While it captivity, his captors demand Tony use his technical prowess to build them a Jericho missile. Rather than aid his terrorist captors, Tony builds the means for his escape; the Mark I. Upon his return home, Stark vows to reform Stark Industries for good. During his captivity, his self-discovery showed him that weapons of war are not the means to riches; they are the means to death and destruction. While Tony is busy reorganizing Stark Industries, those closest to him have other plans for his company.

Hollywood has lined up a new film for every superhero that has ever seed the inside of a comic book. Obviously, some will fail, while others thrive. Thankfully, Iron Man was one that seemed to thrive. While not perfect in every aspect, what it managed to do well, it did really well.

First the bad. For the first half of the film, the bad guys were a group of terrorists ambiguously named The Ten Rings. The film does a wonderful job of making them out to be the most evil beings on the planet. You are over joyed when Stark gets his revenge. The only problem was, his revenge comes about an hour into the film. After killing off the main bad guys, a new baddie must be identified. Sadly, there is next to no back-story on the new bad guy, so you don’t feel that it was out of Tony’s element when he eliminates him. Next time, we’ll only need one reason for our protagonist to fight, not eleven.

Now the good. What Iron Man did well was make Iron Man really seem like a super hero. Robert Downey Jr. played the most lovable, piece of elitist scum possible. You loved every minute of seeing him get torn down from his high horse, but you also felt bad for him when he hit rock bottom. This was mostly due to Downey Jr.’s impeccable acting in the role. Even after coming home you could see he was still an asshole, but one who had a little more love in his heart.

Aside from the acting, the special effects really portrayed a level of technology that is only present in comic books. Automated systems rebuilding suits of armor in 8 hours is only the stuff of computer-generated trickery; but that didn’t stop it from being totally awesome. Thankfully, the technology didn’t try to be ‘real’, which left it open to rather ridiculous concepts, but that’s fine. Viewers know it’s a superhero movie and expect a certain level of unbelievability.

Brandon’s transition home is a slow one, as it is for everyone, until he’s informed he’s been stop-lossed; he’s being redeployed. Understandably, Brandon is furious. He served his time honorably, now the Army is breaking their agreement and forcing him to go back. Questioning the very meaning of duty, Brandon’s life is turned upside-down when he must decide whether to honor himself and fight his orders, or concede to his superiors and their demands.

Stop-Loss is a war movie that isn’t about war. It’s about the love of families and friends. It’s about the destruction of trust and honor that is the result of war. It’s about the choices a soldier must make when deciding whether it is worth endangering their lives by returning to the front-lines.

Stop-Loss is also a social commentary. It questions the sacrifice that American’s make when sending their best and brightest back into war. Who fronts the burden of loss when soldiers come back not to a parade, but to a funeral? Why do some not realize that the only way to support the troops is to bring them home?

A thought provoking and emotional film, Stop-Loss carries a young but talented cast, as well as a visionary director. Well worth a watch, this film should be immortalized as a truism of the facts of war. Sadly, in a society where war is glorified, Stop-Loss is a film which exposes the fleshy under-belly of war, something many people won’t take kindly to.

Whit is Libby’s new boyfriend, and he’s better than Dennis in every way. Whit is an investment banker in downtown london, he runs marathons, has the eye of Libby and is a better father than Dennis. After Dennis gets arrested for trying to buy scalped tickets to The Lord of the Rings on Ice for his son Jake(Fenton), Whit shows him up with tickets for the whole family. To regain his honor, Dennis vows to run the London Marathon to prove to Libby and Jake that he is truly a man and Whit isn’t all he’s cracked up to be.

Run, Fatboy, Run is an interesting take on an old story. Guy gives up girl, girl finds someone else, guy must earn back girl. It sounds pretty straight forward, but Fatboy adds some twists and turns along the way. For example, Gordon(Moran), Dennis’ best friend and Libby’s cousin, wagers with some shady folks that Dennis will complete the marathon. If Dennis is successful, Gordon stands to make a boat-load of cash (hint-hint). Needless to say, it is in Gordon’s best interest to make sure Dennis finishes.

Pegg’s breakthrough performance in Shawn of the Dead was probably his best. The interim film, Hot Fuzz, was disappointing to put it lightly, but Pegg seems to be back in Fatboy. A good, light-hearted laugh, the film is enjoyable from start to finish. Dennis is the lovable doofus who didn’t get it right the first time, but has the potential, so we’re forced to root for him until he finally succeeds.

Several months later, Lyla is involved in a car accident, which threatens the life of her unborn son. After recovering, her father breaks the bad news; her son could not be saved. Devastated, Lyla breaks free from her father’s oppression, determined to make a life for herself. 11 years later, on his death-bed, Lyla’s father tell the horrible truth about what happened to her son; after the accident he was given up for adoption. Now named August Rush(Highmore), a musical prodigy, her son was born with the gift of music. August, desperate to find his parents, believes that if they could only hear his music, the three would be reunited.

While August Rush has a lot of potential for being a wonderful movie, it is lacking something to give it that last extra push. Maybe it is fact that everyone in the film (all the protagonists at least) seem to be push-overs. There is always someone else in their life telling them what to do. Lyla has her father, August has Wizard and Louis has society telling him to give up music and try to be something real. What doesn’t make sense is the fact that no one sticks to their ideals and actually follows through with their dreams. I guess that’s part of the movie’s conflict; an antagonist for each protagonist.

I was rather disappointed at the role Robin Williams was given. As one of my favorite actors, seeing him in the previews as a supporter of August, made me want to see the movie. Once I saw it, and realized that Williams was actually the bad guy, that left me a little bitter. When do previews present a character as a role model and supporter, when they are actually a villain. Misleading if you ask me.

While the ending of the film is happy, as expected, it leaves you disappointed because of the build up that could have either been more harrowing (i.e. the struggle increases for the protagonists), or more idyllic (i.e. everything just seems to work out). Honestly, I can’t put my finger on what was disappointing about the film. If you enjoy happy endings and music, you will enjoy this film.

His reign is to be short-lived though. A band of marauders attacks the village stealing several men, women and children to be their slaves. Among those taken is Evolet, and D’Leh is forced to pursue in an attempt to rescue her. Aided by his father’s friend, Tic’Tic(Curtis), D’Leh must travel beyond the White Mountains, through the forests and across the deserts, to the land of the gods to save the woman he loves.

Compared to the time after, little is known about the time period before 4,000 B.C.E. (Before Common Era, the correct naming). 4,000 B.C.E. was when civilizations started emerging through the banding together of small tribes. Obviously, this film wasn’t titled to include that time-period, but the story was. A major aspect of the film revolved around the construction of a pyramid. Presumably, this is one of the Pyramids at Giza, because of their proximity to the Nile in the film and real life. The problem is, those pyramids weren’t built until around 2,500 B.C.E., not 10,000 B.C.E..

Really, the film feels like it wanted to be Apocalypto, or at least, to build a box office rake on it’s coattails. What 10,000 lacks in a engaging story, it makes up in visual effects. Truly, the effects were astounding; from the stampedes of mammoths to the rain-soaked sabre-tooth tiger to the construction of the pyramid. Sadly, the visuals were not enough to distract from the breathtakingly lackluster story, which revolved around a young hunter trying to save a young girl he loves from certain death.

Reflecting on the film, I realize that what was subtly apparent was the disappointing amount of non-action there was. Over and over, the suspense was built up only to find out what happened was ultimately underwhelming. Normally, films don’t delve into the action too quickly in fear of disappointing later. Watching 10,000 you are kept in a constant state of apprehension; waiting for something to happen, that never does.

10,000 felt like a cross between Apocalypto and Stargate, minus the worm-holes. Viewers who have a critical eye for films that aren’t historically accurate should shy away. Others looking for a mediocre film with pretty visuals to watch on a snowy Saturday are in for a treat!

Thomas Barnes(Quaid) is a veteran Secret Service agent. Having taken a bullet for The President six months earlier, he is brought out of medical leave to protect The President on a diplomatic mission to Spain. Meeting with other world leaders, President Ashton(Hurt) is present at the World Summit on the War on Terror when an assassination attempt takes place. All is not as simple as it may appear on the surface. Barnes must unravel the truth and uncover the plot to kill the president before it is too late.

Execution is everything in film making. The idea of telling a story from differing views of characters in the story is a very interesting one; one that could be very entertaining. To put it bluntly, Vantage Point had poor execution. The movie is shot as the retelling of a story that is only 25 minutes long. The same story is told over and over (a total of 6 times) to the detriment of the story. Honestly, I was getting sick of the format after about the 3rd run through.

There were some hilariously funny aspects to the film though. The scene after the President has been shot, it is revealed that the man who was shot was actually a body double. The real President Ashton is in a hotel room with his senior staff, all of whom are pressuring him to bomb the training camp of the terrorists suspected of planning the assassination. In a moment of brilliant comedy and social commentary, President Ashton turns to his advisor and says (paraphrased) ‘There has just been an assassination attempt on my life. We can’t give in to what the terrorists are expecting; they’re expecting us to overreact. We have the sympathy of the world on our side, let’s not squander that.’ Obviously, this was a jab at the current administration, whose first line of offense consists of overreacting.

In the end, this movie is a poor excuse for a film. The want to make a good movie is there, the whole thing just lacks substance. The film Bobby addresses a similar framework (and story) with much more success. Save yourself the time and catch the last half hour of the film. That’s when the story is actually told.

Combine rum, Amaretto, Kahlua, Bailey’s, ice cream and cream into a blender. Blend on low speed until smooth. Pour into a mug and garnish with cherries.

Makes 1 serving.

Cloverfield’s first trailer was shown during Transformers, at which time, it was simply the untitled film that showed an attack on New York and the date 01.18.08. Being the king of viral marketing, J.J. Abrams setup a very elaborate scheme to keep the film, and it’s monster, a secret until opening day. Shooting under a cacophony of working titles to keep everything under wraps, Abrams was mostly successful at building the suspense for the film.

Sadly, I think the film didn’t live up to that suspense. Going into the theatre, I knew Cloverfield was a monster movie. It had previously been suggested that this was going to be ‘America’s Godzilla’. Knowing that, you are treated to a film that isn’t so much about the monster, but the actors in the film about the monster. While it is an interesting and unique story, it really leaves nothing known about the monster itself. The cliffhanger may have been what J.J. Abrams wanted. Currently, Hollywood is very good at milking a franchise for all it’s worth; the Cloverfield monster seems to be destined for a similar fate as Saw and Spiderman.

The acting in the film was surprisingly well done, considering all those cast were relatively unknown. The actors didn’t actually know what film they were trying out for until they agree to join the project. The special effects were very well done at both a large and small scale. Scenes containing large landscapes of New York had as much detail as scenes shot in a subway tunnel.

I do have two gripes with the film though; first, most of the film was shot without a steady-cam. This leads to the very home-movie feel for the film, which is horribly nauseating. Multiple times I was forced to cover my eyes to settle my stomach, not from the gruesomeness, but from the jarring cinematography. The second issue I have with the film is with the idea of switching between the videos on the tape. A DV tape, as is suggested to be used in the film, doesn’t behave in the way it is show in the film. While recording over a tape, there isn’t a way to stop recording while keeping the tape playing without manually forwarding it. The seamless switching between stories doesn’t make much technological sense.

Other than my personal gripes, I’d say Cloverfield is an interesting monster movie. Plans are already in the works for a second film due out in 2009. Be prepared for another installment, and be sure to stock up on Dramamine before viewing.

Powerful subject matter is a very common theme for films recently; The Savages, Juno, Bella, Martian Child. Instead of the mundane action blockbuster, or the predictable romantic comedy, it is nice to see studios, directors and writers creating works of silver-screen art. The Savages

One of the striking aspects of The Savages is the internal conflicts within each of the characters. Jon, obviously an intelligent man perpetually doing ‘research’ for his new book. At the same time, he is battling against his own emotions over the fact that his girlfriend of 4 years must return to Poland because of an expired visa. His sister, Wendy is also having relationship troubles. Officially single, she is caught in an unhealthy affair with a married man, Larry(Peter Friedman). In the end, both Jon and Wendy must face their family history; how much care should they take of their father, when as children, their father didn’t take care of them?

In the theatre, the ending of the film was unsatisfying. In hindsight, the end was truly real to life; there really isn’t an end to a life story. No one’s story can be succinctly told in a 2 hour film, and The Savages accurately portrays that. Wendy and Jon survive the trials of their father’s death and continue with their lives having learned from the experience.

Her life seems perfect until Jane’s younger, more beautiful, more outgoing sister Tess(Akerman) returns home. On her first night home, Tess meet’s George, Jane’s boss. Immediately, Tess and George hit it off, at the distress of Jane, who is secretly in love with George. To Jane, Tess and George’s relationship is the stuff made of nightmares, but it only gets worse when George proposes and Jane is dragged into agreeing to plan the wedding. In spite of warnings from close friend Casey(Greer), and new acquaintance Kevin(Marsden), Jane must wrestle with her decision to plan Tess’ wedding to the man she loves.

A cute film, 27 Dresses doesn’t deliver any surprises. It follows the simple, timeless, format for a romantic comedy spun around a story about perpetually being a bridesmaid and never a bride. While it doesn’t deviate from the ‘romantic comedy’ shtick, that may be its downfall. Going into the theater, I had an idea of how the story would pan out simply from seeing the previews. My prediction coming true is a mixed blessing; good, in that I wasn’t disappointed at the ending, bad because in some sense, I wasn’t entertained.

The acting was acceptable; not Oscar worthy, but not disappointing. Jane was a good character for Heigl, allowing her to play the hot, playful, confident girl, as well as the shy, conflicted and sensitive girl. Marsden, judging by crowd reaction, was also well cast. The coordinated swooning from the women in the audience was proof enough that Marsden pulled off the cute, well-intentioned, but slightly stalkerish (in a good way) boy trying to win over the girl.

Sadly, Greer’s character Casey was almost sickening. The outlandishness of her sexuality was rather concerning. Being best friends with Jane, Casey was obviously invited to all the weddings she organized. Upsetting was the fact that Casey acted as a female ‘wedding crasher;’ only there to pick up groomsmen and act as the opposing sexual force to Jane’s demure wholesomeness.

In the end, 27 Dresses can by counted on to deliver as a romantic comedy. It should be safe to say it may end up on the top of some favorites lists, nestled between How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days and The Wedding Planner.