(*Click Here@-CT Reviews For Movies Now Showing and DVDs)
***For Show Times Near You & Tickets——Click on Fandango———–>
( ***Click @Family Guide To TV Programing)
***My Reviews Are Below—-An Index on the Right Column Below———–>
Theater release: June 05, 2009 by Universal Pictures; Directed by: Brad Silberling; Runtime: 1 hour 33 minutes; Cast: Will Ferrell (Dr. Rick Marshall), Anna Friel (Holly Cantrell), Danny McBride (Will Stanton), Jorma Taccone (Chaka), John Boylan (voice of Enik), Matt Lauer (himself), Leonard Nimoy (voice of The Zarn)
**Warning: This is not a family friendly film!
Here is the best family review that I have found of this film—by Mark Corallo :
Theater release: May 15, 2009 by Columbia Pictures; Directed by: Ron Howard; Runtime: 2 hours 18 minutes; Cast: Tom Hanks (Robert Langdon), Ewan McGregor (Camerlengo Patrick McKenna), Ayelet Zurer (Vittoria Vetra), Stellan Skarsgård (Commander Richter), Armin Mueller-Stahl (Cardinal Strauss), Pierfrancesco Favino (Inspector Olivetti), Nikolaj Lie Kaas (Assassin)
I found Ron Howard’s new movie adaptation of Dan Brown’s 2000 novel Angels and Demons to be far better than The Da Vinci Code from a Christian perspective. The movie did not dwell on the anti-Christian theories and themes that pervaded the previous work.
That doesn’t mean that it was ‘pro-Christian’- just not substantially ‘anti’. One of the major issues continually dwelt with in the book is the so-called battle between science and religion—and in this case Catholicism. This was obviously downplayed in the movie and I found it far move enjoyable than the ‘Code’.
The movie sets, along with the Vatican and Roman backgrounds were awesome. In the final analysis, this turned out to be a very good suspenseful detective story with a good twist or two. This is actually a movie that most Christians will be able to enjoy and not be offended by—even Catholics will find it rather harmless after all the negative hype. *Top
Theater release: May 07, 2009 by Paramount Pictures; Directed by: J.J. Abrams; Runtime: 2 hours 7 minutes; Cast: Chris Pine (James T. Kirk), Zachary Quinto (Spock), Leonard Nimoy (Spock Prime), Karl Urban (Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy), Zoe Saldana (Nyota Uhura), Simon Pegg (Montgomery Scott), John Cho (Hikaru Sulu), Anton Yelchin (Pavel Chekov)
An incredible ‘reboot’ of the Star Trek franchise with a whole new young crew of actors playing the familiar characters and ready “to go where no man one has gone before” once more!
The film features an innovative way of using time travel to wipe out the familiar ‘time line’ that trekkie’s like myself have watched for over 40 years. A change right at the beginning of the film—the destruction of Kirk’s father and his ship as James T.was being born sends the franchise into a new alternate time loop and makes it possible to do it all over again—differently.
James T.Kirk grows up without a father to guide him along and becomes a regular small town trouble maker before meeting up with Capt. Pike, a former friend of his fathers, who challenges him to seek his destiny with Star Fleet. We also get a glimpse of a young Spock—a half human picked on by other Vulcans and joins Star Fleet as a reaction to the lack of respect he receives from his Vulcan elders.
One by one we are introduced to all of the familiar Enterprise characters—played by a new bunch of young actors—Uhura, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, and Chekov—way younger than they ever were even in the original series. But that is the point—an all new Trek for an all new ‘younger’ generation.
Just when the whole story seems rather confusing, the ‘old Spock’ (Leonard Nimoy) comes to the rescue and explains it all. Usually there is some kind of moral theme or commentary on current culture inherent in a Trek story line. This time the whole story is merely a vehicle to introduce the new crew and get them all together for the next adventure.
The special effects and the sound track are fantastic—far beyond where Trek has gone before. The film is fun and enjoyable on a number of different levels. It is a stand alone story that can be enjoyed by those who have never ‘Trekked’ before.
For me, it was great to see my grandson enthusiastically enjoy the film —he didn’t really care for the past Treks–and now looks forward to the next—and I look forward to seeing it with him-–to boldly go and do it all over again.
Theater release: March 06, 2009, Directed by: Zack Snyder, Runtime: 2 hours 42 minutes
Cast: Jackie Earle Haley (Walter Kovacs/Rorschach), Patrick Wilson (Dan Dreiberg/Nite-Owl), Malin Akerman (Laurie Juspeczyk/Silk Spectre), Matthew Goode (Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias), Billy Crudup (Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan), Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Edward Blake/The Comedian).
WARNING: This is not a family-friendly film. The ‘R’ rating doesn’t begin to explain what you will really see in this film. It is far more graphic with more nudity than the‘R’ would indicate.
That said, the quality of the film and the writing was superior. However, I can’t really say that I enjoyed the film-far more violent and than I really like. Also, not an enjoyable escapist experience-far too much to think about and consider.
The story presents you with a sort of parallel universe where super heroes helped to win WWII and the Vietnam war. Nixon is starting his 3rd term, the heroes have forcibly been retired by the government, and the world is on the brink of annihilation still in the middle of the Cold War.
The movie opens with the murder of one of the ‘heroes’- The Comedian- who is hurled out of his high-rise apartment to his death. Through the investigation we are introduced to the rest of the heroes one by one in person and through the effective use of flashbacks. All of these folks were interesting and all had major flaws– The Comedian for sure. The Nite Owl was probably the most sympathetic—the rest I really didn’t care for much.
The most interesting character of all was Dr. Manhattan who through a freak accident had gained ‘god-like’ powers. Increasingly it was becoming more difficult for Manhattan to identify with the rest of humanity as his limitless abilities increased. The major issue dealt with here—what really does separate god from humanity.
Then there was the arrogant Ozymandias who reminded one of a Greek Olympian who was also supposed to be the smartest person in the world. In the end it was Ozymandias who wanted to play god and bring an end to the ‘Cold War’—willing to sacrifice thousands in the process.
This is one of those movies where it takes 3 or more viewings before you really get everything that is offered up, though I am not sure I really want to see it again. Perhaps when the DVD comes out I’ll take it on once more.
By Chris Glazier, from New Man eMagazine–-Chris looks at several episodes of House which actually revolve around issues of faith which is remarkable for a show which features a doctor that is outspoken in his atheism. *Top
(Image via Wikipedia)
Am I the only one that thinks that the passage of Prop 8 (California’s Traditional Marriage Amendment) might have had something to do with Sean Penn winning an Oscar? Hardly!
For a couple of months now we have heard from movie reviewers nothing but raves and superlatives about Mickey Rourke’s acting performance in The Wrestler. However, since the Oscar nominations were announced, there have been whispers in the industry about what a shame that Rourke was up against Milk–Sean Penn playing a gay activist politician that was martyred.
I read that Penn, a very good actor, turned in a good performance in Milk, but who the heck saw that movie anyway? It was popular in San Francisco, played shortly in L.A. and most the big cities across the country but was virtually ignored in the heartland and by regular folks.
Meanwhile, The Wrestler was popular all across the country. Then there’s Gran Torino and Clint Eastwood’s incredible performance as a retired gun toting white bigot facing issues of life, death, family, religion, race, and change. He is intolerable but also self-sacrificing and somewhat redeemed at the end. A wonderful story and performance that goes completely unnoticed at the Oscars. Also extremely popular all across the country but not in Hollywood–too politically incorrect!
That is the point isn’t it? Politics and progressive social agendas play a big role in what pictures get made and which films receive all the honors in Hollywood. If you don’t think so, you haven’t been paying much attention to the motion picture industry in the last 20 years or so.
Did Sean Penn win his Oscar at least partially because he played a gay activist at a time when Hollywood is still reacting to the passage of Prop 8? I think so!
The picture business has always been sympathetic to the gay agenda and the industry came out overwhelmingly against the Traditional Marriage Amendment. Many actors and media folks continue to make snide remarks about Mormons, Catholics, and evangelical Christians which they lump together and characterize as ‘Fundie’ Christian bigots-homophobes-hatemongers who passed the ‘fascist’ Prop.
Should Sean Penn thank Prop 8 for his Oscar? Well at least Penn himself brought up the issue during his acceptance tirade:
“I think it is a good time for those who voted for the ban against gay marriage to sit and reflect, and anticipate their great shame, and the shame in their grandchildren’s eyes if they continue that way of support. We’ve got to have equal rights for everyone. …”
*Top (Cross-Posted on the Main Page)
Theater release: December 12, 2008 by Warner Brothers, Directed by: Clint Eastwood, Runtime: 01:56:00 minutes, Cast: Clint Eastwood (Walt Kowalski), Christopher Carley (Father Janovich), Bee Vang (Thao), Ahney Her (Sue), John Carroll Lynch (Barber Martin).
The trailer for the film seems to sell the picture as a ‘Dirty Harry’ character living out his retirement years with a Charles Bronson ‘Death Wish’ neighborhood scenario. The film is far more complicated and presents the main character with a number of different ethical, and religious decisions.
The picture opens with Walt Kowalski (Eastwood) at a funeral for his wife. One can tell right away that Walt is somewhat estranged from his family. At the reception afterwards, his family all seem to want something from him and so does the Priest– Kowalski blows them all away.
Next we see Walt relating to his new Asian neighbors who are trying to introduce themselves–he growls some racist slurs and screams at them–”get off my lawn.” At that point you really don’t see any redeeming side to this man called Walt Kowalski.
However, the writers have set you up to think the worst about ‘Dirty’ Walt–as a down right miserable excuse of a human being. But there is far more to Walt than meets the eye or his well developed rough exterior.
As the story develops, we find out that Walt is a Korean War Vet who came back with plenty of baggage that has never been resolved. His wife was the only really good thing in his life and all he has left is his ‘72 Gran Torino that he actually helped to put together while working on the Ford assembly line, his dog Daisy, and his home in an aging neighborhood in the midst of change–all bad from his perspective. Oh yes, then there is his health which is not so good since he is coughing up blood every once in a while.
This is not your usual Clint Eastman action film, though he does make good use of a vintage rifle and a handgun in protecting himself and his neighbors.
He finally does become friends with the teenage girl-Sue next door who sees through his gruff exterior and involves him in a traditional Hmong party. Walt finds out that he does like Asian food after all. When he protects the girl from some African-American gang members, he becomes a hero to his neighbors.
Walt catches the neighbor teenage boy called “Toad” (real name -Thao)—trying to steal his Gran Torino. The boy was pressured into it by the local Hmong gang who was forcing him to join against his will. Walt nearly shoots the kid, who becomes persona non grata until his family offers to have him work off his offence and dishonor. In the process, Walt teaches Toad some skills in maintenance and construction and eventually helps him get a job.
The gang comes back to claim Toad and Walt sends them packing. Then the Hmong gang rapes and beats up Toad’s sister Sue and Toad wants immediate revenge asking Walt to help him get it. Walt tells him to settle down and think it through then locks him away in the basement and leaves to take care of things his own way. But first Walt makes a visit to the young priest that he has been trying to ignore and finally does give his long overdue confessional.
Issues of life and death and what is really important are the themes which run through this untypical Eastman ‘action’ film. In the end Walt does do things his way own way, but is far more caring and sacrificial than ‘Dirty Harry’ could have ever been. *Top
Theater release: November 26, 2008 by Twentieth Century Fox, Directed by: Baz Luhrmann, Runtime: 165 minutes, Cast: Nicole Kidman (Lady Sarah Ashley), Hugh Jackman (Drover), David Wenham (Neil Fletcher), Brandon Walters (Nullah), David Gulpilil (King George).
A far better picture than most of the reviews indicate. The story provides a panoramic picture of the Australian frontier in the late 1930’s and early 40’s up to the beginning of WWII.
The setting is a huge cattle ranch outside of Derby in northern Australia. Lady Sarah Ashley (Nicole Kidman) leaves England and arrives in Australia to check on her husband, who owns the Faraway Downs cattle ranch, and finds that he has been killed and his ranch in danger of being taken over by a rival cattle company.
Lady Ashley decides to stay and make a go of it, asking for help from a dashing, rugged cattle driver named Drover (Hugh Jackman), as well as the aboriginal helpers on the ranch. In the process she develops a special relationship with a young “half-caste”–half aborigine orphan boy, named Nullah (Brandon Walters), and decides to raise him as her own in disregard to the cultural/racial conventions of the time.
A rival cattle baron is doing everything he can through an evil employee-the former ranch foreman for Ashley and her husband, to ruin Lady Ashley’s ranch and force her sell out to him. Turns out that the former foreman is even far more evil than originally expected–he is also Nullah’s real father.
The story line builds up over the point whether Lady Ashley and co. will be able to bring their cattle to market against incredible odds and save the ranch. Then the storyline seems to begin all over and build up to a new climax. There is a lull in between that lasts for longer than it should.
A great story and one that I highly recommend. A growing love affair between Lady Ashley and Drover is clichéd but satisfying. The panoramic scenery is actually worth the price of admission. It is a classic cattle baron story that pits good against evil with both very clearly defined.
The racial divide between the European Aussies, the aborigines, and the “half-castes” is a continual subtext to the story that gives it an ethical edge that those of us in the 21th century will have a hard time reconciling. It clearly demonstrates that times have changed in the last 60 years or so. *Top
•Feed
