Traitor (2008)

The midweek review this week sees Don Cheadle in a type of role I am not used to see him in- leading man. Does it suit him? Read on and find out.

Scott.

Traitor (2008)

The Jeffrey Nachmanoff film from 2008, Traitor, casts Don Cheadle in a leading role (this was the first time I had seen him as a leading man), and I am here to tell you, it should happen more. He is excellent in this suspenseful spy thriller that makes good use of his considerable acting skills. Guy Pearce is also perfect in his role as the FBI agent Roy Clayton, who is heading a task force to link Cheadle's chracter, Sam Horn, an American Muslim, to terrorist bombings all over the world. This is about all the synopsis I can give you, because this is a very easy film to spoil.
Jeffrey Nachmanoff seems to be a more-than-competent director and the secondary characters are good enough to make the story move at a good pace. A very good script, written by Nachmanoff and Steve Martin (yes, that Steve Martin) makes this an interesting, sometimes fascinating film from beginning to end.
I would like to mention two more performances that stand out and really surprised me in their strength. Jeff Daniels plays one of the most important characters in the film, though he doesn't have much screen time. In what little time he does have on screen, he steals the limelight from the more prominent actors. The other performance worth mentioning comes from Said Taghmaoui. His is the character in the film that makes you question your emotions and feelings toward him, and his performance is possibly the most powerful in the film.
This is a film I have been palnning to watch for a long time, and our good friend Shane requested I watch it, and write a review. I am glad I took his advice.

Scott's Final Grade: B
Scott's Final Recommendation: A must watch for any fan of spy thrillers.

Our Top Ten Animate Favorites

In honor of all the great animated films to be released in the last few years, we have compiled a list of our favorites. You may be surprised to see How to Train Your Dragon on all of our lists, but take it from us, this is truly a great animated film. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see it on our list of Top Ten Films of 2010 when this year is over.

The first list is from Becky and it shows that she has a varied taste in animated films, and it makes for a very eclectic list.

Becky's List

1. How to Train your Dragon
2. Up
3. Sleeping Beauty
4. Beauty and the Beast
5. Finding Nemo
6. The Little Mermaid
7. Thumbelina
8. Vampire Hunter D
9. Kung Fu Panda
10. A Christmas Carol (2009)

The next list is from our good friend Leila. She has compiled an excellent list and I was surprised - and delighted - to find movies like The Secret of Nimh and Fantasia. These often-overlooked gems don't make it on many lists of the greatest, and that is a bit of a shame.

Leila's List
I have to go with Bug's Life for my Number 1 for 2 main reasons: 1. Kevin Spacey is the voice of the villain (You really can't go wrong with that). And 2. It's the first animation movie that had a blooper reel in the closing credits. Not only was it brilliant, it was also just as funny as the movie itself.

1. A Bug's Life
2. Aladdin
3. Toy Story
4. The Little Mermaid
5. The Secret of Nimh
6. How to Train Your Dragon
7. Ratatouille
8. Lady and the Tramp
9. Shrek
10. Fantasia/Fantasia 2000 (okay, this one had to be a tie because I couldn't decide between the Sorcerer's Apprentice from the original and Rhapsody in Blue, the scene set in New York City from Fantasia 2000, so they both win.) :)

Scott's List

1. The Little Mermaid
2. Spirited Away
3. Up
4. Dumbo
5. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
6. Princess Mononoke
7. Finding Nemo
8. Coraline
9. How to Train Your Dragon
10. Kung Fu Panda

You can leave a comment that will appear at the bottom of our site, and feel free to tell us what we did right or what we did wrong. Also, feel free to send your lists of favorite animated films. Be sure to come back Tuesday, as Scott will be reviewing Traitor.

Oscar Picks & Pans 2010

Our first post this week is written by our good friend and follower Leila. Her love for film matches our own and we greatly appreciate her taking the time to send this to us, and we encourage anyone who reads our blog to do the same. Thank you all for reading!

Leila's Post


Oscar time! Most Academy Awards are pretty straight forward- you know who pretty much has it in the bag before it even starts. But for once, in a long time, it's anyone's guess on who it belongs to. Below are my picks for the winners , and even these are tentative picks...


Best Actor


Most likely to win= Jeff Bridges ("Crazy Heart")
Dark Horse= Jeremy Renner ("The Hurt Locker")

I haven't see Crazy Heart yet, but I have seen The Hurt Locker, and if there is one to steal the spotlight from Jeff Bridges on Oscar night, it would be the complex performance by Jeremy Renner. However, Jeff Bridges has locked this one down. I won't be upset if he wins- this man really deserves it and has been overlooked for years. Not quite the Susan Lucci of the Oscars, but maybe close.

Best Supporting Actor

Most likely to win= Christoph Waltz ("Inglorious Basterds")
Dark Horse/ Should Win= um, yeah not that many other choices

Of all the categories this year, this is probably the most one-sided. Stanley Tucci made a convincing run as the creepy-neighbor- who-is-really-a- serial-killer in the somewhat decent but lackluster The Lovely Bones and would possibly be a dark horse, but no one chewed the scenery like Christoph Walz as a sadistic Nazi in Inglorious Basterds. If he didn't win, I might just give up the Academy Awards all together ... but don't quote me on that.

Best Actress

Most likely to win= Sandra Bullock ("The Blind Side")
Dark horse / should win=Carey Mulligan ("An Education")

All through the awards season, all people have heard is who is it going to be- Sandra Bullock or Meryl Streep? While it's hard for someone to compete with Meryl Streep (much less Sandra Bullock), Carey Mulligan gave an amazing performance as the young and completely engaging Jenny in An Education, and the best lead performance for an actress. I hope when Oscar night arrives, and the envelope is opened , the Academy remembers this instead of going with popular opinion (aka Ms.Bullock).

Best Supporting Actress

Most likely to win = Mo'Nique ("Precious")
Dark horse/should win= Mo'Nique ("Precious")

I really enjoyed both performances by Anna Kendrick and Vera Farmiga in Up In The Air (Kendrick, especially, was the movie's highlight) but from everything I've heard (sorry, have not seen the movie yet), Mo'Nique's performance as the abusive mother in Precious was a powerhouse performance, and the award will be richly deserved.

Best Animated film

Most likely to win= Up
Dark horse= Fantastic Mr. Fox

Up was the critic's darling and fan favorite of the year for an animated movie (I mean, it IS up for Best Movie as well), so this one is a given. The only other movie that could overthrow it is the OTHER critics' darling for animated film: Fantastic Mr. Fox. If popular opinion does rule, Up has it in the bag.

Best Original Screenplay

Most Likely to Win= Mark Boal ("The Hurt Locker")
Dark horse/Should win= Quentin Tarantino ("Inglorious Basterds")

As much as I liked The Hurt Locker, no one can craft words to provide such great dialogue and imagery as Quentin Tarantino did for Inglorious Basterds. It's a great revenge story like no other .

Best Director

Most Likely to Win= It's a tie: James Cameron ("Avatar") or Kathryn Bigelow ("The Hurt Locker")
Dark Horse = Quentin Tarantino ("Inglorious Basterds")

James Cameron did provide great visions in this movie....or should I say, his special effects team did? Hmmm food for thought, Academy voters. And come on, do we really want to see another narcissistic speech from Mr. "King of the World"? Give it to his ex-wife, who's Hurt Locker thrived under her care- the carefully planned shots and sequences. Both Ms. Bigelow and Quentin Tarantino did a better job, and didn't have to use a blue screen for most of their movies.

And of course, the big one....

Best Picture

Most likely to win= Avatar
Dark horse /Should Win= Hurt Locker or Inglorious Basterds

It has really been a tight race this year, and the front runners are Avatar (winning the Golden Globe for Best Picture) and The Hurt Locker (winning
many other awards). Needless to say, The Hurt Locker AND Inglorious Basterds had better acting, better dialogue, and a better storyline than Avatar. And let's face it- they are just better films all together.

Happy Oscar watching!



Scott's Post


It's the time of the year I look forward to, and when it is over, I am glad it is gone. Oscar season is exciting for me, but always proves to be frustrating at the same time. The snubs get to me, and the winners frustrate me, and yet, I never miss it. I decided instead of just remaining idle this year, I will put in my two cents, and give everyone a chance to respond how they see fit. If you agree, great, just let us know. If you disagree, good, it means you are thinking for yourself, and we welcome any feedback be it positive or negative.



Best Actor

Will Win: Jeff Bridges
Should Win: Jeff Bridges

I was totally blown away by this performance. Bridges as "Bad Blake", a down-on-his-luck country singer who finds love on the road, is in my opinion, easily the best lead performance of the year by a male. Bridges has been snubbed too many times, it won't happen this time. I think bridges has this one.


Supporting Actor

Will Win: Christoph Waltz
Should Win: Christoph Waltz


This one is, and should be, a lock. His performance in Inglourious Basterds is one for the ages. I think this performance, and this film will be talked about for many years to come.


Best Actress

Will Win: Sandra Bullock
Should Win: Gabourey Sidibe

Sure, Gabourey's role in Precious takes a certain type of actress, with a certain look. But should this detract from the first time professional actress's accomplishments in this film? I think not! She was absolutely wonderful as the illiterate teen trying to make a life for herself, despite a terrible mother. Her chances of winning this award are slim to none, and that's a shame.


Supporting Actress

Will Win: Mo'Nique
Should Win: Mo'Nique/Anna Kendrick

Mo'nique will win this easily, but I also believe Kendrick was equally as good in Up in the Air. If either won, it wouldn't hurt my feelings.


Best Animated Film

Will Win: Up
Should Win: Up


Up is not only the best animated film of the year, but one of the best films of the year all-around. The first twenty minutes of the film will melt the even the hardest heart. Up is in the bag, as Pixar films are every year. They continually produce the best animated films year after year.


Best Original Screenplay

Will Win: The Hurt Locker
Should Win: Inglourious Basterds


I will be royally pissed if The hurt Locker wins this. There is no competition here. Inglourious Basterds is one of the best screenplays of the last decade and if Tarentino wins no other award, he should win this one. The writing in this film is what makes us sit on the edge of our seat, laugh, cry, and cheer for the good guys. This is the award I am most passionate about this year, and I hope the Academy does the right thing here.


Best Director

Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow
Should Win: Quentin Tarentino

I am so afraid of seeing this award passed to Cameron again. I will not cry if Bigelow wins this as The Hurt Locker is a superbly directed masterpiece of a war film. However, I feel this should be Tarentino's year. Inglourious Basterds will be talked about way after The Hurt Locker is forgotten. Tarentino is the best director in the biz, and this, in my opinion, is his best direction.


Best Motion Picture:

Will Win: The Hurt Locker
Should Win: Inglourious Basterds

I believe The Hurt Locker will narrowly snatch this away from the grimy paws of Satan himself: James Cameron. That is all I have to say about Cameron. Inglourious Basterds in my humble opinion (hehe) is a superior film to The Hurt Locker, but again, I wouldn't shed tears if it won. It is after all a superb film and deserves it's awards.


Becky's Post

I love this time of year because I greatly enjoy speculating (and arguing with my fiance) about who is going to win which award. Of course, during these discussions, I rarely dare to mention James Cameron's name as Scott will then describe to me exactly why Cameron didn't deserve ANY of the awards he's EVER gotten. Lol, I kind of have to agree with him, but the discussion is a lot of fun, anyway. Sadly, though, Cameron will be mentioned, soon. Sorry, Scott.

Best Actor
Who Will Win: Jeff Bridges
Who Should Win: Jeff Bridges

I am in absolute agreement on this movie. While Crazy Heart was not the most original story on the market, Jeff Bridges’ performance in this movie was nothing short of genius. While Jeremy Renner’s performance in The Hurt Locker was brilliant, Bridges made us laugh and he made us cry, and he thoroughly deserves the award for Best Actor in a Leading Role.

Supporting Actor

Who Will Win: Matt Damon/Christof Waltz
Who Should Win: Christof Waltz

I’ve been hearing a lot about Matt Damon winning this award lately, and, with all due respect to you, Matt, I hope this isn’t so. Christof Waltz in Inglourious Basterds was utterly amazing. He played a murderous Nazi sociopath in the movie and still managed to somehow be endearing. His performance was this side of genius and I’m really rooting for him on this one.

Best Actress

Who Will Win: Gabourey Sibide
Who Should Win: Gabourey Sibide

Okay, readers, you may disregard this section of my post. I haven’t seen any of these movies. However, from what I’ve heard, and from the small snippets I’ve seen of the movie, Gabourey Sibide wholeheartedly deserves this award. I’m just enamored of this girl. She is an incredible actress, and I’m hoping that over the coming months, Hollywood won’t try to “fix” her as Hollywood has been known to do…

Best Supporting Actress

Who Will Win: Mo’Nique
Who Should Win: Mo’Nique!!!

Of all the categories in this award show, I fancy this one as being the hardest to decide. Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick were both wonderful in Up In the Air and I don’t think it’s really possible to decide which one gave a better performance in the movie. Maggie Gyllenhaal was pure gold in Crazy Heart, and I do believe that if Mo’Nique wasn’t nominated here, Maggie would be the clear winner. However, Mo’Nique as the absolutely AWFUL mother of precious is going to be a piece of cinematic history.

Best Animated Film

Who Will Win: Up
Who Should Win: Up/Coraline

Pixar has a tendency to take over this category, and I must admit, it is usually deserved. In the case of Up, again, I think it’s deserved. However, I couldn’t decide between Up and Coraline for this one. Up is a sweet, witty, and beautiful movie. The characters – including the dodo-like bird, Kevin – are all endearing and acted just perfectly! On the other hand, Coraline is an incredible animated film that doesn’t really resemble any other animated film ever made. Thoroughly creepy and entertaining, Coraline definitely deserves the award as well, and I have to say, I wouldn’t be disappointed if either one of these movies wins the award.

Best Original Screenplay

Who Will Win: Inglourious Basterds
Who Should Win: Inglourious Basterds

Killin’ Naatzees and Hitler turned into hamburger. Nuff said.

Best Director

Who Will Win: James Cameron
Who Should Win: Quentin Tarantino (Inglourious Basterds)/Katherine Bigelow (The Hurt Locker)/Lee Daniels (Precious)

Okay, this one is a crap shoot. I think James Cameron will win (sorry, Scott) merely because of the beauty of the movie and the fact that the movie was so expensive and took so long to make the Academy would feel remiss in not choosing it. I think that’s sad, but it’s perfectly possible. Quentin Tarantino, Katherine Bigelow, and Lee Daniels are definitely the deserving people in the group.

Best Motion Picture

Who Will Win: Avatar or The Hurt Locker
Who Should Win: Inglourious Basterds or The Hurt Locker

Okay, I am rooting for Inglourious Basterds all the way. This movie deserves it all the way, and I think Quentin Tarantino deserves it, too. However, if it comes down to The Hurt Locker and Avatar – as much as I LOVED Avatar – I hope The Hurt Locker wins just to teacher James Cameron a lesson. I don't know if anyone saw it, but recently, in an interview, Cameron hinted that if Katherine Bigelow won an award, it would be because she was a woman. Not because she's a fantastic director. I take offense to this! So, If Quentin Tarantino can't win this award, Gooooo Katherine!

Enjoy the Oscars, everyone. I know we will!!!!!

For this week's post, we are posting a review written by one of our followers, and good friends, Leila. Done on An Education, we are sure you will find the post very interesting! Thank you for following, and we encourage all of our readers and followers to send in reviews and ideas for future reviews!

An Education

Set in early 1960s, young and precocious 16 year- old Jenny dreams of life beyond her dreary high school doldrums - listening to French albums, smoking with her high schools girlfriends, dreaming of college life. She yearns for the glamorous life she feels like she know all about but has yet to experience. Enter not -so- young and dashing, David. Older than Jenny, he swoops and charms Jenny and her parents as if the answer to all of their prayers, and shows her the life she has been dreaming of: jazz clubs, extravagant trips, glamorous friends and anything she wants. But when David offers to take her away permanently and glide her into this perfect life, will she give her up her future to this exciting life?

Carey Mulligan is astonishing as young Jenny- she is the perfect combination of innocent youth wanting to grow up and an old world soul. You would think being a sheltered high school girl, she would not fit in to the high society that David and his friends have created for themselves but she quotes French, speaks of art and literature naturally, and becomes more charming that her not-so- worthy counterparts. As David (played with smooth subtlety by Peter Sarsgaard) is charming and caring, Jenny is the one who is truly captivating as she is smart, sassy and steals almost every scene she is in. As I said, almost-- the only competition she has in this arena is Rosamund Pike as the ditzy Helen, the girlfriend to David ‘s best friend Danny (Dominic Cooper). Helen is suave but brings comic relief, as she is the anti-Jenny. She detests anything college related and urges not Jenny to “not be one of those”. You don’t want to like her, but she is draws you in completely- as much as the movie itself does.

And as any love, the movie isn’t perfect. Granted England might have had a slightly different culture than America in the early 60s, but the idea that parents of a 16-year-old girl falling prey to the charms of a 35-year-old man courting their daughter seems a little far-fetched. And when David deepens their relationship, the parents seem thrilled that this young man is wanting to change their daughter’s future that easily and not put up a fight, especially when David might seem to good to be true.


The real question of the movie never really stems from the moral questions on whether this May-December romance is appropriate, but more of whether Jenny the feminist can survive the limited choices of an education vs. the need to be with a man who can provide for her, and would she become the brunette version of Helen, trophy girlfriend but co-dependent on the fun lifestyle? And that is what is interesting about this movie, because one could argue that after 40 years of the movie’s time period, and with slightly different circumstances, it’s still a relative question for women today.

GRADE: A

Midweek "Masterpiece: Four of the Apocalypse (1975)

Synopsis: Four petty criminals, 3 men and 1 woman, seek to cross the Utah terrain, and in the process are hounded by a sick, twisted individual who will kill them all if given half a chance.

Scott's Review

I guess you can tell by my choice for this week, I am a genre film fan. I have chosen a spaghetti western directed by Lucio Fulci. The best of both worlds, the old west, and bloody gore. Would Fulci's talents translate from gorehound cinema to the dusty plains of Utah? The answer is..... not in a good way. I adore Fulci's horror films, even the not-so-good ones. So, of course, I had high hopes for this film and had actually heard good things about it. Boy, was I disappointed.
Fabio Testi is actually quite good in his role as Stubby Preston, a petty, a**shole thief and criminal, who eventually shows he has a heart of gold (sigh). His, actually, is not the only good performance as Michael J. Pollard gives a performance good enough to make you root for him (as usual for Pollard). Though, there is a TERRIBLE performance for every good one, and the worst of these is Lynne Frederick as Bunny. She overacts so badly, I would swear she is mid-orgasm every time she spouts a word. Of course some of this is the fault of Fulci's misogynistic views, and the way he directed actresses, but it doesn't matter whose fault it is, this is one of the worst performances I have seen in the last few years.
The score itself was very good, but the folk songs do not fit. Fabio Frizzi has done much better work (Zombi 2, City of the Living Dead).
I was hoping Four of the Apocalypse would benefit from Fulci's direction, but unfortunately the opposite is true. This just comes off as a weird, unwestern-like Italian film where all the buildings look old and the people dress funny, but talk like us (yes, the language is too modern). This is one of Fulci's films that suffers from being a Fulci film. Horror works beautifully in the Fulci style. Westerns just don't stand up as well.

Scott's Final Grade: D

Scott's Final Recommendation:

For die-hard Fulci fans only. Spaghetti western fans will be sorely disappointed.

Edge of Darkness

Hello everyone! We had a great week of watching movies and we would like to share our reviews of one of those- The Mel Gibson comeback, Edge of Darkness. I hope you enjoy this review enough to come back next time!

Edge of Darkness

When his daughter is murdered, police detective, Thomas Craven, delves into investigating her murder. What he discovers is corporate lies, government corruption, and a minefield of secrets his daughter was keeping. With the help of his daughter's friends and the government agent sent to clean up the mess of the murder of Craven's daughter, Craven goes on the hunt.

Becky's Review

I love a good revenge movie. If a film has a stand up and cheer moment, I'm the kind of girl who likes to stand up and cheer. Edge of Darkness has some stand up and cheer moments...three or four of them in fact. That makes me happy.

I was delighted to see Mel back on the big screen in a leading role. With all due respect to Passion of the Christ (2004) and Apocalypto (2006), acting is where Gibson shines - though he seems to have an affection for roles of bereaved fathers. Let me just say that Gibson does Martin Campbell proud in Edge of Darkness. His performance is, if not masterful, then convincing.

The very first scene of the movie serves to make the audience nervous, and this nervousness stays with you throughout the first twenty minutes of the movie, despite Craven's (Gibson) domestic appearance. The murder of his daughter, coming on the heels of a mundane period in the movie, is absolutely vicious and traumatic. The scene will stick with me for a very long time to come. What follows, Craven's investigation and all of the people he comes into contact with, is a study in fine directing.

Martin Campbell does a wonderful job directing his star-studded cast. As Gibson moves among his colleagues and friends, there is an awkward, almost embarrassed air about the meetings. It is almost possible to hear what the characters are thinking as they come into contact with the bereaved Craven. There are awkard pauses and silences that only add to the tension of the movie, so that by the time the climax of the film rolls around, the audience is as tense as the characters.

All in all, this was a great film! I thoroughly enjoyed it, although, every time Danny Huston (Craven's daughter's boss) came onto the screen, I found myself comparing him to Ray Wise's Devil from the TV show Reaper. They dressed and even looked the same. Perhaps this was on purpose...

Becky's Final Grade: B+

Becky's Final Recommendation: Go see it. Definitely go see it.

Scott's Review

Martin Campbell (Casino Royale, The Legend of Zorro), directs this revenge thriller starring Mel Gibson, and I couldn't be happier to see Mel back on the big screen.
The film opens with a scene that wouldn't be out of place in a Hitchcock thriller and it works very well, asit gives the film a sense of foreboding. The next few scenes seem a little fast and choppy, and at the time I didn't know what they were going for. However, there is a massive SHOCK shortly after. It is at this time that we realize what we are watching.
Yes, we are watching a revenge thriller, but this one goes beyond the formula and works hard to create something smarter (sometimes is succeeds, sometimes it doesn't). By the time we get to Ray Winstone's character, we are in need of something to break the monotony, and that is exactly what Winstone gives us. He is the mysterious character we usually see in these types of films, and none have played it better. I can't say enough about his performance, and can't say much more without posting spoilers. This film has quite a few twists to keep the viewer entertained and guessing. It has politics, revenge, violence, and definitely deserves it R rating. There are quite a few shocking scenes of violence that I wasn't expecting, but to a horror buff such as myself, this serves as redeeming value.
Mel Gibson gives a great performance, and though I thought he could've done without the Boston accent, I didn't even notice it after the first 45 minutes. He is believable in his role as......well I won't say what he is.....spoilers and all that. I enjoyed this film and though I won't remember it in a year, I can't say much bad about it right now.

Scott's Final Grade: B

Scott'sFinal Recommendations:

See it as long as you don't mind a little blood and some fairly brutal scenes.

Mid-Week "Masterpiece"

Happy Tuesday everyone!
This is the first Mid-Week Masterpiece post, and as you will see, masterpiece is a relative term here. As I said in our last weekend post, I am a fan of genre films, and I plan to post a new genre film review every Tuesday. These are usually films Becky wouldn't be caught dead watching, or is too nice to hurt my feelings by "tearing it a new one" in a review. I am sure some of you will agree with her when it comes to these films and that is great. Just write in and tell me how wrong I am. I don't mind a bit.
In these Tuesday posts I will review anything that could be tagged as a genre film (within reason), and these include spaghetti westerns, Euro-horror, Euro-crime, Ozploitation, Blaxploitation, Cult horror, Giallo, among others. If you have any ideas and would like to see a review of a genre picture that you enjoy (or hate for that matter), just send a comment or an email and let me know.
Ok. Now on to the first Mid-Week Masterpiece review

The Inglorious Bastards (1978)

Let me start off by saying, "calm down." I know Inglourious Basterds has been reviewed hundreds of times by hundreds of critics, but this is the 1978 Enzo Castellari Italian action film by sort of the same name (compare the spelling). However, I will not pit these two film against each other as they are two completely different movies and though they have a few things in common, this is the last time I will mention Tarentino's masterpiece in this review.
A short synopsis of this film is: A group of American soldiers are being transported to a German military prison, but in the process are attacked by a German militia and the prisoners escape. The rest of the film shows the prisoner trying to reach neutral Switzerland until they can be rescued and transported back to the US.
Most of this film is action-packed, and the action is done very well. Though obviously choreographed, I was drawn into these action scenes, despite the cartoonish and bloodless sequences, or maybe because of it. This is not your typical run-of-the-mill 1970s action film, and what I like most about this film is that it knows what it is. It is a fun action romp with a simple story and this gives time for the characters to bring a dimension to the film that many action pictures are lacking, pure unadulterated fun. This is the first time I have seen a killer slingshot and a polearm used in a modern action movie, and it works!
I wont give much more away but definitely wanna say, Fred Williamson was AWESOME in this movie. He is better known in his blaxploitation roles, but he is a standout in this film. He provides good comic relief and quite an intimidating presence. Some of the racially motivated humor can be a bit much, but works here.

Scott's Final Score: A-

Scott's Final Recommendation:

If you are an action fan, this is a must-see. Go rent it now, but don't take it too seriously.

Werewolves Ate Michael Clayton

For our weekend post, we decided on Tony Gilroy's 2007 crime drama, Michael Clayton and the 2002 cult horror film directed by Neil Marshall, Dog Soldiers.

Michael Clayton

Michael Clayton (played by George Clooney) is a clean-up man for a large law firm. He is sent to clean up the dirtier cases presented to his employers, such as hit and run cases that involve prominent politicians. An old friend has been working a very large case and has had some sort of mental breakdown, and Clayton is sent in to clean up the mess. His friend, Arthur Edens (played by Tom Wilkinson), has become obsessed with the primary plaintiff in the case he's working, and as Clayton tries to fix the problem he becomes embroiled in the case. Murder, madness, and mayhem ensues.

Scott's Review

With Michael Clayton and all the fanfare surrounding it, I went in expecting a well-acted, well-directed, and well-written film. Does it live up to the hype? Well, the answer is mosly "yes."

The film opens with a thought-provoking - if not almost insane - tirade from Tom Wilkinson in voice over. This narration leads into one of the best scenes in the film which I will not spoil, but I will say it was a major surprise and set the tone for the rest of the film.

Michael Clayton is rather deliberately paced, but the acting was so engrossing that the pacing wasn't off-putting at all. Tony Gilroy's script pops with intelligent dialogue and is quite reminiscent of a Jason Reitman script with Steven Soderbergh direction. I also mention Reitman because Clooney's performance reminded me a lot of his work in Up In the Air (2009), which was a more subdued role for George Clooney.

By the time Tom Wilkinson hits the screen, the Michael Clayton character has been fairly well-established, so this allows Wilkinson to steal the show without overshadowing Clooney's character. This film was nominated for three acting Oscars for Clooney, Wilkinson, and Tilda Swinton. In my opinion, Wilkinson was more deserving of an Oscar win than Swinton. His rantings throughout the movie were engaging and believable, and while he was on-screen, I had thoughts of Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975).

Swinton's character, Karen Crowder, is the main antagonist in this film, and frankly, at first, I was quite underwhelmed by her performance. Though I am still skeptical of the Oscar win, the more I ponder this performance, the more I warm up to it. I now see flashes of brilliance in this performance through her facial expressions and the total transformation versus any other performance she has done.

I realize I am takling more about the performances than the story and plot of Michael Clayton, but this film is all about the performances. Even a scene of violence about two thirds of the way through the movie is very well-shot and disturbing. It is all due to the performance of the antagonist.

On the down-side, some of the acting is a bit over the top by a few of the bit players. But, it never took me out of the film.

My final grade for Michael Clayton: A-

My final recommendation: Anyone who is not put off by a slower moving story should watch this film.

Becky's Review

I'm not a fan of crime drama. Never really have been. That being said, I expected Michael Clayton to be somewhat boring to my tastes, but well-acted, well-directed, and well-shot. Everyone I know who has seen it has sung its praises and it got great reviews, so, at the very least, I was hoping for some entertainment. I was somewhat satisfied.

The opening Voice Over delivered by Tom Wilkinson was very promising. It drew me into the movie, and I was fully expecting the rest of the movie to be just as explosive as Wilkinson's lines. No, this was not to be. Michael Clayton is a study in understatement. Though the subject matter is inflammatory, the story seemed almost sedate in several places. Even as Clayton is being yelled at by a panicked client, I could almost sense the Ambien in his pocket. He didn't seem to show very much emotion. The same can be said of Karen Crowder. Her character is very understated, though this is actually a good thing for her character.

Swinton plays the antagonist in Michael Clayton, and the unassuming nature of her character makes her actions seem all the more attrocious. The only problem is, given the sedate nature of Swinton's and Clooney's characters, Wilkinson's character - a manic depressive lawyer who has gone over the deep end - seems all the more outrageous, and somewhat out of place. On the bright side, however, Wilkinson provides the comedy relief that keeps the movie moving.

Michael Clayton has been described as deliberately paced on several occasions. I have to agree, though I'd be more inclined to call it slow. The story is very convoluted for the first half, but if one can persevere through the first 45 minutes of the story, one will be rewarded by a very interesting second half of the story, and a stand-up-and-cheer ending.

So far, I've only discussed the negative aspects of this film. However, there are gems aplenty in Michael Clayton. Often I found myself dazzled by the cinematography. Clayton's surroundings seem to be affected by his moods. At the start of the movie, when Clayton has sort of hit rock bottom, the world around him is dark, almost dirty. It becomes brighter and cleaner when the plot shifts to four days in the past. Later, in keeping with the understated theme of the movie, we are treated - if you will pardon the use of this word - to a very well-executed murder scene. It is short, spartan, and absolutely the most cold-blooded murder scene I've ever watched. An amazingly well-done part. Although the movie does have its hang-ups, it also has enough movie magic to make it a pretty good watch.

My final grade: B

My final recommendation: IF you are a fan of crime dramas and if you can persever past the first 40 minutes, you'll enjoy this movie.

Dog Soldiers

A routine military training exercise goes horribly awry when a group of British soldiers discover the remains of the special forces troupe they were supposed to be training with. Suddenly, the soldiers find themselves being chased through the woods by an unknown creature. They are rescued by a young woman who drives them out of the woods to a secluded and seemingly-empty old house where they try to make a stand against what they are gradually coming to realize are werewolves. As the night moves on, internal strife and betrayal threatens to destroy them all before the creatures have a chance to do so.

Scott's Review

I was very excited about finally watching Dog Soldiers because of the great reviews and all the hype surrounding it by genre fans (which I am one of), but it always for one reason or another slipped by me. So, the question was, "would I be as enthusiastic when the film was over?" The anwer is, "No."

This film started with a scene that was as campy as anything I have seen in the last five years. This disappointed me because it wasn't the fun kind of campy, but within 15 minutes, the film redeemed itself with some very good acting by the British cast. It is not a spoiler to tell you that a scene with soldiers around a campfire listening to old war stories was very well-done. The story was engrossing and brought me right back into the film.

Only to let me down 5 minutes later.

Some of the violent scenes close to the beginning of the movie are poorly shot and though the film realizes it is a B film, it doesn't alway make the right choices for special effects. Dog Soldiers definitely gains a few points with me by using practical special effects and very little CGI, but the obvious use of sausages as human entrails made me laugh instead of cringe. Maybe this was the plan all along, but it didn't quite work for me.

The scene about 40 to 45 minutes in of vehicle mutilation is almost as campy as the opening scene. This is no fault of the actors, as most of the acting in this film is very well-done, and the director seems to be very proficient at directing actors.

The first reveal which includes the revelation that the soldiers are being chased by werewolves is pretty clunky and it is almost laughable that they didn't already know, and despite the proficient acting, this scene made me dislike the characters and it never brought me back in. The cliches started with this scene and just kept coming. For example, a gun does you no good if you're going to stand with you back to an open window...idiot. Even worse than these cliches, the werewolves are total wusses and are only strong when it is convenient to the scene, but I kept trying to tell myself, "At least the make-up is practical."

Even though I have discussed mostly the negative aspects of this film, it has three major things going for it: The acting, the writing, and the last 15 minutes. Although the final reveal did not surprise me, everything after that was a blast. This film realized it was low budget and made some good choices, so I can't consider a movie with practical special effects, pretty good writing, really good acting, and a better than average ending a total loss.

My final grade for Dog Soldiers: C

My final recommendation: Fans of genre films should see this one.

Becky's Review

I have to admit, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. There were bits that were campy, there were bits that were down-right silly. However, there were also moments that were well-done and well-acted. There were cringe worthy moments, and there were laugh-out-loud moments, and I have to tell you, I learned a whole LOT about British vernacular. The opening scene of the movie, though a bit campy, was imperative to the plot, so I was able to just shrug it off. And I was quite surprised by the werewolves. They were actually a lot of fun (until later on in the movie, but we'll get to that later).

The first twenty minutes of the movie are devoted to allowing us as the audience get to know the British soldiers. The camaraderie between the men is very believable and allows us to become attached to them. Later, after the soldiers have discovered the decimated camp of their training mates and are running through the woods away from the "creatures," the first chink in the movie's armor appears. The music in the movie is great and very engaging. However, it is somewhat overly ambitious and not exactly earned. They are terrified, running through the woods, and the music in the background sounds like music that should be play during the climax of the movie, which doesn't occur until later. Normally, I'm not so picky that I would pick on the music so early in the story, but it made the whole scene seem off kilter.

Dog Soldiers is very well-paced and the story is great. The acting is better than average and the direction is just as good. However, somewhere in all that talent, something went amok. These men have been rescued and are holed up in an isolated farm house. The family that usually lives there is absent, and the men have boarded up the windows. The creatures, what they are gradually beginning to learn are werewolves, are trying to beat in the doors and are breaking through the windows. The soldiers have worked out for themselves that all they need to do is survive until morning when the full moon is gone. So, out of this information, three problems arise. Number 1. The moon they show is most definitely not even close to full. The quest is, did they do this on purpose? If not, they certainly never addressed it. Number 2. What kind of dimwit is going to stand with his back three inches in front of the window while he loads his gun. This was a very unbelievable part, and it happens not once, but twice! and Number 3. If you had discovered that all you needed to do to get out of the mess you were in was wait until the sun came up, would you still try to escape? Hell, no! At least I wouldn't. I'd be finding the deepest, darkest hole I could find and hiding there until the dawn! NOT trying to hotwire the nearest car and trying to get out with a very shaky escape plan.

I suppose every horror flick has its problems. The problems in Dog Soldiers were not enough to ruin the story however. Afterall, the world is just a better place when someone breaks out the Claymore! I thought it was a truly enjoyable Werewolf flick!

My final grade: B-

My final recommendation: If you're a fan of horror, action, or the werewolf genre, watch it.

I want to thank everyone who have become followers of Georgia Videophiles and welcome all of you. To thank you, we are opening up the comment section of the blog to suggestions for reviews. One weekend out of each month, we will take at random two of the films suggested in this manner and have a reader appreciation post by reviewing these films for you and we will welcome your review of these films, as well. However, you do not need to wait until this time to send us your reviews, lists, or comments. We're always happy to hear from you and we will answer every comment either in the comment section or if you comment to us by e-mail, we promise to return your e-mail. We will have another post either Tuesday or Wednesday which will be a more obscure genre film. Thank you for reading!

Our Top Ten of 2009

Well, it is a new year and we kind of hate to see 2009 go. As Becky and I were compiling our list of movies for our top ten lists, we realized 2009 was the best year for films that we can remember. The Hollywood blockbusters had a few surprise gems, the smaller studios and indie filmmakers had an excellent year as well. 2009 was my favorite year for horror films yet (as you will see in my top ten as well as the honorable mentions). Here are our lists, and we welcome feedback, positive or negative (as long as it is constructive). These lists will give you an idea of the difference in mine and Becky's tastes, and help you to see what you are getting yourself into

by following our blog :)

Scott's Top 10 2009

1. Inglourious Basterds

2. The Hurt Locker

3. Let the Right One In

4. Up in the Air

5. Antichrist

6. Star Trek

7. Zombieland

8. District 9

9. Trick R Treat

10. The House of the Devil

Honorable Mention

Drag Me To Hell

Moon

The Hangover

Up

Sherlock Holmes

Watchmen

Precious

Gomorrah

Taken

Becky's Top Ten 2009

Avatar

Trick R Treat

Star Trek

Sherlock Holmes

Inglourious Basterds

The Hangover

Zombieland

Let the Right One In

Drag Me to Hell

A Christmas Carol

Honorable Mention

Taken

Up

District 9

Orphan

Coraline

Monsters Vs Aliens

Harry Potter and the Half - Blood Prince

Well there they are! We will do other top ten lists, so if anyone has a suggestion, please feel free to send an email.

Next time we will pick a film to talk about and give a starred review. If you would like us to review your favorite film, just let us know. However, expect us to be honest and pull no punches.

Thank you for reading our first blog post and please come back for the next one!

I promise it will be longer.