This Means War (2012, U.S.)

I'm going back and forth on this one, between liking and really liking. It certainly stands out in the romantic comedy genre with its unique plot. Spy versus spy? Perfect set up for both verbal and physical comedy, totally unrealistic but still enjoyable. Not only is the love triangle aspect pretty well done, but the focus is more on the competition between the guys that the relationships with the girl.

That being said, Reese Witherspoon totally stole the show from the guys. I think she is just great. She's strong in dramatic roles and perfect in romantic comedies, and she always adds a touch of class to the most ridiculous movies. I loved her position as a consumer product tester, which was a unique job for a heroine and also contributed some good joke potential. She was adorable dancing around her kitchen to rap music, and so witty when she basically told FDR (who tried to pick her up in the video store by choosing a movie for her) that she could pick apart his moves and she obviously wasn't he was looking for. She was great. I liked Chris Pine as FDR—very cute, very full of himself, very smooth. But I really loved Tom Hardy as Tuck—modest, adorable, thoughtful, not shy so much as reserved. (Side note: while I was imdb-ing this movie, I saw a discussion board about how ugly his teeth are and how they detract from his appearance. It's funny, if you search for pictures of him online, you only find him with his mouth closed. But I never noticed his teeth, so I guess they added to his character.)

I didn't see the ending coming at all, including who she would choose. My friend explained to me why she had to choose the one she did, but I was rooting for the other team, so I didn't like it! Still it was surprising and fun, so I'll bump it up above the standard romantic comedy 3.5.

Rating: 4.0

Fireball (2009, Canada)

So, I watched this in an attempt to erase the memory of The Lost Samaritan out of my head and replace it with a better Ian Somerhalder. I should have known better. Hello, look at this poster. That about sums up the movie.

A violent football player, Draven, wants to get revenge on all the people who've done him wrong. Somehow his body chemistry changes and he becomes a human torch. A fire investigator and a federal suit try to track him down, as he sets fire to everything. The big finale takes place in a nuclear plant.

Yeah, terrible. This is beyond B. There are no words. Bad writing, bad acting, bad scoring, bad everything. I don't know how I made it to the end. Don't watch it.

Rating: 1.0

The Lost Samaritan (2008, Germany)

Terrible. Terrible! I was feeling the need to watch something with Ian Somerholder in it, and this was a definite mistake. An accountant has a long night at the office, and on the way home helps an injured motorist, which leads to him becoming the target of two dangerous assassins. I can't even remember how. Then he gets home to find his wife cheating on him, and the assassins follow him there, so he goes to a cafe and the waitress ends up tagging along on his adventures. How does any of this make sense? There's no clear plot, and that's the least of the problems with this travesty.

The music was way over the top music. I gather that this movie was made in Germany, and all the German actors who were supposed to be Hispanic or white Americans still had German accents. The script was ridiculous, writing beyond terrible. The one major "why" of the plot was never answered. The accountant's relationship with the waitress makes no sense. And to top it off, the girl's not even sexy and she tries too hard.

What was Ian Somerhalder thinking? He's a pretty talented actor. This was just sad.

Rating: 1.5

Repo Men (2010, U.S.)

Remy is a repo man for The Union, a company that installs artificial organs and takes them back when the owners can't pay their debts. After a job-related injury, he wakes up to find himself the owner of a state of the art heart. When he can't pay, he goes on the run, and his former partner is sent after him.

The concept wasn't bad, although I fail to see why his company wouldn't have covered a work-related injury. (Though to be fair, their boss was pretty evil.) The music was pretty cool, very smooth and jazzy, which lent a nice contrast to the constant action. The huge twist ending was also exciting. However, mostly I found the whole thing to be entirely too graphically violent.

Rating: 2.5

Salt (2010, U.S.)

I never thought I would see the day that I agreed with Roger Ebert, but I think it has come. He gave it four out of four stars, saying that "It's gloriously absurd. This movie has holes in it big enough to drive the whole movie through." Amen. It's like a super cheesy and preposterous 1950s spy film but with the realism that comes from modern day film techniques, and this is a very disconcerting combination. You could almost say it was so ridiculous it was good.

A lot of the plot devices lacked clarity, but I can't go into without giving away the ending. I did figure out one plot twist thanks to an episode of Lost, which was kind of fun for me.

Of course, I love Angelina Jolie more than anyone else I know. She makes an excellent action hero (see Tomb Raider). Apparently she's been wanting to do a spy franchise, and I wish this had a better script so they could make a franchise out of it. I do have to say thank goodness Tom Cruise dropped out, because this movie would have been ten kinds of awful with him instead of her.

Besides Jolie, the three best parts were the action, the setting, and the music. A lot of the action was based on Salt running and running and running from her pursuers, rather than explosions and shooting (though there was a good share of that too). The filming took place primarily in D.C. and was really well done. And the score (by one of my favorite composers) was perfect. If I had listened to it without the movie, I would have said to myself, "This would make good spy music!"

Don't expect much, and you'll be entertained. Especially if you like Angelina Jolie.

Rating: 3.5

Gamer (2009, U.S.)

Wow.

In a dystopian future, people play an online game called "Society" )like the Sims) where they control real people in a not-so-virtual world. These actors are paid to "work" in this game. Then the game creator, Castle, gets another idea, creating a modern warfare game where the game's "characters" are cons from death row in America's overcrowded prisons. It is intense. Gerard Butler plays a con who was set up for murder and has survived 20-odd "missions" in the game. (If they survive 30, they're pardoned.) Logan Lerman is the 17-year-old gamer controlling him. Ludacris heads a subversive group called Humanz who are trying to expose the evil of Castle's empire.

It is intense, action-packed, thought-provoking. It offers some interesting commentary on modern society, thinly disguised by a horrible future. Of course, at what point does commentary on society's obsession with gaming, sex, and violence just become a vehicle for gratuitous gaming, sex, and violence? It's kind of a fine line, and they toe it here, but I think it works. Because once you finish watching this, you'll start thinking about those things, but then you'll think, "Well bad me for liking this movie so much!" At least that's the feeling I got.

Sometimes it was a bit over the top (i.e. when Kable vomits whiskey into a gas tank and then urinates into it as well, which somehow makes the car work), but for the most part it was excellent, from the science to the action to the satire to the very last plot twist. I was pretty surprised (having only watched this in a quest to find the pre-chick flick Butler), but I really liked it and would pretty strongly recommend it.

Rating: 4.0

Jumper (2008, U.S.)

When 15-year-old David is about to drown (while saving something that belonged to his big crush, Millie), he realizes he can instantaneously transport himself anywhere he wants. (In this instance he goes to the Ann Arbor Public Library, which I thought was amusing.) Eight years later, he's living in NYC and using his talent to rob banks. Suddenly a shadowy group called Paladins, who hunt Jumpers, start coming after him. For some reason he decides this is the perfect time to travel to Italy with his girl. There he runs into a British Jumper who tries to explain how foolish David is being.

There's a lot of action, a lot of very neat special effects as they jump from place to place, and a lot of beautiful settings (Tokyo, the Coliseum, the Sphinx...). They didn't overcome the lack of coherent plot and overall logic. Why were the Paladins exterminating Jumpers? Where did the Jumpers come from? Why take a girl you haven't seen in years on a trip to Italy when you're being hunted by bad guys? How does the Brit Jumper know about the Paladins and how does he track them? Why bother making David's mother a Paladin, and why does she have another child who is irrelevant to the plot?

It really was a neat premise and had fabulous special effects, but there is no escaping from poor plot. Fail.

Rating: 2.5

The Bounty Hunter (2010, U.S.)

Blah, blah, blah. Another romantic comedy with a good idea and a terrible execution.

Milo is a bounty hunter with bad luck, and then he gets an assignment to track down his bail-jumping journalist ex-wife, who's doing a story on a dirty cop murder cover up. They find themselves on the run in a ridiculous, unbelievable adventure.

Look, people. Jennifer Aniston is not a good actress. She never has been, she never will be. She plays the same character over and over again. Rachel Green, Brooke Meyers, Nicole Hurley... they're all the same. (I will say that she was actually excellent in The Good Girl, but that was an exception and not a rule.) Gerard Butler, on the other hand, is a wonderful, wonderful actor. He was the Phantom of the Opera, for crying out loud. And now he's doing crap like The Bounty Hunter and The Ugly Truth. Also he's looking kind of rough. It's just not right.

Rating: 2.5

X-Men (2000, U.S.)

I can't lie, I was confused for most of this movie. Partially because I was talking to Jeff through most of it, and partially because I never read or watched X-Men as a kid. Mostly I wanted to watch the trilogy so that I could watch and understand Wolverine because a) I have become a Hugh Jackman fan (especially since he hosted the Oscars) and b) Aaron Jeffrey is in it!

Still, I thought it was pretty sweet. For starters, the aforementioned Mr. Jackman was awesome, and the rest of the cast was great too. The special effects were really believable, which is sometimes all one can ask of a movie like this. One thing that did really bother me was when the script obviously dropped the ball. For instance, Storm is letting herself (and everyone else) get beat up, and I assumed she just couldn't use her powers inside. Then five minutes later, she uses her powers to save the day. Why couldn't she do this earlier? I don't know.

So yeah. Good casting, good special effects. That pretty much sums it up.

Rating: 3.5

Torque (2004, U.S.)

Would you like to see a terrible action movie often hailed as The Fast and the Furious on Motorcycles? If so, look no further! Before I have to say anything else, I have to defend myself by saying that I watched this movie with a bunch of friends on a B-movie night. So I knew it would be bad.

There are a lot of motorcycles. I guess they're cool. There are rival bike gangs, who are beyond lame. Also, one of the gangs is primarily black, and it is incredibly racist. I mean really, Ice Cube? (Not "Why did they cast him?" but "Why would he do it?") Also, the few Asians in the film were beyond stereotypical. We called the main Asian character Red Dragon, because he wore a red dragon biker jacket. Painful.

The plot was insubstantial: good guy framed for murder must prove his innocence, which involves a lot of motorcycle stunts and explosives, of course. He has a "sexy" love interest, but several of us were in agreement that this woman (although in her late 20s) looked old and worn out. Yuck.

Basically, it sucked. But the lead actor was kind of cool in the delivery of his lines... "Why yes, this is a terrible movie and my lines are even worse, but look at my over-the-top bad boy smirk!" Oh yeah.

Rating: 1.5

Quantum of Solace (2008, UK)

I. Love. Daniel. Craig. There is no other Bond for me. To be fair, I've only ever seen the Brosnan and Craig films. And Casino Royale was my first Bond, and I already had a soft spot for it because I'd seen them filming it. But still.

The plot of Quantum of Solace was very typically Bond, probably more so than Casino Royale. Bad guys doing something extremely technologically complicated, creative, and deviously evil. (And as far as evil plots go, this one really takes the cake—but I don't want to give it away.) Sexy women getting in the way, sleeping with Bond, getting killed off. Car chases, shootouts, and explosions. Only this time, Bond had more than duty motivating him—he had revenge. And he very subtly reaches toward revenging Vesper's death. It's not an obvious plot point, but it nicely ties QofS with CR. I love continuity.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's start with the beginning. I did not like the opening credits, nor the new theme song performed by Jack White and Alicia Keyes. (Surprising, because I do love Jack White.) I just don't think anything could touch "You Know My Name" and the clever gambling theme of the CR credits. I liked the "cut out" looking men more than the CGI women, even if it was less "Bond."

The opening scene of QofS is a car chase. I'm back and forth on car chases overall; they have to be really well done to get my attention. And while this one was pretty cool, the jerky camera movements were just a bit too much. It's hard to appreciate a scene when your eyes can't focus on it! It also took me awhile to figure out what was happening. Apparently the beginning of this film takes place directly after the end of the last film. Again, love the continuity—don't love that Bond was wearing a different suit. Confusing!

After that, it was all great. I'm still a bit confused on some of the plot points, but as far as I can tell, every Bond film takes at least two viewings to work out the kinks of who did what and why. The casting was fabulous. Of course I love Craig and Dench, so no surprises there. The actors who portrayed the main Bond girl and the main villian were both amazing. Olga Kurylenko was both fragile and tough, and she definitely held her own. Mathieu Amalric can only be described as "slimy." They were perfect.

The cinematography was well done (from gritty to stunning, depending on the . The score was understated and effective (though again, it didn't touch CR either). The choreography (I'm talking fight scenes here) was realistic and yet very dance-like (if that makes sense).

I'm pretty much dying to see it again.

Rating: 4.5

Wanted (2008, U.S.)

So I would probably see this movie no matter what, because I have a HUGE girl-crush on Angelina Jolie. Also, Atonement got me interested in James McAvoy (only as an actor, I don't think he's gorgeous like some girls do), and I haven't seen him in anything else (with the exception of Wimbledon, in which he had a tiny role). Then there's Morgan Freeman, and you know how I feel about him. Add that all together with a really awesome preview, and I was pretty excited about it.

So here's my recommendation: if you have a weak stomach and want to see this one, bring something to vomit in. It was incredibly violent, and not the stylized, clean, Matrix-type violence I was expecting. It was more much more crude, like 300 but less fake, like No Country for Old Men but more thought out. It was disgusting.

Aside from the violence, everything else was great. The plot was interesting, engaging, and somewhat complex (in a good way); the violence was like a beautiful dance (well, plus the blood and gore); the narration was personal and yet distant (and spot on); and Angelina Jolie was, of course, beyond sexy. Morgan Freeman was in a somewhat god-like position, which is exactly where he belongs. I have definitely decided James McAvoy is a great actor. His character was vaguely reminiscent of Edward Norton's in Fight Club (see below), but it was still him. Great acting all around.

Oh, very interesting note here: while watching the credits, I was shocked to see "Music by Danny Elfman." Of course, I adore Danny Elfman. And I had really liked the score of Wanted. But never in a million years would I have put the two together. Usually I would describe his work as "whimsical," but this was harder, more driven. It almost made me think of techno. I definitely need to re-listen to the score and try to pick out the Elfman in it.

If I had to describe Wanted using other films, I would say that it was like The Matrix (styled violence, bullet time, etc.) mixed with Mr. and Mrs. Smith (Angelina Jolie, assassins, etc.) mixed with Fight Club (violence, narrative style, etc.) And yet it really was unique, one of a kind. Minus the extreme violence (which I just really can't handle), I would've given this one a 4.5. As it is, I can't quite do it. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it -- although I could have done either. Which leads us to our default rating.

Did I mention how sexy (and badass) Angelina Jolie was?

Rating: 3.5

Hancock (2008, U.S.)

Will Smith has been in some pretty awful movies (in my opinion). Case in point: Men in Black, Wild Wild West, Bad Boys... But he's a great actor. Truly great. And while this was just another Will Smith action flick, it wasn't just another Will Smith action flick. I would have waited to see this when it came out on DVD, but again, Mom wanted to see it.

It was definitely not what I expected. It was funny, it was dramatic, there was a bit of action, there was some weird, angsty, (interracial--good for you, Hollywood!) romance. The premise was actually quite good, and while the execution was slightly lacking, it still turned out well. The only part that really bothered me (and detracted from the film) was Hancock shoving one man's head up another man's rear. That was just disgusting and stupid and didn't do anything for the movie at all. So that was disappointing.

Also, the score was pretty good, alternating from subtle to in-your-face super hero-ish music. I believe I've seen several movies with music by John Powell, but I don't think it's ever stood out so much. So I think that was a good thing.

Overall, I would recommend you see this one, if you like heroes, Will Smith, or summer blockbusters. (I would probably give this a 3.5 on a normal day, but I can't give it the same score that I just gave Fool's Gold. So it gets a 4.0.)

Rating: 4.0