Like Anne Rice’s Lestat; Edward Cullen has that sexy, romantic and mysterious complex going for him. But that’s where similarities end as far as vampire movies are concern because Twilight was innocent and pure in plot, filled with teenage angst and social challenges. The blood-thirsty, horror driven and sexually charged were all little to non-existence.

The lovely Kri sten Stewart came with the right amount of insecurity, curiosity and strength to play opposite Robert Pattinson who must be a household name by now among the girls. Their temptation for each other is strong but their touch is forbidden, and Hardwicke really played to these two extremes to drive her movie.

But when this took up three quarters of the storyline, it became too much of a good thing. The story development for the two leads just kept ploughing on with no end in sight. And it slowed the story progression down really fast and dragged on really slowly.

So much so that when the other Cullens appeared onscreen, they were such a pleasant distraction because they brought with them the much needed dynamics to offset what’s being focused on over and over. A bit more focus on the other siblings, or on Bella’s classmates for that matter, would have made the movie a lot better.

And even when the “bad” vampires showed up in the final act, and no matter how condensed they were written in, they were also a welcome to the monotonous.

Rating: 4 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

What this movie truly lacked in becoming a great film was in the storyline. There wasn’t anything particularly interesting or special about it. As a thriller, it’s not all that thrilling. And it’s not awfully intelligent, nor is it action-packed enough to be all that exciting - although Scott does bring in some hard hitting stuff when there’s a call for it but there’s less than a handful of those scenes.

The romance between those involved felt more like an obligatory event, and one such a story could have done without - but the ending of the movie revolved around it instead. The moment this friendship blossomed, the story seemed to take a downward turn and lose its original sparkle that has guided the movie so far. Had the focus of the story been on the men only, I wonder if the movie would have had a better and stronger ending.

Futhermore, DiCaprio’s character did not give him the depth and complexity that his previous roles came with. But on the other hand, Crowe looked comfortable enough in his role out of the limelight. And the slick Mark Strong as a potential backstabber was magnetic.

Don’t get me wrong now, this was still an entertaining piece. The execution by Scott was all there with impressive explosions and a compelling torture scene. But I just expected more from these three names. To be fair though, it was adapted from a novel so the blame should not fall on them.

Rating: 7 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

The idea behind the story was a very good one. And to follow the story of Bolt was a sweet love affair. The characterisations weren’t anything special but the audience could really feel for the them. And that’s all a movie needs to do, really - to have heart and to make people care.

Disney this time without Pixar did show why Pixar is so superior. But while it lacked in the animation and colours when compared to what Pixar could bring, the story was still strong enough to carry its own weight. And that’s what Disney has always been strong at.

And it didn’t hurt when they can make Bolt look as cute as he was.

Agreeably, the jokes were aimed more towards the adults so some jokes the children may not get. But there’s enough for everyone to be entertained from start to finish, even when you know exactly how it would end. And best thing is that there never was a dull moment in there.

Rating: 8 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

With an all-star cast delivering their best right from the get-go, viewers are all in for such a treat. As if having George Clooney, John Malkovich and Brad Pitt aren’t enough in one movie; the brothers still manage to squeeze in the great talents of Tilda Swinton and Frances McDormand. And all of the characters come with their own personal quirks that are played to perfection by the actor.

With such complexities in the script, the direction has to be able to catch up because it is so easy to lose the plot while focusing on the development of each wonderfully-written character. But the Cohen Brothers know exactly how to deliver the movie and deliver they did because at the end of the day, the audience know exactly what is going on with every scene.

As for the actors, without them, the movie would not have worked as well. All of the main cast deserve a nod at the Oscars. Especially John Malkovich portraying the loose-cannon and a drunk-in-denial is brilliant. Right from the beginning when he is accused of having a drinking problem, that shock on his face is just priceless and extremly funny.

My only reserve, and a slight one at that, was Brad Pitt. I still saw Brad Pitt in his character Chad and was a little disappointed. But I also see how this could very well be subjective.

As erratic as the movie may get, the punch lines are never off target. And the best of them comes from the irresistible chemistry between Pitt and McDormand; as well as, and quite surprisingly to be honest, from Simmons and Rasche, as short-lived as their scenes may be.

“Report back to me when it makes sense,” commands Simmons’ character. And the next time we see Simmons, that’s the start of the funniest scene in movies for 2008. I laughed so hard that I almost cried. When was the last time you laughed this hard at the cinema?

Rating: 8 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Co-wrote, co-produced and self-directed by Stiller, this satirical comedy is a send-up for Hollywood’s actors, directors, agents and everyone else in the movie business; the script is cleverly written with care and precision and is delivered with surprisingly focused direction by Stiller. This will certainly help his decelerating career.

Stiller should be doing roles that does not require him to be too animated, like this one, from now on. He and Jack Black were truly enjoyable in this movie. Partly because there were a few other characters to focus on, especially the great Robert Downey Jr; and these two declining jokers never really flourished to their usual selves. So they were onscreen for minimal period but for maximum effect. And that worked wonders.

Downey Jr of course stole most of the show. His character was hilarious and effective; and putting a Black actor, Brandon T Jackson - as Alpa Chino, to “properly represent”, brought the funny to new heights.

But the true scene stealer was the A-lister in a fat suit. I honestly didn’t recognise him until his last few scenes, though his voice was still familiar throughout.

What Stiller got right was really in his direction. The storyline for such a movie-within-a-movie rarely made sense at all, especially when it’s filled with absurdities and inconsistencies. But Stiller was able to hold it all together and even delivered the funniest scenes by recreating familiar dramatic moments more than a few times that really hit home with movie fans.

Another great move made by the producers is hiring Academy Award cinematographer John Toll, who is also responsible for Braveheart and Legends Of The Fall. There never was a moment where a scene looked dull.

Only time will tell if this movie would be one to be remembered, but for this year, it was definitely one of the highlights. And kudos to Ben Stiller!

Rating: 8 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

In this second instalment, the story revolves around the “origin” of Alex the lion. And the writers are going with a story arc that has worked before, and are blatanly taking a lot from the pages of The Lion King. Even the protagonist voiced by the omni-present Alec Baldwin reminds a lot of Scar. But while Scar was a ruthless threat, Makunga here is silly and pathetic. Well, it is a comedy after all, right?

As now without having to deal with introductions, the four stars each begin to develop their own sub-plot to contribute to the main storyline. Even the karate-Nana has been brought all the way from New York but that was the most boring character for me. Sasha Baron Cohen’s loony King Julien was surprisingly entertaining as he got more screen time and his jokes were more pronounced than before.

However, there just wasn’t enough time to really look at each of the main characters, let alone the sub-cast which also included the penguins. The running time of the movie was just too short to be effective as each scene was rushed along one after another.

The only upside was that there wasn’t much drama involved as the movie focused on comedy and laughter. But even so, it meant that there wasn’t anything serious to make the older audience care for the characters. One could say there just wasn’t any heart in the movie.

The only thing I was impressed with were the colours of the scenery. Some were truly breathtaking, for a cartoon.

Rating: 5 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

And after decades and decades of the same old thing, I’m so glad Daniel Craig came along and the whole outlook to the Bond franchise has changed. It’s darker, more effective, more exciting (but I use the word quite loosely there). There’s still the penache and style, they have to keep some semblance of the James Bond, but at least things looked like they are getting more realistic. “Getting”, though far from there yet.

Comparing however to Casino Royale, I remember I enjoyed that more than this new one. Partly because the story there was more straight forward than this one, which was really confusing for me on the plot and agenda. If you’re distracted during the dialogue exchange, things will just fly over your head and you’ll never catch your footing again.

Director Marc Foster’s action scenes are fast and hard-hitting, suitable for a Bond film but quite surprising for someone of his reputation. Some scenes even come with fantastic camera work though they are few and far in between. And this instalment feels more like a Jason Bourne movie rather than a 007 in more ways than one.

Rooftop chases and fist-fights that were plentiful in Bourne movies were never given this much attention nor choreography in previous Bond flicks. Also, there are almost next to no gadgets used, making the two feel even less different from each other. I for one can live without those gadgets.

It’s about time the beautiful and leggy Olga Kurylenko has more than just the occassional screen time as she starred for the third straight time opposite men with guns. It’ll be interesting to see if she does flourish from here on out, but hopefully not in another action movie.

Also, as the arch nemesis, Mathieu Amalric’s Dominic Greene is quite the let down. Though he comes with his own quirks and sneers that predominate previous Bond villains, he doesn’t have anything else that’s uniquely his; and the ending fight never pushes the audience into an adrenalin-frenzy.

But I do feel the success of this new generation of Bond flicks comes greatly from the addition of Paul Haggis. But somewhere along the action and style, nobody focused on Bond’s pain and loss anymore when in actual fact, it was those emotions that drove him into the hunt in the first place. Had it been more emotional, especially for a James Bond, it would have been great.

But when all’s said and done, Craig should be the better Bond of this new generation.

Rating: 6 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Even though the movie was shot in 2006 and only given a released date this year, and unless someone erased my memory of 2006, hairstyles from two years ago were never that bad.

Whatever made the Pang Brothers felt like they needed to revisit their own work from back in 1999 never really transcended through the screen from this udpated version. Instead it was filled with cliches that are usually found in this genre. If this was back in 1999, then it may have been more well received. Even if it was 2006, this would still have been stale.

Nicholas Cage’s acting also wasn’t anything spectacular here. In fact, he looked very stupid while trying to do some hand gestures when communicating with Charlie Yeung’s deaf-mute character. (And she’s deaf and dumb, not blind. How could anyone fall for that “hair”.)

Yeung became the weakest link in this movie. Her acting as a deaf-mute never looked natural from beginning to end. It looked like someone didn’t do her homework in character-study.

And the sub-characters, Kong and Aom, who became a major part in the second half of the story, had less than 10 minutes in total focused on them. There was just not enough foundation to build on in any of their relationships; and when the directors did focus on the emotional scenes, they were fleeting at best.

What were they even thinking when they wrote the part where Kong bought Aom a piece of jewellery and she immediately fell in love with him? She’s a stripper and he’s buying her expensive jewellery? True love just like that, sure. That’s just lazy writing from the Pang Brothers.

The silliest of scenes and certainly the most unnecessary one was when Yeung’s character performed on stage in a traditional group dance for Cage. Obviously the directors never saw how difficult it was for deaf-mute actress Marlee Matlin to compete in Dancing With The Stars.

Although the Pang Brothers’ trademark for a dark setting and a dark storyline, and their eye for capturing local scenery and flavour, did somewhat drive the movie forward; the main problem was with originality and ingenuity. Even the action sequences were not exciting as they never amounted to much of anything.

Rating: 3  /10

(all images from imdb.com)

Director John Moore did well in making it look like a video game. But a little too well perhaps, that the story progression suffered a lot. The scenes felt disjointed from each other as they jumped from one to the other, cutting out a lot of in-betweens that would make you wonder what could have or should have happened. The protagonist moved from location to location in a straight line, as if some invisible force was guiding him (perhaps a person with a game controller).

The casting of Olga Kurylenko and Mila Kunis as sisters were also bad choices. One’s a supermodel and the other is just 5 feet tall. I couldn’t even decide which is the elder one. Both of them also lacked screen time, especially Kunis’ role which was never properly defined. And that’s more than I can say for Amaury Nolasco as the villain.

For the first hour of the movie, the storyline looked straight forward enough to be a crime / vigilante genre, but towards the ending it started becoming science fiction and fantasy - a la Constantine. I don’t think that’s what the game was about at all.

What this movie lacked was hard hitting action sequences. The pace was just too slow with not much going on that boredom inevitably set in very close after the opening and lingered throughout the entire movie. The only time when it got interesting was when those winged silhouettes showed up, looming with mystery, danger and menace.

But in the end, they didn’t add much substance to the story either and felt more like a gimmick because the whole movie would have tanked even more without them.

Mark Wahlberg gives a respectable performance as a tortured, lone avenger searching for revenge without over-acting his part, and without constantly sounding exasperated like he did in The Happening. However I hope the producers realise this doesn’t warrant a sequel.

Rating: 4 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

As if inspired by Michael Bay, this action thriller has so many explosions that some were not even necessary or warranted other than for visual impact. Though I admit they did keep the entertainment level up and lure the audience in with some false sense of urgency.

The movie actually started out as a potentially good one but it soon becomes implausible and unbelievable. The movie suggested that in this day and age, every computer chip can be connected to one another and controlled — down to the most remote machinery like a standalone crane, even electric cables. It’s just too far-fetched.

It was not until nearer to the end before the audience realised that this story is based more on science-fiction rather than a realistic theme. But by then, it’s already too late. All the previous over-the-top events have already put a bad taste in the mouths of its audience and that feeling just wouldn’t go away that easily. What kept the audience in their seats were perhaps some very well choreographed action sequences and properly directed and coordinated by Caruso.

LaBeouf no doubt can play an action hero character but he also knows how to play one without channeling heroism, and he did that well in this one, playing the unlikely hero that saved the day in the end.

Rating: 5 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)