This was an action movie through and through. Audiences going for it expected it to entertain hard with action, and that’s exactly what they were getting, if not more.

The Hollywood formula for a movie like G I Joe came in a familiar packaging. Throw in a young cast of good looking actors, pump in enough budget to shoot almost the whole movie in CGI, and have explosions every other minute for the sake of grandiose.

The writers (Stuart Beattie, David Elliot and Paul Lovett) took the same direction as Star Trek and made this a semi-origin movie whereby Duke cobra2.JPGand Ripcord started off as outsiders and had to earn their ranks into the elite team of the Joes – wrong decision. One of the most unnecessary sequences was the training montage which is ineffective in storytelling; though it did give Brandon Fraser a very distracting cameo.What the movie did right was out of the 118 minutes running time, 100 of them were all about the action; and they were hard hitting and fast paced. Usually the action will take place simultaneously in a few locations so the scenes constantly jumped from one to another.

Credit must go to director Stephen Sommers for the smooth transitions and keeping the excitement on a high throughout the entire movie. His slow motions also came in all the right places, creating highlights such as Snake Eyes’ intro. Another impressive feat for Sommers was having the camera very still in an ambitious action movie like this so that the audience could see exactly what’s going on. Not many directors have done this lately.

What suffered most though were the characters which were not properly written and not consistent at all with the cartoons’ direction. The poor writing may also have contributed to the atrocious acting, apart from those who were fortunate enough to be wearing masks.

Just because the hero always gets the girl in Hollywood, Ripcord and Scarlett were duty-bound to induce some hormonal effects. The script was unconvincing and again inconsistent with the history of the Joes because Snake Eyes and Scarlett was the celebrated couple.

Snake Eyes is by far the coolest character but because of his silence, he couldn’t be effective in a movie. However, every time he was on screen, he was always doing something cool (credit to Ray Park). If only the writers had waited for a Snake Eyes origin movie before delving into his past with Storm Shadow because those two deserved a movie of their own.

But when the intent of a movie was all about big, flashy, uninterrupted action – bringing a cartoon to life for the old-school fans and action junkies – this movie achieved that, and more.

Comparing to the other recent Paramount release – Michael Bay’s Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen – though Bay is the better wizard and though both movies were big and loud, G. I. Joe was not a mess to watch.

The story was as straight forward as it could get; and even with terrible acting, ridiculous dialogue and cheesy one-liners, the unrelentless and mindless action will keep you gasping for air.

Reviewer’s Rating: 7 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Half-Blood Prince was dark and menacing and was far from what this series was when it started with The Sorcerer’s Stone.

With the death of Cedric Diggory at the end of The Order Of The Phoenix, there finally came a sense of dire danger. But the change in direction the story arc has taken also became more interesting and thrilling. And This looming darkness has carried on into this sixth instalment, bringing back director David Yates for seconds.

The driving force behind the story this time came from Harry searching for the evil left behind by Voldemort. And his encounters with Draco became more than just shoving and throwing useless punches at each other; they are actually hurting each other now with deadly spells.

Perhaps deliberately less fanciful than previous instalments, The Half-Blood Prince puts its characters closer to life-and-death drama as Yates injected more grit and grime into the filming, and making the story more serious in preparation for the final story arc, which will be made in two parts.

Radcliffe is slowly and finally growing into the role. His acting has come a long way since he started the series. And so are his cast-mates; although while Watson is becoming a young woman in her own right, Grint has developed a physique that is beginning to be difficult to hide his real age.

Felton as Draco portrayed the biggest change in character since the last instalment, fully embracing and yet still too young to understand the dark side. He definitely has been given more this time and is a fine and welcomed change from his usual one-dimensional character.

But the best performance belonged to Jim Broadbent with his eccentric portrayal of the professor who holds a secret link to young Voldemort.

The only character that should have been given more screen time is Bellatrix because Helena Bonham Carter plays her with such care-less abandonment that is pure evil and yet mesmerising at the same time.

But who’s the Half-Blood Prince? And this is where the movie fails to make a connection. There were only one or two points in the movie where you will be asking this question because for the rest of the time, the movie-makers do not make you wonder or show you how Harry is affected by this mysterious character.

Having said that, however, this is still one of the stronger entries from the franchise; and hopefully it will bring out the best in the finale.

Reviewer’s Rating: 7 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Not that anyone was betting on him to deliver another brilliant idea like Tropic Thunder, but with the sequel of Night At The Museum, it’s as if he didn’t even try.

Though understandably this wasn’t completely his fault since he didn’t direct or write Battle Of The Smithsonian, but it would be hard to believe that he had no say whatsoever in the production of the movie.

As a sequel, the movie overflowed with big names and bigger special effects. Statues and bobbleheads came to life, paintings on the wall offered alternate worlds, and to every fangirl’s dream, the Jonas Brothers showed up as three little singing cupids. Well, not literally, but a reaction is almost a definite effect.

The Smithsonian Museum was one of the main attractions of this movie but didn’t mean that cinemagoers were going to learn a thing or two about history. Accuracy and logic weren’t exactly the main concerns, especially when Kahmunrah spoke in a lisping British aristocratic accent by Hank Azaria.

However, Azaria as the Egyptian pharaoh is one of the highlights this movie had to offer. He gave a hilarious and entertaining main villain and also lent his voice to Abraham Lincoln and The Thinker, whose Bronx accent may or may not have been a little insulting.

Amy Adams impersonating the famed aviatrix with a screwball-heroine twist was perhaps the best character here. She was the only one who was really giving acting a go, portraying Amelia as charming, likeable and a delight to watch.

But there’s no way she could have saved the entire script from being lazy and brainless. It’s as if the main concern of director Shawn Levy was to just reproduce the first movie with a few new faces and more computer generated images to make it fresh again.

Even the jokes failed to stimulate as they felt more like an afterthought. The writers must have tried hard to be original while mixing in pop-culture with historical characters that the end product felt fragmented and rushed; and often with lack of continuity in story progression.

Things happen for convenience sake and usually with no good reason. Why did Stiller and Adams had to run away from the army when all they were trying to do was to retrieve a bobblehead? Why couldn’t they just explain?

And with so many new players involved, the older talents like Steve Coogan and Robin Williams had nowhere to shine and no way to form a connection, or make the audience care.

Rating: 5 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

The original Logan was born a mutant with feral instincts, as well as feral ferocity, and was constantly struggling between in control and going berserk. In this Hollywood version however; Logan/Wolverine was tamed and clean-cut, already on the side of good, and dangerously bordering on plain and boring.

This movie had no problem drawing in the crowds. Geeks and the general male population will be there while the female may be attracted by the line-up of Hugh Jackman, Liev Schrieber, Taylor Kitsch and Ryan Reynolds in leather.

Reynolds had one of the best combat sequence, one great line and one brilliant I-could-care-less-what-you-think salute.

Kitsch plays Gambit and did not disappoint as he properly delivered his role as another fan-favourite and much-awaited character; though his accent was all wrong.

Jackman and Schreiber really kept the movie grounded and gave their characters the much needed depth to what would otherwise be just another mindless action flick. Jackman has always been the anchor in these X-movies and he did well yet again even with a half-baked story.

The action sequences here were turbo-charged, visually stunning, and almost unrelenting from beginning to end. But here’s where the big problem laid.

Apart from some continuity issues being left out (like how the two brothers have different last names or how they stopped ageing all of a sudden); with all that action crammed into the movie, what it really lacked was the emotional connection that seemed devoid entirely.

Wolverine and Sabretooth jumping at each other with minimal dialogue whenever they meet didn’t really offer any good storytelling. It could have been better had the story just focused on the origin of Wolverine and his rivalry with Sabretooth, really develop how they fell apart and how the hatred grew, rather than a pure adrenalin movie.

It could have been more interesting as well had the story highlighted Wolverine in the gray area between good and evil, battling within his own psyche to be more human than animal, making his character more raw rather than so refined right from the beginning.

And cut out the useless cameos of underdeveloped characters like Cyclops and focused more on Gambit would have been nice.

Rating: 6 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

One word to sum up this movie would be “life” – which is also what’s written in beautiful cursive fonts behind the title of movie posters, easily missed unless you look closely.

Benjamin Button was Fitzgerald’s reply to Mark Twain’s observation that the best part of life comes at the beginning and the worst at the end. So, what if a person is born old, age the opposite way and dies young? What then?

It was just amazing what Fincher and his team has achieved in the ageing process. From “baby” Benjamin looking like ET and then going through a seamless transition from a man in his 70s to his 50s, to Blanchett looking absolutely believable be it at 20 or at 60. But the most unnerving sight came when Pitt appeared 20 years younger, as if he was superimposed from Legends Of The Fall. Either the visual effects have made huge leaps and bounds or the makeup artist is to die for.

Pitt took on the role with quiet confidence, portraying great sympathy and gentleness. His performance was so smooth that the illusion of age disappeared along with the visual wizardry. Blanchett went from appearing confidently invincible to completely vulnerable with great ease. Tilda Swinton oozed with aristocracy while Taraji P Henson caught everyone by surprise with an Oscar-nominated performance.

What really worked here is Fincher’s storytelling. It was clear that the story and the characters took priority, and the special effects were just visual aids to the story’s progression and not the main show.

Fincher and Roth turning this fantastical conceit into a love story was a joy to experience, and a sadness when it ends. They did not sugar-coat nor force emotions upon their audience. Instead they allowed their visuals to speak and let the audience interpret however they will.

Movies speak differently to different people and this movie speaks to all ages. One interpretation is that the young and the old – the beginning and the end – shared more similarities than differences (as seen when Benjamin, around 70, first meets Daisy, no more than 10). And no matter how one is born; the journey of life is what matters most.

Therefore, worry more for the life yet to live, not blame how we come to life or how we will meet death. And at the centre of it all, as corny as it may sound, love conquers all.

Rating: 9 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

To be fair, Hollywood can do a lot of things right. But they also never seemed to learn from mistakes. This is one of the times ( the other being The Forbidden Kingdom and Street Fighter: The Legend Of Chun-Li) when Hollywood should have allowed Asian actors to thrive in the movie, instead of placing an American in the forefront to lead the movie. How do you address a Caucasian “Goku” with a straight face anyway?

If nothing else, Memoirs Of A Geisha has already proven that a full headcount of Asian actors can work. But the producers probably already knew that they didn’t have good enough a script, or a director for that matter, to pull it off.

At the helm is James Wong, and again he has received a sizable budget for the movie; unfortunately he is still as lost as his last movie, The One. All he seemed to be able to do this time was to put in shots of cleavages whenever he can, almost to a point of being disgusting.

The plot itself is weird, vague and confusing. What made it worse is the lack of pacing for the entire movie. The scenes jump from one to the other without much development. Hence the actors suffer from some serious amateurish acting and character crisis.

The lovely and talented Emmy Rossum from a promising elevated performance as Christine in The Phantom Of The Opera somehow landed herself in this role with the most hideous outfit and hairdo. The great Chow Yun Fat has been reduced to that weird and sleazy uncle who refuses to dress his age and who nobody in the family wants to invite to family functions. Even though he’s Asian, he is the most miscast of the lot. Kind of reminded me of the director being a sleazy uncle always on the lookout for cleavages.

The production design as well was amateurish. The fantastical locations never looked real and somehow in a strange way that complemented the characters and all the lines the actors are forced to throw out; because everything just looked fake.

Coming out of the cinema, you don’t feel like you’ve just watched a Dragonball movie. It’s as if this isn’t the real movie but an imposter.

Reviewer’s Rating: 2 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

From the movie’s opening, it straight away jumped into its dark theme and violence, and why it’s rated R. Nothing in the fight scene between The Comedian and the mysterious assailant was watered down and the brutality of each punch was reinforced by an unrelenting choreography sequence.

Snyder is a visionary. Whether the result is appreciated, he is out to create something so cool and so different that no one has seen before. He’s done it in 300 and he’s doing it again here.

Watchmen, visually, is incredibly stunning. From the texture of the superhero costumes to the grime in their hair, from the colours you see onscreen to the meticulous production designs; Snyder’s knack – or obsession may be a better word – for details is one of the main reasons how this movie springs to life from a graphic novel.

But as stunning as the visuals go, Watchmen was still far from being perfect. From the ensemble, there were great performances like the supporting effort from Jeffrey Dean Morgan, and then there were the not-so-great from some of the main characters.

Unlike 300, where acting didn’t have to be the main focus, this wasn’t the case with Watchmen. The depth of each character required much psychological development in order to portray what the comic has so successfully achieved, and the adapted screenplay just didn’t have the luxury in time to delve into every individual. This left the actors an impossible task of showing any emotional growth on their part.

The writers also had to forego some of the important story arcs to recreate this story for the big screen. Balancing out a faithful adaptation and a crowd-pleaser meant having to sacrifice and compromise.

But it was Snyder who weaved all the fragments into one cohesive and progressive story that gripped at you right from the start. Where another visually pleasing adaptation, The Spirit, has failed; Watchmen has succeed in most parts.

Again to stress the point, this isn’t your average superhero movie. It’s a dark, dark story that awakens the intellectual, psychological and the philosophical. Amidst all the stunning visuals and smooth choreography, the topic of existentialism lies at its core.

Rating: 8 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Inkheart is another failed adaptation from a bestseller. The potential was all there, just that the script and delivery failed the book.

Director Iain Softley did not have enough focus on his characters. Though he told the story fine, he didn’t make the audience care for the characters unfortunately so by the end of it, we don’t really care what happen to say Dustfinger or if Mo can get his wife back.

The many characters introduced into the story from other fantasies such as Rapunzel and others were never really properly incorporated. They appear once in a while to keep things interesting and then nothing more on them or their fate in this fantasy. Worst of all, they do not give you the sense of wonder and marvel that would usually come with fantasy characters.

Rating: 3 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

And whether it’s newly inspired script with new writers, or the director and writer for the previous two movies Len Wiseman getting the boot; this third instalment is by far the most entertaining.

But without Wiseman’s stylishly over-the-top execution, however misguided as it was, as well as Kate Beckinsale’s star power, the entire outlook of the movie initially was very much in limbo; especially with what happened to a Rachel Weisz-less “The Mummy 3”.

Director Patrick Tatopoulos, who did the special effects for the previous two, came in with more modest ideas in terms of direction without all the stylised effects that Wiseman had so freely flaunted.

And this actually worked to his advantage because all that futuristic movements a la “The Matrix” would have been very out of place in the middle century. Also, due to a limited budget set by the producers, there were less special effects going on.

However, the downside with said limited budget was that when there was any special effects (the werewolf transformation for example), it looked really old-school and cheesy. And the fight scenes were unimpressive and even confusing without proper choreography. The final fight scene was most disappointing to say the least.

Those who were unfamiliar with Sheen during his first two forays into big-budget Hollywood-vehicle may not know he is actually a very good actor. All that should change as we finally see Sheen (if not in The Queen or Frost/Nixon) in the leading role, giving life to Lucian with brooding and compassionate complexity that is both feral and human.

Rhona Mitra replaced latex-laden Beckinsale as the strong female Vampire. Virtually an unknown, she generated much less expectation than Beckinsale and brought with her a fresh face and a fresh performance.

Though this instalment wasn’t the smartest or the most exciting fantasy flick, it does give this franchise some hope and is certainly the best of the series in all and every aspect.

Rating: 6 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

The movie showed why the novel is a bestseller but failed to do it any justice. Right from the start, the story progression was like a sprinter racing to get to the finishing line.

Director Gil Kenan, whose only other credit is the animated movie “Monster House” two years ago, made a rather weak transition from animation to live-action feature movie. Kenan failed to capture the emotions of his characters and the drama of the story as he tried to fit everything else in.

There were also many issues not addressed that may not sit well with the audience. For instance, the various conceptual flaws of a city underground for so long and how it survived without everyday necessities. Who produces toiletries and stationery? What about sewage and hospitals?

But even more so, how did the people of Ember become so naive and incurious? Why is everyone taking things so easily when their very existence is in the brink of extinction? There should have been a coup.

And what about those rodents and insects introduced into the story, how did they evolve into gigantic creatures? These issues should have been addressed to give the story more depth.

Fortunately for the movie, it was able to attract a great cast to play some colourful characters. Oscar-nominated Ronan is expressive and a dear to watch; Treadaway although was not as effective but played his part well enough. The supporting cast from the veterans like Bill Murray, Martin Landau and Tim Robbins provided the funny and the suspense.

Whether it’s the studio’s jurisdiction to keep the running time short or the lack of experience from the director that failed the storytelling, it was still a valiant effort from both parties. The background music also was a big help in setting the tone throughout each individual scene.

And Kenan’s vision for the city of Ember came through with very detailed imaginations. From the narrow and dank streets to the inside of Lina Mayfleet’s apartment, Kenan successfully brought them to life.

It is quite clear that “The City Of Ember” is a very interesting and exciting fantasy-adventure story, but it is just unfortunate that the movie rushed through all that.

Reviewer’s Rating: 6 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.