counter background, or emphasising the contrasts between the strong relationship days and the deteriorating days, he maintains the films smart and witty spirit. The soundtrack as well is one of the best factors for this movie. The songs are very coincidental to what is being shown on screen, featuring prominently The Smiths, Regina Spektor and You Make My Dreams by Hall & Oates. I seriously recommend the soundtrack as it features some classic Indie tracks and some very memorable tunes.

I am a sucker for these types of Indie Movies, you know the sort, appear out of nowhere as Sundance and go on to receive positive reviews and are praised for its originality. Juno is fairly similar, as is Garden State both of which are a couple of my favourite movies. This film has now joined the ranks of the latter movies. (500) Days of Summer offers more of a unique twist on the genre then Juno and Garden State did. It is a Love Story that doesn’t run smoothly or end the way you’d expect it to. I’d say that this is also a lot more original than Juno and Garden State, yet it maintains a sense of familiarity to it which makes it that bit more accessible. If the late great John Hughes’ had ever made an Indie comedy it wouldn’t have looked much different to this (just make the two main characters teenagers and there you go).

For a truly original rom-com which puts a unique twist on the premise, I’d definitely pop down to your local Blockbuster and pick up a copy. It may not cater to everyone’s taste, as the narrative structure and random & quirky humour aren’t for everybody. But if what I have written above appeals to you, then this is an essential film for you.

Film: 4/5

Special Features: 2/5

Very little in the way of special features on the DVD. All that is on the disc is a selection of deleted/extended scenes. They feature a deleted sequence involving Tom’s parents but most the deleted scenes are either variations of scenes that are in the movie or are just fairly pointless deleted scenes that you know would not have done the film any good and rightfully ended up on the cutting room floor. But the DVD does come with a digital copy of the film which allows you to take the film with you anywhere on your iPod.

Now before we get to the review, let me just say that i’m not a professional movie critic and this is my first review with the BTF site. This is a somewhat more technical look at the film, so here it goes:

Up In The Air
Directed by: Jason Reitman

Starring: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick, Jason Bateman

Reviewer: Eric Smigiel


Jason Reitman’s Up In The Air is a very important film for our times. It attempts to humanize a man that has some in-human qualities. However, by the end we realize that everything is still up in the air. Only we have the power to change who we are. Is it worth it?


The cinematography in the film coupled with the lighting, and fused together with editing is where the film shines visually. In the scenes where people are getting fired it is very steely in tone. A blue/cold look runs through those scenes in particular as well as follows Ryan Bingham(George Clooney) throughout the early stages of the film. This obviously represents that he is somewhat dull in nature, and just cold in what he does… which is firing people. However, by the end of the film more colors are infused in the films palette. One scene in particular that represents this well is when his sister is getting married and he has to go to a colorful elementary school where the husband-to-be is. Ryan teaches the husband-to-be, as well as himself, what life is all about.


The editing is another aspect that is pretty influential. For example when Ryan is packing for a business trip he packs up all of his things in a quick fast motion inter-cut with quick cuts of say the zipper, or the top of the briefcase coming down. By the end of the film, when his company decides to switch from air trips to more-grounded online interactions with the firing of employees, we see him pack up his bag one last time. This time, much slower than what he normally is used to. Slowly, he realizes that the packing up of his belongings is one of the only things he has or can depend on in his life.


An aspect of the film that didn’t work was the odd Simon and Garfunkle-esque songs. Sure it makes the film a little more upbeat then what the subject matter entails, but it just feels out of place, and out of touch with it’s characters. In a way, the music is a character of it’s own that shouldn’t be in the film.


Up In The Air ends up being a powerful film from the director of Juno and Thank You for Smoking and is definitely recommended as it is a truly human and emotionally driven portrait of life today.


Rating: 4/5

THE BOOK OF ELI
Directed by: The Hughes Brothers

Starring: Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman and Mila Kunis

Reviewer: Andrew Gaudion

Post-apocalyptic movies are nothing new in the world of cinema nowadays. In fact, they have been around for the better part of 40 years. We had Vincent Price muttering away to himself in his loneliness with that instantly recognisable tone in the first adaptation of Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend, entitled The Last Man On Earth in 1964. We re-visited this with Charlton Heston in 1971’s The Omega Man and again in 2007’s I Am Legend. We were given glimpses of a machine controlled wasteland in The Terminator films from 1984 and 1991 (and then given a focused piece of it in the latest instalment Terminator Salvation). So what does The Book Of Eli have to offer that we haven’t already seen before?

Well, very little is the answer to that. We have destroyed buildings, wrecked cars, collapsed motorways etc. The landscape is nothing original; Terminator gave us all of this. But what about the context, what is the reason we are in this wasteland? Is this original? Well the creative Twin force of The Hughes Brothers (last movie being From Hell, in 2001) have done something that is welcome to this genre, they don’t technically tell you how the world got in this state. They seem to have taken into toll that there has been many post-apocalyptic movies before this, and where they would have had a dramatic voice-over or some text filling us in on the information before hand, this film simply gets on with it. Hints are dropped throughout the film, but it is never fully explored. I find this a welcome change, we can pretty much guess what has happened and the directors have left it up to you to fill in the gaps and be satisfied with your own opinions. What information we do get tells us that an Atomic War some 30 years ago wiped out a large proportion of the human race and left cities in ruin and the rest of the human race wearing funky glasses to protect their eyes. Some of the survivors have converted to living off the land and turning to cannibalism whilst others have tried to create some form of order and create new communities. It is in the wasteland that used to be known as America that we are introduced to Denzel Washington’s Eli.

Eli is a mysterious character who you figure out more and more as the film progresses. We are introduced to him killing a cat with his trusty, Rambo-style, bow and arrow, showing that this is a man who copes with what he has got and is well trained in survival skills. Eli is on a mission, to take a book (which has a cross on the front, wink-wink-nudge-nudge) to a place where it shall be cherished and deserves to be. He walks West, guided by an inner force, taking out anybody who gets in his way and poses a threat with his impressive martial arts and rather nifty dagger. But when he stumbles across a small established community to gain supplies. But whilst here, the dictator-esque leader Carnegie (Gary Oldman) learns of Eli’s possession and attempts to take it from him to use the power he believes it holds. With the aid of Carnegie’s stepdaughter Solara (Mila Kunis), Eli tries to stay one step ahead of Carnegie and his men whilst trying to make sure the book gets to its rightful place.

The story itself is enough to keep the reader interested, but then again nothing hugely original. And it is no secret that there are some strong religious connotations within this movie. But the film manages to have these religious messages without coming across as too preachy, believe what you want to believe, this film is not trying to make you think differently in terms of religion, it is what simple drives the story. There are times though when the film threatens to take itself too seriously. These mostly involve the scenes between Eli and Solara. Solara provides the audience a voice. She is at times confused and needs to ask questions, she helps to fill some gaps that may exist; she is what prompts the character of Eli to come out of himself and to become more rounded. Mila Kunis handles this role competently, she still needs to develop herself as a big screen actress but this role is a move in the right direction. The role is very layered and has a fair amount of depth to her, she conveys this convincingly in some areas are not quite as well in others (the ending particularly). But she creates a vulnerable and very likeable character. Washington is as dependable as ever, handling the emotion and the bad-ass action scenes like the pro that he is. The scenes between Solara and Eli alone, being it walking or at a campfire, is where the film drags however. They only seem to be there to reveal information, which they do but otherwise they don’t really go anywhere. This is where the supporting cast and the very impressive and stylish action come into play.

Gary Oldman is the British-thesp-villian-for-hire here but boy does he have fun, and you have fun watching him. He plays off especially well with Washington and even the most simplistic scenes with him are a joy to watch, he shows why he was one of the most in demand actors in Hollywood right now. There are some neat little cameos here as well which supply some much needed humour at parts, most notably from Michael Gambon and Frances De La Tour as two gun-wielding pensioners, who also happen to cannibals.

The action of the movie delivers, and it is what you would come to expect from this type of action flick, limbs fly and heads roll! The way that the sequences are shot, and indeed the film, are shot is technically impressive. Subtle touches here and there make the film that bit more professional, be it the grimy Spaghetti Western style cinematography or the touch of green that line the clouds of this post-apocalyptic world.

I am a person who believes that without a decent and engrossing and/or entertaining story, no matter how pretty the film may be, it isn’t a good film (hence why I didn’t think much of Avatar). Eli may not deliver much on the originality front in terms of concept, but in terms of entertainment value and context, it ticks all the boxes and gives us what we expect. Just don’t go wishing for something more.

Rating: 3/5

The long anticipated Zach Snyder adaption of ‘Watchmen’ hit theaters last night. The midnight showings last night brought in an estimated $4.5M which could potentially set ‘Watchmen’ up for a weekend in the low $70M range. According to /Film. I’m actually going to predict a slightly lower weekend figure, I’ll weigh in for the $64-$68M range, but we shall see on Monday.

On another note, if you’ve seen the film be sure to post your thoughts, reviews and rants below.

Source: /Film

Late last night the first cut of James McTeigue’s ‘Ninja Assassin’ was screened.

Directed by James McTeigue (‘V for Vandetta’) produced by the Wachowski Brothers and written by J. Michael Straczynski (‘Changeling’) and Matthew Sand, ‘Ninja Assassin’ is the story of young Raizo (Rain) who is taken from the streets as a child by the very secretive, almost mythical Ozunu Clan and is trained as one of the most deadly killers in the world. After the death of his friend Raizo flees and lies in wait for revenge.

In Berlin a Europol agent named Mika Coretti (Naomie Harris) finds a money trail which links several political murders to the Ozunu Clan. The Ozunu Clan now targets Mika who is saved by Raizo. The two enter a deadly game of cat and mouse with the Ozunu Clan.

So about the above mentioned screening, some lucky person who got in was kind enough to share a review with Collider below are the highlights:

The Good:

Heavy and surprising doses of crowd-pleasing ultra-violence.

Fairly non-stop action scenes, from modern locations like freeways to an old-school dojo.

Ninjas, crouching in shadows. Gotta love ‘em.

The Not So-Good:

The plot, rather than presenting an original spin on ninjas or martial arts stories, relies on cliches and archetypes. Betraying the clan, avenging a girl, fighting the master.

The relationship that grows between the hero and the female cop he’s mixed up with, grows from an incomprehensible notion that he can hear her heartbeat, and that it’s “special”. This is also how we know the warrior hero is, in fact, gentle and sensitive.

There’s the embarrassing use of Asian mysticism in some scenes, such as the act of meditation being able to heal wounds.



Post your thoughts and comments below.

Source: Collider

This was originally posted on my blog.

As a fan of most everyone invloved I really expected to like this film. I am quite happy to say that I was in no way disappointed my expectations were surpassed on every level.

In his own words Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt) states “I was born under unusual circumstances while everybody else was aging, I was getting younger all alone…” , born not as an infant but as an old man, not expected live long the boy (who looks to be about 90) is left on the steps of an old age home where he is discovered by one of the employes, Queenie (Taraji Henson). Benjamin grows into his old and decrepit body gaining maturity as he does so, playing with soldiers, listening to stories and longing to play with the children he sees unfortunately he is still confined to a wheel chair.

Benjamin first encounters Daisy when she is about six or seven years old- mentally he is the roughly the same age as her but physically he is somewhere in his 80’s. As Daisy (Cate Blanchett) gets older and Benjamin gets younger there relationship grows stronger. However even when the two are about the same age (somewhere around 1970) and the relationship is strongest, there is still an underlying tension; Benjamin will get younger and Daisy will grow older the relationship can not last. Benjamin tells Daisy when she’s pregnant that she should find a real father for the child because she can’t look after both him (as he gets younger) and the baby.

Things come and go, as we travel through life physically nothing will stay the same. Benjamin grows younger knowing someday he will become an infant unable to care for himself, while Daisy grows older knowing that someday she will not be able to care for herself. However despite there physical infirmities the couple still love and care for each other until the very end.

The storytelling displayed is top notch, and the filmmaking epic. Apparently the screen play floated around for about 15 or 16 years before finally going into production and it’s quite easy to see why, the technical challenge of making an infant look as if he were 90 then aging backwards must have been enormous however the final product is flawless. It does not look CG, rubbery or unnatural in any way; if there was a baby born into a 90 year old’s body I suspect he would look very much like Benjamin did in this film.

I often find myself carefully scrutinizing shot composition, cinematography and other technical elements however I was so completely engrossed in the story it’s hard to accurately judge the film on a technical level. But from what I observed; technically, the film is a masterpiece as well. This is a serious Oscar contender.

‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button’ is a magical and moving film which depicts life’s challenges and triumphs told through the eyes of a man who is traveling the same path as everybody else, just in the opposite direction.

Written by Eric Roth, and Directed by David Fincher ‘The Curious Case of Bejamin Button’ also stars Jason Flemyng, Mahershalalhashbaz Ali, and Tilda Swinton.

Rating:

Source:TravisFantina.com

Over the weekend ‘Eagle Eye’ soared into spot #1 at the box office (heh heh it’s a pun), these numbers are despite a barrage of mostly negative reviews which seems to sum up how much audiences pay to critics these days…

After that opening paragraph I should know that nobody is going to read my review however if you are one of the few who still reads reviews allow me to sway you;

‘Eagle Eye’ stars Shia LaBeouf, Michelle Monaghan, Rosario Dawson, Billy Bob Thornton and Michael Chiklis, and is directed by D.J. Caruso.

‘Eagle Eye’ starts out in a fast paced yet cliché room of decision making, it’s a room we’ve seen in films like ‘Transformers’, and ‘The Bourne Ultimatum’, the one with all the feds making big decisions while watching the action through big screen TVs. In this room the Defense Secretary (Michael Chiklis) is trying to convince his colleagues not to bomb a funeral precession which may be attended by a high level terrorist. Defense Secretary advises against the bombing but they are in the minority. I found the whole scene a bit tedious and cliché however just when the scene became really tedious there was a big explosion and the title came up on screen ending the intro.

We are introduced to Jerry Shaw (Shia LaBeouf) who is involved in a heated poker game over his break, we quickly find that he does not work a glamourous, dangerous or particularly interesting job no he’s just a rep at ‘Copy Cabana’. After his shift he receives a call from his mom telling him that his brother just died. There is a funeral after-witch Jerry’s dad confronts him we get the classic “Why can’t you be more like your brother, you little Stanford dropout” scene.

Later Jerry returns to his job at Copy Cabana and life continues a usual, until Jerry goes deposit a check finds that he has $751,000 in his account, (weird right?), things get even stranger for Jerry when he enters his flat and finds bags and bags of ammonium nitrate along with other explosives, weapons, and manuals to air force jets. His phone rings “The FBI will arrive at your door in 20 seconds, run” Jerry does not heed the voice and is arrested in about 20 seconds when the FBI does in fact come.

Rachel Holloman (Michelle Monaghan) a young, single mom gets her son ready for a big recital in Washington DC where he will be playing for the president, she gives him a kiss and helps him board a train looking both worried and excited for her son. Shortly after he boards she receives a call from the same woman who called Jerry, the woman asks Rachel if she wants to see her son again then gives her instructions which, if not followed will result in the death of her son.

Agent Thomas Morgan (Billy Bob Thornton) interrogates Jerry, then, with clearance from the higher-ups agrees to give Jerry a phone call. However as opposed to making a phone call Jerry receives one, it’s the voice again telling him to duck. Jerry turns just in time to see a tower-crane coming towards the window (ok the chances of the crane being in the vicinity of the window are slim to none but it’s a fun scene none the less). The crane smashes the glass and Jerry jumps, and takes the train. While on the train Jerry receives another call giving him instructions of what to do next, the woman on the phone still does not reveal herself.

Jerry is told to walk to a parked Porsche Cayenne, he hops in and finds Rachel who he believes to be the woman on the phone the two fight a bit then realize they are both victims. However they still have feds chasing them and a woman threatening to kill Rachel’s son if she does not obey the two decide to take there chances with the woman and they hit the road, an awesome chase ensues with many a police car flying through the air incurring hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage it’s fun!

Jerry and Rachel embark on a faced paced and dangerous journey where they must obey a woman who follows there every move with uncanny vision while at the same time trying to uncover the woman, prove there innocence and come out alive.

‘Eagle Eye’ is fast and fun. True many coincidences aid the story telling, and there are more then a few parts that “the plausibles” will surely complain about. But this is a fun popcorn thriller, not a deep psychological study. When I walked into the theater expecting to have fun and be entertained for two hours and that’s exactly what I got. If your looking for a fun film to see go see ‘Eagle Eye’ if your looking for something deeper go see something else it’s as simple as that.

Rating:

-Travis Fantina

It’s been just over 4 months since principal photography and on Augest the first cut was screened for a small number of studio executives at Paramount. Edited by Mary Jo Markey and Maryann Brandon, the screening of the first cut went quite well. According to trekmovie.com the first screening was “very impressive.” and “far beyond expectations”. Keep in mind this is only the first screening so the film is still far from finished, most of the 1300+ effects shots are not finished yet, the film also has yet to be scored. However this early positive buzz is very exciting, while the effects and music are important (and can make or break a film) the number one thing is story then performances which everyone at Paramount seemed to really like.


From director J.J. Abrams and screenwriters Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci (”Transformers,” “MI: III”) comes a new vision of the greatest space adventure of all time, “Star Trek,” featuring a young, new crew venturing boldly where no man has gone before. Star Trek explores the early Starfleet careers of future Enterprise officers Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), Scotty (Simon Pegg), Amanda Grayson (Winona Ryder), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), McCoy (Karl Urban), Sulu (John Cho), and Chekhov (Anton Yelchin). A Romulan, Nero (Eric Bana), and a much older Spock (Leonard Nimoy) are influences, as well as Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood), the first captain of the USS Enterprise. Star Trek hits theaters May 8th 2009.