Reviews by Lexi

''Yea? I blow a hole in your face and then I go in the house... and I sleep like a baby. You can count on that. We used to stack fucks like you five feet high in Korea... use you for sandbags.''

Disgruntled Korean War vet Walt Kowalski sets out to reform his neighbor, a young Hmong teenager, who tried to steal Kowalski's prized possession: his 1972 Gran Torino.

Clint Eastwood: Walt Kowalski

Gran Torino comes from someone who has considered some of his highly praised directorial works as over appreciated, I was absolutely in awe and pleasantly surprised with Gran Torino, a exquisite film and compelling story to boot.
Eastwood stars as Walt Kowalski, an ill-natured racist Korean War veteran living in the heart of a run-down and heavily Hmong-populated area of Michigan. When his 17-year-old Hmong neighbour, Thao, tries to steal his '72 Gran Torino, the ever-so-grouchy Walt is wrenched away from his lonely porch and is thrown into the life of this Hmong family. Not only is Walt now sampling southeast Asian cuisine but he begins to unwillingly mentor Thao, begrudgingly care about the family, and selflessly protect them from the local gang.



I disagree greatly with the suggestion that Eastwood is merely channeling his classic tough guy routine here in Gran Torino - I see and get far more out of his performance. There are many different facets to this Walt character, there is a lot from his past that he is living with and a lot in the present that he is working through. I think Eastwood brings out the conflicted nature of his character very well in a subtle way. Yeah, Eastwood is one tough dude in the film, but he works in his classic tough-guy persona while being very funny, layered, and giving a heartfelt effort. It is easily the best performance I have ever seen him give.

''Ever notice how you come across somebody once in a while you shouldn't have fucked with? That's me.''

Screenplay was probably written with Eastwood in mind (I am not sure of the behind-the-scenes details on this) and it shows. He captures Kowalski perfectly. The film is surprisingly humorous, something that isn't being captured well enough in advertising. It's absolutely hilarious at times (watch as Kowalski attempts to make a man out of Thao by teaching him how to talk like men do), and Eastwood handles the shifts in tone brilliantly. When the film takes a dark turn towards the end I sat on the edge of my seat in suspense, fully aware of where it was heading but still mesmerized by Eastwood's tour-de-force direction. This is an artist at his prime as an actor and as a director.
Whether or not Gran Torino will hold up as one of Eastwood's great films remains to be seen, and the film feels like it would be good for multiple viewings. The characterization is strong and not simplistic at all, you could argue that Kowalski is just another moody war vet, but Eastwood's beautiful, nuanced performance as well as some neat little touches in the screenplay (particularly towards the end) which I won't discuss in detail to avoid spoiling anything (and it's really fun to watch this movie unfold, Eastwood keeps the film moving at a wonderfully involving pace) would prove you wrong. The film works on yet another level as a deconstruction of Eastwood's image. I don't mean that as a negative, it just adds to the film's strength as a character study.

Overall, a Korean war veteran who has killed and has seen killing. His hate for Asians, presumably due to the war, is subdued after acts of kindness by his neighbors and the boy he befriends. Kowalski's parish priest is persistent in attempting to subdue the hate that boils within Kowalski. In the end the priest gets through to Kowalski, learning something from Walt as well. Kowalski repents in the end and offers up the supreme sacrifice for his Asian neighbors. A heart-warming story that leads one on an emotional journey of self discovery.

''The thing that haunts a guy is the stuff he wasn't ordered to do.''

''It's called Karate, man. Only two kinds of people know it, The Chinese and The King. And one of them is me.''

Singer Dewey Cox overcomes adversity to become a musical legend.

John C. Reilly: Dewey Cox

What a surprisingly funny and entertaining movie. This movie is one of the best spoofs on media stars to come out in a long time. Not only was John C. Reilly wonderful in his role as Dewey Cox, the entire cast was great. Special commendation must be afforded to Raymond J. Barry who plays Dewey's rambunctious father. Mr. Barry was truly hilarious. Now there a lot of nudity in this movie, but it's part of the story and without it the story of Dewey Cox could not be effectively told. If you like a clever script, strong comedic acting, and a movie that is a great parody of the entertainment industry and undoubtedly draws its material from the actual depraved behavior of some of the most well-known and internationally famous entertainment stars, then this movie is for you. Remember, though, the humor is adult and it's not for kids.

There are so many things wrong with Dewey the character. At times he can be downright nasty; most of the time he is thoughtless and self-centered. Nevertheless, the creators of this movie have succeeded in developing a character who, despite his myriad of shortcomings, is likable, and, unlike the mentally challenged and emotionally stilted Forrest Gump, is a creditable metaphor for the human condition - and for a Hollywood movie, that's impressive.

The actual material itself is fairly hysterical. There are plenty of laughs to be found at any given turn here, and many laugh out loud moments to go with them. Just watching these actors delivering their lines in purely serious ways, especially during the some of the film's most ridiculous moments (ironically, moments that fall very close to those found in Line or Ray), is just too much to not be able to laugh at. All of these actors seem very at home with the material, and look like they are having a lot of fun with their characters. This also seems to be one of the closest followed scripts of the past few Apatow films, and rarely does it appear that the characters are improvising (or they have just really improved from their consistent ad-libbing). The sets, backgrounds and costume designs, evoking the specific periods, are just as funny, if not more. There is a grand sense of authenticity at work here, and anyone watching the movie can pick out specific ties to their own memories (real or imagined) of those eras. Of course, there are a few too many nods to current fashion trends, but it stays very keenly in the area of that specific era depicted during that point in the film.

Reilly as Cox is a marvel in the lead role. He brings his more refined dramatic style to the role, and I think it helps lend a certain aura of credibility to the performance. He really makes this character his own, and when he is not being downright hilarious, without even breaking a grin, he is being heartbreakingly hysterical. It is a mixed bag, but Reilly makes it work, and he makes it work very well. His performance as the actor is only topped by his performance as the singer. He leads songs brilliantly at every point in the film, and even though the subtext of most of them is a bit risqué, they are still wonderfully written songs sung by someone with a great voice. If this role does not spring board Reilly into more leading actor work, it just may give him the needed boost to be a singer (or at least, to do more musicals or head to Broadway).

The supporting cast, although not nearly as funny as Reilly, all lend a hand in making Walk Hard a very funny movie. From Kristen Wiig and Jenna Fischer as Cox's wives, to Tim Meadows, Chris Parnell, and Matt Besser as his band mates, to Raymond J. Barry as his father, everyone manages to steal a scene for themselves, and manages to deliver some solid laughs. Yes, there are quite a few flat jokes that are given by the supporters much more often than Reilly as the lead, but for the most part, they do a great job backing him up. It also helps that it seems like everyone has some sort of minuscule amount of chemistry with Reilly, allowing their jokes to fly very easily.
Despite its faults, Walk Hard is a solid addition to the growing canon of Apatow comedies, and is one hell of a funny parody. Reilly was the best man for this role, and I am happy to say that he makes the film more than just watchable.

''What the fuck are you?''

Warring alien and predator races descend on a small town, where unsuspecting residents must band together for any chance of survival.

Steven Pasquale: Dallas Howard

Gunnison County, Colorado faces an incredible crisis of galactic proportions..A Predator-alien hybrid, Pred-lien, has birthed on a Predator ship, causes the space vessel to crash-land in a forest region on Earth near the Colorado town posing a thread to humankind. We watch as the Predalien spreads eggs into the human populace while the face-huggers, which escapes the crashed Predator ship, attach to human faces. The birthing process, unlike in previous Alien films, is much faster it seems and they soon grow into the monsters that go on a murderous rampage leaving bodies piled up. Soon the National Guard moves in only to be eliminated in quick fashion, leaving a motley group of surviving citizens to fend for their very lives as menacing baddies are at every turn. A Predator warrior, who finds his fallen comrades, silently vows vengeance, and any human in this path will die.

Glossy dumb cartoon action-horror flick is a fun way to waste 100 minutes. Characters are given just enough exposition to establish them before they face the trials of being in between a war of a Predator warrior and slimy alien walkers. Yes, a lot of the film takes place at night and within darkened places(such as a sewer during which alien face huggers attach themselves to derelicts' faces and Predalien attacks a female hobo who finds her buddies under unfortunate conditions, while we also see the Predator warrior setting up hi-tech booby-traps and blasting them before exploding through the city street above)so the action can be hard to place which is a shame. I didn't have a problem others, it seems, have with the CGI used in the film. CGI granted is obvious in areas. The filmmakers found clever ways to use Predator warrior's night vision to display the violent wake of their victims' dead bodies. There was also an amusing scene where a citizen's head is taken clean off by the Predator warrior's helmet laser. And, the Predator warrior uses a large , hi-tech forms of daggers which, when thrown, slice off alien heads(..one even sticks a human to the wall). The Predalien is a funny hybrid which can actually lay eggs down the throats of victims(..as is the case when the things fills the body of a pregnant woman in a hospital). It has the face of a Predator, yet has the alien walker's whipping tail. As in any of the previous films that came before this, there are human casualties, in the wrong place at the wrong time, such as a father and his son hunting, nuclear power plant technicians who find themselves trapped at work while the Predator warrior does battle with an alien walker, a sensitive father whose killed right in front of his returned soldier wife and frightened daughter, etc. You have two brothers, with a troubled relationship, who must set aside their differences when terrors are threatening them.
One's gorgeous girlfriend gets the goofy clichéd lines that have become standard dialogs for these kind of films, such as "We're not gonna make it, are we?" or "Maybe, they're all gone." You have the typical governmental corruption, as humans expect an airlift to rescue them with a plane under different orders. As you've probably read elsewhere, with a fine-tooth comb, you could pick this film clean because there are an endless foray of holes which pop out to snap you faster than an alien walker's second mouth..but, it goes by so fast that I barely had enough time to care. Certainly a guilty pleasure, but isn't a classic by any means of the imagination. If you can somehow turn your brain off...this might be entertaining.

If anything, we get little aliens bursting from the stomachs of women, acid melting away human faces, and a combat between a Predator using the gadgetry at his disposal against a growing number of nasty, slimy-mouthed aliens. What's not to love? Cue awkward silence...

"I told the truth."

A research chemist comes under personal and professional attack when he decides to appear in a "60 Minutes" expose on Big Tobacco.

Al Pacino: Lowell Bergman

Against this backdrop director Michael Mann gives us The Insider, a film every bit the equal in seriousness to All the President's Men. Russell Crowe plays Tobacco Executive Jeffrey Wigand. Al Pacino is Sixty Minutes Producer Lowell Bergman. Wigand has just been fired from his $300,000 a year job. Bergman wants help deciphering a tobacco industry document. The two of them start an uneasy relationship. The film suggests Wigand's employer began spooking his family BEFORE the executive agreed to become a whistleblower for Sixty Minutes. I doubt that is true.



Soon the two men are developing the story. The Mississippi Attorney General's office wants Wigand to testify. Reporter Mike Wallace (Christopher Plummer) is brought in to interview Wigand. Executive Producer Don Hewit (Anthony Michael Hall) is brought on board. Brown & Williamson gets wind of Wigand's betrayal. Bergman says it wasn't him who tipped B&W. Wigand begins a new job as a high school science teacher. Brown and Williamson assigns detectives to follow him and make trouble for Wigand's family. The Tobacco giant plants anti-Wigand stories in other Press outlets in anticipation of the Sixty Minutes bombshell. Wigand's wife and daughter leave him. He loses his home and the wife divorces him.

The story keeps developing and the pressure builds. But the biggest problem is inside CBS itself. CBS Legal learns that Wigand has a contract with Brown & Williamson that provides for serious financial penalties if Wigand reveals ANY of its secrets, and CBS is liable too. All of a sudden the story is threatening the financial interests of the Network itself. Wallace and Hewitt agree to back off. Bergman is livid. He says CBS owner-CEO Laurence Tisch is betraying the news division because he is afraid a major liability suit will queer plans he has to sell the network to Westinghouse. Left out of the script is the news that the Tisch family owned Loews controls Lorillard, another of the seven giant tobacco companies in America. Even director Michael Mann had to make some concessions. He must have bargained away this embarassing little detail when making his own deal with CBS over what would appear in the script.

Bergman has to tell Wigand the story has been squelched. After all he has had to put up with, Wigand is more than disappointed. Bergman begins leaking CBS' betrayal of the news division to other press outlets. Wallace is now angry that his own part in the coverup has been revealed. He and Bergman quarrel. The Producer is furloughed for a week by Hewitt. But CBS News has a black eye that would make Edward R. Murrow roll over in his grave. Wallace has a brilliant public relations ploy. Lets go over to Black Rock (CBS Corporate) and sell them a package that will save all our reputations. I won't tell you what the deal is though you can probably make a good guess.

The film is two hours and 37 minutes long. It doesn't drag but its a very long sit for a film audience that is mostly under 30 and more interested in special effects than public affairs. In 1976 the film would have been hailed as something like the Second Coming. Today, a film like this is released with almost no fanfare. Its only hope is to capture enough awards to alert the mostly 35 and older audience that has abandoned filmgoing, at least in theatres. Two years ago, Crowe made a boffo debut in a wonderful film called LA Confidential that was soundly trounced at the Awards by the Carnivorous, youth-oriented Titanic. And Crowe, whose performance is tempered in this role, is one of the greatest screen actors to hit these shores since Marlon Brando, James Dean, George C. Scott and Tony Hopkins. Because he still insists on acting at a time when appearing in monster special effects packages is the key to success.., because of this, Crowe's success as a film actor is still not a cinch.

There are other actors in this film that are wasted. Any film that would use Rip Torn as little as this one does, deserves a slap. Torn plays PR man John Scanlon, but he barely speaks a sentence. British actor Michael Gambon plays a high executive at B&W. His screentime is minimal. And Mann repeats a video clip of Gambon repeatedly. The guy who lit a welding torch to reshape the Otter's Uncle's Lincoln in Animal House 21 years ago is wonderful as one of the courtroom lawyers from Mississippi. Wings Hauser, the aptly named and wonderfully over -the-top B-movie actor who usually is larger than Richard Simmons onscreen, is subdued here as a B&W lawyer at a Mississippi court hearing. Speaking of subdued, the most interesting performance is Christopher Plummer's subtle underplaying of Mike Wallace. Plummer's Wallace almost seems to be subordinate to producer Bergman. I wonder if Wallace is really this quiet around his colleagues at the network. The Plummer portrayal is in savage contrast to the Mike Wallace we are used to on-air. Plummer makes no attempt to imitate the on-air Wallace. His delivery is sufficiently newsman-like, but it is not the hard-hitting TV character we are used to. Gina Gershon is sharp and sharklike playing the CBS Lawyer who deflates the team's hopes of putting the story on the air. And former New York Post Editor and columnist Pete Hamil plays a reporter-editor at the New York Times, one of the few Gotham publications he has not worked for.

I was quite impressed by this, in a debased American Cinema, the Insider stands out just because it is directed to an adult sensibility. There are many adults unfortunately whom will not enjoy this film. Its been a long time since Watergate. Not everyone is interested anymore.
All in all this is a true masterpiece. Intellectual (which is rare in a film today), gripping, and truly mesmerizing in every sense of the meaning. This is by far among Mann's best work to date and if he churns out more treasures like this I will remain a fan forever.

"Did you just type: good angles on APRs, into Google?"

A college grad lands a job as a financial journalist in New York City to support where she nurtures her shopping addiction and falls for a wealthy entrepreneur. Based on the novel "Confessions of a Shopaholic" by Sophie Kinsella.

Isla Fisher: Rebecca Bloomwood

P.J. Hogan may be responsible for the refreshingly grim atmosphere of 2003 offering Peter Pan that tried to take away the timeless tale of the boy who wouldn't grow up away from its heavily romanticized robust roots, yet the ample book origins of Confessions of a Shopaholic, his latest film about a woman who wouldn't grow out of an excessive materialistic folly, is as substantial and as memorable as a flicker of a candle. Based from Sophie Kinsella's series of uber-popular books, this hybrid of The Devil Wears Prada and Sex and the City has all the profoundness one can expect from a Jerry Bruckheimer-funded project and a hypocritical underlying theme on anti-consumerism despite the extravaganza that's shown to us.



For a romantic comedy to remain in its genre, there are certain boundaries that it mustn't wrong. So we really can't begrudge such a film for playing it safe and Confessions of a Shopaholic is successful at that. Our financially naive protagonist inadvertently finds her calling while awaiting what she feels she's always longed for, but her addictions strive to bring her down. As she reaches rock bottom she will inevitably conquer her demons and rise once again. Perhaps closer analysis may uproot a deeper message as her boss's journey contradicts her own; while he yearns not to be defined by family she discovers that it is indeed those loved ones that define her.

Struggling with her debilitating obsession with shopping and the sudden collapse of her income source, Rebecca Bloomwood (Isla Fisher) unintentionally lands a job writing for a financial magazine after a drunken letter-mailing mix-up. Ironically writing about the very consumer caution of which she herself has not abided, Rebecca's innovative comparisons and unconventional metaphors for economics grants her critical acclaim, public success, and the admiration of her supportive boss Luke (Hugh Dancy). But as she draws closer to her ultimate goal of writing for renowned fashion magazine Alette, she questions her true ambitions and must determine if overcoming her "shopaholic" condition will bring her real happiness.

The finding yourself story, which has the truth come out eventually, seems to keep popping up in every single romantic comedy of late, Confessions of a Shopaholic is no exception, although the supporting characters and environment that surrounds star Isla Fisher is entirely more satisfactory. In fact, her wide-eyed, perky and cheery attitude brightens the screen, even if the plot is unduly contrived and understandably formulaic. She's believable, charismatic and similar to a great many, and eye candy for the rest - which is more than can be said for most of the generic female-oriented films that flood the field of foreboding romantic finding oneself genres.

Like last year's How to Lose Friends & Alienate People, Confessions of a Shopaholic revolves around the same humorous elements that made the far superior, serious executed story films of the 80s, Big and Working Girl successful: an open-minded boss who's willing to risk hiring an under qualified (or outstandingly creative) employee for the chance on a fresh point of view, and the joys of seeing said underdog rise to the top, against the norm, utilizing random luck at every turn, and combating jealous coworkers. The pattern is simple, the outcome is assured, and while no scene dares to stare originality head on, this fluffy, flamboyant romantic comedy manages to entertain unexpectedly.

''For our homeland. Until the very last man. Our duty is to stop the enemy right here. Do not expect to return home alive.''

The story of the battle of Iwo Jima between the United States and Imperial Japan during World War II, as told from the perspective of the Japanese who fought it.

Ken Watanabe: General Kuribayashi

A film with powerful, historical significance. Told from the side of the Japanese as they prepare to protect Iwo Jima from American invasion.
Some scenes especially the suicide deaths are quite graphic, and the action in it has a gritty, tense, war-drenched realism to it.
Fantastic diverse range of Japanese actors; Ken Watanabe always impresses. Watched this numerous times and always find something new; very powerful, very emotional, very relevant and historical. Lets all take note of our past for the future.



In the second half of Letters from Iwo Jima a group of Japanese soldiers find an American who has been badly wounded and take him into their cave. Their general speaks English, so he begins talking to this soldier, whose name we later find out is Sam. Although the two men should be sworn to kill each other, they are able to have a connection in the one conversation they have. A while later, the general comes back into the room only to discover that Sam's wounds have killed him. He searches him for a while and discovers a letter written by his mother. The letter is full of words that truly come from the heart of this kid's mother, and by the time the general finishes reading the letter, every soldier in that cave has realized that Americans aren't these savages; these hate-driven murderers. No, they all realize that Americans are exactly like they are, and that they don't want to be there and want to return home safely just like their enemies. I believe the point that Clint Eastwood is making with his Iwo Jima saga is just this: these two enemies were far more alike than they had imagined and they were both fighting only in hopes of returning home safely to their family.

''I don't know anything about the enemy. I thought all Americans were cowards. I was taught they were savages.''

As for the specific film itself. In just about every way imaginable, this absolutely masterwork is a step up from Flags of our Fathers (which is not something I say easily, as Flags is a good film). From the acting of the incredible ensemble cast, to the film's delicate but powerful script, to the beautiful imagery of the film (the colour distortion could not be any more brilliant), to Clint Eastwood's absolutely perfect knowledge of film and what works in a film like this.
The score written by Kyle Eastwood Clint's son(Original Music by Kyle Eastwood, Michael Stevens)captures the feel of the movie better than any score written for this year. It is very quiet, poignant music, but listening to it makes you think about all the people that die as a result of war.
The acting is truly phenomenal. All of the actors do incredible, extraordinary work; although I must single out two actors in particular who really blew me away. The first is Ken Watanabe. I haven't seen any of his native work, but I can safely say based upon his American studio work (The Last Samurai, Memoirs of a Geisha. and of course this film)that the man is a force to be reckoned with. I simply hope that he is not reduced to roles in vain of Chow Yun-Fat or Jet Li in their Western cinema roles.
He adds such an atmosphere of wisdom, intelligence and determination – quite the opposite of how the Japanese enemy is usually portrayed in WWII films. His character is entirely human and not reduced to a suicidal, angry General type, which is probably what many people would expect. The second is Kazunari Ninomiya, who plays Saigo. What a heartbreaking performance this actor provides. He is small, scrawny, not built for war. He has trouble fitting in. His expression is that of constant exhaustion. But his determination to live and to honour his general over himself is touching and fascinating to watch. His delivery and performance in general is absolutely stunning.

''We can die here, or we can continue fighting. Which would better serve the emperor?''

In terms of themes, the most intricate and important aspect of the film is its examination of the psyche of the warfare itself. In Flags of our Fathers; like in his earlier films such as Unforgiven, Eastwood portrays an examination and dissection of heroism and what it meant both for those who are labeled heroes and those who did the labeling.
With Letters from Iwo Jima, Eastwood studies the exact opposite of the spectrum; Glory. It's almost as if Eastwood is more fascinated with the Japanese comprehension of heroism than the American one. The Japanese soldiers in the film don't have such a thing as heroism to begin with. What they do have is glory and honour. They accept their clear and present defeat with humbleness and modesty, perhaps too much so as they would rather take their own lives than fall into the hands of the enemy. If Flags of our Fathers was a criticism of wartime splendor and heroism, Letters from Iwo Jima is a modest glorification of these elements.

In all, with Letters from Iwo Jima, Eastwood creates a new kind of war film that stands quite apart from its counterparts both because it portrays the side of the enemy but also and especially because it takes extra special care in emphasizing the human aspect of the soldiers it depicts, humanizing and characterizing them to endless extent. As a psychological study of warfare and as a history lesson; Eastwood has crafted a truly masterful and meaningful piece that's riveting and fascinating as it is intricate and complex. One of the best films of the year.
To sum it all up; Letters from Iwo Jima is one of the greatest war films ever made, and is easily does the best job of depicting war as something that harms all involved that I have ever seen. Clint Eastwood has, with this achievement, engraved his name as one of the greatest American directors in film history.

''A day will come when they will weep and pray for your souls.''

''They may have fought for their country but they died for their friends. For the man in front, for the man beside him, and if we wish to truly honor these men we should remember them the way they really were, the way my dad remembered them.''

The life stories of the six men who raised the flag at The Battle of Iwo Jima, a turning point in WWII.

Ryan Phillippe: John "Doc" Bradley

The film told from America's perspective.

Historical, epic and well executed but slow paced, perhaps disjointed, on the whole compared to Letters.



Glorifying heroes and putting the flag up symbolises victory.
Although it jumps back and forth through time to the actual landing at Iwo Jima, like its counterpart Letters there are very graphic scenes. The realities of war and the coldness and brutality are all shown. Good acting and well contrived cast but more of a history of the Flag than a proper War Movie. Clint Eastwood flick that is a tribute to the past...
Flags of our Fathers is an important film, but unfortunately, not a stellar one. The battle scenes are very well done and show the chaotic atmosphere and pace that follows a ground war, but it's the relationship and the manipulation of public interest as used by the media that the movie hits home. In a time where America is fighting two separate wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with veterans of Vietnam still being paraded on CNN every evening news to discuss comparisons, Flags of our Fathers is important in that it shows how a single picture or event can change an entire opinion over an effort that will cost young men and women their lives.
But where Eastwood tries hard, he tries mightily, to drum up any emotional attachment to the three characters. Haggis does his Crash best to have us 'tisk' at the consistent barrage of racial epithets thrown towards Indian descent Ira Hayes, but Eastwood fails to weave this sympathy and the sympathy for those left behind on the beach into an emotional punch that will carry us to the voting polls in the awards season.

The biggest dysfunctional hiccup with Flags of our Fathers comes with the expectation that the three major players in the production bring to the table. Eastwood in particular has stemmed together three films – Unforgiven, Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby – that each dealt with a person of people dealing with the emotional weight of violence that they were present or about to endure. The heavy handedness of Flags of our Fathers is be right up his wheelhouse. Add the brilliant writing experience and resume of Haggis and the movie should have been celluloid gold. Instead, we deal with waving veterans, moments of tenderness between the soldiers and the families of the dead they fought beside and the emotional burden of the horrors that surrounded them in combat without any tear tugging or tissue pulling on behalf of the experiencing movie watcher.

Lundsford: You actually chose the Marines because they had the best uniforms?
Rene Gagnon: No sense being a hero if you don't look like one.

Flags of our Fathers was filmed back-to-back with Letters from Iwo Jima which shows the Japanese perspective of the battle and is a moving mirrored story that respectfully gives the honourable view of the Japanese. While watching Flags of our Fathers, there are a few scenes of battle which feature in Letters.
Despite a very strong, moving story and some very intense and brutal war scenes featuring torture and death the one downside to the film is I didn't think the performances were as powerful as they could have been. It felt as though the cast and characters weren't as strong or important as the message behind it and that aspect is a little disappointing. Ryan Phillippe headlines the cast as John Bradley "Doc". Phillippe tends to be a little monotoned in his performances and I just didn't get a lot of emotion from his character. I think he'd do better playing a villain, although he hasn't taken those particular roles into consideration as of yet. His character is vitally important and a strong character but just not enough depth which doesn't help matters any. Jesse Bradford in a very off role for him plays spotlight insistent Rene Gagnon, who encourages all the attention surrounding the infamous flag raising picture. Bradford gets only a small portion of lines and really no depth at all which is unfortunate because he could have done something with this character.

''Nobody even noticed that second flag going up. Everybody saw that damn picture and made up their own story about it. But your dad and the others knew what they had done, and what they had not done. All your friends dying, it's hard enough to be called a hero for saving somebody's life. But for putting up a pole?''

Now the big exception to this slightly sub standard cast is fellow Canadian Adam Beach who plays Native American Ira Hayes. Beach definitely gets all the depth in his character that should have existed in the other characters. Hayes is met with constant racism from the battleground to the media spotlight. Hayes becomes an insatiable alcoholic from his desperate guilt in leaving his friends and fellow soldiers to battle. He feels this dedication to his people and to the country despite the racism. He has some heart wrenching speeches and moments in the film and hands down should receive an academy nomination for his moving performance. The supporting cast is who's who of Hollywood young up and comers who perhaps just didn't have the experience needed to carry the film. Barry Pepper, Jamie Bell, Paul Walker, Robert Patrick and the film lacks a certain experience to it in the cast. They needed someone top notch, a great actor (Eastwood himself would have changed the entire feel of the film if he had starred or even played a small role.)

Despite a slightly under written cast the film is spectacular. It shows such a diversity from the brutality of the world war 2 battle field to the hero worship of America that stemmed from the infamous picture. The extreme opposites the film takes you through really sends a powerful message that is unforgettable. I think this film will gain a cult following like many of Eastwood's films do and it should be appreciated for it's message and it's brilliant direction by Eastwood.

''This isn't just any island to them. This isn't Tarawa, Guam, Tinian, or Saipan. This is Japanese soil, sacred ground. Twelve thousand Japanese defenders in eight square miles, they will not leave politely, gentlemen! It's up to us to convince them.''

''Sometimes you really can find that one person who will stand by you no matter what.''

Two best friends become rivals when they schedule their respective weddings on the same day.

Kate Hudson: Liv

The romantic comedy is a type of film that relies on two obvious traits, the ability to make its audience laugh, and the ability to make that very same audience tear-up or at least feel some degree of warmth towards the central characters' love story. Bride Wars, which ostensibly at least, takes the form of your typical rom-com is an example of such that constantly tries to do the former and only hints at the latter only in the background in order to advance plot. The result from this is a middling and sluggishly mundane feature that neither offers memorable characters or even a few cheap laughs. To be fair, there has to be something said for the fact that I am not exactly within the movie's target audience criteria. Yet judging by the reactions of those around me, I got the feeling that what I was experiencing wasn't exclusively restricted to gender.

The story here, which zooms and focuses upon two best gal-pals Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) as they try to cope with their simultaneous weddings, is one that is likely to get a few chuckles from females, but less so with their male counterparts. Yes, this is somewhat expectant of a movie titled Bride Wars, but then again, if half of your audience are neglected to the sidelines then you're needlessly cutting yourself short. This stunted, polarizing depiction of "every girl's biggest day" feels fitting to its source material, so women will enjoy this moreso than men, but not by much. You see, aside from the fact that Bride Wars wants nothing more than to cater to cheap gags and sappy melodrama fit to please the Legally Blonde enthusiasts, there also remains blatant problems in just about everything else that fills the movie's first two acts. With little romance to back up the flimsy plot, dull, dry characterization coupled with non-existent chemistry between either the friends and their partners, or even themselves, the vast majority of Bride Wars turns ugly, rather quickly, the movie pushes that this cat fight between Hudson and Hathaway is meant to be fun and airy with plenty of laughs, but it's too transparent and formulated to even move beyond dry caricature.

It doesn't help at all that the majority of the performances from the main cast are remotely daft. Hudson and Hathaway, who are supposed to playing long-time best buddies whom suddenly fall out over a petty dispute, are strangely forgettable, if not repelling, like a pair of unidentifiable twins. In all fairness, both hit the proverbial hammer on the head with their portrayals as stock-pile, cardboard cut-out typecasts befitting of the genre and only the genre, but this isn't exactly saying much. The remainder of the cast, who each have around ten minutes tops of total screen time are just as unremarkable, with Kristen Johnston giving the movie its only real favour and edge. So, what's worse than a romantic comedy with next to no compelling or memorable performances? Not much.

To be lenient however, Bride Wars isn't really a romance at all. At least, that's what I derived director Gary Winick was trying to put across. If anything, the movie exists more as a mildly poignant example of companionship in the form of friends rather than romance. This tangent, which takes full form in the third act, for the most part surpasses the drudgery that comes beforehand, and establishes a touching, if slightly overly done sentimental climax. By all means, it's far too little, too late, but I at least found myself moved by the movie's final statement, even if it was by means of extreme contrast. Yet had Winick went with this theme for the majority of his film, rather than save it for after all the silly, perfunctory cat fight scenes that in turn just about destroy all human shades within his characters, Bride Wars could have been a much more flowing, and relevant feature instead of a strangely wafer thin comedy piece. Instead it exists simply as throwaway popcorn fodder for girls on a night out who have nothing better to do than to revisit the same old characters, wacky situations and sit-com dialogue typical of your average Top Model episode. This is certainly no Devil Wears Prada and it's definitely not going to be affirmatively, kept in memory.

''...But there's also the chance that the one person you can count on for a lifetime, the one person who knows you sometimes better than you know yourself is the same person who's been standing beside you all along.''

Danny: Pick us up in two hours.
Ronnie: Fuck you, Miss Daisy.

Wild behavior forces a pair of energy drink reps to enroll in a Big Brother program.

Seann William Scott: Wheeler

In Hollywood, there is no denying that most releases of the year follow certain formulas or structures plot-wise. When it comes to comedy, there's usually the family-pushed sugar-fest and the profane, adult-orientated kind; it seems kind of perplexing, but the two very rarely meet in the middle. Enter Role Models, which for all intents and purposes does nothing remotely new in terms of storytelling. This is straight forward, buddy movie material with little to no divergence from the typical standard expected from sappy morally toned family comedy that is given to us near enough every month in some form. Yet, working in its corner, and it's something which I'm conflicted about as to whether it truly works or not, is its adult themed characters and humour. There's no doubt about it, David Wain's movie is a lot more amusing than your average farcical comedy fare, and it has an amusing soft center story too, but it too often falls on its face because of a sense of ill-focused material; Role Models is entertaining stuff sure, but an incoherency in tone prevents the film from ever taking off and connecting with its audience.

The script here follows a rather standard three act curve. We begin the story with goof-ball Wheeler(Seann William Scott) and Danny Donahue(Paul Rudd), two spokespeople for an energy drinks company that speaks to schools about doing their drink in place of drugs. After a really bad (but hilarious) day however, the two end up with 150 hours of community service, having to look after kids from the Little Wing Foundation. What ensues from here is nothing out of the ordinary; it's material we've all seen before so many times, from putting perspective into life, cherishing friends and being an individual in the face of conforming to society. Yes, it's been done to death, yet there remains a certain sweet, well constructed charm to the way in which Role Models plays it out. Some of it has something to do with the movie's adult sense of humour, but much of it really lies in its adult sense of direction.

''Me and the judge have a special relationship... I don't wanna get too graphic but I sucked his dick for cocaine.''

Going against the grain, Role Models blends farce and caricature with modestly rounded characters and adult situations. The person who sticks out most is Rudd's character, who is given a healthy dose of development from beginning to end, fleshing him out as a compelling character that isn't afraid to get his ego diminished. Sure, it isn't anything remotely revolutionary in terms of character design, but Rudd does well with what he is given and gives the story a human quality. His on-screen buddy Wheeler, played by William Scott is less of a character and more of a walking vehicle for laughs, it's something Scott has gotten used to over the years and he does what is asked of him, bringing in the movie's biggest laughs with ease. Christopher Mintz-Plasse, who shot to stardom with his debut in Superbad here shows he's no one hit wonder either, playing a similar albeit just as amusing persona. His opposite of sorts comes in the form of Bobb'e J. Thompson as a foul mouthed delinquent with a tough shell covering a big heart. Thompson, much like his direct co-star is used mainly for comical purposes, but his performance is always laughter-inducing.

As much as I enjoyed Role Models however, there were moments in between all this great adult storytelling where I felt like I was relapsing into Daddy Day Care. This sometimes contradictory tone that Wain adopts seems out of place; with a script such as Role Models', you would think that the direction and focus would simply be on delivering an adult story, yet it seems that the movie tries to accommodate younger audiences (that won't be there of course, unless they sneak in). Nevertheless, with such a tone, the movie does achieve a sense of whimsical charm that a lack of such sometimes brings the average raunchy, profane comedy down. The problem here isn't that Wain tries to lighten things up every now and again, but that he does so far too often.
Despite this, Role Models remains a testament as to how standard Hollywood structures can be adapted to fit new breeds of storytelling. Sure, this has been done before, sure it's usually a clone of previous attempts, but it's a surprise in alot of regards. And yes, there was promise here for something quite a bit better which leaves a sour taste, but with some great laughs and heart-warming story chock full of moral, it's hard to be overly cynical; a light, fun, sporadically refreshing and well constructed adult-family hybrid comedy with decent characters and drama.

''I'm not here to service you, I'm here to service these young boys.''

''I couldn't stop running it over and over and over in my mind. The vague and distant suspicion that we never understood what happened that night; what our role was. Or maybe it was just like the hundreds of other children who disappear each year and never return. Amanda was even more haunting for never being found.''

Two Boston area detectives investigate a little girl's kidnapping, which ultimately turns into a crisis both professionally and personally. Based on the Dennis Lehane novel.

Casey Affleck: Patrick Kenzie

In his directorial debut, Ben Affleck has completely morphed himself into an emerging artist and even more talented director. Gone Baby Gone might be the most innovative and moral challenging film of recent years. This is the story of young Amanda, a little girl who mysteriously disappears from her home and the activity and dangers that befall upon the people involved in her rescue.



The film stars Affleck's brother Casey as Patrick, in his most challenging and engrossing performance to date. Not since Sean Penn in Mystic River has a role been so subdued yet immensely victorious and depth defying in choice of delivery and spot on emotions. Casey Affleck has paved the way for himself in roles that demonstrate the actor's showcase and give the performer range. It's a bit odd what to make of the younger Affleck in the upcoming awards season. He fairs a better shot for his earlier raved performance in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for a nomination, but his performance in Gone Baby Gone is just as important.
Ed Harris, who's been long overdue for Oscar recognition is purely haunting in his role as Remy, a hard-nosed cop looking for young Amanda. In one scene in particular, Harris shines and gives his best portrayal since The Hours. Although his character is a bit one-dimensional, Harris elevates the material and turns it into his show and steals frame after frame in a role easily submerged in a picture like this.
Morgan Freeman, in a role we have not seen him in before, plays Captain Jack Doyle, the head of the missing persons unit with personal experience in the loss of a child. Freeman, although absent for most of the narrative, sugar coats the top acting talent in the picture. Freeman's agenda into more range projects in his older career is reaffirming his Oscar win in 2003 for Million Dollar Baby, but now with the more rewarding films worthy of consideration.
Michelle Monaghan plays Angie, Patrick's significant other who's personal fears interfere with her involvement in the case. To be honest, Monaghan gets lost in the shuffle and while the audience empathizes with her throughout the latter of the film, she's placed into a role easily overshadowed by stronger supporting casting. Perhaps being the only strong woman role would have gave us something to awe at, but not with the guns at full blaze at the hands of Amy Ryan.
Ryan plays Amanda's mother Helene, definitely not the most likable of characters but tragic in character arc. It's like a full on tennis match going back and forth with Ryan and audience; the viewer is hating her one moment and then needing to hold her the next. Helene is multi-layered and grasps her own importance of parenting and the whole film it becomes a fallen angel lost in the crossfire of conception. That is the tragedy of the film, a film not only about the loss of a little girl, but the loss of innocence and the torment that betrayal brings, guilt and corruption can weigh heavily upon our very soul.

Ben Affleck is completely in control of proceedings, which he has lacked in his acting. He knows what the mission is of this picture and would gladly take a spot amongst some bigger, older talents among Oscar prospects this year. Along with Co-adapting the film with Aaron Stockard, if Oscar is feeling like inviting Affleck to the Kodak, the screenplay category seems like a better fit, especially with an already win for Good Will Hunting. Other possibilities for consideration is wonderful cinematography by John Toll and a great musical score by Harry Gregson-Williams.

Comparisons to Mystic River are all about, being done by the same author how could we expect no less. Mystic River had more of the message of the domino effect of one's actions on others, Gone Baby Gone brings it to a whole new level and scope. This film is about a society, a society who has lost the importance of innocence and the beauty of life. It focuses on the beauty of children and rest assure, when the film is over, if you're not yearning to be a better parent of embrace a child as a blessing, there is probably emptiness in your chest. This film is altogether realistic, truthful, beautiful and spectacular. A must-see film of the year and a pleasant surprise coming from Ben Affleck.