Cool title, but what does it mean? Salvation for the terminator? No, that wouldn’t make sense. Salvation for the resistance? No, that didn’t happen. Oh well, just another movie title that couldn’t live up to its name, like “As Good As It Gets” or “The Never Ending Story”.

The big question is whether this movie does justice to the Terminator franchise. Despite director McG, who’s name sounds like a Happy Meal and the two writers (John D. Brancato & Michael Ferris) who have churned out garbage like "The Unborn" and "Catwoman", T4 was decent; I give the film a B+.

People seem upset about two things. First that director Joseph McGinty Nichol
uses the name McG, and second that the rating was PG-13.  I could care less about names, but I have to agree with the crowd on this one. You have a McName, so McF’n use it; you’re a director not a wannabe rapper flippin paddies at the golden arches.  With regard to the second criticism, again, I have to concur.  Just because the Dark Knight made a ga-zillion dollars by getting guardian free kids to the theatre doesn’t mean it’s going to work for you. Lets see some skull crushing bloody battles, it’s called Terminator because these things kill.

The story begins with Marcus (Sam Worthington, who delivers an excellent performance) on the day of his execution in 2003, apparently the death of some police officers and his brother landed him a death sentence and condemned conscience.  Serena (Helena Bonham Carter) desperately convinces Marcus to sign his body over to Cyberdyne Systems (biosciences division); apparently it’s difficult to find healthy donors who know they are about to die; Serena wants to take advantage of the opportunity. 

Following the execution, the story jumps to the year 2018 where John Connor (Christian Bale) and team investigates an underground Skynet facility, apparently abandoned.  Here, we see Marcus laid out on a laboratory table with dozens of apparent humans behind bars. Despite first assumptions, we find that Connor is not leading the mission and against his better judgment to further review Skynets operations within that facility, he follows orders to investigate the surface teams apparent failure to communicate. Obviously the team was killed as was everyone John left in the underground facility (Connor is the only survivor of the mission).

Despite the somewhat typical pattern of this opening sequence, the flow is captured nicely with no ridiculous foreboding camera angles or music to ruin the moment.  Connor narrowly escapes what appears to be a nuclear explosion from the underground facility.  Long after Connor is retrieved, Marcus who is apparently impervious to nuclear explosions, emerges from the pit of rubble. This is Marcus’s first consciousness since his execution in 2003.  After coming into contact with his first terminator, Marcus is somewhat saved by the teenager Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin, an emerging talent).
Reese is Skynet’s number one assassination target (John Connor being number 2).
As you might recall, Kyle Reese is the soldier John Connor (sometime in the future) sends back to protect his mother Sarah Conner in T1. Reese subsequently fathers John.

Since this little paradox was established back in 1984, I can’t be too harsh;  besides, it could be explained by looking at space time as an infinite possibility of everything that has ever or will ever happen. The problem with T4, is that somehow (in 2018) Skynet is already aware that John Connor will become the leader of the resistance and eventually defeat Skynet.  The problem isn’t that Skynet already knows this information, after all, records from Sarah Connor’s stay in the loony bin obviously turned John into some sort of prophet among the resistance and it’s not unreasonable to assume that info from the first three terminators didn’t survive. 
The problem is in the fundamentals of the concept.  If space time is laid out in such a fashion where one person exists in the past only because of that very persons actions in the future, then the story line presupposes either an exact unchangeable sequence of events (Fate) or a tangling of alternate possible universes, both of which seem to suggest a certain futility to the entire war.

One point I find particularly absurd, is that when Skynet discovers that they have captured Kyle Reese they do not immediately kill him. It seems they use Kyle as bate to lore John Connor to Skynet headquarters, but in actuality if Skynet terminated Reese, then John Connor would cease to exist; no need to trap him.

Anyhow, here we are: Marcus making friends with Kyle and his little mute sidekick Star (newcomer Jada Grace).  By the way, it was nice that they didn’t have the mute child say something at the very end, that card has been played far too many times. When Marcus, Kyle and Star start off towards the resistance they meet some hostility from other human survivors, but the interaction is short lived because somehow an 80 foot terminating machine sneaks up on everyone. The machine accomplishes its mission and captures Kyle and Star, but the increased activity in an otherwise neutral zone grabs the attention of the resistance who is already scouting the increased commotion created by the trio when they fled LA.

One of the nice concepts in this film, is that the
resistance isn’t unrealistically advanced, they use common military and defense tools such as submarines and fighter jets. After all, 2018 is less than a decade away.  This might seem like a strange contrast when you see the advanced robotics of Skynet, but the writers were working with a timeline established back in 1984.

Blair Williams (Moon Bloodgood), an ejected fighter pilot, leads Marcus to Connor at the resistance base. When a group of scavengers attacks Blair, bad boy Marcus steps in to win the admiration of the lovely maiden.  The final strides to the base are outfitted with magnetic mines. The explosives are meant to defend against machines, but a mine sticks to Marcus and blows. This is where we discover that Marcus is actually a machine with a human heart and brain. He thinks he’s human, but his endoskeleton is metal and his brain contains a microchip. The special effects here are good, but the placement is lame.  The bomb stuck to his leg, yet intermittent area’s of flesh around his body are blown clear, including the side of his face opposite to where the bomb exploded.  Also, any flesh that was recently ripped from the metal would be jagged and loose, but this is one of those cases where unrealistic actually looks more realistic.

The heart of the movie (pun intended) is with Marcus who really steals the show. The movie is more about a man coming to grips with who (and what) he is, what he did in his past, and whether he can find redemption. Christian Bale does an excellent job, but there really isn’t much to development.

The resistance makes its moves based on John Connor rather than the appropriate chain of command. When John urges the resistance to stand down so that he may conduct an extraction mission, the independent pockets of resistance do as he wishes, despite the substance lacking speech that was neither inspiring nor insightful.  This blind disobedience shows Johns influence as a respected commander, it also shows the lack of talent between the two script writers.

Connor, like Blair puts faith in Marcus, yet Skynet built Marcus as the ultimate infiltration unit and has been observing everything through his eyes.here is where the logic of the script really breaks down:
First off, Skynet reconstructs Marcus’s human appearance as if it matters to anyone but the CGI team.  Basically, lets save some cash by eliminating the need for more CGI-truly weak.  What makes the story worse, is that Skynet feels compelled to to explain to Marcus how it masterminded such a duplicitous plan and how it intends to kill Connor and crush the resistance.  Skynet is a machine!  It doesn’t have human faults, it doesn’t need to satisfy an ego.  There is no reason Skynet would explain this, especially through conversation.  Totally lame.

The writers were faced with the tough challenge of making the Terminator series more logical for today’s audience.  They didn’t touch the issue of Skynet being developed by the remnants of the first terminator or the other time issue of Johns father (except by restating the conundrum via tapes from T2); basically telling the audience to not think about it.  

Despite these and a few other problems, there was a lot of good that came out of T4.  For example, the future wasn’t just some battlefield of human skulls.  There is actually some open land, after all it’s still planet Earth and only nine years from now. 
It was also nice to see new terminators and the progress of various terminator machines, especially Schwarzenegger’s T-800 (played by Ronald Kickinger).  Through some really good makeup and computer enhancements Kickinger actually looks like Arnie.
If only they ended on less of a clich

For those that have read Dan Browns first two Robert Langdon adventures know that Angels and Demons was written prior to The De Vinci Code.  However, in order to capitalize on the second books massive sales and controversy, director Ron Howard made Angels and Demons the second installation in the saga.

The chronological order really makes no difference and takes nothing away from either movie. If you are a fan of the first films adaptation of the novel, you might be a bit disappointed in Angels and Demons. The trailers are boasting this as bigger and better than The D.V.C., but in reality it’s not even close. The plot deviates drastically from the novel which would be fine if the changes made any sense, but they don’t and subsequently ruin the film.

If you enjoyed the National Treasure movies, you might have a good time at Angels and Demons.

*Read on for a breakdown, the good, the bad and the ugly…spoilers await.

Some people prefer the Angels and Demons novel to the De Vinci Code, despite the fact that it wasn’t as well written, engaging, suspenseful, factual, descriptive, or controversial; hence it only became popular as a consequence of the latter book; the movie unfortunately follows suit. With the cumulative intelligence of the U.S. populous, it’s no wonder Hollywood panders to the non-thinkers. It’s practically the American dream, "create something worthy of merit that will be praised by the movers and shakers, the critics and thinkers, then pump out whatever ("sell out"), for the other side of the IQ line, the side that gravity deludes from the dream of reaching the sky.

The Good (what’s the antimatter with this movie?)

The movie is entertaining, it just isn’t very logical. Despite some of the major and minor problems, there are some highlights and upgrades from both the book and the first film. For example, Tom Hanks hair, this little upgrade made the movie about 50% more watchable.  The acting is also terrific!

A book upgrade that I practically liked was the team of people at CERN that created the antimatter… THANK YOU! For God’s sake Dan, if two people were able to create antimatter, they would never be able to run a 4 mile long particle accelerator by themselves, especially with no one else knowing, nor is it realistic that they also invented and fabricated the magnetic field chamber (penning trap) to hold their discovery/invention; not to mention they were a father daughter team- yeah right.

Even though the movie got the CERN team thing fixed, I could have done without the ridiculous scientific references constructed for the layperson. That shit drives me crazy. Never would there be a crude computer graphic showing particles colliding while a monotonous female computer voice calls out "reaching 99% the speed of light". Let the non scientific people live in their own world where stuff is amazing for the sheer fact that they don’t understand how it works… that’s what it comes down to anyway.

The overall flow of the film was very fast paced; a countdown until disaster. To avoid any impediment on that theme, dirctor Ron Howard did away with a great deal of the novels subplots and minor mysteries, which didn’t matter much anyhow. For example: the assassin’s lust for woman, the famed Illuminati Diamond, Vittoria’s revenge and Leonardo Vetra’s religious beliefs.

The idea of Science and Religion pursuing the same answers, working together and not against one another was very direct in the movie, there was no need for Leonardo Vetra to be both a priest and one of the most gifted scientific minds on the planet, his omission (especially as Vittoria’s foster father) was a much more reasonable direction for the story line. On a side note, the this subtlety severed the parallel between both Vetra and the Pontiff’s murder as a result of mixing religion and science. Vetra’s death as a result of his daughters push to advance in the name of science and the Popes death at the hand of his son for the opposite. Dan Brown was definitely making a point, that too far in any direction can be devastating, but there is also a clear message in his writing that the Catholic Church (weather ultimately good or bad) is extremely dubious at best.

Is the title Angles and Demons a reference to the Catholic Church and the Illuminati? And if so, the Illuminati (the enlightened ones) use Angels to guide their path, what does that say about the Catholic Church?

In an effort to maintain the flow of the movie and prevent down time, lines from the book were shifted between characters in the film. For example: the Camerlengo (Ewan McGregor who is perfect for this role by the way) asks Langdon  bout his belief in God and Langdon gives the answer that Vittoria (Ayelet Zurer) gives Langdon in the book when he asks the very same question. Changes like these help to maintain some of Dan Brown’s original work, while simultaneously moving along the plot with a more logical and character accurate presentation; though sometimes the lines seem to be injected into the dialog.

Other small yet logical adaptations were made for the movie: Langdon being accompanied to the Vatican achieves, not falling out of the helicopter without a parachute and having Commander Richter (Stellan Skarsgård) and not Maximilian Kohler provide the final evidence against the Camerlengo.
I also liked how Galileo’s Diagramma (a fictional work) was not destroyed, but rather given to Robert for his literary work. This was a much better gift than the Illuminati Diamond which didn’t make as much of an impact in the book as it should have.

The overall path of Illumination was put together well, both by Dan Brown in the Novel and the footage and visuals in the movie. The incorporation of the four elements together with the sculptures and ways in which the cardinals were killed really made the movie.

It didn’t make a lot of sense that Robert and Vittoria were the only two people the assassin refrained from trying to kill.  Although, the elimination of the kidnapp
ing scene was a good move; the movie didn’t need any more drama. This alteration also cut the first major traumatic bonding experience between Robert and Vittoria (the second being Roberts assumed death in the helicopter).

In itself, this was a bit of a welcomed changed from the good guy hero always landing the girl. Of course not getting the girl isn’t as happy of an ending and subsequently caused one of my favorite lines from the book to be cut: 

Vittoria: "I plan to prove neutrinos have mass."
Robert: "Neutrinos have mass?… I didn’t even know they were Catholic!"

The Bad: (what’s the matter with this movie?)

As refreshing as it was to not follow the same Hollywood theme where the girl and guy fall in love in 2 hours, the void between Robert Langdon and Vittoria Vetra left a void in the antagonist/hero persona. Langdon no longer fit the brainiac/historian/ladies-man image that Hollywood needed to fill the aging Indiana Jones.

It was disappointing that Langdon and Vetra seemed educated on just about every subject; it’s exhausting and unrealistic. If they both new so much and were so quick to pick everything up, why didn’t Langdon think of the Castle of Angels or even the bridge of angels, an obvious masterpiece of Bernini’s that wouldn’t have been forgotten until the very end. At least in the book the pair were more ignorant to the churches and sculptures of Rome, they had a good amount of help on the path of Illumination: The devils hole was already opened in the book, a miscellaneous guard revealed information concerning the sculpture for Air, the docent at the Pantheon informed them both about Bernini’s chapel, the earthly tomb (the movie made an attempt to show this, but Langdon knew exactly what to inquire about, reasoning it out within seconds), and the Swiss Guard recommended looking at the Vatican assets for Bernini’s various works.

The path of Illumination didn’t seem as difficult as it should have, there was a blaring obelisk at each church.  Could it have been any more obvious especially  four hundred years ago when the city wasn’t as large?

The movie mentioned how the Camerlengo found the designs for the brands in the Vatican Achieves. If so, it would be extremely unrealistic that he then found the path of Illumination, set up a complex plot involving the theft of antimatter from a top level security center and then had each brand pattern fabricated into steel branding wands without drawing any suspicions. The book however, did explain that the brands along with the path of illumination and deception of Bernini were all in the Papal Vault (vault that only the Pope can view).

It was a bit disappointing that the assassin wasn’t Arabic, he may have been Muslim, but there was no way of knowing. Obviously, this was done to quell any complaints regarding racial profiling but the fact is that revenge for the slaughter of Muslims during the crusades worked well in the story line, it didn’t need to be replaced by some dorky looking wimp assassin.

Unlike the book, the movie didn’t portray the church as a dying fad. It would have been nice to hear some talk of what the annihilation of St. Peters Basilica and Vatican City would mean for the Catholic Religion;  The only reference in the movie was the complete opposite to that in the book. Cardinal Strauss (Armin Mueller-Stahl- an excellent actor who’s cognate in the book was Cardinal Mortati) made reference to the church being more than brick but the book goes on to debunk that claim by declaring that the Catholic Church holds most all its equity inside the walls of the Vatican (about 48.5 billion dollars) and if bankrupt the priests could not afford to work. It talks about the church’s attendance at an all time low, down 46% in the past decade and how the Catholic Church spent $183 million in one year to support struggling dioceses.  The conclusion was how these factors would surely mark the end of Catholic Days.

In the novel, the Illuminati influence seemed more powerful, everything was laid out perfectly. Everything was more calculated and impressive. The antimatter for example was stolen at just the correct time (not twenty seconds after they created it); the preferiti seemed to be kidnapped from plain site and the assassin’s knowledge and workings of the Vatican seemed impossible. The lesser presence of the Illuminati in the movie was a double edge sword, though it made more logical sense, it was far less captivating.

The Ugly: (what the hell is so sinful about this movie?)

Probably one of the worst blunders with this film was that there was no media presence covering the ordeal. This defeated the entire purpose of the Illuminati façade. If the Camerlengo wasn’t going to use the media to show the world the power of God overcoming the forces of evil, why would he go through such trouble to implicate the Illuminate? Without the world watching, Camerlengo Carlo Ventresca would have no reason to blame science; in fact he could have just killed the Pope and left it at that. 

Ventresca would also have no reason to publicly and brutally kill his innocent brothers of the cloth; he would have no reason to brand himself if he wasn’t going to show the world. The whole plan was to tie Science and Satan together, resurrect the ancient fear then crush it through the power of God; thus making people believe in miracles once again. If the only purpose was to prevent the Cardinals from electing a Pope that would follow in the former Pontiffs footsteps, Ron Howard choose a truly week motive.  But either way, he made a gross mistake.

It really made absolutely no sense what-so-ever to go through the entire charade, putting Vatican City and his beloved church (for which he committed these heinous crimes in the first place) in dangerous peril on the brink of annihilation by the hands of Science’s antimatter, if the only people to witness the whole thing were a bunch of old cardinals and the Swiss Guard; all of which were dedicated to the church to begin with. This brings up another good question. Would someone that devote kill all those priests and the Pope to make his point about science? The book portrayed the Camerlengo as more mentally disturbed, a child raised by religion without a father who watched his mother get blown apart by a bomb. The movie failed to recogn
ize the Pope as Carlo Ventresca’s biological father. This was a much stronger impetuous for the Camerlengo to kill the Pope because all he knew in the book was that the Pope fathered a child, an enormous sin for a priest let alone the supreme pontiff, a sin the Camerlengo could not allow to go unpunished.

Obviously without the assassin contacting the media, the whole idea behind this story seemed wasted at best. If Ron Howard wanted to take the story in such a different direction, I think he should have actually made the Illuminati a real entity. At the end, Camerlengo Ventresca could have been one of the Illuminati members, he could have been appointed Pope before Langdon and Vetra could share the truth, thus making the Illuminati infiltration ultimately complete.  Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory and this would have left the audience wondering.

The book reinvented the crucifixion and the resurrection of Christ, a clever interwoven idea that was almost completely lost to the movie. The subtle message was that: what looked like a miracle, like divine intervention, was actually a sham; and behind that sham was a group of men in the Vatican who share the secret.

The De Vinci Code had the same bold message, but that one wasn’t lost in translation.

One other big blunder that didn’t come together well, was that the Vatican supposedly requested the services of Robert Langdon. The book made much more sense, as it was CERN that requested Langdon’s services and had him quickly sent to the Vatican with Vittoria. The Vatican would have absolutely no reason to call in Langdon to decipher something they already knew much about (the Illuminati). They especially wouldn’t have him come so quickly, before they even knew the circumstances of the antimatter or the missing preferiti.

Further, in the movie, it was Inspector Olivetti (Pierfrancesco Favino) that called in Langdon, whereas in the book, Olivetti wanted nothing to do with either Langdon or Vetra’s antimatter. The film didn’t show much of an argument about the power of the antimatter and the discussion seemed rushed, not natural…either it wasn’t well written in the movie script or more likely, it wasn’t edited very well.

A few other things that really bothered me were the shootings of both Father Simeon (Cosimo Fuso) and Commander Richter (Maximilian Kohler in the book) in the Popes private study. The Swiss Guard would never shoot a man in this room on impulse, let alone two men. And who killed the assassin? In the book it was Langdon, but in the movie he died in a car bomb…who rigged that? Did the Camerlengo do it himself or employee another assassin?

What the hell was that fifth brand all about? Obviously, they changed it because the Illuminati Diamond was stupid, and the fifth brand represented the Camerlengo’s own sacrifice or crucifixion (which like St. Peter’s wasn’t as worthy or as great as Jesus’ sacrifice). This did slightly represent the crucifixion and resurrection, but again with no media, the world didn’t’ really know what was going on.

Oh, and why did Cardinal Baggia live… what the F?

J.J. Abrams’ new "Star Trek" coming out late this evening, takes a cue (as did Gavin Hood with X-Men origins) from Chris Nolan and George Lucas who presented their renditions of Batman and Star Wars "origins" respectively.  Star Trek falls somewhere between Nolan’s masterfully executed Batman Begins and the complete botch job of Lucas’s three prequels. 
Writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman don’t exactly present the back log of the original Star Trek, but rather an alternate reality spawned by the disruption of space time.  The alternate reality conveniently allows the plot to disregard any previous movie or television references to any crew members past (since one mistake would be sacrilege to a Trekkie); it also leaves the door open for any future discrepancies.

Apparently the disruption in space time created an alternate universe where Star Trek plots make sense, too bad it didn’t do anything for a Trekkies ability to land a date for the movie.

*Just for Trekkies, the DVD uncut version will feature 12 hours of extra footage

NOT A TREKKIE?

If you’re not a Trekkie, you’ll probably find the movie exciting and entertaining with typical Hollywood theme’s where the chip on the shoulder antagonist overcomes unfathomable odds to take his rightful seat and deliver comeuppance to his father’s executor.  The familiar bad guy unmercifully kills at will, looks like tattooed afterbirth from the underworld and resides in a space ship that could have grown from a thorn bush in hell; oh and the black ominous spacecraft is obviously a billion times larger than the bright shinny U.S.S. Enterprise, we wouldn’t want to make it too easy for the good guys.

Did we mention that the bad guys name is Nero (Eric Bana, who did a great job), because what right-minded Romulan mother wouldn’t name her baby after a self-indulgent murdering emperor who lived on a completely different planet 22 centuries prior?  I’m surprised they didn’t name him Captain Hitler, after all, he did try to exterminate an entire race of people.     

Since there’s so much jammed into this film, there’s really no down time, but you battle through more exposition than bad guys.  The few confrontations you do see are generally mild altercations between "good guys" or ridiculous hand-to-hand combat scenes after all characters accidentally drop their guns.  The humor is either tacky or intended for the Trekkies (which is basically the same thing). 

FOR THE TREKKIES:
 
I knew you’d find this site. 
Well, you’ve probably already seen the movie three times considering this review was posted within the 48 hour time frame that you waited in line for the first tickets to be sold.  But just incase you’re reading the review from your iphone while you wait outside the theater, lets start by saying that you can safely revel in the delightful adventures of your young favorite crew without it impeding on your own deductions and extrapolations regarding their pasts, as everything you watch in this film is only an alternate reality to what occurred in your cataloged collection. 

Besides the film having to rush through the characters history’s in order to get everyone in place on the Enterprise, the plot had to tie in the death of Kirk’s father (the beginning of the alternate universe) with the same conflict that bands the young Star Trek crew together, there was hardly time to develop this plot, let alone a more probable sequence of events, so why not just throw in the birth of Kirk (which took about 5 seconds), his name and the typical failure of auto pilot, all at the same time.  I guess anything is possible in the future, including bad boy James T. Kirk going from country hick rebel to Captain of the most advanced Space Ship in history within three years. 

With that said, you might be pleased at how well Chris Pine captures the brash young James T. Kirk or how well Karl Urban or Simon Pegg portray Leonard McCoy and Scotty with a perpetual worrisome frustration and high energy excitement respectively.  These young actors are taking science-fiction icons from an error when acting was as stiff and rehearsed as a third grade play and melding them into todays entertainment market.  With classic’s like "Damn it Jim, I’m a doctor not a physicist" and "I’m giving it all she’s got Captain", Urban and Pegg do a decent job of making the classic line’s their own.  You’ll also find injected fun just for you, such as the miscellaneous guy in red taking the fall or Nyota (Zoe Saldana)finally taking her clothes off.

If you’re counting on FX, then you might be a bit disappointed; it wasn’t completely over the top.  The scenes that were done were beautiful, not all physically accurate (such as the collapse of a planet into a black hole from the center would not start from the outside nor would the implosion start on one side and work around), but non the less beautiful.  The real trick is to see this feature in IMAX, as IMSURE you all will.  

Something else that kind of bugged me was the fact that Nero sat around for 20 years waiting for his revenge and yet his anger never faded even a little, he never changed his clothes, he never found anything else to do (like warn his planet of the danger to come, and he never seemed to age.  Now I know Romulan’s are supposed to be related in some way to Vulcan’s who age slowly, but then why does Spock age at the same rate as Kirk?  Do Vulcans only age slowly after puberty; do they even have puberty?  Maybe the sequence in the movie wasn’t chronological when showing Spock’s childhood, I really don’t know.  What I do know, is the Star Trek is sure to become a big Enterprise once again.

Before I tear into this film with all the reasons why you shouldn’t go see it, let me first just mention that you should definitely go see this film*.  It may be the typical inspirational ballad of a stubborn old-timer that reaches salvation through an unlikely friendship, but a little cheese can be good once in a while; even if it is from Hollywood.

The fact of the matter is that this is a Clint Eastwood picture, so if you like Clint, you’ll probably like this film.  The message is all wrong, but who cares, when Clint’s at the helm.  Basically Dirty Harry retired, moved to Detroit, and changed his name to Walter Kowalski.

*Addressed to those who are not minorities..read on for plot summery & critical breakdown

Eastwood portrays Walter Kowalski, a hardened Korean War veteran who’s disdain for everyone and everything occupies the time he hasn’t allocated for home repair, throwing back beers, or polishing up his past which is reflected in the 1972 Gran Torino that he helped roll off assembly back in the day when a flourishing Ford Motor Company afforded the typical white suburban family the American dream. 

                 "Children today are tyrants.  They contradict their parents,
                  gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers". 

Every generation has it’s own form of expression and rebellion, whether it’s Elvis dancing on the Ed Sullivan Show, belly piercing, or bustin out a 2 Pac rhyme.  Walter Kowalski, perhaps like many approaching death, finds a little bit of peace in a fresh face for whom his built up resentment over the years is only stereotypic rather than personal; by the way, the quote above was from Socrates (470-399 B.C.). 
 
With an M-1 war riffle close at all times, Walt finds himself a hero of the racially integrated neighborhood after confronting Hmong gang members that spill onto his lawn during a night time scuffle. 

Not wanting anything from his immigrant neighbors except to be left alone, he reluctantly finds himself compelled to do what he believes is right, despite his long held prejudices.  This includes rescuing Sue (Ahney Her), his teenage neighbor, from a trio of young aggressive African Americans-

                 "You ever notice how you come across someone once
                  in a while that you shouldn’t have f@#ked with?
                 That’s me".

…what a great scene, even little Eastwood was in it. 

Battling his bigot judgement, but compelled to call it like he see’s it, Walt brashly dispenses unsolicited advice to both Sue and her brother Thao (Bee Vang). 
Walt looks at the diffident young Thao (who pressured by gangbangers, attempted to steal his Gran Torino) the same way he looks at his grand daughter that wants his car when he dies, or the daughter-in-law interested in the house but not the man who lives there, and even his son who inquires about his fathers afternoon in hopes of scoring some lions tickets. 

Though a bit out of character, but compelled by a moment of loneliness at the loss of his wife and a recent attempt by his son to shovel him off into a retirement home on his birthday (not to mention the depletion of his beer), Walt accepts an invitation from Sue to join her families barbecue.  It wasn’t long before Walt discovered he had much in common with his immigrant neighbors (even more than his own surviving flesh and blood). 
The story had a very nice progression thereafter, gradually breaking down Walt’s walled off past and curtain of bigotry.  Slowly the Gran Torino made it’s way from under the cover and out of the garage, until it was displayed at the foot of the driveway.  Thao referred to by Walt as pusscake, egg-roll, and Toad (which gradually turned into an endearing term as their friendship grew), was even given the car to use on his first date, a reward for his advancements in becoming a man under Walt’s guidance.

It’s not hard to see where the story is going, and when the Hmong gang retaliates against Thao and later Sue, Walt’s ugly past is back to haunt him. 
The old man decides to act against the injustice that plagues his new friends and the neighborhood that until recently he viewed as another victim of immigration chocking the American town.  

I’m not going to argue the fact that Mr. Eastwood has some great movies under his belt both as an actor and a director, but I have some qualms with Gran Torino, which was obviously an attempt to show the world that old school Clint can be gangsta too.  First off, if Clint’s setting out to show audiences that he’s down with the times, he needs to drop the 80′s parlor tricks.  It’s true that children might commonly chat up the obvious flaws of their parents at every chance meeting, but we don’t need the 20 second prolog breakdown of Walt by his two sons, especially when the first 10 seconds tell us everything we need to know; without words.  Second, if you’re going to punch through balsa wood and sugar glass maybe you could put some force into it, you know, make it kind of realistic… it’s 2009, not a 1985 MacGyver rerun. 

The end has an interesting twist, but nothing we haven’t seen before.  So, aside from a bunch of directing shots that rubbed me the wrong way and the typical Hollywood scenario, the film was entertaining; some scenes even had me holding my breath.  If the overall message didn’t sound something like the Grinch who has a heart after all and the inept Hmong are a step above logs on the lazy scale without white man guidance, I might have been able to swallow some of the newcomer acting. 

Of course Clint nailed the bitter hard-ass role superbly, maybe almost too much; his ironclad glare of contempt could freeze Medusa in her tracks.  In a complete juxtaposition, the acting of Christopher Carley (Father Janovich) and Ahney Her (Sue Lor) made me twist and turn in my seat.  Carley’s more comical lines were delivered well, whereas Her’s just made me cringe every time she stepped on camera. 

Clint’s inflammatory racist remarks together with memorable stalwart lines will most likely make you laugh:     

 "If I have to come back here, it’s going to get
  f@#king ugly"

When all is said and done, like the generations before us and the generations before them, the story is the same, it’s just packaged by Clint Eastwood and stamped by Dirty Harry; dramatized by the original song "Gran Torino" performed by the man himself in a deep raspy hum reminiscent of Rod McKuen.

Movie Trailer-

Kevin Smith is at it again, in his most recent film, Zack and Miri Make a Porno.  The film is not pornographic in nature, despite the adult film stars, the title and the fact that Smith had to fight for the R rating (initially rated NC-17). 

Everything Seth “Midas” Rogen (Zack) touches turns to comedy gold, so it’s no secret that this film is chalk full of funny.  With wonderful comedic acting skills refined by her days on Scrubs, costar Elizabeth Banks (Miri) solidifies her recent Hollywood ascent to movies such as W. and The H-Man Cometh.
As expected we have seasoned Smith vets with the acting of Jason Mewes (Lester) and Jeff Anderson (Deacon).  What we don’t have is the old school unilateral Kevin Smith diction coming out of every actors mouth; a character development feat he matched only in Jersey Girl and to some extent Chasing Amy. 

Spoiler alert, Elizabeth Banks does not get naked : (

  It’s obvious that Kevin Smith let Seth Rogen be Seth Rogen as the film is dominated by his humor with injected bits of Kevin Smith and Scott Mosier.  Justin Long inserts his own humor as he mimics an adult gay porn star. Interestingly, Justin Long plays the role of Brandon, who is Bobby Longs (Brandon Routh) gay partner; keeping it close to home are we?

Zack (Seth Rogen) has absolutely no shame, which creates a slight stretch for the final conflict needed in any good love story, even a comedy. 
After venturing out to make a porno to ultimately pay the rent, longtime friends and roommates Zack and Miri find their true feelings for each other. Zack not wanting Miri to “work” with anyone else during production of “Swallow My Cockuccino”, sets the conflict; especially after Miri assumes Zack has already preformed a wet run (opposed to a dry run) rehearsal with Stacey (played by Katie Morgan). 

Zack lay’s his feelings on the table and Miri throws them back in his face.  Upset, Zack leaves the set and doesn’t reunite with Miri until three months later when Delaney (Craig Robinson) convinces him to watch the unfinished film to see for himself that Miri never slept with Lester (played by Jason Mewes, better known as “Jay” from Jay and Silent Bob). 

After running back to the apartment he abandoned, he finds a naked Lester walking out of Miri’s room, at which time the audience is subjected to a full frontal of Jason Mewes and the all-to-illustrated Dutch Router.

Rogen and Banks share great chemistry in a film that’s balls deep with one-liners, and sexual innuendos. 

If you’re looking for a shameless comedy, you’ll find it in “Zack and Miri Make a Porno”.  Just remember to leave your morals at home with the kids, as cussing and vulgarity are some of Kevin Smith’s stronger suits.

The movie is steeped in action, with more than a dash of drama and a tinge of comedy, overlayed on a plot that sucks you in quickly and doesn’t spit you out until the very end.  As far as action films go Eagle Eye is 20/20.

I’m not a fan of movies that exceed believability within their own context.  If Aliens are taking over the world, it doesn’t mean a cop car can hit a pile of dirt and fly 600 yards over a building. 
Eagle Eye pushed the envelope a couple of times, but not so much that I didn’t enjoy it.  There are of course some major flaws, that could have been abated during the aftermath debriefing. 

Read on to learn more about what makes Eagle Eye worth or not worth seeing.

With some familiar faces of Billy Bob Thornton, Michael Chiklis, Rosario Dawson, Michelle Monaghan and a small part for Ethan Embry, the movie definitely had a strong cast.  There was even a quick spot for Jerry Ferrara from my favorite HBO series Entourage.

Ok, so the acting was good, the premise was good and the flow was good.  So what prevents this from being a great movie?  For starters, Eagle Eye is an action flick, a difficult genera to capture greatness, although “The Dark Knight” reached such status within the comicbook genera, so it’s definitely not impossible. 

The first thing that really bothered me about Eagle Eye was the flashy editing; you’re not fooling me into thinking there’s more action because you spliced together a bunch of scenes faster than my eye can determine what the hell is going on.  How about one fluid shot?  If people are fighting I want to see it, not some quick busts of light that give me motion sickness; Hollywood needs to drop this habit fast…hint hint Jim Page.

Before I get into some of the other problems that will inevitably keep this film from winning gold, lets talk quickly about the plot. 
Basically, a super computer capable of tapping into every satellite, voice, video, data, and electrical signal on the planet (including cell phones while they’re not being used), utilizes these mediums to analyze everything from physical characteristics and personality traits, to controlling automated systems, electronics, and information. When this computer goes rogue and takes on a life of it’s own, apparently due to strict programming protocol designed to protect the people of the United States, a young man and woman get caught as pones in the AI’s super plan to eliminate the upper echelon of the Executive Branch of the United States government.

The super computer “Aurea” initiates operation Guillotine (plan to eliminate 12 top U.S. executive branch members) because the U.S. President and advisors carried out an air strike based on faulty Intel; the strike left approximately 50 innocent middle eastern people dead.  Against Aurea’s and the Secretary of Defenses (Michael Chiklis) recommendation, the president executed the strike when the positive ID for the target was only 51% and casualties were estimated to be high.

Ok, lets assume there is a computer capable of simultaneously performing local and remote tasks, analyzing every Americans actions and personality, and most importantly collecting information and determining relevance and application without the designers, operators, or programmers realizing anything is awry. 

Wouldn’t the computer determine the presidents personality to identify his character and genuine intent on protecting American lives? 
Ok, even I can get past that minor flaw, but what I don’t understand is this:

If the entire plot to kill the top leaders of the United States government was based on their failure to protect lives, then how could the computers strict adherence to safety and preservation of life justify or even initiate a plot that would inevitably result in the death of a massive amount of innocent people? 

How about all the police officers and innocent civilians that were killed throughout the movie?  What about the innocent music man, the people in the tunnel, or everyone attending the State of the Union (including an elementary school band)?  Are these people expendable?

This major flaw contradicts the entire premise the movie was built on.  It could have possibly been abated by explaining a programming error, but with no reference we the audience are to assume the computer bases its actions on a strict set of commands and principals taken to the extreme.  

Another important question I have is:
If the massive AI computer can so easily kill people throughout the entire movie, why does it need an elaborate plan to explode the entire State of the Union audience, why can’t Aurea just take each of the 12 officials out individually, with a car crash, or crane or any other method used throughout the film?  Oh, and if Aurea wanted Michael Chiklis as president, she’d only have to knock off half her list, as the Secretary of Defense is sixth in line for the presidency after the VP, Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate, Secretary of State, and the Secretary of the Treasury.

I do like how the writers worked in the physical need to have Jerry (Shia LaBeouf) present at the Pentagon, but if Aurea needed him, she wouldn’t risk his life so easily at the beginning of the film.  There was no need to implement him as a terrorist (sending all the gear to his apartment), the only thing that accomplished was getting Billy Bob on his trail.  Also, there must have been another option for over riding the system lock, otherwise when someone who didn’t have an identical twin was to die, a multi-billion dollar project could be rendered useless.

Alright, I could go on with the little stuff all day, but the fact remains that this movie did its job.  It entertained me for 2 hours and 39 minutes.  It made a solid statement about government surveillance and the advancement of technology.  It suitably showed the struggles of parenthood and presented a subplot love story that wasn’t rushed, rather captured just right and emphasized by the closing scene. 

There’s definitely good movies to be seen in the theater, but if adventure is what you crave, my recommendation would be to check out Eagle Eye on Imax, but only if you can sit back fo
r two and half hours and let it take you on a ride. 

Leave a comment and let me know what you think!