Reviews by Lexi

''So there was actually one place on American soil with free, universal healthcare.''

[cut to ariel picture of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba]

''That's all I needed to know.''

A documentary comparing the highly profitable American health care industry to other nations, and HMO horror stories.

Michael Moore: Himself

I personally have found Michael Moore to be a most interesting individual. I find his ability to divulge in controversial issues and address serious scenarios, allow people who witness his documentary-styled films an eye opening account of the subject matter. This piece is no different, but with a twist. He comes with easily checkable facts & lots of them.
Any American who watches this will (Excluding certain CEOs of HMOs) be appalled by what they see. Any person from Canada, United Kingdom, France or even Cuba who may see this will be thankful of the system they have in place.
The American health system has been openly criticized for a long time because they don't have Universal healthcare opting out for it's socialism infleunce. After seeing the horror stories of the individuals in this story, including the deaths of people with carefully filmed accounts, in the U.S. it makes me thankful for being English.



Sicko is right on target with it's message and execution. The US is 37th in the world in terms of quality of health care(slightly ahead of Slovenia, but behind Costa Rica)but number one in terms of per capita health care spending, or $7,000 per person per annum.
Michael Moore chose the title Sicko for the movie, but what I think he meant by this was Ghoul which is an Arabic word, among so many in English. In Muslim folklore, a ghoul was an evil spirit believed to plunder graves and feed on corpses.

[to a British couple in hospital]''So how much did you have to pay for the baby?''

What is the for-profit, insurance industry run, so-called health care system, then, if not a truly evil racket run by conscienceless, psychopathic ghouls who feed on human frailties and innocent flesh? And the only way you combat this system(long buttressed by the government, the insurance companies and the AMA)is to take the profit motive out of it: an immoral motive when it comes to people's health and their lives.
Michael Moore wants to take the insurance companies out of the equation and wants to regulate health care like a public utility as it is done in practically all other developed countries.
He successfully points out that all this fear of socialized service is nonsensical nonsense: for example, our fire departments are run as a public good, and so are police departments.

''Keeping people hopeless and pessimistic - see I think there are two ways in which people are controlled - first of all frighten people and secondly demoralize them.
An educated, healthy and confident nation is harder to govern.''

Michael goes to 4 countries with Universal health-care coverage, including a longtime alleged nemesis Cuba. In all instances he finds that there is great medical coverage, FOR NOTHING!. Above these, medications are either free, or almost free compared to U.S.A. In Cuba a woman paid less than 5 cents for a medication that she was charged $120 for back home, while in Britain there is a £6.95 maximum charge on any prescription. In France, if you have a medical condition you are paid by the government & the employer to rest up. The myth of long lines to see a GP in Canada are blown away.
Obviously Moore is up to his usual bag of trickery with his inspiring propaganda, expertly combining heartfelt sentiment with big laughs in his anecdotal doctrine, and essentially preaching to the masses. Gloriously informing us that insurance and pharmaceutical companies are vile profit driven machines who lobby hard in Washington and buyout politicians left and right isn't exactly telling us something we didn't already know. Scary still are the review board doctors working for the insurance companies who get paid big bonuses for denying the most claims, and saddest of all, the people who actually die from not getting their treatment. Moore, never shying from his political leanings, firmly points his finger at Nixon (whose policies paved the way for HMO's), Reagan (who propagated the idea of socialized medicine as the first sign of Communist invasion), and Bush (who signed into law prescription drug bills that have crippled our senior citizens). He also suggests that Hillary Clinton, whose own health care plan was shot down by special interests back in the early 1990's, is now on the same payroll after losing the good fight.

Moore really scores, though, when he starts globe hopping and shows us just how well socialized medicine works in countries like Canada, Great Britian, and France, and how much all of the people involved (doctors and patients) think it's wonderful and that our system is absurd. The most telling anecdote is when he's able to get a group of 9/11 heroes suffering from the debilitating effects of having worked at Ground Zero some much needed treatment in Cuba (of all places!) after they have been repeatedly denied by their insurance companies here in the States.

Other than marrying a Canadian or moving to one of these countries where health care is free to all, he offers no solid suggestions for how people who want to stay in America can fix the system other than to give this vague sense that socialized medicine works. He's shed some light on the topic, and points us in the right direction, but isn't willing to lead the way with any practical solutions.

''If this is what can happen between supposed enemies, if one enemy can hold out his hand and offer to heal, then what else is possible? That's when I heard that the man who runs the biggest anti-Michael Moore website was going to have to shut it down. He could no longer afford to keep it up because his wife was ill and he couldn't afford to pay for her health insurance. He was faced with a choice of either keep attacking me or pay for his wife's health. Fortunately, he chose his wife. But something seemed wrong about being forced into such a decision. Why, in a free country, shouldn't he be able to have health insurance and exercise his First Amendment right to run me into the ground? So I wrote him a check for the 12,000 dollars he needed to keep his wife insured and in treatment, and sent it to him anonymously. His wife got better and his website is still going strong.''

So dismiss the ideology if you'd like, or tear into the minor points of damning factual evidence, but make no mistake, Sicko is a tremendous film, possibly Moore's best, equal with parts devastating in execution, hilarious social satire, and genuinely moving emotion. Moore acknowledges (following a brief prologue) that the film is not about the 50 million Americans who are completely uninsured, but the 250 million who think they're covered, and their battles within our broken system. The film's first act is the story of a few of those Americans, and while Moore's reliance on anecdotal evidence may not be the greatest journalism, it certainly makes for good drama and better film-making that a laundry list of statistics. Although statistics combined with drama equal an unrivaled piece of brilliance.

The second act takes us on a tour of foreign countries and their government-run health care systems—along with some helpful rebukes (though again, primarily anecdotal) of the usual (and usually right-wing) arguments against "socialized medicine." In a strange way, however, Sicko becomes about more than health care, Moore discovers other advantages, as stated, of living in England or France, and wonders why America can't boast of the same.

I'm sure that some more narrow-minded critics will seize on such passages as proof of Moore's anti-Americanism, but I think it's quite the contrary.
He loves his country, but knows it's flawed and festering with cancer, in this case the Health-care system. Here, it seems, are some ways in which it could be better. What could be more patriotic than that? I will say that I wish the advance hoopla over Moore's trip to Cuba hadn't leaked out, as the film is structured in such a way that it would have been a nice surprise. That being said (and concerns about the validity of that footage aside), it leads to some amazing footage of (at long last) care for people who genuinely deserve it, and a moving scene at a Cuban firehouse that moved me in a way that no other 9/11 commentary has before.

So overall the U.S. is being eaten alive by illness, Insurance and drug companies growing rich and complacent on a peoples weakness, a system that eats at that weakness. There are many dangers in this world, and terrorism isn't the biggest one, certainly for the bloated giant that is the U.S. which makes me feel like quoting V from V for Vendetta when he says, There's something terribly wrong with this country...'', because these words pretty much sum up the state America is in. Concerning the way they treat their citizens, the way they treat and care for their 9/11 heroes, the way they dump their ill members of society into the cold outside, and the Politicians who give empty promises and valiant words yet never say the true meaning in what they are saying. Moore's film should make people see the problems present and people shouldn't be contradicting his findings but solving them, because one of the richest, biggest Super-Powers of the Planet should be able to care for it's citizens with free provided for Health-Care. Otherwise certain other ''Socialist'' creations like the Mail man, the Police Force, Fire Brigade shouldn't be there either. Something needs to be done, so let's hope they do the right thing.

''In the mean time, I'm going to get the government to do my laundry.''

''Legend says that a crystal skull was stolen from a mythical lost city in the Amazon, supposedly built out of solid gold, guarded by the living dead. Whoever returns the skull to the city temple will be given control over its power.''

Famed archaeologist/adventurer Dr. Henry "Indiana" Jones is called back into action when he becomes entangled in a Soviet plot to uncover the secret behind mysterious artifacts known as the Crystal Skulls.

Harrison Ford: Indiana Jones

Crystal Skull may I say is a breath of fresh air in one glorious stroke of genius by Steven Spielberg once again.
His fun ideas like Indy being saved by a fridge from an Atomic Blast to him blowing back a dart in some pygmy/Aztec's mouth to Indy clutching at a snake for dear life, is entertainment fun at it's best. Not to mention chases laden with effects that effortlessly stream across the screen. Crystal Skull has that magic from the other chapters and we see an older but still determined Jones out to save the World once again.



Now, about the cast. The star is aging, the sidekick is from Even Stevens, Karen Allen hasn't been in a big movie in God knows how many years, and, for some reason, people were worried about Cate Blanchett in her role. Well, let me put the concerns to rest,the entire cast is established pitch-perfect chemistry and everybody plays their parts incredibly well. Harrison Ford is, for the first time in a decade, having the time of his life and it shows in his excellent return to the famed American icon. It's no secret that he has been campaigning for this movie for years, and it shows in his strong performance. Karen Allen shares fantastic chemistry with both Shia LaBeouf and Ford, as she provides a lot of the necessary charm to the second act of the film. Blanchett uses a heavily over-the-top Russian accent, but she finds just the right note between creepy and intriguing to make her the best Indy villain since Belloq in Raiders. Ray Winstone does well enough in his role, as does John Hurt and Jim Broadbent.
Shia LaBeouf as Mutt(Echoes of Superman Returns family wise plus Mutt wasn't Indy named after the dog? :P) is sensational bringing youth and experience together with Ford. He's got attitude, spunk and charisma in his fresh approach, looking like something out of Grease but way more cooler.
Cate Blanchett as Irina seductive and beautiful even when playing a villain. She was fun along with Ray Winstone and John Hurt who added to fun upon fun.
Karen Allen has some good chemistry with Ford, showing a bickering but loving couple.
Look out for the reference to Raiders Ark Of The Covenant in the warehouse, bloody genius!
Music Skull has the flair of its predecessors which blends with the action and fast paced story. Effects are used but not overly while stunt work is not noticeable.

''I've got a bad feeling about this.''

Crystal Skull oozes 1950s: Russian spies, nuclear testing, a screening of Howdy Doody and Dr. Jones on a sort of academic blacklist all take place in the first ten-or-so minutes of the picture (as does—sad to say the high point of the film for me—a cameo appearance by Neil Flynn, a friend of Ford's from The Fugitive who is best known for his portrayal of The Janitor on ABC sitcom Scrubs). The filmmakers have discussed at length how, while the earlier Jones films were an attempt to capture the essence of the 30s and 40s adventure blended with a more contemporary feel, The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull will be a 50s-style action romp with some science-fiction sensibility thrown in for good measure (a questionable choice to start, as many of those films eventually ended up as Mystery Science Theater 3000 fodder). In an attempt to capture that feel, you have some campy dialogue, some stock characters. There's a fairly generic bar brawl, started by LaBoeuf and set to the tune of Shake, Rattle & Roll, which solidly plants this film in its era. This is an interesting artistic choice because in the previous Indy films, even with their date stamps, the adventures that always transpired were always relatively timeless, as is this.

''Well, the word for gold translates as treasure. But their treasure wasn't gold, it was knowledge. Knowledge was their treasure.''

The other aspect of the film that is bound to turn some heads is the role that extra-terrestrials play in the picture. As in Spielberg's classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind, there is no dialogue, as such, shared between man and his visitors...but their presence is strong and pervasive, particularly in the second half. Using Roswell as a jumping-off point, it is revealed that the good Dr. Jones has been used as a government agent in a variety of capacities since we last caught up with him--he is a Colonel in the Army, apparently, and also has worked with the CIA, MI6 and as a spy against the Russians in the time since Hitler autographed his father's diary for him in the early '40s.

The adventure sequences in the picture are unrealistic yet highly entertaining and fun. While some of the car chases and fight sequences are good, and alot of the side jokes are on the mark, there are times (Marion is injured while driving, but mysteriously gets better) that it's hard to follow visually what's going on as they try to pack too many characters and subplots into a fast-moving sequence. Many of Harrison Ford's comic moments are on-target, but other diversions,(such a CGI-rendered prairie dogs and LaBoeuf's own private army of monkeys) bring to mind some of the more artistically-questionable moments of Return of the Jedi and detract from the seriousness of consequences faced by our protagonists.

''I barely recognize this country anymore; the government has us seeing communists in our soup.''

A strong story and great performances don't imply that this film isn't flawless. It isn't, but the flaws are few-and-far between and didn't hinder my overall enjoyment of the film. The first 20 minutes are somewhat slow, it takes a little while to get to Marshall College. These first twenty minute aren't necessarily boring; it is still entertaining, but it could have used probably 5 minutes of edits and pacing corrections. This is my biggest problem with the film, and once Indy returns to Marshall College, the film really kicks off and turns into the roller coaster ride that everyone has been hoping for.
Crystal Skull itself is well written, and well made with only a few exceptions. As long as you don't expect another Raiders of the Lost Ark, you'll probably be pleased with the film as it is, with the exception of one sequence which doesn't quite seem to fit. Beyond that, the plot, characters and acting all fit with this new kind of Indy film.
Cinematography is not the 80s style we'd probably all like, but it's not bad. The camera is certainly held much more stable than many of today's films, and the action is very clear and easy to follow, as is the stunt work great. There is a lot of computer animation--most of it looks believable, but some of it does not--but that which was done well fits superbly.
Overall acting was also very good. I was very impressed by Cate Blanchett, and to my surprise very pleased with Shia LeBeouf's character and acting.

To conclude, all in all out of the installments of Indiana Jones they all have a religion or premise at the heart the deeper you look, while Raiders was Jewish, Doom was Hindu, Crusade was Christianity. And Skull is out of this world! Watch and see...

Skulls is definitely a terrific fun comic caper masterpiece of sorts and Indy whips back out of retirement!

''Imagine... To peer across the world and know the enemy's secrets... To place OUR thoughts into the minds of YOUR leaders... Make your teachers teach the true version of history, your soldiers attack on our command. We will be everywhere at once, more powerful than a whisper, invading your dreams, thinking your thoughts for you while you sleep. We will change you, Dr. Jones, all of you, from the inside. We will turn YOU into US. And the best part? You won't even know it's happening.''

''What if this is as good as it gets?''

A single mother/waitress, a misanthropic author, and a gay artist form an unlikely friendship.

Jack Nicholson: Melvin Udall

Helen Hunt: Carol Connelly

Greg Kinnear: Simon Bishop

Nicholson won a well-deserved Oscar for this movie. Then again, I feel like he deserves an Oscar for virtually everything he's been in. Hell, you can even give him an Oscar nod for Anger Management. THATS how great he is! He's one of those actors who can communicate even more emotion when he's not saying anything than when he is. And of course, he has one of the coolest movie star voices ever, so it makes it a joy whenever he does speak. I still feel like "You can't handle the truth!" wouldn't be as priceless a line if Jack didn't yell it. He can say almost any line of dialogue and turn it into gold. In this movie it was "You make me wanna be a better man." Again, an otherwise forgettable line of dialogue made timeless and moving by Jack.

As Good As It Gets is a flawed film but it doesn't matter, with scenes that drag over an overlong running time, but it's highly enjoyable and altogether pretty well-written. Aside from its many hilarious moments, it's also quite touching. But I have to admit that it's the comedy that sticks out most in my memory. There's some priceless gags like when a Jewish couple is sitting at Jack's usual table. He first intrudes into their conversation saying something about his crotch He complains to Helen Hunt, his usual waitress, saying "I have Jews at my table!", He then intrudes in the couple's conversation again, noticing the food on their table, saying "Obviously your appetites aren't as big as your noses." Now, I probably wouldn't want to personally know a man like Melvin in my real life, but I still found those cracks to be hysterically funny. The same when he attacks Greg Kinnear's gay character with constant homosexual slurs.

The performances are great all-around. Though Jack pretty much steals the show, Greg Kinnear gives a wonderfully endearing performance. He doesn't play out the gay stereotypes, yet he's sensitive and feminine enough to have me convinced that he is gay. It's nice to see Kinnear rise from the host of Talk Soup and the thankless late night talk show Later to a fine actor. Previously, I wouldn't have any notion that he could become what he is now. Helen Hunt also gives a compelling, emotionally packed performance. And Shirley Knight, as her mother, provides a little bit of comic relief. Cuba Gooding Jr. has a small but interesting role, and he makes the best of it.
Frank, played by Gooding Jr., decides to give the dog to Melvin, who refuses at first but is left without any option but to obey. He soon achieves a certain subtle love for the beast, and when Simon has healed and comes back for the dog, it doesn't even want to leave. It even starts to develop nasty habits, like avoiding cracks in the sidewalk.
Meanwhile, a troubled single mother and a part-time waitress, Carol is constantly nagged by Melvin. Only she can deliver him food. Only she can take his order. Only she can kick him out of the restaurant. Mistaking this for some sort of sexual craving, she tells Melvin flat-out that she will never sleep with him. He doesn't seem to care. That had never even crossed his mind.
The fact is that Melvin is insufferably lonely. He likes to act as though he likes to be lonely, but the truth is that his loneliness is something he loathes. He would love to reach out and gain some friends--but he's too proud to humble himself in such a way. We all know people like Melvin--he just takes himself to a new extreme.

Melvin is surely one of the great screen characters of all time, ranking up there with Raymond Rain Man Babbitt and Forrest Gump as some of the most unique and likable inventions to ever grace the big screen. Nicholson presents his character in an especially effective way--at first he seems gruff, then he seems strange, then his soft side is revealed, and he slowly becomes the likable mean guy who lives upstairs and likes to try and kill neighbors' dogs.
Hunt won the Oscar for her work in As Good As It Gets, but it was truly Nicholson who deserved it.
Regardless of all this, As Good As It Gets still stands alone as one of the cleverest romantic comedies of all time, and certainly one that both sexes can agree on. The film features some of the most memorable lines ever written on paper, the majority of them all coming from the lips of Melvin Udall, perfectly spoken by a typical gruff Jack Nicholson. They all come off as utterly hilarious and convincing.

"How old are you? If I would guess by your eyes, I'd say you're fifty."

"If I went by your eyes I'd say you were kind.''

This is the type of new-age romantic comedy that rivals the greatness of When Harry Met Sally or Sleepless in Seattle. It's founded in its characters, their lives, their interaction, and how they learn to overcome their own personal obstacles and moral obligations. This film carries all the Autumn-time sweetness and cleverness of a Rob Reiner comedy, and all the lightness of a Frank Capra movie.

I just like to end with the scene for me that really touched me in it's deep awe inspiring glory, that shows a bold definition of what love can truly be like:

Melvin Udall
I've got a really great compliment for you, and it's true.

Carol Connelly
I'm so afraid you're about to say something awful.

Melvin Udall
Don't be pessimistic, it's not your style. Okay, here I go: Clearly, a mistake. I've got this, what - ailment? My doctor, a shrink that I used to go to all the time, he says that in fifty or sixty percent of the cases, a pill really helps. I *hate* pills, very dangerous thing, pills. Hate. I'm using the word "hate" here, about pills. Hate. My compliment is, that night when you came over and told me that you would never... well, you were there, you know what you said. Well, my compliment to you is, the next morning, I started taking the pills.

Carol Connelly
I don't quite get how that's a compliment for me.

Melvin Udall
You make me want to be a better man.

Carol Connelly
That's maybe the best compliment of my life.

Melvin Udall
Well, maybe I overshot a little, because I was aiming at just enough to keep you from walking out.

''You measure yourself by the people who measure themselves by you.''

Two terminally ill men escape from a cancer ward and head off on a road trip with a wish list of to-dos before they die.

Jack Nicholson: Edward Cole

Morgan Freeman: Carter Chambers

The Bucket List is certainly a sentimental favourite that as a viewer touches your emotions and has you hoping for the equation of a bond of friendship in the concluded proceedings, even though the film is funny and somewhat unrealistic and unbelievable. The performances from Jack and Morgan as expected are effortlessly executed, and I personally like Rob Reiner's means of showing how an unlikely and odd companionship develops between two guys on their way out of this life by doing activities they've always wanted to do. The Bucket List in many respects is a real life fairy tale that most ordinary folks would dream about before they die, yet the character types played by Nicholson and Freeman make it what it is.

Edward Cole (Nicholson) is an incredibly wealthy hospital owner who firmly believes that he's running infirmaries instead of health spas, and therefore demands that each room contain two beds and two patients. When a twist of fate lands him in his own hospital, he's stuck sharing a room with Carter Chambers (Freeman). Both men are dying of cancer, and the doctors give each of them only a few months left to live. The two slowly but surely realize how much they enjoy each other's company, so when Carter begins writing a bucket list, Jack prompts him to see it through. The Bucket List is a list of all the things both Edward and Carter would like to accomplish in their remaining months (before they literally kick the bucket) and with Cole's wealth, the two end up touring the world, skydiving and race-car driving. As their list of goals begins to come to an end, they realize how much they've truly lived just in the last few months alone, and how much their short friendship has impacted the fading remnants of their lives.

''We live, we die, and the wheels on the bus go round and round.''

Jack Nicholson's performance is excellent as the curmudgeonly Ebenezer character that receives a change of heart and a change of view with Carter's friendship. Little character development is necessary as we have come to recognize Jack's style over the years. We're already familiar with his character and relate to him in much the same way we feel about all of his recent projects. He's attained a level of recognition that allows us to acknowledge him simply as Jack. Regardless of his role, he's still Jack, and he doesn't disappoint.
The same can be said for Morgan Freeman who continues to play roles that accentuate his knack for worldly, wise and good-natured characters that can make us laugh and cry from moment to moment. Rarely do we see two actors work so well together? this odd couple appears to have been destined for these roles. The chemistry between these veterans is pleasantly refreshing, and because of it, The Bucket List is one of the most entertaining films of the year.

Another aspect, which is a great credit to screenwriter Justin Zackham, is the dialogue, which is continually hilarious even while it borders on heartbreaking. Sarcasm and cynicism are proudly worn by Jack, and the conversations conducted between the two are far from dull, although they do have their moments when a yawn is not far away.
Meaningful, affecting and downright funny, the script seems amazingly well paced and flows more naturally yet the transition from start to end seems to be a series of stops and starts in areas.

''I'm proud of you.''

''Nobody cares what you think.''

Nearly everything is likable about The Bucket List, except the tone of the film, which many awards voters and critics may feel is too repetitious of late. The film is uplifting and heartwarming, and while the conclusion strives for unpredictability, comparisons may be drawn to similarly crafted works. Driving Miss Daisy and As Good as it Gets are immediately brought to mind, especially because these include the same actors, although the morals of A Christmas Carol and It's A Wonderful Life are clearly beneath the surface of this feel-good comedy.

Most importantly, aside from the journey and discovery of friendship and caring by travel and adventure a special bond is formed. Each has learned before they meet the end they have made each a better person that cares they both found what's important in life through one another. The Bucket List isn't really a tear inducer, yet it's a story of two terminal cancer patients provides the need for compassion as the viewer feels pain during the early scenes and you are certainly touched by the way the characters emotions grow by friendship you as the viewer feel your emotions have taken a good friendship journey. Finally this film is made even better by the performances of the two veteran legends Nicholson and Freeman. I highly recommend anyone view The Bucket List.

''The simplest thing is... I loved him. And I miss him. Carter and I saw the world together. Which is amazing... When you think that only three months ago, we were complete strangers! I hope that it doesn't sound selfish of me but... the last months of his life were the best months of mine. He saved my life... And he knew it before I did.''

'' Now comes the part where I relieve you, the little people, of the burden of your failed and useless lives. But remember, as my plastic surgeon always said: if you gotta go... do it with a smile. ''


The Dark Knight of Gotham City begins his war on crime with his first major enemy being the clownishly homicidal Joker.

Michael Keaton: Batman / Bruce Wayne

Jack Nicholson: Joker / Jack Napier

Kim Basinger: Vicki Vale

Batman, the first major Blockbuster of Tim Burton and effort to Bob Kane's Dark Knight. Regarded by me when i was younger as a truly captivating movie it was very fun to watch indeed.

I watch it now and time has taken it's toll, what with sequels and the new reboot, which has overshadowed this in part, Batman Begins.

Granted Tim Burton infused so much energy into making this film he became sick, and it shows in the end result how much effort he's put in yet at the same time i see now he couldn't let loose all his artistic vision and darkness in full intensity. What with Warner Bros. overlooking and shadowing his every move.
Granted the sprawling metropolis that is Gotham City is a unique dirty huge vision of amazingly huge skyscrapers, buildings in contrast to it's dark grimy back alleys. Tim Burton hands down has given party of his vision.

On to the performances, which should start with Michael Keaton & Jack Nicholson.
Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman is dark, mysterious, thoughtful and quiet yet underneath this lies a character that shows he's a man not of many words, that in his expression there's something that tells us more. Granted he's a versatile actor and his days of Beetlejuice show us he can change himself as any good actor should be able too.
Jack as the Joker kind of overshadows Keaton completely in all his intense lunacy. He's loud, colourful, insane and has all the qualities that Nicholson can empower. His performance maybe a little too good that it does make the movie more Joker than Batman. Granted he stuck in my memory most when i was little, even his random killing ended up being humourous and his one liner's, don't even get me started, he's a legend.

''Where does he get those wonderful toys?''...Magic !

Michael Gough as the Butler is like putting the kitchen sink in the bathroom, it belongs where it started, Gough just fits hence all the successor's of the Batman franchise, excluding Batman Begins & Dark Knight of course, featuring him that he's instantly connected to the role.
Jack Palance falls victim to the ''other'' Jack, pardon the pun and that bit where Joker shoots him, get me a potty because...THAT'S FUNNY! i know I'm sick but hey ah well...

Kim Basinger of course has the sexiness and female lead bit in the bag, and her chemistry with Keaton & Nicholson shows she was comfortable.

Batman would be a great start but the follow up Batman Returns is Burton Unleashed. Overshadowed by the recent Batman Begins which puts a more realistic serious human face on the villainy.

Still a great film Batman shines in all it's Blockbuster Comic glory, a fine way to finish of the 80s period.

Take it away and hit the road Jack !

''Never rub another man's rhubarb!''

''I want to play a game.''

With a dead body laying between them, two men (Whannell and Elwes) wake up in the secure lair of a serial killer who's been nicknamed "Jigsaw" by the police because of his unusual calling card.

Leigh Whannell: Adam

The original Saw, a film that was originally planned for a straight-to-video release but after receiving positive nods at pre-set screenings, was finally given the go ahead in October 2004, just in time for Halloween. Saw contains one of the those plots that shows you certain plot threads then twists them and distorts them for mouth watering results.
It's not hard to see why this almost hit the instant DVD release list. I mean, people will closely observe that it obviously contains similarities of its successors, namely Se7en (95), and that may be all the ammunition the haters will need to crush it.



But I begin with assertions and an experience that Saw is a genius thriller, yet not exactly original or daring. The film does its best to exploit the claustrophobia and mounting tension that collects as it progresses.
This is a Silent Hill 2 similar venture in some ways, the hero even looks like James Sunderland from that game. Saw falls into the trap alot of franchises do, such as Matrix, Pirates of the Carribean, these films needed no follow up but due to Box Office and more money to spin they followed them on with sequels unequal to the effortless originals. Again this happens with Saw
Ironically, the title has alot to do with plot, a hooded psychopath who deals his own brand of justice, going by the name of Jigsaw, a puzzling anti-hero. A clever piece of the title, Jigsaw is,
The two main characters, the main players of the sick game at center stage, Lawrence (Cary Elwes) and Adam (Leigh Whannell, also the film' screenwriter) are the main focus here.

The two men awaken to find themselves chained to lead pipes in a decrepit public bathroom. In the middle of the floor, is a dead body that's surrounded in a pool of its own blood, with a gun in one hand and a tape recorder in the other. As it would turn out, they're the latest victims of a serial killer known as the Jigsaw Killer.
Jigsaw has a nasty little way of torturing his victims by trapping them in a situation where they have to kill if they want to survive. As Lawrence explains, technically Jigsaw is not a killer, simply because he hasn't killed anyone, the victims do that themselves. As one fortunate victim observes, who survived her ordeal, she is bound to a chair with a reversed bear trap-like device strapped to her head with pliers wired into her upper and lower jaws. A timer is on the device and if she does not locate a key before it runs out, her mouth will be ripped open and no more pretty face. In order to get out, she must open up the stomach of a dead man lying on the floor next her to get the key.



''Face it Larry, we're both bullshiters. My camera, it doesn't know how to lie. It only shows you what's put right in front of it!''

As Jigsaw ever so carefully points out to his victims, he doesn't just choose them at random. To him, they're all perfectly immoral individuals and he uses their immorality to set up horrific situations where the victim rarely survives the trap; in essence, life is its own reward because Jigsaw's victims don't value it, as he explains to the one young woman lucky enough to fight through his plan. Also on the case of Jigsaw, are two detectives Tapp (Danny Glover) and Sing (Ken Leung), who bring forth the news of Jigsaw's previous victims in one particularly gruesome flashback sequence.

Lawrence is pretty well aware of the case of Jigsaw, as even once he was considered a suspect by the police. As you would have it, Adam is not especially trustful of Lawrence being that he seems to know a lot and is not reporting many details to him. They realize, however, that if they are going to survive this nightmare, they're going to have to play into Jigsaw's game, observe the clues he's willing to give them, and ultimately make it out alive.



''Live or die, make your choice.''

Saw was directed by James Wan and written by Whannell, with dazzling results who also makes an effective victim alongside Elwes. Elwes, a highly underrated actor, is given a chance to shine here, even though this really isn't an actor's movie, as it is more in the ball court of the director. However, we do get a sense of the desperation of the two leads, who soon realize that they're not the only ones trapped in this madman's puzzle.
The movie does benefit from its own moody atmosphere and vibes it sends forth, which may cover up any of the film's shortcomings. Towards the end, it does lose pace slightly, as events seem to go spiraling down the conclusion route, but quickly regains an injection of momentum as it draws to a climax.

But having said all this is Saw a genre classic? Certainly. Is it a classic like Se7en? I don't know. There's alot to consider when pondering a question that compares two different levels of movie making. I loved it, but the sequels that followed has everyone after a twist which kind of denotes that no surprise is in store for fans of the original. Granted this will always be the best of the franchise and that shocking ending is genius. So some poor acting and unrealistic traits let it down but Saw's mind set and ideas are phenomenal.
While Se7en was a blown up epic made for the big screen, this is a more small scale TV-styled mini project compared. Having said that it works and the feel and vibe also works too. Jigsaw raises some interesting questions about the complacency of society and shows that sometimes just a little push is sufficient to make individuals appreciate life and more specifically their own lives.

''Most people are so ungrateful to be alive, but not you, not any more...GAME OVER!''

''Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the center of the Earth.''

On a quest to find out what happened to his missing brother, a scientist, his nephew and their mountain guide discover a fantastic and dangerous lost world in the center of the earth.

Brendan Fraser: Prof. Trevor Anderson

Journey to the Center of the Earth will readily appeal to its target audience of youngsters and the easily impressed, its a biaare far teched flight of fantasy story won't earn the respect of any long term Jules Verne fan.

The jokes alternate between rather amusing and unsuccessful attempts, but the creative implementation of 3D effects pleasantly surprise, balancing out the whole Journey into a much more digestible plater.

Most people know it isn't possible to travel to the center of the Planet. Everyone except for publicly criticized science professor Trevor Anderson (Brendan Fraser), who journeys to the mythical world within a world to unravel the mystery surrounding the disappearance of his brother. Accompanying him is his nephew Sean (Josh Hutcherson) and their attractive mountain guide Hannah (Anita Briem) who join in on his adventurous exploits of discovery and wonder, in a lost land of terrifying creatures and prehistoric threats.

Glowing hummingbirds, magnetic floating rocks, and giant carnivorous plants may sound pretty silly, and that's because they kind of are. However, when such creations are thrown into a 3D movie they become spectacular moments of visual brilliance. Except perhaps the floating rock hybrids.

Journey manifests its main function for existence, and generates an ample amount of creative uses for its medium. From things jumping out of the screen, to more things leaping forth from the screen, Journey wastes no opportunity to throw every manner of object or deadly creature at its perspective audience, resulting in an abundance of visual stimulation and a noticeable absence on solid storytelling. At least the former was expected.

The true Verneian will be dismayed to learn that little remains familiar between this latest adventure to the Earth's core and the original novel. And while it may be unfair to compare it to the book or even the 1959 film, director Eric Brevig's vision often feels like an excuse to use a famous title rather than a sincere adaptation. Goofy comedy replaces earnest, though far-fetched, explanations and the unfriendly locale thrives on stereotypical monstrosities designed specifically for dimensional effects. Odd musical bouts aside, the '59 version utilizes a human antagonist for an extra layer of depth on a film already submerged deep within the Earth's crust, and a race for discovery accompanies the challenge of survival. This new Journey substitutes a young boy for a young man, a bumbling scientist for a genius professor, and an animated avian for an Icelandic Guide, but at least the female protagonist remains, this time in the form of a mountain guide. Unfortunately all elements of drama and romance take a backseat to the outlandish action and phosphorescent birds.

The 3D in this film is probably of a better quality, but it basically works in the same way as Spy Kids 3D and Sharkboy & Lavagirl. Once in a while, something will really stretch out of the screen (most often a hand) but most of the time the 3D adds a more real depth to the image, I guess you could state. The effect is certainly interesting, but is it really better than watching a 2D movie? Is Journey in 3D better than Journey in 2D? I couldn't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure it is, the 3D that makes it stand out. But what I mean to say is this: would the Indiana Jones films be better in 3D? or the Die Hard films? etc... Honestly I don't think so. Perhaps when watching a 3D movie on a really humongous screen could it really give a heightened sense of realism, but it would really have to be huge, because the screen I saw it on was already pretty damn big. Thus, I'm really doubtful that 3D is the next big step in cinema. It's fun and cool to see a 3D movie and to have some come out from time to time, but I think 2D should remain the mainstream and I'll even go as far as to say that I believe 2D can be more involving than 3D. After all 3D still isn't that interactive just like 2D, we are still just spectators and watching proceedings. Just like the fact that special effects aren't need to make a masterpiece of film. They are all relevant points in the long run and scheme of things.

There was potential in the plot line, but at least for me it was lost in the 3D trickery. Its too bad Chart didn't stay on as Director and make a true 3D adventure. I never quite got to the point of caring about any of the characters and after about an hour found myself in a state of boredom and complacency.

If you are looking for a fun movie that you can let your children or young friends watch, and have a few laughs, its not a bad road to take, but there are much better movies or alternatives in the genre.

''Ideas are bulletproof.''

A shadowy freedom fighter known only as "V" uses terrorist tactics to fight against his totalitarian society. Upon rescuing a girl from the secret police, he also finds his best chance at having an ally and maybe a companion.

Natalie Portman: Evey

Hugo Weaving: V

Set in a fascist controlled Britain, V for Vendetta is inspired by the graphic novel by Alan Moore. Resulting in this superb grand masterpiece, the film adaptation.
Scarily enough it also has parallels with what is actually happening now, and how this country really is on the same spiralling road into a hell of its own making. Notice the Gordon Brown look alike, the dictator Police-State, the controlling system, propaganda laden News and Terrorists being blamed for the own Governments evil doings. It's thought provoking aspects like these that make V a very interesting piece indeed. This paralleled state of existence not far from our blurry own.



The plot of V for Vendetta is surprisingly complex and expertly stitched together, and I don't want to divulge any juicy details.
Suffice it to say that a masked anarchist (Hugo Weaving) must save a young woman (Natalie Portman) during his attempt to expose a corrupt flawed government.
Weaving is perfectly cast, using his formidable physicality and imposing voice to give gravitas to the insanity of the character.
Hugo weaving although unseen behind the mask shows depth in his masked vigilante V, he portrays his emotion and passion.
Portman has gone from child to teen star and is finally emerging as a talented, adult actress following her Oscar-nominated turn in Closer, which I have yet to see. Here, she gives her best performance to date as the orphaned, Evey.
John Hurt is characteristically impressive as the enigmatic evil government leader, who's more of a dictator than a PM. Stephen Rea gives a wonderful supporting turn as the police inspector charged with finding V - before it's too late. Making us see a flip side and narration to proceedings.

''A building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by people. A symbol, in and of itself is powerless, but with enough people behind it, blowing up a building can change the world.''

The Wachowski Brothers former colleague, James McTiegue, takes on the directing tasks here and steers an enormously impressive first feature, using every means available, in a manner reminiscent of his mentors breakout hit The Matrix. Unlike Matrix, McTiegue allows the story to be more of a focus, and as a result the film is a tense yet emotional storm, with outbursts of spectacularly filmed and choreographed action. Showing more maturity and restraint than the Wachowskis ever did, McTiegue doesn't show off, and his trickery isn't self conscious. When slow-motion overtakes a late action sequence, it seems extremely natural yet believable. The late cinematographer Adrian Biddle (V is dedicated to his memory) does an outstanding job, Oscar-nominated Dario Marianelli's score is a fantastic accompaniment to the piece, setting your emotions ablaze like V, and the visual effects are astonishing, terrifying, and deeply moving, especially in the climatic moments.

With solid acting, great action, and fantastic technical wizardry, it sounds just like another Matrix clone. But the biggest difference in V is that it is a story of real ideas - not a fantastic, science fiction creation, but a genuine examination of the human condition. The power of fear takes centre stage here, the fear of war, of disease, of famine. Fear is a basic human nature, and has been exploited as a weapon, a method of control, for centuries. And for those who would use it against the innocent, a masked avenger waits in the shadows to deal justice and vengeance.

There was also a strange debate over the quality of adaptation the Wachowski Brothers offered to Alan Moore's original graphic novel. Moore has publicly separated himself from the film, quoting in the New York Times at the time, that ''the screenplay's rubbish''. Well, before we all walk away from the project, remember primly that Alan Moore will be the first to tell you himself that he is a selfish, pretentious prick. He knows it, we know it, enough said. Moving on... The screenplay's fine which you may have determined from what I have said already. In fact, it's again a masterpiece, and I cannot stress this fact enough. What the Wachowski Brothers have done is find the right balance between the theatrics of the graphic novel, and the solemnity to the richly Victorian narrative. They form a dynamic that plays to both sides, allowing for a story that sparks both political debate and giddy entertainment. We'll first shake our heads at the sentimental, soft-focus flashbacks and intriguing sub-plot for nuclear human experimentation but when mulled over, we realize it's just the comic book mentality showing its true colours. After all, V wouldn't start all his sentences with v-words had this film shunned its comic roots.

Revolutionary, thought provoking, V for Vendetta isn't just a comic book/graphic Novel adaptation but a political stab at the world we live in. Yet again a powerful idea can prove the most moving aspect!
Music is atmospheric and the scene with Natalie in the rain, with arms held high, in a pose of rebirth, is phenomenal, mirrored with V's rebirth by fire. Very emotional, very deep and hits home inside with its own humanity.
Ideas are bulletproof, says V, I say this film is bulletproof.

''People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.''

''Have you ever lost someone you loved?''

Seeking revenge for the death of his love, secret agent James Bond sets out to stop an environmentalist from taking control of a country's water supply.

Daniel Craig: James Bond

Casino Royale was a reboot of the Bond Franchise. Reinventing Bond and making 007 a more believable, grittier, cold Agent of MI6, breathing life into Bond again like GoldenEye did. So why do the film's creators give us this offering of disappointment?
Quantum Of Solace barely has the authenticity to actually be a Bond movie, with all the equations of previous older installments stripped away, to make this a realistic venture.

So we have no gadgets, no memorable villains, no Q and no Money Penny again like Casino. The result is a violent and sour affair, and 007 has become a uncharismatic charmless thug of sorts.
As for action, it is fast and extremely realistic but alot of proceedings are too close, too in your face, too dizzyingly incompetent. Like the makers again are trying to make a Bourne film. Let them remember this is BOND not BOURNE, we need a more Gentleman Agent not a lifeless copy visage of another franchise.

So the story of Quantum Of Solace consists of what, I wonder? What was the plot or Story here? It's hard to make heads or tails of the mess that I've witnessed. The scenarios, villains, and threatening action that resided over Casino Royale are curiously absent from this strange sequel.
The motivation of Quantum appears to be revenge, to be a look into his dark side and his few redeeming ways. He's a shadow of his former self, and this goes for the idea of Bond. It's no longer Bond when you change everything that makes Bond what he is.
Quite frankly all characters in this installment are 2 Dimensional cut outs that are never fully explored or explained in detail.

''I am motivated by my duty.''

The so called Story in the light here seems to be mainly concerned in covering Bond's private life, and the romance he had with Vesper from Casino. Did she betray him or not? Well there I was thinking at the end of Casino that she didn't, but Quantum draws the whole affair and plot thread line out even further. Much to my dismay, this unnecessary procedure only succeeds in giving us the audience the answer we had to begin with, feeling like we are going round in a huge circle.

So the new Bond Girls that enter the lime light on this Bond adventure, Gemma Aterton, is completely miscast in a brief, still born role, as an MI6 Junior Agent who comes to get Bond. Perhaps that was a joke I missed in the film.
A bedroom scene with the pair is not convincing at all and abit awkward. This film needs to be higher than a 12A or push the boundaries, because Bond needs a decent Love Making Scene to make it a Bond.
Camille(Olga) a Bolivian with her own revenge plot. Is extremely beautiful, has more action scenes than Bond, but the Romance between her and Bond seems to go stale before it even begins, resulting in an unconvincing snooze fest. Even the kiss they share doesn't have resonance or chemistry involved.

The real engine and star of the show is M who shows us a character who seems to know what they are doing. Although I do admit over-using M lessens her power and ranking. A sure sign that the director is clutching at straws.
Daniel Craig does the same thing he did in Casino Royale minus the one-liners and charm he seemed to send out with Campbell at the helm.
No smiles, no jokes and a very serious man makes for a very wide miss of the target as far as capturing Bond. It's almost as if I would beg on my knees for Martin Campbell to come back and fix all the wrongs Solace has committed by giving us this dire offering.
Marc Foster who's done The Kite Runner just doesn't seem like an ideal candidate for a Bond film, and it shows.
An attempt at political sophistication and debatable questions raised, are shots at cleverness. American and British Governments collaborating with Greene really is the icing on the cake. Not to mention having the names and characters ''Fields'' and ''Greene'' in the same movie. The whole Political side of things are done better in Bourne and it's depressingly apparent when you see this.

The villain Dominic Greene played by legend Mathieu Amalric, the star of Diving Bell & The Butterfly, but on this with all due respect, is the weakest excuse for a villain I've seen in a Bond film for an age. He's short, he's not menacing and has no charm or level of danger like Lechiffre did in Casino. Granted he's a human foe but he has no qualities to make him memorable or even interesting.

Overall Quantum Of Solace leaves alot of questions, no respective answers and gaping holes concerning what actually happens. If anyone can tell me what this ''Quantum'' was meant to be, I'd like that. Or the fact there seemed to be a shroud over the leak ending, and the shoddy song at the beginning sandwiching the whole affair together.
Bond kills indiscriminately, Bond is cold, and Bond's reputation has been tarnished and ruined slightly by Forster. Hopefully the next one will redeem matters, or we wait for the day Campbell comes back to reignite our beloved James Bond. And for Gods sake bring back some gadgets, charm and gentile ways while you're at it, otherwise I may as well be watching a Bourne...

''I think you're so blinded by inconsolable rage that you don't care who you hurt. When you can't tell your friends from your enemies, it's time to go.''

''You bring in a sous chef from an Italian restaurant and I'm the one in therapy?''

The life of a top chef changes when she becomes the guardian of her young niece.

Catherine Zeta-Jones: Kate

Aaron Eckhart: Nick

''What are we going to do about work?''

''What we always do. You tell me what to do and then I'll go behind your back and do whatever I want.''

No Reservations begins with unique Kate, a short tempered chef running her own kitchen. Whenever a customer complains about the smallest thing Kate drags them out of the restaurant. When her sister and niece come to visit, they fall into a deadly car accident and her sister dies. After trying to recuperate after the death of her sister and the raising of her niece she returns to work a week later. Only to discover a new chef working there without her consent. Then things really start hitting it off! The Stars Catherine Zeta-Jones, Aaron Eckhart, and Abigail Breslin all provide stellar performances which have us the audience instantly magnetized to their respective characters.

More interesting in sharper, less sympathetic roles, Catherine Zeta-Jones plays the icier aspects of her role spot on, but she is markedly less arresting when her character turns warm and fuzzy. The script also doesn't really respect her character much, at times she is made to look overly foolish and insensitive in her early scenes as a struggling mother figure.
Aaron Eckhart seems to be playing more of a plot device as Nick, but he does it well, and the requisite sparks occur with Zeta-Jones. Cornering the market on playing put-upon children, Abigail Breslin is fine as Zoe, even though she has to be glumly depressed for much of the film.
The usually more dimensional Patricia Clarkson plays Paula as a surprisingly brittle, opportunistic character, while Bob Balaban isn't given much to do at all as Kate's therapist but act as a bromide. Stuart Dryburgh's autumnal cinematography makes all the food look good, the stars also as a feast for our eyes, and minimalist composer Philip Glass provided the soulful soundtrack dominated by Puccini, Verdi, and Flotow arias.
Exotic food has an intimate bond with exotic music, especially opera arias, since time immemorial. But with someone like Phillip Glass as the director and composer of soundtracks, I expected a little unorthodox numbers from the good old days along with Nissun Dorma and Piano Concerto No.5 on E flat major. Nonetheless, this movie keeps you entertained for every single minute without boring or stressing you for even a moment. It melts in your mouth like the finest quality Creme Fraiche.

The movie in of itself is very sweet and well acted. Especially all the acting stuff between Eckhart and Catherine Zeta-Jones. Breslin is good too, she plays her character very much the same as in Little Miss Sunshine, except this movie she deals with loss. The other interesting thing is that No Reservations really attempts to help you understand the elements and physics of food. It goes into intricate details to describe various dishes. The story tries it's best to really incorporate the many different recipes into our minds. Not to mention the music, the music in this flick was very fancy-french too, giving it a very solid edge to proceedings, reminding me of a real acted out Ratatouille styled Chef affair and really it all ties together and works effectively.

''Kids like fishsticks...''

''I can't believe I'm actually paying for these suggestions.''

Its not just comedy but tragedy on offer here, when Zoe realizes her mother was not around anymore, when she looks at pictures or was watching videos, then tears formulate in her young eyes.
However, these moments of sadness are fleeting, theres plenty more to lift our spirits to new heights, and I feel this is what Director Scott Hicks wanted to achieve. The genre title is romantic comedy but the film genre feels confused.
Acting is not really an issue here or a factor. I find it difficult to question casting because I find it difficult to find any fault. One thing it did achieve was to wet my appetite watching the countless mouth watering dishes served.
I was amused by Kate's reactions to customers whom hassled her, something else that was a positive touch. I feel a lot was on display here, and a lot of little plot threads in between the lines within that were interestingly hinted at.

To conclude, a mesmerizing romantic drama which also gives us an insight into the world of being a chef and creating miraculous dishes. There is imagination, an artful form in the shape of cooking. Scott Hicks has crafted an amazing film, which has a soul, it has love, fire and emotion. Also quite frankly is a tad underrated and unjustly criticized. At it's beating heart is what lies the most important factor, the factor being a feel good piece, a feel good film that never lets down. A film which beats us into submission with music mixed with food spiced up by the prospect of new found love. The characters make us fall in love too as we see them interact with each other and we become absorbed into their world and their ways.

''I know I'm doing everything wrong, but I promise you that I will always be here for you.''