From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 6 18:59:17 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Mon Jul 6 18:59:21 2009 Subject: Review: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Message-ID: <17fe5ac5-6a32-4cfa-9e7f-dd175f26a9d6@l28g2000vba.googlegroups.com> Transformers(r): Revenge of the Fallen (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 3 Out of 5 Stars or B The Plot: (from IMDB.com) The battle for Earth has ended but the battle for the universe has just begun. After returning to Cybertron, Starscream assumes command of the Decepticons(r), and has decided to return to Earth with force. The Autobots(r) believing that peace was possible finds out that Megatron's dead body has been stolen from the US Military by Skorpinox and revives him using his own spark. Now Megatron is back seeking revenge and with Starscream and more Decepticon(r) reinforcements on the way, the Autobots(r) with reinforcements of their own, may have more to deal with then meets the eye. The Review: Halfway through Transformers(r): Revenge of the Fallen I realize why this Michael Bay explode-a-ganza was becoming a slight guilty pleasure. Socks: spell it out s-o-c-k-s. A mnemonic for the Spanish "esto si que es": it is what it is. Bay does not pretend or ascend to anything than directing big glorified action trailers that run way over their five minutes. T2 could be a choppy and loopy preview for T3, possibly a coming attraction for another Spielberg scion of Jones or a historical romance without the Japanese bombs. It is all there and nowhere at the same time. It is what it is. Transformers are those fiendish Hasbro(r) toy cars that morph into robots and others things with years of patience and a thirty-page instruction manual. Most kids can do it in a minute or less while their parents are still trying to assemble the one from four Christmases ago. Michael Bay and I count among the frustrated adults able to get them open but not closed--and certainly not into the cool third level planes and weapons. The fights between the autobots(r) (the good) and the decepticons(r) (the bad) are lumbering pinwheel bouts filled with clanging-banging metal effects. Think Mighty Morphing Power Rangers with better lines and a bigger costume budget. T1 had fourteen speaking robot parts while T2 has 46 --three times the metal but only one and half times the pot and pan cacophony because Bay plays funereal music and slow motions thing down on the big blows. The eternal punches count for most of the extended 150 minute running time- six minutes longer than T1. The screenplay by current Star Trek reboot writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman (with additional support from Ehren Kruger) does not go boldly beyond the original. It sticks to its Hasbro(r) world. The human soldiers do their own G.I. Joe(r) thing--grunting, puffing, shooting and running away whenever one of the big bots decide to do a fanny fall. The autobots(r) and Joes(r) are an elite fighting team rooting out and destroying the last of the decepticons(r) left from T1. A very closely-knit group of boy toys in play here. Shia LaBeouf seems to be grooming himself for the upcoming Indy Jones five, practicing his snide repartee and comic fighting skills and donning an almost classic jacket (sans fedora) when T2 goes through all the Egyptian artifacts and sets of Indy 3 (The Last Crusade). Yes, the Jones action figures are also part of the Hasbro(r) universe. In between the trailers there is almost a comic romance going on. LaBeouf and the recently voted sexiest woman in the world, Megan Fox generate a candlewicks worth of heat despite all the balls on action around them. The romance speeds by at 200 words per minute, in true screwball style but without the precision and timing. Kevin Dunn and Julie White (and a manic John Turturro) as the flappable parents provide the main laughs. Bay lets the product placement provide the rest of the reality. Chevrolet is still the only car on the block, the factory worth of destruction probably keeping it viable between government funding and chapter 11. Still, it is disconcerting to see LG (a Korean company) providing all the monitors for the military. I give Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen 3 out of 5 stars or a B. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Michael Bay - Director / Executive Producer Ian Bryce - Producer Tom Desanto - Producer Lorenzo Di Bonaventura - Producer Don Murphy - Producer Ehren Kruger - Screenwriter Alex Kurtzman - Screenwriter Roberto Orci - Screenwriter Ben Seresin - Cinematographer Steve Jablonsky - Composer (Music Score) Linkin Park - Featured Music Roger Barton - Editor Tom Muldoon - Editor Joel Negron - Editor Paul Rubell - Editor Nigel Phelps - Production Designer Brian Goldner - Executive Producer Steven Spielberg - Executive Producer Mark Vahradian - Executive Producer Deborah L. Scott - Costume Designer Industrial Light & Magic - Animator / Visual Effects With: Shia LaBeouf - Sam Witwicky Megan Fox - Mikaela Banes Josh Duhamel - Major Lennox Tyrese Gibson - USAF Tech Sergeant Epps Kevin Dunn - Ron Witwicky Peter Cullen - Optimus Prime [Voice] Julie White - Judy Witwicky Ramon Rodr?guez - Leo Isabel Lucas - Alice John Turturro - Agent Simmons John Benjamin Hickey - NSA Advisor Theodore Galloway Rainn Wilson Hugo Weaving - Megatron [Voice] Tony Todd - The Fallen [Voice] Charlie Adler - Starscream [Voice] Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya Home Archives From mleeper at optonline.net Mon Jul 6 19:00:25 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:00:28 2009 Subject: Review: The Brothers Bloom (2009) Message-ID: THE BROTHERS BLOOM (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: The second film for writer-director Rian Johnson is a pleasantly bizarre story of two international con men trying to con a wealthy and attractive widow. Or are they trying to con each other? In any case, Johnson is trying (and succeeding) to con the audience. The film is fun, but the characters are not well developed. The audience has to be onboard not for the characters but for the twisty ride. Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4) or 6/10 The most playful crime films are the ones about confidence tricksters. They could be telling a straight story or they could be pulling the wool over the audience's eyes. And the viewer never knows for sure. Some tell their story directly about people in this profession--and they usually are a fascinating subject to write about--and some pull their own hustle on the viewer at the same time they are entertaining. THE BROTHERS BLOOM is about as twisty a con man film as I have seen. It is written and directed by Rian Johnson, whose debut was the creative high school film noir film BRICK. The Bloom brothers have been fraudsters since they were boys. We see them as young teens pulling a scam on an entire town. This is when the younger of the Blooms (apparently his name is Bloom Bloom, played by Zachary Gordon and later played by Adrien Brody) first associating a really good con game with attracting girls. His older brother Stephen Bloom (played by Max Records and later by Mark Ruffalo) plans the cons and entices Bloom into the scheme. His planning is meticulous with all the steps represented as blocks in a flow chart. The art design picks up the motif of the hand- lettered boxes and uses them as chapter titles for their story. Flash-forward several years and the two brothers are now part of a three-person team. The third person is almost literally a silent partner. She is a Japanese woman with the Chinese name Ying-Ling or Bang-Bang, as she is usually called. Rinko Kikuchi plays Bang- Bang. Their latest mark is Penelope Stamp (Rachel Weisz of the "Mummy" movies and the excellent THE CONSTANT GARDNER). The two men apparently charm Penelope who seems as ill-fated in finding friends and love as she is driving a car. Bloom is now in his thirties and realizes if he does not get out of the game soon these scams are going to be his whole life. And perhaps he would like to retire with Penelope. Incidentally, it is nice to see Maximilian Schell along in one of his least glamorous roles ever. The problem with this film is that the people are not characters but plot contrivances. I guess what it means to create a character is to make the character understandable and perhaps just a bit predictable. But Johnson wants to keep his characters enigmatic so the viewer is never really sure what they will do. This means that we cannot believe we understand anyone. A film like THE STING intelligently does not make its plot too convoluted and unpredictable. Consequently its director, George Roy Hill, could develop his characters more than Johnson allowed himself to do in THE BROTHERS BLOOM. THE BROTHERS BLOOM is as much a game as it is a story film, but then so are most mysteries. The audience climbs onto the convoluted plot and tries to hold on to the storyline. Then Rian Johnson does whatever he can to surprise them and throw them off. Right through to the end and perhaps beyond the audience is not sure who to believe. That makes for an enjoyable ride, but not enough more than that. I rate THE BROTHERS BLOOM a high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or 6/10. Film Credits: What others are saying: Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From homeryen88 at gmail.com Mon Jul 6 19:01:01 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:01:03 2009 Subject: Review: The Hangover (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000906291938v48a2f54bnfcb75d45746939d7@mail.gmail.com> "The Hangover" - The Comedy Effects Linger by Homer Yen (c) 2009 If a tree falls and no one hears it, did it really fall? Well, here's another variation on that theme. If a group of guys go to Vegas, do some really bad things, and can't remember any of it, did it really happen? That's the funny premise of "The Hangover", which is a little like "Memento" meets "Road Trip". When our group of fun-loving guys wake up from a what-must-have-been-an-incredible-night, they can't remember a thing. They don't even know where Doug is. And, they need Doug. So, let's backtrack a little. It was supposed to be just a simple bachelor party for Doug (Justin Bartha). Yup, two days before his wedding, his best friends decide to take him out for a little fun in Vegas. His companions certainly seem harmless enough. There's Phil (Bradley Cooper), the most liberal of the bunch who proves that by taking his students' field trip money for spending cash during their trip. There's Stu (Ed Helms), a milquetoast sap who will probably never win an argument in his life. And there's Alan (Zach Galifianakis) who ably combines loser and dimwitted into one character. None of the characters are too over-the-top, and I suppose that every guy knows people that are more-or-less like each of these four. Meanwhile, none of these actors are really well-known, which allows the story to seem more real than if the foursome comprised Ben Stiller-as-Doug, Matthew McConnaughey-as-Phil, Will Farrell-as-Stu, and Jack Black-as-Alan. Mike Tyson, in a cameo, sums it up pretty well when he says, "stupid things happen when you are [beep] up." How stupid do they get? Well, when the story really gets started, the men find themselves in their hotel room after what-must-have-been-an-incredible-night. They can't remember a thing. They don't even know where Doug is. And, they need Doug. The three groomsmen do their best to retrace their steps to find Doug. As they put the pieces together, there's evidence of all manner of craziness that has ensued. Some of it you might expect from a Vegas Road Trip, like the quickie marriage to a stripper. But the tiger? The visit to the hospital? The missing tooth? The naked Asian dude? It's all pretty funny stuff. Yet, in addition to the expected crass and raunchy humor, there's a soul in this film. In the sinful abyss that is Vegas, there exist pockets of vibrancy. No matter how absurd the set-up, we can't help but like the stripper with a heart of gold (Heather Graham). The men have a chance to stretch beyond their means. You get more than you'd expect from a film like this. It's like getting a natural blackjack, which pays 3-to-2. There was "Road Trip" for those in their 20s. There was "Wild Hogs" for those in their 50s. And the 30-somethings answer back with "The Hangover". Maybe in the sequel, they'll answer the only question left unexplained: where did the chicken come from? Grade: B+ S: 3 out of 3 L: 2 out of 3 V: 2 out of 3 From mleeper at optonline.net Mon Jul 6 19:04:40 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:04:43 2009 Subject: Review: Lovely by Surprise (2009) Message-ID: LOVELY BY SURPRISE (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: Newcomer writer/director/producer Kirt Gunn gives us a strange absurdist fantasy on the subject of the relation between an author and her characters. Three stories are told simultaneously. One is of an author, one of the characters she is writing about, and a third world seems to strangely link the other two. The film is bizarre and at times touching, but in the end leaves the viewer perplexed and a little unsatisfied with the stories. Rating: +1 (-4 to +4) or 6/10 It is frequently said by authors that their characters take on a life of their own, and sometimes are even uncooperative. LOVELY BY SURPRISE is not the first fantasy in which a novelist creates characters who will not cooperate with the author. But this fantasy is a little different because the relationship between author Marian (played by Carrie Preston) and her characters Humkin (Michael Chernus) and Mopekey (Dallas Roberts) is so enigmatically set up. In many ways Marian is totally at the mercy of her fictions. In many ways she is the weakest character of the film. As she suffers from writer's block she goes for help from Jackson (Austin Pendleton), her former writing professor and erstwhile lover. Jackson tells Marian that she has no choice but to kill her main character. How this could possibly work for Marian is unclear, because in her story there are just two brothers who live on a houseboat in the middle of a field. Humkin and Mopekey live like five and six-year-olds, running around in their underpants and playing childish games. Their only sustenance is milk and sugared cereal inexplicably delivered to the houseboat. Marion knows that without Humkin she will have only Mopekey on a houseboat in the middle of a field, and no story to tell. She lets Jackson bully her into trying to kill off Humkin in her story. But by this point Humkin has more power than Marian. Meanwhile, in an apparently unrelated thread, Bob (Reg Rogers) is a car salesman whose philosophy will not allow him to sell a car. He analyzes each of his potential customers and explains only too accurately how they need something else in their lives more important than a car. ("Buying a car will not protect you from evil.") His empathy for his customers stands in the way of his career. Yet ironically, in his personal life widower Bob cannot produce enough empathy to reach his six-year-old daughter, Mimi (Lena Lamer), who has remained silent since she lost her mother. Bob is a single character in both Humkin's world and in Marian's. He is a thread linking the two worlds together with his own world that intersects both. Generally in fantasy film there is an underlying logic that explains the rules by which the story works. Writer/director Kirt Gunn gives us a weakly structured film with no such simple explanation of the rules. Worlds and half-worlds just intersect without explanation, as enigmatic as the houseboat in the field. One rather expects a fully developed--if alien--world as we had in I {HEART} HUCKABEES or the literary fantasy STRANGER THAN FICTION. Kirt Gunn's world has logical contradictions that leave the viewer wondering if Bob can be in the same world as both Humkin and Marion, can't Marian and Humkin somehow get together? Gunn seems to want, as one of his characters says "to see things as they absolutely are not. With the possible exception of Bob, the characters are not fully fleshed out. The novelty of the world gets in the way of character development. This is not a fatal flow, but it damages the effect of the final film. Quirky but not really engaging, LOVELY BY SURPRISE is heavy on surprise but light on lovely. Neither the idea nor the characters are fully satisfying. I rate it a +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or 6/10. Film Credits: Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From mleeper at optonline.net Mon Jul 6 19:05:30 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:05:32 2009 Subject: Retrospective: A Dog of Flanders (1960) Message-ID: A DOG OF FLANDERS (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: A rare but truly fine family film has finally made it to DVD. A Flemish boy is held back from his dream of becoming an artist by his extreme poverty. But then he makes two friends. He finds a dog, beaten and abandoned, and adopts the dog even less fortunate than him. But more important is the relationship he forms with the artist in town who tries to teach the boy the meaning of being an artist. The story has been adapted to silent films and to Japanese anime, but a standout performance by Theodore Bikel makes this the best of the three sound and live-action adaptations. This film is a personal favorite of mine. Rating: +3 (-4 to +4) or 9/10 One of the great double features of my youth was 20th Century Fox's pairing of JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH with James B. Clark's A DOG OF FLANDERS. I came away liking the co-feature as much as the film I had gone to see. (Okay, almost as much, but I was a *real* science fiction fan.) Over the years I have looked several times to find it on video. It was available only on a rare VHS tape. Finally it has been released to DVD, digitally re-mastered, and I could not be more pleased. So why would a film that outwardly looks like it is just a boy-and- his-dog story set in Belgium be such a find? First of all, the dog story is just a sub-plot. The film is more about the struggles of an impoverished boy to dedicate his life to creating art. But there is something more about it that is very unusual. It is honest in a way that very few family films ever are. Life is very hard for its main character and the film does not pull its punches. This film is not sugarcoated. (Admittedly the ending is not as grim as the ending of the book.) There are themes in this film of cruelty, of loss, but also of love and of the redemptive power of art. Does that sound like a lot to put into a single film, a family film? It is there and it all works. Nello Daas (played by David Ladd, son of Alan Ladd) lives with his grandfather (Donald Crisp), the town milk deliveryman in a Belgian town. Nello's one obsession is art. He is fascinated by the local painter Piet van Gelder (played by the wonderful Theodore Bikel). The boy has tried doing his own art using what little he has-- iodine and charcoal, which are far from ideal materials. Nello knows that there is supposed to be a magnificent painting in the local cathedral, a work of Peter Paul Rubens, but the painting is behind a curtain and the cathedral charges a franc to see the painting. Grandfather knows how unlikely it is that Nello could be a successful artist and has planned a very different career for his grandson. One day Nello and his grandfather find a dog that had pulled a cart, but is now collapsed from overwork and mistreatment. Nello adopts the dog in spite of the fact that he and his grandfather barely have enough food to keep themselves alive. But the heart of the film is in the relationship that Nello forms with the self-doubting artist van Gelder. This is a classic, and I consider it one of the best family films ever made. It is moving and says a very great deal about life and about art. Some major changes were made from the original story, but it does not tell children that life is never hard. I rate the 1960 version of A DOG OF FLANDERS a +3 on the -4 to +4 scale or 9/10. Though never said, the town is really the City of Antwerp and the cathedral is the Cathedral of Our Lady. The great Rubens painting the boy wants to see is Rubens's The Elevation of the Cross: We see the actual city, cathedral, and painting in the film. The title dog, named in the film Patrasche, is played by Spike, who also played the title role in OLD YELLER. The screenplay was written by Ted Sherdeman who co-wrote the screenplay for another famous animal film, THEM! Film Credits: Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Mon Jul 6 19:06:05 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:06:08 2009 Subject: Review: Waltz with Bashir (2008) Message-ID: <9ceb03f2-490e-4f81-9b51-f8cb698c308c@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> Waltz With Bashir (Vals im Bashir) (2008) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 4 Out of 5 Stars or A- The Plot: (from IMDB.com) One night at a bar, an old friend tells director Ari about a recurring nightmare in which he is chased by 26 vicious dogs. Every night, the same number of beasts. The two men conclude that there's a connection to their Israeli Army mission in the first Lebanon War of the early eighties. Ari is surprised that he can't remember a thing anymore about that period of his life. Intrigued by this riddle, he decides to meet and interview old friends and comrades around the world. He needs to discover the truth about that time and about himself. As Ari delves deeper and deeper into the mystery, his memory begins to creep up in surreal images. The Review: Sometimes the greatest soul pain is in the amnesia of life. The moment's one ought to remember but cannot. In Waltz with Bashir, an animated documentary about the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the Sabra Shatila massacre, Ari Folman tries to recover that experience from the ennui of war, genocide, the holocaust and the Jewish consciousness. Folman was a 19-year-old Israeli soldier stationed close to the Sabra-Shatila refugee camps at the time of the massacres. Now forty-five, Folman can only remember the leave times. He seeks out others in his platoon to see if they have the same memories. Waltz with Bashir becomes their animated nightmare, testimony and witness. The memories that come back are like a pack of twenty-six snarling marauding dogs baying under a window-- the ritual nightmare that has haunted Boaz Buskila for thirty years. Twenty-six was the number of dogs he shot during the war. Boaz gives his testimony but not his face. The animated Boaz is a composite done by an actor in the original reference videos. The same for Carmi Cna'an, the longtime friend of Folman with genius potential but who turned his back on all of it after the war to embrace Buddhism and a Dutch exile. Their encounter in Bashir is cold and detached, made tolerable by the reefer they share. The other five who share their faces and voices, recall the events with a narrative and emotional detachment that makes them characters, witnesses and bystanders to their own story-- something terrible that happened to someone else. The reality is there- as much of it as they can absorb before the body heals the mind with the balm of forgetfulness and memory and time bends existence into the eternal fiction-fact compromise. Only Roni Dayag has a trauma free normality, a future without the war shadows and ghosts. Detached from his squadron he survived by spending the night sitting still behind a rock and slipping into a calm sea that drifts him back to his comrades the next day. Dayag found peace in the surrender to that calm flow while the others fight the tide of guilt and conscience. They rise out of the sea's baptism, fully armed but naked, fearful and weary, thrust into the golden exploding city melting before their eyes. Folman revisits that scene two more times just as the violence and war shifts to more savagery (the invasion) and massacre (Sabra-Shatila) making it a prophecy that points to the entryway of Sheol. The squadron drift into a stasis and nothingness that allows the Sabra-Shatila evil by the Christian Phalangists. In a memorable scene, Israeli flares light the way to the camps. In their head and souls, The Holocaust lives just a small conscience step away from genocide. The two who try to do the right thing are circumscribed, their futures dismembered. Dror Harazi, Folman's tank squadron commander who aspired to be a general, did everything he could to alert his superiors to the situation at the Shatila camp, only to earn a premature and disgraceful discharge from the army. His testimony is a last cry to expose the truth. Ron Ben-Yeshai, an Israeli war correspondent of twenty years and at least six campaigns, called Minister of Defense Arik Sharon about the massacres. Sharon did nothing to stop them. The next twenty years for Yeshai were without promotion. Sharon made sure of that. The need to forget horror provides horror its opportunity. Waltz with Bashir shows the results of that genetic holocaust which has existed ever since Cain murdered Abel. It gets an A-. The Credits: (From Allmovie.com) Ari Folman - Director / Producer / Screenwriter / Cinematographer Serge Lalou - Producer Gerhard Meixner - Producer Yael Nahlieli - Producer Roman Paul - Producer Max Richter - Composer (Music Score) Nili Feller - Editor David Polonsky - Art Director / Illustrator Thierry Garrel - Co-producer Pierrette Ominetti - Co-producer Aviv Aldema - Sound/Sound Designer Bridgit Folman Film Gang - Animator Tal Gadon - Chief Animator Yoni Goodman - Animation Director Roiy Nitzan - Visual Effects Supervisor With: Ari Folman - [Voice] Ori Sivan - [Voice] Roni Dayag - [Voice] Shmuel Frenkel - [Voice] Ron Ben Yisahi - [Voice] Dror Harazi - [Voice] Boaz Rein Buskila - [Voice] Carmi Cna'an - [Voice] Yehezkel Lazarov - [Voice] Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya From mleeper at optonline.net Mon Jul 6 19:06:52 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Mon Jul 6 19:06:54 2009 Subject: Review: Bill Plympton's Dog Days (2009) Message-ID: BILL PLYMPTON'S DOG DAYS (a DVD review by Mark R. Leeper) Bill Plympton's fourth collection of his short films is every bit as creative, if not quite as anarchic, as his earlier work. It still is full of weird camera angles and lots of strange ideas from a strange mind. But in this collection he is giving more plot and the surrealism is being replaced by a more simple insanity. There is a lot in the package and it is a lot of fun. Animation is a field of art in which just about anything that can be imagined can be brought to the screen. If the mind's eye can see it, it probably can be shown in an animated film. But very few animators can use this medium the way that Bill Plympton can. Plympton has a bizarre--some would say sick--mind that comes pouring out in his animation. While major animated films are going in the direction of 3-D effects and super-realistic visual effect, Plympton's style does not change. His images still look like flat colored pencil sketches (as probably many of them started) but his edge is in his imagination. Watching a Plympton cartoon is rarely so tame an experience as falling down a rabbit hole into a new world. Plympton's only rule is to break all the rules and the visual expectations of the audience. Humans morph into other objects or deform like Silly Putty. Giant hands of God drop from the sky. It is hard to say that most of his best animated films really have what could be called a plot. They are more sketchpads of ideas that usually become more and more bizarre. Like with no other filmmaker one has the feeling that anything visual can happen. DOG DAYS is probably a little more reserved than some of Plympton's earlier work (though "reserved" is a relative term). He might previously have had lovers melting into each other or eyeballs turning into hot-air balloons and floating away. They were interesting ideas but they did not tell anything like a story. His work is more disciplined now, but there is still a very wild sense of humor behind it all. The ostensive purpose of this DVD is to show Plympton's seven independent short films that he made from 2004 to 2008. That is seven short animated films that total to about 45 minutes. That is 45 minutes of entertainment on a DVD listed for about $20. You say you're not satisfied? You say you want more for your money? Each of the film has Bill's own commentary. The DVD also includes music videos, commercials, and other commissioned films. The DVD case says that it is 130 minutes, and I suspect that does not include the commentaries. I have a suspicion that this is the whole Plympton portfolio for the interval from 2004 to 2008. The first three films comprise his "Dog" Trilogy. They are "Guard Dog", "Guide Dog", and "Hot Dog". These each have several awards listed on the case. Frankly I don't see this as his best work. The three cartoons all feature the same dog trying to function in a world he does not understand. There is too much in common among the three pieces. Maybe one would have been enough. Next, "The Fan and the Flower" is a simple fairy tale based on a visual pun. Paul Giamatti narrates. It is entertaining but better films are to come. Plympton really hits his stride with the last three films, all unconnected. "Shuteye Hotel" is a nasty little horror story. And Plympton's style of animation is the perfect medium for this story. Trying to do it live action might not be impossible, but it would be very hard to carry off. CGI might not be much better. Ironically we learn in the commentary that this was Plympton's one attempt to use CGI. The attempt was a fiasco except that it gave Plympton a story to tell when people suggest he use CGI. "Santa, The Fascist Years", narrated by Matthew Modine, mixes Santa Claus and fascist imagery. It could be a riff on the cooperation pacts that some religious leaders made with fascist dictators in WWII. Plympton says it was originally just an attempt to combine religious and fascist imagery on a Christmas card, later expanded to a full film. "Spiral" is Bill Plympton's take on abstract animated mathematical films. It begins as an experiment in mathematical form but also makes a comment. (Plympton's attack on another animator's work in the commentary is surprisingly vehement.) Included is a large slice of his commissioned work, animation he did for other people's projects and where he was probably not allowed to exhibit his special brand of weirdness. Included is a thirty-minute Christmas show that he did for the Cartoon Network and various other items he did for cable TV, including an account of Shay's Rebellion made for the History Channel. What at first looks like a short DVD in fact has a lot of material to be seen. Several of the pieces were familiar from animation film festivals, but it is good to see them collected. Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From Faust668 at msn.com Tue Jul 7 19:33:48 2009 From: Faust668 at msn.com (Jerry Saravia) Date: Tue Jul 7 19:33:51 2009 Subject: Review: Righteous Kill (2008) Message-ID: <0e846245-bc61-4589-af50-519d6a7f81e2@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> RIGHTEOUS KILL (2008) Reviewed by Jerry Saravia RATING: One star and a half Once upon a time, there was a tremendous thrill in seeing either Robert De Niro or Al Pacino on screen. Now, for the first time, they are paired in the same movie and share scenes together (unlike "Heat," save for one scene, and "The Godfather Part II"). Alas, the exciting novelty of these two iconic actors wears thin and is superfluous to decent storytelling, so much so that "Righteous Kill" feels and acts like an average crime thriller that went straight to DVD. Detectives Turk and Rooster (respectively and respectably played by Robert De Niro and Al Pacino) are veteran cops who have seen it all. They also don't follow the rules since they plant evidence to get the bad guys of their choice. Anyway, a serial killer is on the loose, apparently killing violent offenders who get off on technicalities. The assumption is that the killer is a cop, someone with access and a grudge. Evidence seems to point at the righteous Turk. Other cops played rather respectably by John Leguizamo and Donnie Wahlberg also believe that it must be Turk. Turk does have a grudge and he is shown to play against the rules, hence planting evidence (funny how a scene like that used to be considered so shocking, and now this movie treats it as if he is drinking a cup of coffee). Turk also has vigorous sex with a forensics expert (Carla Gugino), though there is not much of a relationship. She does care about him but De Niro plays Turk like an unhinged animal ready to burst. Any measure of empathy, let alone sympathy, is thrown out of the cinematic window. "Righteous Kill" is an anonymous and bloody thin thriller with no real story whatsoever (I love "Law and Order" and its spinoffs and there is more meat in their weekly stories overall than in this movie). De Niro merely frets and does his trademark mugging so frequently, you'd think he was priming himself up for a "Meet the Parents" sequel. Al Pacino is far more subtle yet he also grows annoying as well. Critics often lambast Pacino for ratcheting up his hollering-at-the-top-of-his-lungs routine but here, his whispers and soft inflections can also grate the nerves. That leaves Leguizamo and Wahlberg who give the film a little lift out of its doldrums - it may be sacrilege but they should've been cast in the lead roles. As for Gugino, her character is so severely underwritten that she may as well be the killer. "Righteous Kill" is not quite disposable junk but close. De Niro and Pacino have played cops before in far superior films. Here, they are treading so much water you're almost afraid they'll drown. For more reviews, check out JERRY AT THE MOVIES at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/Jerry_at_the_Movies.html BIO on the author of this page at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/index.html Email me at Faust668@msn.com or at faustus_08520@yahoo.com From Faust668 at msn.com Tue Jul 7 19:43:31 2009 From: Faust668 at msn.com (Jerry Saravia) Date: Tue Jul 7 19:43:33 2009 Subject: Retrospective: S.F.W. (1994) Message-ID: S.F.W. (1994) Reviewed by Jerry Saravia RATING: Zero stars "S.F.W." is a movie that pretends to be important, that pretends to have something to say. It does not, thereby qualifying it as a pretentiously shallow movie whose message is the title of the film. So Freaking What? I would love to end the review there but why should I? This generic Generation-X wannabe focuses on the most insidiously moronic and foolishly empty-headed hooligan in many moons. His name is Cliff Spab (Stephen Dorff) and he is something of a cultural hero. He has killed some terrorists in a convenience store where he and a teenage girl named Wendy (Reese Witherspoon) have been held hostage. Cliff's best friend was killed by these terrorists who are masked, dressed in white, and videotape the entire 36 day ordeal. When Cliff and Wendy escape, they are branded heroes, particularly after the video footage is aired in every news channel. Why is Cliff so popular? Because he repeats the titled catchphrase that becomes some sort of mantra. Wow. And why is Wendy always giving interviews? Because she knew Cliff and might have fallen for him. Intriguing, for the moment. I wish I could say there was more to "S.F.W." but that is basically it. The movie has no level of satire whatsoever since it has prime targets that deserve skewering, like the media's relentless coverage of the hostage situation or the public's adoration of this new alleged culture hero. It doesn't contain any level of human interest in Cliff Spab - he is an uncultured idiot who mostly drinks beer, has sex, watches TV, and loves to trash his bedroom. How punk! Dorff tries to give the character some dimension, especially when he stares at a TV screen and sees the violence shown from the videotaped hostage events. It looks like it may traumatize him but Dorff and director and co- writer Jefery Levy indulge in a vacuum of nothingness. They assume that the catchphrase is the movie. Yes, indeed, and so f'ing what! For more reviews, check out JERRY AT THE MOVIES at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/Jerry_at_the_Movies.html BIO on the author of this page at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/index.html Email me at Faust668@msn.com or at faustus_08520@yahoo.com From Faust668 at msn.com Tue Jul 7 19:45:14 2009 From: Faust668 at msn.com (Jerry Saravia) Date: Tue Jul 7 19:45:18 2009 Subject: Retrospective: It Runs in the Family (1994) Message-ID: <99f72055-cc3f-4a13-b5ce-7acf07d3bd13@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> IT RUNS IN THE FAMILY (1994) Reviewed by Jerry Saravia RATING: Three stars I have a special memory in my heart for Bob Clark's "A Christmas Story." It is as memorable and nostalgic a piece of Americana as almost anything else related to Christmas, including Santa Claus. The trick to the success of "A Christmas Story" is that it had wicked humor and poked fun at itself. This rarely discussed sequel, "It Runs in the Family," is decent family fun but it loses a bit of the charm though, to be fair, it has a playful sense of wickedness. Consider the setup. Kieran Culkin (replacing Peter Billingsley) plays Ralph Barker, the kid who once really wished for a Red Ryder BB Gun for Christmas. Now, he seems to wander around the summer time, wallowing in his pride to get the perfect spinning top, the kind that is not too colorful in design but just big enough to make other kids envious. Alas, this spinning top doesn't quite make it as inspired as the Red Ryder BB gun (and who can forget that it may shoot your eye out!) but it will do. It's basically a way of getting even with the local bully Lug Ditka (the eternally creepy and creepier eyes of Whit Hertford). Meanwhile, Dad (Charles Grodin replacing Darren McGavin) bears some hostility to the noisy hillbilly neighbors next door known as the Bumpus clan. Dad fights back by staging an air siren and military instructions with the help of a turntable and some speakers in one of the funniest scenes in the entire movie. Mom (Mary Steenburgen replacing Melinda Dillon) has an affinity for gravy boats that are marked with reproductions of movie stars and gets one every Ladies' Night at the local movie theatre, along with an animated short! The problem is she is sick of having so many gravy boats, and who wouldn't be. Along with the return of director Bob Clark and narrator Jean Shepherd, "It Runs in the Family" (also known as "My Summer Story") replicates some of the same spirit and joy of "A Christmas Story" but little in the way of novelty or true inspiration. The problem may be the casting of key roles. Kieran Culkin is a cute kid but he is no Billingsley, and hardly gives the role the wide-eyed innocence Billingsley gave. Charles Grodin is a bit miscast but he gives it a good try - still, he seems harmful in his attempts to deal with the Bumpus clan (hence, a little more wickedness than expected). The beauty of Darren McGavin is that he only suggested giving anyone hell, not like he really had the intent. Mary Steenburgen, however, is beautifully cast and displays a little more sass than Melinda Dillon gave the original to warrant sufficient praise. "It Runs in the Family" was shamefully dumped into limited release in September of 1994 without any real advertising by MGM. Again, I may be biased in my nostalgia for the original, but this sequel is nowhere near as memorable or as charming as "A Christmas Story." Still, reliable Jean Shepherd's narration and a few funny scenes (including references to jawbreakers will please the tots and the adults) and some decent acting overall, not to mention an affection for an era that no longer exists, merits a mild recommendation. For more reviews, check out JERRY AT THE MOVIES at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/Jerry_at_the_Movies.html BIO on the author of this page at: http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/index.html Email me at Faust668@msn.com or at faustus_08520@yahoo.com From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Tue Jul 14 15:12:40 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Tue Jul 14 15:12:44 2009 Subject: Review: Public Enemies (2009) Message-ID: <24f7a295-dca1-4445-902f-65fc14f3d88a@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> Public Enemies (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 3 Out of 5 Stars or B The Plot: (from MRQE.com) Based on author Bryan Burrough's ambitious tome Public Enemies: America's Greatest Crime Wave and the Birth of the FBI, 1933-43, director Michael Mann's sprawling historical crime drama follows the efforts of top FBI agent Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale ) in capturing notorious bank robber John Dillinger. A folk hero to the American public thanks to his penchant for robbing the banks that many people believed responsible for the Great Depression, charming bandit Dillinger (Johnny Depp) was virtually unstoppable at the height of his criminal career; no jail could hold him, and his exploits endeared him to the common people while making headlines across the country. J. Edgar Hoover's (Billy Crudup) FBI was just coming into formation, and what better way for the ambitious lawman to transform his fledgling Bureau of Investigation into a national police force than to capture the gang that always gets away? Determined to bust Dillinger and his crew, which also included sociopathic Baby Face Nelson (Stephen Graham) and Alvin Karpis (Giovanni Ribisi), Hoover christened Dillinger the country's very first Public Enemy Number One, and unleashed Purvis to take them down by whatever means necessary. But Purvis underestimated Dillinger's ingenuity as a master criminal, and after embarking on a frantic series of chases and shoot-outs, the dashing agent humbly surmised that he was in over his head. Outwitted and outgunned, Purvis knew that his only hope for busting Dillinger's gang was to baptize a crew of Western ex-lawmen as official agents, and orchestrate a series of betrayals so cunning that even America's criminal mastermind wouldn't know what hit him. The Review: Public Enemies is all about the smiles. The ones about getting away with it all, pulling off the big one, finding love staring you in the face, seeing your name up in lights and yourself on the big screen. That big moment comes at the very end of Public Enemies when Johnny Depp as John Dillinger watches Clark Gable in Manhattan Melodrama walking sneeringly to his fate in the electric chair. JD sees JD and approves just as much as Dillinger admires the Gable style-- a style he tried to duplicate with plastic surgery and that reedy moustache that dominates his famous last photos. In the polls of the time, Dillinger was more popular than President Roosevelt and Charles Lindbergh. Dillinger even staged an impromptu press conference and exchanged jokes with reporters during a prison transfer. He had an easy smile, style and confidence and a Hollywood agents sense of public relations-- a shrewdly cultivated Robin Hood persona that allowed him to hide in plain sight. In his heists, he would often destroy mortgage and foreclosure paper or give back the money of the man who was cashing his paycheck. "We're here for the bank's money, not yours," he reputedly said. One robbery had the Dillinger gang pretend to be a film company that was scouting locations for a bank robbery scene. Except for the press conference and paycheck incident, none of this Dillinger history is in Public Enemies. Adapting Public Enemies from Bryan Burroughs lush nonfiction chronicle, Director Michael Mann and screenwriters Ronan Bennett and Ann Biderman manage to lose the human Dillinger along with his g-man nemesis, Melvin Purvis in the march of facts. Mann and Depp keep the inner Dillinger in the shadows, showing only the guise--afraid to admit that there was not much to the man beyond luck, bluff and that Hollywood gangster style. There is barely a blush of romance between Dillinger and his moll Billie Frechette (the vibrant Marion Cotillard barely covering her French accent in a role that leaves her mostly worrying and fretting alone in a room). The few scenes Deep and Cotillard share before her arrest and imprisonment burr with a Bonnie and Clyde promise cut short by the fact that she will outlive him. Cotillard's coda with the wonderfully taciturn Stephen Lange playing the Texas Ranger Red Hamilton-- a man of violence with a secret gentleman ethos-- grants Public Enemies its only emotional grace. The real Melvin Purvis was a short, skinny Southern lawyer who looked like the nerdy Crispin Glover and talked in the high tones of Don Knotts. His essential qualities: brevity, unflappable calm and tenacity-- embody the Christian Bale screen persona, the man of thought prompted to action and greatness by rampaging evil events. The quiet enmity between FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and Purvis that Public Enemies displays was historically authentic. Purvis' disgust over Hoover's constant grandstanding and his what-ever-it takes ethos would lead Purvis to quit the Bureau just scant years after Dillinger's death. If Dillinger was Public Enemy Number One than Mann certainly makes the case for Hoover being Public Enemy Number Two. Mann tries to fudge things by suggesting that Dillinger and Purvis were really two sides of the same coin, the last of the old stubbornly holding on while the new marches over them. In Enemies it comes when Dillinger walks into a safe house that is merely a front for a bookie operation-- rows of phones and bet takers all making in a day what Dillinger did in his last five heists. Organize crime cutting loose the unorganized criminal. Dillinger was dead the moment he refused to pick up the phone. Purvis, however, adapted-- after the disaster at the Little Bohemia Lodge Purvis brought in Texas Rangers with the stomach and experience for the manhunt. Purvis was Dillinger's self- annihilating fury, his death wish. Ironically, Hoover discarded Purvis as soon as Dillinger's body turned cold. For the next forty years, Hoover was America's only crime czar. The Dillinger-Purvis parallel bleeds the drama and conflict from the story. The immediacy of Dante Spinotti's high definition cinematography and the actual use of Dillinger haunts such as the Lake County Jail in Crown Point, Indiana; the Little Bohemia Lodge in Manitowish Waters, Wisconsin; and the Biograph Theater on Lincoln Avenue in Chicago, Illinois are reduced to newsreel and postcard reminders. Mann fails to be true to history and movie history at the same time. He should have tossed the dust and saved the lightning. Public Enemies gets a B. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Michael Mann - Director / Screenwriter / Producer Kevin Misher - Producer Ronan Bennett - Screenwriter Ann Biderman - Screenwriter Bryan Burrough - Book Author Mark St. Germain - Screenwriter Dante Spinotti - Cinematographer Bob Badami - Musical Direction/ Supervision Elliot Goldenthal - Composer (Music Score) Kathy Nelson - Musical Direction/Supervision Jeffrey Ford - Editor Paul Rubell - Editor Nathan Crowley - Production Designer William Ladd Skinner - Art Director Bryan H. Carroll - Co-producer Gusmano Cesaretti - Co- producer Kevin de la Noy - Co-producer Maria Norman - Associate Producer G. Mac Brown - Executive Producer Colleen Atwood - Costume Designer Bob Wagner - First Assistant Director Julie Herrin - Unit Production Manager David Kelley - Second Assistant Director Allen Kupetsky - Second Assistant Director Darren Prescott - Stunts Coordinator With: Johnny Depp - John Dillinger Christian Bale - Melvin Purvis Marion Cotillard - Billie Frechette Channing Tatum - Pretty Boy Floyd Giovanni Ribisi - Alvin Karpis Billy Crudup - J. Edgar Hoover Stephen Dorff - Homer Van Meter David Wenham - Pete Pierpont Stephen Graham - Baby Face Nelson Jason Clarke - John "Red" Hamilton Stephen Lang - Charles Winstead Len Bajenski - Police Chief Fultz Lance Baker - Freddie Barker Michael Bentt - Herbert Youngblood John Michael Bolger - Martin Zarkovich Ed Bruce - Senator McKellar Bill Camp - Frank Nitti Geoffrey Cantor - Harry Suydam Jim Carrane - Sam Cahoon Adam Clark - Sport Rory Cochrane - Agent Carter Baum Brian Connelly - Officer Chester Boyard Matt Craven - Gerry Campbell Peter DeFaria - Grover Weyland Emilie de Ravin - Barbara Patzke Madison Dirks - Agent Warren Barton Don Frye - Clarence Hurt Spencer Garrett - Tommy Carroll Peter Gerety - Louis Piquety Gerald Goff - Captain O'Neill Shawn Hatosy - Agent John Madala John Hoogenakker - Agent Hugh Clegg John Judd - Turnkey Branka Katic - Anna Sage Elena Kenney - Viola Norris Steve Key - Doc Barker John Kishline - Guard Dainard Diana Krall - Torch Singer Andrew Krukowski - Oscar Lieboldt Keith Kupferer - Agent Sopsic Shanyn Leigh - Helen Gillis John Lister - Judge Murray Domenick Lombardozzi - Gilbert Catena Dan Maldanado - Jacob Solomon Adam Mucci - Agent Harold Reinecke Carey Mulligan - Carol Slayman Kurt Naebig - Agent William Rorer John Ortiz - Phil D'Andrea Sean Rosales - Joe Pawlowski James Russo - Walter Dietrich Randy Ryan - Agent Julius Rice Martie Sanders - Irene the Ticket Taker Gareth Saxe - Agent Ray Suran John Scherp - Earl Adams Robyn Suzanne Scott - Ella Natasky Jeff Shannon - Angry Cop Richard Short - Agent Sam Cowley Casey Siemaszko - Harry Berman Danni Simon - May Minczeles Leelee Sobieski - Polly Hamilton Rebecca Spence - Doris Rogers Stephen Spencer - Emil Wanatka Jeff Still - Jimmy Probasco Christian Stolte - Charles Makley Lili Taylor - Sheriff Lillian Holley Rick Uecker - Edward Saager Mark Vallarta - Harry Berg Guy Van Swearingen - Agent Ralph Brown Michael Vieau - Ed Shouse Wesley Walker - Jim Leslie David Warshofsky - Warden Baker Alan Wilder - Robert Estill Chandler Williams - Clyde Tolson Kris Wolff - Deputy Patrick Zielinski - Doctor Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 16 13:53:32 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Thu Jul 16 13:53:34 2009 Subject: Review: Bruno (2009) Message-ID: <3e56e1df-e5a7-428c-bece-6089fa92f7fc@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> Br?no (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 3 Out of 5 Stars or B The Plot: (from Allmovie.com) Br?no (Baron Cohen) is the gay "voice of Austrian youth TV," but when his career in haute couture hits the skids, he realizes that his last, best hope for fame is to make it big in Hollywood. Upon arriving in the U.S., his initial instinct is to create a celebrity interview show. Unfortunately, his champagne-soaked test screening goes horribly awry, forcing the flamboyant television host to once again reassess his career. Eventually, Br?no comes to the conclusion that in order to find true success, he needs to go straight. Enlisting the aid of a homosexual rehabilitation specialist, he interviews swingers and testosterone-fueled hunters while attempting to get in touch with his inner heterosexual. When all else fails, Br?no stages an ultimate fighting competition for a rowdy arena of drunken spectators. The Review: Sacha Baron Cohen's Borat character was the secret us inside us. That little foreign part of us with its prejudices and hatreds that we keep politely bottled up. His Br?no is the nowhere near us one, the over the top grandiosity that exists maybe in our most drunken thoughts. If Borat was id gone wild then Br?no is superego gone f***ing wild. Nope, sorry, this review is not going to aspire towards that kind of outrageousness. However, be forewarned that Br?no is rated R for graphic penis singing and dancing, ass bleaching, sex involving an Asian little person and extended ghostly fellatio --all of them screamingly funny. Then, Br?no exists to be offensive and tasteless. The film's only concession to political correctness was the slashing of a three-minute sequence involving La Toya Jackson doing a parody of her brother Michael. Still, its 60-20-20 ratio of laughs to groans and the out and out disgusting is a comic triumph by my shallow definition. My main quibble: since the plot (you can read it above) is Borat II in structure--why the need for four screenwriters? Especially on a mock documentary that depends on Sacha Baron Cohen's improve ability? Baron Cohen had all of America as his stage for Borat. The character was an oddity limited to British television and the small gathering of American HBO devotees who watched Da Ali G Show. This time around, success spoils the shooting party. The Milan Fashion Week sequence required a top down hair and fashion makeover of not only Cohen but the rest of the film crew after the real Milan fashion police thwarted an earlier party crashing. Obtaining new credentials as an Italian photographer with a haute new outfit, Sacha and company were able to find a hidden nook backstage for him to change into Br?no. At the start of the Prada fashion show, Cohen ran past security and onto the stage while director Larry Charles' cameras were rolling. To get an idea of how the rest of the world "gets" Br?no and we don't, stay for the clever "We Are the World" style number with Bono, Elton John, Sting, Snoop Dogg, Slash and Christ Martin that runs over the end credits. Harrison Ford's two word expletive response and the easily punked Paula Abdul are the only Hollywood stars who make an appearance. The American production shoots were in Alabama and Arkansas (apparently the only states where Borat did not score big box office) and the Hollywood filled with enough desperate parents willingly to let their children do anything to be on screen. Two of the more outrageous ones made: liposuction and dressing as a Nazi pushing a wheelbarrow carrying a Jewish baby into an oven. In Alabama, Br?no goes hunting with some good old boys-- some attempted midnight tent swamping earning him some buckshot. He then attends a swinger's party where a whip yielding matron asks him to perform in ways he never imagined. As part of his attempt to go straight, he meets with a Christian counselor who tries to pray the gay out and enlists in the National Guard. Br?no is so ?ber gay he exists beyond stereotyping into conceit. He is too gay to be truly gay, as the lack of outcry from gay rights groups seems to bear. He is just a mirror that reflects and exposes our prejudices. Take away the glory seeking; the clamoring for celebrity and Br?no would not raise an eyebrow. Br?no gets a B. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Larry Charles - Director Sacha Baron Cohen - Screenwriter / Producer / Screen Story Jay Roach - Producer Peter Baynham - Screen Story Anthony Hines - Executive Producer / Screen Story / Screenwriter Dan Mazer - Screen Story / Screenwriter Jeff Schaffer - Associate Producer / Screenwriter Anthony Hardwick - Cinematographer Wolfgang Held - Cinematographer Erran Baron Cohen - Composer (Music Score) Richard Henderson - Musical Direction/Supervision Scott M. Davids - Editor James Thomas - Editor David Saenz de Maturana - Art Director Denise Hudson - Art Director Lisa Marinaccio - Art Director Jon Poll - Co-producer Jason Alper - Costume Designer / Associate Producer Jonah Hill - Associate Producer Dale Stern - Associate Producer Allison Jones - Casting With: Sacha Baron Cohen - Br?no Gustaf Hammarsten - Lutz Paula Abdul LaToya Jackson Harrison Ford Ron Paul Chris Martin Elton John Slash Snoop Dogg Sting Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya Home Archives From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 16 14:01:07 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Thu Jul 16 14:01:10 2009 Subject: Review: Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (2009) Message-ID: <75cad711-be28-4951-ae3d-9328ae18bda7@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 2.5 Out of 5 Stars or B- The Plot: (from MRQE.com) The sub-zero heroes from the worldwide blockbusters "Ice Age" and "Ice Age: The Meltdown" are back on an incredible adventure for the ages. Scrat is still trying to nab the ever-elusive nut (while, maybe, finding true love); Manny and Ellie await the birth of their mini- mammoth, Sid the sloth creates his own makeshift family by hijacking some dinosaur eggs; and Diego the saber-toothed tiger wonders if he's growing too "soft" hanging with his pals. On a mission to rescue the hapless Sid, the gang ventures into a mysterious underground world, where they have some close encounters with dinosaurs, battle flora fauna run amuck--and meet a relentless, one-eyed, dino-hunting weasel named Buck. The Review: The one enduring thing about the Ice Age series is the nut and squirrel sequence. As the rest of the creatures march into extinction and the plots go glacial, the squirrel's dance with the acorn becomes classic, balletic, poetic and endearing. This time around, Scrat finds a Scratte (rhymes with sautee) to tangle and tango with and love the nut. The two bicker and dance the dance of love while trees, the foam of water and other long neck dinosaurs form clever heart patterns in the background. The acorn becomes a ring, a rival and eventually the only thing that matters. Scrat and the acorn are at one point encased in their own separate bubbles that waltz into and float away from each other. The symbolism of their bittersweet fate is clear. The pack of the last two films, having struggled to become friends and family, now is facing the prospects of parenthood. Their adventure takes them to a lost world in search of Sid the Sloth (voice of John Lequizamo) after the angry mother of the three baby dinosaurs Sid has adopted comes back to claim her brood and makes Sid the family pet. The two wooly mammoths Manny (Ray Romano) and Ellie (Queen Latifah) and Sid the saber tooth tiger (Denis Leary) are aided in their search by Buck, a mad weasel with a pirate's eye patch ( amusingly voiced by Simon Pegg also having a banner year as Scotty in the reboot Star Trek) on his own quest for a great white dinosaur. Shot in 3-D, like every other animated film with a $20 million plus budget, Ice Age 3 barely justifies the gimmick. The primordial dinosaur world has sweltering jungle lushness. Buck's manic energy is perfect for eye-popping visuals. The finale with dropping waterfalls, Sid floating on molten magma and pterodactyls piloting through narrow chasms are a 3-D delight echoing the best moments from the Star Wars six pack-- mainly a New Hope and Revenge of the Sith. Still, twenty percent of Ice Age is well, ice, which is resolutely 2-D and white and rife with the usual force perspective gags. Only Pixar's Up fully integrates 3-D in a natural way. Fortunately, Scrat and his acorn come in every fifteen minutes to stop gap the dragging action. Ellie's mid film delivery forces a too long scene were Sid must come to the rescue-- the naturalness of mammoth labor being too rough for its PG audience. Ice Age 3 is pleasant for the kids and tolerable for the adults, just like a warm baby bottle. It gets a B-. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Carlos Saldanha - Director John C. Donkin - Producer Lori Forte - Producer Peter Ackerman - Screenwriter Michael Berg - Screenwriter Yoni Brenner - Screenwriter Jason Carter Eaton - Screen Story Mike Reiss - Screenwriter John Powell - Composer (Music Score) Harry Hitner - Editor Michael Knapp - Art Director Chris Wedge - Executive Producer Christian Kaplan - Casting Michael J. Travers - Production Manager Galen Tan Chu - Supervising Animator Peter de Seve - Character Design David Mei - Model Effects Supervisor James Palumbo - Co-Editor Michael Thurmeier - Co-Director Patrick Worlock - Production Supervisor With: Ray Romano - Manny [Voice] John Leguizamo - Sid [Voice] Denis Leary - Diego [Voice] Simon Pegg - Buck [Voice] Queen Latifah - Ellie [Voice] Seann William Scott - Crash [Voice] Josh Peck - Eddie [Voice] Bill Hader - Gazelle [Voice] Kristen Wiig - Pudgy Beaver Mom [Voice] Eunice Cho - Diatryma Girl [Voice] Karen Disher - Scratte [Voice] Harrison Fahn - Glypto Boy [Voice] Maile Flanagan - Aardvark Mom [Voice] Jason Fricchione - Adult Molehog Male [Voice] Kelly Keaton - Molehog Mom [Voice] / Shovelmouth Mom [Voice] Joey King - Beaver Girl [Voice] Allegra Leguizamo - Aardvark Girl [Voice] Lucas Leguizamo - Aardvark Boy [Voice] / Beaver Kid 2 [Voice] Clea Lewis - Start Mom [Voice] Jane Lynch - Diatryma Mom [Voice] Christian Pikes - Little Johnny (Aardvark Kid) [Voice] Avery Christopher Plum - Beaver Kid 1 [Voice] Joe Romano - Ronald (Shovelmouth Boy) [Voice] Carlos Saldanha - Dinosaur Babies [Voice] / Flightless Bird [Voice] Sofia Scarpa Saldanha - Molehog Girl 1 [Voice] Cindy Slattery - Bird [Voice] Chris Wedge - Scrat [Voice] Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya Home Archives From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Jul 16 14:22:27 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Jul 16 14:22:30 2009 Subject: Review: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) Message-ID: <6cidndFBvorvpsPXnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@earthlink.com> HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): ** 1/2 Director David Yates's HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE is consistently visually stunning -- a real feast for the eyes. The story -- not so much. Always entertaining but rarely more than mildly so, the movie takes over an hour of just taxiing around the cinematic runway before it attempts liftoff. The result is a movie that is never disappointing but rarely soars. And the ending is jarringly abrupt, serving mainly as a commercial for the next movie in the series. On the good side, this adaptation of another of author J.K. Rowling's novels will satisfy the fans while never boring those who have never read any of the books. A warning is due however. If you haven't read any of the books and haven't seen at least some of the movies, HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE is likely to leave you baffled throughout much of the movie, since it makes huge assumptions in how much knowledge you have going into the theater. For the record, I've seen all of the films, with my favorite being HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX, the previous one in the series, and have read none of the books. While I admire the film series, they generally seem to be preaching to the choir, assuming that the audience is filled, as it is usually is, with avid readers of the books. I did notice this time that, while my packed audience cheered loudly during the opening credits, as if a rock star had just stepped on the stage, the reaction during the ending credits was surprisingly muted, with only scattered applause, which is not like the reaction at most early screenings for Harry Potter movies. The cinematography by Bruno Delbonnel is consistently fabulous. The best visual sequences aren't the special effects shots, of which they are many extremely impressive ones, but the more simple ones. Rarely has heavy rain felt so dark and ominous and evoked such a strong, overwhelming sense of mood. I could watch this movie again and again -- so long as I concentrated only on the spectacular images. There is nothing wrong with the story itself, but it is rarely compelling for non-Potter devotees. The best part of the plot is the introduction of an evil character called Tom Riddle. Riddle, at age 16, is playing with just the right amount of creepy wickedness by Frank Dillane. I won't tell you more about him, lest I give away too much. The weakest parts of the narrative are the excessively chaste romances. In a movie populated with kids, most of whom appear to be about twenty-years-old, why are the filmmakers so scared that showing more than a microsecond kiss will scandalize the viewers? After all, the film is pretty happy to frighten the little kids in the audience, of which there will be many. One kid close to me screamed out, "Mommy, I don't like it!" during the terrifying opening sequence in which a major pedestrian bridge in London collapses, causing hundreds of people to perish quite realistically. HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE is a don't-miss movie for Potter fans. That much is certain. For others, it is worth seeing if you are willing to commit to spending the full two-and-one-half-plus hours. You don't want to start watching it unless you are willing to see it all, since the second half is when the story finally starts picking up. HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE runs 2:33. It is rated PG for "scary images, some violence, language and mild sensuality" and would be acceptable for kids around 9 and up. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Wednesday, July 15, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From homeryen88 at gmail.com Wed Jul 22 17:41:47 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Wed Jul 22 17:41:50 2009 Subject: Review: Transformers-Revenge of the Fallen (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000907202123l1f11d606hedf381f82dc9d8c0@mail.gmail.com> Transformers 2: They're Loud and They're Proud by Homer Yen (c) 2009 I'm sure that many of us remember the cheesily-animated, Saturday morning cartoon where robots could transform into all manner of vehicles like cars and tanks and airplanes. And, in the theme song, the lyrics declared: "Autobots wage their battle to destroy the evil forces of the Decepticons." Autobots good; Decepticons bad. In a sense, all of that Saturday morning goodness has been preserved for the Transformers sequel. Well, the animation/visual delivery has certainly evolved a thousand-fold since those 80s cartoons. But the goofy dialogue and the one-liners and the improbability brings me back to my childhood. Autobots still found a way to win, Starscreen found a way to reinforce his image as a bungling lieutenant, and Saturday mornings was just mindless fun. We are at the height of the summer and moviegoers look for a combination of low-cost entertainment coupled with high levels of escapism. These Hollywood execs certainly know that and this time around, they give us even more battling robots; more action sequences; and more special effects than you can absorb in one sitting. Particularly wild was one of the final scenes where a brave hero scales the great pyramid as he pursues a behemoth of a robot in the hopes of helping mankind avoid annihilation. Why is humankind in danger of being destroyed? The lore behind the battle between Autobots and Decepticons is brought to light in this installment. The robotic race needs "Energon" to survive. This energy source is harvested by a special device that sucks up the power of the sun, thereby destroying it in the process. A "prime directive" of sorts forbade the robotic race from destroying suns if it would harm other life forms. Somewhere along the way, a faction of robots began to ignore that mandate, which created the civil war that is mentioned in the lyrics of the Transformers theme song. The bottom line is that the Decepticons will stop at nothing to secure the energon by destroying Earth's son. The Autobots, working in conjunction with the humans, do everything they can to foil their plan. That's all fine and good. But, given the enormity of the task, it failed to capitalize on what could have been a wonderful story arc. I think about monster trilogies like "Star Wars" and "The Lord of the Rings" and even "Pirates of the Caribbean". Those were operatic pieces that soared with emotion and triumph. And I think that somehow "The Transformers" could have also taken a similar approach. In fact, it needed to. The robots seemed more like toy tie-ins rather than Messiahs. The film is virtually bereft of character development. Yet, it is quite a spectacle to behold. Robots transform from one form to another with more reckless abandon. An all-out battle at the end of the film between the good guys and the bad guys is lots of fun to watch. Optimus Prime opening a can of whoop-a** on Megatron is better than watching the MMA. Sure, I liked the first Transformers movie better. But, this is the definition of a summer film. Grade: B- S: 1 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 2 out of 3 From homeryen88 at gmail.com Wed Jul 22 17:43:29 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Wed Jul 22 17:43:31 2009 Subject: Review: Bruno (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000907212045o32f458abg3ed3261b82ea7c90@mail.gmail.com> "Bruno" - The Excessiveness is Hard to Swallow by Homer Yen (c) 2009 That tagline is pretty tame compared to the exploits that are being unleashed in Bruno, the follow up by Sasha Baron Cohen who introduced us to the culturally-backwards "Borat." I remember a few years back seeing one of George Carlin's comedy shows in Vegas. On the outside, when he took the stage with deliberate pace, he looked like any mild-mannered hippie. On the inside though, there was a vulgarity-infused monster looking to come out. His very first words out of his mouth shocked me. However, I understood that those words were said to set the tone of the show. Going forward, you knew what to expect and he was unapologetic about making sure that those expectations were met. And, if you didn't like it, then you should have just left and headed across The Strip where Rita Rudner was headlining at the New York New York hotel and casino. Watching "Bruno", my inner emotions were shifting gears constantly throughout the film. I found the film funny at times and disgusting at others. I laughed at the misery inflicted upon others and also felt guilty at times for laughing at the misery inflicted upon others. The film was never boring and yet it was hard for me to watch at times. I saw this film around lunchtime and snuck in a sandwich that I got from Potbelly's, which is right next to the theatre that I go to. Once the film started, I couldn't even manage to eat the sandwich. All I can say is: when a theatre screens a film like this, they should expect sales of hot dogs to drop! Bruno is outwardly gay in the same way that the most prolific WWE wrestlers appear to be on steroids. When we first meet Bruno, he is a television-reality show star. Equally influential and vapid, I laughed at how he poked fun at fashion-reality shows. I chuckled when he attended a fashion runway show with an all-Velcro suit and makes a mess of things. I shuddered at watching his romantic escapades with his boyfriend. He comes to America and puts well-known personalities in awkward situations. Especially funny was his interview with Paula Abdul in a house that didn't have any furniture. And, his ambushing of a prominent Congressman puts Cohen at the top of the heap when it comes to pranksters. He also inserts himself into unsuspecting groups of hetero individuals. Most eerie was his attempt to stir things up 'brokeback-mountain-style' with a trio of hunters. His funniest moments, though, are when he includes large groups of unsuspecting viewers. His guest-appearance on the Richard Bey talk show was by far the most dramatic in terms of inflaming the crowd. I can't say that, overall, I really like the movie. I liked "Borat" better. Why? Well, this film has only one angle it can work with. And that's his flamboyant gayness. At least with "Borat", that character was a universal nincompoop. So, there was humor to be found in virtually every corner of our country. The scope here is more limited and the attempts for laughs felt more desperate. I do admire the bravery and courage it takes to be able to pull a project like this together. I'm sure that Sasha Baron Cohen is risking his reputation, not to mention dozens of lawsuits. As a matter of fact, at many points in the film, Bruno seemed to be facing real danger in the land of Shotguns & Pickups. This is a film that will have a lingering affect. It will be too much for some. The talking genitalia will assure that. Well, if that offends you, feel free to walk to an adjacent theatre and see "I Love You Beth Cooper". Grade: C S: 4 out of 3 L: 3 out of 3 V: 1 out of 3 From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 22 17:46:02 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Wed Jul 22 17:46:04 2009 Subject: Review: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (2009) Message-ID: <466e9c3f-3fe7-458a-a7f4-b901284e8e81@k30g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 3 Out of 5 Stars or B The Plot: (from MRQE.com) Voldemort is tightening his grip on both the Muggle and wizarding worlds and Hogwarts is no longer the safe haven it once was. Harry suspects that dangers may even lie within the castle, but Dumbledore is more intent upon preparing him for the final battle that he knows is fast approaching. Together they work to find the key to unlock Voldemort's defenses and, to this end, Dumbledore recruits his old friend and colleague, the well-connected and unsuspecting bon vivant Professor Horace Slughorn, whom he believes holds crucial information. Meanwhile, the students are under attack from a very different adversary as teenage hormones rage across the ramparts. Harry finds himself more and more drawn to Ginny, but so is Dean Thomas. And Lavender Brown has decided that Ron is the one for her, only she hadn't counted on Romilda Vane's chocolates! And then there's Hermione, simmering with jealousy but determined not to show her feelings. As romance blossoms, one student remains aloof. He is determined to make his mark, albeit a dark one. Love is in the air, but tragedy lies ahead and Hogwarts may never be the same again. The Review: Having a muggle only appreciation for the Harry Potter franchise, (I have only read Deathly Hallows) it is easy to come to each new incantation with a level set of eyes. They need to work as film and film only. That is why the first two installments bored me--they were respectful and lifeless, the classic comics version, made for the fans. The third and the last one were the only ones that worked by themselves --and those were the ones who departed in some way from the canon. The Order of the Phoenix managed to wrap up all the agony of teenage angst (the anger, the alienation, the rebellion against authority, the confusion) into the conventions of a political thriller. Peter Yates direction and Michael Goldenberg's screenplay (filling in for resident Potter scribe Steve Kloves) made the hormonal rush of adolescence fit in with the unfinished serial roughness required of the Potter world. Stuck between childhood and looming adulthood, it was rightly awkward, a work in progress like all the teen years are. Alfonso Cuar?n (Children of Men) helmed the third installment, The Prisoner of Azkaban, the most majestic and honestly emotional of the Potters. Azkaban had an artistry based on a true understanding of children and film craft (Y tu Mama Tambien, Great Expectations, A Little Princess), the perfect magical-realist edge. The Potter kingdom was his-- had he wanted it. Half Blood Prince snogs around the descending blackness, trying to be a romance in the dark for about half its running time--at least, until the noir and adult stuff kicks in. The kids are starting to feel their oats and the ensuing bliss and jealousies. Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) are rivals in a chaste triangle that involves Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) and Ron's sister Ginny (Bonnie Wright). Love is treated as an oddity, a potion gone awry, something not real. There is little emotional depth to the couplings and entanglements. It is just fluff. Cuar?n would have found the edge to make it more mature. Yates cannot find the parallel in all the snoging to give it a serious side, a socio-political consciousness. He sees only the candy heart. The politic is for the adults and Harry-- and it involves the death of a major character. There is urgency to Dumbledore--a Dumbledore trying to prepare Harry for the looming battle while still letting him enjoy the first flush of love. Michael Gambon, in his best performance in the series, plays it with the right mixture of fear and courage. Alan Richman's slow release word play reflects Snape's ever-shifting loyalties. Helena Bonham Carter is all black magic lusciousness as Bellatrix Lestrange. Jim Broadbent's guest starring role as Horace Slughorn, the visiting professor of potions with much needed info on Voldemort, is pretty much a romp. Voldemort's story is the dark shadow that blots the soul here, the inky spots of memory in a beaker of clarity. Dumbledore sees separating the truth from the legend, the magic from the man, turning the immortal lord to mortal muggle as the key to victory. Harry fate is to find, confront and destroy the scattered remnants of that immortality. William Dillane and Hero Fiennes Tiffin (yes, the son of Ralphe Fiennes of he who plays Voldemort) give the teenage and childhood Voldemort a suitably bad seed edge. Yates deafly handles the revelations and the action. Love may trip him up, but death and politics he knows intimately. The movie gets a solid B. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) David Yates - Director David Barron - Producer David Heyman - Producer Steve Kloves - Screenwriter J.K. Rowling - Book Author Bruno Delbonnel - Cinematographer Nicholas Hooper - Composer (Music Score) Mark Day - Editor Stuart Craig - Production Designer Alastair Bullock - Art Director Martin Foley - Art Director Molly Hughes - Art Director Neil Lamont - Art Director Martin Schadler - Art Director Hattie Storey - Art Director Gary Tomkins - Art Director John Trehy - Co-producer Timothy T. Lewis - Associate Producer / Unit Production Manager Lionel Wigram - Executive Producer Jany Temime - Costume Designer Jamie Christopher - First Assistant Director Simon Emanuel - Production Manager Fiona Weir - Casting Tim Burke - Visual Effects Supervisor Nick Dudman - Creature Effects / Makeup Special Effects Greg Powell - Stunts Coordinator John Richardson - Special Effects Supervisor With: Daniel Radcliffe - Harry Potter Rupert Grint - Ron Weasley Emma Watson - Hermione Granger Helena Bonham Carter - Bellatrix Lestrange Jim Broadbent - Horace Slughorn Robbie Coltrane - Rubeus Hagrid Michael Gambon - Professor Albus Dumbledore Alan Rickman - Professor Severus Snape Bonnie Wright - Ginny Weasley Maggie Smith - Professor Minerva McGonagall Timothy Spall - Wormtail David Thewlis - Remus Lupin David Bradley - Argus Filch Warwick Davis - Professor Filius Flitwick Tom Felton - Draco Malfoy William Melling - Nigel Evanna Lynch - Luna Lovegood Jessie Cave - Lavender Brown Frank Dillane - Tom Riddle (Teenager) Hero Fiennes Tiffin - Tom Riddle (Age 11) Natalia Tena - Nymphadora Tonks Julie Walters - Molly Weasley Rob Knox - Marcus Belby Matthew Lewis - Neville Longbottom Helen McCrory - Narcissa Malfoy Freddie Stroma - Cormac McLaggen Alfred Enoch - Dean Thomas Afshan Azad - Padma Patil Shefali Chowdhury - Parvati Patil Mark Williams - Arthur Weasley Jamie Waylett - Vincent Crabbe Amelda Brown - Mrs. Cole James Phelps - Fred Weasley Oliver Phelps - George Weasley Katie Leung - Cho Chang Georgina Leonidas - Katie Bell Devon Murray - Seamus Finnigan Geraldine Somerville - Lily Potter Joshua Herdman - Gregory Goyle Ralph Ineson - Amycus Paul Ritter - Eldred Worple Gemma Jones - Madam Pomfrey Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 22 17:46:52 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Wed Jul 22 17:46:56 2009 Subject: Review: Tokyo! (2009) Message-ID: Tokyo! (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 2 Out of 5 Stars or C+ The Plot: (from MRQE.com) Triptych feature telling three separate tales set in Tokyo, Japan. "Shaking Tokyo" centers on a man who has lived for 10 years as a hikikomori, (a term used in Japan for people unable to adjust to society and so they never leave their homes) and what happens when he falls in love one day with a pizza delivery girl. "Interior Design" follows the story of a wannabe movie director who arrives in Tokyo with his girlfriend only to find that parts of her bones are turning into wood. "Merde" concerns a hideous, Gollum-like humanoid that emerges from the sewers of Tokyo. After wreaking some mild havoc, the creature is captured and interrogated by the authorities. Merde, as this terrorist calls himself, baldly indicts the people of Japan as "disgusting," and the ending suggests that future cities are ripe for harassment. The Review: Tokyo! a triple feature of short films directed by Michel Gondry (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), Leos Carax (Pola X, Les Amants du Pont Neuf) and Bong Joon-hoo (The Host) has nothing but derision for the host city. The Tokyoites here are an unloving, alienated, disaffected and angry bunch. The title sequence depicts an animated flat cityscape drawn in muted primary colors-- no pretty picture postcard views like in Paris and New York film anthologies. Almost every shoot is street level with almost no hint of sky. Gondry's Interior Design explores alienated love; Carax's Merde (French for the expletive s**t) is a satirical attack on everything Japanese--its imperialist past and capitalist--consumerists present; Bong Joon-hoo's Shaking Tokyo, exposes a peculiarly Japanese version of shut-in anxiety, the Hikikomori. Michel Gondry aligned with Charlie Kaufman equals the brilliant Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The two seem to share the same hallucinations and creative dreams. Gondry soloing on his own creations can be pleasantly comfortable (Be Kind Rewind) or a boring illusionist (The Science of Sleep). Interior Design about the slow dissolve of a young and roaming Japanese couple's relationship is heartfelt and nicely observed until the girlfriend starts turning into a piece of furniture. The literal symbolization of her mental and emotional stasis sacrifices the meaning and a well-earned ending for trademark kookiness. It is a case of Gondry typically over thinking the unnecessary. Leos Carax has been a cinema nonentity since 1999, so not surprisingly his creature (played by Carax regular Denis Lavant) pops up from a manhole cover after a long underground sojourn, promptly creating chaos, shock, fear and loathing in the Japanese denizens he ambles into -- money, cell phones and flowers magnetically Velcroing to his hair and clothes. On his second jaunt, he gleefully tosses the remnants of an imperialist war cache onto citizenry and infrastructure alike. Eventually, he is tried, convicted, hung and resurrected. Allegory or satire? Maybe both. Then, just like its title, Merde is just maybe a piece of merde. The 10 year Hikikomori (a person sequestered in his room for six months or longer with no social life beyond his home, literally a withdrawn being) of Bong Joon-hoo's Shaking Tokyo crashes into the world when he pushes a tattooed button on the thigh of a sleeping pizza delivery girl. The shock of love causes her to become a Hikikomori also. He wanders an overexposed world looking for her, an earthquake occurring at their meeting and his pleading for her to enter the light. Joon-hoo's haiku about the seismic nature of virgin love gets it right. Except for Jong-hoo's contribution most of Tokyo!'s wit gets lost in its impenetrable symbolism. Interior Design gets a C, Merde a C- and Shaking Tokyo a B+-- graded on the curve Tokyo! gets a C+. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Bong Joon-ho - Director / Screenwriter Leos Carax - Director / Screenwriter Michel Gondry - Director / Screenwriter Masa Sawada - Producer Michiko Yoshitake - Producer Gabrielle Bell - Screenwriter Caroline Champetier - Cinematographer Jun Fukumoto - Cinematographer Masami Inomoto - Cinematographer Etienne Charry - Composer (Music Score) Lee Byung Woo - Composer (Music Score) Jeff Buchanan - Editor Nelly Quettier - Editor Mitsuo Harada - Production Designer Yuji Hayashida - Production Designer Toshihiro Isomi - Production Designer Kenzo Horikoshi - Executive Producer Hiroyuki Negishi - Executive Producer Yuji Sadai - Executive Producer Celine Guignard - Costume Designer Hironori Ito - Sound/Sound Designer Takeshi Ogawa - Sound/Sound Designer Fusao Yuwaki - Sound/Sound Designer Sadie Hales - From Idea By With: Ayako Fujitani - Hiroko Ryo Kase - Akira Ayumi Ito Denis Lavant Jean-Fran?ois Balmer Renji Ishibashi Teruyuki Kagawa Yu Aoi Naoto Takenaka Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya From homeryen88 at gmail.com Wed Jul 22 17:48:45 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Wed Jul 22 17:48:48 2009 Subject: Retrospective: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) Message-ID: <4a52a9000907212047q3b537305u101a74bab1de83c0@mail.gmail.com> Drink from the "Goblet" by Homer Yen (2009) Looking for a more character driven Harry Potter film? Then, this 4th installment will slake your thirst. Dark and difficult times lie ahead for our young wizard. Death Eaters have re-appeared signaling the possible return of the evil Lord Voldemort. A dangerous Olympic magic event puts various contestants' lives at risk. And most fearful of all, Harry Potter will have to *gulp* ask a girl out to the Yule Ball! "Goblet of Fire" is a more up close and personal look at our favorite boy magician. And why not? Harry is starting to enter the most terrifying phase of his young adult life. That's called puberty! And, we see that he's starting to age slightly while his voice is beginning to deepen. And so to is the depth of the storytelling and the character development. Harry has so much to learn. And, in this fine offering, identities are unmasked while secrets are revealed. Let's just call this The Education of Potter. This film is certainly more ambitious than the others. Most notably, it has many more characters. The new professor this year is the mad-if-not-calculating professor Moody (Brendan Gleeson). He seems willing to push the envelope in every area from disciplining unruly students to teaching the young students the dreaded unspeakable sins. And yet, given all of the gorgeously eccentric educators that have taught in the past, this one (with an artificial roving eye) seems right at home. In addition, there are three new young adults that are introduced who have come to compete in the thrilling but dangerous Tri-Wizard Challenge. With all of this going on, the first 30 minutes is basically a revved up introduction of all the colorful characters. And there are many. It felt cluttered with special effects with nothing substantial in the foreground. Add all of this to the existing world of Potter familiars, and this seems like it will be a long movie. The weakest point of the story, I believe, is the reintroduction of the evil Lord Voldemorte. Ralph Fiennes, who plays him with kooky creepiness, seems to fall a bit short in terms of how menacing he should be. He needs to take a lesson from the Sith Lord in the Star Wars films. Meanwhile, the Tri-Wizard contest is a triumph of imagination and brutality. Potter competes against three other contestants. One is daring, another is an athletic machine, while another is a graceful beauty. They have mastered spells and are far more mature. Potter does get lots of help. But goodness, it's crazier than Survivor and perhaps a bit too tense for the youngest viewers. But all that is not nearly as scary as asking a date to the Yule Ball. Oh, was I the only one who took forever to muster enough courage to ask someone to the Prom? Ah, the coy human nature and the cute relationships. Heck, even the burly but lovable Haggard finds a doting mate. Is it the best of the series so far? Yes, in many ways. It is more magical. It has more characters that populate the world. And, most importantly, we get a more intimate look at what makes Potter the doe-eyed but well-meaning school boy that he is. The 3rd installment (The Prisoner of Azkaban) with its time-traveling construction had a much more intriguing story arc. But in this one, the sparks fly. And, we look forward to his 5th year at the Hogwarts School of Magic. Grade: B+ S: 0 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 1 out of 3 From homeryen88 at gmail.com Thu Jul 30 17:26:18 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Thu Jul 30 17:26:21 2009 Subject: Review: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000907232024r188338b9t4a00b81eaaa3a87c@mail.gmail.com> "The Half-Blood Prince" Has Half-Hearted Conviction by Homer Yen (c) 2009 I like the tagline that you see on the movie posters advertising the sixth Harry Potter movie. "Once again, I must ask too much of you," says the wizened Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) to his star pupil, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe). However, after watching this film, I think that he was warning the audience as much as he was speaking to the boy wizard. At 153 minutes in running time, it is a long movie. Unfortunately, it felt even longer. And, what's worse, after the film ended, it really didn't seem like any significant advancements were made. If nothing else, the trio of best friends (Potter, Hermoine played by Emma Watson, and Ron played by Rupert Gint) is growing up before our very eyes. They are much more proficient at casting spells, much more proficient at exploring the nooks and crannies of the immense Hogwart's compound, and are much more proficient at the Quidditch competition (one of the visual highlights of the film). And as they grow, darker times lie ahead. The confrontation between Potter and Lord Voldemort will inevitably come. The stakes have risen; everyone's lives exist within a far more dangerous landscape; and there's heartbreak as affection portents their adolescence. With every installment, a new teacher comes to Hogwart's to grace us with their eccentricities. And, I was delighted to see the quirky Jim Broadbent on staff as the Potions Master Slughorn. Especially interesting was the Potion of Luck that Harry eventually uses at an opportune time (and that I wished that I could have quaffed prior to entering the theatre). This sixth chapter is more ominous than the preceding ones. They seem to get darker as the series goes on. This is not just reflected in the story's theme but also in its overall look. Less plentiful are the colorful palettes that define the Quidditch games and the mystical beasts of the land. There were fewer scenes that featured the imaginative inner workings of the school such as the Escher-like staircases that move about from one level to another. Even the grand dining hall has lost some of its luster. Gone are the more innocent and wondrous times as reflected in "The Goblet Fire" (my personal favorite). The film doesn't really feel like a next-chapter in the Potter series. It's almost the same feeling that I got when I saw the 2nd chapter of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, "The Two Towers". It was nestled between the far superior "The Fellowship of the Rings" and "The Return of the King." I'm glad that we had another opportunity to see Aragon and the gang. But, "The Two Towers" felt unnecessary. So too did this one, even though it was comforting to see all of the Harry Potter castmates again. The dangerous mission that Dumbledore and Harry finally do go on seemed like a waste of time when the answers that they seek won't really mean anything until we get to the last installments of the franchise. Having said that, I'll be there in line eager to buy my ticket. I won't be tattooing a lighting bolt to my forehead, but as I've watched every installment thus far, I'm not going to give up now, even though the "Half-Blood Prince" disappointed. I think someone waved their magic wand prior to writing this story and incanted the words: "maximous superfluous"! Grade: C+ S: 1 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 2 out of 3 From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Jul 30 17:46:07 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Jul 30 17:46:09 2009 Subject: Review: (500) Days of Summer (2009) Message-ID: (500) DAYS OF SUMMER A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): **** (500) DAYS OF SUMMER is so absolutely adorable that, as the ending credits were rolling, I had the overwhelming urge to wrap my arms around the movie and never let it go. It was so precious and utterly enjoyable that I wish its fast 96 minutes had been 500. I could never get enough of this delightful tale. When the DVD comes out, I hope it's chock full of deleted scenes. Although I usually never watch them on DVDs, I want to see every minute possible of this wonderful film. It's hard to know where to begin in describing one of the best -- and quite possible the best -- film of the year. From the very beginning you know the movie will be something special, as it opens with one of the funniest textual introductions I can remember. After that, the frequent narrator carefully sets the stage for us, by explaining, "This is a story of boy meets girl, but you should know up front that it isn't a love story." The film is perfectly cast, especially in the two leads. Joseph Gordon-Levitt (THE LOOKOUT) plays Tom, a guy with a hangdog look and the unshakable belief in the existence of "the one," as in the one person in the world that he is destined to fall in love with and be with for the rest of his life. One day, Tom, a greeting card writer, is so smitten that you can almost see Cupid's arrow shooting through his heart. Summer (Zooey Deschanel), who left Michigan to escape boredom, has moved to L.A. to become the assistant to Tom's boss. She is as commitment phobic as Tom is commitment obsessed. She makes it clear to Tom from their first romantic encounter that she intends never to be anyone's girlfriend and that their relationship will never be serious, even if it does become sexual. Of course, Tom claims to agree with her demands, although he doesn't mean it for a minute. As a comedy, (500) DAYS OF SUMMER is absolutely, side-splittingly hilarious, but that somehow manages to be eclipsed by something more special. As a touching, captivating romance between two hopelessly different characters, this is where the film achieves true greatness. Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber's script for our two lovebirds is superb. (Okay, so it's technically one lovebird and one, well, likebird.) Devised as a series of days in their lives, the film skips back and forth in time with cute little title cards giving us the number of the day, from one to five hundred, in Tom and Summer's relationship. Especially well done is the way certain things work great for them early on, while the exact same things will have the opposite effect when their relationship wanes. There is so much else in film to recommend it as well. Matthew Gray Gubler (the long-haired nerdy doctor from "Criminal Minds") and Geoffrey Arend give excellent performances as Paul and McKenzie, Tom's two geeky best friends. As Rachel, Tom's wise-beyond-her-years sister, Chloe Moretz is a real scene stealer. No matter how often Summer lectures Tom with thoughts such as, "There is no such thing as love. It's a fantasy," the movie comes across as a sweet, albeit frequently bittersweet, ode to the need for love. Deschanel is as cute as a bug, so, no matter how often her character claims to eschew a belief in the concept of love, it's hard not to fall for her. Director Marc Webb displays a real aptitude for knowing exactly how to handle his actors. Deschanel, in particular, can sometimes be excessively quirky, but this time the director has Deschanel's quirkiness dial set to exact the right number. I can't end this review without mentioning Eric Steelberg's dreamy cinematography. Every scene, indoors and out, is shot with a wonderfully inviting, warmly golden glow. This is a near perfect film. Its only problem is that it eventually has to end. I did not want it to stop. As I said in beginning, this film is so absolutely adorable that I wanted to hug it and never let it go. (500) DAYS OF SUMMER runs 1:36. It is rated PG-13 for "sexual material and language" and would be acceptable for kids around 9 and up. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday July 24, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Jul 30 17:47:18 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Jul 30 17:47:21 2009 Subject: Review: Irene in Time (2009) Message-ID: IRENE IN TIME A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** "You come from a long line of narcissists," Eleanor (Victoria Tennant) tells her daughter Irene (Tanna Frederick). In IRENE IN TIME, the latest film by the quintessential indie writer and director Henry Jaglom, the narcissist comment is both dead-on accurate and probably the chief reason why this film is likely to divide audiences, as it did ours. Some will find Irene, a self-centered blabbermouth, fascinating, since Frederick portrays her obnoxious character so well. Others will find the ever-annoying Irene, well, too annoying to be worth spending time with. On the other hand, if movies were only made up of nice guys and winners of humanitarian awards, they would be pretty bland. And, while I love serial killer movies, I hope never to cross paths with one in real life. So I felt about Irene. I was quite intrigued by her, even if, at a cocktail party, I'd probably run the other way if I saw her coming. While I like some of Jaglom's movies and not others, this one worked for me. Still, none of his movies have topped his ALWAYS from 1985, one of my all-time favorite films. (Please don't confuse this small picture with the big budget Hollywood picture of a few years later starring Richard Dreyfuss and Holly Hunter.) Even when Jaglom flops, his failures still manage to have parts that make them almost worthwhile. The story is told with frequent cuts to a studio where Irene belts out one tune after another, with my favorite being a little ditty with lines that include "Starbucks burning bright." Frederick told us after our screening of the film that she had never sung before, except in the shower, but was willing to give it a try. She probably will not be offered a recording contract based on her musicality, but her singing is quite pleasant to the ears. The fairly unoriginal plot of IRENE IN TIME concerns Irene's lousy love life. Always on the hunt for a man, she almost runs screaming from a restaurant when an old beau, out of the blue, proposes marriage to her. More typical are her dates in which she tries so hard to be interested in her dinner companions that she scares them away. Although she is a voracious reader of such books as "Stop Getting Dumped," the books can't save her from herself. When one date reluctantly tells her that he develops strip malls for a living, she gushes out a long string of over-the-top thoughts that are as shallow as they are disingenuous. The uncontrollably loquacious Irene ends a long string of nearly incomprehensible thoughts with, "mini-malls are so great!" The unlucky guy discovers that he can't find the exit fast enough. Somehow, for all of her flaws, including an obsession with her dead father, Irene slowly and surprisingly worked her way into my heart. Because of this, I found the film's ending particularly effective and poignant. What I did not realize at the time was that the ending was ambiguous. After our screening was over, the director polled our audience. As it turned out, about half of the audience interpreted the ending one way, while the other half had a completely different understanding of it. Moreover, until Jaglom did the poll, almost all of the audience did not realize the ending had any ambiguity whatsoever. For the record, we asked Frederick what the ending meant, but she would not comment, saying it was for every viewer to interpret it in their own way. IRENE IN TIME runs 1:35. It is rated PG-13 for "thematic elements and some sexual content" and would be acceptable for kids around 10 and up. The film is playing in limited release now in the United States. The movie was shown recently at the Camera Cinema Club (http://www.cameracinemas.com) of Campbell and San Jose. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Jul 30 17:56:41 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Jul 30 17:56:44 2009 Subject: Review: The Ugly Truth (2009) Message-ID: THE UGLY TRUTH A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): * 1/2 The ugly truth is that Gerard Butler's fingers-across-the-blackboard performance makes THE UGLY TRUTH painful to endure. Butler plays Mike, a scruffy, disheveled guy with a filthy mouth who dishes out lots of scandalous and vulgar advice to women on a public access channel. If Butler was the film's star rather than its costar, the movie would be an instant candidate for my worst of the year list. Almost every time he spoke, I was ready to run screaming out of the theater, especially since he, along with most of the actors in the movie, spoke with the rapidity of a recent graduate of a speed speaking course. It's one thing to be obnoxious, but it's a different matter entirely if it is done in triple speed. Thankfully Butler does share top billing with a more appealing actor, Katherine Heigl (the probably not really dead, dead woman from "Gray's Anatomy"). As Abby, Heigl is not at the top of her form, but she is light-years better than Butler. The plot has Abby, the producer of a Sacramento morning news program, being forced against her will to hire Mike, since the news ratings of her program are sagging. The film's premises are filled with only-in-the-movies moments. Can you imagine any character that Katherine Heigl plays really needing help in the dating department? Nope, neither can I. And, if you can believe that, would you buy that she would accept it from a pathetic guy like Mike? Nope. And in real-life, do you buy that a character like Mike could turn out to have a heart of gold and be a great father figure to his nephew? Nope again. As much as I hated this film through most of it, I've got to admit that between its numerous groanable minutes were several jokes that were extremely funny. Between teeth grinding moments were several big laughs, with the biggest coming in a dinner party where Abby accidentally has on the remote controlled vibrating underwear that Mike gave her as a gift. Farfetched? You bet, but in the context of an off-the-wall comedy, it managed to work particularly well. If you are dead set on seeing THE UGLY TRUTH, wait for the DVD, when you can be firmly in control of the fast-forward button, which you'll be hitting a lot. THE UGLY TRUTH runs a long 1:41. It is rated R for "sexual content and language" and would be acceptable for teenagers. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, July 24, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 30 18:14:15 2009 From: jjmoya1955 at yahoo.com (Jonathan Moya) Date: Thu Jul 30 18:14:18 2009 Subject: Review: Somers Town (2009) Message-ID: <3bdf96ff-2396-4019-be75-45ff3cfcb2e7@c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> Somers Town (2009) A Movie Review By Jonathan Moya 4.5 Out of 5 Stars or A The Plot: (from Allmovie.com) Tomo has just turned 16, and as a result he's no longer under parental care. Eager to escape the Midlands and seek out a better life in London, Tomo sets out for the big city and strikes up a friendship with Polish immigrant Marek while traversing the streets of Somers Town. Marek is a quiet and sensitive boy who harbors a growing interest in photography and still lives with his father. But Marek's father is a hopeless drunk, and doesn't even notice when his son invites Tomo to share their apartment. Most days, Tomo and Marek are content to pass earning some quick cash from an eccentric neighbor, wandering the streets, and admiring a pretty French waitress named Maria who works at a nearby caf?. Eventually, the two become obsessed with the girl and begin tracking her every move. But one day Maria simply vanishes, leaving the boys to feel as if they have lost their muse. Later that night, Tomo and Marek decide to dull their pain by sharing a bottle. Of course, it's this very same night that Marek's father discovers his son has taken in a new roommate, and Tomo is swiftly evicted. As a result, the growing bond between the two boys is put to the ultimate test. The Review: At the end of This is England, loosely based on the experiences of its director Shane Meadows, the young Midlands skinhead Shaun (played by the fabulously talented Thomas Turgoose) throws a St. George's flag into the sea and watches it sink-- along with his childhood. For Shaun, adolescent style has turned into the dragon of politics and bigotry, killing its own in blind rage. Shaun stands between shore and sea (a la Antoine Doinel of Truffaut's The 400 Blows), between past and uncertain future. He has lost his real family (his mother) and abandoned his racist brothers who have adopted the politics of violence. In Somers Town (again based on memories of Meadows past) Tomo (Thomas Turgoose again) is on a train, shuttling away from his Midland family to London, his own jaunty confidence his travel mate. Somers Town is the colloquial name for the area around North London that houses the St Pancreas depot for Eurostar's Chunnel train. (Eurostar provided major funding for the film project.) The locomotives crisscross under the English Channel and do the London- Paris route in 2 hours and 15 minutes or the London-Brussels trip in 1 hour and 51 minutes, according to the official literature. Befittingly its community is also a way station, filled with Eastern European migrants and migrating lower-to-lower middle class Brits. For Shane Meadows and frequent writing collaborator Paul Fraser Somers Town is also a fit for adolescent-- the quiet stopping place between childhood innocent with its hints of summer memories and the burdens, responsibilities and addictions of adulthood. The group which welcomed the child passing through under the tunnel in This is England is now a marauding pack intent on stripping Tomo of money and baggage. He is beaten, bruised and battered; the bruises on his face visible for the rest of Somers Town black and white life. Tomo stumbles upon his innocent expression in the photo bug Marek (Pitor Jagiello), a gangly, shy and lonely Polish youth who wanders about while his father (Ireneusz Czop) works or hangs out with his mates. Marek's photo muse is the much older French waitress Maria (Elisa Lasowski). The innocent triangle that forms between the three gives Somers Town its charming Trufautian Jules et Jim echo. The mid- picture lark through streets and parks with a found wheelchair turned magic vehicle is the last imaginative and innocent journey before adult rivalries and responsibilities. Maria's last words before her sudden disappearance to Paris echoes Tomo and Marek relationship. "Remember, I love you both the same." The three minutes of color video with Tomo, Marek and Maria reunited in Paris is both Truffaut homage and Eurostar travel poster. The embrace and kiss between them under the bright light streaming off Sacre Coeur's dome makes for the perfect ending to Somers Town-- and adolescence. The perfectly caught details of that reverie raise Somers Town above bromance into minor masterpiece. Marek and Tomo teeter-totering on too small carousel horses in the park while drinking and eating the wine, bread and cheese lunch they bought for the all too soon gone Maria. Tomo's outfit: the way big trousers and summer dress tucked into his trousers - the booty of a launderette raid to replace a ruined tracksuit. The boy not quite ready for responsibility, but forced to be his own mother and father-- his evolution from seeing himself as "useless waste of space" to finding his own space. Marek's photo obsession is an attempt to understand the world, love and his space in it, his stopgap before the inevitable child-parent split forges the uneasy compromise. He and Tomo are perfect mates. Somers Town runs barely 67 minutes, almost a midday fantasy. Still, it is long enough to cover the awkward years. It gets an A. The Credits: (From AllMovie.com) Shane Meadows - Director Barnady Spurrier - Producer Paul Fraser - Screenwriter Natasha Braier - Cinematographer Gavin Clarke - Composer (Music Score) Richard Graham - Editor Lisa Marie Hall - Production Designer Nick Mercer - Executive Producer Greg Nugent - Executive Producer Robert Saville - Executive Producer Jo Thompson - Costume Designer Danny Cowley - Sound/Sound Designer With: Piotr Jagiello ... Marek; Ireneusz Czop ... Mariusz; Perry Benson ... Graham; Thomas Turgoose ... Tomo ; Kate Dickie ... Jane; Maria...Elisa Lasowski ; Huggy Leaver ... Cafe Owner Copyright 2009 by Jonathan Moya