close [×]

Dear Flixster Community,

After seven fabulous years with you all, we are sorry to let you know that we're going to be retiring the Flixster Community site on September 30, 2014. Please note that you can still access your ratings, reviews, and quizzes on Flixster and Rotten Tomatoes using your same login. We have had so much fun building this community with you.

Thanks for all the memories,

365 movies in 365 days

  1. brendan151
  2. Brendan

On 11/9/12 I decided that I will watch 365 movies a year, or a movie every day for a year. The way it works is that if I watch 2 in one day I will get one day where I went have to watch one. But I can only use those days off if I absolutely need them. I watch movies every night when I am done with homework. Once I have seen 365 movies I will be done that. Every time I see a movie I will add to this list. Once there are 365 movies on the list I will be done. Also if see a movie that I have already seen before, that won't be added to the list. It has to be something I haven't already seen.

Page Views
  brendan151's Rating My Rating
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows 2011,  PG-13)
Breakfast at Tiffany's 1961,  Unrated)
The Campaign 2012,  R)
Lockout (Unrated) 2012,  PG-13)
Dr. No 1962,  PG)
Kill Bill: Volume 2 2004,  R)
I Am Legend 2007,  PG-13)
I Am Legend
A fantastic performance from Will Smith. He really acted like he was the last man on earth. It is interesting how they show the effects that being alone has had on him. It reminded me of Tom Hanks in "Castaway" when he was talking to the maniqins in the video store. You could clearly see the mental effects it had on him. I was surprised because I found this to be more of a drama then a scary movie. It was more reliant on his acting then I expected, which is why I liked this.

However it wasn't all drama though. It was still a very creepy movie. The scene where he is laying in the bath tub with his dog gave me chills, when you could hear the noises of all of the infected people outside. The scene when he walks into the pitch black building trying to find his dog was creepy, especially when he sees the dear being eaten. I kept telling him not to do this, and to get out like you do with all people in scary movies.

I liked the way they made New York look abandoned, and like nobody had been there in years. It looked really appropriate considering the fact that he is the only man alive in that city. It was strange to see New York so quite, considering that the streets probably were only quite like that the night of September 11th, when it everybody was staying at home watching tv. The stuff that he would do during the day I found was most interesting. How he would hunt, and spend each day almost like it was a saturday. It looked like that because you would see him doing things like making himself breakfast, exersize, play golf, and rent movies.

When you watch this you really do put yourself in his shoes. I kept thinking how I would be living my life in his situation. Like when he was hitting Golf balls I kept thinking that I want to see him play on a course. I could really picture myself doing all of the things he was doing during the day, because his acting was so convincing.

The short flashbacks that were randomly scrambled throughout the whole movie of the night his family dies, and when they ordered a quarantine on New York, explained his current situation very well. However it would have been nice if they explained what started the virus, and how it was made. This is definitely a film that makes you want to see more for that reason, and for the reasons given in the previous paragraph. I thought that this was a really good movie all around.
Rounders 1998,  R)
The Spy Who Loved Me 1977,  PG)
Moonraker 1979,  PG)
American Beauty 1999,  R)
American Beauty
"I guess I could be pretty pissed off about what happened to me. But it's hard o stay mad when there is so much beauty in the world. Sometimes I feel like I am seeing it all at once, and it is too much. My heart fills up like a balloon that is about to burst. And then I remember to relax. And stop trying to hold on to it. And then it flows through me like rain. And I can feel anything but gratitude for every moment of my stupid little life. You have no idea what I'm talking about do you? But don't worry you will someday." - Lester Burnham

American Beauty was the directorial debut of Sam Mendes. He won best director for this, and the movie won best picture for the year of 1999. Kevin Spacey got the award for best actor for the 2nd time in his career. The film won a total of 5 Oscars, and it is truly won of the greatest films ever made.

It is one of my favorite movies as well. I have seen this 2 and a half times, and I never watch a movie twice so that says a lot coming from me. I have a love hate thing with it however, because the characters in this movie are all really flawed and kind of nasty. There are a few characters that you really like, but even they have some really huge flaws in them. The American dream is to have a job, and a house so you can raise a family. However that dream in reality is very flawed and this movie shows that. Nobody in this movie is happy so it is a very depressing movie that bothers you at times. I found it to be a very dark black comedy. I also found it to be thought provoking, and interesting.

A dead man narrates the story. Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) is dead, and he is narrating the story of the last year of his life. He has less then a year before he dies, but he doesn't know it, but he pretty much already is. He is a walking cliché. He is depressed, he has been working in the same job for years, and his family thinks he is a loser. His wife Caroline (Annette Bening) is miserable, and she hates herself. She is a total fake, and she does the worst job trying to hide the fact that she is miserable. She is a bully to Lester and to their daughter Jane (Thorah Birch). I hated her completely. I thought Annette Bening did a great acting job, because I hated her character so much, and you were supposed to so she gets props for that. Jane is a typical teenage girl. She is angry, confused, and she has bad self-esteem. It doesn't help her that her friend Angela Hayes (Mena Suvari) is beautiful, and all she cares about is her looks. Angela is the most arrogant person I have ever seen. She and Caroline are the two characters that I couldn't stand. Angela is the American beauty in the story. However in the end I think that they tried to make you think that Jane is the American beauty. Because they make her look better and better as the film goes along, and they make Angela look like a really ugly person.

Lester develops a crush on her, and it is very creepy, because she is his daughter's best friend. He fantasizes about her naked in a bed of roses. The fantasies can be funny, because his facial expressions when he is in the middle of them are hilarious. I think Kevin Spacey won the Oscar for this film, because of how funny he was in the film. He eventually starts to change his life, and begins to stand up for himself, and that is when the movie gets really good. My favorite scene is when he has a fight with his wife in the middle of the night, and then he just stands up for himself and leaves her stunned. Also the scene at dinner when he starts saying how he gets treated like he doesn't exist, and he throws the plate at the wall. That scene really bothered me, but I loved it. Lester is one of the few characters who you cheer for in this film. I found that I could relate to him, because at times I want to change like he did, and basically say the hell with this. I wouldn't go as far as he did, because he did start doing weed, and blackmailed his boss. His story is another breaking bad story that you see in a lot of things. However he really starts to cause stress with his family once he starts to stand up for himself.

The next-door neighbor Ricky Fitts (Wes Bentley) just moved in. He is a pot dealer, and user. He films everything that goes on around him, including Jane. It is very creepy, but he films her because he thinks she is beautiful, and because he finds her interesting. When Angela is around he ignores her, and he just films Jane. He eventually begins a relationship with her, and a friendship with Lester. He is abused by his father Colonel Fitts (Chris Cooper). Colonel Fitts is homophobic, and just a nasty person. He beats his son up a few times in the film.

The film takes you through a wide range of emotions. That is why I like it so much. You feel, sad, happy, angry, and bad for people at times. All of the characters that you hated you feel bad for in the end. The ending although you may think is sad because you can tell that Lester was happy when he died. That is not a spoiler because you know he is dead at the beginning.

-----Spoiler Alert-----
Lester gets killed by Colonel Fitts because Fitts kissed him, and that brought out the fact that Colonel Fitts was a in the closet gay man. The fact that he had it in him was why he hated it so much, and it was something that made me think. You know that Lester is happy because when you see his head on the counter dead, he is smiling. Ricky walks in and is stunned by it, but then he smiles when he can tell that Lester is happy. The film started with him asking Jane is she wanted him to kill her father, and it is ironic because she got her wish.
-----End of Spoiler Alert-----

This is a film that was better the 2nd time, because I picked up on things I hadn't noticed before. I never noticed that Colonel Fitts saw a lot of things that made him suspect that his son and Lester were both gay and together. I didn't pick up on those signs the first time. Also when he shoots Lester I never noticed that when the blood hit the wall that it looked like a rose. I could never figure out the symbolism of the rose throughout the movie the first time I watched it, but I noticed it the 2nd time.

-----Comparisons to The Great Gatsby-----

Although the Great Gatsby and the movie American beauty take place 80 years apart with very different plots, there are many striking similarities between the flawed lead characters and these flaws create much drama and pain for the other characters, and often for the viewer. The flaws lead to the downfall of several characters, including the death of Gatsby and Lester, and leave most of the others scarred and damaged. The Great Gatsby and American Beauty both contain elements of class; people presenting a false image, cruelty, bullying, bigotry and dishonesty. Both stories are missing the most important elements of life including real love, good marriages, integrity, positive self-images, and treating people well. These stories involve people mostly with the opposite traits. No one should want to live the kind of lives shown in these stories.

Daisy and Carolyn have the most similarities among the main characters. Both are very miserable but they try to present an image of success, happiness and perfection to the world. Both were happy at one time in their lives, Daisy during her years in Memphis and Carolyn when she was early in her marriage and her daughter was young. Now both their marriages are farces. Daisy's husband Tom is cheating on her. Lester is fantasizing about other women and openly hostile towards Carolyn, standing up to her for the first time. Neither loves their husband. In Chapter 2 Myrtle's sister says to Nick "Neither of them can stand the person they are married to" referring to Tom Buchanan's marriage to Daisy and Myrtle's to George Wilson. Lester's hatred of Carolyn is apparent in everything he says to her and how he looks at her. And both show glimpses of how unhappy they are. Carolyn breaks down in tears and anger several times and decides to kill her husband but gets beat to it by the next-door neighbor. And you see that Daisy knows how bad her life is when she tells Nick about what she said when her daughter was born in Chapter 1, "All right, I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she will be a fool-that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool." She seems to be saying that she can't be anything better than a fool and she knows it, which makes it worse. In the end she chooses to stay with Tom despite her obvious hatred of him and the fact that Gatsby is willing to do anything for her, including take the fall for killing Myrtle. This shows how awful she is. And Angela is on her way to kill her husband but somebody beats her to it.

It seems that Jay Gatsby and Lester are very different. Gatsby is a millionaire and a man that has had many successes. Lester is working at a burger joint, smoking pot all the time and fantasizes about his daughter's friend. No one looks up to Lester like they do Gatsby. But they are both flawed in similar ways. They are both guys who want to change their lives even if what they do is illegal or hurts others. Both men want women that seem to be awful women. Lester fantasizes about his daughter's best friend Angela who he thinks is beautiful, but she is actually a terribly flawed person. Angela is arrogant, nasty, and conceited as you can possibly be, and she hurts everyone around her. Gatsby wants Daisy, who he builds up to represent perfection and him achieving what he wants in life, but she is actually a shallow terrible person. They both waste their time fantasizing on women that aren't good for them or worth them. Both are delusional about these women too. Lester lifts weights so he can be more attractive to Angela. In Chapter 4 Jordan tells Nick "Gatsby bought that house so that Daisy would be just across the bay." This could be like Lester lifting weights to impress Angela, except he is using his fantastic mansion to impress Daisy even though she already chose someone else. Both men don't get what they want in the end, Gatsby loses Daisy and Lester does not take the opportunity Angela offers him. By the end you have sympathy and some admiration for both yet at the end they are hated by others and this leads to their ultimate downfall. Both men are shot and killed by men who accused them of doing something they didn't do-Gatsby of killing Myrtle and Lester of having sex with his killer's son leading to the father revealing his own repressed homosexuality.

There is bullying in both stories as well. Angela, Carolyn and the Colonel all bully throughout American Beauty. Angela makes fun of and demeans anyone that disagrees or interferes with what she wants. She constantly demeans Ricky because he feels he is taking her friend away. The Colonel bullies his son and wife. And Carolyn bullies her husband and daughter. She demeans her husband by reminding him the moneymaker in the family. In Gatsby Tom Buchanan and Myrtle Wilson bully and demean others. Tom demeans and bullies Wilson throughout the story and bullies Myrtle. Gatsby in the scene in the hotel room in Chapter 7 when he says "I suppose the latest thing is to sit back and let Mr. Nobody from Nowhere make love to your wife." He is trying to make Gatsby seem worthless since he was poor without a prominent family name. In Chapter II Myrtle demeans her husband when she says "the only crazy I was when I married him. I knew right away I made a mistake. He borrowed someone's best suit to get married in, and never even told me about it, and the man came after it one day when he was out." She is demeaning him for being poor. She demeans and bullies him to his face as well. Myrtle always tries to act like she is someone she is not like both Angela and Carolyn in American Beauty. And all three women are very unhappy and insecure underneath.

There are huge differences between the stories and I liked American Beauty much more. Nothing gets resolved in Gatsby. I felt the same way about everyone all the way through. None of the characters were reformed or redeemed in any way. In American Beauty there are several stories of redemption. The main one is Lester standing up for himself and becoming happy. He even dies happy. Ricky stands up to his father. And Jane stands up to her bullying friend Angela and becomes happy with Ricky. She becomes the American Beauty. You even feel sympathy for the characters you hate in American Beauty like the Colonel and Carolyn. In the Great Gatsby the only person that generates any sympathy is Gatsby, but not much, since he is as delusional as ever. Wilson is a sympathetic figure until the end when he kills Gatsby and himself. I feel that readers and viewers want stories where there is a mix of good and bad characters as well as stories of redemption and felt that the Great Gatsby portrayed only bad character so Fitzgerald could convey his feelings for that time.

-----End of Comparison-----

This is an amazing movie that demands to be re-watched. The acting is awesome, and so is the story. Perfect movie.
Goldfinger 1964,  PG)
This is when James Bond really became James Bond. When we think of 007 we think of cars with cool gadgets, and cheesy villains. Sean Connery was the best Bond after Daniel Craig and this was the best film he did, and the best in the whole series after Skyfall, and Casino Royale. The first two in the series Dr. No, and From Russia With Love were great, but not as great as this, because they were slower, and they didn't have all the gadgets that make the stereotypical 007 film that we love. They had them, but not as much as this film did. All the James Bond films are cheesy, but some of them are too cheesy. This one was cheesy enough for it to be funny and entertaining, but not so much that the film couldn't be taken seriously at all. That is why this is my favorite of the old ones. What is good about Sean Connery is that he is like the Cary Grant of the 60's in the Bond films. He sounds like him and was similar in personality to him. He had the same leading man presence that Grant had too. Which was perfect for a 60's Bond film.

James Bond (Sean Connery) is ordered by his superior M to go to Miami Beach to observe Auric Goldfinger (Gert Fröbe), a bullion dealer that is staying at the same hotel. After bond catches Goldfinger cheating at gin rummy, and stops him he consummates the relationship with the employee he used to blackmail Goldfinger into losing. He is knocked out by Goldfingers servant Oddjob (Harold Sakata)he wakes up and finds her dead covered in gold paint. After he learns what Goldfinger's true mission is he arranges to meet Goldfinger and play golf with him. He beats Goldfinger, and then follows him to Switzerland determined to find out how he smuggles Gold internationally.

This film gets parodied a lot in Austin Powers films. OddJob's famous thing in this film is that he throws his hat and it breaks a statue. In the first Austin Powers there is a guy who throws a shoe. The 3rd Austin Powers film was called "Goldmember" which was a parody to the title of this film. The Bond films have had a huge effect on the film industry, and the fact that they get parodied so often shows that. This film is one of the most important films in the series, and it is one of the greatest films of all time. It is the one Bond film in the book "1001 movies you must see before you die."

This is a great movie that is fun, funny, and cheasy. You can make fun of it without ruining it, which makes Bond films so special. Also because this is only the third film it was still original and new. After a while it got ruined because it became the same thing over and over again. I liked this one because it felt so original at first. The other Bond films were mostly decent, but they weren't as good until Daniel Craig came around and reinvented 007 and made it better. This is a great classic overall.
Lincoln 2012,  PG-13)
Thunderball 1965,  PG)
Training Day 2001,  R)
You Only Live Twice 1967,  PG)
Argo 2012,  R)
This film won best picture for 2012, and it really deserved it. Though it was my 4th favorite film of 2012, first being Silver Linings Playbook I thought that it would get best picture for sure. This declassified true story delivers intense suspense, great dialog, and an awesome edge of your seat feel to it. It grabs you right off of the bat and just gets more and more awesome as it goes along. It was perfectly paced, and ten minutes into it my Dad and I looked at each other and said "This is already awesome for me." We walked out of the theater with our stomachs in knots because it got so heavy and intense. I felt tense for about a half hour after the film was done.

Partly because the film felt so real, and it was so convincing. Though the ending had to be made historically inaccurate so it wouldn't be boring for the audience it still felt real. This is a film that you probably knew the ending going into it, because it was a true story, and a declassified one so part of the struggle to writing this screenplay would have been making an ending that kept you on the edge of your seat even thought you know what will happen. Chris Terrio did a great job adapting the screenplay from the book. He won best-adapted screenplay for this.

Ben Affleck I never really liked him that much as an actor, but I have always thought he was a really good screenplay writer and director. He wrote Good Will Hunting with Matt Damon in high school, he wrote and directed Gone Baby Gone, and he wrote, directed and starred in The Town. He didn't write Argo, but he did direct and star in it. I grew to appreciate him as an actor more when I saw the town, but I thought he was really good in this. I think he should direct and write more films then he acts in. This film was different, because his films usually take place in Boston, and he gives the true feel of the city in his films. I come from Boston so I found that I could relate to his films like Gone Baby Gone, not for the story or characters, but because you get the true feel of the city of Boston in them. This film was so different from his other films, and it took place in many places all around the country and the world. I think that is what made this an interesting film for him to do, and he pulled it off beautifully.

Protesters try to break into the American Embassy in Tehran so they are forced to shred all of the documents after all attempts to hold off the crowd fail. Six diplomats escape as the protestors barge in and take everybody hostage. The escapee's are Robert Anders (Tate Donovan), Cora Amburn-Lijek (Clea DuVall), Mark Lijek (Christopher Denham), Joseph Stafford (Scoot McNairy), Kathleen Stafford (Kerry Bishé), and Lee Schatz (Rory Cochrane). The actors actually looked like the real people. The Canadian ambassador lets them hide at his place.

Things get intense in the CIA as they try to figure out a way to get them out. Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) a CIA exfiltration specialist is brought in to help come up with an idea to get them out. He is inspired by watching Battle for the Planet Of the Apes to do a cover story where the escapee's would be Canadian filmmakers looking for locations for their film in Iran for their science fiction movie.

Tony and Jack O'Donnell (Bryan Cranston) get in touch with John Chambers (John Goodman) and tell him of their idea. Chambers is a Hollywood makeup artist. They then get in tough with Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) who is a foul-mouthed Hollywood producer that is hilarious. He sets up a fake movie, script, publicizes it to look legitimate. The film will be called "Argo," and it will be a sci-fi fantasy. It then becomes a really intense movie with a lot of suspense, and an incredible story.

The movie was absolutely awesome. I loved it from start to finish, and I would recommend it to everybody. The story was incredible, and the fact that it really happened made it even better. The book isn't that great, and it is boring, but the movie blows you away.
GoldenEye 1995,  PG-13)
Flight 2012,  R)
Flight was a very good movie, but it was not what I expected it to be. The trailers made it look more like a really cool film, but it turned out to be a really serious drama. It was better then I expected though, and I liked the story that was misrepresented in the trailers. It is a heroic story, about a hero who has done one huge heroic and miraculous thing, but has done many terrible things. The story is clichéd in certain areas, but the uses of clichés are good. Clichés are good as long as you go into depth with them, and this film does a great job with that. Directed by Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump, Cast Away) this story takes you into the investigation of a plane crash that was piloted by Whip Whitaker (Denzel Washington).

Whip is an alcoholic and an addict. One morning he wakes up in a hotel with his girlfriend drunk so he does some cocaine to get his head straight. He then heads out to the airport to get ready to fly. He sneaks a few drinks into his orange juice and falls asleep in the cockpit, but is woken up when the plane breaks down in mid air, and starts falling. He makes all the right decisions and he crashes the plane in a field, and saves nearly everybody on the plane. He wakes up in the hospital and he is told of his condition. The crash is all over the news and he is now being called an American hero. They found alcohol and the cocaine in his blood which was predictable, and the story becomes a drama about weather or not the crash was his fault or if it was because he had a broken plane, which he claims they gave him. It also follows his life afterwards, and his huge drinking problem. "Will he go to jail or not?" is the question you have the entire time. It is a very different role for Denzel, because he gained a lot of weight for it so he would have a beer belly, and just the character itself is different for him. Different because he usually has a pretty charming personality which he doesn't have at all in this. It shows what a great actor he is though.

Whip is a hero for that but as the story unravels he looks like he shouldn't be called one. He has saved a lot of people, but he has hurt a ton with his alcoholism. The ending makes you think, and it leaves you satisfied. You could feel happy or sad at the end, depending on how you felt about him during the film, but they did end it well. The only plot hole is that they never really described why he started drinking and snorting cocaine. That is the only question you have when you leave the theater.

Other then that it was a very good movie, and very well done. It is enjoyable, and thought provoking. It got intense at certain moments, because of the acting. John Goodman has a small role in it, but he delivers some funny lines, which he pretty much always does, so it was good to have him in this. The compelling performance from Denzel Washington really adds to the film being thought provoking, and it being intense at times. It was a very good drama, and just another good one to add to Denzel's filmography.
Diamonds Are Forever 1971,  PG)
Wreck-it Ralph 2012,  PG)
Live and Let Die 1973,  PG)
Fight Club 1999,  R)
Juno 2007,  PG-13)
Vertigo 1958,  PG)
Suspense is defined by films like Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo." It has been recently voted the greatest movie of all time, and it is well deserved. My favorite Hitchcock film is "Rear Window," but I still love this one, and it is one of my favorite Alfred Hitchcock films. It is a mixture of suspense, mystery, romance, drama, and neor. Like all Hitchcock films it is really slow, and then it gets really suspenseful, and it is exciting at the end. The first half is a bit of a neor/drama film that turns into a romantic suspense film that is dramatic and interesting. The film had a great surprise twist at the end, and it is one that you won't see coming. It shows how Alfred Hitchcock is still today the "Master of Suspense." This isn't my favorite as I said earlier, but one of them.

How I rank Hitchcock films of the ones I have seen.

1. Rear Window
2. North By Northwest
3. Psycho
4. The Birds
5. Vertigo
6. Dial M For Murder
7. Strangers On A Train
8. To Catch A Thief

Part of the films masterpiece is the invention of the camera technique called the "Dolly Zoom." A dolly zoom is when the camera zooms in the opposite direction that it is moving. When James Stewart gets vertigo in this the camera zooms forward while it moves backwards creating a vertigo effect. The dolly zoom has been used in films like Jaws too. It is a really brilliant thing that he invented for this film that truly did inspire many other films.

Vertigo is what you get when you are up high, and you have acrophobia. John "Scottie" Ferguson (James Stewart) has acrophobia but he realizes he has it at the worst possible time, and it results in a man falling to his death. Though it wasn't his fault he decides to retire from police work due to the guilt he feels, and because of his illness. Gavin Elster (Tom Helmore) his old friend lures him into another case in which he must follow his wife who has been possessed by some sort of spirit, and he doesn't know what to do. All of the things that Ferguson finds her doing eventually is tied into the ending. His wife's name is Madeleine (Kim Novak). After he witnesses Madeleine jump into the San Francisco Bay, he gets her out and saves her life. They then begin a romance that ends after she kills herself by jumping off of the tower from a church. She ran up the church because she knew he wouldn't make it up because his acrophobia would return. He did the whole thing to help him cure his acrophobia. The rest of the plot I will save for you to see for yourselves.

It is a great film with great acting from James Stewart, and brilliant camera work. That is why it has been voted the greatest film of all time. I love it so much.
Octopussy 1983,  PG)
Primal Fear 1996,  R)
Primal Fear
Well my rating is actually 85%, just like the user rating. This was a really addicting movie to watch. I kept watching it on my phone in an airport on Netflix. I at one point was walking towards the bathroom watching this on my phone, because it was so good. I was at the edge of my seat during the entire 2nd half of the movie. The first half was a little slow, but still really good. I find that slower crime films are more suspenseful, because they help build up for the more awesome stuff at the end. That is exactly what this film did.

This is the film that made Edward Norton a well known actor. I find that he usually plays the same role, but in this one, he was so different then his later stuff. He played a boy that was kind of wimpy almost, and the exact type of guy you would expect to be innocent. he has a stutter, and a quiet voice, with a slight accent. His character's name is Aaron, which was different from his usual role, but not a big stretch however. He also played Roy. Roy is Aaron's 2nd personality, and is very evil, and brutal. He is the one that killed the priest. He takes over Aaron, and causes him to do very violent things, which afterwards he blacks out, and doesn't remember a thing. Why Edward Norton is so good in this film, is because he plays a boy with multiple personality disorder. He plays two different people in one. Both personality's are entirely different from each other, which is why he is so good in this. He did a similar thing in Fight Club. In that movie he also played a guy that had an alter-ego, or a 2nd personality. That was his 2nd best performance, but this is his best. I won't blow the ending, because it's really good.

Richard Gere plays Martin Vail, a defense lawyer. Martin is disliked because he defends criminals, which many defense attorneys are for that same reason. It's a real life cliche that you see with defense attorneys. But he really believes that Aaron is innocent, but eventually thinks he is innocent on the grounds of temporary insanity. He doesn't learn about Aaron's illness until later in the film. By the time he learns about it he has already pleaded innocent, and he doesn't think he can change his plea in the middle of the trial. He has a very intense case that he wants to win. He hurts others around him to help Aaron, but he believes he is doing the right thing. It is one of those conflicts that you see a lot in movies, where there isn't a right thing to do.

The film was very graphic, and the murder of the priest was brutal, and really disturbing. He was stabbed several dozen times, and had many other things happen to him when he was killed. However you hate him after you learn what he made Aaron do on tape. That was also a disturbing, and upsetting thing, that I won't say what it is so you can be surprised. The fact that the murder was so awful, made the emotions you get during the whole film more intense, and it gives you more of them. The disturbing part of this film makes it hard to watch, but also makes it so you want justice to be done even more so. They really do make you wonder weather or not Aaron is guilty for the first half of the film, but you are never entirely sure until the end. There were certain things that happened with Aaron in the trial that were predictable, and I found that I could predict what the last scene would be. I liked it that it was slightly predictable, because then you start to feel like I know whats going to happen, but I don't know when and how. That is why this movie is so good.
On Her Majesty's Secret Service 1969,  PG)
500 Days of Summer 2009,  PG-13)
500 Days of Summer
The first time I watched this I absolutely hated it, and I thought it was the most overrated thing I had ever seen, and I detested every minute of it. I posted a really bad review for it saying that it was one of the worst films I had ever seen. To be perfectly honest I haven't seen enough bad films to come up with a good list of the worst films of all time, so it may not be fair for me to say that, but it was still one of the films that I hated the most. After posting my review for it, I got some comments that made me think that I should give it another try, and see if I appreciate it more the 2nd time.

But did I appreciate more the 2nd time? No I hated it just as much, and if not as much probably more the 2nd time. During my 2nd try of the film I had to stop about forty-five minutes in because I noticed myself reacting to the film the same way I did the first time, and I knew that I probably don't have it in me to watch the whole thing again. All I can say is that I just hate this movie, and it annoys me. I also find that it tries to be funny, but I don't really think it is. So overall I just don't get the fuss that is made over this film on this site or by the people I know personally. Also everybody thinks the film is so cute, which I really don't get at all. I can see where there are certain moments where it would be considered cute, but there are way more annoying ones in my opinion. The film doesn't even entertain me, and I got bored right off the bat. When I first watched it I kept waiting for the film to get better, and it didn't. It starts off kind of okay, and then just slowly gets worse and worse, and I was just glad it ended.

This guy named Tom (Joseph Gordon Levitt) meets a girl named Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel), and falls for her at first sight. He thought he would never be happy until she entered his life. At first he heard that she wasn't very nice, but after he learns that she loves "The Smiths" like he does he forms a huge crush on her. He begins to obsess over her, and starts getting advice from a 12-year-old girl named Rachel Hansen (Chloe Grace Moretz), which is another part of the story that I don't like. The whole idea of a grown man getting advice on love from a twelve year old seemed kind of weird to me. I will admit though that I think that Chloe Grace Moretz is a pretty good child actress. I think she may become a big star in the future.

But back to the story, they eventually start hanging out. However they look like they are in a romance, but Summer refuses to call it a relationship. It gets annoying, because they do all the things that people do with each other when they are relationships such as having sex, handholding, sleeping together, and many other things, and she is so commitment phobic, that she will only call him her friend. It hurts him too, and when they finally start dating she ignores him at parties, and doesn't treat him like a boyfriend. She dumps him for no good reason, and after she does she just goes about eating her meal as if she didn't dump him. She is completely unsympathetic, and I feel like she would make a terrible girlfriend. The reason's why Tom can't get over her, and why he thinks she is so wonderful is beyond me. I am surprised that only few people agree with why I hated her. It felt unrealistic how she would not even acknowledge the fact that they are in a relationship. People say that this is a really realistic romantic comedy, but I don't see that at all. I am also not a fan of Zooey Deschanel. I don't think that she is that good of an actress, and I feel like she plays the same personality in everything she does. She is a talented singer, but I don't think she has any talent as an actress. Joseph Gordon Levitt I think is a pretty good actor, but I just didn't like the character he played in this film. I found him to be kind of shallow, and I felt like he only liked Summer because she is pretty and interested in him. I also get annoyed when I feel like guys I know personally fall for girls because they are attractive or interested in them. I also don't like girls that are like Summer. Part of my distaste for this movie is that it is all characters that I don't like.

I also found it annoying how they did the film in a weird timeline. It felt like a really unnecessary thing to do just to make the film more artsy or interesting. The only thing in this film that I liked was the cinematography. The film looked really good, and apparently they made it look they way it looks so it would bring out Zooey Deschanels blue eyes. It was a good effect and it did do that, but it is the only part of this film that was interesting to me.

Everything else was annoying or weird to me. Usually when I dislike a film that most people like everybody else loves I can appreciate it, but for this film I have no idea why it is so popular, and I just don't even appreciate it. The first time I reviewed this film I was hoping that people would explain to me why they like it, because I was thinking of giving it another chance. I got some explanations, and I started watching it again with a different expectation, and I didn't see the points that they gave me. I think it is just fair to say that I hate this film. It is one of the movies I dislike the most. You can disagree with me all you want, but I don't see myself ever changing my opinions on this film. I anticipate even more comments of people disagreeing with me and not liking my review, because I am even more critical of the film now then when I first saw it. Though I don't get why people like this at all I will at least respect the fact that people like it, because it is popular, and I am the minority. But I will never give this film another chance.
Skyfall 2012,  PG-13)
Greatest Bond film of all time. My favorite Bond films are the ones that stick out the most from each other. This one was really different from every other one. What makes it different is that it is all based around a story that doesn't have a lot of girlfriends in it. They killed the Bond girl off really quickly. It is also much darker then other Bond films, and the whole story was an unusual one for a Bond movie. It was built up to be a finale, which it actually wasn't, but they did try to give you that feel. This film had more of an epic action film. It showed how he appeared to have lost a step in the beginning, but quickly got it back. I won't give the ending away. But it was also very different, from any Bond film. This film wasn't like any other super formulaic, or cheesy Bond movie, which is why it rocked.

When James Bond (Daniel Craig) is chasing a man he gets shot and he falls off of a bridge into the water, and goes down a waterfall. He is presumed dead, and he uses his supposed death to retire, but when an office building explodes he decides to report for duty. He must go back for training but he is rusty and he has lost a step. He can't shoot or fight as well, so this film is about his resurrection. He eventually does come back, and is in full strength by the end.

Now Daniel Craig is the best Bond, without a question for me. All of the other Bonds played the role exactly the same to me, but certain actors were considered better then others, because some were in better movies like Sean Connery. But when you really think about it, Sean Connery, Roger Moore, they all played 007 the same way. Daniel Craig I feel like actually plays 007 in a different way, which is why I like him the best. He is just a totally serious, and he doesn't say any of the catch phrases that get old after a while. He is also way slicker, and his style is cooler. When he walks into the room he really looks like a James Bond. If you described James Bond to me, I would probably imagine he would look like Daniel Craig. I think he was born to play 007. Because he plays the role exactly the way it should have always been played. My 2 favorite Bond films, he was the one who played 007.

I loved the part when he was in Shanghai, because I felt like that was the best setting in any Bond film. The scene when he fights the guy in the room with all of the glass walls, in that skyscraper was one of the coolest Bond scenes ever. I also loved the scene just before that when he is hanging on to the bottom of the elevator, dangling from god know what height, and then he just climbs up. It showed the guts the James bond has. The whole ending at Skyfall, was what made this film so different from other Bond films, because I had never seen a scene in any Bond film, that took place in a setting like that. The action in that scene was so sweet, and I was on the edge of my seat for that entire section of the movie. The action was all predictable, but still awesome.

Every Bond film also has an intro with a great song playing while the opening credits role. This one had the best intro, and the best song yet in my opinion. The song "Skyfall," by Adele was awesome, and the whole intro, was so awesome. It was dark, and unique. This movie had some really awesome music. It had the old classic themes that you hear in all 007 films, but ha some new things that I hadn't remembered hearing in earlier films. The Bond films are the types of movies where you really listen to the music in it, because it's always great.

Now I haven't really ever talked about the Bond girls in my reviews for other Bond films, but I am going to do that now. The Bond girl in this film had a really small role. This movie was barely focused on 007 getting girls. I did like Bérénice Marlohe, but not as much as Olga Kurylenko. Olga Kurylenko was the best Bond girl of all time. Even better then Halle Berry.
The villain was good too, because he wasn't ridiculous like other villains were. He was very serious, and wasn't at all cheesy. He also seemed much smarter then all of the Bond villains. Though he is not my favorite Bond villain, he is one of them. I give Javier Bardeem two thumbs up for his performance.

Some people may have trouble with the length of the film, but I didn't at all. I felt sad when it was over, because I wanted there to be even more, because it was slow at the beginning. I wanted to see even more action, and for there to be even more added to the story after the fight at Skyfall. It was so good, that I wanted there to be another half hour. I felt like I just couldn't get enough of this movie, and what was in it. I believe that a great movie should have you psyched when you walk out, and you should want to see more. I had a lot of both of those two things.
The Living Daylights 1987,  PG)
Frankenstein 1931,  Unrated)
Cloverfield 2008,  PG-13)
X-Men 2000,  PG-13)
I thought that this was ok. It had an interesting story, for a super hero film. The whole thing about mutants, and human evolution was interesting. When I think that movies are ok, it's because there are several things I like, and don't like. That is the situation of this film. I liked some of the X-men, and disliked the others.

Wolverine is definitely the best. They do focus more around him for sure. He is a tough guy, that has been moving around from place to place his whole life. He is the only one of the X-Men that wasn't born a mutant. He became on by surgery, which was brutal, and almost impossible to survive. He was one of the only members of the group that I liked. Xavier was really good. I liked him a lot. I found him more interesting then the other X-Men. Well you probably are supposed to, because he is the leader. But overall Patrick Stewart gets props for his role. Mystique was the coolest of the bad guys. That is a super hero power that I wish I had. That would be awesome. She was awesome.

The CGI looks a little fake at times, and you can tell it's computer generated. There were several things in this film that reminded me of the Matrix, which is only a year older then this. When it looked like Xavier was dying, it was like the scene when Morpheus almost died in the Matrix. Also when Mystique would change into somebody else, that reminded me of the agents in the Matrix turning into other people.

This film was too short, and I didn't feel like there was enough of a story. I found it to be predictable as it gets for some reason. The film wasn't very reliant on acting, which I didn't like, because I felt like it was all based on effects, and action, instead of acting and the story. I disliked the ending too. You can tell with this film that they made the story short so the could put more into the sequels.

I didn't like cyclops, because I didn't like his power. It was too cheesy, and wasn't that cool. The toad was terrible. I hated him, because his power was kind of gross, and stupid. Storm was ok, but they made her look ridiculous. halle Berry is a beautiful woman so they shouldn't change the way she looks for a movie, and plus they made her look really weird too. They could have made this film a little bit less cheesy, but they didn't.

Overall thsi was a very entertaining, but overrated super hero film. Not one of my favorites.
Six Degrees of Separation 1993,  R)
The Man with the Golden Gun 1974,  PG)
Brave 2012,  PG)
Hellboy 2004,  PG-13)
Life of Pi 2012,  PG)
Life of Pi
An amazing film, that is one of the most beautiful masterpieces of all time. It is the best visual masterpiece since Avatar for sure. There are two types of visual masterpieces, there are realistic looking ones, and the ones that are more like fantasies. Avatar is the best example of a fantasy that was a visual masterpiece. This is a realistic one. Ang Lee directs this film where a boy named Pi is on a ship that sinks, and he is the only survivor along with several other animals, one being a tiger. He makes the tiger, and the whole sea look incredible. There are sharks swimming around him, and many other types of fish. This is one of the most beautiful looking movies I have ever seen. It is amazing how they were able to keep the film interesting, while the majority takes place in the middle of the ocean with just one boy, and a tiger. The story is so interesting, because it mostly takes place in the middle of the ocean. It's mostly about how he is trying to survive, and keep the tiger from eating him.

What made it beautiful was all of the animals and fish. The use of color was also amazing. The tiger although it is a very dangerous animal that Pi is scared of is beautiful, and incredible to look at. It is a scary beautiful. The Hyena I think is a cute looking animal until it attacks something. Like when it attacked the Zebra it was not pretty at all. The movements of all the animals all seemed so real, and like they actually did film this with tigers, and Zebras. I haven't read the book, but I really would like to do that now, so I can compare it to the movie. When I read the book, I will add more to the review, comparing and contrasting the movie with the book.

The relationship between the tiger and Pi was interesting, because it brought out just a few human like characteristics in the Tiger. It shows how all-living things relate to each other in some way. Pi describes how the Tiger kept him alive, because he was more alert because of the tiger. The tiger's name is Richard Parker. Richard is just the way you would expect a tiger to be. He is scary, aggressive, he growls a lot, and is vicious. Pi learns to deal with him by giving him some of the fish that he catches, so that way Richard won't get so hungry that he will be forced to eat him. Richard takes the lifeboat, while Pi stays on a big raft that he made so he will be safe from Richard parker. Eventually Pi gets up, and decides that Richard is going to have to learn to live with him. He goes on the boat with a pole, and shows him whose boss basically. They do learn to deal with each other very well. They aren't friends like the trailer makes it seem like they are. They just learn to live with each other out there.

The most incredible scene in the movie is the scene at night where the water is all light up, because there are hundreds of jellyfish below them. That looked like something in Avatar. Then the whale jumps up, and the big splashes are amazing. It looked so real, and stunning. The scene where all of the flying fish land on the boat, looked really real, and very beautiful. All of the fish in the movie, seemed real, and the fishing scenes were cool. I thin fish are beautiful, and they picked all of the types of fish that look beautiful for this movie. The opening credits go throughout an entire zoo, in which has many beautiful animals, and many beautiful locations. It was one of the best opening scenes I have ever seen before.

The beginning of the movie before they got on the ship was more like Slumdog Millionaire, which is another one of my all time favorites. It had the elements of the boy finding a girl that he liked, and the setting of Slumdog Millionaire. In school everybody picks on Pi for his name. They call him pissing. Even the teachers call him that. But one day he tells everybody the meaning of his name Pi, and it all stops. His Father works at a zoo in India. One day when Pi tries to feed the tiger, his Father catches him, and gives him a harsh lesson, in which he makes him watch the tiger eat a goat so he will see that tigers are dangerous animals. That is excellent use of foreshadowing that is important for what will happen in the future.

The carnivorous island he lands on was very interesting, and I don't think I have ever seen anything like that place. It really looked like the forest in Avatar at night. It was a great effect when you see all of the fish float to the surface of the pond at night time, and it looks so bright, and blue. The whole place did at night. The movie used a lot of really bright blue with the water at night in many parts of the film that really looked like something you would see in Avatar.

I mostly compare this film to Cast Away. Like that movie it is only one guy stuck on an island trying to adapt to his situation after a plane crash. Except in this movie it is a ship that sinks, and a boy stuck in the middle of the ocean with a tiger. That is really the only big difference between the two. Another similarity is that they both count the days they are out there. They also have their own companions. Tom Hanks had Wilson the soccer ball. Li had Richard parker, who he said kept him alive the entire time. They are both very similar, but Cast Away is the movie that this movie is most similar too in my opinion.

The best way to do 3-d is to make a beautiful looking movie, that doesn't have a lot of things that are made to look really good in 3-d. Like in Friday the 13th part 3, they did all of these things in it that would stick out at you when you watch it in 3-d, but look really stupid when you watch it in regular tv. The use of 3-d in this film just makes it feel more like you are actually there, and it makes it feel even more real. That is the best way to use 3-d, because when you make a film that will have a ton of things that stick out at the audience in 3-d it looks terrible when it's not in 3-d. You need to make it so that it makes you feel like you are actually there in 3-d, but also so it still looks really good when it's not in 3-d. They did that perfectly, and that is why it is such a masterpiece.

Now I want to buy the book, because it must be amazing, because this movie really was.
The World Is Not Enough 1999,  PG-13)
A Walk to Remember 2002,  PG)
Battleship 2012,  PG-13)
The Wrestler 2008,  R)
The Wrestler
This is a story of a clichéd wrestler who is at the end of his career, and is well past his prime. He lives alone in a trailer. He works in a grocery store, ad has a manager who mocks him for his wrestling background. He left his family when his daughter was young, and she hates him now. He be-friends a stripper played by Marisa Tomei. He still does several fights, and he is still good.. Once he has a heart attack he decides to change his life entirely. He tries to fix his relationship with his daughter, and tries to get healthy again.

Mickey Rourke gives really good acting job in this movie which reminded me of Jeff Bridges performance in Crazy Heart. This film was a lot like Crazy Heart. It had the same feel, but different stories. They both had people who are at the end of their careers, and that have stage names, and health problems. However in the Wrestler there is no happy ending, and nothing gets resolved. That is the one weird part of this film, and the only reason why I don't think it is great. I wish that there were some more happy elements in it. They made it seem like he was fixing certain issues, but he didn't.

The wrestling is so fake. Well I mean not fake in a way that it looked bad, but it has all of the stuff you see in stuff like RAW wrestling that looks so staged. Like at the end when he is in the fight, his opponent is saying to him come on finish it we have given them enough of a show. The fight he is in before he gets a heart attack they are using staple guns, and barb wire. His opponent staples a dollar bill to his forehead. The fighting is so messed up. He also does steroids in one scene before a fight. He also cuts his forehead secretly while he is on the floor, to make it look like he got hit that hard. This is a very good movie but it points out the stupidity on wrestling matches like that.
300 2007,  R)
For Your Eyes Only 1981,  PG)
Ocean's Eleven 2001,  PG-13)
Ocean's Eleven
This is a very good movie, with an awesome cast. This film was fast paced even at the slow parts, and really entertaining. Danny Ocean gets out of prison and gets ten men together to rob a casino of well over 100 million dollars. The whole film is about how they plan to do the heist, and they build up how impossible it is to do. There is a scene where Danny Ocean goes over the plan, which sounds almost impossible to do, and he says it like it's nothing. Which is just an awesome scene.

It is kind of your typical guys casino, or heist film, but better. The poker scenes are like the scenes in Matt Damon's other good film Rounder's. The film has the same film feel that all gambling films, and casino movies have that make them so entertaining. The guys in the movies always talk to each other in a certain way, which makes them sound really cool. That is true with this film, they are all really cool. George Clooney was the coolest for sure. Brad Pitt brought the same cool guy performance he played in Fight Club to this film, and once again proved how underrated he is.

Danny Ocean also has a personal vendetta with the heist he is trying to pull off. His wife left him after he was sent to prison, and now she is with the man who runs the casino. He is robbing his casino not only for money but also to defeat the man with his ex wife. Andy Garcia played that man. Andy Garcia was what Robert DeNiro as in Casino, in this film. The guy who ran the big Casino in Las Vegas. Ocean does win his wife back too. It was a total in your face job by Danny Ocean.

The robbery scene is awesome. It is brilliant the way they pull it off. It worked perfectly. Everything went exactly to plan. They even caused a citywide blackout, which was awesome. They really thought it all out well. In the two weeks leading up to their epic heist, they are checking everything out in the casino, and figuring out the ways to figure it all out. They also have a lot of good dialogue, and funny lines.

The music in this film also adds to the entertainment. It's the type of stuff you hear in films like Dirty Harry, Goodfellas, and James Bond. The funky rock, blues, and jazz music should be in all films like this. It makes the film way better. Music, and movies are my two big pations, so I like it when they have good use of music in movies, which this film really did. I loved this movie all around.
Ocean's Twelve 2004,  PG-13)
The Bride of Frankenstein 1935,  Unrated)
A View to a Kill 1985,  PG)
2001: A Space Odyssey 1968,  G)
Ocean's Thirteen 2007,  PG-13)
Requiem for a Dream 2000,  R)
The Curse of Frankenstein 1957,  Unrated)
Dracula 1931,  Unrated)
American Pie 1999,  R)
American Pie
American Pie is a very funny teen flick that shocks you at many times. Itâ(TM)s about a group of guys who make it their goal to get laid before they finish senior year in high school. It is a clichà (C) that gets used in films all of the time now. It was special when it came out, but it has been done many times now.

Jim is my favorite guy. The opening scene is a shocker. You see it in the trailer, but it is still a shocker. It gets raunchy right off of the bat. The funniest but most surprising things all happen with Jim. He is the type of person who is a nice guy, but he canâ(TM)t catch a break. Like Brad Hamilton from âFast Times At Ridgemont Highâ? al of the worst, and most humiliating things happen to him. They are all disgusting, and really sexual. But that was the funny thing with this movie. The relationship between Jim and his father is funny. His father is always trying to teach him about sex, and he gives him dirty magazines, and tries to teach him by using them. He also catches him doing some very humiliating things that are funny. But you canâ(TM)t really tell if he knows what his son is up too.

Oz joins the chorus because there are a lot of attractive girls there, and he hooks up with one. His friends donâ(TM)t get it, and at one point Stiffler thinks he is gay. He is an example of how guys will do anything to get girls. Sherman is the type of guy who acts like he is all that, but he really isnâ(TM)t at all. He is funny for that reason. He isnâ(TM)t in the film that often, but he is funny when he is. The date Jim has for the prom is funny, and is another example of how everything happens to him. All she ever does is tell stories from Band Camp, and annoy the hell out of him. She is very funny for that reason, but she surprised me at the end.

Overall this was a very funny movie, and is especially great if you are a teenager.
Tomorrow Never Dies 1997,  PG-13)
Zodiac 2007,  R)
"I get headaches, I kill I don't get them." - Zodiac Killer
"By the time I am done with them they don't need any help." - Zodiac Killer
"I kill the most dangerous animal." - Zodiac Killer

Alfred Hitchcock was the master of suspense, but David Fincher is the master of creepy and disturbing suspense films.

Zodiac is a great movie about one of the most famous unsolved murder cases of all time. It tells the story of the Zodiac killer, and about how one man who is a cartoonist tries to solve the case. Jake Gylenhall plays Robert Graysmith, the man trying to solve the case. He becomes obsessed with the case, after a couple of years go by, without the Zodiac writing. He becomes obsessed with the Zodiac codes, and he keeps calling Mark Ruffalo in the middle of the night to talk about the case. At first I didn't like Jake Gylenhaall, but towards the end I started to like him more. I thought that he played a role at first that was more suited for somebody like Edward Norton. But then he got more intense, and I started to like him more. However I would have chosen a different actor though. I feel like somebody like Daniel Craig would be good, because he is more intense. Richard Gere would be a really good fit for that role too. I am not saying that Gylenhall was bad, but he wasn't great. You would need a more intense actor to do that role. But I still liked him though.

For those who don't know anything about the Zodiac killer, he was a serial killer that operated in San Francisco in the 60's, 70's. He has claimed to have killed 37 people, but only five of his victims have been discovered. He would write letters to the newspapers taunting the police, and would have coded messages in them. He used the Zodiac code, and that is why he called himself Zodiac. He was absolutely insane. He stopped writing in the 80's, and in his last letter he said that he has killed 37 people. We still don't know for sure who he is. The man that they thought was Zodiac, they were going to interrogate him, but he died of a fatal heart attack before the meeting. The case is open to anybody who wants to buy it.

This film was very creepy. The stuff with Zodiac was really disturbing. There is a scene where he murders two people by a river, and it is so demented. The final scene in the Strangers is what I would compare that scene too. The opening scene was a creepy murder too. Any scene in this film that had the Zodiac in it will creep the hell out of you. There is a scene where he calls the news channel, and starts talking about his headaches, which people who are insane tend to get a lot of. He says that he likes killing, and that when he dies his victims will be his slaves in his afterlife. If I rate to rate that on a level from 1-10 on how sick that is, I would give it an 11. He also says "I get headaches. I kill I don't get them." That meant that he killed to help him get rid of headaches. That shows you how insane he is. If they caught him they would have put him in a metal hospital for sure instead of jail.

This movie uses references to other films that connect with the story. Zodiac says he likes to kill people because that is the most dangerous animal to kill. Robert Graysmith eventually connects that to the Most Dangerous Game. Which is a book and movie about a man who hunts other men on his private island. I knew that reference as soon as I heard it actually. I remember reading the Most Dangerous Game in 8th actually. There is also a scene where they watch Dirty Harry in theatres. I think they used that, because the Scorpio killer in that movie is similar to Zodiac. They both write to the press, and to the police, taunting them. But Zodiac kills just for fun and for pure pleasure. Scorpio wants to get some ransom money. The references to other films are very well tied into this movie.

I won't give the ending, but it is a hard one to figure out. I found it hard to figure out, because I kept thinking how are they able to make a good ending to this without catching the killer. Zodiac was never caught, so it would be hard to end the film well. They did however. They just kind of showed how the investigation all ended, and gave some real life facts. Robert Graysmith was also getting several anonymous phone calls in real life, and it said that he never received another one again, after the guy who they were going to interrogate died of a heart attack. So that leads you to believe that they did catch the guy but you never know. This was overall a really good, and fascinating movie.
Mean Streets 1973,  R)
Never Say Never Again 1983,  PG)
8 Mile 2002,  R)
8 Mile
This is a really good movie with a story that seems awfully familiar, but is still a good one. The film is partly inspired by the rapper Eminem's life. 8 Mile is a thoroughfare that separates the middle class neighborhoods with the lower class neighborhoods in Detroit. Eminem plays Jimmy Smith but goes by Rabbit. The movie has certain elements that were based on Eminem's life. His friends are like the friends he had when he was growing up, so that is why his acting seems so realistic. He played himself a little.

The song "Lose Yourself" was written by Eminem I between scenes during the filming if 8 Mile. The song pretty much summarizes the whole story of the film. The line in the first verse of the song "He opens his mouth, but the words won't come out, He's choking how, everybody's joking now" refers to the opening scene in the film where he gets up on stage to start the rap battle, and chokes. Well you read the quote you know what happened. "When he goes back to his mobile home, that's when it's Back to the lab again, yo This whole rhapsody He better go capture this moment and hope it don't pass him." That refers to how when he goes back to his room at night he starts writing his lyrics every night. Well if you like the story of the song you will like the movie. That is for sure.

Rabbit lives in a mobile home with his Mom. She is a drunk, and is very irresponsible. She is also soon to face eviction, and her abusive live in boy friend won't do anything about it. His mother is a typical abused woman who doesn't want him to leave her. Rabbit is a blue-collar worker who works at a car shop. He meets his girlfriend there Alex (Brittany Murphy). However his life hasn't changed at all since he finished high school, and he is just going downhill. He is a genius rapper, and his goal is to start his music career, and he knows that is probably the only way he can make a decent living and help his family. All of the things that happen in the film all just build up to the big competition at the end of the film where he redeems himself from his choke in the opening scene. He faces all three members of the group "Leaders of the Free World." They had harassed him all throughout the movi, and now it is his time to get even with them. The ending is simple. He just decided that he needs to find success on his own, and that is the right path for him. Great ending.

Eminem is probably the only hard core rapper that I like. I love "Lose Yourself," "Love The Way You Lie," "Without Me," "Sing for the Moment," "Mockingbird," etc. I didn't like him until I saw this film. Most rappers I feel like they don't have any message that has any meaning to it. This film shows how he has meaning to his songs and that he is more special and unique then guys like "Jay-Z," "Pitbull," or "Nicki Minaj." Only Eminem fans can see that.

Most rappers that act are terrible, and they make stuff that is awful. They usually do comedy's that aren't funny. Eminem though I feel like he is playing himself in the film, he is doing some really serious acting however. One of the rare hip hop singers that can act. Examples of singers who I think can't act are Rihanna, Ice Cube, and Beyonce. I hope Eminem tries to do something that is completely different from this.

This was a really good movie, that wasn't very original however. But there are so many people and stories in the world that it is impossible to come up with something entirely original. If you hate Eminem you may not like this, but even if you do you probably still will like it. I didn't like him when I started watching this, and now I love him.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower 2012,  PG-13)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
"In this moment I swear we are infinite."
"I, I will be king and you
You will be queen, Though nothing will
Drive them away, we can beat them
Just for one day, We can be Heroes
Just for one day" - David Bowie

A great movie that I enjoyed every minute of. I found that I really related to the character Charlie. I am similar to him in personality, and there were little things we had in common, like my first date was a prom like his. The film does reach out to a lot of teenagers of all kinds, especially ones like me. It talks about teen problems, such as dating, cheating, bullying, being gay, and even abusive relationships. Even if you are not a teenager you will love this movie too, because it is actually just a great movie all around, and because it is so thought provocative.

The acting in this film is great. At first I thought that Logan Lerman may have been playing a role similar to himself, but he actually pulled off some difficult acting in some very tough scenes. His character Charlie is the movie character I connect with the most, and I kept saying that to my family as we watched this. He played a very shy, sweet, and innocent kid, who has had a lot of bad things happen to him. But overall everything worked out for him in the end. Emma Watson was good, but her accent came and left. She would sound British at times, and American at others. But she only sounded noticeably British about once or twice.

Now the only thing I had seen Ezra Miller in before this was the movie "We Need To Talk About Kevin." I was very impressed by him in that movie, and I can see he is a really good actor because he plays an entirely different role in this film. In that other film he played a really disturbed sociopathic kid, and in this film he plays a flamboyantly gay guy, who is nice, and very out going. His character is also the funniest guy in the film. I like him a lot, and I think he should be in more mainstream films, and not just indie films that aren't as successful. However indie films are better, because Hollywood doesn't make as many changes to the screenplay, and they have less control of the production so I can see why he would only make indie films.

This film gives you a wide range of emotions, which I really like. There are a lot of things that are really depressing and that really bother you, but a lot of heart warmth too. Paul Rudd wasn't in the film a lot, but this was the film I liked him in the most, because of how good he was with Charlie. He brought a lot of the positive emotions into the film. Patrick and Sam brought a lot of positive emotions, and they really helped out Charlie. There was a lot of conflict with them, but I think the more conflict the better the film is. I mean who wants to see a film where everybody is happy at every moment, and there is no conflict? That's boring. The conflict in this film was very well used. The screenplay writing was fantastic, and there were some great lines that made you say to yourself "Yeah!"

The song "Heroes" by David Bowie, which is one of my favorite song's is the tunnel song in this movie. One scene Emma Watson is standing on the back of the truck while they are going through a tunnel and that song is playing. They don't know what song it is however, and Charlie finally finds it at the end. But until he find sit they just call it the tunnel song. It is a symbolic song for them, because they are not very popular kids, but they could be heroes. Just like the song says "We could be heroes just for one day." At the end Charlie narrates "That one moment when you know you are not a sad story. You are alive." The song is playing when he says that which makes it even more symbolic. The film is loaded with symbolism like that which I will leave you to pick up on. I would recommend this film to everybody, because it is great.
Casino Royale 1967,  G)
The Prestige 2006,  PG-13)
Citizen Kane 1941,  PG)
Citizen Kane
This is one of the greatest movies ever made that seems really clichéd today, but when it came out over seventy years ago was completely original, and went on to inspire so many movies. The film is a mystery/drama film that revolves around the life and death of Charles Foster Kane. Charles Foster Kane's last and final words before he died were "Rosebud," then he dropped a snow globe once he died. The mystery is what does "rosebud" mean? It goes back into his entire life, and shows all of the biggest things that happened in his life. He owned a newspaper business, and the reporters for it are the ones trying to figure out the meaning of his last words.

Orson Welles was the genius mastermind behind this all time great classic. He co-wrote the screenplay with Herman J. Mankiewicz, he directed it, and even acted as Kane himself. All of the themes in this film that are clichés now he invented, and you appreciate him even more now knowing how inspiration his work was. In order to truly appreciate old films like this when you are seventeen years old like me, you need to know a little bit more about it before you start watching. You need to know how it inspired all of your favorite modern day films. All these old directors of all of these old films are the true geniuses. Even though old films like this may not seem as good nowadays because we have way more technology now, are still great if you still have a strong appreciation for films, and if you know the effect they had on the world at the time. The film is an acquired taste for somebody my age. But like all other acquired tastes its fantastic once you acquire it.

Some of these clichés are going back into the protagonist's life to show how he/her got to that point in their life. Another one is the protagonist's rise to fame, and when he/she goes down hill, because he/she isolates themselves from their family, and is only focused on work. Kane becomes more distant from his wife, the deeper he gets into the newspaper business, and politics. You will figure out the meaning of "rosebud" in the final scene of the film, but I won't spoil it for you.

One thing with old movies is that the actresses are all terrible. They are too dramatic, and they tend to do all of these big heavy sighs that are annoying today. Also they tend to all talk the same way. They have these really fake accents that make them sound like little girls. The men sound the same too, but they sound good, and more powerful. The women too me back in old movies are always annoying. That's the only thing I don't like about old films.

But overall this is one of the all time great masterpieces of filmmaking that I hope that more people my age will come to appreciate for what it is. Because it is a huge deal for movies.
Moonrise Kingdom 2012,  PG-13)
Defiance 2009,  R)
True Romance 1993,  R)
True Romance
This is what a Quentin Tarantino type of love story. When he thinks of romance it's like this film. The film is violent, dark, and romantic at times. Tarantino wrote the screenplay, but he didn't direct it. You can see his style in the screenplay writing when you watch the film, because of all of the violence, brutality, and foul language. It even has the usual all start cast that he usually has in his films. You can see how it was written by Tarantino, but you can tell that he didn't direct it. It doesn't seem like an older film like the stuff that he directed does. The film doesn't have the indie film style that his films like Pulp Fiction have. That is how you see the difference of what the film is like when he only writes it, and doesn't both direct and write it. The film is about a guy named "Clarence" who meets this cute girl named "Alabama" and falls in love with her in one night. She confesses to him that she was paid by Clarence's boss to go out with him, because he never gets out, and he wanted Clarence to have a fun time on his birthday. She is a prostitute, but she actually fell for him in that one night. Typical cliché that you see in all love stories. Clarence goes and kills her pimp who is portrayed by Gary Oldman. She thinks that was such a romantic thing to do, which I think Tarantino wanted her to have that reaction to make fun of really cheesy romance in older love stories. The type of romance that when you think about it is really awful, and makes you want to spew. But they get married after that. The big conflict is that after he killed the pimp he grabbed what he thought was Alabama's bag, but turned out to be a bag with over 200,000 dollars worth of cocaine. They try to sell it, but the gangsters try to come and get them, because it belongs to them. The film got really crazy and intense in the end, and it was awesome. This was a great movie that was written by Quentin Tarantino, but directed by Tony Scott, that not a lot of people have seen, but they should see if they like Tarantino. I don't really think about Tony Scott directing this film, as you can see by how I don't really talk about him, and I just talk about Tarantino in this film. But Tony Scott did do a great job. Great movie.
Accepted 2006,  PG-13)
Edward Scissorhands 1990,  PG-13)
Edward Scissorhands
Well this is a classic Johnny Depp film that pretty much is a symbol of his acting career. It is a very good classic that is quirky, and fun. It is about a boy named Edward who has scissors for fingers, and was created in a lab. A woman brings her home, and he is the talk of the whole neighborhood. Edward to me was a mix of Freddy Krueger, E.T., a mad scientist, and a little bit of Edward Colon. He has the hands of Freddy Krueger, the sweetness and innocence of E.T., the hair of a mad scientist, and the skin of Edward Colon. He also scratched his fingers against the walls like Fred Krueger did, when he was angry. He is very sweet, but gets into trouble because he accidently hurts people with his hands. When he does people think he did it on purpose. He starts to fall for the daughter of the woman who brings him home, but her boyfriend abuses Edward and wants him gone. The movie teaches a lesson that you shouldn't be something your not, because it will not do anything good. Edward tried to live like a human being, but he wasn't, so a lot of bad things happened to him in the end that really hurt him. He didn't deserve those things, so you felt really bad at the end. The film is pretty funny however. A really funny part of the film is that Edward trims all of the hedges in the neighborhood, and makes them into all different forms of art. He makes a hedge into to swans that form a heart. Once he cuts all of the hedges he starts giving women, and dogs haircuts. It is also funny when he tries to eat, because he can't pick up peas with his scissor hands. When he is walking around the house for the first time, it is kind of like E.T. looking around the house, because of the curiosity. Some people love him, but some think he is a freak. At first the girl he falls for won't eat something, because his hands touched it. She freaked out when she saw him sleeping in her bed. But she ends up falling for him. Though Edward appears scary with his pale skin, scars, black shadowing around his eyes, crazy hair, and of course his hands, but once you get past that he is a totally loveable character. The film has some Spielberg like emotions. It has the type of warmth that his films usually give you, and the sadness that they give you. This feels like something that he would have done. I like that about it though. I also like the flashbacks to when he was being created, and his creator was teaching him. This film did a good job explaining his background. Overall a very good film. This is classic.
Rear Window 1954,  PG)
Rear Window
Rear Window is my favorite Alfred Hitchcock movie, and one of the greatest movies I have ever seen. It is tied with Silver Linings Playbook as my 7th favorite film of all time. It is a total masterpiece of film making, and it is one that must have been amazing to make from a directors point of view. Hitchcock has had a lot of films that I would have loved to experience from his point of view, but if I could go back in time and be him for the making of one of his films I would choose Rear Window because it must have been fascinating for him. I think that because it was fascinating just to watch the movie, because it felt like you were really there. It felt like you were spying on all of the neighbors that he was spying on. That is why it is such a remarkable movie, because you feel like you are there, and because it is original as it gets. I imagine that Hitchcock must have felt like he was watching real people going through their lives in one room the entire time.

What is so remarkable about the film is how it all takes place in one mans apartment, and how you can only see inside of his home, and what he can see out of his rear window. The plot and character development is very unique and remarkable. A photographer with a broken leg cannot leave his apartment, and he must sit in a wheelchair and look out at the neighbors. Because of how hot it is nobody will close their windows so he can spy on everybody, and he gets to know all of his neighbors, and what they are up too. He even names certain people. There is one lady who he calls "Mr.'s lonely heart" because she is always pretending to have a man over and then starts to cry in the middle of it. There s also a ballet dancer who he spies on, who he calls "Ms. Torso". My favorite thing is the musician who lives up stairs. You hear his piano playing throughout the entire movie, and at one point Hitchcock makes a cameo and he is with the musician. He throws a party and you can tell he is trying to make it to the radio. There are newly weds who have moved next door, and there are also two people who sleep on the fire escape stairs. Somehow the neighbors who are innocent seam like something would happen to them. Hitchcock made the things with the neighbors suspenseful, and you will know what I mean by that when you see it. Well the film is really slow, so it can develop the relationships between characters, and the lives of his neighbors.

The man's name is L.B. Jeffries (James Stewart), and he is the peeping Tom who stares out the Rear Window all day. It starts off one the first day of his last week in a cast. He has a girlfriend named Lisa Fremont (Grace Kelly) who is beautiful, sophisticated, and a bit of a celebrity. He doesn't think that she is right for him, because her high-class sophisticated life doesn't blend with his working class life. He doesn't think she will be able to be with him for that reason. It is actually more of a thing where he doesn't think that he is good enough for her. The develop that more as the story goes, and I didn't pick up on how they developed it the first time I saw it.

He also has a nurse named Stella (Thelma Ritter) who comes in to take care of him everyday while he is recovering. He is so bored and all he can do is spy on the neighbors, and she makes fun of him for being a peeping tom. Lisa also makes fun of him for that, but she eventually begins to take an interest in the man that he is spying on and so does Stella.

The man they are spying on in particular is a man who looks like he probably just murdered his wife, and looks very suspicious. He makes several trips in the middle of the night with a briefcase, and is using things like saws. All of this is causing Jeffries to get very suspicious, and he even contacts the police, but the won't do anything because that isn't convincing or good enough to get a warrant.

The thing about the film is that you know the guy killed his wife, so the suspense isn't who did it, did he do it. It is how are they going to prove this, and how will it end. The ending is unpredictable until you get to it, and the suspense at the end is crazy, and tremendous. The first hour and twenty minutes were good, and interesting but the rets of the film is crazy and awesome. That is why I love the film so much. It is so fascinating. It is also beautiful and peaceful at first. The neighborhood is very nice and peaceful, and it is beautiful at sunset and at night. The film makes me feel happy, at peace, and it puts me on the edge of my seat. It is my favorite Alfred Hitchcock film, and I love a lot of his films so that says a lot. What a genius, and I think that this film really shows how he was the master of suspense. The ending of the film was probably one of the most suspenseful, and on the edge of your seat endings of all time. Such a phenomenal movie. The only two Hitchcock films that challenged this one for being my favorite were "North By Northwest," and "Psycho." But they are entirely different. Also his best films always have James Stewart in them. Well the best ones usually either have James Stewart, Cary Grant, or Grace Kelly in them, so if you want to get into Hitchcock know that the ones you should watch always have one of those actors in it. There are only a few of his absolute most amazing films that don't have them in it like "Psycho," "The Birds," and "Strangers On A Train."

He was really good at having people in one small setting for the entire film. He did that with "Rope," and "Lifeboat." But he perfected the idea of having an entire movie in only one place with this film.
Blade Runner 1982,  R)
Pan's Labyrinth 2006,  R)
Zombieland 2009,  R)
Total Recall 1990,  R)
This is 40 2012,  R)
This is 40
To start off I thought that the film was very funny to start off I thought that the film was really funny but incredibly annoying but incredibly annoying. It was annoying because it was non-stop fighting throughout the entire movie, and I found myself feeling really wound up after I left the theatre. The people, and the fighting was way to stereotypical. The daughter Sadie was such a stereotypical teenage girl, that it just annoyed the hell out of me. Also the arguments were often so stupid, and irrational that it just disgusted me. I found the things in Knocked up with Paul Rudd, and Leslie Mann annoying and stereotypical, but I thought that this was just ridiculous. The film is relatable in certain areas. I am 17 and I have some arguments with my family, but not as exaggerated as the one sin this. I could see a little bit of my life in this at times, but not nearly as extreme as this. My life is pretty decent. The film also went on way to long, and I got really bored. At the beginning of the film it was entertaining, and funny, but it didnâ(TM)t take long for the film to get annoying. I felt really uncomfortable watching this for a long time. Everybody I went to see it with thought it got better at the end, but I donâ(TM)t know what I thought of that part because I was so annoyed by the film that once it got to the end I found myself finding everything annoying. I was uncomfortable watching this. Leslie Mannâ(TM)s voice I find a little annoying sometimes. When she is yelling or in arguments, I canâ(TM)t stand her. I usually like her, but when she gets angry I find her annoying to listen to. Paul Ruddâ(TM)s father was very annoying. Charlotte to me is always funny, and I really liked her in Knocked up. The film got better towards the end, but I hated it for about the first hour and 10 minutes. It was decent at the end, but overall I was really wound up from this movie. It was so over the top, and obnoxious.
Hereafter 2010,  PG-13)
Heat 1995,  R)
I Am Sam 2001,  PG-13)
I Am Sam
This was an incredibly emotional movie that might have been the most amazing performance Sean Penn ever gave in his career. He plays a mentally handicapped man named Sam. Sam loves the Beatles, and the entire soundtrack is Beatles songs. It reminded me of Across the Universe at times. It also has a few Kramer vs. Kramer references in it. He also loves IHOP. The film does references several things like those. He has a daughter played by Dakota Fanning when she was little named Lucy after the song Lucy In The Sky with Diamonds. The mother of the child runs away leaving Sam to raise Lucy by himself. He makes a living by working at Starbucks for $8.00 an hour. He has the intellectual capacity of a 7 year old, and they are worried that he wont be able to take care of her when she turns 8, because she will be smarter then him at that age. When an incident goes down at Lucy's 7th birthday party, Sam gets arrested. He is released but has to go to court to see if he is eligible to take care of his daughter. Which creates a lot of emotion. It gets tough to watch at times, because it is sad. You get a wide range of emotions actually. You feel all emotions pretty much. There is a lot of warmth, but there is so much heartbreak. There are about two different scenes where you may shed a tear. I wont tell you them though. Sean Penn's acting is amazing, and it is one many roles he has had where you sat there thinking "That's Sean Penn, o my god." You think that because of how much he changes his personality for it. He is everything everybody will tell you he is in this movie. Michelle Pfeiffer doesn't get enough credit for her performance in this. It was by far her best. I didn't like her at all in Scarface, but she is fantastic in this. She didn't have the type of role that Sean Penn had, but she still played a really tough role. She played his lawyer, and did his case pro bono. She has tons of personal issues, and you can see that with her when you see how she acts. She always seems so frustrated with everybody, and everything. Also nothing ever goes her way. Her case really helps her personally, which you will notice at the end of the film. This film did introduce us to Dakota Fanning. She was really little when she did this, but she did pull of some tough emotional acting. This is just all around a really well acted film. Sam also has many friends that have the same disability that he has, and I am not sure if the are like that in real life or not, but if they aren't they are great actors. You will see how everybody loves Sam, because he is a sweet man, and it is hard to not like him. You can tell all of his neighbors, and co-workers at Starbucks love him. His daughter Lucy is very close to him, and they have a really nice relationship. It is interesting to see because she is smarter then he is, so she almost like the parent. A lot of times you can see how she is more competent then Sam. When the film is over you wonder what it will be like when she is a teenager.
Intolerable Cruelty 2003,  PG-13)
The Mummy 1999,  PG-13)
Silver Linings Playbook 2012,  R)
Silver Linings Playbook
"You have to do everything you can, and if you stay positive you have a shot at a silver lining." - Pat (Bradley Cooper)
"We are not liars like they are." - Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence)

Silver linings Playbook is one of my top ten favorite movies, and it is in my opinion the best movie that has come out since the year of 1996. It is a phenomenal movie that is thought provoking, quirky, interesting, and funny. It makes you think about relationships, your own life, and about other people in the film as well. It is overall a very intellectual movie. It was better the second time, because you pick up on things, and there are things that you appreciate more like Bradley Coopers acting when you see it again. David O. Russell adapted this screenplay off of the novel of the same name written by Mathew Quick.

The film depicts the life of Pat Salitano (Bradley Cooper) who just got out of a mental institution, and is trying to find a silver lining. He was in the hospital because he caught his wife cheating on him in the shower, and he beat her lover to within an inch of his life. Pat is a very smart and wise guy, but delusional, and slightly stubborn. He is not as much stubborn as he is just going through a tough time, and struggling. When he gets out of the mental institution there are a few signs that show that he should still be there. He will still lose it here and there, but he is more positive, and his thinking process is better. A silver lining for him is to get Nicki back. He is under a restraining order, and he can't call or see her. He is delusional because he can't see that is marriage is done, and that he should try to start over. Though he isn't official divorced, it looks like he won't be able to get her back, or he should at least try to be with Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence). He is also manic bi-polar, so he has no filter, and he can't show sympathy. That is also the reason why he always loses it in the middle of the night. Part of his struggle is that he is always hearing his wedding song, and when he hears it, it tortures him. I think he is a bit of a schizophrenic because he hears that song when it isn't even there. Overall he needs more help, everybody around him is struggling or has some really big noticeable problem. I am also going to say that this was Bradley Coopers best acting job of his career, and if it weren't for Daniel Day Lewis playing Lincoln I think he would have won the Oscar for best actor. His acting was so good in this and it really was a hard role that was different for him. Playing a character that is bi-polar, and going through the tough time he is going through is a tough role. He is also very funny in this, because of his lack of a filter he says all of these really funny things like he says to Tiffany at the dinner table in one scene "You have poor social skills, you have a problem." That was a very funny line in the movie. Though he usually plays the same personality, I think he is a very good actor. He seems very likeable, and I feel like he would be a guy that would be cool if you met him. Like Tom Hanks his personality makes the audience feel connected to him, and that is why we like him.

All of the characters in this film you can connect with, but my favorite character was Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence). Tiffany is a troubled girl, who is attractive, talented, and smart. She is also is stubborn, and she won't do anything that is against her way. She is not like other girls at all, but she is different in a really good way. I would say she is more of a tough girl, which makes her different. Her problems have made her tougher, and stronger. Her husband just died, and she lost her job because she went a little crazy after he died. She develops a friendship with Pat, and they eventually start to help each other a lot. She tells Pat that she lost her job because she slept with everybody in her office, including women. She isn't like that anymore, but she likes that side of herself. Overall I think she is a very interesting character, and she is my favorite for that reason. Jennifer Lawrence just won the Oscar for best actress for her role in this film, and she truly was fantastic. I find it interesting that she is 21 because that was a really hard role to play for somebody who is so young. I thought she truly did deserve her Golden Globe award for "Best Actress in a Motion Picture - Musical or Comedy." The Oscar award she won I think she really deserved more than anything. I was actually cheering for her to win, and I wanted the movie to win best picture. When she won I was really happy, because I thought that she truly did deserve that. She comes across as very likeable to me also. She seems very normal. After she won she met jack Nicholson, and she was really start struck by it. That made me really like her, and I felt like she seemed like a very normal person. I think that she is an outstanding actress. She has become one of my favorite actresses, and I really like her now. She was fantastic in this movie, and plays a really hard role, and pulled off some really tough acting so perfectly. There is one scene at the end where she looks so stressed and emotional, and her acting is so great. She was so convincing. Because she stared in the Hunger Games, she will be remembered for that more so then this because that was a really popular book so more people went to go see the movie. Though her acting in the Hunger games is very good, it is no where near as difficult or impressive as the her acting in this movie. She is a really great actress, and I am glad that she is young too, because she will be around for a long time. I can't wait for her to be in more movies. I hope more people will think of her for this role more so then the Hunger games. I thought the Hunger Games was very good, but nowhere near as good as this.

Another important character is Pats father Pat Sr. (Robert De Niro). His father has this goal to open up a restaurant, and he makes his money from betting on the Eagles games. He is extremely superstitious, and obsessive compulsive. I picked up on all of the superstitious things he does the 2nd time I saw it. He always wants Pat to stay and watch the games with him, because he thinks that the Eagles have a better chance of winning if Pat is watching. He also does things like holding a handkerchief, and having several remotes all pointing in the same direction. He is a stereotypical gambler who does research before making bets, and knows everything about the game he is betting on to increase his chances on winning. He won't let his son leave the house without giving him a really hard time about it on game day. The gambling stuff is actually pretty funny at times. Robert De Niro is my all time favorite actor, and he has never disappointed me. This is my 2nd favorite film of his, Awakenings (1990) is my favorite. I sort of feel like he has been doing a lot more smaller roles lately so I didn't expect him to have a big part in this film, but he did which I was very happy about. I felt like this was another role for him that was pretty unusual, considering that he usually does crime. Phenomenal actor.
When I first saw it I gave it a 9/10, but it was even better the second time. Now it is part of my 10/10 film club. It is only the 21st movie that I have rated a 10/10 on this site. It was better he second time because I picked up on a lot of things, and there were several things that I was able to appreciate more. I could spend all day talking about this film, and there are certain parts of the film I could write a lot about, but I won't because it would spoil it for those who haven't seen it. This was an incredibly unique, interesting, thought provocative, and remarkable movie. One of my top ten favorites at the moment. I didn't think it would win the Oscar for best picture, but I really wanted it to. I was cheering for it to win; because it is my favorite film since the year of 1996 I loved it that much.

----------Compare and Contrast to the Book---------
The screenplay was adapted by David O. Russell from the novel of the same name written by the author Mathew Quick. Both the book and movie are great, but they are really different. The movie has a lot more positive and funny things in it. An example is the scene in the movie where Pat reads "A Farewell to Arms" in the middle of the night and throws the book out the window is not in the book. In the book he reads that novel and cries at the end of it, because he was sad about what happened to Catherine. Another scene is the part where he goes to dinner at his friend Ronnie's house. The scene in the movie is very similar to the scene in the book, except the scene in the film is funnier, because of Pats lack of a filter.

In the book Pat is much more mentally ill, and it is clear that he should still be in the hospital, which in the book he calls "The Bad Place." He is even more delusional in the book, and he loses it even more often then he does in the movie. He refers to his life as his movie. He thinks that his life will have a perfect ending like a movie. He is like a kid with his childish fantasies and his unrealistic expectations. You like him, and you cheer for him, but you know that he really does struggle. He is very positive in the book like he is in the film, but much more crazy. In the movie his positive attitude seemed to inspire other people, like he said "Never throw a marriage out the window," which really helped his friend Ronnie with his struggling marriage. He is also a huge body builder that is always working out in the novel. He was always running with a trash bag over him in both the movie and the book, but in the book he is always talking about his weightlifting, and how he needs to burn off what ever he just ate. He did that to get hi wife back Nicki too. In the book he learns that he was in the hospital for almost four years and when he learns that he can't believe that it has been that long. The same scene in the movie when he see's his brother after he gets out for the first time is the same, except the jersey he gives him is a Hank Basket 84 jersey. In the movie it was Deshean Jackson 10. During the Eagles games he is always cheering for Hank Basket, but Basket doesn't do a lot.

Tiffany in the book is also a little different. Jennifer Lawrence made the character a lot better. In the book she doesn't talk a lot, and she is really unstable. She was unstable in the movie, but I didn't think she had that much personality in the book. On her dates with Pat she never really talks, but he talks to her. She loses it a few times like he does. The relationship between the two is very different then in the book. There are certain scenes in the book between the two that are in the movie but different though.

One scene that does happen in the book is when she says to Pat "You can f!@#k me as long as we turn off the lights." That scene was exactly the same in the book, except it is longer. She cries into his jersey for about ten minutes before he leaves, but in the movie it is only a few seconds. But after they have one date she tells him "Pat I don't want you to f!@#k me." That scene where she said that too him wasn't in the movie. The diner scene in the film where he orders raisin bran is also in the book, and they go to that diner a few times. However he never says anything that upsets her, and makes her go crazy like she did in the film. That was an ok scene in the book that was made much better in the film.

In the movie she always ambushes him while he is jogging. Later you learn that Pats mother would always call her so she would know when he was running. In the book she always waits on the corner for him, and runs with him. At first he doesn't know why she is following him, but then she tells him that she is "Scouting him." Later you learn that she is scouting him to see if he is in good enough shape to dance with her. Like in the movie he dances with her so she will agree to deliver letters to Nicki. She handed Pat letters from Nicki that she secretly wrote like in the movie, but in the book she has to tell him. In the movie he figures it out. In the book he writes to Nicki that he wanted to meet her at the place where they got engaged on Christmas day, but Tiffany shows up and confesses to him what she has been doing and he takes off running and he gets mugged in a bad area.

Pats father in the book is even more mentally ill then him. When he gets home from the hospital, which he calls "The Bad Place," his father won't even talk to him. His father won't talk to anybody if the Eagles lose, but if they win he will be in a great mood for a week. His Mother goes on strike at one point. She writes him a letter saying that he must talk to Pat or get rid of the flat screen TV he bought or she will not cook for him, clean the house for him, or do anything else for him. The father seemed like a really macho guy in the novel. He was stoic, and a very bad guy. He snapped out of it at times, and he eventually left the sports page for Pat, which he had never done before. In the book he doesn't make his living by betting off of the Eagles games. I don't think they really ever discuss what he does for a living in the book. However he was very super stitius about the Eagles in both the book and the movie. I think that David O. Russell just took that idea and made it better.

One part of the book that was better then the movie was the relationship between Pat and his therapist Dr. Cliff Patell. I liked that part of the movie a lot, but it was better in the book, because there was a lot more of it. In the book they would always do the Eagles chant in his office "E! A! G! L! E! S! EAGLES!" People in the waiting room could never tell what was going on so it was funny. In the book when Cliff sat down he was his therapist, but when he stood up he was his friend. They would talk to each other like regular guys, so Pat loved seeing him. They would also go to Football games together. Cliff went with many men on a bus that said "The Asian Invasion" on it, and they would park it in the same spot always. That is the one part of the book that is better then the film. The book does give more detail then the film of course, but the story isn't as good as the movie.

The only time where I have seen a movie and read the book that it was based on and found the two to be completely different but still great was Jaws. This is the 2nd time that has happened to me. Both the movie and book were great.

----- Conclusion to this movie/book review-----
Now that Bradley Cooper is doing more serious things I want to see him completely change his personality in a film to the point where you are surprised that it is even him. I can't wait to see what ever Jennifer Lawrence does next; because I think she truly is a great actress. I predict that thirty years from now she will be considered one of the greatest actresses of all time, and this will be one of the greatest movies of all time. This is an amazing movie, with amazing performances with an amazing cast. The book was great, but not as great as the movie. The directing and screenplay writing was fantastic, and the film should have won even more awards at the Oscars then it did. It did deserve all of the Oscars, golden globes, and independent film awards that it did get though. One of my tope five, or at least top ten favorites, and one that I want to watch over and over again.
Seal Team 6: The Raid on Osama Bin Laden 2012,  Unrated)
Sea of Love 1989,  R)
...And Justice For All 1979,  R)
Django Unchained 2012,  R)
Django Unchained
Django (Jamie Foxx) is a slave who is being brought to the Greenville Slave Auction when Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) saves him. Dr. Schultz is a bounty hunter, and a former dentist who wants Django to be a bounty hunter with him. Django has the goal of freeing his wife Broonhilda (Kerry Washington) who is a slave at Candieland. They go around the country catching bad guys, and trying to gain money so they can buy his wife. The film was crazy, and violent, but it had a great story.

This movie was just absolutely awesome in every way. Like all of the best Quentin Tarantino films he took all of the best cinematic elements to the next level, and it made the film just absolutely ridiculously sick. I saw this with My Dad three days after it came out, and we both walked out of the theater so psyched up. The best Tarantino films usually do get me really psyched when I am done with them. I have seen the film a total of three times, and I still get psyched every time I see it. Quentin Tarantino films like Pulp Fiction, Inglourious Basterds, and this one never get old. They are classics that will live on forever. This film is too young to be considered a classic, but I think it will definitely be one in a few years.

Whenever I watch a Quentin Tarantino movie I always feel like I just saw something I had never seen before, or at least not from him. This film is mostly original, except for the few things that were obviously stolen or parodied from other old westerns. With this film he blended satire and comedy into a spaghetti western about slavery in his Oscar winning screenplay, which I have read, and loved. The film is beautifully written, and put together. He blended all the different styles together so well, and the film came out just awesome. Nobody could blend those things together into one epic western but Quentin Tarantino. It is movies like this that make him my favorite director of all time.

This film uses a lot of satire to make slavery look awful. The film has received a lot of critcism for it's violence, and use of the n-word. Now the violence on the slaves in this movie I feel like was either exaggerated to make you hate slavery even more then you did before the movie or was told accurately. In other movies about slavery you see things happen to the slaves that will upset you, but this film made me feel more upset about it then any other film. I feel like Quentin did that so that we would have a different perspective on what slavery was like, and in interviews he has said that he is happy with the films response because people are discussing the topic of slavery in a different way. That is why he made this film, and made the slavery look more brutal and awful then most movies seem to do.

Now as for the criticism of the films extreme use of the n-word I find that I can't criticize Quentin for putting that in the film so much, because back in 1958 when this film took place that is how people spoke about African Americans. An argument that I can understand is that he used it too much, and after a while it wasn't necessary to use it as much to get the point across that whites were racist to African Americans at the time. That is the only argument that I could understand, but I think that when you are telling a film about slavery and really trying to make something look bad you have to do things like that. I think that it goes back to the thing where everything may have been exaggerated to make it look really awful. Tarantino has always been really liberal with his use of that word, but this was the only film where I felt like it was necessary. I do give him credit because it is hard to have the courage to do something like this where you know people will be upset by it, but he did one of the best jobs I think anybody could do.

There is also a lot of over the top violence that doesn't include the stuff that happens to the slaves, which all Tarantino films have and I can understand why you would criticize the film for that. Violence is just one of the many things that Quentin takes to the next level. In this movie there were times where a guy would get shot, and about a bucket or two of blood would fly out. It is pretty ridiculous and crazy, but after a while I felt like "its Tarantino that's what he does." One day I was in class and a girl told me that she heard Django was really good and that every time somebody got shot about a pint of blood came out. Then she just said to me "That's Quentin Tarantino for you." Yeah I would say that what that friend said to me is right. All of the blood in this movie is just classic Tarantino. The blood and violence in the movie was taken to the next level like all of the other awesome aspects of film were.

The violence in this film shocked me even though I expected it for some reason. However I found the shootout scenes to be kind of exciting, because they were so crazy that it became entertaining as hell. By taking violence and gore to the next level he made the film exhilarating in certain ways, but disturbing at the same time. When that huge gunfight happened where people were basically being blown up by gunshots I felt kind of exhilarated by how crazy it was, but disturbed by how over the top it was. I think that was what Tarantino was trying to do, and how he was trying to make us feel. When I saw it in theaters with my Dad a few people around us were laughing.

This is the shootout scene I was talking about. It is really crazy, and the bloodiness of the film gets campy, but it is still a well-done scene in a way.

I feel like he does violence for many reasons. First of all you can have some potentially great cinematography with violence. Tarantino in interviews has said that he thinks violence in movies is great cinema. I agree with that to an extent. Some movies that are violent have incredible cinematography, but I don't think that you need violence to have great cinematography. The violence in this film is unnecessary, but it is just part of a style that Quentin Tarantino has. I usually can take violence so that is why I am able to watch his films and like them. However I do question what is going on in his head, because I have a feeling that he is a real weirdo. But he is definitely a filmmaking genius.

Though this film is one of my top ten favorites, there were one or two moments where I felt like I would rather not look at that. But it wasn't the bloody gunfights that bothered me as much. They didn't bother me that much, because I know how unrealistic they are, and because of that I was able to get past that. It was the slave violence that bothered me more. Like when they fed the runaway slave to the dogs at one point, and another scene where two African American men fought each other to death. Those were the two violent scenes that I would have rather have not seen. But at the same time I think that goes back to the thing that I said where I think that the films violence towards slaves may have been exaggerated or told accurately to make us hate the slave holders from the 1800's even more. I found that my distaste for slavery was even worse after seeing this movie. I always hated it that slavery used to be a thing in America, but I hate it more now.

There was more slave violence in the screenplay that got taken out for the movie. I read the screenplay, and thought that it was beautifully written. However there were some changes in the movie, and there were some things that were left out. Like there is a scene in the screenplay where Django (Jamie Foxx) is having sex with his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), and then their slaveholders barge in and force them to keep having sex in front of them for their amusement. Also the scene where Django is hanging upside down and Stephen (Samuel Jackson) is telling him about what is going to happen to him is worse in the screenplay, because in the screenplay Django gets tortured more. Stephen burns his face in that scene, and it is described that Django unlike most heroes in movies shows pain, and screams. I can tell that Tarantino had to cut certain things out to make the film more watchable. I am glad that they cut out those things, because I don't think I would have been able to stomach that kind of slave violence. The gun violence was tolerable but intense for me, but the stuff with the slaves being punished for running away or tortured was a little bit much for me at times. Tarantino actually added violent scenes that weren't in the script to the movie. Like that violent gunfight that I keep talking about in this reviews was not in the script. I feel like Tarantino is the type of guy who can improvise stuff with his films. The script was great, and it got him the Oscar for best original screenplay. It just needed a few things to be taken out of the movie, and a few things to be added to it. Then it would have been perfect.

I feel like I have said enough about the violence in the movie, so I feel like I should talk about the acting now. A thing I notice with all Tarantino films is that that scripts are so good that all the best actors want to be in them. I also feel like the way he writes them allows the actors to be really good in the films, and it make sit easy for them to show off whatever skills they have as an actor. This film had incredible acting, and part of it was because of how great the characters were.

Leonardo Dicaprio took on the role of Calvin Candie. His character was a nasty, evil, and self-absorbed slaveholder whom you hate. I thought that this may have been his best acting job. It was the first time that he took on a role that wasn't a lead in a while. He usually takes on intense leading roles, but in this one he took on an n intense supporting role, and he pulled it off beautifully. He really made you hate his character, and he really got into it. In fact there was one scene where he cut his hand by accident on a wine glass, and he needed stitches later on. When he cut his hand he stayed in character, and then rubbed the blood on his hand all over Kerry Washington's face. When I first saw that scene I thought it was probably scripted, but it wasn't. I think he did that, because of how into the character he got. I felt like that was a great idea to leave that in because it added to the brutality, and to the evilness of the character, and I felt like it made that scene even more intense. It was an awesome acting job from a great actor. I thought that he was the guy who changed his personality the most for the movie.

Jamie Foxx and Christoph Waltz took on the two main characters. Jamie Foxx as Django, and Christoph Waltz as Dr. King Schultz. Christoph Waltz won the Oscar for best supporting actor, and he really deserved it for this. He gave an awesome performance, and he was funny, and just a perfect character for a Tarantino flick. Django was originally a character from a 1966 western called "Django." There is one scene where the guy who played the original Django has a cameo, and in that cameo he meets Jamie Foxx's Django. I like Jamie Foxx's Django better, because he was cooler. He was a dead shot like all great guys in westerns, and he was able to come up with some great lines. That is why the new Django is better then the original.

What Tarantino did was that he took things from old westerns, and blended them into his own creative story that had slavery, satire, and comedic things in it. It was one of the most creative films I have ever seen in terms of blending in different story elements. The 2nd best Tarantino film after Pulp Fiction. I loved this movie, and it got better for me the 2nd and 3rd time for some reason. So awesome, and I was so psyched after I watched it.
Sexy Beast 2000,  R)
Casanova 2005,  R)
The Rainmaker 1997,  PG-13)
The Verdict 1982,  R)
Michael Clayton 2007,  R)
The Talented Mr. Ripley 1999,  R)
The Cabin in the Woods 2012,  R)
The Imposter 2012,  R)
Confessions of a Dangerous Mind 2003,  R)
There Will Be Blood 2007,  R)
Hitchcock 2012,  PG-13)
Alfred Hitchcock may be the greatest director of all time. Probably because of how many things he invented with filmmaking and how many things he did that nobody else had done before. This film is about the making of what may have been his most famous movie. It is a pretty decent movie that s not as good as the book however. The film was interesting, but the didn't include all of the details from the book, and if it were a half hour longer they may have been able to make it more detailed. I think the reason why it got mixed reviews was because it was only an hour and a half long, and they didn't get enough detail for it. It could have been really good if they made it longer though. It was still pretty decent though and if you are a Hitchcock fan like I am you will probably enjoy it.

Anthony Hopkins did a very good job playing Hitchcock, and the makeup job really made him look like Hitchcock. He naturally sounds like him, and he did the persona of Hitchcock very well. Alfred Hitchcock seemed like a very weird and interesting person. Something that they don't really talk about in the movie is that he was scared of everything. He never drove a car because he was scared of police officers pulling him over. This film showed some of his problems but they didn't go deep enough into them. He was having nightmares in the film, and they showed his dieting habits too. He was very unhealthy, which you could tell just by looking at him. He also was depressed, because of how people in Hollywood would criticize him for his film until it became a hit. Overall he was a very troubled guy all of his life. He was kind of a tortured genius.

This film goes into his struggle sin the making of Psycho. At the time films were much more tamed and Psycho was pretty extreme for the era. Alfred Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) was very picky with his work, and he was really militant about not doing something twice. He was hot in the fifties and he did most of his most famous films in that decade. He had just did North By Northwest in 1959, but he knew that with the new decade starting that he would have a new audience, so it was time to change it up for him. He read the book Psycho by the author Robert Bloch that was published in 1959. After he read it he decided that would be his next piece of work, and he ordered that the book be taken out from the bookstores until the film came out, because he didn't want anybody to know the ending of the film before the film came out. He got Joseph Stefano to write the screenplay. In the book he had a few people adapt the book into a screenplay for him, but in the end he went with the one that Joseph Stefano did.

Nobody could see why Hitchcock was doing with this film, because it was so different, and it was nothing like the stuff he had been doing over the last ten years. In the book it said that nobody could ever see what Hitchcock was seeing with the film he was doing until it came out. It says in the book that Cary Grant didn't get Hitchcock's vision of North By Northwest until it became one of the most famous movies of all time. I think that is a sign of a true genius, and Alfred Hitchcock was one of the biggest ones or the biggest ones in film making history.

Something else with the film was that it was really disturbing and twisted. He had a lot of battles with the censors for certain things in Psycho like the shower scene and the opening scene. The book describes it more, but the movie just does the basic explanation. The shower scene where Norman Bates kills Marion Crane made women afraid to take showers for years after it. It was controversial, because nothing like that had ever been done before. Hitchcock thought it would be a really unexpected thing to kill off the protagonist of the story half way through, and Psycho made it ok for films to do that. It was controversial because films were not allowed to show nudity, and Hitchcock would have only been allowed to do the scene if he didn't show her nude, so he had to do a lot to make sure that they didn't show any nudity. That was part of the censorship battle. Hitchcock focused mostly on that one scene.

When it came out Hitchcock had precise plan as to how he wanted Psycho to be shown. He sent a manual out to the theatres with instructions on how to show it. He didn't want anybody to be allowed in after it started, because he thought they would lose the effect of the film if the missed any of it. The film shows you how Hitchcock always had such exact visions, and how that was such a big part of his genius.

The film at first I thought was really good, and now I just think it is decent, because I read the book after. It is still interesting, and it inspired me to go deeper into Hitchcock films. I also appreciate him more because of this movie, and the book it was based off of. Anthony Hopkins did a very good job playing Hitchcock and it was a hard role. The book didn't talk about his wife that much, but the film did, and that was the one really interesting part of the film. I think this is a film that should be re-made and done with a better script that makes the film two hours long, and with more detail from the book. Though I had a lot of flaws with it is was still a pretty good movie. I would only recommend it to Hitchcock fans, or too people that want to get into Hitchcock, or to people who want to be in film. A lesson from this film is never question a genius, and let the artist do his or her work.
Gangs of New York 2002,  R)
Unforgiven 1992,  R)
Raging Bull 1980,  R)
Raging Bull
This was an absolutely awesome movie, that was one of the best films that Robert De Niro. This is the back and white Rocky, but way better. The beginning was like the black and white version of Rocky, but soon became something way darker, and much more deep. The fact that it was in black and white made the films themes, and plot seem even more dark, and tough. This is probably the darkest boxing film I have seen so far, because of the abusive relationships, and how he just goes downhill.

This was the third time Martin Scorsese worked with Robert De Niro, but the first time Robert De Niro worked with Joe Pesci. The combination of Robert De Niro and Martin Scorsese had been proven a great one in films like Mean Streets (1972), and Taxi Driver (1976), and became greater with this film, and just got even greater over time. This is just the third classic they did together, but it is the first one Robert De Niro did with Joe Pesci, and that too was also proved a great duo in this film. Martin Scorsese, Robert De Niro, and Joe Pesci went on to do Goodfellas (1990), and Casino (1995). Well I know this is a very repetitive paragraph, but I made it that way to get the point across that this was the beginning of a great trio. Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci acted in Once Upon A Time In America (1984), and A Bronx Tale (1993) together without martin Scorsese directing. The two have so much chemistry as actors. When you see all of the films they were in with each other they also had different types of relationships with each other, which showed what great actors they both were, and how great they are together.

In this film Joe Pesci plays Joey LaMotta, who is Jake LaMotta's brother. This was when people started paying attention to him actually. Joey helped his brother with his career, and deal with the mob, and to try to keep his brother from going insane. Robert De Niro played Jake LaMotta. Jake LaMotta was a very paranoid, abusive, and irrational man who abused his wife, and everybody around him. I think the fact that he was such an abusive and nasty person is what allowed him to be such a great boxer. He truly was a Raging Bull in the boxing ring, hence the title. He beat his wife after she said that the boxer who he would be fighting against in his next match was handsome. I think that is why he was paranoid. He seemed to be really scared of losing everything. At one point he asked his brother if he had slept with his wife. His brother refused to answer that and left, then later he beat his wife because he thought she slept with him. Then he goes to his brother's house and attacks him in font of his whole family. That was when the relationship he had with any person in his life was ruined. The film is about his rise and fall. He slowly started cracking up, and sinking farther and farther. The film was very dark and depressing. It was amazing though.

This film is my fourth favorite Robert De Niro film after Awakenings (1990), Goodfellas (1990), Godfather II (1974). However I think that this was his most incredible acting job. At first he is this championship boxer, in great shape, then he puts on over 40 pounds in about two weeks, because Jake LaMotta put on a ton of weight later in his career. It really shows when you cannot only play a role that is completely out of character for him, but you also change yourself physically for a role. The best actors become the characters they play and he truly did in this film. That is why it was one of the most amazing acting jobs of all time. His character was like Carl Rizzi in the Godfather. Abusive, and a scumbag. He sounded like a younger Veto Corleone with his accent. Robert De Niro is my favorite actor for both his incredible ability to act, and because of his phenomenal filmography, which I celebrate almost all of it.
Raiders of the Lost Ark 1981,  PG)
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom 1984,  PG)
Casablanca 1943,  PG)
Zero Dark Thirty 2013,  R)
Zero Dark Thirty
The film is everything that happened with Al Qaeda after 9/11 leading to the point where the killed Bin Laden. It is the story of the greatest manhunt of all time. It was nearly ten years before they found and killed Osama Bin Laden, and this film shows all the work and events that occurred during the world's biggest manhunt. This is a film where you know the ending before it starts and it is still suspenseful, and intense. It is a slow moving film, that gradually gets faster and faster. You kind of sit there, knowing what is going to happen like another movie that came out that year Argo. In both films you knew how it ended but it was still really intense, and suspenseful. That was why the film was so good. I loved it I have to say. Jessica Chastain I think would have gotten best actress if Jennifer Lawrence did not play the role of Tiffany in Silver Linings Playbook. I wanted Jennifer Lawrence to win that award, but if it weren't her it would have been Jessica Chastain. I did not think the film would get best picture, but I think it definitely deserved to be one of the nominees for that category. The film is just as awesome as you would expect it to be. However there wasn't as much action as I thought there would be, but it was still intense. It was interesting, suspenseful, and a great drama, with great acting. However I doubt that the film was entirely accurate. The mission's details were so secretive that there is no way they could have gotten it right. I feel like in about twenty years from now when it is made public the details of the mission, this movie will be pretty inaccurate. It is still an awesome film. It is called Zero Dark Thirty because the mission to kill Bin Laden started at 12:30 at night.

The film starts off with some recordings from September 11th 2001. The screen is black when they play the recordings then it starts. Patrick (Joel Edgerton) is a tough guy navy seal. He is one of the guys that tortures the members of Al Qaeda that they hold as prisoners. He starts the film by torturing the nephew of Osama Bin laden for information. The nephew is Ammar al-Baluchi, and he doesn't say anything, so he is subjected to waterboarding.

Water boarding is a form of torture where you are held down, and they place a towel over your face. They pour water on your face, and that simulates the feeling of drowning. It was used only at the beginning of this film, but it was a tough scene to watch. It was tough considering that this was how the film started. I also wondered how often were these guys telling the truth when they said they didn't know anything. The film was criticized for it a lot, and it is not for sure if it is accurate. Some have argued or thought that it glorifies torture, which I disagree with. I think it is impossible to glorify torture. It is wrong and it is awful that we had to do it to get information. However some may think it is karma, because they are terrorists and they have tortured our people before. But still nobody deserves that.

Maya (Jessica Chastain) is a really intense, socially awkward, intense, and obsessed girl. All she ever does is work on the Bin laden case. She doesn't have any real life or friends. All she has done since she has joined the CIA is the Bin laden case. Jessica Chastain did a great job portraying her, because she was really intense, and she really did have a hard role to play.

The torture does work, and they get the info from him about an old acquaintance that is working as a courier for Bin laden. The courier is using the name Abu Ahmed. They catch Abu Faraj in 2005 and he denies knowing any courier even though Maya tortured him. They develop Maya's determination and desire to catch him as the film goes along, and she ends up surviving the 2008 Islamabad Marriott Hotel bombing. She eventually figures out where Osama is being held, and for everyday they don't do anything they she writes the number of days on one guys office window. She does that until they decide to kill Bin Laden on May 1st. The mission starts at 12:20 A.M. on may 2nd. The have to fight their way in, and they shoot many guys on the way in, and they finally do shoot and kill Osama Bin Laden. The last half hour of the film is the mission. Something that they did that was historically accurate was that they took a picture of Osama dead on the ground. The picture has not yet been leaked, because of how controversial that would be, because it is supposedly really nasty. They didn't show them dropping his body in the ocean, and they just ended it right after they killed him.

One of the terrorist attacks that they show was the 7/7 London bombing in 2005. I was actually in London when it happened, and it was a very scary day. Terrorists detonated four bombs in the public transportation systems during rush hour in the early morning. I had just woken up when I heard of it, and I was only ten when it happened but I was there though. Three were in the underground trains, and one on a bus. Fifty-two civilians and four suicide bombers were killed in the attack.

On September 11th 2001 four men crashed for planes into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania after its passengers tried to take back the plane. 2,977 people were murdered that day in the most awful way. This film is about the ten-year manhunt to catch Osama Bin laden the man responsible for the biggest terrorist attack of all time. That attack showed what kind of evil, and hatred people were capable of. America hates Osama bin Laden more then they hate us, and I remember everybody at my school was really happy when he was killed. There was about a week where people at my school were talking about it. This film inspired more of a discussion and it was talked about around my school when it came out. It was an awesome movie, that didn't win any awards but would have gotten them if 2012 weren't such a phenomenal year in movies. There were so many awesome movies that I felt like deserved awards that didn't get any and this was one of them. Kathryn Bigelow directed this and The Hurt Locker which won best picture, but I didn't think was as good as Zero Dark thirty. Mark Boal wrote Hurt Locker and Zero Dark Thirty too. Those two have collaborated twice and their two collaborations have been nominated for best picture and one of them one. They should keep working together, because they make great movies together. This was an awesome one.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button 2008,  PG-13)
North by Northwest 1959,  Unrated)
North by Northwest
This is my favorite Alfred Hitchcock film after Rear Window, and one of the rare movies that I will give a rating of a 10/10 to. It is a suspense story that gets used a lot today, but was entirely original when it was first used. Cary Grant plays Roger Thornhill; a man who is being mistaken for another man named George Kaplan and is and kidnapped. He is brought to a house where he is interrogated, and is forced to drink burban so he can stage a drunk driving accident. When he gets released a man he is talking to gets stabbed in the back right in front of him, and he pulls the knife out of the mans back, and it looks like he murdered him. Now he is wanted for murder, and a manhunt begins. That starts an awesome chain of events that truly do prove that Alfred Hitchcock is the master of suspense. This type of suspense story gets used a lot today, but it had never been done before this. A man running from the law trying to prove himself innocent, and find the person who is setting him up. That is a formula that is clichied now, but completely original back then.

Cary grant to me is the original Sean Connery. He sounds like him, acts like him, and even resembles him slightly. If Hitchcock made a Bond film it would be like this. When he talks with women he has the same charm that Sean Connery's James bond had. I find that a lot of the actors and actresses in old films were all-similar to each other. Now Hitchcock obviously loved blondes because all of the women in his films are blonde, and they do take on the same personality in each film. Grace Kelly is still my favorite actress in any of his films.

After he did this film he did Psycho, which may be his most famous movie, but is not his absolute best in my opinion. This film and Rear Window are his two bets films in my opinion. All of his films have something that stick out from the others. This one was much more of an adventure. It was a manhunt, and it had actions scenes at places like Mt. Rushmore. Rear Window was unique because it all took place in his house, and all you saw was inside his place and what he could see out the window. Psycho was much more of a scary flick, and it was creepier. Vertigo was unique for the dolly zoom. This film was the one that I felt like had more effects and action. The famous scene when he is getting chased by a crop dusting plane is awesome, because it is suspenseful. They give you little hints as to what is about to happen, and leave you guessing as to what will happen. You know something is going to happen but not sure what. Once it happens it looks really cool, and pretty realistic for a 1950's movie. The ending at Mt. Rushmore it all looked pretty fake, but it was still a great scene. Old films tend to be more reliant on story and suspense then effects, which is actually good.

This is one of y absolute favorites, and one of the greatest films of all time. Hitchcock was always amazing.
Seven Psychopaths 2012,  R)
Dead Calm 1989,  R)
Harold and Maude 1971,  PG)
Gangster Squad 2013,  R)
Gangster Squad
This was actually a very good movie. My opinion as to why critics hated it was because it is over the top in certain areas, and it is kind of a really stereotypical gangster film that isn't very original. Sean Penn plays Mickey Cohen a vicious gangster who pledged to a life of violence. He planned to practically own Las Angeles, but the LAPD wouldn't put up with it. Josh Brolin and Ryan Gosling are two cops who go out with several other cops to catch Mickey Cohen. They call themselves the Gangster Squad. They bug Cohen's house, and are able to really hurt his plans.
The film is very violent. In the first scene Mickey Cohen has a guy chained to two different cars, and the cars go in opposite directions, which rips him in half. There is a lot of gore, and brutality in the film, which is accurate because real life gangsters were very brutal. The film however did have some good dialog and a good amount of funny lines. The film was very entertaining from start to finish.

The film doesn't really have a lot of character development, but they do develop certain relationships between characters a little. The relationship between Josh Brolin and his wife they go into detail with. He had fought in gorilla warfare before and now that he is at it again she is really scared. She asks Ryan Gosling to make sure that he doesn't try to be a hero and get himself killed. She ends up picking all of the men that he goes out with.
The relationship between Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone reminded me of the Notebook in certain areas. It has Ryan Gosling with a very pretty red haired girl (Emma Stone), just like in the Notebook. This is the 2nd time he hooked up with Emma Stone in a movie, the first time being Crazy Stupid Love. In this film Emma Stone plays a girl named "Grace" and she is one of Mickey Cohen's girls. But Gosling dates her in secret. If Mickey Cohen finds out that Gosling is with her he will kill him.
I won't give any more details on the characters but there isn't a whole lot for me to tell you. The rest is kind of a standard gangster film. It is forgettable when you compare it to stuff like "Godfather," "Goodfellas," or "Untouchables."

Sean Penn was criticized for being over the top, but I thought he was pretty good. I think that it is just unusual to see the guy who played "Jeff Spicoli," "Harvey Milk," and "Sam Dawson" playing this extremely vicious, nasty gangster. But from I have heard about Mickey Cohen it seemed to me that Sean Penn did a pretty good job. He is probably the greatest actor ever, and I could never criticize him, because what ever I see him in I am always shocked by how great he is. He wasn't over the top at all in my opinion. Al Pacino in Scarface, now that is over the top. Give Penn a break he did a good job.

This was overall a very good and entertaining film, but forgettable though. It is basic entertainment so it won't be ranked as a great gangster film, because it isn't. But I would still recommend it.
A Clockwork Orange 1971,  R)
A Clockwork Orange
I like weird and violent movies, but this just goes about a hundred miles too far. The reason why this movie has such a cult following baffles me. I thought that this was probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Maybe even the worst film I have ever watched. It is just the weirdest movie I have ever seen, and it is the type of weird where you can't even figure out what it is about. Every scene is either so weird that it makes you uncomfortable, or it is too disturbing too watch. That is part of the reason why I hated this film so much, because of how disturbed I was by the whole thing. I like a few Stanley Kubrick films, but this one was just too weird. I know that the film is an acquired taste like a lot of his films, but I think I would rather not have the taste for this film. I have the taste for really weird films, but I don't like this one because of how disturbing it is.

Now I will admit that the cinematography of the film is great. There are certain parts of the film that really looked amazing. There are many things in the film that look really artistic, and the film does make Stanley Kubrick look like he is some sort of artist, besides a filmmaker. I think Stanley Kubrick is one of the greatest directors of all time, and this was one of his best jobs directing, but I hated the film for how bizarre, and disturbing it is. I think that from a directors point of view this movie is incredible, and if you think of it that perspective it is hard not to love. Even though this is one of the movies I hate the most I still did appreciate everything about it that makes Stanley Kubrick so unique and great.

It also has good acting from Malcolm McDowell. He plays Alex, a guy who you hate from the very beginning. You can tell from the start, and from the cover that it is all about him, and that is part of the reason why I hated this I guess. The film revolved around one of the worst characters I have ever seen in a movie. Not bad as in lousy, bad in as a terrible person. He is a sadistic sociopath, whose main interests are classical music, ultra violence, and rape. Malcolm McDowell did a brilliant job portraying him, and he really seemed insane and awful. The role did seem like it was a really difficult one to do, and I give him a lot of respect for pulling it off as well as he did. He really makes you hope that something awful happens to him, and awful things do happen to him.

He is the leader of his "droogs", Pete (Michael Tarn), Georgie (James Marcus), and Dim (Warren Clarke) in a futuristic dystopia that is London. They drink "milk plus" which somehow makes them go crazy and go on a "ultra violence" rampage, where they fight other gangs, and they drive up to one couples house, and cripple the husband, and rape his wife. The rape scene is one of the worst scenes I have ever watched. They just sing, "Singing in the rain" the whole time. That is just the start of the super violent things that happen in this film.

After a while his Droogs want more equality in the crimes they commit, and after he bludgeons a woman to death they finally turn on him, and they smash a bottle of milk in his face, and leave him for the cops. He is sentenced to jail, and is eventually tested at the hospital. The rest of the plot is so weird that I can't even explain it.

People say that this film is really thought provoking, but I just don't see it. I see how it is an incredible job done by Stanley Kubrick, but I just hated the film anyways. The novel I have no intention of reading, because I am sure it is more disturbing then this. I hated this movie so much, but I may watch it again to see if I like it more. But at the moment I just don't get it. This is a film that even if you like it you shouldn't really recommend to people, because it is offensive to watch. Too disturbing, and weird.
Papillon 1973,  PG)
Hot Fuzz 2007,  R)
Trouble with the Curve 2012,  PG-13)
Rosemary's Baby 1968,  R)
Snatch 2001,  R)
No Country for Old Men 2007,  R)
No Country for Old Men
To start off I think Joel and Ethan Coen are two of the greatest filmmakers of all time. They bring a very unique style of filmmaking, and a wide range of different kinds of films to the film world, and every single film I have seen of theirs I felt like had something about it that I had never seen before. Their movies are all pretty weird in their own ways, but that is what makes them unique. Their quirky style of movie making has produced many cult classics like "Big Lebowski." Their films are not for everybody, because they don't appeal to a mainstream audience.

The Coen Brothers are guys that grow on you. The more you watch their films the better they get, because they are a bit of an acquired taste. At the same time however most of the really talented filmmakers are an acquired taste. The more talented you get in a certain art, the more artsy your viewers are going to have to be so they can appreciate your work. I have found that the more I have gotten into the art of movies the more I have grown to appreciate the artsy filmmakers like Joel and Ethan Coen. That is why they are an acquired taste. You have to go deep into movies, and develop an appreciation for them to like certain things.

This film is an acquired taste, and even though I think it is a really good one I am surprised that it won best picture. I feel like if it had been nominated in another year it would most likely not have one. It seams like an odd film win best picture when you think about it. It is an odd film overall, but when I first saw it I was surprised that it one best picture. This is a film that I would expect to get nominated for certain things, but not win best picture. I don't think there has ever been a film to win best picture that was anything like this, and that is why I am surprised it won that year. Don't get me wrong I think that it is a great movie, but I find it to be an interesting choice to win best picture.

This is a very weird, but interesting crime drama adapted from Cormac McCarthy's novel of the same name. It is about a murderer named Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) who escapes from jail by killing the deputy with his handcuffs. Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) comes across the aftermath of a Mexican drug deal gone wrong while he is hunting out in the dessert. There is a bag with 2 million dollars in it, which Moss takes, and Chigurh goes after him to get the money. That is a short explanation of the story.

I really liked this movie. I found that it got better the 2nd time too. I am reading the book now, and I will add more about the book after I am done reading it.
Collateral 2004,  R)
Killer Joe 2012,  R)
Gone With the Wind 1939,  G)
A Haunted House 2013,  R)
Despicable Me 2010,  PG)
Despicable Me
This is a very good animated film that falls into the class of things like "Up, and Finding Nemo." Gru (Steve Carrel) is a villain that has the ultimate goal of stealing the moon. In flashback sequences it shows that he wanted to go to the moon when he was a child, but his mother never seemed proud of him. He has been getting beat by everybody around him his entire life, and now he wants to come up on top. It is a typical formula that animated films seam to have these days, but it works. The film kind of seems like an animated Mission Impossible, or like an animated James Bond film at times. It has plenty of gadgets; like the shrink ray. When he steals the shrink ray, but when his archenemy "Vector (Jason Segal)" steals it from him he devices a plan to get it back. He adopts three little girls, because he thinks that he can use them to get the shrink ray back, because Vector lets them into his home so he can buy girl-scout cookies from them. That starts off a very funny, and silly series of events. This is a very family friendly film that would appeal to adults to.

The minions are my boys. I love those guys, because they are awesome, and they are hilarious. They are these really small yellow things, and some of them have only one big eye. They are funny, because they always seem really happy and excited to be doing evil things along with their master Gru. They are like the green alien toys from Toy Story, because they sound and act like them. They are these totally loveable guys, because they are kind of cute, and they are really funny. There are many funny things that happen with them in the laboratory.

Gru is funny to look at. He has incredibly tiny legs, but a really heavy upper body that makes you wonder how his legs support his upper body. When you hear his voice you can tell it is Steve Carrel's voice, but at the same time he has a very funny accent that makes a lot of his lines funny. He has really weird teeth, and an extremely pointy nose that looks like a sowing needle. He at first ignores the girls he adopts, but eventually becomes a loving father. The film has all of the formulaic conflict that all animated films seem to have, but it really does work.

I won't tell you anything else so you can enjoy the film, but you will like it. Definitely a good family night movie with the kids, that is still good if you are an adult.
The Night of the Hunter 1955,  PG)
Charade 1963,  G)
The Untouchables 1987,  R)
The Man Who Knew Too Much 1956,  PG)
Looper 2012,  R)
It starts of in the state of Kansas in the year of 2044. Thirty years from now time travel will be invented and it will be very illegal. People send back people they want to kill back in time, because it is impossible to dispose of a body in the future. What Looper's do is lay a mat on the floor and wait for the person to appear and shoot them immediately. Then they must dispose of the body. There is always some silver in the person's back that they have to kill. The silver is their pay. They are called "Loopers" because time travels go around in loops, and when they kill somebody who went back in time that is called closing a loop. The film's concept is a little complicated, but not to the extent of things like "Inception," or "The Matrix." It is the best original sci-fi film since The Matrix in my opinion, and it's even better then Inception. It was very entertaining and very cool. It had a very good screenplay, and good cgi. They made the city look pretty similar to the city in "Blade Runner." The acting is nothing special, but films like this don't require great acting.

Bruce Willis is Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) in the future. They try to make Joe look like a younger Bruce Willis, and do a very mediocre job with it. They do a flash forward sequence that show many events in his life, and show how He started to look like Bruce Willis. Though they are very different and you can see how he changed over time with Bruce Willis, they are still similar in ways. When you see them go to a restaurant together they order the exact same thing, showing that they have the same taste, likes, and dislikes. I can tell that was put in there to see if people like me would notice. Definitely an interesting thing the director chose to do.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt has been on a role recently since he did "500 Days of Summer (2009)" which I didn't like but it started his stream of good films. This year he has been in Dark Knight Rises, Lincoln, Django Unchained, and Looper. Those are all huge films that were all fantastic. I hope he keeps it up, because I am really starting to like him. He can play different roles to. In this film he was a tough guy assassin, in Dark Knight Rises he played a cop that would be called "Robin" at the end of it. He also played a whiny and depressed guy in 500 Days of Summer. He has a good range, and I hope he keeps up with his streak of great films.

Bruce Willis I think is an ok actor. He tends to play that Die Hard character of his in a lot of films like "Pulp Fiction," and he did that in this film a little too. However in this one he was more serious, and he didn't have any catchy lines that got annoying after a while like he did in all of his Die Hard films. In this film he was dressed the exact way he was dressed in Pulp Fiction. He wore the same leather jacket, white t-shirt, and the same pair of jeans. I feel like that was a reference to that character. I wonder if he actually likes to dress that way, or if they chose to have him wear that.

The film is a very original sci-fi film that will most likely not have a sequel, because it wasn't set up in a way where that would be possible, except there is one way. The right way to say it is that it is probably impossible to make a good sequel, so I hope they don't. However this is a great sci-fi film that I think will be a classic in ten years. Great story, idea, and screenplay. Loved it.
Mama 2013,  PG-13)
Pi 1998,  R)
In Bruges 2008,  R)
In the Heat of the Night 1967,  G)
Big Fish 2003,  PG-13)
Chinatown 1974,  R)
Gimme Shelter 1970,  PG)
Gimme Shelter
This is a documentary about the tragic Altamont Speedway concert that the Rolling Stones put on in the month of December in the year 1969, while they were touring to promote their "Let It Bleed" album. They put on a free concert and had the Hells Angeles for security, and to control the crowd. When they started to play "Sympathy for the Devil" a fight broke out and 7 people were killed by the hells Angeles. One man charged at the stage with a gun, so one of the Angels stabbed him to death, and that may have just saved Mic Jagger's life. If he shot Jagger that would have made things so much worse, and that would have probably been a preview to John Lennon's murder. At the end of the film you see Jagger watching the footage of the incident, and another person is point out the man with the gun, and where the knife was in the Angels hand when he stabbed him. He looks so stunned and sad by what had happened. You could tell he really felt responsible for it. A lot of people know that people got killed at this concert, but a lot of people don't know that there were four births reported. This incident truly shows what drugs, sex, and rock and roll is like when it is all in one at a single moment.

I will say that I love the Rolling Stones, and their sixties stuff is some of my favorite music of all time, and I have listened to it over and over again. The film shows a lot of videos from concerts in the same year before the incident. The shows are crazy, but exciting. Life looked awesome for them, and everything was going great, and they kept writing better and better stuff. They were working on their next album "Sticky Fingers." One scene they were listening to the demo of "Wild Horses." They show that they were doing great in the studio, and the concerts were amazing, but you see the craziness of the show's, which is foreshadowing for the Altamont Speedway tragedy. It also helps add to the shock factor of what happened at that show. That is the style of this documentary.

What happened was that they started playing "Sympathy For The Devil," and a fight broke out in the middle of the song. Jagger stopped the song thinking it was just a fight and he told people to "Chill out." He didn't know that people had just died. When he started the song again, one of the Angeles whispered in his ear. Jagger continued to do his little dance for a second then walked to the front of the stage, and looked at the crowd with the worst expression on his face. He was able to get his cool back, then he continued the show as if it didn't happen. He thought that if he ended the show there would be riots so he decided to act normal. Every song after that he would have to tell everybody to chill out, because everybody was so crazy. Everybody in the audience either looked angry, high, happy, but they were all high. It was disturbing because Jagger seemed like he was begging for them to calm down. He seemed that way after the guard whispered in his ear. It was very disturbing to see everything at the event. People were getting naked in the place too. It was just awful. It truly shows how much drugs effect you and why you shouldnt do them.

They stopped playing "Sympathy for The Devil" for a long time after that. I saw them in concert in December of 2012, and that was the best song in concert. They sound way better today than in the sixties, because concert technology has gotten so much better. I think it is ironic that the hell's angels killed people during that song. I think that because hell's angel's sounds like a satanic name, and the song has the name devil in it. Also it had to have been hell at that concert, and it must have felt like the devil was there. They stopped their tour after that. The film ends with Gimme Shelter playing over the credits.
Apocalypse Now 1979,  R)
Apocalypse Now
This is the greatest war film of all time, in terms of symbolism, drama, and the heat of the moment in every scene. A fantastic movie that starts off really good and is epic at the end. It is intense, artistic, weird, and creative. It is a total masterpiece of filmmaking and directing by Francis Ford Coppola. It is a hard film to direct and that is why it is such a masterpiece. It is a difficult one to act in too. Too make a war film like this during that time would have been one really difficult thing to do, and only a genius directors could do it right. If you didn't think Francis For Coppola was a genius after seeing Godfather's one and two, you will after this.

This was 31.5 million dollars spent beautifully. That was why it was so well done, because there was a perfect amount of money spent in all categories, such as the cast, the effects, and the sets used. The cast had three really great actors in it. Martin Sheen, Robert Duvall, and Marlon Brando were the really great stars in this. Francis Ford Coppola did The Godfather (1972) with both Marlon Brando and Robert Duvall, and it was magnificent. Those three do really well together. Martin Sheen was perfect in the film too. He had the right amount of intensity in him, and seriousness.

Not only did Francis Ford Coppola select a perfect cast, use the budget perfectly, but he had a perfect use of symbolism too. Something that gets said in the film is this is where it ends. Well certain things like that get said. The river is a symbol of that. The river symbolizes is this the end of the river for you, or are you going to keep going. The Doors song "The End" gets played a lot to add on to the theme that this is the end. Apocalypse Now means the world is going to end now, but in this film the title means end of his life.

This and Saving Private Ryan are the two greatest war films of all time in my opinion. Saving Private Ryan is greater in terms of it being realistic. This film is much more dark and suspenseful. Saving Private Ryan I could tell for the most part what the ending would probably be like. This film I could tell, but I thought it had a much more intense ending in terms of just darkness. Saving Private Ryan's battle scenes are more intense then any scene in this film, but they don't have the slow dramatic intensity that Apocalypse Now has. It is hard to explain, and I think people would think I am crazy for thinking that Apocalypse Now is more intense then Saving Private Ryan, but I have more reason to explain. Saving Private Ryan is a different kind of intensity. Saving Private Ryan is more of you are gritting your teeth, and your fists are clenched type of intensity. Apocalypse Now is more of a on the edge of your seat suspense type intensity. They are both phenomenal movies, but for some reason I think I like this one a little bit better.

Benjamin Willard (Martin Sheen) just got out of a battle. When he was in he wanted out, and now that he is out he just wants to be in another battle. His wife left him, and now he knows that the army is his life. He knows now that he loves war, and he wants to be there for the rest of his life. Another mission comes to him immediately. The mission is to find and kill Colonel Kurtz (Marlon Brando). Kurtz has gone insane and is living in the middle of the jungle. "Every man has got a breaking point. You and I have one. Colonel Kurtz has reached his." That is what Willard is told when he was given the mission. Kurtz is still giving orders and controlling troops, and he is not in the right state of mind at all. That is why he most be killed. Willard goes on a boat with several young guys to go out and find him. Several of them die along the way. When they find Kurtz he is in this weird place and he has heads all around the place as decorations. Though it is a long time before Marlon Brando gets put on screen he is absolutely phenomenal. The film has one of the greatest ending scenes that is dark, intense, and just stunning. There is no war film like it, and there is no ending like the one in Apocalypse Now.

My favorite war film, and one of my rare films that I rated a 10/10. Francis Ford Coppola is one of the greatest directors of all time, and he proves it with this film.
District 9 2009,  R)
District 9
District 9 is a very interesting, and entertaining alien film, that is very original. It is like a documentary, and part of it is like a regular film. A huge Alien spacecraft hovers over the city, and there are so many aliens that they have to control them and put them into different areas. They put the aliens in District 9. It is kind of like the Hunger Games. It is basically a documentary about how it affected the world, and how people reacted to it. AT first it is, then the plot kicks in, and it is intense.

"Prawn" is what they call the aliens, because they are parasites and they live off of humans. They love cat food, and in their slum "District 9" they have guys who sell cat food to them. They make the aliens pay rent, and live as if they were humans. Their district is just like a normal human society, except it is a slum and it is all aliens. People protest against them, and they want them to leave the planet. Riots break out, and they start to kill them. People start to consume their body parts because they think they will get their powers. One reporter finds a spray in their lab, and gets sprayed with it. He begins to turn into an alien, and when he escapes the lab he was being held at, and is now a fugitive on the run. He must find the cure before he gets caught, killed, or turns into an alien.

This was a very interesting, and very well written and directed film. For an alien action film it had some pretty good acting. I think it was made to show us what it would be like if aliens came to this planet, and how we should deal with them. They had to live in District 9 and make a society that is like the society humans have formed. They did a good job controlling them, and eventually they left. The film is almost like a guide to show us how we should handle that situation. Very good movie.
The Hurricane 1999,  R)
The Hurricane
Denzel Washington plays Rubin "Hurricane" Carter in this drama that won him the Oscar for best actor. Rubin Carter was a boxer that was falsely convicted of murder, and was given multiple life sentences. He was a professional boxer that could knock you out in the first round with a style of really quick and hard punches. His he had a record of 27-12-1 with 19 total knockouts in his short boxing career, before he was convicted.
On June 17th 1966 two men entered bar and opened fire. Two people died instantly, and one woman lived for another man and passed. A man said he saw two black men running out of the bar. Two cops pull over Rubin when he is in the passenger seat of a white car driven by another black man. He is immediately taken in as a suspect. Though the one who didn't die at first says it wasn't him, due to police corruption he is given a life sentence for all three of "his victims", that he didn't actually kill, or have anything to do with. Police corruption, and racism is what did him in.

"Here comes the story of the Hurricane
The man the authorities came to blame
For something that he never done
Put him in a prison cell but one time he could-a been
The champion of the world." - Bob Dylan

That famous Bob Dylan song, which is actually my favorite, was written while people were protesting, and wanting him to be released. He would have been the heavyweight champion of the world if it weren't for him being in prison. That song sums up his whole story. He got the nickname "Hurricane" because an announcer once said, "Rubin Carter came through like a hurricane." He said that after one of his knockouts. This is the 2nd review of a film I have written where I used that was written about the same story to help summarize the film. The first time I did that was 8 Mile.

Three bodies lying there does Patty see
And another man named Bello moving around mysteriously
"I didn't do it" he says and he throws up his hands
"I was only robbing the register I hope you understand
I saw them leaving" he says and he stops
"One of us had better call up the cops" - Bob Dylan

After the shooting a man who witnessed the whole thing decided to rob the register. A woman walked in and caught him. So he made up a lie that two black men did it, so she wouldn't think he did it to rob the place. A total scumbag, and a coward that guy was. The film has a lot of heart-warming things in it, but a lot of things like that, which really anger you. I can't even imagine how bitter Rubin Carter must have been when he was in prison and when he got out.

"When a cop pulled him over to the side of the road
Just like the time before and the time before that
In Patterson that's just the way things go
If you're black you might as well not SHOW up on the street
'Less you wanna draw the heat." - Bob Dylan

That is probably the most intense lyric in the song. Rubin Carter was driving home from a club really late, and he got convicted of murder. That shows how extreme racism, and prejudice was during the time. He can't even come home from a club late at night without "drawing the heat."

He wrote a biography called "The Sixteenth Round" during the first few years of his sentence. One buy picked up a used copy of it, and read it. He started writing to Rubin and he wrote back. Eventually that boy and the family he was living with decided to try to get him out. He failed a couple of trials and appeals, but eventually he was proven innocent. There is a lot of heart-warming stuff with Rubin and the kid. Usually stuff where a kid is reaching out to an adult in pain is very touching, and it is remarkable in this case, because it really happened.

This is a great movie, that is one of Denzel's best. The film shows how he spent most of his life in jail. He was in juvie when he was a kid, and he escaped. A few years later he was found and he had to finish his time. He trained himself to be a boxer, and vowed to never go to prison again. He immediately became one of the best boxers in the world, and right when it looked like he was going to be on top he was sentenced to life in prison. It is a crushing, but heart-warming story at the end, with a lot of intense acting. I won't tell you anything else, but if you know the story of Rubin Carter, or the lyrics to the Bob Dylan song you will know everything that will happen.
Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind 2004,  R)
Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind
"How happy is the blameless vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd;" - Alexander Pope
I think "Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind" means the light and energy that your mind has and the spotless mind part is the things that are forgotten. I think that because of the 2nd line "The world forgetting, by the world forgot." The first line in the poem is almost like Chinese to me. I think it is questioning how happy certain people are with the things they remember or forget. That poem was sited by Kirsten Dunst in this film, and was used as inspiration for the film.

Joel (Jim Carrey) decides to have his ex girlfriend Penelope (Kate Winslet) erased from his mind, because he knows that she erased him from her mind. The film really messes with your mind as they mess with Joel's mind. In this crazy movie they go into his mind and erase all of his memories of Penelope one by one, but in his mind he decides that he wants to call the whole thing off, and he starts running throughout his entire mind with Penelope trying to stop the whole thing, and wake himself up. The film is so interesting, crazy, weird, and great. It is not as much of a comedy as a fantasy film. Most of the film takes place in his mind as his memories are being erased. He goes back to being a child in his mind, and I can't really even explain it. It is a tough film to review, because it's elements are hard to explain, but that is good because I won't be able to give a lot of information on it, and you will have to see it to understand how complex the film is. It will demand a second viewing because I am still not sure of certain things.

His memories with her are a lot of fighting and they show how depressed he was and how she got frustrated with him. He has a lot of happy moments with her, and moments where they look like a clichéd struggling couple that just seemed bored of each other. They are both polar opposites actually. Penelope has a lot more positivity, while Joel is dull and negative. Penelope dies her hair in many different wild colors, and that was a directorial thing to show how much more of a colorful and interesting person she is. He figures out a lot as he is running around his dream trying to save her from erased from his mind. He met her after breaking up with a woman named "Naomi." The beginning will connect to the end, and the film is just mind bending. I found it confusing after the mind erasing was done actually, more so as to when they were doing the job.

The film has some really good acting from Jim Carrey, and Kate Winslet. It was an unusual role for Jim Carrey, because he wasn't that silly. Kate Winslet played a very eccentric character that was definitely more interesting then Jim Carrey's character. The film has incredible directing from Michael Gondry, and phenomenal screenplay writing from Charlie Kauffman. Charlie Kauffman sure is a creative and weird genius. He hasn't written many movies but the ones he does write seem to be great. I can't wait to see what ever he comes up with next. This was a fantastic movie that was a true masterpiece, and purely genius. Absolutely brilliant!!!
Being John Malkovich 1999,  R)
Being John Malkovich
Ever wanted to be another person? A celebrity in particular? Well this film shows you what it is like to be John Malkovich for 15 minutes. John Malkovich is one of the great American actors, and it would be amazing to be him. Craig Schwartz (John Cusack) is a struggling puppeteer, who gets a job working at the 7 1/2 floor of an office. He finds a trap door behind a filing cabinet in his office, and goes into it, and discovers that when he goes in he is in John Malkovich's had. He can see through his eyes, and hear what he thinks.

For Craig that is the greatest thing in the world. As a puppeteer he wants to be able to control the puppets he has, and he will be able to control Malkovich with his skill. At first he believes that consciousness is a curse. His life is kind of a mess. He looks like a mess, he actually looks like john Lennon on the cover of Abbey Road. His house is a mess. He has a monkey, cat, lizard, and a dog. Everything about his life is a mess. His home is like a zoo, because of his pet obsessed wife (Cameron Diaz), and he even looks like a total mess. He escapes to his puppet workshop when he is feeling down, as a form of release.

His job on the low ceiling 7 1/2 floor as a files clerk in the Mertin Flemmer building in New York is what leads to him finding the portal. He meets a woman named Maxine who he finds attractive, and wants to be with her, but she doesn't have the same interest in him. You don't like her actually. She ends up starting a relationship with Malkovich, and Lotte (Cameron Diaz) is watching it through malcovich's eyes. However when you go into the portal, after about 15 minutes you get spat out and you land by the toll booth that you have to go through to get from New jersey to New York City.

This is a hard film to review, because of how weird it is. It is great, and it is mind bending. This was the first film that Charlie Kaufman wrote the screenplay for. He is a weird, brilliant, and very creative, and imaginative person. An incredibly weird genius who writes a lot of masterpieces. This is one of his best. Great film.
Paranormal Activity 4 2012,  R)
Adaptation 2002,  R)
Zoolander 2001,  PG-13)
Full Metal Jacket 1987,  R)
The Great Gatsby 1974,  PG)
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby was based off of F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel of the same name. It takes place in the roaring twenties when the economy was soaring and everybody was getting rich. It is narrated by Nick Carraway (Sam Waterston). A difference between the movie and the book is that the book is narrated completely by Nick, and he has to be there. The movie has scenes where Nick is not present. That is the one big difference between the movie and the book. In the book you learn about a lot of things that happened through gossip, but in the movie you see more things, and not everything is through gossip.

The Great Gatsby was a literary masterpiece, but a really bad movie. It is bad because of casting choices to play certain characters. Robert Redford played jay Gatsby, and I honestly thought he was the only good casting choice. Mia Farrow did a terrible job playing Daisy Buchanan. You hated her character just as much as you did in the book, but she could have been a little bit less over the top with her acting. I always thought she had an annoying speaking voice, but she sounds incredibly childish in this movie. You can play a character that is supposed to be terrible and make her a little less annoying. She doesn't have to be so over the top and childish. Way too whiny, and I couldn't stand her. Karen Black was the exact same way. She played Myrtle Wilson just as badly as Mia Farrow played Daisy Buchanan. The men aren't as annoying as the woman, but you hate them too. Gatsby is the only one you like. All of the people in this movie are vile, deceitful, and they cheat on their spouses.

Jay Gatsby (Robert Redford) is the only likeable character in this, but he is incredibly flawed. He is positive, and successful. He wants to be part of the crowd that is called "old money." He can't be part of it however, because he didn't inherit anything, he came from nothing and made something out of himself. Part of the ridiculousness of the story is how people who inherited their money look down on people who earned their money. They gossip and put down put like Gatsby, and they are really stereotypical rich people. They are snobby, arrogant, and you hate them if you aren't like them.

Another thing about Gatsby is that he is delusional, and he wants to be with people who aren't as good as him. In my opinion he is better then every other character put together. He just can't see that, because he is so driven to get what he wants, that he won't consider the fact that it may not be worth the effort. If he did he would be much happier, and he would live his life much better. You like him but you really wish he were wiser in certain areas. He also wants to be with Daisy who is an awful person. He continues to fantasize about her obsessively, but she isn't even worth it. It ends up doing him bad at the end.

The movie could have been great because it is very similar to the book, and it was written by the author of the book F. Scott Fitzgerald, and by the famous Oscar winning director Francis Ford Coppola. The film had all of the elements you needed to be a classic, besides good acting. The acting really made the film awful. I also hate it how nothing gets resolved in the end. It is depressing, and it bothers you through out the movie. The film would have been a classic if something got resolved in the end, and if the acting was better. Because honestly those were the only two flaws, but they ruined the movie completely.
The Birds 1963,  PG-13)
The Birds
After Alfred Hitchcock did his most famous movie "Psycho (1960)" it looked like it would be hard to do anything that measured up to that. 3 years later he released the birds, which didn't reach the level of masterpiece that Psycho was, but was still one of his best films. It is the most well done film of the 60's, in terms of making things look real given the lack of technology. This is a total masterpiece and just another film that manifests Hitchcock's genius.

This like most of his other films devotes a big chunk of the movie to developing relationships, and building suspense. About 1/3 of the way through the film birds attack a little kids birthday part, marking the first of many attacks to come. The film is disturbing at times when the birds attack people because they attack kids at times. After that first attack birds of all kinds just go on attack leaving everybody scared, and paranoid. This was his scariest film for sure. The fact that it was so slow at first makes it feel even more intense later on, because one it starts to get going you feel like "woah!"

Whoever trained the birds did an incredible job. The birds really do attack people. At certain moments birds are really biting at people's faces. I think Hitchcock used a reverse green screen. I think he would film the birds flying around, and the people trying to fight them off was the green screen. For the most part everything looked really real. It is just another brilliant Hitchcock technique that probably was used many times after this.

The only flaws with the film were that some of the acting was bad, and the people were pretty stupid. Other then that the film was great.
It felt like Jaws but with birds. In jaws people were scared to go in the water, in this film people wouldn't go outside. Also the town in Jaws looked like the town in this film. Jaws came after this and it is my favorite film. I feel like you can compare the two, and they both had genius directors. Fantastic classic. One of Hitch's best.
Rope 1948,  PG)
Rope is a very weird but interesting Alfred Hitchcock film. It rationalizes murder at first, and talks about how it would help the world. It opens up with a man being strangled to death with a rope. Brandon Shaw (John Dall) and Phillip Morgan (Farley Granger) just committed the perfect crime, and they did it just to do it. They have some interesting points about their crime, but they are incredibly sick just to think of. They did it because everybody always talks about pulling off the perfect crime, but they never do it. It is an interesting idea for a film, but a really twisted thing to think of. That is what I meant about interesting but sick points. The murdered a man in his apartment just for the experiment of doing it, and seeing how they would get away with it. Brandon is proud of what he has done, but Phillip can't handle the guilt. Brandon tries to contain him while they throw a party at the same place. The whole movie takes place in that one apartment. Not once do they leave the house. They put the victim in a desk, and put food and appetizers on top of it. So people would be unknowingly eating off of his grave. The party was the final touch of their "Masterpiece." Rupert Cadell (James Stewart) has his own opinions about murder, and he rationalizes it. He believes that only the privileged should be allowed to do it. Part of the reason that Brandon and Phillip did it was because they wanted to impress him. I found the film to be interesting, but disgusting that it was actually glorifying murder at one point. It eventually shows how awful it was, and if it didn't I probably would advise against this, because it seemed like James Stewart's character was promoting murder. He eventually gets suspicious of what they have done, and he was talking about his opinions about murder at first, which made people angry, and they thought he was joking. He gets more suspicious because of Phillip being so nervous the whole night. Phillip can't take the guilt while Brandon is a sociopath and he has no conscious at all. The film turned out to be very good in the end. Not one of Hitch's timeless classics, but a good one. Alfred Hitchcock is the most interesting director of all time.
Shadow of a Doubt 1943,  PG)
Dazed and Confused 1993,  R)
American Gangster 2007,  R)
American Gangster
"My man." - Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington)

American Gangster is one of the only good gangster films of the 21st century. It shows how Denzel Washington doesn't fail. He is a great actor and this is one of his best films. It is my 4th favorite film of his after "The Hurricane," "Philadelphia," and "Training Day." It is like "The Godfather," and "Goodfellas" but with black people. It is a true story, based on a gangster named Frank Lucas who operated out of Harlem. Bumpy Jackson started to teach Frank his ways and how to run an illegitimate business. When he started teaching him immigrants were taking over the city, and putting people out of work. The drug business seemed almost like a job they did because they were running out of them. The country was getting too big so they had to do illegal things. After Bumpy Jackson died Frank Lucas inherited his empire in 1968, and built it into a big drug business. He had soldiers coming home from the war in Vietnam smuggle a form of heroin into the country, and he put a chemical in it that makes it blue and 100% percent pure. It gains the name "Blue Magic."

The film also is about police corruption. Russell Crowe plays an honest cop, who is disliked for being honest. He can't be bribed or paid off which adds a lot to the ending when he takes down Frank Lucas's empire. Though he is an honest cop he is not an honest man. He is in a custody battle for his son. His wife left him because he cheated on her with a few different women. You have mixed feelings about him, but you like him because he has the most endearing qualities of pretty much any person in the film. It shows you how bad the people in the film are if the most likeable guy is a man who cheats on his wife. But you do like him because he is an intense guy who seems to be the only police officer who believes that police officers should be trying to put bad guys behind bars, instead of taking bribes. It says at the end that 3/4 of the police department went to jail for taking bribes. A lot of them also did drugs, and got them from Frank Lucas. Police corruption has improved and there is no where near as much as there was before, but it shows how bad it was that one guy was disliked by other cps fro not being corrupt. The other police officers do drugs with Frank Lucas. He truly is the only honest one in the department.

Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) is a sociopathic guy who kills his own family members at times. He is kind of like the Godfather in a sense. There is one scene where he is having thanksgiving with his family, but his business is going on and his workers are killing people under his orders. It is kind of like the scene when Michael Corleone becomes Godfather to his sister's child. He also delivers a chicken in a cage to one of the police officers house who he was bribing and when he opens the door his car blows up. That reminded me of the Godfather a lot. The guys had a really great sports car and he could afford it because of the bribes he would take from Lucas. The whole incident was to send a message I guess. I forgot what that was for. The film is hard to follow, so I will have to watch it again so I will pick up on things. But overall this is a really good movie that goes on the list of the all time greatest gangster films. Another classic Denzel Washington film.
Once Upon a Time in the West 1968,  PG-13)
My Left Foot 1989,  R)
Scent of a Woman 1992,  R)
Scent of a Woman
Al Pacino gives the greatest performance of his acting career in this movie. He has had an amazing career filled with some great performances, but this was his best. He plays Col. Frank Slade, an ex soldier who went blind in battle, and whose life has gone downhill ever since. It is Al Pacino's best role, because it is very unusual one for him that is different, and harder then some of his other roles. Frank Slade is also a much more interesting character then most of the other guys he played. Frank Slade is quite a character actually. He is very funny and inappropriate. He says things that really shock you, and anger people. He has a really strange voice that make sit so you can tell he was a war colonel. When he meets Charlie (Chris O'Donnell) he calls him either "idiot" or "moron" a lot. He is very funny that way, and he makes the film into a bit of a comedy. Another thing about Pacino's acting that is really good is that he hardly ever blinks.

He is a sad character however. He hires Charlie Simms (Chris O'Donnell) a boy from a nice expensive college to take him to New York and help him around. He tells Chris that he is going to stay at a high-class hotel, eat dinner with wine, see his brother, make love with a beautiful woman, and them he will blow his brains out. He is a lonely guy, who doesn't get along well with his family, and because he doesn't have that many things to do anymore. You see how much he wants to die at certain points in the film like he crosses the street while he isn't supposed to and when there is heavy traffic. He also drives a car really fast down a dangerous road, when he is blind. I had forgotten about his death wish for a while until that scene actually. He also hates to get out of bed, which is a pretty common sign of depression.

Charlie is a poor kid who goes to a school full of rich kids. His friends are pranksters, and they take a prank to far. They pop a balloon full of white paint all over the Deans car. If he doesn't turn his friends in he will be expelled, but his friends are slime balls, and so is the dean but he won't turn his friends in because he is that selfless. Frank ends up helping him, while he helps Frank. They both become fond of each other, and the really help each other's lives in the end.

It is a great movie with a great script, and story. I would recommend this.
Gladiator 2000,  R)
Dial M for Murder 1954,  PG)
The Truman Show 1998,  PG)
King Kong 1933,  Unrated)
Almost Famous 2000,  R)
21 2008,  PG-13)
75% actually

21 is a very entertaining and enjoyable film. It is kind of formulaic, and its themes are a little overused, which is why I think the critics don't like it. Either way it's a good movie that is worth watching. It's about a group of M.I.T. students that go to Las Vegas every week to play blackjack and to count cards. Counting cards isn't illegal it is frowned upon. That is illegal actually but they said it wasn't in the film. This was during the time when the people who run the Casino would take you out back and beat you up if they thought you were counting. Micky Rosa (Kevin Spacey) is the leader of the group, he doesn't play anymore but he takes fifty percent of the winnings.

He gets Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess) a math genius on his team, and he becomes the best player on the team. He teaches him to count cards, not to gamble. Ben does it because he needs money to get in Harvard med. At first he refuses to join but among further thinking he changes his mind. At first he says that once he gets enough for Harvard med he is done, but he eventually gets greedy.

The film develops his character a lot. He eventually gets too full of himself, and he becomes a jerk. Some foreshadowing that they do to hint that he will change is that he lies to his mother that he got the scholarship into Harvard med so he won't take her money. That gave me the impression that he was going to get way to into the card counting. He did and he became very arrogant, because he was far better then everybody else on the team, and he disrespected his teacher at one point. He becomes very arrogant, and he starts to ignore his friends that he had before he started going to Vegas. They start to resent him because he doesn't respond to their calls, and he eventually starts being a jerk for to them. Everything does catch up to him and he loses everything, but he gets it back in the end however. When I said critics probably didn't like it because it has some overused themes in it, well I kind of has his character development in mind. People becoming too arrogant or full of themselves is a cliché in films, and the cool feeling the film has is also used a lot, so critics probably felt like it wasn't very original, or it was just trying to be like great films like Rain Man, or Oceans Eleven, and that it is forgettable for those reasons. But in reality people will find the film to be entertaining and to be very interesting so that is what is important. The film is very good, and critics should appreciate it more.

Some other cool things in the film are how they communicated with each other. They use hand signals to communicate with Ben so he knows what table he should play at, and what the count is. Folded arms means the table is hot, a touch of the eye means we need to talk, hands through hair means get out now. When they are winning they always say "Winner winner chicken dinner." The film is very cool I that sense.

Laurence Fishburne didn't have that much of a role until later in the movie. He plays the owner of the Casino, and he watched the footage from the eye in the sky. He notices that these people are always coming to his Casino and winning big amounts. He eventually picks up on their signals, and he knows what Ben is doing. Ben is the specific person eh is looking for, and he threatens him and says "If I ever catch you in this town again I will break your cheek bone with a hammer and kill you." There is actually a great twist in the end.

Overall this was a very good movie, and is definitely worth watching. It even reminds me of home, because I am from Boston, and a lot of this takes place at M.I.T., and Harvard. That is another reason why I liked this. I would recommend this.
To Catch a Thief 1955,  PG)
The Rocky Horror Picture Show 1975,  R)
Strangers on a Train 1951,  PG)
Road to Perdition 2002,  R)
The Big Lebowski 1998,  R)
The Big Lebowski
"You are entering a world of pain." - Walter Sobchak (John Goodman)

"The dude abides." _ The Dude (Jeff Bridges)

The big Lebowski is a comedy that gets better when you re-watch it. It is very good the first time, but I loved it the second time. I rarely ever watch a movie twice, and I am selective about the ones I will watch twice, and I decided to watch this twice because I thought I would appreciate the humor more the 2nd time. I was completely right, and it was even better the 2nd time. It is better the 2nd time, because you pick up on little things. Like the line "The aggression will not stand." I noticed the 2nd time that he heard that on TV in the opening scene at the grocery store. The film also has humor that you may not get the first time, but you will the 2nd time. I say that because that is what happened with me.

Plus the film is really ridiculous, and kind of wild so there is a bit of a shock factor in it. Also now that Jeff Bridges is an academy award winning actor it is weird to see him in this. It also shows what a good actor he is when you see how good he is in this, and when you see how good he is in Crazy Heart, and the remake of True Grit. John Goodman plays Walter Sobchak, and he plays his typical funny self, but he is way crazier in this then most of his other stuff. His character is loud, moronic, and wild. But that is why he is so funny in this. I love John Goodman in everything he does, because he always cracks me up.

Jeff Lebowski (Jeff Bridges) goes by the name "The Dude." He sometimes talks in 3rd person and he calls himself that. He is really poor; in fact he is so poor that he has to write a check to buy milk, because he doesn't have enough money to carry around with him. One night he comes home to his disgusting apartment and two men are there and they are asking him for the money that he doesn't have. They then realize that they have mistaken him for another Lebowski, but not before one of them urinate son his rug. That rug is the nicest thing that the Dude has, and it tied the room together. He eventually meets with the Big Lebowski (David Huddleston), and explains the situation that his wife owes money all around town, and that these people who urinated on his rug were looking for you and not for me. Eventually the Big Lebowski's wife has been kidnapped, and he asks the Dude to drop off the money to the kidnappers. When the ransom drop goes sour because of something that Walter does it sets off a series of really crazy and funny events. Bad things continue to happen to the Dude, and he must fix the situation before a couple nihilists' come over and kill him.

The film is a classic Coen Brothers film that stick out from all of the others, but it has a few of the same actors who were in his other films. It has John Goodman from Raising Arizona, and Steve Buscemi, and Peter Stormare from Fargo. John Turtorro is in two scenes, but he is hilarious in both of them. In a lot of comedies there will be something that comes in randomly at several points in the film, and when it does it is always hilarious. That was John Turtorro in the Big Lebowski.

The Coen Brothers are masters at black comedies. They are good at having things in their films that really stick with you, and you remember. Like this film has a lot of things that I remembered such as the nihilist's, the stuff with the rug, all of the trippy dreams he has, and individual characters like Jesus Quintana (John Turtorro). It is also very quotable, and I plan to quote this movie a lot with people that I know who love it. Another thing that I noticed was there was a triangle with how the three main characters got annoyed with each other. Walter was always telling Donnie (Steve Buscemi) to "shut the f!*$ up Donnie." And then The Dude would always get mad at Walter for being an idiot at times. It was a funny triangle that I picked up on the 2nd time I saw it. You see that a lot at the bowling alley. A lot of scenes take place at the bowling alley, because the three compete in tournaments together, and that is basically their main hang out place. My favorite scenes were there actually, and I won't say what they are too eave it as a surprise.

The film is memorable because it is like a funny and catchy song that you hear that is fun to listen too, and it sticks with you because you like how catchy it is. A lot of Coen Brothers films are like that. They are definitely an acquired taste, but like Quentin Tarantino when you acquire the taste they become some of your favorite movies.

This film is so clever, wild, and funny. It is ridiculous, and every other word was the f-bomb. There are many things that I will always remember from this, and it is one of my favorite comedies. One of the rare ones I can re watch. The Coen Brothers are always great, and I plan to see all of their films because I have loved all of the ones I have seen so far. I would recommend this to experienced movie watchers mostly.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 2012,  PG-13)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Hobbit is very good, but not nearly as good as the others. The Lord of the Rings is better because it has a better story, and more of the characters that you love. This film had a few of the same characters like Bilbo, Gandolf, and Frodo briefly at the beginning. The scene with Frodo happened during the time of the Fellowship of the Ring, then it goes back sixty years in time and the story goes from there. It is a prequel to the Lord of The Rings, and it is funny that it came out so much later then the last Lord of The Rings film, because it almost feels like they have resurrected the series. They actually have but it will be a different Lord of the Rings series. There will be at least one more Hobbit movie, because they clearly set it up for a sequel.

Bilbo Begins at first was a carefree hobbit living in the Shire, without any responsibility until Gandolf put a mark on his door telling all Dwarves to meet here. They have to go on a journey, which Bilbo refuses at first. It is a typical heroes journey story, where he refuses the call at first, then he reluctantly accepts. Then eventually surprises everyone and achieves his/her destiny. That is exactly what happened in this film. At first they use Bilbo as a burgalour because Hobbits are good at stealing due to their size, and the fact they don't make a lot of noise.

Some ways that this film connects to the Fellowship of The Rings is that Bilbo finds the sword that he later gives to Frodo which glows blue when orcs are around. He found it in a cave, along with many other things. He also gets the ring from Gollum in this movie. They show how he got it and how he escaped from him when Gollum figured out that Bilbo stole it from him. That is why this film is good. Because it tells you how certain things happened, and what led to them happening in the Fellowship of The Ring. It is very good, but not as good as the original Lord of the Ring trilogy. Now I hope the Hobbit prequels to the Lord of the Rings won't be like the Star Wars prequels that went downhill. They probably won't because they were books and books are always good. Very good movie, and I can't wait for the next one to come out.
The Descendants 2011,  R)
Anchorman - The Legend Of Ron Burgundy 2004,  PG-13)
Anchorman - The Legend Of Ron Burgundy
What happens is that Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) is the anchorman of San Diego, and he is a huge deal. When he is on everybody tunes in too hear him deliver the news. His news team always finishes first in the ratings, and he is on top of the world basically. But they bring in a woman named Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate), and she has a goal to become the anchorwoman. Ron and his crew all try to go out with her but Ron is the only one who succeeds. At first they are in love, but an incident where Ron's dog gets punted off a bridge causes him to be miss the news she has to deliver it, and they end up having to give the news together. They end up breaking up. They also start to fight each other a lot, and Ron and his crew will do anything to get rid of her.

Anchorman is a very funny satire. A classic Will Ferrell film, that is very quotable. The film is one of those cult classics where it is so stupid at times that you have to laugh. At times the stuff isn't that funny, but it is mostly very funny. The film is a spoof/satire on being an anchorman and news broadcasting. Satires and spoofs always exaggerate certain things to make whatever they are trying to make look dumb, look even dumber. The films stupidity is all part of the fact that it is exaggerated, and it is a spoof. Spoofs are usually stupid, but that's what makes them funny, and that is what made this film funny.

It is a stereotype with newscasters that they are really concerned with how they look, and that they have these great voices. Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) is the stereotypical newscaster in this film. He thinks he is really good looking, but he actually looks kind of funny. That is the joke that makes fun of the newscaster's looks. He also has the stereotypical deep voice that they have too. Also a lot of people think that the newscasters aren't really thinking about what they are reading when they are delivering the news, and at certain moments Ron Burgundy says something that shows that he wasn't thinking about what he just read.

His crew isn't very funny in my opinion. The only guy in his crew that I found funny was Brick Tamland (Steve Carell). He is the stupidest person in the movie. Literally he says at one point that he has an I.Q. of 48 "and is what some people would call mentally retarded." He delivers some very good lines. Ron was the funniest guy for sure, and most of the funny stuff came from him, while the rest just happened around him randomly. The film was very funny, and I enjoyed it both times I watched it. I have also gone back and watched the clips of it on YouTube many times now. Not my favorite from Will Ferrell, but one of them.
Once Upon a Time in America 1984,  R)
Paper Moon 1973,  PG)
True Grit 2010,  PG-13)
True Grit
This is a very good remake of the 1969 classic of the same name. It is another good Coen brother's film, but this one reminds me of the western Unforgiven for its pace, and the fact that it feels more like a drama. The film is really well written, and acted. The only cast choice that I didn't understand was Matt Damon. I thought he was very ok. I don't think of him as a very good actor, because of how he never plays anybody else bedside's himself. The rest of the cast was great, and the performances were too. Jeff Bridges was the best in terms of acting for this film. He had a perfect accent that sounded like Carl Childers from the Billy Bob Thornton classic Sling Blade. He also had the personality right, and was just overall perfect. Hailee Steinfeld also impressed me with her debut as an actress. She seemed to be very intense for a fourteen year old, and she did seem very determined to catch her father's murderer. The only thing that was wrong was that she didn't seem very sad that her father died. I am not sure weather they told her that they didn't want her to be, but I thought it was a little weird that she wasn't sad.

Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) murdered Mattie Ross's (Hailee Steinfeld) father out of cold blood. She then hires bounty hunter Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to find him. She pays him 50 dollars and wants to go with him. At first he refuses to that, because he doesn't want to put her in danger, but she is so intense about killing her fathers murderer that he eventually agrees. When Cogburn is asked "How many men have you shot?" he replies "Shot or killed?" That implies that he is experienced, and he has done it a lot. Mattie Ross hired him because she had been told that he has "True Grit." He is a great shot, and he gets into a few shootouts, which he always wins. He is a terrific western movie character, and Jeff Bridges is great in it. This was a very good film.

The Coen Brothers are always great, and they always seem to be original, but they never lose their style that made them famous. They are genius's, and two of my all time favorite film makers. I haven't seen the original, but I have heard it is not nearly as good as this.
The Trouble With Harry 1955,  PG)
Lifeboat 1944,  Unrated)
Once Upon a Time in China 2001,  R)
Beasts of the Southern Wild 2012,  PG-13)
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid 1969,  PG)
Spellbound 1945,  Unrated)
End of Watch 2012,  R)
How to Train Your Dragon 2010,  PG)
Mississippi Burning 1988,  R)
A Time to Kill 1996,  R)
Side Effects 2013,  R)
In the Name of the Father 1993,  R)
Win Win 2011,  R)
Close Encounters of the Third Kind 1977,  PG)
Donnie Darko 2001,  R)
The Deer Hunter 1978,  R)
A Beautiful Mind 2001,  PG-13)
A Beautiful Mind
Ron Howard directed this amazing movie that won 4 academy awards including best picture in the year of 2001. I think that A Beautiful Mind is the best film that he has directed of the ones I have seen. The film is a true story about a tortured genius named John Nash. John Nash was a math genius, and a code breaker. He was absolutely brilliant, and there was no code or pattern that he couldn't crack. He was tortured because he is a schizophrenic. He was paranoid until he learned it. When he learned that he had it he eventually got better, but he never beat it entirely. He still see's people that aren't there, but he ignores them and he moves on with his life. The film goes through the story of his life from the years of 1947 - 1994.

At first John was kind of a stereotypical genius. When he spoke he sounded as educated as it gets, and slightly arrogant at times. He seemed like he thought he was above things at certain points, but that feeling I only had about once or twice. He is the type of genius that doesn't have many other redeeming qualities other then his brains. He is not very sociable, outgoing, or even relatable. It is sad because not many people liked him, and he knew it. He is fascinating to listen too, and I would love to meet a genius like him, because I am sure it would be a really interesting experience. His genius was purely mathematical, and that he analyzed the world around him through math and algorithms. He went to Princeton University in the year of 1947. People picked on him for being weird, and he clearly was strange. He never went to class because he thought, "Classes will dull your mind, destroy the potential for authentic creativity." In his case he was right, and he did better by not going to class. He would find algorithms for everything, and wrote them on the window of his dorm. During the time he was at college he would do things like try to figure out how to spend the night with a girl who he met at a bar, but he wasn't any good at it. He and his friends were always trying to figure out how to get with a girl, but he would always come up with some mathematical solution to it. Five years later he is working at the Pentagon as an analyst. He also worked at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and he had to teach their students to get the facilities that he wanted to work at. That is how he met his future wife Alicia (Jennifer Connelly). She actually asked him out, and the eventually got married.

His illness is something you are oblivious about until you are finally told about it. Like all dramas it starts off happier then it really gets more serious when the conflict kicks in. He had a roommate named Charles Herman (Paul Bettany) who was his best friend, that didn't exist. That roommate he imagines has lots of personality, and eventually a niece named Marcee (Vivien Cardone), who never gets older. That is how he earns that he doesn't actually see her. They see each other regularly, but not so much that it isn't abnormal. So that kind of makes it seem like they just ran into each other. The big one was the man William Parcher who he imagined that he worked for. William Parcher (Ed Harris) wanted him to help him decipher codes to a bomb that terrorists were going to detonate in America. However Parcher was just a part of his imagination, and ash spent a ton of time deciphering codes in newspapers and magazines that didn't make sense. The people he was imagining started to put him in danger, and he became really paranoid.

He was put in the hospital, where he got a lot of help. When he got out he eventually started to see them again, and he put his baby in danger thinking that his old roommate who didn't exist was watching him. Parcher came back and started to tell him about his work and he basically just relapsed. He eventually realized that he was never going to beat it, so he decided just to ignore the three people who would always see, and he lived his life that way. He and his wife are still alive today, and he still lives with his illness. He will have to ask if a person is really there or not. Once he learned of his illness that allowed him to get much better.

Russell Crowe did a phenomenal job portraying John Nash. He starred in the bets picture of the year two years in a row. Gladiator in 2000, and A Beautiful mind in 2001. He is a great actor, with an ability to play a wide range of roles, but this was his best role. Jennifer Connelly was also really good. Her acting was hard to do at times, because it got really emotional at times. This was overall a fantastic movie with great acting, directing, and a really inspiring story. One of my favorites for sure, that is one of the rare films that I intend to watch again. I loved every minute of it.
Dog Day Afternoon 1975,  R)
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly 1966,  R)
Million Dollar Baby 2004,  PG-13)
Million Dollar Baby

"Boxing is about giving respect for yourself and taking it away from the other guy." - Morgan Freeman

"To make a fighter you have to strip them down to bare wood." - Morgan Freeman

Clint Eastwood has acted in, directed so many great films, and Million Dollar Baby is one of his best works as both an actor and director. It is highly emotional, and loaded with great acting. Is character development is clearly manifested throughout the whole movie, and there is a lot of it. There is a lot of drama in it, and plenty of conflict, and I think the more of it the better the movie. The film really did deserve the best picture award that it got in the year of 2004. It goes into the class of great boxing films like Raging Bull, and The Fighter.

Morgan Freeman narrates the story with a rougher voice that sounds like a mix of his normal speaking voice and Clint Eastwood's Batman like voice. It is about a boxing coach named Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood) who has been a boxing coach all of his life, and he has a girl named Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank) that wants him to coach her. He refuses at first, and he says that he doesn't coach girls. After she starts practicing at his gym and begins to get a little better, he agrees under strict conditions. She can't ask questions, and at first he will only coach her and he refuses to be her manager. He agreed because she got mad at him because boxing makes her feel good and he was trying to deny her of that. When she begins to struggle he becomes her manager, and not just her coach. They become a really strong pair, and she wins every fight she is in, and often in the first round. It is like the female Rocky at first. But when she gets into the championship round she faces a really dirty fighter who after a round ends hits her in the back of her head knocking her down and her neck brakes when it hits the chair she has to sit on. She is paralyzed from the neck down.

Maggie Fitzgerald is a very nice girl who you like a lot. She is tough though. Hilary Swank really did deserve the award for best actress that year, because she not only pulled off some amazing acting, but she got in great shape for the role. She was really muscular for this film, and the people that deserve Oscars are the ones who can alter their personality, and change physically for a role. Her character was a very motivated and driven one. She has a terrible family that is just pure trash. The first week that she was in the hospital after being paralyzed they went to Disney world and universal studios. They are self absorbed and awful people. One scene she buys them a new house and they just complain. Her mother gets mad because if the government finds out about this house she won't get wealth fare anymore. They are the most selfish people. It made me wonder how come Maggie seemed so cool.

Frankie is a really tough and macho guy, but a lot of Clint's characters are. He is a good man though. Something that they led me to believe was that he has a really strained relationship with his daughter, because they discuss her a lot. That is part of Clint's character. This was one of his best acting jobs. He teaches Maggie many things. He teaches her footwork, how to breath when you are fighting and many other things. He is a great teacher and manager. Maggie at first was lousy but she became great because of his training. You liked him in the end.

This was a really great movie that was painful to watch though, because of how sad the paralysis part was. But it shows you how good movies are that they can make you that sad. Clint Eastwood did a great job directing and acting in this film, and Hilary Swank is amazing too. There are other characters that I would love to talk about, but I want to leave enough for the people who haven't seen this yet. Greta movie.
Rise of the Guardians 2012,  PG)
It Might Get Loud 2009,  PG)
A Good Day To Die Hard 2013,  R)
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist 2008,  PG-13)
Network 1976,  R)
The Impossible 2012,  PG-13)
Manhattan 1979,  R)
August Rush 2007,  PG)
Sinister 2012,  R)
Live Free or Die Hard 2007,  PG-13)
The Call 2013,  R)
A Fistful of Dollars (Per un Pugno di Dollari) 1964,  R)
Winter's Bone 2010,  R)
Winter's Bone
This was Jennifer Lawrence's first big film. She was really good in this film, and she was on screen for the entire film. I think she is the best actress of our generation. She is only twenty-one years old, and she has been nominated for best actress twice, and won once. She is my favorite actress at the moment after I saw Silver Linings Playbook, and I liked her even more after seeing this. She also looks different in all the films she is in. She can play any role, and she can even change the way she looks in every role, that is why she is so great. The film was a very good and serious drama, that is not very entertaining, but it is interesting. It is dark, sad, and pretty depressing however. It is weird though, because for a while there doesn't seem to be that much of a story, besides a family with a lot of problems. It is slow, but it gets good.

Seventeen-year-old Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence) has to look out for her two younger siblings and her mentally ill mother. She is in high school but she practically has to be a mother to her younger siblings, and raise them herself. She even teaches them to shoot so they can hunt squirrels. They have to hunt because of how poor they are. The father hasn't been coming home for a while, because He is out on bail following an arrest for manufacturing methamphetamine. It becomes a mystery about her trying to find her father, and she eventually finds out what happened to him.

The film was dark, unpredictable, and very good. Jennifer Lawrence is a fantastic actress, and she is great in everything she does. Not only was she good in this, but everybody else was too. Overall a very good movie.
Suspicion 1941,  Unrated)
High Noon 1952,  PG)
Rebel Without a Cause 1955,  PG-13)
Rebel Without a Cause
Rebel Without A Cause is what made us remember James Dean. It was his best role by far. A very good movie; with a very good script, that also follows a very relatable theme in the 1950's. The performance from James Dean is what makes the film good, while the other performances were nothing special, his was. The screenplay, and James Deans acting were the two things that made this film as good as it is. It is weird how James Dean was so famous for this movie, and East of Eden, but he died when he was so young. He was obviously a great actor at the time, because he sure was popular for only having two big hits.

I had wanted to see this for a long time, and I thought I would enjoy it. I liked it just as much as I thought I would, and I thought it was very good. I bought it on DVD so I could watch it, and I thought it would be a good classic to own, and I was right. The important thing about this film was that it stood the test of time. I find it interesting how films about teenagers in high school seem to always stand the test of time. Some examples are "Breakfast Club," and "Ferris Buellers Day Off." Films like that and this one will always be good classics. They don't get old.

Directed by Nicholas Ray, this film tells the story of Jim Stark (James Dean). He is a "Rebel Without A Cause" just like the title says, but he has a reason why he rebels. He rebels because he is unhappy, and he is angry because of the way other schools treated him. I think he was treated badly because he is strange, and because he does rebel against everything, and he has no cause or apparent reason for it. He is a stereotypical rebel. Meaning he just goes against everything, and he even rebels against his fellow students. When people call him "chicken" he rebels against them, and gets really mad. He also doesn't appreciate anything that his family does for him. His parents have to move to another town to help protect him from getting in trouble. It is sad because the other students do pick on him, which causes him to be unhappy and to rebel. He is just a troubled rebel who has a reason why he chooses to rebel, but no cause that he is for.

Jim and his family move to another town, and he must go to a new high school. When he goes there he immediately gets into a knife fight, which he wins. In the fight they do not stab they just do little slashes and give each other small cuts. At first he didn't want any trouble but eventually has no chose but to be in the fight. He then meets them at 8:00 that night by the cliff to do some ridiculous stunt that leads to another guy driving his car off of the cliff and killing himself. It then turns into a wild night.

The film was very fun and entertaining. Something else I felt about it was that all the kids were rebels in their own ways, and not just Jim. It is an interesting film that will celebrate its 60th anniversary in 2 years. So far it is 58 years old and it has held up, and is still a good story and movie. I can't wait to see "East of Eden" after this. I hope I like that one just as much as I liked this.
The 39 Steps 1935,  PG)
Frenzy 1972,  R)
Raising Arizona 1987,  PG-13)
Raising Arizona
Raising Arizona is such an awesome movie. It is definitely my favorite Coen brother's film, and I loved every minute of it. The film was so entertaining, and it was so funny. Joel and Ethan Coen did a good job with their debut film "Blood Simple," but they hadn't perfected their filmmaking skills yet. With this film they became truly amazing filmmakers, and screenwriters. They went on to make so many other great ones after this. This film truly does show the creativity, and the style of humor that makes the Coen Brothers so good. They have a very unusual style of comedy, which is probably an acquired taste. This film however some people think is terrible, because they don't know that it is a comedy. I don't get that because the film is so funny that it is hard for me to see how you could take it as a serious movie, but for some reason some people do take it seriously. So if you haven't seen it you should know that it is a comedy going into it.

This was back when Nicholas Cage was making good movies. For some reason he can't make a good movie anymore. He was actually really good in this movie. I find that he always plays himself in everything that he does, except for Raising Arizona. This is the one film where he showed any range at all. He plays kind of a dumb stereotypical southern redneck in this, and he is really funny in it. He narrates the story too, which I think is good because I think he has a good actors voice, but however he has an accent for this though so it makes his narrating interesting. Holly Hunter was in Blood Simple and she played Ed in this story. The wife of H.I. (Nicholas Cage), and she also plays kind of a stereotypical southern redneck character. This film is mostly just stereotypical southern rednecks in my opinion, and that is what the humor is based off of. There are a lot of lines that are made funny by their accents, or because of the stupidity of the character. Coen Brothers films allow the cast to show their acting skills in my opinion, and this is a great example of a film that allows the actors/actresses to show their talent.

The story is a bout a man named H.I. McDonnough (Nicholas Cage) who has been imprisoned a few times, and after the third time he decides to change his life, and he asks Ed (Holly Hunter) the lady who takes the mug shots to marry him. They eventually decide to have a baby, but the learn that she can't have one, because she is infertile. They can't adopt one because H.I. has a criminal record, but they learn of "Arizona Quints," and they kidnap one of the five children from the house that they take care of the babies. After that they are visited by H.I.'s prison buddies Gale (John Goodman) and Avella (William Forsythe) who have escaped from prison. From that point on it is all a bunch of very funny, and weird stuff that influences H.I. to go back to being a criminal.

This was a classic film, and definitely my favorite of the Coen Brothers films. It was hilarious, witty, clever, and pretty creative. I would recommend this to everybody.
Oz the Great and Powerful 2013,  PG)
Oz the Great and Powerful
Oz the Great and Powerful could have been really good if it weren't for a few things. The prequel to the Wizard of Oz was very entertaining, and beautiful to look at but it wasn't perfect. Maybe if I saw it in 3D it would have been better, but I didn't like a few things like James Franco's acting. I usually like him, but I didn't in this for some reason. Well maybe its just because he played a character that wasn't very likeable. His character was pretty egotistic, arrogant, not very nice, self absorbed, and he was a liar at first. They do change that and his character goes through some formulaic character changes. Formulaic meaning the typical hero's journey story. The effects are unbelievable, but not perfect. I think we have not yet perfected technology yet, because you can still tell at certain times that you can tell that it is a green screen or t is computer animated. I think in the future technology and visual effects will be absolutely perfect. The effects in this are great, but if you pay close enough attention at times you can see a green screen. Except most movies you can tell when it is a green screen or not. That is the area where they need to perfect technology in special effects.

In Kansas, Oscar Diggs (James Franco) is working as a small time magician, who travels around with his circus. He is arrogant, and he thinks he is way better then he actually is. Well when he ends up in Oz it turns out that he is, but in Kansas he is a nobody. He is also a womanizer, and he gets caught flirting with the wife of the strongman (Tim Holmes) in the circus. He chases after Oscar and he escapes in a hot air balloon. He gets sucked into a tornado, and ends up in Oz. Oscar meets Theodora (Mila Kunis) the Witch who tells him he is the wizard that was prophesized to come and save this place. At first he lies and says he is the wizard, but eventually admits he isn't the wizard to a monkey named Frank (Zach Braff). He eventually lies and agrees to go kill the witch so he can be the king of Oz. He is very ignorant, and he has no idea what kind of trouble he will get into. He eventually meets Glinda (Michelle Williams), and they make it to Oz. Evanora (Rachel Weisz) turns Theodora (Mila Kunis) into A wicked Witch, and the whole story is put into place.

Some connections to the first one is that whenever water touches Theodora she gets burnt. She became the witch from the original film later on, and in the original film she melts at the end because she got burnt. When she gets burnt when she cries that is kind of a hint that she is the witch from the Wizard of Oz. The ending, which I can't spoil, connects to the original film too.

This was a very ok prequel that had its ups and downs. Most of the positives were the cinematography and effects. James Franco's acting wasn't that great, and I found him to be kind of sleazy. When Mila Kunis became the witch I thought she sounded annoying when she would scream, and her laugh was obnoxious. Well maybe I just find the witch laugh and scream annoying, or maybe just when she does it. She did a good acting job, and they really made her look different. The film was very predictable however, and I knew everything that happened. It was just as bad as it was good. So that makes it an ok movie.
The Killing 1956,  Unrated)
Rushmore 1998,  R)
Rushmore is a really interesting Wes Anderson film. It is very quirky, funny, and silly at times. Wes Anderson is one of those directors who has a completely original, and unique style, which makes him one of the best. His style is very quirky, weird, and the kids are like adults in his films. He always has a lot of interesting music in his films, that really adds to the film, and the entertainment of it. Wes Anderson always writes his screenplays too. He wrote this with Owen Wilson, and it is a really well written one. He has never directed a movie that he didn't write or co write, which is good because that means the film is his vision entirely when it comes out in the end. This was his second film. It came after his 1996 hit Bottle Rocket, which he did two years earlier.

I have only seen a few Wes Anderson films, but I have seen enough and read enough to notice that he is one of these guys in Hollywood who works with the same people, so all of his films have a similar feel. The Wilson brothers are always involved in his film. He co-wrote this with Owen Wilson, and Luke Wilson made a quick appearance in this. He teds t have Bill Murray in his films a lot. Bill Murray played Mr. Blume in this film, and he stared as Steve Zissou in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. Bill Murray also did the voice of Badger in Fantastic Mr. Fox. My favorite directors write their own stuff, and they have the same actors in their films. I have only seen about 3 or 4 of his films, but he is becoming one of my favorite directors.

It starts off with an interesting intro. It starts off in math class, and the teacher puts up "The hardest geometry problem in the world," and he says that whoever gets it won't have to open another math textbook again. Max Fischer (Jason Schartzman) stands up and does it in seconds, and got it right. Max is like a grown adult, which a lot of kids in Wes Anderson films are. He is also very eccentric, and is nothing like any other kid at Rushmore. Rushmore is the private high school he goes too. He is really proud to go there, and he only wears his school uniform because of it. He does the most extracurricular stuff, but the least scholarly stuff at that school.

Herman Blume (Bill Murray) comes to admire him, but they both starts to fight each other for the love of the widowed Ms. Rosemary Cross (Olivia Williams). AT first it is only Max who loves her, but she won't go with him of course because he is a student. Eventually she starts an affair with Mr. Blame, which starts the fighting with max. Bill runs over Max's bike, and Max cuts his brakes on his car.

Max gets expelled from Rushmore because he tried to make an aquarium for the school. He doesn't care at all for his grades, and he only wants to do extracurricular things. I think it is because he is a genius and he gets bored with school because he is above the schoolwork. Max is an interesting character. His secret to life is find out what you love and do it for the rest of your life. What he loves is going to Rushmore. So if he didn't get expelled he would have probably spent his whole life doing extra curricular things for the school. He truly is delusional, and not in the right place mentally. He is a genius, but not very smart.

Part of the extra curricular activities that he does is putting on really high production plays. He writes them, and directs them. He made a play about a war that reminded me of films like Platoon, or Apocalypse Now. He is really talented, and the fact that he can do the stuff that he does is incredible. He is a fascinating character, and a typical kid that you would see in a Wes Anderson film.

This film was so creative and witty. I loved it, and everything about the style that Wes Anderson brought into it. Weather it was the soundtrack, the personalities and skills of the people, or just the plot. It is a brilliant film that is definitely worth watching again.
Black Swan 2010,  R)
The Maltese Falcon 1941,  PG)
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone 2013,  PG-13)
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone is a really unfunny movie that just has several really funny people in it. The comedians sticks in this film have gotten old, and they are running out of funny things to do. This is an example of a film where the humor is not at all creative, and is just purely tasteless. It didn't even have many jokes. The movie was really lousy. It got boring after a while too. It started off with some potential to be good. It seemed like it could be interesting, but it eventually just got slow, and serious for the most part. The film had maybe three or four funny things but even then they weren't that funny. Nobody in the theater was laughing, I found that sad. The jokes were very predictable and overused, and you can tell that the writers of this film were not very creative, or original in their jokes. The film contained no intelligent humor at all.

Burt Wonderstone (Steve Carell) and Anton Marvelton have been friends for thirty years. They have been doing the same magician gig for the last ten years in Las Vegas. Another magician named Steve Gray (Jim Carrey) does way more interesting, wild, and original things then they do. They have been doing the exact same show for years, and Burt has become a really arrogant jerk to every body. Everybody is tired of Burt and Anton, so they start paying more attention to Steve Gray. Steve Gray does some really painful and disgusting things for his tricks, that aren't really magic tricks like not blinking for three days even when they spray pepper spray in his eyes, and holding in his urine for twelve days. He just does wild stuff but very few magic tricks. He also laid in a bed of red-hot coal, and slept in it over night. His show is called "Mind Raiper." That name was just another tasteless joke in the film that may be funny to some, but will not be after you hear the name a second time. However his so-called "magic tricks" take away the attention from Burt and Anton. Fewer and fewer people go to their show and eventually they have to come up with something wild and original. They come up the hotbox trick, which fails after twenty minutes when Burt freaks out and breaks it. Anton gets really injured, and that ends their friendship. After that it just becomes a really slow comedy, and that was when it got really tasteless. It had potential at the start, but just went downhill in a landslide.

I would not recommend this to anybody, because there is nothing to praise about it. It will be forgotten shortly. It will stay in theaters for a month or two, and be forgotten about completely after that. The performances from Steve Carell and Jim Carrey are just like the ones they gave in every film. Well actually Steve Carell was slightly different from his usual self, but his humor wasn't at all. I think the reason why I disliked it so much was because I felt like the jokes were so overplayed, and there weren't many jokes in my opinion anyways. Its like none of these guys had ever written a comedy before. Two of the screenwriters hadn't actually, and this was there first screenplay and it clearly manifested itself that they had never done it before. Really bad movie.
Dances With Wolves 1990,  PG-13)
Stop Making Sense 2014,  PG)
Foreign Correspondent 1940,  PG)
The 400 Blows (Les Quatre cents coups) 1959,  Unrated)
For a Few Dollars More (Per Qualche Dollaro in Più) 1965,  R)
Rebecca 1940,  Unrated)
Les Misérables 2012,  PG-13)
Trainspotting 1996,  R)
Milk 2008,  R)
Clerks 1994,  R)
Cinderella Man 2005,  PG-13)
Top Gun 1986,  PG)
The Royal Tenenbaums 2002,  R)
Blood Simple 1984,  R)
Ordinary People 1980,  R)
Ordinary People
Ordinary People is a really good movie. I like films that get better and better as they go along, and Ordinary People is a great example of a film that the last half hour was way better then the first half hour. I also like it when a scene is intense, because of the acting, dialog, and emotion in it instead of just because there was a lot of action in it, and because it was suspenseful. This film had a lot of really intense and really good scenes. It is also one of the most well acted movies I have ever watched, and the acting to me seemed like it must have been the hardest type of acting to do. The acting was very emotional and intense in the film, and that was why the film was so great. The scene where Conrad (Timothy Hutton) talks to his therapist after he learns that his friend from the hospital just killed herself is one of the best scenes I have ever watched in any movie. The final scene is also a great scene, but I won't spoil them for you.

Conrad (Timothy Hutton) has a lot of problems. His older brother died in a boating accident, and drowned right in front of him so he has survivor's guilt. It is a lot like the movie Stand By Me, because the brother was a star athlete and everybody loved him, so the younger brother feels like it should have been him who died. The film is shows what the death of a child can do to a family. He tried to kill himself and he was in the hospital for it, and he got held back a year in high school for it. He has flashbacks of his brother drowning, and they show more and more of it as the film goes along. He see's a therapist named Dr. Berger (Judd Hirsch), and his therapist is a really good one that is able to get a lot out of him. However therapy was looked down on at the time. During the time, people thought that you were weak if you saw a therapist, but now it is the opposite.

His mother Beth (Mary Tyler Moore) is really cold to him. One scene he gives her a hug and she can't even hug him back. Mary Tyler Moore does a great job of making you really dislike her, and I found myself hating her but you are supposed to. She tries to act like everything is all right in the house, and she refuses to talk about their problems, and does everything she can to hide them. She doesn't want anybody to know that Conrad is seeing a therapist, and the fact that he tried to kill himself was a big embarrassment to her. She just makes matters worse for the family because she is so self-absorbed. Conrad begins to think that she hates him. There is a lot of intensity that builds up with that. The fact that Conrad is so close to his father Calvin (Donald Sutherland) makes her look even worse. Conrad and Calvin are both suffering, and the fact that she is so self absorbed catches up to her in the end, and they start saying things to her. She just ignores all of their problems, and she hurts them by that, because she refuses to try to help herself, or her family. She gets mad if one of them reveals any of their problems. I found that I really liked everybody in the movie besides her.

It is a thought provoking film, and the stuff with Conrad made me think, like the fact that he said to his friend from the hospital that he misses the hospital made me think. I think he missed it, because his home life is so bad that the hospital must have been better. Plus because the mother was stubborn about admitting or facing any of their problems, he couldn't be helped in any way. But at the hospital he was constantly getting help, and I think that is why he misses the hospital. The girl who he was friends with at the hospital made me think about weather or not she was happy like she said she was. It felt like she was putting on a mask, and hiding her struggles and it turned out that she was. The film shows what will happen if you are always wearing a mask and if you are hiding your problems. The film teaches that you should always be seeking help no matter what you think people will think of you. That was the message or lesson that this film taught.

This was a great movie that had a secret message that you needed to think about, and figure out for yourself. The message was one that all humans should learn if they don't already know it, because it will really help you. The acting is phenomenal, and I felt like Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore, Judd Hirsch, and Timothy Hutton gave performances that were good enough for academy awards. Timothy Hutton did win an award for best actor, and Judd Hirsch, and Mary Tyler Moore were nominated. The film won best picture that year, and Robert Redford won best director, and it was his directorial debut that he won for. Alvin Sargent did win the award for best screenplay too. I must say that I thought the film deserved all of the awards it got, and it was a great one. Somebody may not like it, because it is slow, and it is sad, but if you are ok with that you will love it. I would definitely recommend this.
American History X 1998,  R)
American History X
American History X is a really great movie. It is really intense, interesting, and well acted. It is a tough movie to watch though, because the intensity can be pretty extreme. It is not one that you can watch over and over again, because there are a few moments where it is hard to watch. Tony Kaye made his feature directorial debut with this film, and he did an incredible job. The film had a lot of things in it that showed that he had a vision in his mind for the film, like the black and white sequences, the intensity, and the direction of the acting. The black and white sequences I think symbolize the racial part of the film, because when the film is in black and white it is in flashbacks of Derek's (Edward Norton) white supremacist days.The film is hard to follow at times, and it is good to know something about it before you watch it. I didn't know anything about it, and I found it hard to follow. My Dad had to explain certain things for me.The film is about white supremacists, and it really shows what they are like. They are the lowest of the low. This movie really shows that. They looked like a bunch of uneducated losers in this film, and I have a feeling that the film probably portrayed them accurately. The whole film they were dropping n bombs, and whatever racial slur you could think of. I found that I really grew to hate that movement after seeing this, because I saw how awful and racist they came across. They also seem really stupid too. White supremacy is the belief that white people are superior to all other racial backgrounds. It is not true however. All people are created equal.Derek Vinyard (Edward Norton) a neo Nazi, and gets a swastika tattoo on his chest after his father got murdered by a few black drug dealers, and becomes the leader of the white supremacist movement. Three Crips try to steal his truck and he goes outside and shoots them. The first guy he killed the other guy he curb stomped, and the last guy got away. He went to prison for three years after that, but it would have been longer if his brother Danny (Edward Furlong) who witnessed the incident testified against him. He would have gotten a life sentence actually.When he is in prison he grows a lot, and goes through some interesting things. He befriends a black prison inmate Lamont (Guy Torry). He became part of the Aryan brotherhood in jail, and he thought he was sailing through it after a year until he is brutally raped and beaten in the shower one day. When he gets out he decides to change his life. Everybody expects him to go back to his old ways but he decides to change. Derek is actually a very smart guy, and you can see that after a while. He finds his little brother Danny is becoming like him. He has shaved his head the way he used too, and is racist against everybody. Derek wants to fix that, because while he was in prison he learned how awful the way he used to be was. On the day Derek got released Danny got in trouble for submitting a book report on Mein Kampf. That book was written by Adolf Hitler, and it is about all of his beliefs. It is the bible for white supremacists. His history teacher reports him to the principal Bob Sweeney (Avery Brooks), and Mr. Sweeney convinces him to give him another chance. Mr. Sweeny tells Danny he will now attend the class "American History X." He makes him write a paper about the events leading up to his brother's imprisonment.This was a great movie that was intense throughout, but tough to watch. One of my favorite movies, but not one I could watch over and over again, because it is tough. I would recommend this though.
A Bronx Tale 1993,  R)
A Bronx Tale
A Bronx tale is one of the great gangster movies. What is good about it is that it is a much more clean gangster films then ones like Casino or Scarface. It does have some violence in it, but not a ton. The film isn't very dark which gives it an interesting feel, and it actually has a lot of humor in it, which I liked a lot. It was Robert De Niro's directorial debut, and he did just a well, as you would expect him to do. The film felt like Goodfellas, but less brutal. It had a few of the same actors, and it was similar because of the narrating.

Calogero Anello (Age 17 (Lillo Brancato Jr.)) narrates the story from the point where he first got involved with Sonny (Chazz palminteri) when he was nine years old. Like Henry Hill from Goodfellas he was a gangster when he was a kid. Lorenzo Anello (Robert De Niro) drives the bus in their neighborhood, and they live next door to the bar that the mob hangs out in. Part of the film is Lorenzo's struggle to keep his son from going over there. Calogero (Age 9 (Francis Capra)) witnesses Sonny murder a man on the street in broad daylight. The police line up all the suspects and tell him to identify who did it, and he doesn't rat them out. He thinks he did a good thing but his father tells him "You did a good thing for a very bad man."

Calegero goes to the bar and wins Sonny a lot of money playing crabs for him, and gets a cut of the winnings. His father finds out about it and confronts Sonny to leave his kid alone. It then flashes forward eight years and the guy who plays Calegero at age 17 (Lillo Brancato) looks like a really young Robert De Nero. Calegero is a very smart kid, and is good friends with everybody in the mob.

Sonny teaches Calegero that it is tough to be feared and loved, but if you could only be one it is better to be feared. He says you can't give them too much or they will walk all over you. He also taught him what makes a great woman, and that you can only have three great ones. The film is more about relationships that mob violence then movies like Goodfellas. That makes it a more interesting movie. He ends up falling for an African American girl named Jane, and that causes problems. A lot of the things in this movie revolve around race, like the n-bomb gets dropped a lot. Also they beat up a couple of black guys on the street just for being black in one scene. That is the only bad part of the film.

The film was great. It was really well acted, and they trained Francis Capra not to blink, which I thought was good. I really liked this movie and I would put in in the top ten for gangster films. If you like stuff like Goodfellas you will like this, though it is not as good as Goodfellas it is really good.
Midnight Cowboy 1969,  R)
The Machinist 2004,  R)
Miller's Crossing 1990,  R)
The Wolf Man 1941,  Unrated)
Sleepless in Seattle 1993,  PG)
Minority Report 2002,  PG-13)
Brüno 2009,  R)
This movie is just offensive, and degrading as it gets. It was done in the worst taste imaginable, and I can imagine somebody who is gay watching this, and finding it so offensive, because it seems like he is trying to make a fool out of him or her for comedy, which isn't funny at all. It represents gay people in the worst stereotype. Not just the way they are, but the things they do. Bruno's non-stop acts of public homosexuality are degrading, because nobody does the things that he does. This film miss-represents gay people in a way that makes them look really bad, which really bothers me. Not only that, but it is just so graphic that it makes me feel uncomfortable. It is borderline gay pornography, and I found that after I watched it I kept thinking about it, because I had never seen things that graphic before, and because the film bothered me. It made my stomach feel uncomfortable, and almost sick, because of how over the top disgusting it was, and because of how close it felt to watching porn at moments. I am in no ways homophobic, but a film that feels like a porno I don't want to watch.

Now Borat had a very original formula, where Sacha baron Cohen would go around playing some really offensive stereotype doing crazy, and outrageous things with real people, and he would seem to be making fun of people for comedy. It was funny at times, but uncomfortable at others. He would play some foreign character, and go to America. That was what he did with Borat. With this film he did the exact same thing, except it was with a gay man named Bruno, who had a fashion show called "Funkytime with Bruno." He goes to America intending to be a big celebrity, and he goes around doing many graphic homosexual acts in public. He is always talking to real people, and acting as if he is a really dumb foreign guy, while he is actually just a British guy playing a dumb foreign guy. The people he talks too don't even know what is going on, and he angers real people in his films. Borat lead to many lawsuits because of that.

Though Sacha baron Cohen has talent as an actor in my opinion, his style of comedy is uncomfortable and offensive to the max. I wasn't as much as offended by the film, I was just disgusted by it, and I can imagine a million different people being really offended by it. One day at my school a guy from Kazakhstan gave a speech on how people in his country just hate him for Borat. He talked about how much that movie offended him. This movie is about five times as bad, so I am sure the offense given to people by this film is way worse then Borat. Something I see in society today is that humor is way more crude and graphic then it used to be. Crude humor can be good for a while, but after a while things can get too graphic. Sacha Baron Cohen always has to take things several levels too far. Some people like that, but some people like myself hate it after a while. I know a bunch of people who love films like this and Borat, while people like me get uncomfortable during them knowing what he is actually doing during the film.

You don't have to go around doing really offensive stereotypical characters at such an over the top level to be funny if you ask me. The true geniuses in my opinion can be funny, without offending anybody. Something that I notice about the funny comedians who aren't crude or offensive can probably appeal to anybody, while people like Sacha Baron Cohen only appeal to certain people. That guy clearly doesn't care if he offends or angers people, because he does it constantly. I have told people before things he has done in his films, and they got offended. For me the thought of how offensive this film was made me feel bad. It didn't personally offend me, but it stuck with me. This is one of the films I hate the most, because of how obnoxious it is, and I am intentionally being really critical of it to get my strong belief for how films like this should not be made out even stronger. I can appreciate why somebody would find his films to be funny, but I have a really strong distaste for them.
Like Crazy 2011,  PG-13)
3:10 to Yuma 2007,  R)
The Evil Dead 1981,  R)
Warrior 2011,  PG-13)
The Darjeeling Limited 2007,  R)
Star Trek 2009,  PG-13)
Dr. Strangelove Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb 1964,  PG)
The Gods Must Be Crazy 1980,  PG)
Evil Dead 2 1987,  R)
The Place Beyond The Pines 2013,  R)
The Place Beyond The Pines
The Place Beyond the Pines was a really good movie. It was very thought provoking, and well done. The film is really well acted, and it had a really good cast. Ryan Gosling I am usually not a fan of I thought was very good in this. I think he usually plays the same character in all of his movies, and I also think he is very overrated, but in this film he was very good. He did play his similar role, which is a guy who doesn't say much, but he had a little bit more of an edge for this one. Bradley Cooper did a good job of playing a cop, which he had never done before. He still played his own personality, which he does in pretty much all of his movies, but he was still good. I think that Bradley Cooper is a really likeable guy, and I have a feeling that directors tell him to play his own personality because people can relate to him because of his personality. I do wonder if he will ever play a role that makes us feel stunned that it is him. The film was everything I expected it to be. I expected it to be a slow drama, with good acting, and a thought provoking story and it was exactly that. It's not making a lot of money, which I don't get why. Well drama's like this don't get promoted a lot, but they are often better then most of the films that get all of the promotion and advertisements. The movies that get all the promotion are like pop music, but movies like this are the type that you get into when you go deep into movie, and they are way better.

Luke (Ryan Gosling) just quit the circus because he learned that he father a baby named Jason with a woman named Romina (Eva Mendes). Romina is with another man, but he still wants to raise the child because he knows that it's his job. He says he will do anything he has to do. However he only makes minimum wage and he doesn't make enough to raise a baby so he starts robbing banks so he would have money to raise his kid. He does it with good intentions, but it eventually catches up to him. The story of Luke robbing banks to help support his kid shows what a parent will do to help his/her kid. He gets caught and gets into a chase that end sin him being shot and killed by Officer Avery Cross (Bradley Cooper). The film then goes into Avery's life afterwards, and the life of everybody around him affected by the fact that he killed Luke. It was self defense though and he is considered a hero. The film has a couple of stories told at once in chronological order. There is the stress of Avery's shooting, police corruption and once Jason grows up and learns about his father. I don't want to give away anything else, but there is a lot to talk about and this is a movie that I could write forever about, but that would ruin it for somebody who hasn't seen it.

I liked the way it told many stories because it made it more thought provoking. It is definitely a film that when you see again you will pick up on things, because there is a lot to analyze with this film. I didn't see Blue Valentine, which is the other film Derek Cianfrance directed with Ryan Gosling staring in, but I will soon, and this film inspired me to do so. Derek Cianfrance is a good director and he works well with Ryan Gosling so he should continue to do so. I thought that this was a really good movie, and I will have to re-watch it.
Burn After Reading 2008,  R)
The Fast and the Furious 2001,  PG-13)
The Fast and the Furious
This movie was like pop music. I felt like it mostly was, just a bunch of cool cars, races, hot girls, and buff guys like Vin Diesel. The film is like candy for the mind, but then again I feel that way about most action movies for some reason. I like action when there is a good plot, but this film had a bad story in my opinion, and I feel that most people like it because of the cool races, cars, and girls. Well a lot of people tell me that's why they liked it at least, so I feel there is a percentage of people who love these films just for those reasons. I will admit that the cars were pretty awesome, but this is just not my thing. I think you have to be a gear head to love these films, which I am not. I am just a movie buff that spends all of his time watching and reviewing movies. I find that movies like these don't really appeal to guys like me who look at films the way I do. I find that I like it when there is a plot and not just a lot of action, and this film I felt like had more action then it had a plot. I find that the film is hard to review because there isn't very much to review about it, because it has no themes, and it doesn't have that much of a plot to think about. I can respect why people would like it, but it just isn't my thing.

It is about underground races and an LAPD officer named Brian O'Conner (Paul walker) who has to go undercover to investigate the illegal street-racing scene. After he gets a cover job at the Racer's Edge he enters one of the races he fried the engine because he doesn't know how to race. He wins the respect of Dominic (Vin Diesel) after he saves him from being arrested. Then it just goes downhill from there.

There isn't any acting really, and when there is acting it isn't impressive in any way. I don't like Vin Diesel that much or anybody in this film. They just don't have any skills to do anything besides action. The best actors should be able to do dramas, and stuff that isn't just action. I don't think Vin Diesel has the ability to do any acting that is difficult at all, and that is why he resorts to these kinds of films.

I didn't like this movie, because it felt to thoughtless, and just like any standard action movie. Well most action movies are standard action movies, but this one is more unique though, so saying it's a standard action film I guess isn't fair to say. I just am not that much of an action guy. When I said that the film is like pop music I meant that it is like a poppy song that doesn't have any thought provoking or interesting music or lyrics. This film doesn't have anything in it that makes you think at all. The film is well done, but it is not that good. Completely overrated, and the only reason why it got a 40 is because it was entertaining, but it barely deserved that. I will see some of the sequels to see if they get better for me though.
JFK 1991,  R)
Midnight in Paris 2011,  PG-13)
42 2013,  PG-13)
42 was a really good movie, about a great ball player. Jacki Robinson was the first black man to play major league baseball. This film tells his story, and the trouble he went through because he was black. This was during the time where there were separate bathrooms for black and white people, so the idea of having a black ball player was hated by everybody in the league. The story of this film is truly inspirational, and it felt real. I thought that they did a great job telling it as it was. It was extremely well acted too. I expected the guy who played jacki Robinson (Chadwick Boseman) was the guy who would give an Oscar worthy performance, but it was actually Harrison Ford who in my opinion should get an Oscar nomination for this. He played the role of Branch Rickey so well, and I probably wouldn't have thought that it was he. So overall the story was well told, and the movie was really well acted.

The story mostly revolves around the 1947 season of the Brooklyn Dodgers. At the time there were only 400 MLB players, and they were all white. They took one player out of the league, and put Jackie Robinson in to replace him. He became the first ball player in the league to be black. Pitchers were throwing at his head a lot, and he would duck. He had a hot temper and they had to teach him not to fight back, and to just ignore it all. A lot of his teammates wanted to go on strike so he wouldn't play, but they refused to let him go. He was to good to be let go, and he became one of the great ball players of all time.

It is not a typical sports drama, because it tackles a real life issue in history. The treatment of blacks was very terrible at the time, and the discrimination levels were the worst. This film tells it like it really was. I like these true story sports films, and not the ones like Rocky. Films like 42 are the really good sports films.

The racial stuff in the movie made me feel awful, considering that stuff like this at one point was happening in the country I live in. Like there is one scene where Jackie is at the airport with his wife and they give their tickets away to a white couple. There was one part where a hotel wouldn't let the team stay there because of Jackie. Though this stuff is upsetting, you have to do it. What made the film so good was that they successfully showed what it was like for him, and that they were able to make you mad at times. A great film around a topic like this needs to tell it like it is, and it needs to anger you at times. This film did exactly that. This was a great film, and I loved every minute of it. It was a great true story, and the acting was great. Not your typical sports drama at all.
Fearless 1993,  R)
Notorious 1946,  Unrated)
M*A*S*H 1970,  PG)
The Blair Witch Project 1999,  R)
This Is Spinal Tap 1984,  R)
Olympus Has Fallen 2013,  R)
The Kids Are All Right 2010,  R)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade 1989,  PG-13)
Up in the Air 2009,  R)
American Graffiti 1973,  PG)
True Grit 1969,  G)
The Artist 2011,  PG-13)
The Man Who Wasn't There 2001,  R)
The Apartment 1960,  Unrated)
The Insider 1999,  R)
Mud 2013,  PG-13)
Now Matthew McConaughey as a serious actor I usually think is really good. When he does those rom coms like Fools Gold, or How To Lose a Guy in Ten Days I think he is terrible. He is really good in this and he changed for this film. He changed physically, and he had to make himself look like a guy who has been on an island for a long time. He looked rough, dirty, and unwashed. They did a good makeup job with it too, because you could barely tell it was him. He also had the accent down perfectly, and at times I couldn't understand what he was saying because of it. I am glad he has broken out of his rom com phase and is doing stuff like this now. He broke out of that phase with Lincoln lawyer, and I think that is when he showed his skills as an actor. He tends to play a lot of lawyers, like in Lincoln lawyer, A Time to Kill, and in Bernie. So this was a completely different role for him.

The character he plays "Mud" is a fugitive hiding from the authorities on an island. He befriends two boys, and they help him try to reunite with his love Juniper (Reese Witherspoon). The two boys do a lot to help him out, and he tells them his story. A lot of people warn the boys about Mud, but they think he is a nice guy. He is a nice guy, but he just made a big mistake. The film makes you question him throughout, and you really can't figure out if he is good or bad until the end. It is also a movie that is suspenseful, because you have no idea how it will end.

Now I really wish that films like this get made more often. I am tired of mindless action movies, and they are like pop music too me. I like stuff like this that is interesting, different, well acted, and that let you think about what will happen. Mud was a really good movie that I would say is probably an acquired taste for a certain audience, but is one of the best films I've seen so far this year. This movie reminded of a film that came out about a month before called "The Place Beyond the Pines." They were both really good in the same, way but different at the same time. The Place Beyond the Pines is a little bit better, but not by much. What makes them great in the same way is that they are both really well acted, and they are both indie dramas that make you think a little, and they are in obscure locations.

I like films like this, because they are more reliant on acting, an interesting plot, and style. Indie dramas are good, because the directors and screenwriters have way more freedom to do what they want, and they can show their talent more. This film is a good example. Jeff Nichols wrote and directed this film, and I felt like I could see his true vision for the film, and I didn't see any Hollywood influence in it. That is why Mud was as good as it was.
The Thin Red Line 1998,  R)
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy 2011,  R)
Death of a Salesman 1985,  PG)
The Aviator 2004,  PG-13)
Malcolm X 1992,  PG-13)
Iron Man 3 2013,  PG-13)
Iron Man 3
I had mixed feelings about iron man 3 going into it. The trailers made it look epic, but sometimes they overdue these epic superhero films, and they turn out bad like Spiderman 3. But sometimes they do them right and they turn out awesome. Dark Knight Rises was the only time I could think of where the third movie in a super hero movie trilogy was great. Even that one got some criticism. I predicted that they would make this the final Iron Man film, but they would keep him alive for Avengers 2. I will not say weather I was right or wrong so I don't spoil it.

The film turned out to be very good, and it was very well done. I thought that it was better then the 2nd one, but I am not sure if I liked it quite as much as the first one, but I probably did. But weather or not you liked it as much as the original you will definitely like it better then the 2nd one, and you will definitely enjoy this.

The only flaw with the film was that it was very predictable. Well pretty much all of these films are predictable, but it was obvious at several points. The ending was the most predictable part of the film, but it was still a good ending, which I will not spoil. The humor was good but at times very predictable, and I didn't get why everybody else in the audience was laughing at times. Most of the time it was good, but at times it was too obvious for me to laugh at. I also wish that they cut down on the jokes a little, because at times it didn't feel like a serious movie. Most of the time they were good, but I felt like there were slightly too many jokes. Those were really the only two flaws with the film. The rest is perfect.

This film picks up right after the Avengers. All the marvel films before the Avengers were set up so they would build up to the Avengers, and they all connect to each other in some way. The Avengers was great because it was planned years in advance, and it was a massive project. The years of work and preparation paid off, as it is the third highest grossing film of all time. I can tell that this film will be the first of the marvel movies since the Avengers to build up to the sequel. Thor: The Dark World looks like it will directly connect to the Avengers 2, because it has the villain Loki from Avengers in it. I have no idea how the will connect Captain America: The Winter Soldier to the Avengers 2, but I look forward to seeing how they do that next year.

The film starts off with a flashback where Tony Stark met a man named Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) at a new years party, and he told the guy he would meet him on the roof of the hotel to discuss the project that he had in mind with him, but he never met him there. That was 1999 when he was still a playboy. Then it goes back to the present, and it is Christmas, and Killian has invented a way to recode DNA completely. He approaches Pepper (Gwyneth Paltrow) about it.

Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is not having fun this Christmas time. He hasn't slept in days, and he is having a lot of anxiety problems. I felt like they were trying to make it look like his health was going downhill, and that he would probably die at the end. He has however come up with some cool things like he came up with something that allows him to call his suit. What happens is that he will do a certain motion and all the parts of his suit would just fly on to him, and he would be Iron man. I thought that was pretty good.

There is a major terrorist called the mandarin (Ben Kingsley) who has been bombing places, and causing major destruction. He tells Tony Stark that he is coming for him, and he does. He destroys his house, and nearly kills him. Tony ends up in Tennessee after that and he must repair a suit, but with the help of a young boy he is able to do so.

I feel like the way Dark Knight Rises was done and Iron Man 3 was done was the ideal way to do a third superhero movie. Make it so the hero will be going through a lot of problems, and like they may die. They also both have the huge terrorist villain who is threatening to destroy everything. That makes it so that there is a lot at stake, and a lot to do, which give's the film a more intense feel. I liked Dark Knight Rises more then iron Man 3 because I liked it how it was just a dark and serious movie, while Iron man 3 is more of a funnier super hero movie, that is less serious. However this is still very good.

Also you need a perfect actor to play the super hero. Robert Downey Jr. is so perfect for the role of Tony Stark. His natural personality is perfect for it. He plays the egocentric hero so perfectly, and he is also funny in that role. There is no better actor to play that role then Robert Downey Jr., and everybody I know thinks that too.

Iron Man is different from other super hero films. Like Batman he doesn't have any natural powers. But as a person that is where he is very different. He is much more egocentric, and narcissistic then the average superhero. Usually they are quiet people when they aren't doing what they do. That is what makes Iron Man unique. He is also like the Fantastic Four, and everybody knows who his identity is. Iron Man is one of the only super hero series that I like.

I thought that this was a very good, and fun movie. It was done right, and it ended well. Only a few flaws, but I didn't notice any plot holes which films like this usually have. Very well done. Shane Black the director of Predator, and Lethal Weapon did some really good things with this, and he was a great choice for the director of this picture. Definitely see this if you are a iron man fan, because it is very entertaining, and very fun to watch.
Letters from Iwo Jima 2006,  R)
Death Proof 2007,  R)
Death Proof
This is the first time I watched a Quentin Tarantino film that I didn't like. I found this film to be way too weird. I know that Quentin Tarantino is an acquired taste, and I have acquired the taste, because I love everything else he has done, but this one I just couldn't get into. I found that the though of something like what happened in this movie was upsetting to think about. I think Quentin Tarantino is one of the all time greatest film directors and screenwriters, but I do think he is probably disturbed. I always wonder what must be going on in his head, but this film I think shows how disturbed he truly is.

The film had his typical style, where the dialog was really long and interesting, but it had no humor in it, which most of his films usually have, and that is why I love them so much. This film just had the disturbing factor, and the dialog wasn't even really that interesting to listen too, and it just went on and on. I felt like he must have been going through writers block or something when he wrote the dialog. He got it back when he did Inglourious Basterds two years later. I don't even know why he made this film to be perfectly honest, because it doesn't bring anything unique or interesting to the cinematic world, which all of his other films do.

The story is about a man named Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell) who is a total psychopath, and a weirdo. He goes around driving a stunt car that is "Death Proof" hence the title. He stalks girls with it and then he kills them by driving at full speed, and doing intense things while driving to hurt the girls or girl he wants to kill or mess with.

The film had no point, or no redeeming quality to it. It had the Tarantino style that is one of the most influencial ones in movie making history, but the style was not used to perfection like it was in films like Pulp Fiction, Inglourious basterds, or Django Unchained. I am ahuge tarantino guy, but this is on the very bottom of my list of my favorite films of his. I would not recommend this, and not even to true Tarantino fans, because even if you like it is still definitely his weakest film compared to the others. The film was just upsetting, and I didn't like it.
Apocalypto 2006,  R)
Driving Miss Daisy 1989,  PG)
Capote 2005,  R)
Tombstone 1993,  R)
For me the Sergio Leone westerns of the 60's are dated, but the ones from the 90's and of the 21st century rock. Tombstone is one of the best westerns I have ever seen. The director of this film George P. Cosmatos is a one hit wonder. He made this one great film, but all of his other films were bad. This film shows that he should have been doing westerns his whole career.

The film was a perfect western. It was really well paced, and it was intense when it had to be. It had all the characteristics that made old westerns great, and many more modern ones. The newer westerns are usually better acted and this film was really well acted. I feel the need to point out the terrific performances from Kurt Russell, and Val Kilmer. Those two carried the movie for me. It also had more development. Not only was there plot development, but also there was character development, and the suspense gradually got greater as the film went on. They went more into the personal lives of the characters, which modern westerns tend to do. It had the old western characteristics like all the gunfights, and the fact that it was a gang of bad guys. SO this film will appeal to lovers of old westerns, and more modern ones.

What actually happens is that there is a man named Wyatt Earp (Kurt Russell) who decides to retire from law enforcement, and go to the town Tombstone. He meets up with his old friend Doc Holliday (Val Kilmer) and learns that the town has been taken over by a group called "The Cowboys." He came to Tombstone to retire and reside with his wife, but now he is caught up in something huge. It started off slightly slow, but then got really intense, and it was great.

I like my western films to be like this. Unpredictable, suspenseful, well acted, and well developed. I am writing a western screenplay, and this is one of the films that inspired me to do it. Westerns were an acquired taste for me, and I am really growing to love the genre. This will always be one of my favorites of the genre. My favorite western films are ones like "Unforgiven," the remake of "True Grit," and this one. I liked the intensity of this film a lot, and that is what made this film so great. One of the all time great westerns for sure.
The Great Gatsby 2013,  PG-13)
The Great Gatsby
The film starts off with a narrative intro from Nick Caraway (Tobey Maguire). He tells the story of how he met Jay Gatsby in the summer of 1922. He goes to New York to become a stockbroker, and he reestablishes his relationship with his cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan). He lives next door to jay Gatsby (Leonardo Dicaprio). A extremely rich man, who nobody ever really see's. One night he comes home and see's a man who he believes is Gatsby standing at the edge of the dock reaching towards the green light that he see's at the other side of the lake. The green light will later be a symbol of where Gatsby wants to be. The light is on the dock of Daisy and tom Buchanan's (Joel Edgerton) house.

He later learns about Gatsby, and learns many lies about him, like people think he is a killer. He feels like Gatsby is watching him, and at certain times they show him looking at Nick from his window. Nick later receives an invitation to his house, and that make shim believe that Gatsby is definitely watching him. Nobody is ever invited to his house, they just all show up, and party. Gatsby's parties are always huge, and super over the top. They show what an eccentric time the 1920's were. Stocks were going up like crazy, and that is why it was called the roaring twenties. Everything in the time seemed over the top, and the story shows that.

Getting back to the story, at that party he finally meets Gatsby, and is amazed by his story once he gets to know him. He then helps Gatsby see Daisy again, who he used to be with. Gatsby starts an affair with her, and is trying to repeat what happened several years ago. Nick tells him he can't repeat the past, but Gatsby is delusional and thinks he should try. It causes problems, and a lot of drama.

I predicted that this would be the best movie of the month of May, going into it. I thought that it would end up being way better then that original film with Robert Redford. I thought that if it just stuck to the book it would be a really good movie, because the book is such a classic, and the story is so famous that it would be hard to make it bad. It turned out to be a decent movie, and I enjoyed it more then that god-awful original from 1974. Everything about the film was better then that original, but it still could have been better.

To start off the casting was way better. Leonardo DiCaprio was a perfect choice for the role of Jay Gatsby. For me it wasn't as much as he was really good in it, as much as the role is just perfectly suited for him. He had the same accent that he had for Django Unchained in this though, and it felt like he hadn't completely broken out of that character. I didn't feel like Dicaprio had pulled of a character that he had never doe before, but he was just such a perfect choice for it that most people will probably think he was great.

Tobey Maguire I had mixed feelings about for the role of Nick Caraway. I usually don't like him, because he just seems so awkward, and I never found his presence in the film to be that convincing, or strong. But after reading the book I felt like that could be appropriate for that role. I was right, and I thought that he was a very good casting choice. The only movie I had ever seen Carey Mulligan in was Drive, and I liked her in that so I thought that she may have been good for the role of Daisy Buchanan. I thought that she would definitely be better then Mia Farrow. Mia Farrow I just couldn't stand in the original, but I thought that Carey Mulligan was pretty good. I basically thought that the casting choices for this one were just so much better.

I also thought that the directing and cinematography was way better too. I had not seen a single Baz Lurhmann film until this one, but I really liked his directing style for this one. The film had a very interesting style to it that is a little hard to explain. He uses a lot of cinematography, and different story telling techniques like an interesting style of narrating from Tobey Maguire. They had never found a way to tell this story in a good way for a movie, but Baz Lurhmann figured out how to make the Great Gatsby into a film, and make it good. Nobody had done that so far. It was a true work of art, and it took F. Scott's Fitzgerald's masterpiece, and made it into a visual masterpiece. It turned out to be a very intelligent movie with a lot in the plot, and it made you think about the time like the book did. It is definitely one of the best films so far this year. I don't think it will be nominated for best picture though, because the critics didn't like it according to this site. I am not entirely certain why critics don't like this film and why it has less then 50% approval from them. You would think that this would be something that they love. Movies like this prove that you should only pay attention to the user rating of a movie.

However there were a few things that didn't make sense for the time even though I loved it. He used music that was modern like from Jay Z. The music gave it a more modern feel, and it didn't feel right for me. It was interesting, but it didn't make sense for me. At the beginning of the narrative intro Nick says that Gatsby was the only person that he could tolerate, and didn't feel disgusted with from that time. That made me think I would feel disgusted by the characters for the entire movie, but it wasn't until the end of this movie that you hated people like Daisy, and Tom. Because they didn't develop what a bad person Daisy was, they weren't able to develop how delusional Gatsby was. In the book he was just completely blind as to how awful Daisy is. This movie didn't show that until the end, but even when they showed it they didn't show it completely.

I have mixed feelings about that, because it doesn't portray the book, which makes you pretty much hate everybody but Gatsby, but at the same time it makes the movie more watchable. They went through some of the scenes that you felt disgusted by really quickly, and they didn't develop the things from the book that anger you. Like people looked down on Gatsby in the book because he earned his money instead of inheriting it, and that was one of the things that angered you the most from the book. They didn't really develop that with this movie. The reason why I have mixed feelings about not developing those things is because it doesn't completely tell the story the way it is supposed to be told, but at the same time it makes the movie more watchable. Most audience members who either didn't read or like the novel, will like the way they did this, but true fans of it, may think it was underdeveloped a little. Referring back to what I said about critics not liking it I think the reason they didn't like it was because it was slightly underdeveloped, and more focused on the visual beauty at certain times. I enjoyed this movie, but it wasn't perfect. It was better then the 1974 version, but it still could have been done slightly better.
What's Eating Gilbert Grape 1993,  PG-13)
Grease 1978,  PG)
Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle 2004,  R)
The Ides of March 2011,  R)
The Master 2012,  R)
The Master
The master is definitely an acquired taste. It is one that will get better every time you watch it, and I think it is the type of film that you have to really be in the mood for. When I first watched it I had to quit on it, because I was so bored, because it is very slow. But then I thought that I might have missed something big. I watched it at like 11 at night several weeks ago, and I was just not in the mood for something like this when I first tried to watch it, and I think that is why I hated it the first time. I decided to re-watch it because I knew it was definitely an acquired taste, and I felt like I would pick up on something great. I really did pick up on something great.

The 2nd time I watched it I really liked it, and I actually loved it. It was extremely well acted, and it really was an intellectual movie. It has an unusual style that makes it so you have to think more to understand everything that is going on. It is not blunt at all, and you have to really think about what you're watching so you get it. This is the type of film that you could hyper analyze in an English class in high school, because of it's style. First time I watched it I wasn't in the mood to analyze anything, but when I was in the mood to analyze something I gave this another shot, and really liked it. I noticed that at times it didn't appear to have that much going on, and that is why you really have to think a lot about what you are watching to get it.

Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) is a war world 2 veteran who gets out of the war, and has many problems that he is trying to run from. He is extremely obsessed with sex, and he relates a lot of things to sexual things. One scene at the beginning he is taking the test where he is shown a picture and he has to say what he see's, and he just see's sex. In the opening scene his obsession is manifested when he has sex with a person made of sand on the beach. He also is a big time alcoholic. He gets job as a photographer at a department store, and gets fired because he gets into a drunken fight. These things develop his character right of the bat, and they show how flawed he is. One thing they did that I think was to develop his sexual obsession more was that when he went on a date he fell asleep at the table, and I think that that was done to show he has no interest in a relationship and he is only interested in sex.

He then gets a job in a cabbage field, where he starts making these mysterious brews, and it poisons one of the migrant workers there, and the other workers chase him off. They do a shot of him running as fast as he can in the field. I think that they did that shot to symbolize how he is running from something, and not just the people who are chasing him. I think that because the shot lasted long enough for it to be a symbol. He is definitely running from something, and I think that they made that fairly obvious. The scene where he poisons the guy shows how he isn't doing the world any good. He isn't doing himself or anybody else any good. He is completely flawed. It was the 2nd job in a row he lost in that scene, and it gave me the impression that when he finally meets whom Phillip Seymour Hoffman plays that guy would really help him.

He ends up on the yacht of Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) when he gets drunk. Dodd tell shim the next day what happened, and he says that he can stay on the ship with him as long as he keeps making his brew for him. He is at sea again, and water is a huge symbol in the story, which I think symbolizes how life flows.

Dodd is "The Master." He is a doctor, a scientist, and many other things, but what I think he is more then anything is a genius. Freddie inspires him, and he inspires him with "The Cause." "The Cause" is a philosophical movement that Dodd leads that helps people in a really deep and intense way. He tries it on Freddie, and he gives him a test where he asks him some deep questions and does certain rules for the test. Like Freddie can't blink or he will have to go back to the start. He pulls out certain information from him which makes Freddie look even more flawed, and that starts a intense relationship between the two. Dodd is the only one who likes Freddie and believes that he can be fixed through "The Cause," but nobody else can. That is a really detailed synopsis of the film.

The film was a really intense one. It demands to be re-watched so you can pick up on things, and so you can get the films message more. It is a hyper acquired taste, because of it's style, and some will find it boring. Others will find it fascinating, intense, and extremely well acted. As long as you are in the mood for something like this when you watch it, you should love it. It is sad at times, because of the trouble that Freddie gets in, but you like it how Dodd never gave up on him. I found this film to be so thought provoking. Films like this will never be grasped by everybody, but for those who do grasp it they probably are really experienced movie watchers with a lot of acquired taste. Those who do grasp it will really like it, like I did.
Warm Bodies 2013,  PG-13)
Warm Bodies
R (Nicholas Hoult) is a zombie, and he hates it. He is unhappy with what he is, and he wants to be human again. All he wants is to be able to connect with people, and go back to the way he was before the apocalypse, but he can't until he meets a girl named Julie (Teresa Palmer). After eating her boyfriend Perry's (Dave Franco) brain he gets his memory from him. The memory he acquires allows him to get to know Julie a little bit better. He takes her back to the airport where all the other zombies live, and he bonds with her there.

Warm Bodies is a really good movie that is a completely different kind of zombie film that adds more to the genre. I have seen serious zombie movies that are meant to be scary, and I have seen funny parodies, but I have never seen a romantic zombie film. The idea is very original for it's genre and that is why it adds to the genre. The idea of a zombie who hates being a zombie and then falling for a girl was interesting. The fact that they both fall for each other and it shows how he becomes more human and how he learns to deal with humans was a great idea for this genre.

For a romantic comedy the only original part is that it is around zombies. It follows the same predictable formula where a guy gets a girl and they fall in love, but a conflict rises and he loses her, but gets her back in the end. It is definitely a little predictable and formulaic, but still very original. I really enjoyed this film and I found it interesting.

They also portrayed zombies in a completely different way. R narrates the films and I assumed that he was narrating his thoughts, but at the same time zombies can't think. I found that to be interesting. I also found it interesting how he had feelings, and he felt unhappy with his current state. Zombies are usually just completely mindless, but they weren't in this film. They had feelings, and they could think. They could also talk a little bit.

From the beginning of the romance between R and Julie you can tell that R is most likely going to be a human again, by the end. On the poster for the film it says, "He's still dead but he's getting warmer." That itself is foreshadowing that he will be a human at the end. That is part of the predictable feel of the film. However I liked the way they developed that part of the story. It was love at first sight when he saw her, which is a human thing so he always had some human things in him. As the film goes on he starts getting better at speaking, and other human things like that.

The film was very funny, and original. It had a really good soundtrack, which added to several scenes, and it made the film better for me. It was overall a really good movie that despite being predictable and formulaic still kept my interest throughout. I would recommend this to most people, and especially to zombie movie fans.
Catch Me If You Can 2002,  PG-13)
High Plains Drifter 1973,  R)
Star Trek Into Darkness 2013,  PG-13)
War Horse 2011,  PG-13)
Do the Right Thing 1989,  R)
Glory 1989,  R)
The story is mostly about Colonel Robert Gould Shaw (Mathew Broderick). I thought that I should give some more of his background that wasn't in the movie. He was born on October 10th 1837, and he died on July 18th 1863. He was born into a prominent abolitionist family.

The film starts off in the middle of the civil war, and at the Battle of Antietam, which took place on September 17th 1862 near Sharpsburg, Maryland. It was the first battle of the civil war that took place on Union soil. It was also the bloodiest single day battle in American History. The film does a great job of showing how vicious the battle was, and it was a really gruesome scene when they showed this battle. In the battle scene people were getting blown up, and were having there limbs blown off too. There were a total of 22,717 dead, wounded or missing men on both sides put together. It really was a gruesome battle, that was tough to watch, and I can't even imagine how awful it was in real life.

It was really tough to watch, but I have tremendous respect for the film, because it depicted that battle in a way, which seemed to be really accurate. It told it as it was. The best directors in my opinion take stuff like that and tell it the way it was. It is hard to do that, because you also have to be ok with disturbing people when you do a battle scene like that. But that is why Edward Zwick's directing was so good. He took a really well done screenplay that was written by Kevin Jarre, and then made it seem so realistic.

Robert Gould Shaw (Mathew Broderick) woke up after that battle in the hospital. He learns that President Lincoln is about to pass the Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln would later pass that one January 1st, 1863. It said that all of those who were slaves in Confederate territory would be free, and the army would have to allow them to fight in the Civil War.

Many African-Americans volunteer, and then they start the training. The training is brutal, and it felt like the movie Full metal Jacket to be honest. One of the generals really makes you hate him, because of how rough he is. Robert Shaw is the guy who you like, but he is still intense. He gets intense with his soldiers to get them ready for the intensity of a battle. Broderick acted that part of the film out very well. I would probably say that this was his best film in terms of his acting. I find that he has been type casted as Ferris Bueller, and that everybody always thinks of him in that character in everything he does. I find that I think of him that way too, but I still think he is a good actor. He has range to him, and he shows it with this film.

The film had a lot of great actors, who gave great performances. Another part of this film is that it was Denzel Washington's first big hit. When this film came out everybody knew that he had a lot of potential, and he went on to be awesome. He is one of my favorite actors, and he has done so many good ones for me. It is also another great Morgan Freeman film for me. It was just a great film all around. This is one that I could go on and on about discussing, but it would ruin it for somebody who hasn't seen it. I would recommend this film, because it is really well done, and because it is also historically accurate.
A History of Violence 2005,  R)
A History of Violence
This was a big surprise for me. I didn't anticipate that I would like this film as much as I did. It was a really good movie, and it is very underrated. I loved the intensity of the film, and it was crazy. It is a film that will just suddenly get really violent, and intense, but it will be over quickly. I liked that style that it had with the sudden violence a lot actually. The film also blends in drama, suspense, and mystery really well. This is really the only script that Josh Olson ever wrote that was any good, but he did a great job with this one. He was able to write a mystery film that you didn't figure out until you were told what the truth was. He also put in a lot of suspense, and you couldn't tell how it would end. The drama side was good to because they really showed how what happened to the guy really affected his family. It was overall really well done.

Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) runs a local diner in an Indiana town. He has a family, and is very in love with his wife Edie (Maria Bello). One night his diner gets robbed, and he becomes a local hero when he kills the robbers, and saves the lives of the people in the store. He is all over TV, which make shim nervous, because he doesn't want that. One day a man named Carl Fogarty (Ed harris) came into the store and starts calling him "Joey" and starts to question him about the old days in Philadelphia. He accuses him of being a part of the mob many years ago. The film from that point becomes a mystery of weather or not he is the guy they tell him he is, or if he isn't. Once you learn weather he is or not it is about how he will get out of the situation he is in.

The film does a good job of making you wonder weather he is that guy that Carl Fogarty tells him he is, because there is foreshadowing of the violent side that he has, when he kills the robbers in his diner. Also his son has a violent edge in him to which he lets out on a bully. But they make him seem like such a peaceful man, and it surprised me when I saw him kill those two robbers, because it didn't seem like something he had in him. You could think either way about his identity, because they did a really good job developing that part of the story.

Overall I thought it was a really good movie. I really liked the plot, and I found it to be very entertaining. I think the reason why it got mixed reviews from users is because it was a little short, and certain parts of the film felt like they could have been developed more. That is the only flaw with the film. If it was about fifteen or twenty minutes longer I think the user rating would be even higher. Usually I think films are too long, but this film is too short. Other then the flaw in length it is perfect, and it is really well done.
Chicago 2002,  PG-13)
V for Vendetta 2006,  R)
The Hangover Part III 2013,  R)
The Hangover Part III
I had mixed feelings going into the Hangover part 3. I predicted in a blog that it would either be good or bad, and there would be no middle. I walked in with mixed feelings, and I walked out with mixed feelings. The film was very entertaining, but it wasn't hilarious like the first one was, and it wasn't as funny as the 2nd one. I really felt like they were just trying to push it with this one. Meaning that they were just trying to see how far they could take this series. Weather you like this film or not, whatever ideas they had left were used in this film. It better be the end like they said it was, because I don't see how they could possibly come up with something else. I may have to see this again to get a final opinion of it, and if I do I will re0write this review, and possible change my rating for it. I am giving it a 50% because I am not sure weather or not it was good or bad, but after seeing it the first time I thought it was ok. But at the same time when I first saw the 2nd one I didn't like it because of how similar I thought it was to the first. But when I watched it again I had a 2nd opinion on it, and I liked it more. So that is why I will give Hangover 3 another try when I can.

What happens with this one is that Allan (Zach Galifianakis) has been off of his medication for months and has been going crazy. He buys a giraffe, and when he goes under a bridge that isn't high enough for the giraffe to go under it takes off the giraffe's head causing a major traffic wreck. His father has a heart attack when he learns of it. Meanwhile Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) escaped from a high security prison in a scene that parodied Andy Dufresne's escape from prison in the Shawshank Redemption. They take Allan to a hospital to get him help, but they are run off the road on the way by a bunch of gangsters led my Marshall (John Goodman). They say that they have three days to find Lesley Chow. They kidnap Doug and say they will kill him if they don't find him in time. The plot is completely different from the first two films, because there is no hangover, and because they had to relate it to the other two. You could tell that they learned that in order for the movie to be good they had to come up with something new, and they did.

There are a lot of things that I want to talk about, but it would spoil the movie if I did, so I won't. I still have mixed feelings about this, and I want to see it again to see if it changes my opinion. But it is definitely not nearly as good as the first.
The Magnificent Seven 1960,  R)
Kung Fu Panda 2008,  PG)
Caddyshack 1980,  R)
Fatal Attraction 1987,  R)
Fatal Attraction
Now Fatal Attraction is a stressful film to watch I have to say. But I also have to say that it is really good. Great to be perfectly honest. It is an intense thriller that is perfectly paced, and really well done. It had an effect on guys in particular, and I feel like all guys should be shown this at some point. The reason why they should see this is because it shows the consequences of cheating on your girlfriend or wife. A lot of men apparently were really disturbed after seeing this, because they imagined themselves getting into the mess that the guy in this film got himself into. It is one that if you imagine it happening to you it will really stress you out. I think that was why the film was written. The term "fatal attraction" gets used a lot because of this film.

The film is about this one man named Dan Gallagher (Michael Douglas). He has a perfect life. His job is great, his family is great, and he has a perfect wife. But he meets a woman named Alex Forrest (Glenn Close), and they have a mutual attraction for each other. They have an affair that lasts an entire weekend while his wife is away. The problem is that Alex is insane. She is super clingy and you can tell when you see the way she clings to him during that weekend that once he has to go back to reality it is just going to be hell for him. The whole film is about him trying to keep his wife from finding out, and trying to get this crazy woman to leave him alone. It also builds up his guilt, and he really starts to manifest how much he regrets the affair almost immediately. Part of the film you also sit there mad at him, because you know that this will later effect his whole family. You also are disgusted because his wife is perfect, and the woman he cheated on her with is the exact opposite.

It was an extremely suspenseful movie. It was the type of film where you knew certain things would happen, but you didn't know when or how. So it was somewhat predictable, well at least it was for me. But even though it is a little bit predictable it is still really suspenseful. A really good movie that will keep you on edge, and gives you a not in your stomach. Great screenwriting, directing, and acting.
Coming to America 1988,  R)
Crazy, Stupid, Love. 2011,  PG-13)
The Wild Bunch 1969,  R)
Fast & Furious 6 2013,  PG-13)
Two Mules For Sister Sara 1970,  PG)
The Outlaw Josey Wales 1976,  PG)
Magnolia 1999,  R)
Magnolia is without a doubt an acquired taste. It is also without a doubt one of the most intellectual movies I have ever watched. I didn't get it the first time, but the second time I found it really interesting. Its extremely bizarre quirky style is just part of what makes director Paul Thomas Anderson unique. Directors and screenwriters like Paul Thomas Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, and Charlie Kaufman have invented their own unique genre in film. You have to analyze their films to get why they were made, and to understand what they want you to understand. Though films like Magnolia are really bizarre they are much more thoughtful then the average blockbuster. That is why I appreciate films like this.

The film is revolved around several characters, and several stories that are happening at once. It isn't one that I could give a good synopsis for that you would have a good expectation for what the film will be about. It is about several different characters going through different kinds of crisis. It is a psychological drama that leads you all over the place, and eventually connects the stories.

Frank "T.J." Mackey (Tom Cruise) runs a program called "Seduce and Destroy" that helps men get girlfriends. Seduce and Destroy is a very famous program that has helped many men. He is famous because of it. His father Earl Partridge (Jason Robards) is dying of cancer. He is being taken care of by Phil Parma (Phillip Seymour Hoffman). Linda Partridge (Julianne Moore) is his trophy wife works on getting his prescription for morphine while Phil takes care of him, and tries to get in touch with his son Frank. Frank is in the middle of one of his Seduce and Destroy seminars while Phil anxiously tries to get in touch with him.

Officer Jim Kurring (John C. Rielly) is sent to investigate a disturbance, and he finds a body, and a boy tries to tell him who did it by rapping to him. He then goes to Claudia Wilson Gator's (Melora Walters) house, who is a cocaine addict to investigate another disturbance. He ends up asking her out on a date. Claudia Wilsons father Jimmy Gator (Phillip Baker Hall) is a game-show host, and he is also dying. The show he hosts the show "What do kids know?"

The film tells the stories of all different kinds of people. From ordinary people to celebrities, and to people that are on drugs or dying. Frank "T.J." Mackey and Jimmy Gator are the two celebrities in the story. They are both on TV, but they are both completely different people. Jimmy is like another version of his father. Like Frank's father Jimmy is dying, and he also cheated on his wife at some point. His child Claudia also hates him, as Frank hates his father. That is the similarity between Earl Partridge, and Jimmy Gator. They don't actually connect to each other in the story, but there is just a similarity between the two.

The story shows how relationships between parents and their kids will affect them. I feel like Frank is this really eccentric guy, and very weird partly because of how what his father did to him earlier in his life effected him. Claudia was affected really badly, and I felt like her cocaine addiction is to help escape her messed up life, and the pain of whatever her father did. Even the kid on the show "What do kids know?" has a ruthless father. The kid is Stanley Spector (Jeremy Blackman), and you can tell how pressured he is by his father. It is just another aspect that shows how parents affect their kids. I feel like that is the part of the story that Paul Thomas Anderson wanted the audience to think about when he wrote the screenplay.

I feel like I should give a lot of credit to Tom Cruise for his performance. There were a lot of good performances in this movie, but his probably comes to my mind first. He had to take on a very eccentric and weird character that was full of energy. The type of character that you would have to really invest yourself in so you could pull it off right. I also feel like Tom Cruise is a very eccentric guy in real life so he was just a good fit for the role, and a great casting choice. I am not always a fan of his, but I felt like this was one of his best performances.

This was a really good intellectual movie that joined several stories perfectly. It is great writing, and directing. Paul Thomas Anderson created something completely original, and unique with magnolia. What he created with the film is very weird, but interesting and though provoking. It is one that if you didn't like the first time I would recommend watching again, because you may like it more. That was what happened with this film and I. Weird intellectual movies like I feel like are only for a certain audience. They are more for an audience that analyzes films, and notices specific details that the director probably was hoping you would notice. I am a part of that audience so I really liked this film. I would say that it is the best film that Paul Thomas Anderson made or at least one of the best.
L.A. Confidential 1997,  R)
The Constant Gardener 2005,  R)
Punch-Drunk Love 2002,  R)
A Separation 2011,  PG-13)
Django 1966,  Unrated)
Hang 'em High 1968,  PG-13)
Atonement 2007,  R)
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance 1962,  G)
Dredd 2012,  R)
Hugo 2011,  PG)
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels 1988,  PG)
The Sessions 2012,  R)
Breakdown 1997,  R)
The Inglorious Bastards 1978,  R)
Man of Steel 2013,  PG-13)
Man of Steel

Man Of Steel is definitely the best superman movie I have ever seen, but I felt like it wasn't amazing like I hoped it would be. I usually lean more towards the user rating but I am a little bit closer to the critics rating for a couple of reasons. First of all I felt like there was too much action and CGI. I guess you need to have a lot more CGI with a Superman movie then you do with something like Batman, but I felt like the 2nd half of the movie was just action, and epic fighting which I usually don't like. I like when there are several fights spread out through the movie, and one big one at the end, because then there can be more plot development throughout the movie. I find that if the action is more spread out they are able to make the ending more suspenseful for some reason. Movies like Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises have more suspense because the action is more spread out, and because they have more of a story throughout. That is why I think that those are the best superhero movies.

The first half of the movie was really good because I found that there was more of a plot there. After a while there wasn't that much of a plot. What happened was that Kal-el (Henry Cavill) was born when Krypton was being destroyed. They send him to planet earth where he grows up as Clark Kent, and eventually becomes Superman. It is the same story as the original with Christopher Reeve, but more in depth. I feel like I should not give away any more details about the movie's plot so you can have some surprises, but that is my synopsis of the film.

It has also been a few years since the last Superman movie, which to be perfectly honest I really didn't think was that good. It was entertaining enough to be watchable, but there were a ton of flaws. I used to like it, but as I have gotten older I have found that my taste has become stronger, and there have been many films that I stopped liking because of that, and this is one of those films. Last time I saw it I felt like it was just trying to hard to be an epic movie, and they over did it. There was too much special effects, and the plot I felt like wasn't very good. This film has some of the same problems like there is too much CGI, and I felt like the plot development at the beginning was really good while it was there. I feel