Tropic Thunder (2008)

Tropic Thunder is one of those films that I personally thought, has more than enough buzz-words and marketing campaigns surrounding its impending release that made the effort of ignoring this film in order to keep any expectations in around a normal level, is virtually impossible. Therefore, it's pretty understandable that I head to this film expecting on perhaps one of the best comedy of the year. In that sense though, the film is satisfying albeit it runs a wee bit too long for a comedy and an obvious tip of the scale regarding its actor performances.

Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) is a tried-true-and-tired action star has been. He teams up with another tried-and-tired comedy star, Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) and 5 time Academy Award winners, Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.) to shoot a film dubbed as "the most expensive war film ever made", Tropic Thunder. But the ego soon collides, and one decision after another put the actors and crew in a real-life situation as they crosses-path with opium smugglers amidst the depth of Vietnam jungle.

The film is more about Ben's take on Hollywood industry. About how Hollywood tends to squeeze the cow until the very last drop of milk (e.g sequels), evil producers, details attentive (useless) managers, drug-addictive actors, et cetera. As far as a commoner concerned, you could find pretty much every thing you need to know on how the industry worked in here. There's also a pretty hilarious take on why Sean Penn didn't even had a nod for I Am Sam. All in all, even if some of the jokes found here dangerously trotting, even breaching the lines of offensive attitudes, they're at least above average and thus made this film indeed, qualify as a serious candidate for one of the best comedy of the year. And some of the cameos are really worth the time on checking them out when the end credit rolls.

I personally couldn't get my head around Ben. Sure, he's been making some popular movies that no doubt most of you would be fond of remembering but, somehow, and I don't know why, I couldn't really spare any small amount of likenesses or gratitudes for him. But apparently, he has many friends in Hollywood that when he make this film as a some sort of mockumentary to this film, he'd get many support in and out of the screens. The most daring decision was of course to put Robert Downey Jr. as a dedicated Aussie actor who went as far as "re-pigmented" his skin in order to "correctly" portrayed the African-American actor in the Tropic Thunder film. And for a comedy that runs more than 90 minutes which is a long way to say "too-damn long", most of the time, the lines from Kirk that kept me going toward the finish line. Robert Downey Jr. is no doubt, an actor on a very different class of either Ben or Jack. Both of Ben / Jack seems like a sad sad foolish toddler who kicking in dirt to win some attentions ... and failed.

My rating: **1/2 / **** - A fun "mockumentary" on Hollywood, that albeit runs a bit too long, filled with uneven jokes that weren't as funny as the filmmakers think they are, able to provide some decent quality entertainment time that most of the moviegoers could enjoy. Robert Downey Jr. out-shined everyone else, and oh, pay attention to the cameos.

Quantum of Solace (2008)

Quantum of Solace. Even if I've seen most of the James Bond series thus far, I'm not and won't considered myself as an avid fan of the double-oh agent. Thus, I was totally indifferent when the news about Pierce Borsnan being replaced by David Craig starts to surface. Alas, as I've seen Mr.Craig in Layer Cake, I was known as seemingly the supporter of Craig as Bond. Well, it's merely because I hate it when people gave a presumptuous assumption on one's capability BEFORE they even see or experienced the said capability themselves. And guess who had the last laugh?

I dare to say that most viewers, casual or serious would agreed about the undeniable Craig factor when talking/discussing about Quantum of Solace. Again, portraying James Bond in his early career, Daniel Craig launches the suave agent into a more physical stretching tasks that required him to once again leap over buildings, avoid explosions, taming a speed-demon roadster, and not to mention, save the damsel in distress. Quantum of Solace is a direct sequel to Casino Royale, is the shortest James Bond film ever, and although the knowledge of previous film that precedes this film is minimum, it is at least recommended for a skim through to familiarize yourself with names and faces throughout this film.

Written by Paul Haggis, who wrote Crash, it was to be expected that this film is at least consists of couple layers of story as once again our agent is pitted against the very same yet un-named secret organization (before SPECTRE?) from the first film. This film's "official" Bond-girl, Camille (Olga Kurylenko) involved herself with this organization on a personal agenda that doesn't really deal with the organization itself directly. James Bond's employer is also testing their (her) trust on Bond's "unique" methods, some old names returns, and some familiar recurring character re-shapes themselves to a level we're all familiar, the villains are also has kinks and quirks of arrogance that makes me actually wonder why does the "good" guys didn't see that they were up to no good from the first sight. All in all, the violent and angry James Bond is return yet again, and even though it's different than the elegant spy he used to be known for through the decades of the franchise, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever of Daniel Craig's imminent increasing popularity as James Bond. Especially for the younger generation.

The film opens with beautiful car-chase sequence, and it's rarely stop from here on unless in a few moments required in order to advance the plot. In terms of action, it has everything I could think of. Bare-hand fights, check. Close-quarter combat, check. Boat-chase sequence, check. Plane-chase sequence, check. Increasingly popular but threateningly close to become a staple of boredom rooftop chase parkour-style sequence, check and I haven't mentioned everything, yet. All that, crammed into a film that barely touches the two hour mark, plus a maddening attention to details and the palpable level of dangerousness, would surely please even the least attentive casual viewer.

But, once you get passed the innuendo action sequences, there's Bond. This Bond is angry, and fueled by the need to revenge, that even his Boss threatened to let him go. He kills seemingly without hesitation or hints of regret. But well hidden beneath that calm, passive outward presence, he is troubled, boiled with rage, mourned with loss, torn between duty and revenge. On one single heartbreaking scene, I had a suggestion that Bond is actually shed a tear. And guess what, from this scene, I hereby proclaimed that Daniel Craig is now my favorite James Bond.

My only complaints? Probably Olga Kurylenko. But she doesn't get much of attention anyway, so no biggie. And oh, Alicia Keys should never ever sings in a duet again.

My rating: *** / **** - This film's overall theme is "personal" This is where we see James Bond finally abandon his personal grit and shove aside his feelings that turns him into an effective, flamboyant, and confident spy agent he was so famously known for decades. Either that, or this is simply an above average, um, make that WELL above average action film. Your choice. If you love Casino Royale, you should SEE this film. Period.

Dr. No (1962)

Dr.No. Before Q, before gadgetry, before box-office, before "gimmicky" questions such as "Who's going to be the next Bond girl?" there's "Dr. No" a display of early James Bond, a gritty, violent, sometimes a cold-blooded agent, who relies more on his muscle and wit i.e physical assets as an agent than the gadgets. This Bond is susceptible to fear (as he admits to Honey Ryder, this film's Bond girl, so to speak), and panic which actually makes him a little more human than what he would portrays in his next films.

I've read that it was due to a limited budget at the time (this is after all, before an accepted agreement that any 007 films would costs many and expected to earns more) that made this films felt so raw. Granted, the first Daniel Craig's Bond film is also portrayed the raw Bond but money doesn't lie, and it shows.

The film opens in Jamaica (in fact, the film took place almost entirely there), where an agent and his liaison were killed for investigating a nearby island called Carb Key. Our favorite double-oh agent was soon sent to the ground-zero where he met with Felix Leiter (a recurring character), a CIA agent, and with help from locals, including probably the first ever Bond girl, Honey Ryder (whose first scene is quite legendary, or so I heard, and infamously reenacted by Heather Graham in one of the Austin Powers' film - can't remember which) was soon face-to-face with Dr.No, a member of an evil organization, SPECTRE, a recurring nemesis in James Bond films, who controls the illicit and up-to-no-good operations in Carb Key island.

In my opinion, you can't be more formulaic with 007 films. Give some plot to the antagonists to disturb the order of peace with one way or another, thrown our vodka-martini-stirred-not-shaken-lover agent into the scene, mix it with some hottie, preferably buxom and exposing as many skin as possible, and pit him against the arch-nemesis in some archetypal pyrotechnics work in the end. So, you asked, what's the appeal then? To be quite honest, I really have no idea. I'm not considering myself as a Bond's fan anyway. Not by a mile.

I thought, that James Bond films, especially the early releases are more valuable in its historical aspect than anything. We're talking about forty years and twenty films of franchise, after all. However, it should be noted that statistically, films that were released in the 60's are on average longer than films released nowadays, Dr.No may seems slow for many casual viewers. I was guilty as well, I played Final Fantasy Tactics A2 on my NDS while watching the film for the whole time, only occasionally rewind the DVD when I felt like I missed something important. Just for a couple of times, if I remembered correctly.

P.S: This is an attempt to see ALL of James Bond films prior and in an anticipation of the release of "Quantum of Solace" later this year (part 1 of 21 - or 22, whichever version suits you, planned)

The Strangers (2008)

The Strangers. The positive buzz generated around this film has promised this film to be a sleeper hit. It does, and more. In fact, it is more than likely that this film would ended up as one of the two best thriller/horror film of the year in my list. Although, given the shock value of the film, I would give Funny Games a slight edge. Just a slight, though.

The film opens with a word that surely going to sent some viewer's mind troubled. "The brutal events that took place there are still not entirely known" Peace-loving audiences who doesn't want to get troubled or annoyed with a film should leave the theater immediately. Kristen McKay (Liv Tyler) and James Hoyt (Scott Speedman) is a couple. One night in February, 2005 (ow, yes, this film is based on true events), they went from a wedding-party to Hoyt's summer house. And well, as these summer houses goes as seen in the films, they are always pretty much secluded. No neighbors, no phones, no cars passing by, which made a perfect choice of place for individuals with an appetite for murder as these so called "The Strangers" in this film to stalk their preys. One time in the film, Kristen asks "The Strangers" of why they were doing what they were doing. Their answer is simply, "Because you're home" and THAT is what I called terror.

The first build-up scene of the film (the first thirty minutes or so of the film) is awesome. I felt Kristen's distress of having someone knocking the front door of your house at four a.m, not knowing who they are and what they were up to. Suddenly, those walls around my room, as surely as those walls around Kristen's house, closing upon me, confined me almost to a point where it almost choked me. This feeling persists, and stays, right until the end.

Well, I don't have anything else to say, but it is in my opinion that our horror filmmakers should rely to the purely human's side of the evil instead of re-hashing the idea of "boo" scenes, sudden appearances, and long haired ghosts. These ideas are already old and stale, anyway. After all, if you asked me, the only thing capable of pure evil in this world is more often than not, are human.

My rating: *** / **** - Although most unlikely, I hope that this film (with Funny Games) could made into this years' Jakarta International Film Festival in December or at least into this year's INAFF in November (if Saw V could made it into this festival, I don't see any reasons of why Funny Games or this film couldn't made it into the festival as well but we shall see) for I am eager to re-experience the whole thing in bigger screen. Currently in the top two of my list of this year's best thriller/horror film.

Eagle Eye (2008)

Eagle Eye. What do I think about Shia LaBeouf? Love/Hate, at best. I thought that he was quite decent on D.J Caruso's Disturbia (probably his first big role) even if its resemblance to Hitchcock was rather uncanny, and then I don't really care about him on Transformers for all I care about was understandably, its Autobots and Decepticons line and given that a small fraction of the care leftovers I had from the film (if there's even any) goes to Megan Fox, it practically renders him nearly invisible. And of course, we had Indiana Jones. If even Stan thought George Lucas and Steven Spielberg had raped Indy, how would you think I'd fared? A kid who grew with Raiders of the Lost Ark? Not very much. Anyways, Eagle Eye is one of those films with catchy trailer that actually looks good, heck, probably awesome in some standard and the fact that this film again pitted Shia under D.J Caruso's direction, I was willing to give it a try.

Brutally honest? For all its worth, the film would please most casual viewers flocking the theater on a weekend for an escape from a daily routine while having a buttered pop-corn and ogling the screen for a light entertainment albeit a forgettable one. Well, actually, after the film ended, I heard a whisper from a dude who sat in front of me proclaimed that it was and I quote, "a best non-stop action film" I took an interest to this dude because he has spent most of the film texting with his phone (Oh, how I hate this kind of attitude. The glare, folks! The glare!).

Jerry Shaw (Shia LaBeouf) is a rebel, a laid-back dude who has been under the shadow of his twin-brother for most of his life. That's why instead of going to Stanford, he chooses to work in a copy shop, gambling in his spare-time, scraping for change to pay his rent, and cut all ties to his family. One day, he found that his bank account increased by $750,000 overnight, and there's enough equipment in his apartment to start a World War III. Rachel Holloman (Michelle Monahan) is a single-mom, on her way to sent her kid for a musical performance in D.C. Enjoying her rare quality time, she went out with her friends until a phone call arrives telling her to do things in exchange for the safety of her son. Meanwhile, Jerry captured by the F.B.I only to find himself receiving the similar phone calls that helped him escape the containment and put him firmly on the red book of the F.B.I. Jerry and Rachel met, car chases ensues, explosions here and there, Eagle Eye, final confrontation, and a fitful ending. Now, whoever controlled Jerry and Rachel Holloman has access to almost any electronic devices from satellite, phone cells, traffic lights, automatic crane stuffs, even to McDonald's CCTV!. My advice, don't ever think about the reason behind why such a powerful entity or organization that had its fingers on almost anything (Brother Eye style) still required the assistance of two normal people to do its bidding because this film works well if you just sit back, relax, and put your mind at ease. Oh, and digging to that huge and greasy pop-corn of yours certainly helps to kill some stray thinking cells in your brain.

As for me, the film ended after the FIRST car chase. Granted, its probably the only memorable sequence in this film if there's one. The camera however, swivel and shifted like it was in the middle of a hurricane. Occasionally, we get a glimpse or two of our hero/heroine only to be replaced by flying metals, crashes and explosions in a quick cuts but of course, that is how they shoot action sequences these days. Still, D.J Caruso earned a kudos for this sequence. Even so, believe me or not, I have already guessed the entire plot after this scene and I had to stifle a laugh when the final confrontation occurs because it remind me to a film, which has been cross-referenced so many times I've lost count (I've seen it twice for this year's film releases alone) and in an inferior and pathetic way it's almost sad. I'm not telling what film though. That, and the film runs a bit too long for my taste (of course, given that I've already guessed the plot and manages to keep one-two steps further in the plot development) and this is coming from a guy who loves Il Buono, Il Brutto, Il Captivo.

And oh, Shia LaBeouf is still Steven Spielberg's "Golden Boy" I was surprised during the end credit that this film's Executive Producer is Mr.Spielberg himself. Just when I thought that Shia could finally get out of his clutch.

My rating : ** / **** - Not my cup of tea, too easy, too long in dwindling before the plot concludes, but action fans should enjoy this film. I've seen no significant improvement from Shia (he still bore that same "panic" look simply because the film keep telling him to "Run, Jerry! Run!") and the rest of the cast fared in similar manner. With perhaps one exception, Michael Chiklis even if he only appears in two or three short scenes. Love the guy! Imagine a less badass version of Death Race with dialog! That's why the dude who sits in front of me was able to texting the whole time and manages to utter a comment about "best non-stop action film" His word, not mine.

Body of Lies (2008)

Body of Lies. When the world swept away with an avalanche, and people went to the theater by the millions to see Titanic, I, acting like a true introvert, frown at its success and particularly to its leading roles, Mr.Leonardo DiCaprio and Ms.Kate Winslet as my teenager peers at the time mooning and swooning over both. Mr.DiCaprio's previous role in Romeo & Juliet and his subsequent role in The Man in the Iron Mask did nothing to improve his image in my eye and I had thought that Mr.DiCaprio will always be like those boyish actors (example, Freddie Prince Jr.) forever trapped in their young boy persona. Not until Gangs of New York did I finally had some perspective to Mr.DiCaprio's true capacity as an actor. Ironically, both Mr.DiCaprio and Ms.Kate Winslet who started as someone I took for less has both become my personal favorite actor as implicitly evident in my blog for the last couple of years and I greatly anticipated their next re-team feature, Revolutionary Road sometime this year. But that's another matter.

From William Monahan's script who quickly become one of the screenwriter who had the knack of writing a multifaceted and complex script (The Departed), Body of Lies promises a rewarding film experience. That is if a story-driven multi-layered and a thought-required film is really your cup of tea. This film won't surprise or tried to conceal the hidden fact up its sleeve in order to provide some "ahh" moments at its climax. Even so, the nature of the script doesn't too often in putting us ahead of the character which made the two hours plus of duration, as I've said before, a rewarding experience.

Mr.Roger Ferris (DiCaprio) is CIA's field-agent working in Middle East. He knows the culture, he aware with the daily situation, he speaks Arabic up to a point where he could distinguishes the accent, and as it's easily seen, he was in a constant danger. His handler, his attachŽ is Edward Hoffman (Russell Crowe), an ambitious desk-officer with his own agendas some of which he concealed even to his field-agent. An event (best I leave it for you to observe by yourselves) put the guys hopping the airlines across the Middle East, U.S. and briefly in Europe but most of the time, they find themselves in Amman, Jordania where they had to work together with Jordanian Intelligence Agency identified by the magnificent Hani (Mark Strong). Hani is willing to co-operate with the CIA with one simple rule, "Do not lie to me" And of course, given the title of the film, you could easily guessed that the truth would found itself rather hard to breach the surface.

One small advice, go take your leak before entering the theater. This is a tight film with many locations, many names (more importantly, many faces) and many story-angle although the film generally focus on Ferris' point-of-view. This is a kind of film where the rare moment of silence would be filled with murmurs from the audience and this is a kind of film where most people (in Indonesia) would describe as "too many talking" film. On a simple glance, one could very much put this film in the same breath with Jason Bourne films although in my opinion, given the nature and overall tone, The Kingdom would be a fairer, albeit much lesser in quality, contender.

Naturally, Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe drives this movie. Although, after The Departed and Blood Diamond, I had to say that this is his most "standard" performance and Russell Crowe is much more awesome in American Gangster. However, after a month or so, this film gives me a reason to open 21Cineplex.com again.

My Rating: *** / **** - If you liked The Kingdom, I dare to say that you're going to like this film as well, better even. However, Leonardo DiCaprio's performance has a tendency to decline (believe me, I've seen all his films in earnest since Gangs of New York) and Russell Crowe's portrayal as Edward is sort of a mix between his role in The Insider and American Gangster which if you've seen both, you'll know that it screams inconsistency. That, and the "meh" ending. Well, at least Mark Strong steals the scene.

Weekend Screening Galore

"Gather ye rose-buds while ye may, Old Time is still a-flying; And this same flower that smiles today, Tomorrow will be dying"

It's been a quite a long while since the last I cried during a film. Dead Poet Society (1985) brings back that moment when the emotional torrent swept me up off my feet as a single drop of tear shed from the corner of my eye. Alas, although it's not the first time that I've seen the film, in so far, the film has never failed to made me at least had my heart expanded within its casket on that particular snow-field scene. "O Captain, My Captain"

Awake (2008). I used to love Jessica Alba. Well, probably I still did. Her bedroom eyes is naturally her first and foremost main attraction to many. On the other hand, I was ever reluctant with Hayden Christensen. And the fact that he keeps having roles that pit him against beautiful actresses doesn't help a bit. Anyway, probably due to my very low expectation, I found that Awake is an okay experience, at least much better than what would I have expected and Jessica Alba and Hayden Christensen actually had their above average performance (which still poor :D) here.

The Love Guru (2008). Another Jessica Alba. Mike Myers probably thought himself as the center of the universe. Even so, this film is probably his funniest film after the first Austin Powers film. Featured many cross-reference to his previous stints (the most obvious one, "Bohemian Rhapsody"), its lightness and disgusting acronyms might appeal to many who seeks for the merest form of entertainment through film.

What Happens in Vegas (2008). There's one single fact that I still found confusing today. Cameron Diaz portrayed as a f-ing hot actress. Big no. But hey, that's just me. Whatever my opinion is, she still is one of the most overpaid working actress in Hollywood today.

My Sassy Girl (2008). I wonder why I even bother to see this excuse of a film. Remaked from the 2002 Korean film of the same title, featuring Elisha Cuthbert among others, this film is far far inferior than the original film. Don't even bother to rent.

Doomsday (2008)

Doomsday. From what I've already seen, I had a reason to believe that Neil Marshall is at least a supporter of female gender domination equality. Both of his films that I've seen so far shows exactly just that. A heroine or heroines that live up to a task usually reserved for their male counterpart. Not that I'm against it, mind you.

Doomsday takes our world into the UK in the future where a virus outbreak prompted the government to resort into a drastic measure of martial law that seen Glasgow and most of the northern part of the UK quarantined-slash-surrounded with a tall impenetrable steel wall. The idea is simple, let no one in or out of the quarantined area. Soon, the quarantined area - and millions that lived within it - became no-man's land, abandoned, and forgotten. Thirty years later, when the general belief is that nobody left alive within the area that was Glasgow and northern UK, a similar case of virus outbreak that once engulfed Glasgow broke in London. It would seems that a similar drastic measure of martial law was soon to be applied in London. However, as it turns out, the government still has something in its sleeve. It was known - only to the selected few, of course - that started from three years prior, some signs of life was recorded within the wall. It was a sign that there's some way to overcome the virus. Soon, a team was dispatched into the wall. Its mission is simple, to bring back survivor or vaccine or anything that proves that the virus is indeed curable. Led by Major Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra) who given her history deemed fit to the task, the team wasn't expected to survive. After all, it was thirty years since the wall was closed and thus made whatever law or values from its inhabitants are somewhat different.

I actually liked this film despite facts that the heroine reminds me of Charlize Theron's Aeon Flux (which is bad), thugs that remind me to Mad Max or that video California from Tupac, and a couple of inconsistencies that left a gap in my train of logic thought. This film has an ample supply of gore and violence to make horror fans happy (and me, though I had refused to acknowledge myself as a horror fan, enjoyed the severed limbs, and plenty of blood and gore that this film has to offer), bare hands fights, close quarter combat, trigger happy, and high-speed chase with tremendous amount of body counts to make any bloody action film fans happy. Indeed that this film isn't really made to goes beyond the level of an acceptance of action films that requires small attention from the brain and if you could put it where it belongs, you'd be ended up liking it as much as I do.

Doomsday is what I'd called as an "air-tight" film in which the miniscule details are crammed up in a 90 minutes of time frame. The background narrative that sets-up the film took at least five minutes, for example. Now this could prove as a turn-off to some of the casual viewers who are so used to arrive late at the theater (it bothers me, really, I mean if they can't be punctual to something in which they had to pay for tickets, how could they be punctual in other more important aspect in their life, such as work? Sigh, my fellow countrymen)

My rating: **1/2 / **** - Doomsday sets in a brooding future. However, thirty minutes off the mark and the mood was shifted into an action packed gore-fest. Not that I mind that, but it was certainly not something I had expected in the first place. For better or worse, again, if you could put this film on the level of mere entertainment, you could actually enjoy it. Assuming of course, that seeing a bloody slaughter, explicit mutilation, and various manifestation of violence of men against men doesn't put you in a state of queasiness.

Death Race (2008)

Death Race. I had ascertained many times that I love Jason Statham (a bad-ass bald dude with a cool accent that could hurt you with a mere frown) as an action figure. An unabashed love that even if he has involved in that Uwe Boll's stinker (which I had to admit, the ONLY Jason Statham's filmography that I haven't seen and I'm not boasting as well. Nineteen films of his, and Dungeon Siege is the ONLY one I haven't seen), I could very much forgive him and return to the theater for his newest film if it's involve death, carnage, bad-ass fights, gun powders, and the like. Even if the plot and script promises nothing, as long as the bad-ass bald dude that is Jason Statham is doing what he's doing best which is beat the crap of the other guy, we don't really mind. I don't.

Death Race's plot is as simple as you could imagine. In the abysmal future when economy slumped, unemployment rate hits record high, and crime rate is staggering, the crime institution are runs by profit oriented private company. One of such company, runs by a particularly evil Hennessey (Joan Allen), put a race involving full-armor and full-weapon cars, conspicuous female convicts as navigators with one simple rule, stay alive until the end of the race. To attract the inmates to stake their life for profits, they're promised freedom after they had won five races. A fan favorite, masked Frankenstein had won 4 races. However, he killed during his final race. The company covered the fact by saying that he was injured and thus unable to participate. During his absence, the rating drops and the company need someone as good and as bad to replace him. Enter Jensen Ames (Jason Statham), ex-convict who has tried to live an honest life after he met his wife and had a daughter. He was framed for his wife's murder by the company and soon found himself participating in a Death Race masquerading as the masked Frankenstein. But of course, not after he threatens Hennessey with an 'awesome' line, "You wanted a monster? Well, you've got one"

From Paul W.S. Anderson, you won't and shouldn't expect too much from this film. The characters were simply exists as means to advance the plot and nothing more. And here, when I'm talking about "plot", I was actually referring to exploitation action scenes where we, as an audience, giving in to our most primal and raw instinct without any or minimal interference from the part of our brain that cries for "logic!" In that note, the film delivers and serves its purpose as a high-octane hot-wheeled smoking asphalt action film.

It is enough that this film has a totally like-able tough guy we all rooting for and an identifiable face that we could associated with evil that we want to see down, obliterated, and shredded into the oblivion. I mean, you don't need character actors to shoulder this responsibility. However, I've got a particular liking for Ian McShane. Well, he was already an awesome dude in HBO's Deadwood anyway.

My rating: **1/2 / **** - Well, for an action films it serves its purpose. Don't go looking for a breath-taking actor-wise performances or a brilliant script that made you want to go back to that English literature class and you could enjoy this film. Rated R for violence, so leave your kids at home (I was amazed that there's actually a couple who take their kids to see this film. I was muttered, "It's rated R, stupid" as they passed my aisle)

Funny Games (U.S.) (2007)

Mirror was actually up for a screening this week, but seeing that I'm not into its original work from which it has been adapted (Into the Mirror, I had wrote something about it in 2003 - whoa! 5 years ago! - and not really liking it), and I had personally thought that Alexandre Aja is already a Hollywood sell-out after his initial horror flick that had launched his career so I had decided to stay at home and watched Funny Games instead and judging by the initial response to "Mirror", I think I had made a pretty good decision.

It could be said that Funny Games - although that it's actually a US remake from an Austrian film also directed by Michael Haneke - has fallen from the radar of many movie-goers out there. I had to focus on the cover (a picture of beautiful Naomi Watts - she had a nose that could melt my heart, seriously - shredded in what appears to be tears and agony, and another, a picture of a golf club covered in dried blood) before I started to really wanted it. Ironically, the title itself was what probably rendered it into an ignorable candidate of a film. All in all, I had wanted to see this film since earlier this year, but the lackluster in news related to it kept it dropped out of my short term memory. I was pretty much forgot about the film until I saw its DVD in one of the store in Singapore last week. And here goes my real review.

First, a disclaimer. Reviewing Funny Games without spoiling anything is hard (especially, considering what happened in the film at the 100th minute. You might want to circle that because I really think that nobody could've seen that coming. My jaw is like dropping all the way to the floor, ALL THE WAY. I was stunned that for minutes I still tried to contemplate the scene). But I think I did a pretty good job of disclosing the content of the film in this review.

Funny Games remind me a lot to A Clockwork Orange but grimmer, messier and far worse (not in a sense of quality which I think it's rather superior). It's creepy, it's haunting, it's disturbing and it manages to do all those things without any sound effect imposed to add a shocking value. Horror and especially thriller fans should be able to appreciate this film and it didn't do a justice that this film is little known.

The film begins pretty harmless, as we follow through a bourgeois family of three, Ann (Naomi Watts), George (Tim Roth), and their son on a journey to their vacation home and as all vacation homes do, houses were scarce and far between, remote and no landline phones. On their way, they met with their next-house neighbor. They said 'hi' but comments were made about the neighbor unusual quiet behavior and about a couple strangers in their front yard. They were soon acquainted with these strangers. Peter and Paul or Tom and Jerry or Beavis and Butt-Head as they identified themselves. By mere looks we knew that these couples were up to no good and they lived up to their expectation as later, they held the family hostage and forced the family into some sort of twisted "games"

I cannot really went further than that, else I would ruin your experience. All you need to know is that this film uses minimal setting, minimal sound, even minimal dialog but in this case, the less is actually more. The camera sometimes linger on an extended period of time on a single spot and on particularly one scene it is hard NOT to look away. Naomi Watts is one of my favorite actress (a nose to die for), and during my review on "The Incredible Hulk" I had given a deserved praise for Tim Roth and the two dudes who plays the villains (Michael Pitt, Brady Corbet) is REALLY creepy. Finally, for consideration as well, given the content, this film was rated R but I think it even deserves an NC-17 rating even if the scenes rarely, if ever, happened behind the frame but this kind of given impression and imagine it for yourself kind of scene is actually worked. Really well. Not easy to stomach, and certainly not for a casual viewer who merely wishes to have fun in her viewing experience.

And then there's the 100th minute scene. From what I've read in various board messages, most of the viewers hated this scene. Well, I personally think, that particular scene is a great scene in a way that it slaps you in the face, hard. It's something that you totally didn't expect and goes "bam" Down you goes, all bloody and gory.

My Rating: ***1/2 / **** - This is a kind of film that made you cringe and silently mouthed the 'F' word. To film that could lasted such impression to me deserves at least a three and a half rating. Given enough time, this film could even well wade into one the most memorable film (four rating). Won't be a favorite though, cause to put this film into a favorite means that I would want to revisit this film time and again and by doing so, it would implies that I was a psycho. I had a very troubled sleep after I saw this film.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008)

Forgetting Sarah Marshall. I usually don't take a rom-com genre seriously. But time and again, I found one that really hit the spot. Either if it's because I could very much relate myself to the characters or simply that the film is indeed in an outstanding quality among its peers. Forgetting Sarah Marshall is one of those film.

Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell) is a TV superstar. She stars in famous TV shows called "Crime Scene: Scene of a Crime" apparently in an alternate universe where terrible one-liner, and shockingly stupid dialog could be passed as a hit TV series. For a five-year-and-a-half, she dated Peter Bretter (Jason Segel) a talented (questionable) musician but hadn't work to fulfilled his passion yet as he only wrote "dark and ominous" soundtrack for TV series. I could relate to Peter in a way that his life is lacking direction. Besides work, which he did most of the time at home, he spent his time lazing around on the couch and watching mind-numbing TV shows. Practically, he has his own little world from which he is ever reluctant to leave, simply going nowhere. Just like yours truly here. However, he hasn't hit the bottom just yet. Sarah is his anchor. But when Sarah suddenly dropped the bomb, and dumped him, that was when he plunge. Devastated and advised by his friends, Peter decided to go vacationing to Hawaii only to met Sarah and the very reason she had broken up with him, Aldous Snow (Russell Brand) a rising rock superstar. Again, in an alternate universe where terrible singer with penchant to sexual lyrics could be passed as a rock superstar.

My initial thought of this film is that the main dude is the main protagonist one. The film want us to sympathize with him, to root for him, to cheer him up and probably get through day with hands held high in a winning salute (not to mention, a buxom babe who happened to be a front desk clerk in the hotel where he was staying dangling to his feet). Obviously, that, put the object from the title of this film (Sarah Marshall) into a no-good bitch. But then again, had that been the case, what made this film different than million other rom-com films that held the same vibe?

I was surprised, genuinely surprised that Sarah Marshall is not at all a heartless bitch who just casually shattered our good-man-slash-protagonist's heart into a million pieces as she portrayed to be. I took a special liking to the way the film told its story. Immediately, as the film begins, Sarah was put into a position where she should be hated with all of your heart's content and only progressed downward as the film progressed, up to a point (at least in my case) where we wanted her to get a payback as mean as possible. However, minutes later, I was shocked that in one scene, and one scene only, I could changed my perspective toward Sarah. She has the same treatment with any other prominent casts in this film, a very humane treatment that pull these characters from the screen and put them in a real life where there's no black or white characters. Just gray. And that what made this rom-com different than the other film from this genre. That, and the fact that I could apply my personal real-life to that of Peter's.

My favorite moment: Dinner scene where the prominent casts discussed (more of mocking I should say) Sarah's latest film about "a spirit manifestation that could kill through the cell-phone" to which Sarah defends that it was actually about "a fear of the rapid advancement of technology" Peter mocked the absurd idea of the film. What makes it funny is that Kristen Bell is actually starred in "Pulse" and the fact that she lets the script mocking Sarah for the film which inadvertently (or not) also mocked her in the real-life for "Pulse" is even funnier.

Judd Apatow produced this film, and now I'm convinced that every subsequent film that bore his name should be given a considerable thought despite of how cliche its premise promised to be. Judd had also promised that every film that got his name attached on either as a writer, producer, or director would have a penis showing. This film didn't falter from the promise. So, purist, beware, this film rated R for sexual scenes. But I promise you, if you're a fan of this genre, you'd gonna love this film. If you don't, then you need to revise your definition of "a fan of a particular genre".

My rating: ***1/2 / **** - Let's see, is this the best film that had Judd Apatow's name attached on it? This, and Superbad, if you asked me although I would give a slight edge to this film since I could relate more to this film.

Wall-E (2008)

Wall-E. When it comes to animation, Pixar rarely disappointed. Of course, some hit and miss are due to abound (I've never seen "Cars" for instance, and didn't really interested to see it in the near future) but as far as I'm concerned, given the premise (love story between robots and minimal dialog?), Wall-E delivers. The fact that this film arrives a month late to our local theater (as with most animation film out there) puzzled me a lot because this is a kind of holiday-family-film-thingy. I just hope they didn't prolonged "Star Wars: The Clone Wars" as well though of course, I think it is safe to assume so.

Welcome to the future. Earth's current inhabitant: One small cleaning robot, Wall-E. He was chosen by the nature to survive for 700 years and thus had developed some sort of curiosity and intelligence that I'm sure none of its original programmers were able to anticipate. Wall-E is a dedicated robot and lonely until suddenly, a robot, origin yet unknown, arrives from space. Her name is Eve and she quickly captures Wall-E's "heart". Together, they're bound to an adventure that led them to the last human civilization aboard the space fortress, Axiom.

It is easy to treat Wall-E, Eve, and any other robots featured in this film as a fully-equipped with human emotions robot through tiny gestures that once you passed the five minutes mark, you could forget that they're robots. Big kudos to the animators. From Wall-E's initial fear, Eve's exasperation and concerns, it is easy to imagine these robots as flesh-and-blood even if their purpose is still and intentionally remain alien and robotic. As absurd as it may sound, this is the best way to enjoy this film, sit back and relax, and stow away that trying-to-logicized-everything thoughts that you may have.

Finally, as a conclusion, even if the film had both subtle (HAL and Dave from 2001 made an appearance, although their names is not explicitly given, the resemblance is uncanny) and serious (ecological-greeny stuffs) messages, the unlikely courtship between Wall-E and EVE was more than enough to keep the viewers of all age hooked and interested. Of course, this film is not a sci-fi per se, therefore, its considerable lack of the "science" part (mostly involving space EVAs) are largely forgiven.

As we all know, Pixar is closely related to Apple, Eve's design should easily remind us to the white iPods and MacBooks but ultimately, the "bong" sound that greets every Mac OS X's user upon booting is quite palpable on at least two occasions. It doesn't really important, anyway just so you know. And there's a nod to the perhaps the only sound I would ever associated with space sci-fi films, "Also Sprach Zarathustra"

My rating: *** / **** - If I may, I would divide this film into two parts. Before and after Axiom. I luuvvvee the Before Axiom part, and frankly, the After Axiom part isn't really giving me other than the usual animation blather. But it's still good, though.

The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008)

The X-Files - I Want to Believe. I was a pessimist when it comes to sequels. Especially if the original was out ten years ago, from a celebrated TV series that has deeply integrated into a special part of my childhood and which I've grown a fondness upon. Further, the sequel was subtitled "I Want to Believe" which more like a justification from its creators (Chris Carter and co.), an echo of hope that they themselves didn't quite confident with it and need to put an assurance to us, the target audiences, even to themselves that they wished to believe that the film would turn out okay.

Watching the original X-Files film, for me (first time almost nine years ago, second time just a couple of days ago), it's like watching three episodes of the series crammed into one two hours cinema experience. That's not saying much, I know, but here's the catch, these three episodes were actually among their best episodes. I wish i could say the same with The X-Files - I Want to Believe.

Some years had passed since the last we saw Scully and Mulder shoulder-to-shoulder against the unexplainable, logic-defying cases that is The X-Files. The X-Files has been closed, Dana Scully is pursuing her career in medical and Fox Mulder, bearded and grumpy, as ever, are living together in a secluded house. They had cut their ties to the FBI. Meanwhile, a case of missing FBI agent and subsequent tip from a 'phsycic' who claims to have a 'vision' on the agent led the FBI to open the old files and requested Mulder to be back on the investigation team. Of course, in order to have the film rolling, Mulder agreed on one condition that Scully hitch the ride as well. Now, this led me to questioned the fed's credibility. I mean, come on, a tip from a 'phsycic' who claims to have a 'vision'? Well, whatever works for you, Carter. Anyway, my level of appreciation to this film hits the extreme low when we saw a picture of George W. Bush accompanied with the familiar Mark Snow's theme. I murmured to myself, "What the fuck was that?" that apparently was too loud that made people who sit immediately to my left thrown her frown at me. It's not that I'm pro with George W. Bush and all, but really, the scene was absolutely a clear in-joke and mockery but just like every bad jokes out there, I don't get it.

For me, the appeal from X-Files series was its conspiracy theory and on-and-off chemistry between Scully, the skeptic and Mulder, the believer. Mind you, I love X-Files series, so in love that I was actually proud to share the same birth date (obviously different years) with Fox Mulder. Therefore, when the former was clearly absent, it's only logical that it left me with a whim of un-satisfaction. Even so, I totally dig the decision to this. After missing for some years, it's only appropriate that Chris Carter made the decision in order to gain new audiences who never ever heard of the X-Files before (I believe, that these new audiences are actually those that can't get the ticket for The Dark Knight and decided to bought ticket for another film that they haven't seen. Thus, The X-Files). Thus, even if I sorely missed CSM and the Lone Gunmen, I could understand. But, what infuriates me more is the apparent lack of commitment from David Duchovny and especially, Gillian Anderson to reprise their role. Maybe it's just me, but I cannot see their mutual respect to each other's view, their genuine concern of each other that so apparent in the series and in the first film, and, this is the worst, although they have been living together, I see no affection, let alone love between these two.

The film's "mystery" was also largely disappointing. The execution was dull and tedious, the revelation was a "meh", and even if at one point, Mulder was put into a peril, we (well, I) don't see any immediate believable danger that threatened him and considering that this happens at the near climax of the film, it shows that how much detached the characters of this film to yours truly here.

My rating: *1/2 / **** - A largely lame excuse for a "reunion", let's hope that Chris Carter (who was excited about a "sequel") could put his feet on the ground again, and let this film gone into a forgotten history.

Red Cliff (2008)

Red Cliff. My knowledge on the history of China, particularly on the epic - yet often highly exaggerated - legend of the Three Kingdom is quite small. Of this miniscule knowledge I've got from comics (no, not the popular "Legenda Naga" comic which I loathe) and especially, games, I took a personal liking to Cao Cao for I think he is one with a noble reason to unite all of China despite his questionable methods, and Guan Yu for his understandably fictionalized and much exaggerated deeds and moral values. Therefore, when John Woo said that his two episode films about the Battle of Red Cliff will be based on historical fact, I was clearly flourish with anticipation. Of course, I don't have any idea about the differences between the historical facts and its romanticised counterpart and therefore could take any depiction of it with a grain of salt.

Red Cliff, episode one runs too long to my liking and it certainly won't appeal to casual viewers who had no idea nor care about the Romance of the Three Kingdom. Therefore i think that it's a wise decision to release this film into one single episode in the North America rather than two episodes just like what we saw here in Asia. Me and my wife agreed that there are many points in the film where the tone shifted uneasily, slowed down to a bore, and threatened my wife (who has a relatively short attention span) into a slumber. Further, we're agreed, not because we're sexist and all, that the role of women characters in this film are ones that put a huge question mark in our head and put a serious dent in the overall. For example, the birth scene. I really don't think that it would hurt anyone had the scene was eliminated entirely.

This film depicted the battle of Red Cliff or as this episode concerned, the first part of the battle of Red Cliff which happened right at the end of Han dynasty and arguably, trigger the event that led into a much known tale of Three Kingdom. The battle pitched a Northern army led by Cao Cao against the southern coalition of Liu Bei and Zhou Yu at the place called Red Cliff which even if the actual place was still a speculation, it was believed to be located somewhere along the Yangtze river bank.

For a viewer who had a prior engagement to the history (or fiction) of Three Kingdom this film could actually become a pleasant experience, my wife and I had a brief discussion on Who's Who during the film and we're actually pretty good in guessing each and every prominent characters that appear in this film. It's no brainer really, Guan Yu, Zhuge Liang, and Zhang Fei were quickly identifiable as they were given attributes that doesn't far off from their physical description in books and once their roles were established, the rest easily follows.

As I've said earlier, the film runs too long and a quick glance to the poster, it's obvious that this episode is mainly concerned with Zhuge Liang (Takeshi Kaneshiro) and his blossoming rivalry with Zhou Yu (Tony Leung) and if I could say it so myself, their chemistry was an okay one, not that "wow" but quite not that "meh" as well. Cao Cao had pretty much the same treatment with most of books and games about Three Kingdom out there, a cocky and arrogant antagonist albeit an excellent strategist almost at par with Zhuge Liang and Zhou Yu. My problem lies with Liu Bei. Although I'm really not into his character, I had wished to see a powerful and charismatic character. He is after all, a man that could made powerful men such as Zhuge Liang and Guan Yu and Zhang Fei pledge their loyalty to his cause. Sadly, I found none of the said qualities in this film. Worse, on one scene, he is treated as no better than a comedy film's clown. That, and those white doves.

My rating: **1/2 / **** - A film that appeals more to the History of Three Kingdom savvy. Fight scenes were few and far between given the long running time. If I could make a comparison, "Warlords" (also with Takeshi Kaneshiro) proves a better fare for a film.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Disclaimer: This review is undoubtedly, understandably biased. Those who look for a fair-and-square review might want to head elsewhere instead. That being said, The Dark Knight is definitely on top of my list of 2008, heck, it's the Best film of all time if you asked me, Heath Ledger deserves an Oscar or I'm going to steal it for him, and.. oh yeah, Christopher Nolan is God!

Years ago, as I returned from the theater after the premiere of Batman Begins, I told my room-mate that its sequel is going to be a blast for we see Batman flips a Joker card hinting his next opponent in the sequel. I said to him excitedly, "Dude, we've never seen a Joker in any Batman films before!" Puzzled, he said, "Really?! I thought we've seen him already" Confident and cocky, I assured him that no, we've never seen a Joker before and of course, being a proud and a self-proclaimed Batman's no.1 fan I had refused to admit that I was wrong but the truth is loud and clear and there's no escaping it. We did saw a Joker back then in the 80's when Michael Keaton donned the masked vigilante for the first time.

I've seen the film of course, but somehow the Joker's presence in that film really slips from my mind. I totally forgot about him. In fact, the only other thing than Batman himself, I only remembered Vicky Vale from that particular film. Now, after I've seen The Dark Knight, I think I know why Jack Nicholson's portrayal of Joker slips from my mind.

Jack Nicholson is a great actor, no doubt about it but there's always a certain line that shouldn't be crossed even if you're a great actor. Ripping Joker, one of the most distinguishable villain in the comic history, out of his root is one such line and really, had you asked me, what Jack did to Joker is what i'd like to call a murder of a character. His portrayal of Joker is literally begged and screamed to be forgotten. Heath Ledger (and Nolan) despite the fan's initial reluctance to accept him as the Joker (a reluctance that slowly turns into an eager anticipation, if i may add) has more than manages to brought Joker back to its root, a sickening super smart villain with a cold ice running in his veins. This is, after all, the Batman's ultimate, numero uno, nemesis we're talking about here.

In a sense, the Dark Knight is actually more about Joker and Harvey Dent than it is about Batman. Nolan introduces us to two of the most important character in Batman. Harvey Dent, superbly played by Aaron Eckhard whom also deserves some award - aw, who am I kidding? Give every single person in this film an award and I won't even uttered a single breadth of complaint - is, was Batman's closest ally next to Jim Gordon (the venerable Gary Oldman) in the effort of cleaning the street of Gotham from injustice and crime. Enter Joker whose needs of crime and terror leverages into more of a passion than a mere money or fame. It takes little from him to prove that he is indeed the only villain of Gotham that could stand up against Batman. Arguably, he even stands taller as in the end, in my opinion, he had won the fight against Batman and that's why the Joker is Batman's nemesis. Jerry Robinson would be proud of his creation.

Arguably the most sophisticated and adult superhero film ever to come out of the pages of a comic book, The Dark Knight won't appeal to children. Parents who thought that Batman is the same Batman as they used to know, expecting their children to had a good time would in for a surprise. I could almost put the almost three-hours of The Dark Knight into a drama and in my opinion, you had to love drama before you could appreciate what The Dark Knight has to offer.

Acting wise, surprisingly, Christian Bale was outshone by almost everybody (except Maggie Gyllenhaal perhaps). His persona as Bruce Wayne, the millionaire, still the best that this franchise had to offer and I think, he is better as Bruce than he is as Batman. Gary Oldman is as good as ever. He is a spitting image of Jim Gordon from the comic anyway. Hence, no complaint from the comic fan, no complaint from general viewer, everybody wins. Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine had their share of shining moment. But really, the star of this film is of course, Heath Ledger who hardly recognizable under that Joker make-up. He was lingering like a memorable dream (pleasant or un-pleasant, your call) during the first half and when he was more palpable during the second half, it's like to see that dream had come to life and more than ready to bite you or embrace you, your call. He steals every single scene he's in right after his first banter with Batman. My favorite Joker moment: (Mouthed the word) "Six" Everyone who has doubtful that Heath would pull the ultimate Joker should dig themselves a hole and buried themselves in shame. Unfortunately, we won't ever going to see Heath returns as Joker anymore and whoever succeeded him had a gargantuan mountain to climb.

With The Dark Knight undeniable success (already taking the spot of biggest box-office opening of all time from Spider-Man 3), it is easy to see that a comic book adaptation film is not how it's used to be decades ago. Just like its paper and inks counterpart, the comic book adaptation is laden with deep and complex characters. No more silly and five-year-old comic-stuffs galore (point finger to Joel Schumacher who painted the supposedly dark and gloomy Gotham City with bright purplish colors). The comic books nowadays are filled with philosophical thoughts and subtle messages. No doubt this trend has been transferred to the silver screen as well. Plus, more and more world-class actors and actresses willing to play superheroes only after their unending passion and deep research on the hero themselves. I think it is safe to say that after Robert Downey Jr. and Christian Bale, the power-that-be, the men and women behind the decision to green light another hundreds-of-million dollars budget of a superhero film would think twice and maybe more when they put a name to shoulder the leading role and this at least half-way guaranteed that another superhero film, be it from Marvel or DC line of superheroes, would worth the wait. Oh, how I love comic.

My rating: ***** / **** - Don't expect me to give a fair judgement, if fairness was accounted for, I would give it a four star rating, anyway.

"The Square Root of Three" by David Feinberg

Quite probably the single best thing that could be obtained from Harold & Kumar Escape from the Guantanamo Bay which otherwise a stoner film merely repeating the formula that put its predecessor (Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle) into the map of fans of intentionally stupid comedy film is this poem by Kumar, "The Square Root of Three" which according to some quick info from Google was written by David Feiberg. I can't help but smirked in amusement.

"I’m sure that I will always be
A lonely number like root three

The three is all that’s good and right,
Why must my three keep out of sight
Beneath the vicious square root sign,
I wish instead I were a nine

For nine could thwart this evil trick,
with just some quick arithmetic

I know I’ll never see the sun, as 1.7321
Such is my reality, a sad irrationality

When hark! What is this I see,
Another square root of a three

As quietly co-waltzing by,
Together now we multiply
To form a number we prefer,
Rejoicing as an integer

We break free from our mortal bonds
With the wave of magic wands

Our square root signs become unglued
Your love for me has been renewed"

The overall film was okay, i guess, if you're a fan of the first film, you'd love it. It's full of ridiculous thing over another, as Harold & Kumar trek their "epic" journey from Guantanamo Bay to Texas, and meeting one cartoonish character after another from a bottomless swim party, a Cyclop inbred, a KKK party, to a smoking weed session with unexpected ally. This film is cock-full of racial stereotypes and enough nudity, profanity and of course, weeds to grant a solid R rating.

My rating: *1/2 / **** - Pretty much an enjoyable time wasting experience. However, a 110 minutes of running time might be a little too long for most to this kind of film.

Batman: Gotham Knight (V) (2008)

Batman: Gotham Knight (DVD). Just like Animatrix series of Japanese-style animes that linked Matrix (1999) and its subsequent two-part sequels (Reloaded and Revolution), Batman: Gotham Knight is a series of animation episodes that (apparently) linked Batman Begins (2005) and the upcoming The Dark Knight (2008).

Batman: The Gotham Knight is a collection of six titles: Gotham Knight, Cross Fire, Field Test, In Darkness Dwells, Working Through Pain, and Deadshot. Each recounted the tale of Batman from various perspective after the events in Batman Begins which arguably turns Batman from a novice crimefighter into the Dark Knight. From a bunch of kids recounting their tales of Batman encounters, each with their own version of spice to fantasize their tales thus rendered the Batman into more than just a simple human being, from the squad of Gotham Police Department, Batman's battle against Scarecrow and Killer Croc, his encounter with Cassandra (not Cassandra Cain, though) in what i'm guessing India, his and Lucious Fox's research to have another addition into his arsenal of gadgetry, and finally his fight against Deadshot.

If you asked me, Batman: Gotham Knight is a more of a gimmick than an essential link that bridged the two Batman films. Long time fans of Batman, and especially Batman Animated series would know most of the stories already. Added to that, here, Batman was voiced by Kevin Conroy, its original voice actor from Batman Animated series. As far as The Dark Knight film which was going to hit the theaters next week concerned, unless my ears deceiving me, not a brief mention of Joker, Harvey Dent, or even Rachel Dawes ever came up which made the episodes depicted in this film act more like filler episodes. Therefore, unless you're Batman fans, really hyped up toward The Dark Knight film, or a film buffs with a lot of time to waste, or all three, it's okay to skip this film entirely and anticipate for the release of The Dark Knight film sometime next week instead.

Wanted (2008)

Wanted. A thousand years ago, a clan of weavers claimed themselves to be the bringer of balance to the world. They formed a fraternity of assassins, and with questionable method of choosing the target's name, they started to cleanse the world. The member of this fraternity of assassins were utterly talented in the art of killing. What i mean by "talented" is clearly an understatement because really, when you could curve the bullet of a shot, jumped off the building to another building across the street safely, timed your vehicle's speed and surroundings to pull off some nearly impossible stunts, to call you a "talented" would be an insult.

The story of Wanted is so absurd that it could only came out of the pages of a comic book. Indeed, Wanted was lifted out of the pages of a comic book therefore to enjoy the film in its fullest potential, you have to shove aside its absurdities and treat it as a pure fantasy. In that sense, Timur Bekmambetov as the director treat this film as such and as a result, provides an enjoyable entertainment imbued with stylish visual displays in vibe with 300 and The Matrix albeit a little less visceral, without being too much going on over the head.

Wesley (James McAvoy) is a practical loser. His life is miserable, his boss is miserable, his girlfriend is miserable, where he sleeps is miserable, his bank account is miserable, the only thing in his life that isn't miserable is perhaps Annabelle, his cat. What's worse, he accepts his miserable attributes of life. Meanwhile, across the street (well, not exactly across the street) a member of fraternity is up for a surprise and the first stylish action ensues as we follow an eccentric high-speed bullet soars through obstacles to finally shot through the man's head. Events quickly unfurled (according to my wife, too slow; according to me, just right) and Wesley met Fox (Angelina Jolie) and gunshots flies, car-chase ensues. Apparently, it seems that there's a member of fraternity that has gone rogue named Cross and he is up and about killing every members of the fraternity. Wesley, whose father was a member of the fraternity and was killed by Cross, (re)discovered a talent required to enroll into the fraternity. Sloan (Morgan Freeman), a self-established leader of the fraternity said that Wesley is the only one who could kill Cross (at this point, my wife and i asked each other, "Why?"). Thus begins Wesley's new life as he undergone many ferocious training before he was up against Cross (Thomas Kretschmann).

As a pure action, the film had its charm in an excess. Wesley is a likeable character and McAvoy easily fit into his place. Angelina Jolie is at her usual vixen persona, she doesn't need to do much to make me sigh in longing exasperation. Acting wise, nothing special from her, but her very last scene is sure going to get mentioned and remembered.

However, me and my wife had a similar question regarding the time when the Russian man got killed. It got me questioned the position in which Wesley was in the fraternity. It seems to me that Sloan and the fraternity had spoiled him a bit too much which in turns made the film rather inconsistent from my point of view. While i could easily ignored the fact, safely stored it elsewhere for later exploitation, my wife can't and as far as she concerned, this is where the film ended for her.

My rating: **1/2 / **** - Good action films, aptly executed, reasonable pacing. If action films is your cup of tea, this film is one you don't want to miss. However, in my opinion, one obstacle (that scene with the Russian guy) got me fumbled and i could never really get up from there.

Hancock (2008)

Hancock. Suffice to say that for all it's worth, i believed that Hancock works rather well (if one didn't want to call it passable) largely because Will Smith's star power whose performance is probably, in my opinion, one of his strongest performance yet.

John Hancock (Will Smith) is a misanthrope, an alcoholic, and a downtrodden man with a 'small' case of superhuman powers. High-speed flying, indestructible body, ultra-powerful punches and kicks, John Hancock has all the ingredients to become a famous superhero who stands in the line of goods against evils. But as the tagline of this film aptly said, "There are heroes. There are superheroes. And then there's John Hancock", John Hancock fall somewhere between a superhero and an "asshole". The public despised him so much that on one occasion, when Hancock allegedly held the bad guys but causing the city a damage worth US$ 9 mills., LAPD Chief himself said (it's not exactly what he said IN the film, just a rough approximation from my part), "We don't want him here, he can chose to destroy New York or wherever instead of this city" He kept on his sullenness and negativity toward society until he met a struggling PR Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman), who then promises to made the public aware and ultimately appreciate what Hancock is capable of.

However, when Hancock met Mary (Charlize Theron), Ray's wife, one could very easily deduce by the mere fact that it's Charlize Theron - one of the prominent working actress today who played Mary - herself that Mary and Hancock promises some twist some backdrop to the overall "depressed Superman" -theme that has actually, in my opinion, going on superbly during the first half of the film.

I'll be bold by saying that no one could came up with an exact reason of why does Will Smith is almost associated with a box-office success. He was an actor whose name and season of summer combined meant only one thing for the film industry, "MONEY!" It's just plain fact. "Hancock", despite of the flaws it suffers, certainly noticeable during the second half, is another proof that Will Smith is still a Money-magnet when it comes to movies.

Hancock is clearly a two-part films squeezed into one. Arguably (if you asked me, at least), the first part of this film was more superior than the second in almost any aspect imaginable. In the first part, we see John Hancock as a miserable anti-hero at best, or a despicable bum at worst. Fortunately, Will Smith's persona made its viewers actually rooting for him to get things right on track and that's why it could be comfortably said that Hancock works largely due to Will Smith in reins. Thus, the first part of this film is probably responsible for most of the impressions left of this film to its viewers. It's funny, and entertaining.

The second part is where Mary, whose name alone threatened to stole the spotlight from Hancock from the very first eye contact came into play. I've heard that this film has undergone much surgery in the editing room for its producers wishes to aim for a "PG-13" rating. Rumor has it, that this film was submitted thrice before finally receives a "PG-13" rating. Therefore, i guess that the jumbled and sometimes incoherent second part of this film is the result of this surgery.

Albeit some of the scenes in the second part still retains the entertaining quality from the first part, i wouldn't be surprised if many among the audiences questioned some part of the plot. Myself, as i've always favored a dark and gloom ending, the way Hancock chose to wrap itself leave me with a frown and a "meh". Clearly, the ending was heavily influenced by the producer's decision and the original ending was more dark and gloomy IF there's an alternate ending, that is. Hopefully.

My rating: **1/2 / **** - It's actually a kind of film where you could have a good time, a few good laughs, but totally forgot about it the second you move your ass from the seat.

The Ruins (2008)

The Ruins. I've read the book, now i've seen the film. The film version of Scott Smith's The Ruins is fairly faithful to its original source. Due to the nature of the media, it's obvious that some differences between the book and the film are bound to happen. In the film, although most of the characters were intact, not all of them had the same treatment as in the book, some of them had their roles altered to compensate with the running time but as psychological horror films go, this film manages to keep its tension throughout, made its viewers actually cared about the characters, and doesn't flinch away from the gore that ultimately saved this film from having a measly rating of PG-13. Therefore, if you can't stomach an R-rated gore film, this one is not for you.

Amy and Stacy were best friends, Jeff and Eric were their boyfriends respectively. On a last day of their holiday in Cancun, they met Mathias who planned to visit the Mayan ruins which is not-even-in-the-map to pick his brother, Heinrich who has been gone that way with a girl from an archaeological team that did an excavation survey on the ruins. Jeff, an established de-facto leader of this group by mutual consensus, urged his friends to a one last adventure to the unknown for their last day holiday outing. Eric, who had always seems to look up to Jeff, reluctantly agrees, Stacy, a dedicated goof-ball, a film's clown also agrees because well, she's too goofy to disagree, and Amy, even if she's initially refused to go, she's simply too weak to resist Jeff's insistence. Together, the five of them, with Dimitri, another tourist they depart to the ruins the next day.

The ruins is a pretty sight for any tourist. It looks like some sort of a Mayan pyramid with a flat top, a visible stair on its side, and green-colored vines all over. The moment our party reached the clearing that led to the pyramid, a score of Mayan sentries appeared threateningly shouting and yelling and when Amy stepped into the ruins, the sentries become more agitated that they doesn't hesitate to blow Dimitri's head off. Panicked, the party were ushered to the top of the pyramid by the Mayans and they were later found out that the Mayans intend to keep them on the pyramid until whatever fate (which the Mayans known for sure what it would be) befell upon them.

Unlike slew of many horror films that came out this year, The Ruins made its audience actually cared for its characters even if that's a little bit of over stretching if you haven't read the book. In the film, the characters were toned down, and ushered into a hasty introduction that merely scratches the surface of the real character described in the book. Since i've read the book, the hasty introduction worked although i would think that it wouldn't nearly suffice to the audiences who had never read the book.

The film was well paced, it doesn't waste too much time on introductions, and although there are few old standardized horror scare tactic (that lady with a phone in the beginning of the film, and that dog who held no significance whatsoever), once things get ugly there's turning back. This film is rated-R so it doesn't stay away from the gore, and even a seasoned horror fans would flinch in some of the scenes and it's something that once more added the plus point to this film as many of the horror films that precede it merely settles for a timid PG-13 rating and aimed at scare tactic that most of time induced by sudden-movement. When a horror film made you look away from the screen, that's how you know that it worked and if you seen this film without even squinting your eyes during the amputation scene, then i'm really sorry to say that i don't want to know you as clearly you're a freako-psycho and i wish to live for a little bit longer, thank you.

Granted, as always, the book version is always better, but aside from understandable trimming and modification here and there, there's no substantial difference between the book and the film. And it kept the dark ending (in a way) intact. This film is one of those rare novel adaptation film that complimenting the original work.

My rating: *** / **** - Easily the best horror film in 2008. Rated-R for gore, profanity, and nudity.