TITLE: The Rite
STARRING: Anthony Hopkins, Colin O’Donoghue, Alice Braga, Ciaran Hinds, Toby Jones
DIRECTOR: Mikael Hafstrom
STUDIO: Warner Bros. Pictures
RATING: PG-13
RUN TIME: 112 min
RELEASE DATE: January 28, 2011

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

It’s always tough to make a movie about exorcisms, because every film about them has to deal with impact that The Exorcist had. That film has defined this type of horror movie for years, and it’s tough as hell to make an interesting film about exorcisms that doesn’t at least borrow one aspect from that classic. Some filmmakers can create a truly scary experience, and others fall back on clichés to make a lackluster movie; The Rite falls into the latter category.

The movie follows a young priest named Michael (O’Donoghue) who is just using the priesthood to get away from his undertaker father and get a free education. Unfortunately, his teacher (Jones) calls him out on the fact that he doesn’t believe in God, and makes him go to Rome for an exorcism seminar to build his faith. During his time in Rome, Michael works with Father Lucas (Hopkins) and performs exorcisms around Rome. Michael starts to question his beliefs while Father Lucas begins to exhibit signs of demonic possession.

This movie has a strong opening and looks like it has a somewhat interesting story to work with, but it doesn’t. The creepy opening in the funeral parlor and the background we get for Michael is interesting, and if it was used effectively, it would have made for a better movie. Also the first few scenes with Hopkins were done very well, and they give us some interesting exorcism scenes that have not been done as much in movies, and walk the fine line between whether the possessions are supernatural or delusions of a crazy person.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

But whatever is interesting in this movie is slowly stripped away until all that we are left with is a bland and boring film that people have seen before. The long process of exorcism and the little details we get along the way that make the first part entertaining are thrown away, and that makes the final part of the movie a cliché that people have seen before. The interesting parts of the story we get in the beginning, which had some potential do not add up to much in the end. The characters start off interesting but very quickly become one-note; the young priest believes in science but some crazy dreams and an exorcism turn him into a believer, and the old priest has seen it all and hates all this modern science that contradicts him. Hopkins is okay right up until the end when he goes from slightly scary to over the top. O’Donoghue isn’t bad, but he’s bland and does not have much charisma.

This is not a completely horrible movie, but it abandons anything that is interesting towards the end. Mix all this with a really bad product placement for McDonald’s, the questionable “inspired by true events” tag and you get a film that is possibly worth a DVD rental, but not worth spending your money on at the theater.

RATING: 4/10

Front page image from rottentomatoes.com.

TITLE: Season of the Witch
STARRING: Nicolas Cage, Ron Perlman, Claire Foy, Stephen Campbell Moore, Stephen Graham
DIRECTOR: Dominic Sena
STUDIO: Relativity Media
RATING: PG-13
RUN TIME: 98 min
RELEASE DATE: January 7, 2011

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

January, a horrible month marked by freezing weather and movies that studios wish they could forget, which would explain how Season of the Witch is finally being released now. After being delayed for a long time, this Nicolas Cage vehicle is finally released in theaters when it should have gone direct to DVD.

Cage plays a knight who is traumatized by the Crusades and leaves the church with his friend, Felson (Ron Perlman). The two knights arrive in Europe in the middle of the Black Plague and our ordered by the church to take a witch (Foy) to a group of monks who will destroy her and stop the plague. Despite the fact he hates the church, Cage decides to go so he can atone for his sins and make sure a girl who could be innocent is not killed.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

The movie is only is 98 minutes long but it felt like a three-hour movie. Ignoring the fact that it ties together two historical events that occurred a century apart, the story is very clichéd, the characters can be summed up in one sentence, the action scenes have no excitement, and within ten minutes of this film’s opening you know everything that is going to happen and wish you had not spent money to see this.

This is a bad movie, but if the actors and the directors took the whole thing a little less seriously and acknowledged that this was not going to be that great, it could have been the so-bad-it’s-good kind of movie that it should have been. Instead, Season of the Witch is very serious 98 percent of the time, and the 2 percent that does not take the film seriously does not make up for the rest. Every actor in the movie is sleepwalking through the film and appears to be just waiting for the director to yell cut so they can collect their paycheck.

The only bright spot is Ron Perlman as Felson; he is the only actor in this movie with any charisma and realizes how ludicrous the plot so he has some fun with his role. This doesn’t change the fact the film is boring, clichéd, and a waste of time to see in theaters.

RATING: 2/10

Front page photo from rottentomatoes.com.

TITLE: True Grit
STARRING: Jeff Bridges, Hailee Steinfeld, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin, Barry Pepper
DIRECTOR: The Coen Bros.
STUDIO: Paramount Pictures
RATIED: PG-13
RUN TIME: 110 minutes
RELEASED: December 22

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

This was bound to happen sooner or later with Hollywood remaking every movie they can find in their studios’ vaults. But to remake John Wayne’s classic western True Grit seems like Hollywood has gone too far. What separates this remake from other sub-par remakes is the skillful filmmaking of the Coen Bros. The filmmakers have created a great western that will help those who want to see a movie that isn’t filled with CGI or a third sequel to a comedy that was not needed.

When her father is murdered by Tom Chaney (Brolin), 14-year old Mattie Ross (Steinfeld) hires U.S. Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Bridges) to hunt him down. A Texas Ranger named LaBoeuf (Damon) joins Ross and Cogburn on their journey and clashes with them almost every step of the way. While the story is not changed much from the original, the Coen Bros. make up for it with a lot of little changes that make a compelling film. The cinematography is amazing and filled with beautiful scenery to create a vivid world.

The biggest strength of the film is the characters. While the plot is about hunting down a murderer, the journey these characters go through and how it changes them is the real driving force of this movie. Every character, including the villains, is fully formed and has their own little traits that make them interesting to watch. Nothing is spelled out to the audience; every story detail and character development is based on the dialogue and the body language from the actors.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

Bridges’ Cogburn is not just a tough lawman. He is a man who has lived a rough life, hunted the worst scum of the west, and has endured everything life has thrown at him. The real standout is Steinfeld’s Mattie; she delivers a great performance as a girl who can go toe-to-toe with the toughest of men and is the one who has true grit.

The only thing that really holds this movie back is the fact the original story it’s based one has a bit of a drag in the middle. The Coen Bros. are skilled enough though that the film still keeps the audience entertained. It may lose points for originality and it isn’t The Coen Bros. finest film (that honor belongs to Miller’s Crossing, screw No Country for Old Men); but it is still a quality film and makes for good entertainment for the holiday season.

RATING: 9/10

TITLE: TRON: Legacy
STARRING: Jeff Bridges, Garrett Hedlund, Olivia Wilde, Michael Sheen, Bruce Boxleitner
DIRECTOR: Joseph Kosinski
STUDIO: LivePlanet/Disney
RATED: PG-13
RUN TIME: 127 minutes
RELEASE DATE: Dec. 17

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

While I was writing this review for TRON: Legacy, my mind always went back to two memories.  The first is the experience of watching the first TRON as kid, that movie and the Star Wars were my first introduction to sci-fi and made me a geek for life. Sure, the plot was lacking a lot of critical parts, character development was nowhere to be found, and it certainly hasn’t aged well.  But it holds a special place in my heart; the effects were revolutionary for the time and the world it created captivated thousands to create a cult classic to last for decades.

The second thing on my mind is the insane eye-fucking I received when I saw Avatar the same time last year and how I was experiencing it again with this movie. TRON: Legacy is a movie with drop dead gorgeous effects, good action, and a script that could have used a lot more work.

Twenty years after his father, Kevin Flynn (Bridges), disappears, Sam (Hedlund) gets a message from him and enters the digital world known as The Grid. Sam must fight to find his father, return to the real world, and defeat CLU, a computer program his father designed that has gotten out of control.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com

I’m not going to spend a lot of time on the effects because the only thing I can say about them is that they are spectacular. Once the 3D effects start, you are sucked into the digital world and you don’t want to leave. Daft Punk’s backs up the amazing visuals that gets the audience excitement up and reinforces the impact of every shot in this movie.  The action in this movie starts off intense with the first disc fight and while it goes down from there, the action scenes are still pretty good right up to the end.

Even though it has fantastic special effects and an amazing soundtrack to go with it, there are some pretty big problems.  First time director Joseph Kosinski does a decent job for a first time director, but the pacing of this movie sucks the momentum away by the middle of the movie and it barely comes back by the end.  With the exception of Olivia Wilde as Quorra, the acting in this movie is bland and uninteresting.

My biggest gripe with this movie is the screenplay.  A lot of critics have been complaining about the story; and while I think it is better than most of them believe, there are still some pretty big problems.  The story has a great foundation, solid character motivations, and a strong mythology to work from; but the script is filled with bad, awkward dialogue and a plot that is cliché.

It seems like the filmmakers were stuck trying to make up for problems with the original while trying to pay respects to it, but the result is a story that could have been so much better than it was.  A big problem I have with this movie and the story is that instead of trying to make an individual film that is unique, the filmmakers set up a lot of characters and nods that only exist to set up a trilogy; and that is shoddy filmmaking in my opinion.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com

Despite the major problems with it, there is still enough in the story to enjoy and the effects make for an entertaining film.  If you’re a geek or a fan of the first TRON, you will like this Legacy.  If you’re just an average moviegoer or didn’t like the original, you’ll still find something to like in this movie.

RATING: 8/10

Front page photo from rottentomatoes.com.

TITLE: The Tourist
STARRING: Angelina Jolie, Johnny Depp, Paul Bettany, Timothy Dalton, Rufus Sewell
DIRECTOR: Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
STUDIO: Sony Pictures
RATED: PG-13
RUN TIME: 103 minutes
RELEASED: December 10

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

Since it’s the holiday season, there are a barrage of family films geared toward kids and not much for adults. Trying to fill this void is The Tourist starring Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp; you might be better off finding something else.

Elise (Jolie) is running from gangsters and being followed by the British police because her lover, Alexander, stole millions from the crime boss who employed him. She receives a letter from Alexander telling her to get on a train to Venice and to find someone who looks enough like him to throw off the cops and the gangsters. On the train she finds Frank (Depp), a math teacher from Wisconsin, and decides to set him up. Soon, Frank finds himself enchanted by Elise and on the run from gangsters trying to kill him.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

Since most people are going to see this movie for Jolie and Depp, they should know ahead of time the chemistry between the two stars is not good. They do a good job with their individual roles, but when they are together there is no real spark. A lot of it has to with the script, which was my biggest gripe with the film. But part of it has to do with the fact that these are actors who just have no spark between them. Jolie and Depp are actors who follow completely different styles in their work, and putting them together in this film just does not yield any results.

But as I said earlier, my biggest problem with this film is the script; if the story had been better then maybe Jolie and Depp would have worked as a screen couple. There is no real development between them; the story they have to work with is filled with clichés, boring action scenes (a chase in a canal with slow moving boats is not that exciting), and twists that are obvious but make no sense with what was shown earlier. There is some great cinematography, the Venice setting is beautiful, and the film gets a little better near the end; but the story and direction are very misguided, and the twists at the end just make it worse.

This movie has been in developmental hell for five years. Its stars were originally Tom Cruise and Charlize Theron. So I’m willing to take into account that this movie has been reworked and rewritten way too many times. But it still doesn’t change the fact its not as good as it could have been with the talent it had to work with.

RATING: 4/10

TITLE: The Next Three Days
STARRING: Russell Crowe, Elizabeth Banks, Liam Neeson, Olivia Wilde, Brian Dennehy
DIRECTOR: Paul Haggis
STUDIO: Highway 61 Films, Lionsgate
RATED: PG-13
RUN TIME: 122 min
RELEASED: November 19

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

Hello readers, my Facebook page has been going crazy with most of my friends talking about how they are going to the next Harry Potter movie. I want to see it as well; but my desire to see it is not as strong as my desire to not see a movie surrounded by a hundred kids trying to cast a spell on me with a toy wand. So if you’re like me and you don’t want to go to the theater for Harry Potter, The Next Three Days is a good substitute.

Russell Crowe plays John, a community college professor who is living the good life with his wife, Lara (Banks), and their son.  But one morning, the cops arrest Laura for murdering her boss; after her final appeal fails and Laura tries to kill herself John decides to take drastic measures.  He begins to plan her escape from prison and encounters all the problems that come with it.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

There is a lot that this movie does very well. Director Paul Haggis crafts some amazing scenes of genuine tension and emotion that really pull the audience in the movie. The story is very strong in the first part of this movie and shifts to good chase sequences towards the second half.

Crowe is very good in the role of man who is not only trying to save his family but is a man who can’t seem to adjust to the real world when everything has been taken from him and retreats to this romantic idea of a man rescuing his love from a horrible prison.

There are a few things about the film that bug me.  The first half features good story and some well-rounded characters that could build to an interesting ending, but by the time of the prison break, this has been replaced by a conclusion that doesn’t fit completely what we have seen so far.

The pacing of the movie makes it feel longer than it is, and while the cast does a great job, Crowe is the only one with a character who is truly fleshed out.  And personally, the prison break really stretches my suspension of disbelief when a good chunk of the plan hinges on skills learned from instructional videos on YouTube.

Despite the problems, The Next Three Days is still a decent movie that will be entertaining, if not memorable.

RATING: 8/10

TITLE: Skyline
STARRING: Eric Balfour, Scottie Thompson, Donald Faison, Brittany Daniels, David Zayas
DIRECTOR: The Brothers Strause
STUDIO: Rogue Pictures, Relativity Media, Hydraulx Entertainment, Black Monday Film Services, Universal Pictures
RATED: PG-13
RUN TIME: 80 min
RELEASED: November 12

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

I am not going to mince words in this movie review, Skyline is a really shitty movie. There was a lot of talk about this movie being the next District 9; this could only happen if we live in an alternate reality where District 9 was the one of the worst films of 2009.

Skyline follows a group of people who got drunk the night before and wake up in the middle of an alien invasion. With people being brainwashed by a blue light and sucked up into a spaceship, the partygoers have to find a way to escape and survive before they are taken.

So what’s good about this movie? The creature designs are okay and there are nice effects throughout. What’s bad in this film? Everything else.  The direction is unimaginative and inept, the plot does not make anyone care about the walking clichés that pass for characters or when something happens. The acting in this movie made me want laugh out loud or groan and the characters are just begging to be killed when they keep making stupid mistake after stupid mistake.  The action scenes are either boring, clichéd, or directed in the absolute worst way possible.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com.

Also, the general tone of this movie feels off; the story should make the audience feel genuinely scared and the experience should feel hopeless, but really no one in the audience cares what happens; they just want the movie to be over so they can get out of the theater and never tell anyone they spent money to see this. I could list more things that are bad in this film but the article would take forever to read. The only reason to see this movie is if you and your friends are at home with nothing to do and want to waste two hours making fun of a movie, which isn’t a challenge with this film.

The directors, The Brothers Strause, directed the terrible Alien vs. Predator: Requiem and claimed that 20^th Century Fox was the reason that the movie was bad. Considering the fact that this was an independent film that the two of them were in charge of, there really is no one else to blame for this awful movie.

RATING: 1/10

Front page photo from rottentomatoes.com.

TITLE: Megamind
STARRING: Will Ferrell, Tina Fey, Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill, David Cross
DIRECTOR: Tom McGrath
STUDIO: DreamWorks
RATING: PG
RUN TIME: 96 min
RELEASE DATE: Nov. 5th

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

The traditional superhero/supervillain structure has been toyed with numerous times in comic books, TV, and movies; if it is made fun of in an interesting way it makes for quality entertainment. With that in mind, if you are going to see the new film Megamind for something more than kid entertainment then you will be disappointed.

The movie follows supervillain Megamind (Ferrell) who was sent to Earth on a rocket from a doomed planet along with his nemesis Metro Man (Pitt), who comes from a neighboring planet. After years of fighting, Megamind finally beats Metro Man and takes over Metro City; but realizes he is nothing without a superhero.

This movie boasts some nice 3D effects and good work from its voice actors, but as someone who is over the age of 10, this movie did not appeal to me. DreamWorks has been able to make animated films that can appeal to both adults and kids, but Megamind clearly is a kids-only affair. The clichés that are present in every kid movie show up here and are as predictable as ever. While the beginning plays very well and there are parts in the middle that are kind of humorous, the rest of it plays to the kids and it does this well enough. There is a good message about how our upbringing shapes that we become and who we really are on the inside, but it becomes lost as the movie goes on.

Image from rottentomatoes.com.

The other thing that is really disappointing is the use of the characters. Ferrell is good as the titular character but his act get very tired quickly in the film. Tina Fey’s character Roxanne Ritchi starts off as the most interesting character in this movie because she is aware of how idiotic the fight between Megamind and Metro Man is, but as the movie goes on, she becomes less interesting and the movie suffers.

What’s disappointing is that there is potential to make a strong film that can play to both adults and kids, but it falls apart towards the end and becomes your standard kids movie for the holiday season. Megamind is a good movie to take children too, but it does not have what it takes to really reach an older audience like some of DreamWorks’ other animated movies.

RATING: 6/10

Front page image from rottentomatoes.com.

TITLE: Paranormal Activity 2
STARRING: Kate Featherston, Micah Sloat, Sprague Grayden
DIRECTOR: Tod Williams
STUDIO: Paramount Pictures
RATED: R
RUN TIME: 91 min
RELEASE DATE: October 22

The first Paranormal Activity came out of nowhere and became a horror phenomenon. Because of its huge success, it was inevitable that Hollywood would make a sequel.  Considering the trend of really bad sequels for horror phenomenons like Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, I expected a cheap movie that would make me beg for the two hours of my life back. While the movie is still pretty cheap, it capitalizes on what worked in the first film and expands the story in a way that does not feel extremely tacked on.

After the birth of their baby, a family returns home looking to begin a happy life. It is around that time that Kate (Featherston), who was haunted by a demon in the first movie, shows up to see her sister (Grayden). That is when the trouble begins. Soon things start shaking in the middle of the night, the dog is acting nuts, and the craziness begins. I’m not going to mention more, because there are some decent surprises in this movie that would be spoiled if I did.

Image from rottentomatoes.com

This movie is not original and it does not take a completely new format. What it does is take everything that was good in the first movie and expand it well. There are more characters to be afraid for, the environment is bigger, and the scares are just as good. The setting is expanded from a bedroom to an entire house and the scares utilize the entire environment to frighten the hell out of the audience. The sound design in this movie is so good that sometimes you are more afraid of what you hear than what you see. The sequel builds on what was established in the first film so well that part of the terror comes from knowing what will happen before the characters do. The demon from the first movie is no longer banging things together and slamming doors, but it feels more like an ever-present monster that will strike at any moment which is a big improvement.

One of the biggest improvements is that the sequel presents us with characters that are not complete idiots (and idiots is the nicest way I can describe the characters from the first movie). They may not be smartest people ever in a horror movie, but they are at least competent enough to realize something strange is going on and seek help from someone who can deal with this; versus the characters from the first movie who either do nothing or do some of the stupidest things I have ever seen done in a horror movie.

To be fair, the format of this film lends itself to easy scares because the audience is deprived of typical things like creepy music and stereotypical direction, which make most horror movies predictable.

Overall, this is a good horror movie that will scare people this Halloween; and it is a good sequel that builds on what was established and makes it much scarier.

RATING: 8.5/10

Front page image from latimes.com

TITLE: Let Me In
STARRING: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Chloe Grace Moretz, Richard Jenkins, Elias Koteas
DIRECTOR: Matt Reeves
STUDIO: Overture Films
RATING: R
RUN TIME: 115 min
RELEASE DATE: Oct. 1

By Seth Miller
Staff Writer, Part-Time Ninja

The original Swedish film Let the Right One In was beloved by critics and horror fans for its original take on the classic vampire story, so it’s a pretty tough sell to convince them that the American remake Let Me In is just as good. In my opinion, Let Me In won’t win points for originality but it’s still a good horror movie.

As in the original, Owen (McPhee), a 12-year-old kid who is constantly bullied at school and ignored at home is on the verge of snapping and doing something homicidal.  Around this time, he meets Abby (Moretz) and her father (Jenkins); Abby is soon revealed to be a vampire and begins to bring Owen into her world.

As a horror movie, this film is definitely one to watch.  The horror is not just some monster that pops out of nowhere to surprise some unsuspecting teenager, but it is a general creepy tone and psychological fear that exists throughout the entire picture combined with traditional scares that creates fear in the audience.  If you are paying attention to the film, you know exactly how this is going to turn out and that just makes everything that happens so much more insidious.  Every scene is directed beautifully, and it’s fantastic to see a vampire in the movies who isn’t some emo vampire that whines about how horrible it is to be a vampire. Moretz does a great job of portraying a vampire who pretends to be an innocent girl, but really doesn’t mind being one or killing people mercilessly for their blood.

As a remake though, this film definitely hurts in this regard.  What I consider a good remake is one that takes the story and adding something new to it; not a shot-for-shot film because what’s the point of seeing the same thing in a different setting with different actors if there is nothing new? A lot of things that were in the original like the creepy sexual tone that Abby has towards Owen are still in the remake but there is also added details like the expanding Abby’s relationship with her father or things that were removed to move the film along like taking out most of the scenes involving Owen’s father.

Photo from rottentomatoes.com

The problem is that while the remake comes up with a few new ideas and new ways to kill a few characters, it relies too many times on scenes from the original which is sad because the director Matt Reeves has clearly shown that he is capable of coming up with great ways to keep this remake fresh and interesting. Also, it ends up doing some things worse than the original; in the original, Owen is shown to be just as much of a monster in the making as Abby, but the remake barely touches on it.

Overall, the problems with Let Me In are pretty noticeable, but they are balanced out by great performances and little tweaks to distinguish it that really make it a very good film. If you saw the original, you’ll like it but won’t be surprised by anything in it; but if this is your first time seeing it, you will definitely like it.

RATING: 9/10

Front page image from rottentomatoes.com.