FANTASTIC Mr. FOX MOVIE REVIEW

Director Wes Anderson (The Darjeeling Limited, The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou) was the subject of a minor controversy a few months ago when an L.A. Times profile alleged that the idiosyncratic auteur rarely visited the London set of Fantastic Mr. Fox, his stop-motion adaptation of the Road Dahl children's tale, preferring instead to issue orders to his crew via email. If the report is indeed true, Anderson’s poor attendance record certainly didn’t detract from the final result. Fantastic Mr. Fox is an utter delight: a lively, endearing comic caper that will appeal equally to both young and old, hipster and non-hipster alike.

Having too often overdosed on self-conscious quirk in the past, Anderson shows admirable restraint with Fantastic Mr. Fox, and the result is undoubtedly his most entertaining and accessible film yet. Admittedly, the film’s old school, retro-style animation does take some getting get used to; younger audience members, raised on a steady diet of cutting-edge Pixar flicks, might even suspect that they’re watching some relic produced before they were born. But their skepticism will quickly fade as soon they’re drawn into the first of several increasingly audacious farm heists mounted by the clever Mr. Fox (voiced with easygoing charm by George Clooney) and his rag-tag crew of woodland critter pals.

Despite its mainstream appeal, Fantastic Mr. Fox retains the distinctive feel of a Wes Anderson film. Clooney and co-star Meryl Streep are complemented by a supporting cast of Anderson regulars, including Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman and Owen Wilson. The film’s art direction is as stylish and nuanced as its stop-motion animation is precise; its soundtrack littered with the familiar sounds of the Beach Boys and the Rolling Stones. And Mr. Fox’s flair for elaborate, intricately-planned heists is reminiscent of one of Anderson’s earliest and most beloved characters, Bottle Rocket’s Dignan.

In an era of animated films produced increasingly by committee, it’s refreshing to see one that bears the singular style and personality of its director. After watching Fantastic Mr. Fox, I for one wouldn’t be the least bit dismayed if Anderson never made another live-action film again.

PIRATE RADIO MOVIE REVIEW

As the British Invasion stormed American airwaves in the mid-'60s, its conquest of its native land took the shape of a sea-based guerrilla offensive. Broadcasting from ships anchored just outside British territorial waters, a handful of so-called “pirate radio” stations defied the BBC’s strict limits on popular music by blasting the isles with around-the-clock rock 'n' roll. Writer/director Richard Curtis (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Love Actually) pays tribute to that vibrant era with Pirate Radio, a sentimental, lighthearted ode to the renegade DJs who helped British rock find its sea legs.

Curtis introduces us to Pirate Radio’s motley ensemble through the bright eyes of Carl (Tom Sturridge), a naive schoolboy whose godfather, Quentin (Bill Nighy, playing perhaps the hippest sexagenarian in history), owns and operates Radio Rock, Britain’s premier pirate station. Surrounded by a crew of boisterous, impossibly well-dressed musical misfits — all of whom are seemingly modeled after various '60s countercultural archetypes (the mod hipster, the impish lothario, the uncompromising purist, the dazed hippie, the Jim Morrison clone, etc.) — Carl’s unusual voyage of discovery commences in earnest.

Pirate Radio may strike some as reminiscent of another nostalgic paean to the wonders of rock 'n' roll, Almost Famous — not least because star Philip Seymour Hoffman essentially resuscitates his Lester Bangs performance in this film. But Pirate Radio is far less ambitious than Cameron Crowe’s 2000 film, not seeking so much to define an era as to use it as the backdrop for a brisk, buoyant comedy. And in that regard, it succeeds far more often than it fails, thanks largely to the efforts of a talented cast led by Hoffman, Nighy, Nick Frost and Rhys Darby. There are a few bittersweet moments scattered throughout Pirate Radio, but at its core the film a comic coming-of-age story — punctuated by a lively soundtrack loaded with classics from the Who, the Kinks, the Rolling Stones and other seminal bands.

It should be noted that a significantly longer version of the film, titled The Boat That Rocked, debuted in the UK over six months ago. Narrative gaps are evident throughout Pirate Radio, but director Curtis’ decision to pare nearly 20 minutes off the film’s running time for its American release looks like a wise one, as the shortened length still tests the limits of one’s patience. Rock 'n' roll can be many things, but it must never, ever be boring.

2012 MOVIE REVIEW

The ancient Mayan calendar, with its supposed prediction of a December 21, 2012 apocalypse, has long fascinated assorted fringe scholars, doomsday fetishists and George Noory acolytes. In 2012, the audacious new disaster epic from director Roland Emmerich (10,000 B.C., The Day After Tomorrow), it provides the inspiration for a $250 million orgy of destruction, the likes of which has never been seen on the big screen.

Give the Mayans credit: their chosen method for the planet’s demise in 2012 is anything if not imaginative. The earth’s core, we’re told, is being heated to the point of instability by mutant neutrinos emitted by an increasingly malevolent sun. (The Mayans, a civilization that had little use for the wheel, having apparently identified the subatomic particle several millennia prior to the advent of quantum physics.) The initial signs of this phenomenon — sudden fissures on Earth’s surface triggered by ruptures in its crust — are casually dismissed as harmless earthquakes by government officials.

Ahh, but they know better. In fact, the President (portrayed without a hint of irony by Danny Glover) and his advisers became hip to this neutrino business years ago, but chose not to inform the public for fear of the panic that might ensue. What they fail to realize, despite the pleadings of the film’s requisite Lone Voice in the Wilderness (Chiwetel Ejiofor, bringing kind of a sad dignity to the proceedings), is that the lethal process is accelerating far faster than anyone could have predicted. Personifying the government’s pompous intransigence in the face of obvious calamity is Oliver Platt, who plays the President’s Secretary of Douchebaggery.

And what a gorgeous calamity it is. First come the super-earthquakes, which send Los Angeles plummeting into the ocean. Then the volcano beneath Yellowstone Park erupts in spectacular fashion, blanketing North America with a massive cloud of poisonous ash. Not to be left out of the eco-gangbang, killer tsunamis join the party, bombarding much of Asia and the Indian subcontinent with tidal waves the size of Mt. Everest. Emmerich’s breathless CGI onslaught is truly unprecedented in its scope.

Beyond the awe-inspiring carnage, however, there’s precious little to distinguish 2012. John Cusack leads a bloated cast that largely phones in a succession of forgettable roles. The conspiracy-themed script is painfully trite, rife with cliches and devoid of any and all subtlety. Its heavy-handed message, urging unity across class and cultural lines, feels superficial and soulless. Even the film’s visual effects — doubtlessly 2012’s greatest asset — occasionally come off as distractingly fake. The film even feigns a gallingly faux subversiveness, toppling Christian landmarks like the Vatican and the Christ the Redeemer statue in spectacular fashion, while avoiding Islamic monuments entirely. (We brought it up in our interview with Emmerich — click to hear his eye-opening response.)

All of this clocks in at a bewildering two hours and forty minutes, well beyond the acceptable length for such an empty-headed disaster flick.

You’ve been warned.

THE FOURTH KIND MOVIE REVIEW

Paranormal Activity’s unlikely run atop the box-office chart may have come to an end, but the moviegoing public’s nascent fascination with otherworldly phenomena — the unfriendly variety, in particular — shows no signs of waning. The Fourth Kind, a supernatural thriller from writer-director Olatunde Osunsanmi, represents Hollywood’s latest attempt to capitalize on this peculiar trend.

Paranormal Activity and The Fourth Kind are very different movies, to be sure, but they share the same basic approach, employing gritty, documentary-style footage to convince us that what we’re watching unfold onscreen is more “real” — and thus more convincing — than the typical glossy Hollywood thriller.

But The Fourth Kind goes far beyond Paranormal Activity in its effort to establish its legitimacy. In an unprecedented — and exceedingly ballsy — maneuver, star Milla Jovovich begins the film by breaking the fourth wall and addressing the camera directly. In a lengthy monologue, she introduces herself as “actress Milla Jovovich,” explains that she’ll be portraying real-life psychologist Dr. Abigail Tyler, and declares that the documentary footage scattered throughout The Fourth Kind is authentic, recorded during a sleep-disorder study conducted in Nome, Alaska, a few years ago.

Why Nome? Because, we’re told, its citizens are afflicted with an unusual number of nighttime sleep disturbances, the bulk of which are accompanied by terrifying visions of hostile, alien-like creatures. Nasty fellows, these extra-terrestrials are, taunting and tormenting and probing their victims as they lie helpless, paralyzed with fear. Some of the otherworldly visitors even have the audacity to take possession of their somnolent subjects, using them as vessels to deliver ominous warnings to Abby and her colleagues. Speaking in ancient tongues with voices horribly distorted, they demand that she end her research.

But Abby won’t listen to them, and her persistence effects increasingly dire consequences. One of her afflicted patients kills himself and his family; another is paralyzed after levitating during a harrowing hypnotic episode; finally, the aliens set their sights on Abby herself. One might be tempted to dismiss these episodes as merely the hallucinations of a badly traumatized woman — the classic unreliable narrator — if it weren’t all captured on video.

For those willing to buy into The Fourth Kind’s claims of authenticity, the experience is at times genuinely terrifying. But after a while it becomes increasingly obvious that the film’s documentary sequences are staged — and often badly so. Director Osunsanmi brought a clever idea to the table, but he didn't quite have the skills — or the actors — to pull it off, and the result feels like an elaborate cinematic con job.

THE INVENTION OF LYING MOVIE REVIEW

The Invention of Lying starts out really strong but turns serious, finds religion, and forgets the laughs. Ricky Gervais co-wrote, co-directed and stars in the film which is set in a world where no one has ever told a lie. The premise is intriguing and the first half hour or so isn't pure genius, but it's highly amusing. In the first few minutes Jennifer Garner's utterly brutal assessment of Ricky Gervais' chances of scoring on their first date is uncomfortable yet funny. She's out of his league in every way and because there's no fudging on the facts, she lets him know it in no uncertain terms. That's entertaining.

But the premise gets old and the honesty is too mean-spirited after a while to elicit many laughs. Points for trying, but the execution is just slightly off in Gervais and co-writer/co-director Matthew Robinson's rookie effort.

The Story

Can you even imagine a world where every single person tells nothing but the truth? Nothing is sugar-coated and no one's feelings are spared. I don't think that's a world I'd want to live in, that's for sure. Even commercials and feature films only spout facts. You should buy Coke because it's famous. Pepsi's good when they don't have Coke. You get the point.

Gervais plays Mark, an unfortunate, unpopular, unlucky screenwriter saddled with having to bring the 1300s to the big screen in an entertaining - yet truthful - way. The Black Plague isn't the most lighthearted of stories and Mark's on the verge of being fired on a daily basis, until one day his boss really does pull the plug on his employment situation. Jobless, practically broke, and with an ailing mom in a nursing home ("A Sad Place for Hopeless Old People" according to the building's sign), Mark heads to the bank to pull out the last of his money. But while talking to the bank teller he makes the discovery of a lifetime - he can lie.

Rob Lowe and Tina Fey in ' The Invention of Lying.'

Since no one else on Earth can do this, Mark has a hard time convincing even his closest friend, Greg (played by stand-up comedian Louis C.K.), that he can speak something other than the truth. Mark tells him he's a Black Eskimo, invented the bike, and has only one arm, and Greg believes every word of it. Flabbergasted, Mark finally realizes he can make a lot of money using this new power and also do a lot of good. As his mom's taking her last few breaths, he comforts her by telling her she won't just be slipping away into nothingness. This sets in motion a chain of events that has people across the globe hanging on Mark's every word.

The Cast

Taken separately, Ricky Gervais and Jennifer Garner were both fine in their roles - Garner's deadpan delivery of some outlandish lines during the film's first 10 minutes was absolutely hysterical. But together there's zero chemistry. Supporting performances by Rob Lowe as Gervais' rival at work and for the heart of Garner, Louis C.K. as Gervais' frumpy best friend, Tina Fey as Gervais' not supportive at all assistant, and Fionnula Flanagan as Gervais' sick mom are all terrific. There's also a batch of big name actors appearing in cameos who all liven up the film during their brief but memorable moments on screen. The cast isn't really at fault in this one; it's the material that lets them down for the last half of the movie.

The Bottom Line

Gervais and Robinson take on organized religion, even going as far as to create new Commandments (with pizza boxes substituting for stone tablets). That actually worked for me, though it's likely to polarize audiences. At least Gervais and Robinson go there and don't back off. Kudos for that.

Jennifer Garner and Ricky Gervais in 'The Invention of Lying.'

However, as the bluntness of the characters seems to escalate, The Invention of Lying takes on a real mean tone, and it didn't need to. The Invention of Lying has a great premise but the execution stalls, losing momentum as it chugs to a romantic comedy cookie-cutter type ending. It all just wears thin after a while. There are definitely funny moments, particularly in the first half of the movie, but not enough to sustain the comedy throughout its 100 minute running time.

Still, it's not a bad movie, just one that doesn't provide as many laughs and as much entertainment as you'd hope given the film's set-up and great start.

JULIE AND JULIA MOVIE REVIEW

Hitting theaters near the end of a summer movie season filled with explosions, over-the-top action and general silliness, Julie and Julia is a delightful, tasty treat for adults. Julie and Julia is cooked to cinematic perfection and filled with terrific performances from the entire ensemble cast, led by Doubt co-stars Meryl Streep and Amy Adams. The story - like the delicious food served in Julie and Julia - will satiate moviegoers looking to fill up on a full-bodied film for their box office dollars.

Julie and Julia, though based on two true stories, plays out as a tale almost too good to be true. Julia, as played by Streep, is so completely engaging and so loved by all who come in contact with her that she seems like the creation of a very imaginative mind rather than a flesh and blood women. Julie, on the other hand, is a timid, can't accomplish anything young woman who, with the help of a famous chef she's never met yet leans on daily, blossoms into a determined, self-reliant woman. What Julie learns from studying Julia takes her from handling phone calls from relatives of victims of 9/11 to juggling interview opportunities and book deals. It would seem the story of Julia and Julie's strangely intertwined lives could only spring from a screenwriter's pen, but Julie and Julia is based on the real lives of these two captivating women.

The Story

Stanley Tucci and Meryl Streep in 'Julie and Julia.'

Julie and Julia is culled from two books. One book tells the story of Julia Child as she transitions from the bored wife of a diplomat stationed in France to student at the famed Le Cordon Bleu school to cooking teacher and ultimately cookbook author and star of her own TV show. The second book was written by New Yorker Julie Powell, a cubicle-dwelling government worker who, back in 2002, decided to stir things up in her life by cooking all 500+ recipes in Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking over the course of just 365 days. And in addition to tackling Child's recipes, Julie charged herself with creating and updating a blog based on her daily adventures in the kitchen. Julie had a history of not completing things, but was determined to see this year-long experiment through to the end. Fortunately, she had an understanding, level-headed husband on her side to steady her when the going got rough (i.e. when she had to kill lobsters, poach eggs, and perform other hazardous duties) and a strength of spirit she didn't know existed until she followed Julia's lead.

The Cast

Although Powell's book dwells, as expected, more on her own portion of the story, the film divides its time fairly equally between Julia's story and Julie's. Meryl Streep plays Julia as a gigantic woman with a real gusto for life, showing her to be as passionate about eating and cooking as she is about her loving husband, Paul (Stanley Tucci). It's a joy (not of cooking but of watching) to see The Devil Wears Prada's Streep and Tucci reunite onscreen as a happily married couple who absolute adore the ground the other walks on.

Amy Adams has a tougher row to hoe playing a struggling woman trying to find herself in a world that doesn't care in the least if she succeeds. Even at lunch with her closest female friends, Adams as Julie is put down, her life brushed off as trivial. But as Julie sees her universe expanding as the number of readers commenting on her blog increases, Adams takes Julie from shrinking violet to a strong woman in her own right. And if you're like me, you're going to walk out of Julie and Julia wondering who Chris Messina is and where he's been hiding. As Julie's husband, Eric, Messina is a revelation.

The Bottom Line

Meryl Streep in 'Julie and Julia.'

Julie and Julia isn't just a movie for foodies, although I'll warn you now not to go to this movie on an empty stomach. Restaurants immediately adjacent to theaters screening Julie and Julia are likely to see an uptick in business from people driven crazy by the mouth-watering dishes on display in Julie and Julia. And if you don't know how to cook...well, I need to stop for a moment to let you know where I'm coming from in the culinary skills department. I once ruined a skillet attempting to cook a grilled cheese sandwich. The result was an inedible disaster and a pan that looked like someone had held it under a space shuttle as it was taking off. That was a few years back and I'm better now, but I'm still far from feeling comfortable around the kitchen. If it's microwaveable, I'm all good. Anyway, Julie and Julia made me want to rush out and whip up a souffle or some exotic beef dish. It also made me long for more films of this ilk, movies that don't need tricks, gimmicks or special effects to compete in theaters.

It's so refreshing to see strong female characters drive a story. Streep and Adams don't share a single scene in Julie and Julia, but they do share the ability to engage the audience. Together though separate, these powerful actresses make Julie and Julia a scrumptious moviegoing experience.

KNOWING MOVIE REVIEW

If I'd have known Knowing's last half an hour was going to play out the way it did, I wouldn't have wasted my time watching the first hour and a half. Knowing takes an interesting premise and all but destroys it with a final act that's, at select moments, jaw-droppingly ludicrous. Knowing's loaded with possibility, but flounders its way to a disappointing conclusion.

It's not Nicolas Cage's fault Knowing doesn't work. Cage, who can and usually does go overboard in scenes meant to convey stressful situations, actually keeps himself reined in. It's the script and the effects that are totally out of control.

The Story

It's 1959 and a classroom full of elementary school students is busy drawing pictures to insert into a time capsule to be buried in the school's courtyard. The students draw pretty pictures of robots and rocket ships and other items representing what they believe the world will look like in 50 years when the capsule's opened. But there's one student, Lucinda Embry (Lara Robinson), whose drawing is unlike the others. Lucinda's hearing voices and those voices are telling her to write down numbers that, on the surface, look to be totally random.

Nicolas Cage in 'Knowing.'

Flash forward 50 years and astrophysicist John Koestler (Cage) is a widower raising a super bright 10 year old son, Caleb (Chandler Canterbury), who's wise beyond his years. He's also a sensitive boy with a hearing problem which causes him to use a hearing aid. He's not deaf, as John points out, he just hears things jumbled sometimes and the hearing aid helps him sort the words out.

When the time capsule is opened at a special ceremony, each member of Caleb's elementary school class is handed an envelope containing one of the drawings done 50 years prior. Caleb receives Lucinda's paper, which he finds fascinating enough to take home instead of leaving it at the school as instructed.

John, who has a bit of a drinking problem, downs some booze and strangely enough, that helps clear up the meaning of the Lucinda's numbers. John becomes obsessed with the idea that the paper actually lists major incidents in which people have died over the past 50 years (including 9/11). And, of course, there are three catastrophes on the paper that haven't yet occurred and John believes he can stop them from happening. To do this he tracks down the now deceased Lucinda's daughter, Diana (Rose Byrne), and granddaughter, Abby (Robinson, again). As they attempt to put the final pieces of the puzzle together, strange men watch their houses and whisper bizarre things into Abby and Caleb's ears.

The Cast

The kid actors – Robinson and Canterbury – aren't annoyingly precocious and are fine young performers. And Rose Byrne does a decent damsel in distress to Cage's 'I'll protect my son at all costs' action guy. Byrne adds a lot emotionally to the story, an important element as Cage, despite the fact he apparently loves his son, comes across as mildly detached.

The Bottom Line

Are we just going through the motions as our fate is already determined, no matter how desperately we want to change our future? Knowing does address that question but with a very unsatisfying resolution. It tosses out half a dozen red herrings along the way, two or three of which would have been much more intriguing to follow than the ultimate conclusion to the film.

Nicolas Cage in 'Knowing.'

The pacing's off, which is disappointing as I never found that to be an issue with director Alex Proyas' previous films (Dark City, The Crow, I, Robot). I was also disappointed with the way the huge action set pieces were integrated into the story. It felt like someone had this great vision of plane and train crashes and just had to find a way to work them into a feature film. Why Cage's character acts and reacts the way he does at times doesn't make the least bit of sense, unless the point is to just push another action scene into Knowing.

Knowing's a film that never seems to figure out what it wants to be, but it goes here, there and everywhere in one big hurry. Riddled with problems, Knowing isn't likely to impress anyone but the most ardent Nicolas Cage fans. But even those may be hard-pressed to endure the ending without letting out a laugh or two.

THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT REVIEW

There are r-rated movies (ones that show some skin and/or sex), R-rated movies (ones with a mix of sex and violence and bad language), and then there are R-rated movies (ones that push the envelope, usually in the direction of graphic violence). The Last House on the Left, the 2009 version of Wes Craven's first movie, is R-rated in no uncertain terms. The violence of The Last House on the Left is cringe-inducingly raw and downright nasty. Last House is strictly an adults-only film, and then only for adults who can handle intense and brutal violence, including a particularly horrific rape scene.

The Last House on the Left is not a film for everyone (but other than Pixar's products and a few other G-rated offerings, is there really such a thing as a film for everyone?). So what do you need to know going into The Last House on the Left to determine if it's for you? If the first paragraph of this review sent up a caution flag but you're still interested, then The Last House on the Left might be something for you to check out.

It's not a fun movie and there are scenes you'll be tempted to watch through your fingers. It's not educational. The revenge plot plays out fairly straightforward once the movie hits its stride half an hour in. After the kidnappers take their victims into the woods, The Last House on the Left delivers an unwavering, unremitting hour of some of the most terrifyingly real moments you'll see in a horror/thriller.

The Story

Based on the 1972 film that launched the careers of Wes Craven and Sean Cunningham, The Last House on the Left has a fairly simple plot. Krug (Garret Dillahunt) escapes from prison aided by his brother Francis (Aaron Paul), girlfriend Sadie (Riki Lindhome), and teenage son Justin (Spencer Treat Clark). Then Justin's left alone in a hotel room for a few hours so he heads into town and picks up two teen hotties – Mari (Sara Paxton) and Paige (Martha MacIsaac) - with the promise of pot waiting for them back in his hotel room. However, their partying is interrupted when dad, Francis and Sadie show up and spoil their good times.

Aaron Paul, Garret Dillahunt, Spencer Trent Clark, and Riki Lindhome.

Krug's face is plastered all over the news, but Mari and Paige haven't been paying attention to that so initially they have no clue how much trouble they're in. But their bad luck - and bad judgement - quickly becomes evident when Krug and his crazy cohorts make it clear the girls won't be going home anytime soon. Taken against their will, the young women are horribly abused and left for dead. Then in a wicked twist of fate, the foursome shows up on the doorstep of Mari's parents' house. Only after they've welcomed in these strangers and given them refreshments and a guesthouse to sleep in do the parents figure out these strangers they've helped have brutalized their 17 year old daughter. And once they come to that realization, the gloves come off and the parents are out for revenge.

The Acting

Monica Potter and Tony Goldwyn go from being caring parents to tigers protecting their young in a totally believable, utterly realistic manner. One second they're serving coffee and chatting about the weather, and the next they're using any manner of household objects as weapons. Go parents!

Sara Paxton's normally seen in lighthearted fare but with this role she proves there's a lot more to her than teenage romantic comedies. Garret Dillahunt (Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles) sports almost black hair (in order to make him look more evil?) and delivers a creepy, fascinating performance as the leader of this little crew of criminals. Riki Lindhome makes Sadie into a chick you'd never, ever want to encounter in a dark alley or a brightly lit street, and Aaron Paul (Breaking Bad) is incredibly good at playing a hideous, delusional killer. Spencer Treat Clark as Krug's conflicted son lucks out and doesn't have to take part in the vicious attacks. Clark's fine as Justin, a teenager with more than his fair share of issues.

Sara Paxton, Tony Goldwyn and Monica Potter in 'The Last House on the Left.'

The Bottom Line

The Last House on the Left is probably not a film you'll buy on DVD after watching in the theater. One screening of this is sure to be enough for anyone. And for those familiar with Craven's version, there have been a few changes made to make this The Last House on the Left flow a little smoother than that 1972 film, and to ramp up the stakes once the parents discover they're harboring their daughter's attackers.

Absolutely harsh, unflinchingly brutal, and unrelentingly intense, this The Last House on the Left is a crisp, provocative, tension-filled remake that lives up to the original. It doesn't pull punches, doesn't cave in to horror movie clichés, and though the rape is one of the most disturbing ever depicted in a film, the payoff is there down the road – if your stomach's strong enough to hang in there and not give up on The Last House on the Left.

LAW ABIDING CITIZEN MOVIE REVIEW

Law Abiding Citizen asks you to not question its leaps in logic in order to get into its violent tale of revenge. And if you're willing to not analyze the plot, to not shake your head in wonder at the series of twists and turns the story takes, then Law Abiding Citizen's not a bad action thriller. But it takes a lot of sacrifice on the viewer's part to allow it to be so.

From a convicted killer's fast-track to the lethal injection chamber, to the intricate, time-consuming maneuverings of a man out for revenge, Law Abiding Citizen isn't going to win any honors for the most coherent, logical plot ever written. However, as action films go, the pacing's fast, the basic premise is fine, and Gerard Butler gives it his all in a darker role than usual. Strangely enough, Law Abiding Citizen's a fun ride, though it feels a bit bizarre to call a film loaded with violence and murder "fun."

The Story

We don't know much about the Shelton family before two ruthless home invaders break into their house, stab the father, and rape and murder the mother and young daughter. Clyde (Butler), the father, is badly wounded but survives, only to see one of the killers get a mere slap on the hand in exchange for testifying against his cohort in crime. Clyde argues and tries to persuade Assistant DA Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) into turning down the deal, but Nick doesn't feel he can get a conviction at trial. Nick's all about his conviction record as he's very political-minded and always looking out for number one, even if it means a brutal murderer gets to serve just a couple of years behind bars.

Gerard Butler shows some skin in 'Law Abiding Citizen.'

Flash-forward 10 years and the one who didn't make a deal is set to die by lethal injection. Something goes horribly wrong and instead of passing on relatively peacefully, the chemicals cause him to be wracked with pain and die a horribly gruesome death. But that's just the beginning of all the deadly shenanigans. The killer who got off easy is found chopped up in dozens of pieces. The most likely suspect in both of these killings? Clyde Shelton.

Arrested for both murders, Clyde goes face to face with Assistant DA Rice as Rice tries to get him to confess to the killings. And Clyde actually says he'll confess if Rice agrees to an utterly ridiculous demand - bring him a comfy mattress for his jail cell and he'll say he killed the men who murdered his family. Once that demand's met, Clyde reveals he has more to say if Rice is willing to make more deals. Rice says he is only because what Clyde has to say involves the potential deaths of other people involved in the prosecution of his wife and daughter's murderers.

As Rice quickly finds out, Clyde won't be happy until he's exacted revenge by killing everyone associated with the case. And, Clyde's not just a grieving husband and father. No, he's a man on a mission with the tools to carry out dozens of killings from inside his jail cell. Clyde will only find his need for vengeance satiated when the entire criminal justice system has paid for letting killers off easy, and that means ADA Rice has to figure out just how Clyde's able to mastermind all these killings (including bombings and a remote controlled assassination of Rice's boss and mentor) before Rice's own wife and daughter become victims of Clyde's brand of justice.

The Cast

Gerard Butler was originally interested in playing the part of the Assistant DA, but opted instead for the role of the widower out for blood. That's a good choice on Butler's part as he's played so many romantic leads and good guys in the past, mixing things up shows audiences he does have a completely different set of skills. Yes, he does get to show off his fabulous body, but there's so much more meat to the role than just what's revealed in that brief but memorable scene. Butler's nasty and ruthless as Clyde, and you root for him despite what he's doing to - in some cases - basically innocent people. Clyde's this puppet-master manipulating an entire city, and Butler pulls off the part so well, it appears he relished the opportunity to get down and dirty with this ruthless and driven character.

Gerard Butler in 'Law Abiding Citizen.'

On the flip side, there's Jamie Foxx who portrays Nick Rice as a smug, self-centered prosecutor completely obliviously to how his actions (or more accurately, inaction) affect the citizens he deals with. We're not meant to support Rice at the beginning of the film, but Foxx tries to at least make him semi-human and not completely loathsome. Still, Butler's characterization of the wronged father makes him the one we pull for throughout the film, despite the attempts by Foxx, screenwriter Kurt Wimmer, and director F Gary Gray to woo us to Nick Rice's side later in the game.

The Bottom Line

Law Abiding Citizen is not the slickest thriller ever put together. It's not the most intelligent indictment of the judicial system ever put forth in a feature film. However, director F Gary Gray said he's not trying to preach to the audience, he's just trying to entertain. Gray wanted Law Abiding Citizen to be a wild ride, and that it is. You root for the guy who's killing people long after you really should - it's that kind of movie. For all its faults, Law Abiding Citizen is a ride worth taking.

The violence is intense, the action is over-the-top, and the big plot twist late in the film will likely take you completely by surprise. Law Abiding Citizen isn't everyone's cup of tea, but if you like your films gritty and raw, it's one you'll find fairly entertaining.

MONSTER vs ALIENS MOVIE REVIEW

I know Jeffrey Katzenberg and James Cameron and a host of other assorted filmmakers want me to like 3-D, but I'm not buying into the hype. I find wearing the glasses and waiting for something to appear to lurch from the screen more irritating than entertaining. But 3-D's not going away anytime soon if Katzenberg and his ilk have their way, and it was in that frame of mind that I sat through Monsters vs Aliens in 3-D and IMAX.

Monsters vs Aliens is beautifully animated, and even the muted colors you see through the annoying 3-D glasses are sparkling enough to enliven the screen. And the voice cast, which includes Reese Witherspoon, Seth Rogen, Hugh Laurie, and Will Arnett, do infuse their characters with more personality than the dialogue should allow them to. Yet fun seemed to be missing from the whole production, making Monsters vs Aliens just a run of the mill animated family movie and nothing more – even with all the so-called bells and whistles attributed to 3-D films.

The Story

Susan (Witherspoon) is ready to say I do to her narcissistic weatherman fiancé when out of the clear blue sky falls a meteorite. Despite the fact she's dressed in her wedding gown, Susan trudges down the hill to get a closer look. But getting up close and personal with a meteorite on your wedding day is never a good idea. The substance contained inside the meteorite causes her to mutate into a 47 foot tall woman at the most inopportune time (as she's poised to exchange vows with her creepy husband-to-be).

The Missing Link (Will Arnett), Dr Cockroach (Hugh Laurie) and B.O.B. (Seth Rogen) in 'Monsters vs Aliens.'

The military shows up (don't ask how they knew they'd be dealing with an out-of-control bridezilla), captures this now gigantic woman, and locks her away in a secret government holding facility alongside other 'monsters'. These other monsters are used to being locked away from the public as they've been caged up for decades, but Susan (newly renamed Ginormica to match her enlarged status) is immensely unhappy and willing to do anything to get out and go home. She's even willing to have Dr. Cockroach (three guesses what he looks like and the first two don't count) experiment on her to see if he can return her to her normal size.

But when Earth is threatened by first a robot from outer space and then a squidish alien who calls himself Gallaxhar (voiced by Rainn Wilson), the caretaker to the monsters, General W.R. Monger (Kiefer Sutherland), suggests letting the monsters free to take on the aliens. And so the battle begins as Ginormica, the gelatinous one-eyed blob known as B.O.B., Dr Cockroach, a Swamp Thing look-alike called The Missing Link, and the gigantic insect labeled Insectosaurus are the people of Earth's only hope. And yes, there's a lesson in there about how it's okay to be different.

The Voice Cast

Seth Rogen sounds like Seth Rogen – which isn't a bad thing - as B.O.B., a blob with a tiny brain who falls hard for a jello dessert. Hugh Laurie plays doctor once again as an overgrown cockroach whose mad cackle sends shivers down Ginormica's ginormous spine. And Will Arnett gamely gets into the character of an amphibious creature who thinks too highly of himself and of his fighting skills. Reese Witherspoon, tackling her first animated feature film role, starts out playing Susan with a perky voice and a bounce in her animated step before transitioning into Ginormica's much more authoritative voice. Witherspoon's warmth comes through, and Susan/Ginormica springs to life thanks to her engaging, energetic delivery.

Ginormica (Reese Witherspoon) and The Missing Link (Will Arnett) in 'Monsters vs Aliens.'

The Bottom Line

Monsters vs Aliens is a step backwards in storytelling, compared to the studio's own Shrek film franchise or any Pixar production. Where Pixar excels is in delivering a compelling, entertaining plot along with fantastic visuals and humor. Monsters vs Aliens left out the entertaining plot and jumped straight to trying to impress with its 3-D action.

There are some fun moments in Monsters vs Aliens, but they are too few and too far in between to make Monsters vs Aliens a must-see (in 3-D or in 2-D). That's not to say youngsters won't laugh and squeal over this animated family-friendly film. There's enough action and enough cool-looking characters to check out to keep the under 12 crowd interested throughout the short running time. But adults are going to get fidgety waiting for Monsters vs Aliens to wind to a close. Pixar's set the bar high and DreamWorks Animations' Monsters vs Aliens doesn't come close to being able to leap over it.

MY ONE AND ONLY MOVIE REVIEW

Renee Zellweger looks gorgeous and delivers her best performance since the original Bridget Jones movie in My One and Only, an engaging '50s period piece directed by Richard Loncraine (Firewall, Wimbledon). The audience for My One and Only is going to be limited, just due to the subject matter, but for adults with discerning taste and a fondness for old Hollywood, it's quite a juicy morsel.

My One and Only is based on the life of actor George Hamilton - he of the perpetual tan. The story follows Hamilton as a young teen trying to deal with his flighty platinum blonde, perfectly made up mother's desire to snatch a wealthy husband after packing up and leaving George's band leader dad behind. Along with Robbie (Mark Rendall), his homosexual big brother who wants to be an actor, George (Logan Lerman) travels from city to city in a Cadillac Eldorado, his mom constantly on the alert for potential beaus with big money. Their journey ultimately leads to California where Robbie gets his shot at a career in front of the camera only to find out he's really not a very good thespian. No matter, George is - and the rest is Hollywood history.

Mark Rendall and Logan Lerman in 'My One and Only.'

In addition to terrific performances by Zellweger, Lerman and Rendall, My One and Only also features Kevin Bacon as George's estranged dad. Bacon's not in the film much, but when he shows up, he's incredibly entertaining to watch. The same goes for David Koechner, Chris Noth, Nick Stahl, and Robin Weigert. It's George's story, but these fine actors make you wish there were time to dwell on some of the peripheral characters who touched his life.

My Own and Only brings the 1950s back to life in stunning detail. The sets and costumes are absolutely faithful to the era. And director Loncraine doesn't just get the props right, he captures the spirit of the decade. My biggest complaint about Ang Lee's Taking Woodstock was that he made it look like the 1960s, but I never believed I was watching people who were actually living through those moments. Loncraine delivers that to us in My One and Only. It's not just set in the 1950s; it could actually be taking place in the 1950s. The characters and dialogue are true to the time, making My One and Only an entertaining little gem.

NEW IN TOWN MOVIE REVIEW

Boy meets girl, they don't like each other, argue, are forced to work together, boy saves girl, girl starts to admit she kind of likes the guy, circumstances force them apart, and girl comes to the realization he's the one. Insert Renee Zellweger as an eager beaver up and coming corporate type from the sunny state of Florida in place of 'girl'. Insert Harry Connick Jr as a good ol' boy who lives in Stereotypical Small Town, Minnesota in place of 'boy.' And there you have New in Town, a romantic comedy that uses every genre trick in the book to try and get a few laughs.

There's nothing new in New in Town. We've seen this plot play out a million times before in much better films. The only thing New in Town has going for it is the chemistry between Renee Zellweger and Harry Connick Jr, and that's not enough to make New in Town a 'Town' worth visiting.

This is a fish out of water story of Lucy, a big city girl who travels to a tiny Minnesota town to help transition her company's latest acquisition, a food manufacturing plant, into a profitable, well-oiled, well-run plant. Of course, Lucy's proposed changes are met with resistance, the locals take advantage of her big city ways, and the union rep she needs to have on her side (who also happens to be a firefighter and a snowplow driver) turns out to be the guy she insulted on her first night in town. But you know - as I've already laid out in the opening paragraph - how things play out, so let's get down to the nitty gritty on where New in Town goes horribly wrong.

Harry Connick Jr in 'New in Town.'

First, every Minnesotan in the film has the IQ of a gerbil. The one exception to the rule is the transplant from a bigger city – Ted – who only wound up in Minnesota after obtaining a higher education elsewhere. From the way they exaggerate the accent (out Fargo'ing Fargo) to the fact the men are all one dimensional hunter/gathers, to the gossipy scrapbooking female Minnesotans, this is one film that seems to have deliberately tried to alienate an entire state.

And secondly, you've got to wonder if screenwriters Kenneth Rance and C. Jay Cox were working off a checklist of clichés. Got the complete opposites as leads? Check. Got the improbable first meeting that establishes their initial antagonism toward one other? Check. How about the typical plot device of forcing the two to play nice in order to get a job done? Check, and double check. The only novel aspect of New in Town was the weather – and jokes about freezing your butt off can only carry a film so far.

Zellweger and Connick Jr are game enough and appear to have tried to make this thing work, but the writing sabotaged their efforts. Plus, I don't think it would have been possible to shoot Zellweger in worse lighting. Once she hits Minnesota (actually, Winnipeg was substituted for the Land of 10,000 Lakes), Zellweger's never presented well onscreen. I don't know if it's the makeup, the lighting, or what, but the end result is very unflattering.

Harry Connick Jr and Renee Zellweger in 'New in Town.'

I laughed a total of two times watching New in Town, and they were more polite chuckles than hearty guffaws. I'm not sure putting out a romantic comedy about a big corporation coming in and putting locals out of work during these hard economic times is a smart move. But then I'm not sure there is a good time to send New in Town out in theaters.

NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM: Battle Of The Smithsonian REVIEW

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian has bigger effects and the setting is of a much grander scale than 2006's Night at the Museum. There's more room to stage chase scenes and many more historical figures/pieces of art available to come alive by moving the film's venue from New York's Museum of National History to the Smithsonian complex in Washington D.C. 20th Century Fox accomplished the near impossible by being allowed to film inside the Smithsonian, yet they failed to take full advantage of the setting.

With so much new to play around with, there should be no reason for Night at the Museum #2 to feel like a rerun of Museum #1, right? Wrong. There's even a lengthy monkey-slapping scene in #2, just like there was in the first movie. Granted, this time there are two monkeys. And twice the monkeys should equal twice the fun, but not so with Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.

The Smithsonian setting does allow a few really quirky, cute interactions with famous works of art. The most engaging of these being our hero Larry escaping with his helper Amelia Earhart into the famous Alfred Eisenstaedt photo of a soldier planting a kiss on a nurse in Times Square on V-J Day. That, and a touching scene with the Tuskegee Airmen thanking Amelia Earhart for her groundbreaking accomplishments, do set this one apart from the original. But there's a lot of retreaded material in here that seems just barely reworked for this sequel.

The Story

Amy Adams as Amelia Earhart in 'Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.'

We catch up with Larry the Night Watchman after he's moved on from his job at the museum to being a rich inventor of semi-useful products. He's pretty much forgotten about his friends at the museum, but when his old buddies are crated up to be shipped to the Smithsonian's warehouse where they'll languish for eternity (or until someone cleans the place and tosses them out), Larry comes to their rescue. The tablet that brought them to life in NY didn't make the trip, but as luck would have it there's another tablet already housed in the Smithsonian's warehouse that has the same magical powers. Unfortunately, the guy who possesses this tablet, Kahmunrah (the older brother of NY's tablet owner), uses its powers for evil.

Kahmunrah's collecting henchmen (i.e. Napoleon, Ivan the Terrible, Al Capone) to help him open up a passageway between worlds so he can bring forth his army of bird warriors. The gang from NY are ready to fight, but they're being held prisoner in a shipping container for most of the film. Meanwhile Larry, Amelia Earhart, the monkeys, some Einstein bobble heads, and the Statue of Abraham Lincoln are left to figure out how to stop Kahmunrah and save the day.

The Cast

Ben Stiller slips into his night watchman uniform once again, delivering pretty much the same level of performance as in the first Night at the Museum movie. If you liked him in that, you'll like him in this. If not, well then why watch this sequel? It's more Larry-centric than the first movie so if Stiller's not your cup of tea, pass on Museum 2.

Robin Williams is back but barely used, Owen Wilson and Steve Coogan have expanded roles as the tiny cowboy and Roman soldier tag team, and even Ricky Gervais puts in an appearance again as the curator of NY's museum. And they all do what you expect them to do with the material, though Wilson and Coogan don't seem to be having as much fun this time around.

From just checking out the trailers I thought Hank Azaria was going to annoy me to no end as the Egyptian Kahmunrah, but he's actually more entertaining to watch than Stiller or the rest of the returning Night cast. However, his performance doesn't hold a candle to Amy Adams as Amelia Earhart. I don't know if Adams is playing her anything like the real Amelia, but it's a blast to watch Adams get all sassy as the world's most famous female aviator.

Owen Wilson and Hank Azaria in 'Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.'

The Bottom Line

There's a batch of other actors thrown into the mix (Christopher Guest, Alain Chabat, Bill Hader, etc) without being given much to do, and way too much time is spent on scenes that are only sort of cute but go absolutely nowhere. Two different scenes have Stiller being threatened if he crosses an imaginary line when one would have been just fine. And we've seen the Easter Island statue or whatever it is make rhymes out of dum dum a couple of times already so enough is enough. With so little time to devote to so many new characters, chopping out a few dum dums wouldn't have harmed the movie whatsoever. I know I'm nitpicking, but I wanted something fresh, something original out of this sequel, and instead it's mostly recycled material.

Kids should still get a kick out of this Museum, but adults may have a harder time finding something worth laughing at this time around.

OBSERVE AND REPORT MOVIE REVIEW

Well, that's 85 minutes of my life I'll never get back. Observe and Report is mean with ugly characters in disturbing situations, which would be fine with me if it were in the least bit funny. Labeled a comedy, there's next to nothing to laugh at in Observe and Report.

You know, I have no problem at all with lines of dialogue sprinkled liberally with 'f—ks' and 'sh-ts' – if, and this is the catch, there's a reason and if it's not overdone. I don't know a single human being who uses the word 'f—k' in every sentence. But in Observe and Report, the word's used so often it goes beyond irritating and becomes absurd.

Seth Rogen's a talented guy and in general I laugh – when I'm supposed to – at pretty much everything he does. But Rogen, playing his darkest, most unlikeable character yet, can't save this disjointed, caustic film from failing to generate any good chuckles. It's great Rogen's trying something different here, but this isn't the right material to use to spread his acting wings.

The Story

Seth Rogen as mall cop Ronnie Barnhardt.

Ronnie Barnhardt (Rogen) is a mall cop – excuse me, the head of mall security – who lusts after a big boobed, plumpy lipped cosmetics girl named Brandi (Anna Faris). When a flasher targets women at his mall, the opportunity presents itself for Ronnie to be the hero, take down the flasher, and get the girl. But Ronnie's prone to violence, delusional, and off his bipolar meds so when a real police detective (Ray Liotta) butts in on what he believes is his case, Ronnie goes off the deep end. The film then takes a serious turn to the dark side, and Ronnie – who's never a likable guy in the first place – becomes someone you'd never in your life want to encounter in a mall or elsewhere on the planet.

The Bottom Line

Anna Faris can make even a very bad movie worth watching. Faris can normally be depended upon to deliver the laughs, and in fact one line of hers (delivered during the most uncomfortable/controversial scene of the film) is the best thing about this movie. But neither Faris nor Rogen are capable of making Observe and Report into anything other than a flatlined comedy without heart, soul, or any depth.

Seth Rogen in 'Observe and Report.'

Writer/director Jody Hill (The Foot Fist Way and Eastbound and Down) could have had a hit with this concept, but somewhere in the execution things went really, really wrong. I think we're never supposed to like Ronnie at any point in this film, and that's fine. But to make a character so unappealing, so repulsive and expect to get some laughs out of his dangerous antics is simply ludicrous. Audiences don't have to empathize with Ronnie or approve of his behavior, but we do have to have something to latch onto about the guy to keep us involved and entertained. Hill never throws us that lifeline.

Shockingly violent, uneven and choppy, Observe and Report is definitely not what you'd expect from the trailers. Anything that could count as comedy is showcased in those promotional clips. The rest is sort of painful to watch and not really worth observing or reporting on.

PARANORMAL ACTIVITY MOVIE REVIEW

Paranormal Activity takes a Blair Witch Project-style approach to storytelling, using 'footage' found after an event to reveal what took place. But while the Blair Witch Project filmmakers opted to keep the actual action (other than rock piles) off camera, Paranormal Activity shows us the goods. What scares the participants also scares the audience.

Whether you're going to find Paranormal Activity a complete waste of time, a decent horror film, or the scariest movie ever depends on whether you think there's enough revealed by the time the film ends. I'm plopping Paranormal Activity into the decent category. It didn't live up to all the prerelease hype; it's not the be-all, end-all of horror movies. But for what Oren Peli was able to accomplish with an $11,000 budget, Paranormal Activity should definitely be applauded. Peli wrote, produced, directed and edited the film and shows real talent and flair for storytelling, signaling the man's got quite a future in filmmaking (if he chooses his follow-up project wisely).

Paranormal Activity's really the little film that could. The movie made its way into Steven Spielberg's hands and the writer/producer of Poltergeist was so freaked out by it, he brought it back to the studio in a black bag. I'm not sure why exactly Spielberg needed to put it in black bag in order to feel safe, but he did. Although it was originally bought by the studio with the idea of remaking it using a bigger budget, a public screening persuaded DreamWorks/Paramount Pictures to leave it be. Paramount is releasing it in a few cities at a time, based on people demanding it in their city. The buzz generated online by people tweeting about it and chatting on message boards has made Paranormal Activity into one of the most talked about movies of 2009. And it was all accomplished without a film crew and with a tiny budget.

'Paranormal Activity' poster

The Story

The action never leaves a two-story house in San Diego. Katie (Katie Featherston) and Micah (Micah Sloat) are pretty much your typical nice young couple. They're not married - she's in college, he's a day-trader. They're relatable, they don't speak movie dialogue, and they seem to really be into each other. Basically, they're people you wouldn't mind being friends with, which means that when events begin to escalate, you really feel for what they're going through. You pull for them to get out of the situation safely.

See, something is terrorizing Katie at night. When we meet the couple, Micah hasn't heard these noises that are waking Katie up from sound sleep. Micah's not really convinced there's anything going on, but he's a caring boyfriend who tries to be supportive. So what does he do? He buys a videocamera in hopes of capturing whatever it is on film. If something's indeed messing with them at night, the evidence should show up in the footage.

Micah follows Katie around with the camera during the day and at night he sets up the camera to record events in their bedroom, feeding the stream into his laptop. And oh yeah, that camera does in fact confirm the existence of something terrifying in their house. To say more would be to spoil the story.

The Cast

First off, I don't know a thing about Katie Featherston or Micah Sloat but I will say they are extremely convincing and absolutely perfect as the couple in the center of all the action. Everything rests on their shoulders, and their performances are truthful and riveting - better than much of what we've seen onscreen this year from actors making millions of dollars in less demanding roles.

The Bottom Line

Had Paranormal Activity taken the Blair Witch Project route of just teasing the scares, it would not have been in any way effective. But Paranormal Activity uses a camera set up in the bedroom at night with low lighting and shows us the paranormal activity going on around this couple sleeping in their bed.

Paranormal Activity works so well because it shows us there really is something going bump in the night. You have every reason to be freaked out by squeaking noises you hear on your stairs or that door that seems to be opened wider than it was when you went to bed. That feeling of being watched...yes, something is keeping an eye on you as you get your 40 winks.

A scene from 'Paranormal Activity.'

Paranormal Activity takes its time getting to the scares, building up the story, drawing us into the lives of this couple, fleshing them out so we see them as flawed but innocent people. As the events unfold and as we see Katie and Micah increasingly lose control of what's going on, we genuinely want to reach out and help them. But unlike many haunted house films, there's a reason why the main characters can't just simply leave. And it's a good reason, a real plot twist that makes Paranormal Activity not just a creepy ghost story.

There's a lot to appreciate about Paranormal Activity, and I'm going to admit a large part of my disappointment in the film likely came from knowing too much going in. That, and I wanted more of the nighttime activities of whatever's in that home with this couple. Yet it is, as I said at the beginning of this review, a decent horror film. The plot is tight, the film moves right along at a snappy pace, and there are a few scenes that made me jump in my seat.

My suggestion: try to avoid watching any trailers or videos from the film before sitting through Paranormal Activity. The less you know, the more likely you are to be frightened

THE PROPOSAL MOVIE REVIEW

Sometimes chemistry can trump originality, as in the case of The Proposal. This romantic comedy from Peter Chiarelli and directed by Anne Fletcher is rife with rom com clichés down to its 'wrapped up in a tidy bow' Hollywood ending any novice to the genre could have seen coming a mile away. Yet despite the fact The Proposal is predictable and stuffed with recycled schtick, it's surprisingly enjoyable and completely charming. If it was a baby, you'd want to pinch its little cheek - it's that cute.

Sandra Bullock had all but sworn off romantic comedies, but fans of the genre should feel fortunate she gave in and did The Proposal. It's been a while since Bullock played a character this much fun to watch. Teaming up with Ryan Reynolds for the first time brought out the best in Bullock, and it made Reynolds come across as even more charismatic than usual.

The Story

In a scene reminiscent of Meryl Streep's grand entry in The Devil Wears Prada, the witchy, bitchy Margaret (Bullock) makes her way through the office as her employees cower in terror. Margaret's one of the most powerful book editors in the business and she doesn't tolerate anything less from perfection from her underlings. And it's her personal assistant, Andrew (Reynolds), who suffers the brunt of Margaret's wrath when things are even slightly out of line.

For three, long, grueling years in which he worked weekends, missed out on family gatherings, and was generally miserable as hell, Andrew suffered and put up with everything Margaret dished out, all the while holding out hope that one day it would all be worthwhile when she promotes him to editor. But nothing in those three incredibly difficult years prepared Andrew for Margaret's latest and greatest demand: marry her or lose his job. Seems Margaret is Canadian and she's been working in this country without the proper visa. In order to keep her high-powered position in the firm - and to stay in NY - she tells her bosses she and Andrew have secretly been dating and are now engaged to be married.

Oscar Nunez and Sandra Bullock in 'The Proposal.'

Once Andrew recovers from shock, he agrees to be Margaret's partner in crime but with a few stipulations of his own. First, he wants the manuscript he's been pushing to be published. And he wants a guarantee that he'll be promoted in the very near future. And finally, he wants Margaret to get down on her knees in public to ask for his hand in marriage. Margaret agrees, and it's off to Sitka, Alaska to meet her future in-laws.

The weekend getaway will also provide the 'engaged' couple with the opportunity to share personal details they'll need to know about each other in order to effectively convince the immigration investigator their relationship's not a sham. But, since this is a rom com, once in Alaska Margaret's icy facade begins to melt. And Andrew, who has real issues with his dad, emerges as someone Margaret could actually care for. Throw in a sassy 90 year old grandmother who wants to see her only grandchild married before she passes away along with Margaret's growing affection for the guy she's bossed around for years, and this mini-vacation turns out to be so much more complicated and confusing than the work-obsessed illegal alien had ever anticipated.

The Cast

Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds make for a formidable team in The Proposal. These two play so well off of each other, we can only hope they'll find another project in which to share the screen - though preferably in one not quite so formulaic. Any decent adult comedy (even of the non-romantic type) would benefit from a Bullock/Reynolds pairing.

W.C. Fields' saying should be amended to "never work with kids, animals or Betty White." In The Proposal White's a scene-stealing senior citizen who pulls the rug out from underneath her co-stars while playing a snappy, spunky, irrepressible granny. Mary Steenburgen and Craig T Nelson are good as Andrew's parents, and Malin Akerman livens up the romantic storyline by showing up in a few scattered scenes as Andrew's ex. Also showing up here and there throughout the film is The Office's Oscar Nuñez. Nuñez is a jack of all trades in The Proposal, playing waiter, store clerk, and the only stripper in the town of Sitka. He's terrific and doesn't overdo it, not even when he's performing nearly naked in Bullock's face, giving her an eye-full of Oscar she'll likely never forget.

Betty White gets touchy-feely with Sandra Bullock in 'The Proposal.'

The Bottom Line

The Proposal is everything those who hate romantic comedies loathe. But for moviegoers who like their films light and fluffy - and don't care if a movie doesn't reinvent the wheel in the process of being entertaining - then The Proposal is just the ticket. A great date movie that's not too sappy, The Proposal is pure escapist fun.

THE SOLOIST MOVIE REVIEW

Here's the deal: Audiences aren't buying into dramas right now. Comedies, comic book-inspired films, action movies, teen films...those are getting the attention of moviegoers. Anything that makes us forget about what's happening in our world and gets us caught up in a total fantasy experience for a couple of hours is doing well at the box office. So, in this climate, it's not the wisest move to unspool something as serious and thought-provoking as The Soloist. Come on, now is not the time of year we normally see films of this ilk, even when the atmosphere isn't as poisonous to dramatic films as it is currently.

The Soloist is the type of prestige film that would normally come out in October, November or December - the sort of picture that usually garners awards attention and attracts ticket buyers looking to check out supposedly the best of what Hollywood has to offer for the year. Orchestrating a beginning of the summer movie season release for The Soloist doesn't make much sense. It was pushed back from a late 2008 release anyway, so what harm would have come from delaying it a few more months to a more appropriate time of year? I don't get it. Summer's when we want to have fun at the theaters, not get caught up in a sad tale of homelessness, mental illness, and the affect of journalism on society at large. And it's a shame The Soloist may get ignored by moviegoers and critics groups alike as it features a couple of the best performances we're likely to see in all of 2009.

The Story

Based on a true story, The Soloist explores the unusual relationship between Los Angeles Times reporter Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr) and Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx), a homeless, schizophrenic street musician who dresses in wild, psychedelic toss-offs and keeps up a steady stream of conversation decipherable only to his own ears much of the time.

Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey Jr in 'The Soloist.'

Lopez is looking for a story to fill up his column, and a random encounter with Ayers sets off his writer instincts and sets his brain to pinging with ideas. Ayers tells Lopez during their first meeting that he attended Juilliard, and the way he plays his violin (which has but two strings left on it) makes that pronouncement seem a possibility. Lopez checks up on him and finds out that in fact Ayers did attend the prestigious school for a couple of years before dropping out.

As Lopez gets to know Ayers - as much as anyone can know a stranger with severe mental problems who's not being treated for his disease - he discovers an incredible musician still exists inside the man who 99.9% of the population would go out of their way to avoid eye contact with. What started as the idea for one column turns into a life-changing relationship from which both men benefit, though in vastly different ways.

The Cast

Is proclaiming Robert Downey Jr one of the best actors of his generation pushing it? Check out The Soloist and tell me Downey Jr isn't at the top of his game as a newspaper reporter who uses Ayers to get a story before finding himself unintentionally becoming the most stable friend the tortured Ayers had during his years on the streets. It's mostly through Downey Jr's eyes that we follow the story, listening in while he dictates what he's learned dealing with Ayers into his tape recorder before writing up his articles for the LA Times. Downey Jr thoroughly and absolutely becomes this veteran journalist who gets too close to his subject and finds himself caught up in Ayers' life to point where an actual friendship has formed.

Jamie Foxx delivers yet another poignant performance as he tackles what just had to be the most difficult role of his career. Whether speaking at a manic pace as Ayers' mind trips out on him or altering everything about his being when Ayers shows moments of near lucidity, Foxx never, ever turns his portrayal of Ayers into a caricature of a mentally unbalanced man.

Robert Downey Jr and Jamie Foxx in 'The Soloist.'

The Bottom Line

Director Joe Wright chose The Soloist as his first American film after having earned high praise for his work helming Pride and Prejudice and Atonement. And Wright appears to have been the right choice for this tricky film. He handles the scenes of homeless people and the mentally ill living hard lives on the streets without sugar-coating his subject matter. Wright's made an honest, unflinching film that's uncomfortable to watch at times, a pure joy to behold at others, and overall as faithful to its source material as possible while still being cinematically entertaining. I'm hoping audiences will give it a chance, despite the bad release date and somber subject matter.

STAR TREK MOVIE REVIEW

This Star Trek did what Batman Begins managed to do for me back in 2005. Prior to that origin story, I had no clue as to what the fuss was all about. Why were people still interested in a guy who dressed up like a bat and fought clowns to keep Gotham safe from crime? I didn't get it, and Batman didn't appeal to me in the least. But Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale taught me everything I, as a non-comic book person, needed to know about the Caped Crusader and made a Batman fan out of me.

The same now goes for this Star Trek. I remember watching exactly one Star Trek movie prior to this - the one with the whale - but nothing about any of the other films interested me in the slightest bit. I did catch reruns of the original series as a kid every now and then, but never considered myself a Star Trek 'fan' of any sort. But now, thanks to screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, director JJ Abrams, and an incredibly talented cast of actors, I really understand and appreciate what it is about Captain Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the USS Enterprise crew that gets people all worked up.

Star Trek takes audiences on the adventure of a lifetime, and I'd gladly sit through this revamped, reinvigorated, re-energized origin tale over and over again - something I don't say about even the very best summer blockbusters. Being a Trekkie seems sort of cool after watching 2009's version of Star Trek, something I would never in my wildest dreams have anticipated ever thinking prior to this Star Trek film.

The Story

Kurtzman and Orci serve up an origin story crammed with details yet fast-paced and flowing. The story they've fashioned takes place in an alternate universe and so not every bit of Star Trek mythology plays out as anticipated; there are twists and turns here that Trekkies and Trekkers won't expect (including a surprisingly touching love story). It's a smart - and brave - move on Kurtzman and Orci's part as they've managed to tell a story that doesn't put off newbies or Star Trek veterans by placing it in this other reality.

A scene from 'Star Trek.'

Every main character from the Star Trek franchise is given his or - in the case of the lone female, Uhura (Zoe Saldana) - her time to shine as they're introduced and given their assignments onboard the USS Enterprise as it leaves on its maiden voyage. We learn Kirk's a rebel who signs up for Starfleet after being goaded into it by Captain Pike. Spock (Zachary Quinto) is an instructor at Starfleet only because he opted not to follow in the footsteps of his forefathers. Bones (Karl Urban), a doctor who doesn't like to fly, immediately finds a kindred spirit in Kirk (Chris Pine), and the two quickly develop a close friendship that actually is the catalyst to Kirk serving aboard the USS Enterprise. Scotty (Simon Pegg) doesn't enter the picture until later on, but when it's his time to join the USS Enterprise crew he does so with a bang. And in this reality, Uhura is an intelligent and feisty woman who doesn't take any crap from anyone, including Kirk.

This new group, fresh out of the Starfleet Academy, is immediately thrust into the heat of battle when Nero (Eric Bana) - a visitor from the future - seeks revenge for a horrific act that hasn't yet occurred. Kirk, proving he's born to be the man in charge, takes the lead after Captain Pike is kidnapped, butting heads with Spock (his nemesis from the academy) as the crew of the USS Enterprises has the fate of Earth resting in their hands. Fortunately, in a splendid twist that makes total sense, another visitor from the future is willing to share information crucial to their success.

The Cast

Chris Pine - brilliant. Zachary Quinto - brilliant. Eric Bana - brilliant. You get the picture? JJ Abrams did a simply amazing job of matching actors to roles, and not once does any performance feel like - and here's where it could have gone desperately, disastrously wrong - a copycat of the original. These are fresh, original takes on the characters yet at the same time, you know exactly who these people are. How did they pull that off? It's an unbelievable accomplishment I can't even begin to describe. Adjectives fail me.

The Bottom Line

This bold adventure is sure to win over a whole new generation of fans. There's something for everyone in this Star Trek. I know I was totally enthralled and completely entertained throughout the film. The special effects were first-rate, the cinematography was stunning, the production design was unparalleled, and under Abrams' direction every aspect of this Star Trek felt vibrant and fresh and engaging. And on that subject, Star Trek deserves to be seen in all its big screen glory so don't wait for the DVD/Blu-ray release.

Anton Yelchin, Chris Pine, Simon Pegg, Karl Urban, John Cho, and Zoe Saldana in 'Star Trek.'

Star Trek is the perfect summer movie. There's not a thing about this film I'd change, a scene I'd cut, or dialogue I'd in any way alter. It's got the action, the heart, the thrills, and the humor needed to provide the perfect escape experience audiences are looking for now more than ever.

Star Trek is an incredibly impressive, exceptionally entertaining film. And best of all, it doesn't matter if you know absolutely nothing about the series or films. Don't be put off by the fact it's a Star Trek movie and don't dismiss it because you're afraid you'll be lost and confused by the plot. No prior knowledge is needed to become immersed in this high-flying, sci-fi extravaganza.

This origin story works on so many different levels, I can't wait to see what Abrams and crew have up their sleeves for the next Star Trek adventure

TAKEN MOVIE REVIEW

Liam Neeson makes Jack Bauer look like a wimp in Taken, a ridiculously silly action drama directed by Pierre Morel (District B13). Taken's like a Bourne movie without the brains, a film made solely to satisfy action junkies who care not one iota about plot as long as there's plenty of bloodshed and a substantial number of dead bodies piled up by the time the credits roll on by. If all you want out of your movie-going dollar is to watch one man overcome incalculably high odds to rescue his daughter from evil foreigners (Americans, good – everyone else, bad), then Taken is the movie for you.

The Story

Bryan Mills (Neeson) quits his job as a 'preventer' working for the CIA or FBI or another organization known by its initials to try and connect with his daughter Kim who he pretty much ignored while she was growing up. Now that she's turning 17, Bryan's decided it's time to try and have a relationship with Kim. His ex-wife's not happy about his sudden desire to become a part of their daughter's life, but Bryan's convinced it's the thing to do.

Now retired, Bryan lives off his pension and money made from taking the occasional odd job with his ex-government agency buddies. One job finds him and his three ex co-workers guarding a pop singer on her way into and out of a concert. Now, we never find out why this pop singer is attacked after leaving the stage, but she is and Bryan happens to be the temporary bodyguard who saves her. She, of course, is grateful and gives him a reward for his bravery that you know is going to figure big somewhere down the line in the film.

…As I'm typing this out, all that's going through my head is the fact that none of this plot nonsense matters one little bit. Rather than continue on in detail, here's all you really need to know:

Liam Neeson in 'Taken.'

Bryan is skilled with guns, knives, his hands, torture devices, stealing cars, and breaking and entering. Kim is a perky 17 year old virgin spoiled by her mom and super wealthy stepdad who buys her a pony on her 17th birthday while her real dad can only afford a small karaoke machine. Why a pony and not a car? She's 17 not 10… But I digress. Against her dad's best judgment she goes on vacation with her 19 year old best friend to Paris. Everything she tells her dad she'll be doing there is a lie. Dad is super suspicious. His worst nightmare comes true as soon as Kim hits French soil. Daddy's pristine princess is this flame that attracts all manner of bad men, all of whom will rue the day they chose her to mess with as Bryan has no qualms whatsoever about killing (which puts him one up on Mr. Pony Buyer). That's Taken.

The Cast

Liam Neeson is a surprisingly believable man of action. Taken shows us a side of Neeson we haven't seen before and given a better script to work off of, it might be fun to see Neeson take on a kick ass, take no prisoners sort of character again. Neeson's intense and most definitely scary as a dad with just the right training and disposition to rescue his precious daughter from the clutches of the evil slave-trading, prostitute making, villains who chose the wrong girl to take advantage of. This is all Neeson's show as every other character is just window dressing or there for him to kill. Even Maggie Grace as Kim and Famke Janssen as his ex-wife Lenore are nothing more than one-dimensional decorations in this action-heavy killfest.

The Bottom Line

Liam Neeson in 'Taken.'

Taken doesn't care who it offends, what ethnic groups might be insulted by their portrayal in the film, how sinister everything French is made out to be, or the fact all events that occur in the film's 94 minutes defy probability and logic. When the hero's outnumbered, why is it the bad guys attack one at a time? Why do half a dozen men stand around and wait their turn instead of acting as a group? Why don't bullets hit their mark when the men firing them are highly trained bodyguards or killers or something of the sort? Why doesn't this ex-government agent ask his buddies to help him track down his daughter? If you're asking these questions and expect reasonable, logical answers from the script by Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen, then you're expecting far, far too much from Taken.

Go in with low expectations for the script but high expectations for the way the action's staged (the hand-to-hand combat is particularly well choreographed), and you'll be satisfied. But, again, this is only a movie for diehard action fans. All others should avoid theaters screening Taken at all costs.