Anyways, back to the movie.  This reminded me a lot of About a Boy.  The plot really isn’t the same, but there is a child involved and a man is trying to impress a woman.  Oh, and there are the British accents as well.  Pegg plays Dennis Doyle, a bit of a loser, who had the girl of his dreams but freaked out the day of the wedding and literally ran off.  Libby, played by Thandie Newton, is said girl who several years into the future is now set to marry Whit, played by Hank Azaria.  Doyle sees there only one thing he can do to prove he’s more of a man than Whit, and that is to run a marathon.

I’ll agree this film may be a bit cheesy, but it’s one of those “feel-good” stories, and probably something most of the family can enjoy.  With the holidays coming up, I always start thinking about movies that aren’t too annoying that would be appropriate to watch with the family.  There are some usual Pegg antics and hilarity in here, especially with his Indian landlord.  Hank Azaria has been good in every role I’ve ever seen.  Strong cast, good story, and funny to boot.  You should probably check this out.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

This film follows the story of Salomon Sorowitsch, the best counterfeiter at the time, and Adolf Burger, an expert printer, as they simultaneously try to stay alive and foil the Germans plans.  Housed at Sachsenhausen, these special prisoners were kept apart from the rest of the camp.  They were given nice clothes, plenty of food, real beds to sleep in, showers, and even had music playing all day long.  I am by no means an expert on the Nazi camps, but I had never heard of this kind of treatment before.

Towards the end of the war the countfeiters at Sachsenhausen were moved to Ebensee, but the operation was never started back up again before the camp was liberated.  Many of the banknotes were thrown into a nearby lake and were recovered by divers years later.

This is another great film for any history buff.  Very interesting and enjoyable.  Some of the special features even include interviews with Adolf Burger.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

The story is a bit ludicrous, yet not that far from the truth.  If you’ve watched any of the COPS shows, you’ll know just how stupid some people can be.  Here we have the whole Miami police force locked down because they’ve all be contaminated with something biological.  Luckily the Reno Sheriff’s Department is there to save the day.

It was all fun and silly until they lost me with the gratuitous nudity and sex jokes.  I’m all for a raunchy film.  I love Kevin Smith’s work, however, there’s a time when stuff is just pointless and meaningless.  It’s hard to explain, but that’s the way I feel.  Definitely don’t want to watch this one again.

Rating: 1 out of 5 stars

The story is really amazing how the young son of a slain ruler is kidnapped, enslaved, and jailed - yet never gives up.  He just keeps getting back up.  I can’t really comment on how Temudjin really was, I’m sure the peoples he conquered weren’t exactly happy to be conquered.  He seemed to be just in what he did though, and he didn’t forget those who were kind and who helped him.  Some parts of the film really personified “an eye for an eye.”

I’m not exactly what language was being spoken in the film, but I assumed it was the native Mongol tongue.  That’s always something I enjoy about films.  Not so great though for those of you who detest subtitles.  To that I say you should get over it cause you’re missing out on some good films.

One aspect I wasn’t sure what to expect was the war factor.  I’m glad to say this wasn’t turned into an action flick.  That would be interesting to watch, but this was mainly focused on Temudjin’s life and his relationships with people, including his best friend who eventually became his enemy.  Definitely rent this and check it out if you’re into historical films, like history, or are into Asian culture.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

I think the hardest aspect for me to buy in to was the magical realism portrayed in the story.  You have a very musically talented man and woman who fall in love and “make a baby” one fateful night.  The girl’s father decides she doesn’t need a child because she has her career as a cheloist.  So the baby boy is given up for adoption and has been living in an orphanage.  So one day the boy is exposed to music and he turns into Mozart on steroids.  He believes the music he creates will bring his parents back together and reunite them as a family.  That’s what made me roll my eyes at this movie.

Performances were ok.  Everything seems very much like a Charles Dickens’ story.  Highmore did pretty well and the music was interesting.  You have to remember though, that musicals rarely float my boat.  They’re just not my thing.  Maybe that’s why I couldn’t get into the story very well.  I’d be interested to see what other think.  I’m kinda feeling like maybe the movie wasn’t so cheesy, but just not my style as with Across the Universe.  I’d love to hear any thoughts anyone else has.

Rating: 2 out of 5 stars

I think one of the big factors contributing to the worth of this film was Stallone stepping in as a writer, and directing the film.  He’s obviously had a lot of experience acting, writing, and directing and was aware “the people” would not abide more of the same considering what happened with Rambo III.  Another contributing factor was Stallone trying to shed some light on the atrocities currently happening in Burma.

Action.  If there’s one thing this movie has, it’s action.  I’m pretty sure Robin would say something along the lines of, “Holy belt-fed machine guns, Batman!”  Liz walked in and saw a short clip during one of the featurettes on the DVD and uttered, “gross!”  I must say I wasn’t grossed out, I actually thought it was kind of cool.  That must be the little boy in me.

The story was pretty general.  Rambo helps some people, against his initial instinct, and eventually ends up saving them.  I really appreciated the “wandering warrior” theme that has prevailed throughout the series.  Parts of the original score were also worked into this score which reall tied the films together.  The execution of the story is really what made it work for me though.  Stallone really pulled off the Rambo character as an older version, still searching for meaning in his life and slightly enraged at the atrocities around him.

If you’re even a tiny bit a fan of First Blood, I highly suggest you check this one out.  It’ll be well worth your time.  I only hope Rambo V builds off of the success of Rambo.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

I think the greatest attribute of this movie is people with different opinions concerning the current president’s performace can watch this movie and come out thinking it backs up their viewpoints.  I was trying to explain this yesterday and wasn’t doing a very good job of it.  I’d be interested to see if anybody agrees with me.

The second greatest attribute would have to be the acting.  I don’t think this film has what they call an “ensemble cast,” but there were definitely a lot of noticeable faces.  We have Josh Brolin playing George W. Bush, Elizabeth Banks playing Laura Bush, James Cromwell and Ellen Burstyn playing George H. W. Bush and Barbara Bush, Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney, Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld, Toby Jones as Karl Rove, Bruce McGill playing George Tenet, Thandie Newton playing Condoleeza Rice, Jeffrey Wright as Gen. Colin Powell, and Stacy Keach as Rev. Earle Hudd to name a few.  The only performance I was disappointed with was Condoleeza Rice.  I was able to pick out most cabinet members and key players in this film before their names were ever mentioned.  They played their parts that well.  Newton as Rice just came off as an SNL performance to me.  It seemed as if she was playing the caricature, and not owning the role.  It’s kind of like when a musician plays someone else’s music.  They can play it like a cover band or put their own spin on it.

I was in the 4th grade when Desert Storm happened and watching this movie brought back a lot of memories from then.  I also remembered hearing things like President Bush’s son owned the Texas Rangers.  I’m sure other scenes would be much more meaningful for those who weren’t quite so young at the time.  It’s weird watching movies about “historical” things that have happened during my lifetime.

I wouldn’t say President Bush was painted in a bad light, but I also wouldn’t say he was painted in the best of lights either.  I don’t know for sure, but I assumed any of the public speeches he gave were probably word-for-word.  I’m sure some think the president is a bit of an idiot and I can’t say I wholly agree with them.  He is college educated.  I think he probably surrounded himself with not the best of people.  One thing I was left wondering about was Barbara and George H. W.  I never would have guessed George W. called his father “poppy.”  There was also one scene where H.W. explained the difference in two pronunciations of Saddam.  I thought that really showed an understanding of language and culture.  I also loved the scenes were George W was eating.  I’m pretty sure it showed him eating bologna sandwiches on more than one occasion.  He also seemed to be a fan of Cheetos, the crunchy variety, and he also had an affinity for Dr. Pepper.

To those of you who think this movie is making fun of Bush, I disagree because I wasn’t sitting in the theater laughing throughout the film.  To those of you who think this movie glorifies Bush, I also disagree because he was in no way made out to be the best President ever.  I say you should probably give this movie a chance and see what you think of it for yourself.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

McBride’s character, Fred Simmons, is a little hard to take.  He’s a Grade A jerk to pretty much everybody in his life.  His trophy wife is just that…a trophy wife, and when you take that away you’re left with not much more than a late model, cheap sports car, and his small martial arts business.  When everything seems to just be not going Simmons’ way, he meets up with his #1 hero, Chuck ‘The Truck’ Wallace.

The film is full of laughs, but has also definitely earned it’s R rating.  The langauge gets to be a bit much here and there.  It’s not that what they’re saying is so bad, it’s just the time and place if you know what I mean.  I wouldn’t call this a grown-up Napoleon Dynamite, but I would say it’s maybe a peak into Rex Kwon Do.  You could also look at it as a man whose life takes a nose dive, but is saved by Tae Kwon Do…sort of.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

My Kid Could Paint That is the intriguing and mysterious story of a sweet little four-year-old named Marla who is supposedly a prodigy in abstract painting, making millions for her parents. After an infamous 60-minutes report, though, her “career” takes a turn for the worse. It raises all sorts of really intriguing questions on art, modern art, abstract art, and the art world, not to mention parenting, the power and nature of media, and the human psyche. I found the bonus features just as good as the film itself, with a follow-up documentary capturing reactions and additional commentary, and a really good interview with NY Times art critic Michael Kimmelman. Kimmelman makes excellent points and handles difficult discussions surrounding art very articulately and succinctly. Marla’s still making art (or is she?) and selling it.

Who the #$&% is Jackson Pollock? is the bizarre mystery of a five dollar painting found at a thrift store by a female truck-driver who didn’t know any better. She bought it as a joke for a friend who needed to be cheered up, but when it didn’t fit through the friend’s door, it found it’s way to a garage sale where a local art teacher planted a thought about it being a Pollock. The most amazing juxtaposition of cultures occurs when this feisty trailer-park trucker barges in on the snobbery of the art world, insisting for ten years straight that this painting was indeed a masterpiece worth fifty million dollars. They, of course, wouldn’t give her the time of day. Is she chasing after a wild dream that simply isn’t true? Do the critics ignore her because of who she is or what the painting is? Is she creating evidence or are they ignoring evidence? It’s full of character who are simply too good to be true. It’s a wild and fun ride, but sadly, leaves you more cynical towards the art world than anything else.

The first is a bit better than the second as far as filmmaking goes, but both are full of intriguing characters and raise their fair share of interesting questions and ideas.  They are conversation starters for sure.  Watching them back-to-back makes for an interesting experience.

This isn’t the kind of Western you’d see when thinking about a classic Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson film.  It’s also not one of the Western musicals that I can’t stand.  It’s just one of those wholesome stories that’s common of that era.

Checking out IMDB, I saw that Shane is played by Alan Ladd who also starred in the show Branded.  That’ll mean something to all of you Lebowski fans.  Van Heflin was in the original 3:10 to Yuma and Jack Palance, the fitness guru, is also in this film.

I have to admit I wasn’t super impressed , but I didn’t dislike it either.  A guy named Shane comes to town and starts helping out the Starrett family.  Shane then stands up for them when some “bullies” start pushing them around.  Eventually everything comes to fruition and there’s a gun battle at the end.  Pretty much your standard Western flick.

I’d say definitely watch this if you want to know what people are talking about if the film is ever mentioned.  If you’re not really into Westerns, older films, or just don’t care, you might not get into this one.

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars