NINJA ASSASSIN.

For any of you who know me well enough, or any of you who just listen to the LAMBcast, you'll know I've been relatively excited about Ninja Assassin. Therefore, it's no surprise that I went and saw the first showing available this morning. Was it what I expected? Yes and No. The movie is about Raizo (Rain), a former ninja who decided to leave his clan and fight the ninja themselves (like an assassin of ninja... hence the non-redundant title, Ninja Assassin). We also have two Europol agents, Ryan (Ben Miles) and Mika (Naomie Harris), who stumble upon a scandal involving political assassinations that seem to have been committed by a ninja clan. Of course, everybody thinks they're crazy, at least until Mika starts being hunted down for knowing too much. But Raizo steps in to protect her, and they have to work together to stay alive while trying to bring down the clan.

The first thing that I noticed about this movie that I didn't expect was the amount of blood and gore. Good God, there's a lot of it. From the start, when a guy's head gets sliced (horizontally) in half and fake CGI blood splatters everywhere, you know you're in for something. I actually wasn't bothered by the amount of blood in the movie as much as I was bothered by the amount of CGI blood in the movie. It's in Tarantino amounts here, but instead of gushing from hoses strapped into fake stumps or whatever, it's just gushes and gushes of technically nothing. It isn't anything that bothered me enough to dislike the movie, however. And it isn't all CGI... in fact, when you get real fake blood instead of fake fake blood, it's all the more welcome.

The second thing I noticed was that the acting wasn't nearly as bad as I had read in early reviews. Sure, it's nowhere close to Oscar-worthy, but it's also nowhere close to, say, The Legend of Chun-Li from earlier this year. And I bring up this particular movie because the Naomie Harris/Ben Miles scenes reminded me a lot of the Chris Klein/Moon Bloodgood scenes from said movie. Fortunately, though, they weren't nearly as poorly written nor as horribly acted. And I have to say, Naomie Harris is a freakin' chameleon. Raise your hand if you've actually realized that this is the same woman who was Selena in 28 Days Later... and Tia Dalma (AKA the weird Bayou woman) from the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels. And then we have Rain, who I've had my eye on since his brilliant (and award-winning) performance in I'm A Cyborg, But That's OK. Also, for those of you who don't know, he's also a South Korean pop star (which is what makes a certain "boy band" joke in the movie funny, but which will be lost to the majority of the film's American audience).

The third thing I noticed was that the action was really freakin' cool (not to mention it's all actual stunt men and little-to-no wire work, which I think adds to the cool-factor)... but it's not the whole movie. In fact, the first half of the movie is backstory interspersed with action scenes. It flips back and forth between three main occurrences: 1) Raizo's childhood being raised as a ninja, 2) Mika and Ryan trying to figure out the ninja conspiracy while not being killed, and 3) action scenes. It's mostly when Raizo's story and Mika's story converge that the action really picks up. Everything up until that point is really good, but everything after that point is awesome (and almost non-stop). In fact, had there not been any action throughout the whole movie except for the climax scene up through the final fight between Raizo and his old master, I would have just dubbed it a slow burn film and been content. Because seriously, that final fight is epic in both the choreography and in the filming style (anything from filming through a burning wall to just the silhouettes behind a lit sliding door... and more). OK, maybe not wholly content (it is a violent ninja movie, after all), but it was still an awesome climax nevertheless.

Story-wise, one thing I wanted to point out was that it could have used a bit more building up of the relationship between Raizo and his "rival" (the guy who always calls him "brother"). I suppose you see them competing against each other growing up, and he's involved in a very important moment in Raizo's life, but outside that, there wasn't really anything that made their bond strong. Because of this, their big fight scene near the end had less of an impact... or at least not as big as the one between Raizo and his old master.

Anyway, on the one hand, I expected it to be a cheesy action movie about ninjas. But what I got was an awesome action movie (with some strong horror elements, especially toward the end) about ninjas with a couple cheesy moments tossed in here and there. So I guess it met my expectations and then some. I was thoroughly entertained, albeit a bit thrown off at first by all the backstory in the first half of the film. I guess I wasn't expecting, what's the word... character depth (:P)? But it's there. And the movie is great fun.



A Keanu 'Whoa'

New: NEW MOON Review + Personal Update.

I posted a REVIEW of NEW MOON in the MOVIES section.

Also, I just felt like updating everybody, since I've been absent a bit. This past Wednesday, I left to Austin for a teacher conference that lasted until Friday. Unfortunately, Tuesday night, my laptop decided to stop functioning properly. So I spent the entirety of the trip (when I wasn't in the conference) trying to find the issue and fix it. Needless to say, I couldn't really watch movies or read blogs or make posts of my own. Then, yesterday (Saturday the 21st), I moved into my own place. Still have some boxes to unpack, but I'm almost there. Anywho, I'll keep this short. I ended up figuring out the issues and fixing my laptop, so now I'm able to get stuff posted up once again, as well as view all of your blogs out there in the blog-o-sphere. So yeah, that's about it. Y'all enjoy the review.

THE TWILIGHT SAGA: NEW MOON.

I'm gonna do this review a bit differently than usual (don't worry, you're not missing anything by me skipping the usual plot blurb at the beginning. There isn't much of one to begin with. Anywho...). It's no secret that I have a large disliking of the Twilight books. Yes, I've read them all. No, it's not because I'm a lit snob (I'm really not). If you want a full list of reasons why I don't care for them, you can check here. Otherwise, I'll keep it to New Moon in this post. And on top of not liking the books, I hated New Moon the most of them all. But ever since I saw the first film and discovered, much to my surprise, that the film was actually better than the book (not hard to do when all you can do is make improvements... the books are, for the most part, unfilmable to any common viewer, so they have to add into the films everything the book was lacking to make them work), I actually started to anticipate New Moon. I wondered if it would take out everything that made me hate New Moon: The Book and make New Moon: The Movie actually enjoyable.

So let's go through a list of why I hated New Moon: The Book so much:

1) Bella is an insufferable, unlikable, selfish character who just uses and abuses those around her to satisfy her own needs.

2) Jacob goes from great character and much more suitable love interest to unlikable jerk about halfway in.

3) All depression, not much humor. And without much plot to keep you going, that's not that great.

4) Long, drawn out scenes of Bella being a moaning zombie... and not that kind that eats human flesh.

5) Absolutely zero action (as is the case with basically the whole series, really).

So how does New Moon: The Movie fare with these five aspects? Let's see:

1) Bella, unfortunately, is still an insufferable, unlikable, selfish character who just uses and abuses those around her to satisfy her own needs. But hey, at least she admits it once or twice in the movie (not in those harsh of words, but whatever). Oh, quick note while we're on the subject of admitting things. I love an admission she makes at the beginning of the movie that I don't believe she makes in the book. Bella and Edward are fighting over age, and Bella says something along the lines of "Isn't this kinda gross? I should be disgusted" based on their age difference. That made me smile.

2) Jacob... oh, Jacob. I loved Jacob in the first half of the book and came to hate him in the second half. In fact, Jacob didn't start to turn back around to likable again until about the mid-point of the last book. So I am delighted to announce that not only does Jacob stay likable in the movie, but his bursts of anger feel more rationalized in the movie than in the book. However, because of this, I feel movie goers are going to have an even harder time accepting that Bella would rather choose Edward over him. I think the only thing that helped me rationalize her choice in the book was the fact that Jacob became kind of a douche at times. And while he has some moments in the movie, they actually make some kind of sense, unlike the book. But the actor did a really good job with the character. He was very fitting (and funny).

3) Which brings us to our next point. The book was pretty dark, dull, and depressing. Like the book, the movie still has not much of a plot, and just kinda bounces from scene to scene. But the movie inserted some much needed comedy, particularly with Jacob and his La Push friends (though I'm actually kinda upset that they basically all but removed Quil and Embry, giving them only a couple lines each). And surprisingly, a lot of the humor was purposeful. Though there was quite a bit that wasn't, as well. For instance, there's a scene with Edward walking in slow motion as the wind blows his shirt back, as if he's some TV model (who eventually starts to sparkle). I'm sorry, but that's just so terrible it's funny. That's really the only thing that helped me get over the ridiculous melodrama of the whole thing--it takes itself so freakin' seriously that it almost makes a mockery of itself. In fact, I'm wondering if the director purposefully gave it some self-deprecating moments because he understood just how silly it was.

4) So, I've already mentioned the melodrama. Some of this does, indeed, include Bella as a moaning zombie. Her nightmares are particularly stupid, as she continually screams into the night, annoying her father (who is so far continuing to be one of the better film version characters) along with the audience. However, one of the eye-rolling sequences of the book (at least for me) was when there are just four pages with the name of the month on it, showing how she just mopes about for four months after Edward leaves. This is actually handled very artfully in the film. Bella sits in a chair staring out the window, and the camera slowly rotates around her. As the camera gets back to showing out the window, it shows a different season outside while giving a subtitle of the month. Eventually, there is also some voice-over of her speaking out her emails to Alice, which was a nice touch that I don't remember from the book. I like how they use the emails to Alice throughout the film to show that she's actually missing other Cullens besides Edward (of course, the emails don't go through, but she keeps trying nonetheless).

5) In the first film, they added the climax fight that wasn't shown in the book. They even tossed in some action bits here and there throughout the film to keep the tempo going. So how did this one fare? There were some moments interspersed... nothing really major, though. But they also added in the scuffle with the Volturi at the end, which was awesome. The action looks much better in this film than it did in the first. It's much more stylized and fun. You can tell they had a bigger budget this time around. One of my favorite scenes in the film is when Charlie and Harry are out searching for the "wolves," and Victoria shows up. The whole action of the scene is so muted with the music and it's really nicely shot. Of course, all this leads up to the "big scene" that jump starts (no pun intended) the climax. But tying all of it together was a great way to make it flow into the ending.

So I said the first Twilight film was better than the book. I also said I hated the book of New Moon, but would hope, like its predecessor, the movie version would also be better than the book. Was I right in this assumption? Yes, I think I was. And it pisses me off that Hollywood seems capable of adapting a bad book into an entertaining movie, yet seems incapable of adapting a good book into one. But that's another post.

I can't, in right mind, give it the following score for being a good movie. The acting is mediocre at best (the best of it coming from Billy Burke, Ashley Greene, Michael Sheen, and Taylor Lautner). But that's what makes it so laughably good (in adding to the melodrama). The characters aren't particularly likable (except, ironically, for the characters played by the aforementioned actors... except Michael Sheen, but I only say that because his is a villain, and he isn't 'likable' in the same respect). The dialogue, most straight from the book, is nearly vomit inducing. But there's still just something about it that I liked. Maybe it's just a good 'bad' movie. So I'm giving it this score based solely on entertainment, I suppose. And I can't wait to love/hate the next one (assuming it, like the last two, is better than the book).


A Keanu 'Whoa'

2012.

For such a long movie, you'd think I'd have a lot to say. I really don't. It's pretty much what you'd expect from a Roland Emmerich film. It has a huge cast of seemingly unrelated yet interconnected characters played by the likes of John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Thandie Newton, Danny Glover, Oliver Platt, and Woody Harrelson. It's the end of the world, so there's a lot of survivalist action mixed with family drama. Some will do anything to live. Some will stay behind to do the nobel thing yet die in the process. Others will be jerks and upset everybody. Someone will put themselves and/or others in jeopardy to save a dog. And somebody will inevitably try to act the hero and nearly die in the process.

It's not a bad movie. Is it predictable? Sure. Is it entertaining? Most of it (it starts to stretch itself a bit thin in its second hour). How is it acted? Averagely. Are the special effects good? Very. Do I care about the characters? At least two (Cusack and Ejiofor. Maybe Cusack's daughter).

The best part of the film is its action scenes, the scenes wherein our main characters are trying to escape certain death. The main two scenes (or at least the best two scenes) are within the first hour or so. The first is when the world is first starting to go, and Cusack has to get his family across town to the airport in a limo while everything is falling apart around them, which is immediately followed up by the small airplane sequence as seen in the trailers, with the plane flying low through the collapsing city (the 'flying low' thing makes more sense in the context of the film, I think, once you know the circumstances). The second is at Yellowstone, when Cusack goes to meet back up with Harrelson to figure out where the "ships" are to get to safety, and in the process gets stuck in the middle of a Super Volcano eruption. After these two scenes, you do see a lot of worldly destruction, but it doesn't involve any main characters, so you really don't care. The next major suspense scene is at the climax of the film, which I won't ruin.

This is why I believe the second hour drags a bit. The two biggest suspense scenes occur toward the end of the first hour/beginning of the second hour. Then you have about an hour stretch with no major suspense before the climax of the film. We probably could have lost the subplot with the two fathers on the cruise ship. If we wanted to keep the time length, we could have given more substance to the Chinese family, which would have made them more than just a Deus Ex Machina for our main cast. Instead, they get about 2 main scenes of less than 5 minutes or so total before they come back into the picture in the third act.

In other words, it looked good and it did have some decent entertainment. There were some parts that probably weren't meant to be funny that were. And I couldn't help but think of Fezzik (The Princess Bride) any time that Russian Businessman spoke. I expected him to start rhyming any second. But it was a bit too long and could have easily been trimmed down a bit, mostly in the second hour. But it was pretty much exactly what I expected, so I wasn't really let down, either.

Stop Saying Okay! Okay.

TV Review: Battlestar Galactica - Season One.

So I finally got around to seeing Battlestar Galactica. And, dear God, it has to be one of the most addicting shows I've ever watched. It starts with a 3-hour miniseries that depicts, basically, the end of the world by the Cylons, a robotic and/or android race. But there's a group of people--military and otherwise--already in space, some of which are aboard the Battlestar Galactica, an old warship that is being turned into a museum. Running the Galactica is Admiral Adama (Edward James Olmos), and his second-hand, Colonel Tigh (Michael Hogan). But there are tons of characters in this show, from the pit crew to pilots to  to communications to medical to press to criminals to government (including a newly appointed President, Laura Roslin (Mary McDonnell)).

I'm not sure where to even start. The characters are phenominal, and it's hard to pick a favorite. From Starbuck to Gaius to Billy (the President's helper), I love any spectrum of character. There are just so many characters to choose from--it's almost like a Harry Potter situation in the scope.

Besides the characters, obviously, the story is where it's at. There are so many twists and turns, especially at the end of the miniseries. I was a bit iffy throughout the miniseries until the end of it when the first major twist is revealed. That blew my mind. But the story itself is a total space drama (with a bit of comedy here and there), but it has deep themes. There is all the Greek Mythology that surrounds the story (which I love). But then there's the budding Christianity, too. Interestingly enough, I love how the humans are connected to Greek Mythology, while the Cyclons (technology) are connected to the Christianity aspect.

Then there's the visuals. From the metallic Cylons to the space flight and/or battles, the SFX are pretty top notch for a television show. The action scenes are fantastic, and I wish there were more of them. And the camera work is unique, too. For a sci-fi space drama, you wouldn't really expect the more documentary feel that you're given. It's not documentary like The Office. But the way the camera moves, from quick movements to zooms in and out, there's a real raw feel to the camera.

You really get into the whole universe of the show (no pun intended). You quickly learn how things are run, what the names of the planes are (Vipers and Raptors), the religious mythologies, etc.  It really just pulls you in and refuses to let go. It really does hang on the shoulders of the characters. And even though there are so many characters, it never feels like there are too many (like in LOST or Heroes, for instance). There's probably just as many characters as those shows (if not more), but this one still found a way to show almost every character in every episode and still not feel convoluted. Everybody and everything works together organically. And that's the real trick to how this show works: it's a futuristic space drama, but it still feels organic, still feels all real.

I don't want to continue rambling on and on, so I'll leave it here. It's a brilliant show, and I didn't expect to be as addicted to it as I became. I've gotten the first disc of the second season already, so I'm about to start that one soon, and I can't wait. I know I didn't talk as much about this season as I usually do, but there's just so much that happens that it'd be impossible to talk about it all in one post. And I don't want to deprive y'all from going through the journey surprise-free like I did. If you haven't checked out this show yet, you should. It's great fun.

R2D2... The One With More Movie Trailers (Yet Again).

Thought I'd give some thoughts on some recently released movie trailers. Just a few, really...

- First, I saw this trailer for the appropriately named Brothers. It's about time they make use of the look-alike quality of Jake Gyllenhaal and Tobey Maguire for the aforementioned brothers.

- Speaking of Jake Gyllenhaal, I actually think the upcoming Prince of Persia film could be a decent video game film. If Bruckheimer can do for video games what he did for a Disney World ride, it'll be fun.

- I saw the new teaser trailer for the remake of Clash of the Titans and... wow. I now can't wait for this movie. I love Greek Mythology as it is, so this should be great.

- The teaser trailer for the upcoming Kick-Ass was just released. It looks interesting, but I'm not sure about it yet. It's kinda looking like a Superhero Movie version of Watchmen, which bothers me, but I've heard some good early things about it. So who knows?

- Had I not been privy to the fact that Damon and Greengrass has teamed up for a non-Bourne film entitled Green Zone, I would have thought from the start of this trailer that it was Bourne 4 (in fact, even with the knowledge of the aforementioned movie, I still thought it was Bourne 4).

- Anybody else tired of seeing the trailer for the new Mel Gibson triller Edge of Darkness before almost every movie? I know I am.

THE BOX.

I wasn't never sure if I was going to see this movie in theater or not. I've seen both Kelly's previous films (Donnie Darko and Southland Tales), both of which take quite a bit of, well, something to sit through and still stay sane. The first time I saw Donnie Darko, I knew I had seen something pretty good. Strange, but good. In fact, it made no sense whatsoever, but something about it still resonated with me. I saw Southland Tales earlier this year after hearing mixed reviews of either "this movie is terrible" and "this is a really good bad movie." And sure enough, it took everything I had to sit through that way too long film, but in the end I felt it was worth it, because it was simultaneously one of the worst movies I had ever seen mixed with one of the most ambitious and possibly genius. And, like its predecessor, it made absolutely no sense.

So enter The Box. When I first saw the trailers, I thought this would be one of his more accessible films. After all, with a pretty straight-forward concept, how could you mess it up? Then the reviews started coming in. Did I actually want to sit through a roughly 2 hour movie that made absolutely no sense and had thus far had a 10:1 good:bad review rating? Everything I had heard said it was just yet another Kelly film: (After the first half of the movie) 1) it just stops making any sense whatsoever, 2) it's confusing, 3) it's weird, and 4) it's pretty terrible. But I was off today and decided to give it a shot. So now that I've seen the movie, do I agree with these sentiments? 1) No, 2) No, 3) Yes, and 4) No.

The basic story for the film is that Norma (Cameron Diaz) and Arthur (James Marsden), a couple in need of money, are given a box with a button on it by a strange man named Arlington Steward (Frank Langella). Here's the deal: If they press the button within 24 hours, they will receive 1 million dollars. The catch? Someone somewhere in the world that they do not know will die.

It's really not until about 45 minutes to an hour into the movie before it starts getting a bit weird. I mean, there's the weird characterizations (disfigured foot, disfigured face, random nosebleeds), but that's nothing compared to what comes later. However, everybody is saying that it makes no sense, it's confusing, and they just had to stop trying to figure it out and roll with it if they were even going to remotely enjoy it. I didn't find it confusing at all. Maybe I'm just weird, but I thought it was pretty easy to figure out and it made quite a bit of sense. I actually thought some of it was a bit predictable, honestly (not everything, mind you). And the closer the movie came to its close, the more I began to like it, as more and more behind the purpose of the box was revealed. I just really liked the whole concept of it.

The acting could have been better, though. I'd say the only two who were really any good were James Marsden and Frank Langella. It's like Cameron Diaz couldn't be bothered to even phone this one in, and all the "blank" people, as I call them, ended up kinda annoying after a while. But Marsden held his own as a leading man, while Langella played a pretty good bad guy. If they had any bad moments, it was a scripting issue. There were a few really cheesy/forced dialogue moments (for instance, the 'christmas tree lights/everybody dies' conversation). But they weren't too terribly common.

The only other thing of note is the special effects. They could have been better. The facial scar on Langella was almost distractingly fake. They could have taken note from The Dark Knight on that one. And all the 'water' effects hardly looked complete. The Abyss had better water effects, and that was made 20 years ago.

Overall, I honestly didn't think I'd end up liking it as much as I did. Will I run out to buy it as soon as it hits DVD? Probably not. But I don't regret seeing it. If I saw it on Showtime or some other movie channel, I might stop and watch. It wasn't remotely as bad as I'd heard, and the story was pretty good. Was it weird? Hell yes. But it wasn't confusing, nor did I have to stop thinking about it to enjoy it. It was good.

I Am McLovin!

(P.S. I'm still not sure if there was some intentional comedy thrown in there from the strangeness, especially with the 'blank' people, but I would hope that Kelly wasn't taking the whole film seriously. Either way, it made for decent entertainment.)

New: The Room Short Review + LAMBcast #4.

I posted a Short Review for The Room in the MOVIES section.

And just in time for LAMBcast #4! I'm not in this episode, though. It's a mini episode dealing with The Room, one of the worst movies ever made.

The episode is run by LAMBcast regulars:

* Fletch of Blog Cabins
* Tom Clift of Plus Trailers and
* Jason Soto of Invasion of the B Movies.

Additional sites mentioned during the podcast:
* The Room's Wikipedia page
* Entertainment Weekly: The Crazy Cult of The Room

You can catch the episode on iTunes, or listen to the widget in the sidebar (I can't get the widget to work in posts for some reason).

And in case you haven't seen The Room, at least check out the following videos, including the official trailer, the "flower shop" scene, and a montage of all the "Oh hi" moments of the movie:

Short Review: The Room.

Premise: A woman no longer loves her "Future Husband" and starts to destroy the relationship between the two of them and all of their friends when she begins an affair with her Future Husband's best friend.

Starring: Tommy Wiseau, Juliette Danielle, Greg Sestero, Philip Haldiman, and Carolyn Minnott.

My Reaction: This movie is hailed as one of the worst of all time. After Jason from Invasion of the B-Movies ragged on it, and then Fletch from Blog Cabins began on it, as well, I knew I had to check it out (especially once they began planning a LAMBcast around it). I didn't see it in time for the episode, but I finally saw it and... wow. Just... wow. No words can explain this movie. From the dialogue to the acting to the music to... anything. And the first thirty minutes of the movie is like a bad Cinemax porn. The last movie I saw this splendidly terrible was The Spirit. Seriously, this movie had me laughing at things that probably weren't meant to be laughed at. From never-ending sex scenes to characters saying one thing and then immediately doing the opposite (or asking for advice and then going "I don't wanna talk about it!"). In the realm of this type of dialogue, my favorite was something along the lines of "My mother tries to control my life! But not anymore. Nobody will control me. I'm my own woman. So what do you think I should do?" And then the flower shop scene ("Hi doggie!") and... it's just hard to pick a favorite. Like I said, there are no words that can describe this movie. Well, maybe four. In the words of Tommy Wiesau's Johnny, "Ha ha ha ha."

THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS.

I wasn't too sure what to expect going into this movie, but I knew it looked good. So I guess, in that sense, the movie exceeded expectations. There's really not a plot. Not only is the movie non-linear, but it's more of a character study than a plot-driven film. Basically, all I can say is that after his wife leaves him, Bob (Ewan McGregor) decides to do some field journalism in Iraq. While there, he meets Lyn (George Clooney), recognizing his name from an earlier interview he conducted with another man (Stephen Root). Lyn, apprehensive at first, eventually takes a liking to Bob and takes him under his wing as they travel through the desert-land of Iraq. Lyn explains his past with a secret military unit known as the New Earth Army, developed by Bill Django (Jeff Bridges). The unit specialized in psychic, peace-driven, non-lethal warfare techniques that made the men into super-soldiers--or, as commonly referred to in the film, Jedi. Kevin Spacey plays a man named Larry who joins the unit and is an eventual catalyst to its downfall (not a spoiler, as the voice-over narration basically tells you this when he's introduced).

Like I said, the movie is very non-linear. It bounces back and forth through time constantly, but it isn't distracting. The only time I was confused was the beginning, as it starts in 1980 but, after the opening scene, it goes to present day without saying 'present day' (unless I missed it). But I quickly caught on (the TV showing George W. Bush speaking as President helps). Though I suppose it isn't really present day, as the "present day" of the movie is actually something like 2003. But I digress.

The non-plot of the movie doesn't really hurt it, either. I only felt one moment of drag, which is about a 5 minute span of film near the end when the movie turns a bit too serious and feels like it needs to start wrapping things up. But then, right when you start feeling that, it starts wrapping things up. So it's all good. Well, as much as you can 'wrap up' with this movie.

The best thing about this film was the writing. It was very clever, very smart, very witty, very funny movie. And it's totally a nerd movie wrapped up in a "non-nerd" casing. The entire movie is filled with nerdy references, the most common of which is Star Wars. And every time I heard things like "warrior monk" or "shaman," or when they constantly talked about things like "level 3 invisibility" or "level 2" something else, I couldn't help but think of things like Dungeons and Dragons. The nerd part of me (which is a pretty big part) wanted to squeal with glee at nearly every other line in this movie. It's just hilarious. There's no other way to put it. Oh, and the satire of the film is good, too, though the ending might be somewhat controversial to those with a more conservative outlook.

And what helps pull off the comedy is the straight-faced way that these guys, led by Clooney, pull it off. You can clearly tell that everybody is having tons of fun with this movie. Clooney is at his comedic best here, and even Spacey has some out-there moments that are so bizarre they're funny. Of course, Jeff Bridges is good in whatever he does. But there are a couple smaller roles that are great. Stephen Root and Robert Patrick make fun cameos, while Stephen Lang has a small but memorable role as he steals every scene he's in just by smiling. And then there's the straight man, Ewan McGregor, who is the Sancho Panza to Clooney's Don Quixote.

I mean, that's really the best way to explain this movie. It's a modern day Don Quixote. Don Quixote thought he was a warrior of legend in his day--the knight. Lyn Cassady thinks he's a warrior of legend in our day--the Jedi warrior (sans light saber). And Ewan McGregor is the one riding around with him, getting into trouble, constantly getting hurt, but sticking by his new friend and eventually coming over to his way of thinking. And in the end, it's up to the viewer to decide if it was all real or BS. And I loved it (I might even go so far to say it could be one of my new favorite movies, and definitely in my Top 10 of the year).

Royale With Cheese

(P.S. As a warning, there is a scene that might be a little too close to home for some people. If you were affected by the tragedy of Ft. Hood, there is a scene in this film that depicts a military base shooting, though in a comical fashion... but after recent events, some might not take to it real comically).

(P.P.S. I almost forgot... I thought it was funny and ironic that Ewan McGregor, at one point, asks the question "What's a Jedi?" Not to mention the constant Jedi/Star Wars references made to, from, and/or around him. But then again, it might have been purposeful casting as an in-joke of sorts).

Jurassic Park 4: Some... Interesting... News.

Joe Johnston, the director of Jurassic Park 3, is excited about returning to Jurassic Park 4. He says there's a good story there. But then he says that it won't be a story about a group of people being attacked by dinosaurs, because that's already been done before.

Um... whanow?

Taking dinosaur attacks from Jurassic Park is like making a Halloween sequel without having Michael Myers killing people. Oh wait. They did that. And we know how that turned out.

Before the day ends...

"Remember, Remember the Fifth of November,

The gunpowder treason and plot.

I know of no reason,

Why the gunpowder treason,

Should ever be forgot."