Casanova

In a Nutshell: A fun and entertaining romp, not serious in the slightest, nor is it intended to be. A perfectly pleasant two hours.

Quick Plot: The "semi-true" tale of the legendary lothario and the love of his life.

In Detail: Honestly, there isn't much to say about this film. It is the perfect "cream puff" of a movie. Light, airy, and sweet, with no meat to it whatsoever. I smiled, I laughed, I enjoyed myself. The settings are lovely, the costumes stunning, and the situations are appropriately ridiculous, with a few witty lines for flavor. And one of my personal favorites, Oliver Platt, is his usual over the top self, even if he is virtually unrecognizable, both physically and vocally. Unless you're out of films to see, I wouldn't bother with this one in the theater. It will be just fine on DVD, or better yet, your movie channel of choice. I just wasn't up for anything heavy that night, and this was the perfect confection of a film to suit my tastes at the time.

Will I Buy It? Doubtful.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

In a Nutshell: Excellent! Far and away the best Potter adaptation to date. Probably a bit too scary/intense for little kids, though.

Quick Plot: Harry is entered into the Tri-Wizard Tournament against his will and must compete not only for the glory of the school, but for his very life.

In Detail: I enjoyed this movie so much, which is surprising since I was very afraid of what would happen to such a long book after all of the slicing and dicing to make it fit into a reasonable (i.e. non-Peter Jackson) film length. They did a remarkable job. Other than the disappointment of not getting to see *any* of the Quidditch World Cup beyond the opening ceremonies, which looked astoundingly awesome, virtually all of the cuts made were appropriate and not really missed (I had a couple of small nitpicks, but that is to be expected, and one cut I did like: thank goodness for no S.P.E.W.!). I must say, Ralph Fiennes plays Voldemort with mesmerizing perfection and conviction. *This* is what we all knew a Harry Potter film could be, though it is probably too much for young viewers. I would not take the average 5 or 6 year old to see this film, that's for sure (it is rated PG-13, after all). Great film! I'm looking forward to the next one.

Will I Buy It? YES! I would have said yes anyway, to keep the series going, but this is the first Potter film that I can say without hesitation that I would buy on its own merits as well.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe

In a Nutshell: Okay. Glorious attention to detail, beautiful to watch, but I ultimately found it a bit boring.

Quick Plot: Four siblings in war-torn England are sent to the country for safety. There, they find a magical realm within a wardrobe in the spare room, ruled by a white witch who is constantly on guard for the four humans who are foretold to end her reign.

In Detail: By now, I'm sure we *all* know that Disney was presenting this film on two fronts, and I am happy to say that it walked the fine line between the two camps very well with this production (probably helped by the fact that Disney is mainly a distributor in this case, not a major producer in anything but the money department). They did not downplay the obvious Christian overtones, nor did they downplay the magical aspects. They presented the story, both "faces" of it, just as it was portrayed in the book; you may read as much or as little into the parallels as you would like in this wonderfully fantastical world. But given that I have read the book (though it was several years ago), and given that it is a Christian allegory, it was way too predictable. I know, many films are now, and what can I expect from a book as old as this one; I also didn't expect it to stray from the book (that would truly have been sacrilege). It just felt plodding and boring, though I'm not sure how that could have been fixed. (Hey, we all knew the boat sank (Titanic) and Anakin became Vader (Sith), but we still went to see those.) Still, it is a good movie, fine for most children, though some of the witch's creatures might be a bit frightening for sensitive little ones at the "table scene" near the end. The make-up and effects were very well done indeed, and the attention to even the smallest detail is fabulous, but in the end, it just wasn't enough for me. I do look forward to future Narnia installments, though. Perhaps I shall enjoy the ones I have not read a bit more.

Will I Buy It? Not just yet. If I like future installments, then I'll go back and pick this one up.

Memoirs of a Geisha

In a Nutshell: Good. Very beautiful, just not much to it. The book was much more gripping. Would probably have been better if I hadn't read the book.

Quick Plot: Chiyo is sold into slavery as a child. She is sent to geisha school in hopes of recovering the investment in her. Can Chiyo become a famous geisha, wealthy enough to pay her debts and win the man of her dreams?

In Detail: A good movie, just not a great one. Very very beautiful to watch, and you are given plenty of time to look with the slow pace of the film. It is NOT slow in a bad way! Just not action oriented in the slightest, not even the "action scenes;" nothing wrong with that when it is done artfully and intentionally, as is the case here. The casting was suburb! Everyone looked and behaved just as I imagined they would. As I said, it probably would have been better to me had I not read the book. The "reveals" did not have any impact since I knew they were coming; there would have been more play to the heartstrings without the foreknowledge on my part. I will say that I felt sorrier for Hatsumomo in the movie than I did in the book, but not so with Pumpkin. It has been several years since I read the book, but as far as I can recall, it was quite faithful (though admittedly I cannot recall much beyond the major plot points). In all honesty, I was most disappointed in the score. John Williams, Yo Yo Ma, and Itzhak Perlman; what's not to love? I genuinely can't even recall the music at all. Some would say that is the mark of a great movie score, but disappointing from such talented artists. Still, all in all, worth seeing if you like purposefully slow-paced eye candy, but will not lose much on the small screen, I don't think. Not recommended for stereotypical men, as they will most likely be bored out of their skulls.

Will I Buy It? Unlikely.

13 Going on 30

In a Nutshell: Very cute film, absolutely worth seeing! Jennifer Garner is delightful. Even given its similarities to Tom Hanks' Big, it still has its own charm and its own points to make.

Quick Plot: Jenna makes a wish on her 13th birthday, and wakes up the next day "30, flirty, and thriving." She remembers nothing of the last 17 years, and looks up an old middle school pal to try and figure out what she's been up to, and where she is going in life.

In Detail: I am so glad I finally saw this movie. People kept telling me I would like it, and they were right. Very cute, very sweet, very well done. I was totally amazed by Jennifer Garner. I don't know if this film reflects her personality at all, but I *totally* believed she was looking at the world as though she were 13. Even the nuances of being a "tween" in the 80s were perfectly carried (not surprising, since I guess she was that age in that era). I was also quite charmed by Mark Ruffalo, which makes me much more interested in seeing Just Like Heaven (aka the new Reese Witherspoon movie). A somewhat chick-flick, definitely feel good flick worth watching if you ever get the chance.

Will I Buy It? Perhaps. I don't buy a lot of these types of films, as they do start to get repetitive, and I'm not in the mood to rewatch them often, but this one certainly has potential. We'll see how many times I look into the DVD case and say "I wish we had 13 Going on 30" before I decide.

Red Eye

In a Nutshell: Very good for a B-movie; not bad for a regular movie even. Worth renting, but don't rush out and see it.

Quick Plot: Lisa just wants to get home to see her dad, and she's rather anxious after her flight to Miami has been seriously delayed. After numerous run-ins with a charming stranger, she discovers she is sitting next to him on the plane. It is not a happy accident. If she does not help him to assassinate a high profile politician before they land, he will have her father killed. But what can she do about it at 30,000 feet?

In Detail: First off, let me dispel what seems to be a common misconception about this film, which stems from a combination of the television commercial and the director. Yes, it is a Wes Craven film. Yes, it is a thriller. But NO, there are not *any* supernatural elements of any kind in this movie. I knew what the film was about before I saw the trailer, so I didn't think anything of it. It was only when my brother commented on being surprised about them just being "normal" people, and then my husband commenting that it "doesn't seem like your kind of movie" that I realized that the television commercial could be misleading if you didn't know the plot, particularly when it is a Craven film. No demons, no "monsters," just your average everyday wacko. ;) Having said all of that, the film is quite tense. Not as tense as War of the Worlds, but well done none the less. I was willing to suspend disbelief until the very end, when things started getting a little out of hand. And one particular element of the ending was quite disappointing. Other than that, I'd say it's worth seeing. Rent it, maybe, or catch it on television, but worth seeing none the less. A fun, brainless, rainy afternoon type flick.

Will I Buy It? No. Worth seeing once. That's about it.

Cellular

In a Nutshell: Your typical B-movie. (Might have been better if I hadn't *just* seen the much better B-movie Red Eye.) Not great, not bad. Semi-tense, had some humor to it, but other than that, it was just kind-of there.

Quick Plot: Jessica has been kidnapped. Her captors have locked her in a room with a smashed phone. After clicking the wires together, she is connected with Ryan's cell phone. She begs for help, and tries to enlist his help to protect her family. If the connection is lost, so is any chance of rescue.

In Detail: Like I said, it was okay. Not good, not bad; just existing. Kim Basinger gives a much better performance than the material calls for, and it did let me see some of the appeal of Jason Statham (I'm certainly more interested in seeing The Transporter after seeing this film). Chris Evans' performance, on the other hand, was rather goofy. I realize this may have been what the part called for, but interestingly enough, the other parts were played too seriously for his performance to fit in. Even William H. Macy, whose character was a little silly, took his part seriously. Evans treated it like a joy ride. Either everyone should have treated it like that, or Evans should have been a little more serious. I realize it was not an incredibly serious part or film, it was just glaringly out of sync. Might have been better with a different lead, and perhaps a slightly beefed up story line, including a somewhat slower reveal.

Will I Buy It? Nope.

The Forgotten

In a Nutshell: Certainly keeps your brain on its toes, trying to figure out exactly who is involved, how, and why. A bit disappointed with the resolution, as the "why" part seems to be missing.

Quick Plot: Telly Paretta lost her son in a plane crash 14 months ago. Or so she thought, until everyone around her tells her that she imagined him. She never had a son; she's had a psychotic break. But when she meets the father of another child who was on that plane, and he does (finally) remember his own child, they must discover why everyone else has forgotten.

In Detail: Wow, I was really pumped about this movie. The whole way through, when I got a moment to breathe, all I could think was "if it can just hold on and continue to be this good, I'll be ready to buy the DVD tomorrow." (I was watching it using OnDemand cable, which is way cool, BTW.) And it did. Right up until the end. A taught, tense, emotional psychological thriller, my favorite kind! But the end just fell flat. It's not that I had a problem with the who or the how, it's that the why is never explained, not even a little bit (or if it was, I certainly missed it). Well, I take that back, they did "explain;" I just don't think "because" is a sufficient answer. :p So it was good, and it kept me engaged, and I certainly wanted to know where it was going and how it was going to get there, as well as who all was involved and who wasn't. I'm just a little let down. Worth a cheap rental or catch it on television.

Will I Buy It? No. Really wanted to for most of the film, but not now.

Hitch

In a Nutshell: I haven't laughed this hard at a comedy, certainly not a rom-com, in ages. Way funnier than it had any right to be, which is one of the best compliments I can give any comedy film.

Quick Plot: Alex Hitchens ("call me Hitch") is a date doctor. Show him a woman, pay him your fee, and give him three dates, and the woman is yours. But when he falls for someone himself, things don't go exactly according to plan.

In Detail: I really like Will Smith. Granted, I haven't seen everything he's done (haven't seen Ali, for one), but everything of his I have seen, I really like, largely due to his role in it. This movie is the perfect vehicle for him. It lets Will Smith be Will Smith, and at his best! As I said, one of the best compliments I can give any comedy film is when it ends up being not only funnier than I thought it would be, but funnier than even the premise or the situations can account for. That means that the actors themselves have made it what it is, and *that* is great comedy. I laughed out loud so many times, I was afraid I was going to wake up the child sleeping in the next room. Not only is Will Smith brilliant, but the main guy he is helping is someone I know. Not really; I don't know the actor. But he is portraying so many of the guys I went to school with (Georgia Tech, for those who don't know), guys I have seen try and fail in just these ways, that it's just priceless. I haven't laughed like that in a long time. Thanks, little brother, for renting that one for me! Definitely a must see.

Will I Buy It? Thinking about it. I need to see it again to see if it would still be funny on multiple viewings.

Addendum: Not only is it still funny, it gets funnier every time we see it. Absolutely had to buy it, and it is now one of my favorite rom-coms of all time.

Madagascar

In a Nutshell: It has its moments, but the rest of the film is rather boring.

Quick Plot: A quartet of pampered zoo animals (lion, zebra, hippo, giraffe) are off on an adventure in "the wild" and must learn to cope with their new environment, and instincts, while trying to deal with a zany group of island primates.

In Detail: I honestly don't have much to say about this film. First, let me state for the record that I don't care for Shrek. I will pause while several of you pick yourselves up off the floor. It's just not my kind of humor. I sat through virtually the entire film being disgusted, either at what was happening on screen, or at the people who found things funny that (to me) simply were not (or should not have been, IMO). Madagascar didn't have that kind of problem for me, I just didn't find its particular style of humor funny. Ah well. I should have known better, but I wanted to give it a chance. Sadly, the *vast* majority of the good stuff was in the previews, so you only smiled at it in context, instead of being caught off guard and genuinely laughing. (When *will* the studios stop putting the best stuff in the previews?! Save some for the movie.) I appreciated what it was trying to say about friendship and stuff, but I just really didn't care for the movie. And the lemurs (or whatever they are) were just annoying, as was the song. I know some people really liked that part, particularly the children, but after the first time, it just wasn't funny anymore.

Will I Buy It? No.