Author: Darren Goodhart

When the original Hostel ended, the young man, Paxton, had just escaped the European torture facility by having to commit a few brutal murders of his own. Hostel Part 2 picks right up with Paxton at it’s start, but quickly moves on to a new set of victims for it’s second installment. Three young female students are making their way through Europe and while attending an art class in Italy, they meet a young model who becomes attached to them and takes them to the Slovak area, setting them up to be the next targets for the dreaded Elite Hunting group (if you’ve seen the first movie, then you know that Elite Hunting is the name of the group that finds these young victims and then puts them up for bid for wealthy business people to come and do with as they please, with the end result having to be killing their victim). We also follow two American businessmen, one who’s gung-ho to do this thing while the other is a little skittish about it. And from there, hijinks ensue…

For the most part, Hostel Part 2 follows the same formula as the original, with setting up the girls in it’s first half, as well as the businessmen, and then it ups it’s pace in it’s second half taking place within the torture facility. Writer/Director Eli Roth follows this,, but also manages to throw in a twist or two along the way, and it’s usually a twisted twist as well…

Critics of these films call them torture-porn, but I don’t quite see it the same way. What Roth has done with his first three movies (the two Hostels and Cabin Fever) has basically gone back to a 70s style type of terror film from which really there is no hope… you’re taking the ride with the victims, and in some cases emphasizing with them, but ultimately the shock comes in either their own demises or what they have to do to get through this themselves. In the case of Paxton with the first film, it was transforming him into something that he wasn’t. In the case with this one, it’s the same with a young woman named Beth, very well played by a young actress named Lauren German- but Roth gives us the twist though too with both of his business men, Stuart and Todd, played respectively by Roger Bart and Richard Burgi.

Personally, I do think that Hostel Part 2 is a pretty effective piece of terror until it’s very final scene and then Eli Roth turns it all into a cartoon, basically I think trying to ease an audience into not taking this all too seriously. I could’ve done without his choice in the end to do this, and would’ve preferred that he ended it without the laugh and just kept it as dark and disturbing as he could’ve.

All of the actors give some decent performances here, along with the above-mentioned, Bijou Phillips plays Beth’s friend Whitney, who’s way more of a sexual free-spirit, and independent actress Heather Matarazzo (who I hadn’t seen in anything in awhile), plays Lorna, their somewhat nerdish friend, who at least for me was the most sympathetic character in the film and whose torture moment is probably one of the most painful and disturbing to watch, primarily due to just how well Matarazzo plays the part.

Even with the ending that I disagree with, I’d still recommend this film, especially if you enjoyed Eli Roth’s other films. His films certainly are not for everyone, I’d be the first to grant you that, but if you like to see a horror/terror film that pushes the boundaries about as far as they can go, then Hostel Part 2 just might be up your alley.

Earl Brooks is for all accounts and purposes, the embodiment of the American success story, he’s got a loving wife, a daughter who he’s proud of in college, and he’s the owner of a successful business, and at the start of our story, Earl Brooks is being named Business Man of the Year. Earl Brooks has his demon though and it’s an addiction, an addiction to killing people and Earl has kept that addiction under control for two years. But in the wake of his successful night, his demon comes back out, tempting him as a way at saying “you deserve this- have some fun tonight” in a manifestation that only Earl can see named Marshall. And Earl finds his next victims, and begins to plan to have his fun… and from there, things begin to build and in some interesting ways…

Wow… I gotta say, I never saw this one coming. The promotion for it had been sparse, almost coming out of nowhere over the last two weeks, and for a movie that stars Kevin Costner, well that’s saying something. This almost seems more like an independent film rather than a big-ass studio production, and that’s one of the things that’s very cool about this great little movie called Mr. Brooks.

Costner’s the star, no doubt about it, and this is from his production company, TIG Productions, and it’s without a doubt one of the more interesting and engrossing serial killer movies that I’ve seen in awhile. This is directed by a man named Bruce Evans, who I’m not really that familiar with, and it really looks great and tells it’s story without getting overly flashy. If there’s any one movie that I can say that this comes closest to putting me in the mind of, it’s a classic serial killer movie that doesn’t get seen that often any more called The Stepfather that stars Lost’s Terry O’Quinn, and me saying that is a high compliment.

Some have criticized this movie for having too much in it, developing a couple of other subplots that they said was almost like having three movies in one. Well, I didn’t see it that way- Earl Brooks is shown as a complex man, and his life is equally complex. These other things happen, but it all gets tied together in a satisfying way for me anyway.

Costner is absolutely terrific in this movie. He exercises a few muscles here that he hasn’t used in awhile and he’s clearly enjoying himself, especially when he’s having his conversations with Marshall, who’s played with some great gusto from William Hurt. Costner and Hurt have some terrific chemistry here, and it’s always fun when they’re on-screen together. Demi Moore is in the film, playing Detective Atwood, and she looks great and plays the part with some real lived-in smarts. Comedian Dane Cook is also in the film, playing a young man who’s discovered what Brooks does and wants to experience the rush first hand by blackmailing Brooks. He does a fine job here being an annoying character but not to the point that the audience is annoyed with him. All in all, Costner and company have assembled a fine cast for the film.

In this summer of sequels, movies like Bug and Mr. Brooks are a breath of fresh air. I know over the next two weeks, I’m going to be seeing four more movies, all sequels (Hostel Part 2, Ocean’s 13, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer and Daywatch) and I can only hope that some of them approach being just as good as what Mr. Brooks is. Good stuff here and very much recommended…

Agnes White is a woman who lives a solitary existence, having her home in a cheap motel, she works as a waitress in a lesbian bar. She’s got her troubles and she’s being plagued by a series of phone calls with no one else on the other end, but she believes it’s her ex-husband Goss, who’s due to be released from prison. One night, Aggie’s friend R.C. comes to her home for a little bit of partying and brings along this strange, but nice, young man that she’s met named Peter Evans, specifically to meet Aggie. Peter’s an odd guy, not looking for anything sexual from Aggie, but seeing something kindred in her to be his friend. Their friendship does become sexual though, and then that’s when the real weirdness begins. Peter confides in Aggie that he’s AWOL from an army experiment that he’s been participating in. He starts to see minute bugs everywhere that he says is some sort of aphid that’s infesting him, and Aggie almost immediately believes him, getting drawn into Peter’s psychosis… and this movie, that’s pretty much been on edge from the start just gets thrust into crazy overdrive after that…

Bug is the latest film from one of the great directors out there, William Friedkin (The Exorcist, The French Connection). It’s an adaptation from a stage play by author Tracy Letts and it’s truly one of the most original films that I’ll probably see all year and for me anyway, one hell of an entertaining experience, but a strange one at that. The thing this movie suffers from though is that it’s from Lionsgate, and I like Lionsgate, but they’ve marketed this film as a horror film for the late teens and twentysomethings out there. Now I knew in advance what I was getting into with this, but I could see someone wanting to see this thinking that they’re getting some sort of Saw-like horror film coming away in the end just thinking they’ve been robbed, and sure enough, there were a few people in our audience that felt that way (but there are horrific things in the film). We probably had 10-15 people in the theatre seeing this when we did, and I sort’ve figured it’d be that way, because of the little Pirate film that was also opening this weekend (I actually thought that we’d be the only people in to see this- but I was surprised when more showed up).

The thing is, Friedkin got my attention all the way through this film, and I truly had no idea what was going to happen from one scene to the next, as this movie went from just being a little creepy to being balls-out over-the-top crazy by it’s very end. What this ends up being is what you might describe as a love story between two very disturbed people, or it might be described as a psycho-drama character study, or even down to being this really extreme black comedy… I don’t know, it almost defies being pigeonholed in one category. About 95% of the film takes place in Aggie’s motel home, and considering that it’s limited to such a confined space, Friedkin keeps it interesting and watchable at all times.

He’s certainly well aided by a terrific cast. Ashley Judd is Aggie, and man, she’s really sunk her teeth into this one, giving what I think is a pretty brave performance that at times can go right into pure parody, but she’s committed all the way through. Michael Shannon, an actor that I’m not at all familiar with, makes one hell of an impression as Peter Evans, in which you’re sort’ve rooting for him to be all right by the films end, but once he’s reached a point where that just can’t happen, then it’s just time to sit back and watch him and try and figure out what he’ll do next. Harry Connick Jr. plays Goss, and he’s just rock-solid, sort’ve reminding me a bit as a white-trash-like Jeff Goldblum here, who’s beefed himself up a bit for the part, making himself pretty imposing to anyone else in the film.

But will you like this? That is the question, isn’t it… well, like I said above, I was thoroughly entertained by this going from being in suspense to what will happen from one moment to the next, to laughing at some of the craziness that the character’s utter on screen (Ashley Judd has a line that will probably be a quotable from this one in the future), to just being horrified at what these characters will do to protect themselves from their perceived threats. I know my tastes in film these days tend to run to being way more entertained by the way off-beat stuff than from the conventional Hollywood fare (in most cases- I still have a good time with Hollywood films too) and for me anyway, so far, Bug has been the most entertaining film that I’ve seen for the summer, but just keep in mind, this ain’t a conventional horror film by any means, and it’s not a “safe” film either, you just don’t know what will happen from one moment to the next… if you like some adventurous stuff, I’d certainly recommend Bug in a heartbeat, at least just to experience it… but after that, well you pays your money, you takes your chances…

In the land of Far, Far Away, Charming’s revenge over defeat from Shrek is brewing and he plans to take over the land with the help of the greatest villains of fairy tales. For Shrek though, life is getting more difficult, he and Princess Fiona have more responsibilites to the kingdom, and after Fiona’s father meets his end, Shrek is left with the decision to either become the new king of the land or go on a quest to seek out another heir, a young boy named Arthur Pendragon… and to complicate matters further, Fiona is pregnant. Shrek makes his choice, yearning for the simpler life that he had, he, Donkey and Puss-In-Boots begin their quest to find the boy… but will they make it before Charming overruns the kingdom?

Well, more than likely, you automatically know the answer to that one…

Shrek The Third is the latest in the series from DreamWorks and PDI, and while everything in this film is technically up to a whole new level- it feels to me like they’ve gone back to this mine maybe one time too many. Now the thing is, I really enjoyed watching this, but it’s not so much for the movie itself, that reason I’ll get to before too much longer. I think that there might be only so far that this concept can go, that is at least with holding everyone’s attention- I think small children will totally love this, but the older you get, the less charm that it might have, simply because the jokes for the most part are all of the same note.

Now it does have it’s moments (for me the best being the moment that the Gingerbread Man’s life flashes before his eyes before he’s about to meet his fate- that’s truly the funniest thing in the film), but most of the film seems like they’re trying to go a little too dark in it’s attempt to stay fresh with an older audience and it’s something that just doesn’t work that well on the whole.

There’s no fault with any of the voice work- and everyone’s back in tow- Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas and Cameron Diaz (as well as an assortment of other famous names) all do fine work with what they have- it’s just that what they have maybe should’ve never been committed, at least with the attempt of trying to appeal to all.

But yet I still enjoyed this and you ask why? Well, here in St. Louis, one of the theatre chains has started to go digital and Shrek was the movie shown in digital projection here and it was the first time that I got to experience that. If you see movies as often as I do, then you know that most theatres really feature underlit projection, and more than often you really don’t get to see the movie how it should be intended until you get to see it at home. For the first time, I saw a movie that looks terrific in a theatre and probably as good as if not better than it will in home. This was like watching HDTV on a really huge level and the level of detail, the color, just the sheer solidity of the blacks was truly amazing. So this is a mixed bag, as a story it’s underwhelming unless you’re a really young child, but on a technical level it was a total blast because the animation seen in superior projection was just about as good as it gets.

For your kids, if you have kids, it’s probably totally worth seeing, but for all others, I’d only suggest it if it’s your first experience with digital projection…

In the movie, 28 Days Later, Britain saw the release of the Rage virus, turning humans into mindless maniacal killers from the results of experiments on animals. 28 days later from the initial release of one of the animals, and almost the entire population of the country was infected with the exception being small pockets of humanity here and there who’d managed to avoid them. 28 Weeks Later extrapolates on this further, going precisely that amount of time further from the initial infestation and to a point where a part of London has been opened up again for human habitation, thanks to a United States-led NATO force. We see a lot of this play out through the eyes of the Harris family: Donald Harris had abandoned his wife and a few other survivors to a sudden contact with the infected and he’s ready to welcome his children, who’d been refugees in Spain, back into his life. Telling his children what happened to their mother, they get curious on their own and manage to escape from the protected perimeter and find their way back to their home… only to begin a process that releases the Rage virus yet again…

And that’s the basic gist of 28 Weeks Later a sequel to the above-mentioned 28 Days Later which was from director Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, Shallow Grave) and was a very stylish new take on a zombie-type of film. 28 Weeks Later from director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo and much of the same crew of 28DL (including Boyle shooting second unit) continues what Boyle started for the most part in fine form. It’s an overall fun ride and one in which you’re never quite sure how it will all turn out in the end.

There are just a couple of nagging issues though that I have with precisely how the Rage virus gets set upon the land again, and they didn’t need to be there, there were other ways that they could’ve gotten to the same place, but for it’s own convenience it took a route that moved it’s story along faster as opposed to doing it in a more logical manner.

Plus there’s an issue involving Donald Harris (very well played by Robert Carlyle) about keeping him around as a “villain” of sorts through the piece so that his kids can have an arc that ties everything together of sorts in the end… this is more of a Hollywood thing than anything else, and for this movie especially with the threat that it deals with, entirely unnecessary– but to say any more would involve some major spoilers and I want to avoid that.

But still, with these problems that I have with it, I still thought that it ws an overall good time and still very much keeping with the precedent that Danny Boyle started with the first film. It’s incredibly well-made, with a huge scope and some very subtle and not-so-subtle effects work. And the music is terrific, especially the repeated rock-guitar riff that gets used in some very intense moments. And both the opening and closing of the film are absolute killers, real nice stuff.

Carlyle is the biggest “name” in the picture, and as I said above, he does real well with his part, as does everyone else in the movie, all solid actors from Jeremy Renner to Harold Perrineau to Catherine McCormack to Idris Elba… delivering the goods solidly. Note also goes to Imogen Poots and Mackintosh Muggleton who play the Harris kids, Tammy and Andy.

I’d heard through the grapevine that this was in it’s own way supposed to feature it’s own brand of commentary on the U.S. and the war in Iraq, but honestly, I just didn’t see that.. to me, any of the steps that were taken by the military in the film to shut down this virus seemed like the logical steps to take, and certainly the steps that I’d want them to take if the situation was “for real.” I think some of this talk about that might be folks looking into this a little too much for their own agendas, but that’s just me.

Still, for the most part, 28 Weeks Later is a pretty good horror film and the issues that I’d had with a couple of it’s points may in fact not be issues at all for others. If you enjoyed the first film, I’d definitely recommend this… and I hope that the speculation is true and Danny Boyle returns to direct the eventual 28 Months Later…

Spider-Man 3 is, of course an obvious continuation of both of the other Spider-Man films, and there’s a lot that goes on in this film- at the start, our man Peter Parker is on top of the world, things are going well for him at school and at work, he’s got the love of his life in Mary Jane Watson, and the city loves him as Spider-Man, although J. Jonah Jameson is still doing his best to tell the city that he’s a menace through his paper, The Daily Bugle. But soon things begin to unravel- Mary Jane appears in a musical that gets less than stellar reviews and sends her into worry, a criminal, named Flint Marko has escaped from prison and soon finds himself transformed into a new super-criminal named the Sandman, up-and-comer photographer Eddie Brock is trying to take Peter Parker’s position at the Daily Bugle from him, a mysterious alien substance crashlands on Earth and begins to attach itself to Parker, and Harry Osborne is still out for revenge, finally making use of his fathers inventions to take Parker out.

That’s quite a laundry list of events for a film like this, and yet it all sort of plays out like you’re reading a year’s worth of Spider-Man comics, which isn’t a bad thing at all… and generally, Spider-Man 3 is a pretty fun movie with a lot of big action scenes with amazing visual effects, some comic moments, a lot of new characters all culled from the comic’s history, and some great moments of poignancy– really all of this feels quite true to it’s source, and that’s the best thing that it can do.

But also, much like the other two movies (which I watched again this past Friday night), there’s a few leaps of faith that it asks you to take as well (with one event with the Sandman being a little detrimental to Spider-Man’s origins) and some little gaps between where something starts off and where it ends up kind of missing that in-between scene that would make a literal-minded audience happy- some of these things can be written off as a read-between-the-lines thing, and others you just sort’ve have to go with.

It’s still a fun ride, and Sam Raimi has certainly packed a lot of meat in his movie- truly if you’re a fan of the character, you’re getting your money’s worth with the film.

Everybody from the previous movies are back (with the exception of Alfred Molina as Doctor Octopus- although he is seen in the opening re-cap during the credits)- of course that means Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, J.K. Simmons, Rosemary Harris, Bruce Campbell, all of the regulars from the Daily Bugle and even Willem Dafoe and Cliff Robertson return for brief cameos… and this time we get some new players to the game including James Cromwell as police Captain Phil Stacy, Bryce Dallas Howard as Gwen Stacy (and really looking good here too- the blonde look works for her in a big way), Topher Grace as Eddie Brock, and Thomas Haden Church as Flint Marko, the Sandman. This is really a solid cast and of course Tobey Maguire gets to shine delivering a huge array of emotions in the film, but I’ve also got to call out all of our villains here too- James Franco delivers a really nice performance, even to the point where you’re just hoping he doesn’t go back down another path- Topher Grace, an actor I don’t really care for a whole lot is of course playing a character from the comics that I don’t really care for at all in Eddie Brock and later transformed as Venom, but I give the young man props, he comes into this most enthusiastically and delivers the goods with this role. A huge round of applause goes to Thomas Haden Church though, who is literally the living interpretation of a Steve Ditko drawing as The Sandman. Church obviously threw himself into this both physically and emotionally and very much plays the part of a tragic character who’s made some wrong choices in life.

Of course, everything else about the film is state-of-the-art… Raimi and his crew have really gotten this down… The only thing really missing here is a full score from Danny Elfman, his themes are used, but it’s composer Christopher Young filling in for him and certainly doing an able job, but not the same thing that Elfman would’ve done.

It really is fun, but… it’s setting some traps for itself that if the series is going to go on beyond this, it really needs to start to avoid these traps… For a lot of filmmakers who make comic-book movies, they really feel the need to turn the whole thing into high opera by it’s very end, usually putting the love interest for the hero in danger and featuring ultimate final confrontations with the villains of the piece (often in some sort of setting that’s high off the ground)… and really, we just don’t need this any more. Mary Jane Watson is not Lois Lane, she doesn’t set out to get herself in the jams that she gets into (and she doesn’t here either, but the script calls for the villains to again find out who Spider-Man really is and attacking him through her) and as an audience for this sort of film, I really don’t think we need to have that moment at the end where the hero defines himself by saving the woman he loves… so even though, this film is fun and it all works- please, Sam Raimi and/or anyone else who’s going to make a Spider-Man movie- stop with throwing Mary Jane in the middle of all at the final confrontation…

Also, these villains need to stop meeting final ends- they continue on in the comics, they can continue on in the films too- Now don’t get me wrong, the death of Norman Osborne in the first film certainly does make sense, and the filmmakers have wisely continued to use him as a spectre that haunts his son… but showing Doctor Octopus drowning in the second film just shouldn’t have been done. And here in Spider-Man 3, we also get some finality with some of the characters, although one of them though makes a lot of sense… I guess the Spider-Man films have a bit of exception to this rule, but still… I think that satisfying comic movies can be made without showing what would appear to be the death of the antagonist of the piece.

And speaking of the villains, y’know, I really don’t have a problem with more than one villain in a film, I just think that if they continue with it, they need to get past the idea that they need to build whole character arcs around them… why not start one of these films with Spider-Man taking down another villain and then just going on into the story proper from there, done well, this will leave an audience wanting way more with the character, and that character could then be used in another film.

Now lately in the news, Maguire and Dunst have sort’ve been playing it blase about whether or not they’d even want to continue this series, and some of it could be holding out for the better payday and some of it could be them being a little full of themsleves- Marvel’s made no secret of the fact that they intend for the series to go on for three more movies, and good… it should, even without Raimi at the helm or Maguire and Dunst in the parts, even though you will get fans who just won’t accept that, this character’s history is rich with material that could keep him going on for awhile in film… I was really glad that they brought Gwen Stacy and Captain Stacy into this- right there is a whole other emotional path they could take Peter Parker down… and as far as villains go, with Dylan Baker playing Dr. Curt Conners, they’ve already set-up the Lizard as a villain (and there’s something in this film that could even take that further if they want) and of course the Spider-Man history is just filled with villains- I’d learned that they’d talked to Ben Kingsley at one point about playing The Vulture- now how cool would that have been? And I’d love to see characters like Electro, Mysterio, and Kraven The Hunter make it to the screen as well- there’s nothing that says this series couldn’t go on for another five or six years quite comfortably…

But back to the film at hand… Spider-Man 3 is certainly rock-solid entertainment and it’s quite fitting with what’s been done with the other two movies… it’s a whole lot of big-time fun and I really doubt that fans of the character will be that disappointed by it… they might see the traps that I describe above, but that’s stuff that can certainly be warded off in future films, and Spider-Man 3 gives them that opportunity to make a few fresh starts in some new directions… highly, highly recommended- go out and have some fun with this.

Chris Johnson is a mentalist who performs in Las Vegas under the name of Frank Cadillac… the thing is, his power is for real: Johnson can see into the future for up to a 2-minute period, but even by doing that, he virtually changes the future every time he does it. He’s haunted by a vision not in his two-minute frame though of a young woman that he’s destined to meet in a diner, who’s key to his own life. Now a terrorist group has a bomb that they’re threatening to detonate, and the FBI, with absolutely no clue as to how to find the bomb, decides that their best bet is to recruit Johnson and have him help in finding the bomb and determining what the terrorists will do next…

… and so goes the premise of Next, the newest film from director Lee Tamahori and star Nicolas Cage and in my opinion, right now the leading contender for worst film of 2007.

Oh, just where to begin with this mess… Well, first off, the premise in itself is not bad and it’s roots are in a story from Philip K. Dick called “The Golden Man.” Now I’ve never read the story, but I certainly recognize some of the Dick elements in the film. Where this goes immediately haywire is just in the limits that they put on Chris Johnson’s ability- a man with his ability, it seems to me anyway, would almost constantly be living 2 minutes ahead of the rest of us, in effect, at least to me, seeming that he should be quite a bit crazy from his ability. But instead they have this under control and in a way where Chris can see all the permutations at once of how an event can play out, which is basically there for script convenience and nothing else. What this does, as this plays out, is give Chris an ability not unlike super-speed, but yet that doesn’t make sense considering how his ability is explained to us in voice-over narration by Cage. They add a further wrinkle with this with the girl that Chris has a vision of (played by Jessica Biel) and Chris tells us this complicates his ability and lets him see further in the future which in turn ties into the film’s end twist, which ultimately ends up being a cheat on the audience.

On top of this, there’s the FBI, with a very small force going into finding this terrorist group (led by Julianne Moore), from a practical aspect, it seems that this force is highly misdirected, losing more time looking for Chris Johnson than looking for the terrorists and the bomb. I couldn’t help but think of the TV show 24, during this and knowing to myself that in the time they spend looking for Chris Johnson, Jack Bauer would’ve found the bomb and had chunks of the terrorists floating in his stool. On top of that, once the FBI do find Johnson, their plan is to set him in front of a TV monitor, with his eyes propped open like Malcolm McDowell’s in A Clockwork Orange and then hoping that Chris will see something in the news that will set him off– What the hell? This FBI group is so inept that they’re nowhere near the group… and yet I know that if I was an agent with their resources, I’d be virtually on top of them, and using Johnson in their vicinity, and yet there’s another catch with Chris’ power: with the exception of the girl, he can only see the future in how it effects him!?!? What a mess…

Nicolas Cage plays the whole thing like your only sympathy with him should be that he’s a haunted man by this love that he’s trying to find and that he’s just using his power to keep himself going and I just didn’t give a damn the whole way through… his only point of sympathy is just with the girl, and really there’s nothing there to hook into. This is the third movie that I’ve seen Cage in this year thus far, and I think it says something that I think his best performance of the year is in the brief cameo that he has in Grindhouse. Julianne Moore does as good as she can do considering the limitations of the script, she’s plenty driven, and she seems resourceful, it’s just that the script itself puts her whole team as not having a clue. Jessica Biel plays the part of “the girl” of the film, and personally, I think she’s pretty well miscast here, she’s probably a good 20 years younger than Cage at this point, just seeming wrong for the guy there, and her point of audience sympathy is just in the fact that she’s a teacher for poor, underprivileged American Indian kids… big whoop, again, I could care less…

We had a group of five with us last night to see this, and even though I doubt most of that group will read this, I have to apologize to them for openly talking during this movie as I was making fun of it as it was playing out… and yet, I just could not help myself… fortunately, at the end of the film, we were all pretty much in agreement as to just how bad it was, and our fun just might’ve been in the smart-ass comments we were making… The thing is, on some movies that are meant to be a bit of dumb-ass action romps, I’m willing to forgive on a lot of things as long as they keep some of their pacing brisk and their action entertaining, here they just give you too much time to think about things– and as such, it will fall apart right before your very eyes… A far better film is out there that’s somewhat similar to this called Deja Vu that just came out on DVD this past week, that never had me questioning what was going on there…

The movie itself just seems like another “miss” for director Lee Tamahori– but how much is he to blame here, I don’t know… with the involvement of a star like Cage, it’s really hard to say, and because it is a big budget film, it’s harder to say just how much this film was cut by (it weighs in at only about 90 minutes). Tamahori has also directed such movies as Once Were Warriors, The Edge, Mullholland Falls, and the James Bond movie, Die Another Day.

If you’re a big Nicolas Cage fan, I doubt that there’s much that I can do to dissuade you from seeing this, because he’s at his quirky best (or worst, at least for me) throughout this… and maybe for some, that might be OK, but for me, I put this film a bit lower compared to another Nicolas Cage mess called National Treasure, and so far the leading candidate for the worst movie that I’ve seen for the year 2007, even worse than The Hills Have Eyes 2 more because this has a bigger budget and bigger stars who frankly should know better…

Nicholas Angel is the top of the line on the London police force (excuse me, it should now be referred to as service- force implies to much of a physical threat), he’s so good at his job that he’s making the rest of the service look bad and as such he gets a promotion to sergeant but with that promotion comes a transfer to the sleepy, rustic little village of Sandford, where hardly a crime happens…

… that is until Nick Angel shows up and mysterious deaths start to occur.

Hot Fuzz is the latest film from the team of Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg, who brought us the Zombie take-off, Shaun of the Dead. This time, their target is big-ass Hollywood cop/action movies, particularly those as produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and Joel Silver and they deliver the goods pretty nicely here, not only giving you a spoof of said films, but also giving you a story that stands well on it’s own terms too (which is just what Shaun did too). It’s longer than what it should be, but really that’s just keeping in tone with the movies it’s taking off on, always seeming to go a little longer than they should.

Simon Pegg plays Nick Angel, and Pegg is really good here and he should be, he’s in damn near every scene of the film- you’ve got to believe in him or else this could really fall on his face, and you do believe in Nick Angel. He’s really earnest in the part, and at times reminds me of a younger Edward Woodward (who’s also in the film) particularly when Woodward made The Wicker Man. Pegg is backed up by his partner from Shaun, Nick Frost as one of Sandford’s police officers who wants to live the life of a Bruckheimer action movie hero. The ret of the cat are solid British actors, the type you expect to see in a movie about a small village like this, with Timothy Dalton leading the way with his devilish smile as the owner of a grocery store in the town who has more going on than just selling groceries. There’s also a nice bit at the beginning with top British talent like Martin Freeman, Steve Coogan and Bill Nighy that’s really fun to watch.

Now I wasn’t laughing uproariously during this (the kind of movies that do that for me are things like Borat, Jackass Number Two and Clerks II— not anything by Will Ferrell though, never funny, never will be), but I still had a real good time watching it. Some of the film is really quite funny, particularly near the end when it full-out turns into a Bruckheimer film and the rest for me was more quiet humor, but your mileage may vary. Just the same, Hot Fuzz gets a big recommendation here, go see it if you get the chance.

David and Amy Fox are a married couple suffering some problems as the result of the death of their son. They’re on a road trip to one last family event before they make their divorce final and due to a back-up on the interstate, they decide to take some side roads to get to their destination. They end up lost and even worse, they end up with car problems. Their car problems force them to stay at a mysterious motel where they soon discover something really sinister is happening.

And then it just gets freakier and creepier…

Vacancy is a very well-made suspense thriller from director Nimrod Antel that really manages to get under the skin in some very creepy ways, tapping into some fears that I think we’d all have taking those little out of the way road trips that you don’t really want to take. It’s very nicely paced, and it’s well set-up so that you actually give a damn about what happens to David and Amy along the way and you’re rooting or them to get through, which is so unlike other movies of this type when you can’t help yourself but hope for the deaths of some extremely obnoxious characters. David and Amy, while having their problems aren’t like that, and you actually do want them to get out of their situation intact.

It helps that you have actors like Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale cast as David and Amy, both really give good performances, and I’m impressed with Wilson in particular, who almost always end up as the everyman of some sort, but here he’s one that you can relate to. The always good-as-gold Frank Whaley is also in the film as the creepy manager of the hotel. Whaley’s always fun to watch and he delivers the goods in this film quite well.

The funny thing, I was watching Ebert & Roeper this weekend, and this week filling in for Roger Ebert was John Cougar Mellencamp, an odd choice to be sure, but with credentials, with him being a movie director himself. Now I could’ve told you already how Richard Roeper was going to react to this, it would be a particularly smarmy review going on about how he’s seen this again and again and it just didn’t do anything for him. Mellencamp was immediately refreshing compared to Roeper and virtually any other reviewer, because he was more of a man on the street review than what Roeper would give and as such was diametrically opposite of what Roeper’s review was (and he totally countered every argument that Roeper had). The same thing happened with NBC’s movie review show Reel Talk with Jeffrey Lyons and Allison Bailes, although both are professional reviewers, they went opposite ways with Bailes really enjoying the film and Lyons not liking it all, but Lyons mostly didn’t like it for it’s subject matter and at once even stating when a certain something happened in the film, he just didn’t like that at all (although that something is absolutely something that would probably happen in that situation). There was a lot of reference from both Lyons and Roeper about stupid things that the characters do… and I gotta say, I just didn’t see that. There are things that the characters do that might seem stupid, but with the situation as desperate as this was, these options to me were the only things that they could do.

I always like little thrillers like this, and while this one is set-up with situations that you just don’t want the characters to get into, they have to get into them just in order to survive. This is very tight and at times very brutal, but if you’re a fan of a good thriller, well I could think of worse ways to spend your money. Vacancy gets a total recommendation from these parts.