Reviews: District 9 & Ponyo

Gerrymandered

First off, it has to be said that if anything, this movie has the distinction of possessing one of the year's best teaser trailers. I simply can't give high enough praises for what that little bit of footage did. I had absolutely no idea what this movie was about before I saw that footage, and after I saw it, well, I still didn't know much about it but I was totally interested in seeing it. To turn pure ignorance into hyped up excitement is truly something to behold. However, as is usually the case, a movie can almost never be as good as its trailer, particularly when its trailer is amazing. This film is a perfect example, which has to deal with a severe amount of faults before it can relish in its grand accomplishments.

I walked into this film knowing virtually nothing about the plot or characters in this movie, and I'm going to try and preserve that in this review because it does enhance the experience a bit. What I will say is that even the current trailers divulge that aliens accidentally landed on Earth almost thirty years ago over Johannesburg, South Africa. The government has placed these aliens in a refugee camp and is planning to evict them to a new facility. A mediator between the two species, Wikas (Sharlto Copley), is sent to give eviction notices. He's gets on the wrong side of the military and attempts to partner with an imprisoned alien named Christopher to help get out of trouble.

This movie has two major flaws going in, and one of them is the story. The film's script by director Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell is a bit of a wild mess that preferences overwrought metaphors usually seen in science fiction rather than cohesive storytelling. Then, by the time the third act arrives, the film abandons its heavy themes in favor of an action set piece, which feels really out of place considering the film never once devoted enough time to get its leading man to transform into an renegade hero. There's a lot of ambitious things going on here, but it's all sprawled out without much cohesive sense.

Speaking of that leading character, it is difficult to root for him because at many times he is unsympathetic. He is not the lone voice that speaks out against the condition of the aliens' living environments. Instead he is the one who is willing to gleefully look on as the soldiers incinerate unborn alien fetuses, threaten to kill Christopher's son, and still insult that alien even when he is trying to help him. Even at Wikas's most vulnerable, the aliens still manage to posses more humanity and sympathy than him. I think they were stronger characters to deal with, and I wish the film didn't treat their storyline as it was only seen vicariously through Wikas.

Still, while his character is handled poorly by the script, Copley does do a credible job in this role, and he is more than capable to carry a film like this. He does put a lot of passion and energy into this character, and even when we the audience may want to abandon him because of his ethics, Copley makes sure he himself stays with him, continuing to bring out all the good, bad and ugly sides that this character can flesh out. That conviction is what really works. But, as I said, it does seem to shy in comparison to the aliens, and Christopher, who also carries around his young son, seems like a far more interesting character to want to know. Unless aliens look like E.T., there unfortunately isn't much room to have them become a central character. This could have been an exception, but it sadly isn't. Christopher is the film's best character that needed to be flushed out more.

Though, director Blomkamp does manage to keep the energy going with each scene, and he is able to rightly set up the mood in each moment. Even though you'll recognize how heavy handed the metaphors are, you can still appreciate the docudrama approach Blomkamp uses here to create that sense of relevant realism that goes on even today. When the film awkwardly slips into action mode, you also feel the energy in all of those scenes, and most deliver an effective job of entertainment. Blomkamp even stages the quiet moments well, and the emotions are felt even when the dialogue may not carry quite the same sharp punch.

There's always a soft spot in my heart for science fiction, but when it comes to combining that genre with action, instead of the operatic, it can become a missed opportunity. In a nutshell, that is what this film is, a series of missed opportunities. Starting from the beginning where the metaphors are too heavy, to the end where the action is misplaced, to the wrong character being at the center. Still, Blomkamp does have an ambitious vision here, and it is certainly interesting to watch them unfold. It certainly wasn't anywhere as good as the trailer, but it was an intriguing experiment to watch unfold. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: B-

Fisher King

Don't call Hayao Miyazaki the Walt Disney of Japan. It's not just because he has a history of saying that he deplores that title. It's not even because Miyazaki tries to steer clear of subliminal racism that past Disney films have been unfortunately guilty of. The real reason is because he is interested in more than just delivering an animated world that is heavy on the fancy. He wants one that also engages the audience in the beautiful canvas that is often times a very complicated story. His films are pure gems because they combine the striking animation with an intriguing premise that fleshes out equally valued characters. His latest film is one that goes for that once again, and it is an attempt that is fairly hit and miss.

The title of this film refers to the main character, Ponyo, whose American dubbed voice in theatres right now is provided by Miley Cyrus's little sister Noah. Ponyo is a type of fish/girl who aspires to escape the confined life under her strict sorcerer father (Liam Neeson). She eventually befriends a boy, Sosuke (Frankie Jonas, the absolute youngest of the Jonas Brothers), who takes a strong liking to Ponyo, even as she begins to sprout legs, arms and the command of giant waves that look like fish.

The plot to this movie is a paper thin tale concerning Ponyo wanting to permanently become a human, but that has some speed-bumps because the natural balance of the universe is being distorted by the moon. I think. I wasn't all that interested in the plot because it is really lacking in this film. Granted, this is meant for kids, but it still means that the adults brought into this movie will feel like the simplistic storyline will feel uninteresting and a bit slow. The last act in particular is a serious drag and makes the film lose major steam by the end.

But then, Miyazaki certainly has a beautiful canvas to to paint on. It is really magnificent how well detailed the scenery is, given that it is completely handrawn. His eye as a filmmaker is always one that knows how to draw in great dramatic energy in heart pounding scenes. Then, given the fact that they look incredible, the scenes really have a sense of kinetic life, helped greatly, but sometimes overpowered, by Joe Hisaishi's score. Those elements were lacking in Howl's Moving Castle, but it is present here.

I'm a big supporter of the necessity of foreign films being shown in their original language with the subtitles attached. Please, people, do not be afraide of the subtitles. This film is being released with a dubbed American cast, as most Miyazaki films are, and at times it isn't all bad. Even though Frankie and Noah purely got these roles because of Disney nepotism, they give their characters the right amount of innocent speech, though Noah seems like she's trying a bit harder than Frankie. Other voices like Tina Fey as Souske's mother Lisa, Cate Blanchett as Ponyo's mythical mother, and Lily Tomlin as a cranky old lady in the nursing home where Lisa works offer a real warmth in their characters and infuse them with a believable sense even among all the fantasy. However, two voices in particular, Neeson and Betty White, are very distracting. That fault isn't entirely theirs, but because their voices are so distinct, it is difficult to separate between the actor and the character

There is another reason why I think foreign films should be watched with subtitles. Often times, elements of films tend to get lost in translation, and the original intent of a film is not always felt. Sometimes this is the case of a line delivery that is a beat off from what the scene should demand, and other times it seems like a cultural rift doesn't gel well with an American audience. A specific moment is when a discussion on the origin of breast milk is brought up, and I'm willing to bet that those parents who brought their children to see this movie will have an awkward conversation afterwards. There might also be a cultural difference in education, since five-year-olds Ponyo and Sosuke can name gigantic fish from the dinosaur age. I don't know what's being taught in those Japanese kindergartens, but I think even adults could benefit from them.

I understand that this movie is meant for children, and I'm willing to bet that anybody who reads this is not in the target audience either. But the draw of Miyazaki is not only how well the pictures look but how much the dramatic story draws you in. Here, the picture is rich, but the story is severely lacking, particularly in the last act which ends on a horrific freeze frame. But, these characters can still be endearing while sometimes being difficult to totally believe. In the end, you'll wear a smile throughout most of this movie. This might be the one instance when Miyazaki could be called the Walt Disney of Japan because here has has taken the more fantastical route. However, I'm sure it's not a nickname that will stick. *** / ****; GRADE: B

Review: G.I. Joe

Army of None

Well, I thought there weren't anymore things that I could blame the Transformers franchise for. There was already reviving the career of hack filmmaker Michael Bay, the degrading of the once respectable star power of Jon Voight, making Megan Fox believe that people were actually interested in hearing her thoughts, and, of course, giving us the absolutely horrible Transformers sequel. But perhaps the greatest damage this franchise has done is giving Hollywood the okay to sign onto more films based on a line of toys, as if this is the latest, greatest medium to adapt into a feature length film. This film seems to be the first casualty of this new wave of toys to film, and I pray that it remains the last effort.

The elite fighting force known as G.I. Joe was originally a purely American team. Not so now, as the unit is an internationally comprised league of super men and women who fight against global tyranny. Channing Tatum and Marlon Waynes are the two newest recruits to G.I. Joe which is overseen by General Hawk (Dennis Quaid). The "Joes" are in a race with an evil conglomerate that holds technology to antagonizing microbots that can destroy cities in large amounts. The group behind this eventually becomes the infamous arch enemy Cobra (whose Commander will be Joseph Gordon-Levitt).

Now, you probably know that this is going to be a bad movie, but you cannot imagine how far below your expectations this will fall. First off, you'll notice that what these people are saying is horrific. The script feels like it could have been written by fourth graders because it is that bad. But the writing is not just bad; it's lazy. Every scene, every plot twist, every line of dialogue feels so forced and predictable that all of it becomes an effort to make sure not a single neuron in your brain fires at any point. The exposition is laid out by in long breaths and the dialogue is just corny, not to mention the script containing so many retrospective flashbacks that hit an uneven tone. Stuart Beattie can create great conversational dialogue (like in Collateral) but he does his career a great disservice.

Same goes to director Stephen Sommers. Some of his career has been on the same road of Michael Bay as his films generally aren't highly praised nor are they gigantic grossers. However, I thoroughly enjoyed his remake of The Mummy, and I proudly file Deep Rising and Van Helsing under guilty pleasures. But the great action scenes in those films work because Sommers finds a way still identify with the characters in battle, so we can feel for their plight amongst the explosions and swinging swords. He never lets those moments in here, and every action set piece is just an exercise in nauseating camera work, disorienting editing marks, and a numbing sound effects track that tries to give Transformers 2 a run for its money. There's one fight scene between two kids that Sommers stages very well, but it's about the only one to cling to.

I tried to stick up for Tatum in Fighting a couple months ago, but now I contend that he really is a bad actor. There is not an ounce of believability to his character as he delivers every line either like he's auditioning for a middle school play or playing a combat video game. Wanes does deliver a few laughs here and there and tries to bring the likability of this movie up a bit (making this one of the few movies that actually is improved by a Waynes credit). Still, Quaid is so serious work here that he never looks like he's having fun, which automatically transports him into the wrong movie. Sienna Miller shows up as a baddie, but she's as lame, half baked and forgettable as much as the rest of the G.I. Joe team, which, by the way, includes a cameo by Brendan Fraser that will immediately make you ask yourself, "What the hell is Brendan Fraser doing in this movie?"

Then, there's Gordon-Levitt, who finally gave a performance I didn't like. Not only is his role significantly small, but he's saddled with a distractingly bad voice that sounds like Dr. Claw from the Inspector Gadget cartoons and the film's absolutely worst dialogue. In fact, when you look at him, he comes off less as a frightful baddie but more like a cross between Darth Vader and Mr. Peanut. To be fair, it isn't totally his fault as it is a character that is more horribly written than horribly performed, but he's too good an actor to have one of the cheesiest movie villains around. If you decide to watch this movie, immediately seek out Brick and (500) Days of Summer so you can see his talent used in full effect.

But hopefully you won't have to suffer through this movie, which at its best plays like a bad Saturday morning cartoon. I also don't want to give the impression that this is one of those movies that's so bad it's good, because that would be an insult to movies like Never Back Down. This film takes itself too seriously to become a campy pleasure, but its also too silly for it to be seen as a legitimate action picture. The shallow acting and flat direction drag the movie down, but it's that incredibly lazy, predictable, uninspired, unoriginal, amateurish, undeveloped script that puts the heaviest nail in the coffin. Move over Bruno, because I've found not only the worst film so far this year, but the worst I've seen in a long while. Well, maybe until Hot Wheels comes out, and I wish I was joking about that project. 1/2* / ****; GRADE: D-

Review: Funny People

Funny Forum

I'm not exactly sure why this is, but the likable charm of writer-director-producer Judd Apatow has never particularly struck a chord with me. His two previous directorial efforts, The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up managed to keep some smiles on my face, but I certainly believed the overwhelming support those two films received were more than necessary. As for the projects that have had Apatow as a producer, only one has really made me appreciate that particular brand of comedy, and that was Superbad. In fact, after I saw Pineapple Express, I had hoped that this film would have been the tune up he desperately needed to get the comedic ball rolling again (particularly after the abysmal failure that was Year One). So I pose the question to myself that I try to answer: Is third time the charm for me and Mr. Apatow?

To try and answer that, we look to where this story starts, and that is with George Simmons, played by Adam Sandler in one of his serious performances that he seems to do every once in a while. Simmons is essentially Sandler in an alternate reality, where he is a popular celebrity comic that has been bogged down by a slow career. However, his life takes a dramatic turn when he receives news that he has contracted a rare form of leukemia and with this news decides to try and get a new lease on life. He returns to his stand-up roots and contracts a younger comic, Ira (Seth Rogen), to assist and write jokes for him. The two form an inevitable bond and take their relationship to a test when George tries to win back the love that was lost (Leslie Mann) now married to Eric Bana (probably thanking Apatow for the compliment that Rogen got laid in Knocked Up because of Munich).

This is a movie that has a really good two thirds. This is where Apatow crafts a truly well rounded and complex allegory on life and mortality, all through the prism of a comedian's eye. Here is where his craft as a writer in creating stories that defy their conventional genres becomes well nurtured and matured. There is also grand kudos for him not allowing the film's personality to split in two, and the themes of comedy and tragedy are always in a healthy mix. Apatow's directorial hand still feels a bit flat, but it's a hand that only gets better when he allows his characters to guide the medium rather than the camera (speaking of, what is double whammy Oscar winner Janusz Kaminski doing lighting this movie?)

But then we get to that third act, and it is a drawn out affair. Don't get me wrong, the excursion at Mann's house while she attempts to rekindle the relationship with Sandler while awkwardly trying to steer away the suspicions of Bana are funny at times, but tonally doesn't fit with the rest of the film. In all honesty, it feels a bit tacked on and more like a plot to a cheery sitcom rather than a complex comedy. Not only that, but as with most of Apatow's projects, it takes a mighty long time to wrap up, and the film's nearly two and a half hour length starts to take its toll. I'd be lying if that doesn't bring down the movie too much, but the film fortunately has the first two thirds to make up for a rather bland third act.

Anybody who knows me is aware that when it comes to Adam Sandler, I am not the guy raising his hand to declare being a big fan. For most of his career I've despised his lazy brand of slapstick humor that has only occasionally translated to him delivering any believable dramatic work. Here is the perfect role for him because it allows him to become comfortable with this character's overtly comic personality while occasionally slipping into emotionally driven scenes that feel authentic. This is Sandler's best performance in his career, and I for one am very thankful to find one that I like. As for Rogen, I do feel like he's doing more of the same character he's been doing for Apatow since the beginning; it's very funny but not earth-shattering in terms of a range for an actor.

Fortunately, the entire ensemble delivers equally on comedic talent, something that is rare find in comedies that I have only recently seen in Sideways and Superbad. Leslie Mann, who seems to be the only female Apatow stock player (though I wish he'd invite Elizabeth Banks), is once again charming and sublime in a role that doesn't feel completely forced. Familiar faces Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzman play Rogen's roommates, and both present the sly wit and great comedic timing to make them distinct and equally hilarious. Bana is also surprisingly endearing in this role and is never overacted into the stereotype category. Special mention has to be given to the numerous celebrity cameos that range from James Taylor to Andy Dick to Sarah Silverman and even to an extremely funny scene between an irate Eminem and a dumbfounded Ray Romano. The cameos are cheap, but God if I didn't laugh at all those cheap jokes.

So was third time the charm? Yes and no, I'd say. I appreciate that the ambition of this film is much larger than the Apatow projects in the past, and I was really surprised at how well this film was crafted and superbly acted in that first big chunk. But then it does fall apart at the end and loses steam before it crosses the finish line with only the continually funny actors to guide it through. This isn't the perfect Apatow comedy, but it is one that shows where Apatow is willing to take an audience and that is a good step for having me appreciate him on a level that seems to be socially acceptable. If only he gets his film's length under control, then he'd have me set. *** / ****; GRADE: B

The Year So Far...Part 2

I apparently didn't get the memo for the rest of the country's legitimate film critics that the moment to do your mentions for the year's best offering at a given point was moved from the end of June to the middle of July (probably another decision that was affected by the release of The Dark Knight, which was July 18 of last year). I certainly wish that I had known, since immediately following I saw Tetro, Moon, The Hurt Locker, and (500) Days of Summer, which I proudly call my favorite film so far and is a much better contender than Drag Me to Hell. So, since there's no new movie worth reviewing this weekend (I'll politely pass on The Ugly Truth and G-Force: 3D), I thought I'd make another mention on what the year has offered, in terms of great performances and some technical aspects.

Leading Actor: As I mentioned in my review, Joseph Gordon-Levitt has yet to give a performance that I haven't fallen in love with. In (500) Days..., he is able to convey so much emotion while saying and doing very little. He commands every accomplishment his character requires. The same goes to Sam Rockwell for the well received Moon, doing a fantastic one man show and providing more evidence that he's a great actor than taken as he gives a deep, psychological and emotionally involving turn. I'd also give shout-outs to John Krisinski for a surprisingly good role in Away We Go, Vincent Gallo's leading performance in Tetro, and the always reliable Johnny Depp as John Dillinger in Public Enemies. Two little seen movies, The Escapist and Is Anybody There?, had two great leads in Brian Cox and Michael Caine, respectively. Don't expect greatness in either role, but expect them to elevate the material in every scene they appear in.

Leading Actress: Hands down, my favorite actress at this point is Maya Rudolph in Sam Mendes's Away We Go. She's funny and incredibly dramatic, and completely blew me away after seeing her successful run on SNL. She carries so much expression in her eyes and quiet voice that you'll believe she cries more than she does in actuality. She is incredible in this film. Zooey Deschanel, who I've never been a big fan of, finally gave a performance that didn't annoy me in (500) Days..., and she was a perfect compliment to Gordon-Levitt, which is what the girl in a couple film should do. This category hasn't been stellar so far, but I would mention Kristen Stewart giving a mature performance in the surprisingly mature Adventureland and even Alison Lohman giving a devilishly twisted version of the damsel in distress in Drag Me to Hell.

Supporting Actor: Tetro has to be the most contradictory film for me. It is a movie that I did love, and I stand by my review, but it is completely forgettable and I sometimes have to remind myself that I saw it. However, I really remember relative newcomer Alden Ehrenreich conveying a lot of powerful emotions in his soft spoken mannerisms. Watchmen is a movie that I now find dissatisfying, but Jackie Earle Haley's performance as Rorschach was really the most interesting thing about the entire movie, and that definitely deserves special mention. The very little seen The Escapist had a great supporting cast, whose highlights include Damian Lewis as a sadistic prison bully and Liam Cunningham as the wise, long term inmate. I was also genuinely surprised at how well Ryan Reynolds carried dramatic work in Adventureland and he flexed those acting muscles very convincingly (he's got the talent, he just needs to pick the right project).

Supporting Actress: I don't have a lot to report here, and in all honesty I hardly ever do, but I will say that Mabriel Verdu once again amazed me, this time in Tetro, providing a supporting performance that doesn't try to steal the spotlight, but only gives the film a grounded feeling and steals the show anyway because of the great performances. I also want to give recognition to Helen Mirren as the tough-as-nails newspaper editor in State of Play, overplaying that British acting style really well, Lorna Raver as the infamous Gypsy lady in Drag Me to Hell, camping it up really good, and Zoe Saldana, giving a much appreciated re-imagining of Uhuru in Star Trek, turning her from forgettable bit player to commanding screen presence.

Director: In keeping with my favorite film this year, Marc Webb provided great creative energy in (500) Days... and turned a generally passive story into a visually stunning and emotionally driven work of art. The same thing can be said for Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie, BTW) for Moon, delivering a cool and often times chilling portrait of solitude. I appreciated Francis Ford Coppola's personal touch in Tetro and a big mention has to go to Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker, who knew exactly how to make an audience care about the small ensemble enough to get the tension racked up in the well executed suspense scenes. Recognition also to Michael Mann for providing an overstuffed, but engaging Public Enemies and Sam Raimi's playful sense of manipulative humor in Drag Me to Hell.

Screenplays: At this point, original screenplays are just laying waste to the adapted material so far this year. (500) Days of Summer, Moon, Tetro, Away We Go, Up, Duplicity and Drag Me to Hell have all been better than even the best adapted screenplay I've seen this year, which the best has been State of Play. The others that have been qualified for mentioning only to fill up slots have been films like Star Trek, Angels & Demons, and the latest Harry Potter film. I hope some adapted material will be better later, but I'm not seeing it right now.

Techs: My favorite technical category is cinematography, and Tetro dominates in its glorious black and white scheme, with honorable mentions to the glorious wide shots in Sin Nombre and the bleak, French impressionist hues of the latest Harry Potter. Editing is next, and (500) Days of Summer takes it for its inventive, back and forth, storytelling style. Michael Giacchino is always noticed for Pixar work, and Up has been no exception, but two underrated, and forgotten, scores this year have been James Newton Howard's energetic and jazzy tracks to Duplicity and the always great Hans Zimmer doing his operatic best for Angels & Demons. And I know that when we get to the sound categories, many people start to tune out, but a big special mention has to go to the teams behind The Hurt Locker, who really made the tension work, and Harry Potter who especially gave the flashback scenes a aurora of mystery.

Well, I think that about covers it. I'll be back next week hopefully with a review of Funny People. I have yet to love a Judd Apatow film, but maybe third time will be the charm. I doubt it, but we'll see.

Review: (500) Days of Summer

Summer of Love

Boy, I don't know about you, but 2009 has been one stinker of a year so far. Don't get me wrong, I still have a fondness for some films like Up, Star Trek and The Hurt Locker, but those are only small examples. For goodness sake, Drag Me to Hell is still in my top five. In all honesty, I was about ready to give up hope and fear that I had seen the best the year had to offer until the "prestige" pictures started to come out and would make me like films only I was told to like by the Oscar campaigns. But just as all hope starts to fade, a film like this peeks over the horizon and breaths a much appreciated and welcomed bit of fresh air into a disappointing movie season and a generally contrived genre. And what fresh air it is.

Summer in the title refers to the girl Summer (Zooey Deschanel) and the boy she meets, Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). Both are young, attractive twentysomethings working for a greeting card company in Los Angeles. The film yo-yos to different moments in the 500 days of their complex relationship to explore their ups, downs, highlights and low moments that eventually leads to their break-up. That isn't a spoiler because as it is blatantly said by the film's stern narrator, "This is not a love story."

I'm not prejudice against the romantic comedy, but I am a strong skeptic of it because rarely does it feel genuine. Even in this day in age, we still get movies like The Proposal which morphs unrealistic characters with not an ounce of likable or realistic personality and puts them into contrived situations not even fit enough for a bad episode of "Three's Company". But every once in a while, one breaks the mold, and it is when the film not only has likable, and most importantly believable, characters that also spins its tale in a creative way. That creativity is something that director Marc Webb is capable of providing. Making his feature film debut after a career in music videos, he brings a high sense of creative energy that surges through the entire film.

Webb's sense of direction, coupled with that of writers Michael H. Weber and Scott Neustadter, is really what makes the film special than some of its predecessors. The jumping back and forth within the narrative is only one part of that. One notable scene is when Tom attends a party of Zooey and the screen splits in two, showing what Tom's expectations were that night and what happens in reality. Some of the differences are more subtle than the other, but it is definitely a scene that shows how a little creativity can go a long way. Another one would be a sort of faux musical number by Tom and passers by on the street. If you can look at that scene and keep a smile all the way through, then you've found the odd sense of humor the film carries and you will enjoy it for that.

Deschanel and Gordon-Levitt are really perfect for these roles. He has yet to provided a bad performance in any movie I've seen him in, and he can make every character he takes on reach a broad range of emotion while providing so little movements in his character. He's expressive without chewing the scenery. She finally fits into this role comfortably and makes that flighty, earthy persona she's carried for so many years feel like a credible match against Tom's grounded, yet occasionally delusional, mindset. There's also some good supporting work from Geoffrey Arend as Tom's co-worker friend and Chloe Morentz as Tom's wise-beyond-her-years younger sister.

In the end, this is a really sweet movie that always knows its place. It is smart, energetic and delightful, and just when it begins to be a little long winded, it cuts the scene short and moves onto the next that is just as fascinating as the last. The cast is terrific and they work off of a very creative approach to this story. I guarantee that from every moment, even the last tacked on bit, will bring a smile to your face and you'll appreciate the sense of realism the movie carries with its extravagant storytelling. If you don't, then I guess you'll just have to go on grieving with the rest of the year. As for me, I'm relishing in the experience that is the best film of the year so far. **** / ****; GRADE: A

Review: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Spellbound

It's always amazing when a series of books manages to put a chokehold around the pop culture world and massively feed the global masses until a time before this period seems like it never existed. What is even more fascinating is when that excitement even bleeds into the film adaptations. Not many have been able to hold onto both, but few have, such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But now, we have the barley lingering Harry Potter series, which is now limping onto its last legs but still showing that there still can be plenty of surprises and adrenaline left over to fulfill.

It's the sixth year for Harry, Ron and Hermione at Hogwarts and the atmosphere has certainly changed. The Death Eaters, followers of the evil Lord Voldemort, are carrying out attacks, both on the magical and Muggle world alike. Dark themes are abound at the magical school, as they welcome a new teacher, Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), and the trio of friends look into a new, sinister cast given to Malfoy, as well as trying to educate themselves once again on the secrets of teenage love.

David Yates returns as the director of this film after helming the previous entry Order of the Phoenix. That film was good, but I did blame Yates for allowing the movie to become muddled, emotionally flat and lacking on the charm. This time, Yates has taken the notes and delivers a movie that improves on nearly aspect. Following an intense Death Eater attack in the first few minutes, the movie has action sequences that are more exciting (and comprehendible), emotional scenes that carry more weight, and characters feel more believable. Also, the movie just contains more humor than any of the past films, which is a big reason this stands above many of the others. Another reason would be the new cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel, who creates a colorfully bleak palate reminiscent of his French-impressionist work on films like Amelie and A Very Long Engagement.

After so many years, the three leads have had plenty of time to get comfortable with these characters and they certainly don't disappoint here. Daniel Radcliffe is continuing to show the emotional range this character can bring, while Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are making a case for them to be taken seriously as well. Michael Gambon as Dumbledore is really exceptional here, and it is nice to see former bit players like Alan Rickman's Snape, Tom Felton's Malfoy and Helena Bonham Carter's Bellatrix Lestrange find a greater place to carry in this film. The new addition of Broadbent is well placed, and he is magnificent in this role, giving much needed humor and serious emotion whenever needed.

The one hiccup the film sometimes has is in the screenplay. Steve Kloves returns as the writer for the series, having been the sole employee here until a break from the last film. Kloves's familiarity with this story and characters still feels like its going strong, but there some moments when it includes some melodramatic scenes that linger on a bit too long. I would have also considered him ending the movie with a false one he put in that would have left a much more serious emotional impact. However these are not serious complaints, as the movie still manages to flow rather well.

This film soars high above the previous film and makes a serious mark in the franchise. It's looks great, carries many endearing characters and has an intriguing story to go along with it. And don't be fooled by the PG rating; this film still offers plenty of dark elements in its story while also finding the great humor to go along with it as well. In truth, that's the same thing that was found when Alfonso Cuaron did the third installment Prisoner of Azkaban and for the longest time that was the best of the series, in terms of film. At the risk of sounding like one of those TV blurbs, I can say with confidence that this is the best Harry Potter film yet. ***1/2 / ****; GRADE: A-

Review: Bruno

Queer as Folk

Three years ago, when an extremely long titled movie that was short-handed as Borat hit cinemas, I was convinced that I had seen a completely different movie than the rest of the world. I heard people that Sacha Baron Cohen, the film's star, had taken a hilarious character and used this outrageous platform as a way to peer into the American culture and expose our subtle racism and anti-Semitism in order to bring a better understanding of our way of life. What I saw was a man who put on a funny accent and got gullible people to admit and do things they normally wouldn't do, put it on camera and point and laugh at their lapse in judgement. That was essentially the movie, and most of the time it worked. The success is not found the second time out, and the spark is never even close to being ignited like it was before.

Cohen once again uses one of his characters made famous by Da Ali G Show that was popular in his home country of England. Bruno is a gay, Austrian fashionista who works for a fashion centric television show in that country. The film's surprisingly heavy handed plot has Bruno making a trip to a fashion show where his new Velcro suit causes a major disruption on the runway. Bruno is fired, but he travels the world with his assistant and jumps from place to place in order to achieve some kind of fame.

Like I said, I didn't fall in love with Borat like the rest of the country, but I did admit that it was at times humorous. The execution isn't really that much different here (even the stories have similarities), but I think what gave the character Borat an edge was that he was a likable guy, in his own anti-Semitic way. He was crass, but always stored a humble personality that made his adventure have a reason to care. The problem with Bruno is that for all of the film he is a self-absorbed, arrogant jerk who's smug persona as personified by Cohen makes his tactics feel even more cheap, contrived and painfully aware of themselves than they were three years ago. Bruno is not the type of person that a movie is made for.

Cohen is a great comedian, I can recognize that, and I even liked his under appreciated, and somewhat forgotten, turn in Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd. He is generally good at taking characters and investing enough of a spirit in them to get invested. But here, he never lets Bruno settle down and humanize him. He is always making Bruno be on, and force feeding the people around him with so many over the top caricatures of the gay community. His intentions are to get people to admit their homophobia, but that is only when he pushes the boundaries so much that even the most tolerant and accepting of audiences would have to raise their voices. It is unclear where Cohen wants to take us with this character, but it is always in uncomfortable territory.

Larry Charles returns as director, and since then he's also directed Bill Maher's religious lampooning documentary Religulous. Here, the set up is pretty much the same, but the payoff isn't nearly as great. There are more and more moments that feel staged and then don't really have the value of good entertainment. When that fails, the film reverts to truly outrageous and gross out moments. Borat had one really funny scene in which Cohen and his short, stocky assistant wrestle with each other nude and extend it to the hotel lobby downstairs. Parts of that scene were probably fake, but there was a delivery about it that made it humorous (the extra long black bar on Borat for example). This film relies far too heavily on shock value, and includes far too many genital close-ups for my taste.

Maybe there was a good film here to start with, but it is not what is out in theaters right now. Instead, we have a rancid film that is ugly to the touch. There is no endearing center to this film; it is rotten and moldy right down to the core. It is offensive, vulgar, conceded, malicious and, most importantly, not funny. There are a few clever moments sprinkled in, but they are far too few to list off in great number. One that comes to mind would be an interview Bruno does with Ron Paul, trying to boost his fame by participating in a sex tape with the congressman. Paul walks out in a fiery passion, and it is generally funny. A little while later, I saw other people doing the same thing in my theatre. I wish I had followed suit for, at this moment, the worst film of the year. * / ****; GRADE: D