Up

In a Nutshell: As with most recent Pixar films, I liked it a lot, but I didn't love it. Hopefully, as with most Pixar films, it will grow on me with repeat viewings. We did not see it in 3-D, so I can't speak to that aspect.

Quick Plot: As a child, Carl always wanted to be an adventurer. Now a widower, he keeps a promise to his wife to visit South America. The former balloon salesman takes his house up, up, and away, and he settles in for the ride. A knock at the door, in mid-air, reveals an unexpected passenger on his journey, a young Wilderness Explorer named Russell.

In Detail: I have been sitting on this review for 2 weeks now. We actually saw it opening day, but I still really don't know what to say about this movie. Even DH said to me as we were leaving, "I don't envy you having to write that review!" I think I am going to have a recurring problem with movies like this, though. I was so intent on watching it to see if it would be good for our son (now age 4.5) that it is hard for me to enjoy the film on its own merits. (I had the same problem with WALL-E last year.) It was a good movie, and we enjoyed it. I cried twice, so how bad could it be? It was very sweet, very touching in places, and just a feast for the eyes (as usual for Pixar). The sunlight coming through the balloons and casting colored shadows on the ground was just stunning. As far as characters go, Dug is priceless. (Squirrel!) We really did like it. But I can also tell you that we will not be taking our son. In general, I think it is fine for kids around his age, but he is *very* sensitive to animal violence. There is no blood or anything that I recall, but some dogs fighting each other and they were pretty menacing to the main characters. For my child in particular, even though it turns out okay with the dogs in the end, I think the dogs would scare him, especially in the theater on that huge screen. At home on a smaller screen and in a secure environment, I think he'll be okay, but we won't be taking him to the theater for this one. I do think that is a big reason why I am slightly disappointed with the movie, because I so wanted to take him to see it. That's not the movie's fault! It's just hard for me to separate the two. So, good movie, probably better than I think it is right now, and you should definitely see it. (No coda, BTW.)

Will I Buy It? Yes. It was good, and we love Pixar, and I'm sure it will grow on us like the others have.

Star Trek (2009)

In a Nutshell: Loved it. Accept it for what it is, and see it. May not be awesome Trek, but it is an awesome movie!

Quick Plot: Um, well, see, I really can't tell you because most anything about the plot is a spoiler. How about this: a group of seemingly familiar cadets save Starfleet from a crazed man seeking revenge. That's about the best I can offer you.

In Detail: As a summer popcorn action flick, I truly loved it. Other than one picky science bit at the end, I was totally engrossed. As a Star Trek film, I am less certain. I think almost all of the actors did a great job with at least embodying the essence of their predecessors. I will single out Karl Urban for being the most spot on with really working to capture the speech patterns and mannerisms of the late DeForest Kelley. Truly excellent! Yes, the physical resemblance of Zachary Quinto (totally love him) to Leonard Nimoy is truly uncanny (particularly in profile, wow!), but as far as making me *believe* he was Spock (as opposed to Zachary Quinto (or Sylar, though I will admit I never "saw" Sylar in his performance)), Quinto didn't always manage. Mostly, but not always. But I never for a moment doubted that Karl Urban was Bones. In the other direction, I will have to disagree with my BB friends; I did not care for the physical embodiment or the attitude of Scotty's "younger self." He just didn't seem dignified enough to be Scotty.

As for canon, I give kudos to the writers and creators for coming up with a very "trekkie" way to get around it that I feel really works within the existing Trek universe. I see it opening up innumerable possibilities for future familiar-yet-not scenarios. There were plenty of "little things" thrown in there for hard core fans as well. (Listen for the Archer reference; we missed it!) They did miss one golden opportunity to include one of the most memorable "Old Trek" lines in an appropriate place: instead of "I implied," the response should have been "I exaggerated." :-) There were two things I think should have been cut out completely, as they were totally unnecessary: the ice monsters and the water tubes. Waste of film and time, IMO. I also have some issues with Uhura in the turbolift scene, not so much with the implications of what she is doing (trying not to spoil it here), but it was just too much (too intense?) to me. I think a little less would have been better. (I can be more specific if you want to email me.) So, overall, a great summer movie! And a nice shift in the direction of Trek. I'm just afraid some of what Gene Roddenberry really wanted to demonstrate - peace and exploration in the galaxy, diplomacy, thinking through your problems instead of fighting about them - may get lost in the amped-up movie format. The most loved episodes of Trek are usually the "thinking" episodes, and I don't want that aspect of Star Trek to get lost in this new, slick, action-packed universe.

Will I Buy It? Oh yeah!

Bolt

In a Nutshell: We really enjoyed it! A little intense at the beginning, but very fun with a lot of heart. The child loved it, too.

Quick Plot: Bolt is the star of his very own television show as a dog with super powers. The problem is, he thinks it is all real. When he accidentally ends up out in the real world and on the other side of the USA, his "powers" aren't working. How will he ever get back home to his person?

In Detail: This movie was just so much fun. When we found ourselves still chuckling about more than one scene several days later, we knew we would end up buying it when it was released for home viewing. The gags are funny (it's styrofoam! LOL), the banter is hilarious (Rhino in particular), but the story doesn't get lost, and the emotion is there as well. Just really well done. That's not to say that it's not predictable, but hey, it's a Disney; that comes with the territory. I actually don't mind predictable most of the time. We took the child to see it (age 4) at the theater as well. I will say that the opening sequence is a little intense (and a little long at such intensity for very young children, IMO), so you may want to preview it for the little ones. But L was riveted, and it is now one of his most favorite films.

Will I Buy It? Already did, on Blu-ray, no less!

Enchanted

In a Nutshell: Very cute, very sweet, quite funny, perfectly cast. Definitely worth seeing.

Quick Plot: The evil queen of an animated fairy tale kingdom decides to get rid of her rival for the throne by transporting her to the real world. How does such a sweet naive girl manage in modern day New York? Remarkably well, as it turns out.

In Detail: This was such a cute movie. It takes classic Disney archetypes and shows how ridiculous they can seem when compared to reality, sometimes with hilarious results. But it also emphasizes why having those archetypes at all can be important. And it definitely shows that Disney has a sense of humor about itself! The scene with the chipmunk trying to tell the Prince what was going on had both of us just dying. BTW, for anyone trying to figure out why the Prince looks familiar but can't place him, he's Scott/Cyclops (Jean's boyfriend with the laser eyes) from X-Men. Yes really! Speaking of which, all of the casting was simply perfection. I don't think they could have done a better job with any of the parts. One extra bit of casting trivia: The receptionist at the law firm, who has to watch Giselle during Patrick Dempsey's meeting, is Jodi Benson. Think you don't know who that is? Of course you do; she's the voice of The Little Mermaid! Anyway, I really did like this movie, more than DH, that's for sure. He liked it okay; I certainly enjoyed it more than he did. Which actually brings me to my primary criticism: it is definitely a girl movie (little girls and big girls). I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just something you should be aware of. Not much in there for boys, young or old. Still, definitely worth seeing if you're a Disney fan. And huge kudos to Alan Menken (and Stephen Schwartz) for doing such amazing work, as always. You'll be humming the music for weeks. And just so everyone who has seen the movie hates me equally: "How do you know that she loves you?" Feel the calypso beat! That song is almost as bad as It's a Small World.

Will I Buy It? Not sure. As I said, not much there for boys, so I'm not sure how much we'd watch it. But do see it!

Addendum: Every once in a while, a rare film comes along that I originally said I would not buy, and I change my mind. This is one of those. The more we watch this movie, the more we fall in love with it. It is now one of our favorites, and even the child likes it. We haven't bought it yet, but I promise you, we will.

WALL-E

In a Nutshell: Very good movie. Liked it, but didn't love it.

Quick Plot: Humans have trashed the Earth, to the point that they had to leave while a group of robots tries to clean up the mess. After 700 years, WALL-E is the only one still functioning. When a probe robot named EVE appears, WALL-E falls in love with her, following her into the depths of space when she is recalled to the mother ship.

In Detail: It really is a very good movie. I see why the critics love it. It is very sweet and full of heart. It is quite funny in places, it is sad in places, and it is very pointed in places (particularly for adults). Ignoring the setting, it is so very much like a classic Disney movie, it's almost scary. Hey, there's a reason we still consider those movies classics today, and I have no doubt that *this* movie will become one of those classics that my great-great-grandchildren will watch. All of that said, I was a little disappointed in it. It just wasn't a lot of fun. Now, I'm not saying that all Pixar movies have to be fun, I was just hoping it would be a bit lighter, a little more for kids, dare I say, a little sillier. It was fine for kids, no objections to content. In fact, it was great for little kids in one respect: it is not a heavy dialog movie. It is more like a silent movie than anything, and even young kids can intuit a good bit of what is going on. But the deeper points would be totally lost on anyone younger than at least 7 or 8 years old. And if it hadn't been for the fact that they do market their films to children, I suspect the ending would have been different.

We did take the child, and he did seem to like it. It was later in the day than I would have liked, and he'd gotten up unusually early, so he was pretty tired by the time it started. He was very engaged for the first 30-45 minutes. He seemed to zone out a bit in the middle, partly due to what was going on, I think, and partly just due to being tired. He perked back up with 20-30 minutes left to go, though, and he did ask to see another movie when it was over, so I guess he enjoyed the experience. He just wasn't as excited about it as I'd hoped he'd be. We knew it wasn't the perfect movie for him we'd been waiting for, but that's okay. So far this year, Kung Fu Panda is really more what I had in mind for him. I may have to reconsider what I said last week and take him to see it. We're still considering.

Will I Buy It? Yes. I know I sound a little negative about it. It really is a very good movie! It just turned out a little different from what I wanted it to be.

Addendum: As with most Pixar movies, the more we see it, the more we like it. Even the child loves it (robots and space ships, what's not to love).

Kung Fu Panda

In a Nutshell: Great fun! We really liked it a lot.

Quick Plot: Po, the "fluffy" panda, dreams of joining the Furious Five masters of kung fu in the Jade Palace, but his father wants him to take over their noodle house. When this untrained warrior wannabe is selected as the Dragon Warrior to defend the town, no on can believe it, especially Po. Can he master this martial art and save the village?

In Detail: We really did like this movie. The opening sequence had us just rolling! Those 5 minutes alone were worth the price of admission. We will never again use the word "awesomeness" without laughing. Most of you know that "typical" Jack Black films (like Nacho Libre) are not my cup of tea, and I was concerned that Kung Fu Panda would be "too Jack Black," but it wasn't at all. I thought he was great. The animation was quite good, and the kung fu sequences were amazing! They really spent a lot of time working on them, and it showed. (For those not aware, the Furious Five are based on the five main forms of kung fu: tiger, mantis, monkey, crane, and snake.) The plot is very straight forward; nothing unexpected except maybe how the final battle resolves, which was priceless. It was also a lot more serious than I was expecting. Not in a bad way, I just expected them to try and be funny all the time, but it really had a lot of heart and quiet moments as well, which to me was a very good thing. My one main criticism is that the other voice talents were very under-used. Why go after such big names if they don't have worthwhile parts? But that is about the only thing I could find wrong with it. Oh, and do stay for all of the credits. Not only is there a coda at the end, the "background" that is going on behind the credits actually fills in some small bits of the story. Nothing major, just little tidbits that were follow-ups to some things that has been left and not picked up again. It was very neat to see and made waiting for the coda very enjoyable.

Now, for those wondering if we will be taking the child to see it, the answer is no. It is not that I object to any of the content! From that perspective, in my opinion, it is fine for children. The problem is that, at age 3.5 (can you believe it?!), my child doesn't have the judgment not to "hi-ya" everything in sight, and I *know* that is what would happen. He would want to imitate what he saw on the screen, and I think he just needs to be a little older so that he doesn't hurt himself (or us, or the furniture, or the cats, or....). Give it a year or two, and it will be a great movie for him.

Will I Buy It? Yes! We'd buy it just for us, even if we didn't have a child.

Iron Man

In a Nutshell: Loved it. If you like action movies, comic book adaptations, or Robert Downey, Jr. at all, you should definitely see it.

Quick Plot: Tony Stark is the world's leading weapon manufacturer. When he is kidnapped by insurgents and ordered to build them a weapon of awesome power, he instead builds a suit to help him escape and decides to fight evil.

In Detail: Not sure how much detail to give. I certainly don't want to spoil any of the fun bits! I will tell you that my husband grew up reading Iron Man comics and is quite a fan, and I have never read a comic in my life, and we both really enjoyed this movie. You all know that I like brainless action films anyway, and this is by far one of the best movies we have seen in the last 2-3 years. It even had a little bit of brain to it. The effects were good, the banter was wonderful (how could it not be with Robert Downey, Jr.?), there were serious moments and hilarious ones, the film was paced very well, it never felt too long... I could go on and on. Even my parents liked it! Just extremely well done. Definitely looking forward to the next one. Oh yes, there will be a next one. Don't believe me? Be sure you stay for all of the credits; there's a coda at the end.

Will I Buy It? Definitely!

The Pixar Story

In a Nutshell: Excellent Pixar documentary. If you are a Pixar fan at all, you should see it.

Quick Plot: The story of how Pixar came to be. This is not about their technical achievements or software design, but about the people who make Pixar the company we love.

In Detail: Just excellent. I cannot say enough good things about this documentary. I have been a fan of Pixar since *before* Toy Story. We saw most of Pixar's shorts on VHS in high school (1993 or 1994) because one of my teachers knew someone who knew someone at Berkley, if I recall the story correctly. Then came Toy Story, truly one of the most amazing things I ever saw at the theater, both in terms of technical achievement and in terms of pure story. Pixar does amazing things, but what makes the company continue to be amazing is its people. Those people are at the heart of this documentary. See them in their natural habitat, see them when they were young and naive, see them as they are today. And never cease to be amazed at what they have achieved, and what they have overcome to achieve it. (A little bit of trivia for you: the writer and director of this documentary, Leslie Iwerks, is the granddaughter of an old friend of Walt Disney and the first ever Disney employee, after Walt himself. His name is Ub Iwerks. Amazing man; you should do some research on him if you are a Disney or animation buff.)

Will I Buy It? I'm seriously thinking I will. To put that into perspective, I only own two other documentaries, both of them about Titanic.

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

In a Nutshell: Disappointing. I am very unhappy with this film overall. If I could have Pirates 1 and 2, and just forget 3, I would (but that would make the end of Pirates 2 rather bothersome, no?).

Quick Plot: Too much plot for its own good! One of my many complaints. Will looks to free his father from Davy Jones. Will and Elizabeth can't quite get it together. The crew tries to retrieve Jack Sparrow (excuse me, *Captain* Sparrow) from Davy Jones' Locker with the help of a Chinese map and an old friend. And Beckett seeks to destroy all the pirate brethren and bring order to the high seas. And I left out a ton of sub-plots. See, too much!

In Detail: There really isn't much detail I can give without spoiling a whole bunch of the movie. Truly not much I feel I can share. I am just very unhappy with this movie overall. The best part of the whole film should not be a glorified cameo. It was too long and too hard to keep track of who was doing what where and when. There was too much that I feel was brought in out of the blue that should have at least been somewhat incorporated or hinted at in 2; there were a lot of "where the heck did that come from?" moments for me. And there were way too many things that were meaningless. Things they made a big deal out of that turned out to be nothing (or were ultimately ignored), and my largest irritant: meaningless death(s). You want to kill that person(s), fine, but they deserve better than the death(s) they got. It was like the writers painted themselves into a corner, and instead of working out something smart and surprising, they just said "okay, we're done with you, off with your head" (figuratively speaking, of course). And the big moment near the end totally irritated me, but not for the reason you think (has nothing to do with wanting the obvious, it is the lack of choice; was that vague enough, or so vague it made no sense?).

But I will say this for both the movie and the franchise. I've talked about it before, but I have to say it again. It is rare that I see a film that causes me to sit stunned in the theater with my mouth hanging open in shock. In the POTC franchise, that has happened to me not once, not twice, but THREE times!! Once per film, in fact. Now *that* is saying something. Not sure what it's saying exactly, but given that it is a rare occurrence, for the filmmakers to make me do that three times in three movies, that's impressive.

For those who want my spoiler-iffic list of grievances (it's long, I warn you, even by my standards), please feel free to email me, and I'll send it out to you. Please note that it is not in "official" musing form. It is really just a long rambling email to my best bud and my brother, so it isn't necessarily logical and coherent. Anyway, if you're interested, I'll send it to you. But only if you ask, and please, I beg you, only if you have already seen the movie. Oh, and if you missed the coda at the end after the credits (did you know each of the three Pirates films has one?), I hear it is up on YouTube. Just FYI, since I know at least one person who missed it (hi, Kelli!).

Will I Buy It? I don't know. I'll have to see it again to decide. I can't imagine that we won't, just to have "the end" of Pirates 2, I guess. But on it's own merits, were it not part of a trilogy or if the other two could stand alone? No, I wouldn't buy it. (Yes, folks, it irritated me that much!)

Spider-Man 3

In a Nutshell: Quite good, definitely worth seeing. I liked it better than DH, who read the comics growing up. To him, Spidey 2 is far superior; I thought this one was only slightly less good.

Quick Plot: Peter is riding high on the public's love for Spider-Man, but his fame attracts unwanted attention from not one, but three villains, while simultaneously alienating the people he loves most.

In Detail: As I said, quite a good movie. Though packed with action, it was lacking in some originality that the first two had. They also moved a little more away from the "rules" they set for themselves in the first two films. I'm all good with willing suspension of disbelief, as long as you follow the rules that you lay down, and that was missing some here. Spider-Man is not invincible. He smashes into a wall, he's going to hurt and bleed and break something, not walk away with barely a scratch (no matter which suit he's wearing). And what happened to spider-sense? That seemed to be missing (yes, I know about Venom not triggering it in the comics, but Peter seemed not to have it at all in this film no matter who he is fighting).

I did like that the story was more personal, less about an outside foe and more about things happening close to home and heart. But I think they were trying too hard with Sandman. I actually could have done without that whole storyline. Given that the movie did have three villains, I think they juggled all of the various story lines admirably well. But in the end, it was just too much to handle. Just cut one (or two) and make another movie! I did love some other aspects of the movie, such as them finally getting to have some fun with each other on screen. It did add some unnecessary length to the film, but it was hilarious! There was another thing that I thought was excellent that I wish they had done more of, but I can't tell you because it would ruin a plot point. If you've seen it and you're dying to know, email me and I'll tell you. And I have to give credit to Topher Grace. This was not his usual role, and he clearly relished it!

As you may recall from my review of Spider-Man 2, I loved each of the piece-parts of the movie (villain, Peter and Harry, Peter and MJ, etc), but I thought the whole didn't quite work together as well as it should have. For Spider-Man 3, unlike most of the critics, I felt that the pieces worked and flowed much better here, though each of those pieces was generally not as good as Spider-Man 2. Weird, I know. It doesn't make sense to me either, but that's how it stands IMO. Definitely see it, though! Oh, and there's no coda at the end, so no reason to sit through all of the credits if you don't want.

Will I Buy It? Most likely, unless DH truly objects.

Chicken Little

In a Nutshell: Cute little movie, though it was a bit light on plot. Not nearly as bad as the critics lead me to believe. This is the first Disney movie I ever missed seeing in the theaters, and now I'm a bit sorry I did. Far from great, but also far from terrible.

Quick Plot: After an embarrassing incident claiming the sky was falling, Chicken Little is working to repair the damage to his reputation and his relationship with his father. Just as he begins to make headway winning respect and affection, history repeats itself as a piece of the sky falls into his life.

In Detail: I was looking for something very light to watch one evening last week, and this definitely fit the bill. In fact, it was almost too light. It was as though they stretched each scene by 10-20% to make a full length feature. Some song filler is fine, but it does not make a whole film. The stuff they had was good stuff! I just wish they had expanded on it a bit. There were also some great zingers in there just for the adults that will be lost on the kidos. The beginning of the film is the best part, especially for those folks readily familiar with the full body of Disney feature animation. Too funny! I bet it was amazing in 3-D! (My brother says it was.) Worth seeing or renting, especially for children.

Will I Buy It? Don't know. In our pre-child days, I don't think I would have bought it just for DH and me. I might let my son see it on TV to see if he likes it before deciding. Goodness knows, we could use some new films for him to watch over and over (and over and over and....).

Addendum: We did finally buy this movie, and at least for age 3-4, it is one of our son's favorite movies! It has grown on us a lot, too.

Music & Lyrics

In a Nutshell: Very very sweet, and really quite funny. If you're an 80s music fan, you will enjoy it even more!

Quick Plot: A former hit 80s band member is asked by the hottest pop star in the world to write a new song, and she wants it in just a few days. There's just one problem: he doesn't "do" lyrics. But he accidentally discovers that his plant care girl does.

In Detail: We really really liked this movie, probably more than it deserves. When we saw the previews last month, we were just dying laughing and absolutely had to see it. It is a romantic comedy, and proud of the fact, done with style and class. It wasn't fall-in-the-floor funny as we thought it might be. It was a bit more subtle than that. And there wasn't any stupid or gross-out humor, which was very nice. And you have to pay attention to what is being said. Hugh Grant has some great zingers said in typical British-mumble fashion towards the very end of some scenes, but if you aren't listening, you'll miss it. (Like the girl sitting in front of us who was constantly leaning over to her significant other and asking "what did he say?" Drove me nuts!) The best part, though, was the music. The movie is plenty enjoyable on its own, but 80s music fans will be especially tickled with the music. It is such a fabulous homage to that era, very well done. And possibly the best compliment of all: DH and I both have been singing one of the songs constantly since we saw it! "I said I wasn't gonna lose my head, but then POP! goes my heart...." Oh, one more thing. VH1 fans should most definitely stay for the credits! They do a Pop-Up Video version of the video that is shown at the beginning of the film. Now THAT was fall in the floor funny! The stuff shown after the video is interesting, but not really important, so you don't have to stay. But the Pop-Up video thing is great and absolutely worth waiting for.

Will I Buy It? I don't know. I would say yes, there is a serious chance that we might. But I can tell you we will definitely be buying the soundtrack!

Stranger Than Fiction

In a Nutshell: I quite liked this movie! Funny, but not really a comedy. Very sweet and touching.

Quick Plot: As a writer struggles to finish her first new book in years, a man begins to hear his life narrated. He is the person she is writing. So which of them is in control of his destiny?

In Detail: As I said, I liked this movie quite a bit, probably more than it really deserves. I love Emma Thompson, who is her usual slightly off-center self here. Dustin Hoffman practically steals the film. And Will Farrell genuinely surprised me. He was very sincere and understated, and even very funny, but not in the usual Will Farrell way that I despise. The film is a bit uneven in both pacing and tone, but overall, it works. Definitely worth a rental!

Will I Buy It? Not sure. I'll need to see it again to know if it is worth multiple repeat viewings.

Addendum: We did indeed see this movie again, and it has quickly become one of our favorites, so we bought it.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

In a Nutshell: Not as good as the first, but could it ever have been? Too long, generally speaking, but still a rousing good time!

Quick Plot: Will and Elizabeth are arrested for helping *Captain* Jack Sparrow escape from prison. To win their freedom, Will must strike a deal with the East India Trading Company to acquire Jack's infamous compass, or they will both be hanged.

In Detail: Okay, so the plot description leaves a lot to be desired, but there is a ton of stuff in this movie! Almost too much, I'd say, especially when we waste so much time on cannibals. I understand the purpose of that whole sideline was to allow Will to catch up to Jack, but come on! You could have cut 15 minutes right there, easy. That was really my biggest complaint about the film. It wasn't quite as "smart" as the first one, and it sometimes felt a bit disjointed (see remark about being too much stuff in one film). The absolute best scene in the film is when they are on the island with the chest. Between the three men with swords, and the two swords for two pirates and a lady, it is absolutely fantastic and comes closest to capturing the magic of the first film. And for anyone who left the theater before literally the last 15 seconds of the movie finished rolling, you deserved what you got. There is something to be said for a film franchise that has left me open-mouthed twice in two films! I just psyched myself out. I know who is one of the stars of the next film, so I assumed he would be it, so I was stunned about who it really was even though I really should have known. The second film is often the weakest of a trilogy (with some notable exceptions), and I hope that is the case here. Looking forward to being "At World's End" this summer!

Will I Buy It? Already did!

Casino Royale

In a Nutshell: I have issues with some Bond particulars, but on the whole, a quite acceptable addition to the franchise. And surprise, surprise: I see Mr. Craig's potential, that's for sure. Give him a "real" James Bond film (this was not it), and he will make a very good 007 indeed.

Quick Plot: Bond's first adventure as Bond. There is really nothing else of importance.

In Detail: Hmmm.... what to say here. I will say that it is a movie worth seeing. Whether or not on the big screen is up to you and your status as a Bond fan (though if you are a true Bond fan, you've already seen it, haven't you?). And it was not as bad as I expected it to be. On the contrary, it is quite a good spy/action film. What it is NOT is a James Bond film. I agree with whichever reviewer I read who said it feels more like The Bourne Identity than a James Bond. Don't get me wrong, I liked The Bourne Identity. But it is not James Bond. Casino Royale had its moments where it "felt right," but they were few and far between. I understand that there were to be differences, seeing as this was supposed to be his first case (don't get me started on how they made that work (or didn't, as the case may be)). It wasn't the gadgets or lack there of, it wasn't the girl (generally speaking, I liked her as a Bond girl), it wasn't anything specific. It just felt "off" somehow. The surprise in all of this was Daniel Craig. Much to my surprise, he has the potential to become an excellent James Bond. I just hope they give him a better film next time.

Will I Buy It? Yes, but only because I'm a lifetime Bond fan.

Cars

In a Nutshell: By general animation standards, it is a very good movie with some stunning visuals. By Pixar standards, it is a little bit of a disappointment.

Quick Plot: Lightening McQueen, hotshot rookie of the racing scene, gets lost on his way to the final race, meeting a group of misfit small town cars who challenge his perceptions.

In Detail: I think, had this been the first Pixar film, everyone would be completely raving about it. Following such a phenomenal string of Pixar films, though, it would have been exceedingly difficult for this one to live up, and it just doesn't quite manage. (I am also tainted because I think The Incredibles is one of the best movies ever made, so that was not in Cars' favor.) I think it has some pacing issues, definitely too long and slow for little children. I think the story is just too ordinary for a Pixar film. I mean, I know we in America like our predictable films, but that is one of the things that made Pixar great: fresh and original versions of the predictable. But my biggest disappointment: I didn't really laugh out loud. A few chuckles, sure, but not the belly laughs I am accustomed to. I will say that I think people who are into cars and racing will probably get more out of it than I did. I have no doubts there are some references that I missed. Still good, still worth seeing in the theaters. Just not quite up to their usual standards.

Will I Buy It? Yes. It is still some of the best film making out there today, and still great for kids.

X-Men: The Last Stand

In a Nutshell: Quite good, with a few surprises even, but not up to the supremely high standards set by the first two.

Quick Plot: Once again, humanity has attracted the ire of Magneto, this time over the development over a "cure for mutation."

In Detail: Hmm... what to say of this film. It is good, and it is worth seeing. I think it was a little light on plot, but it was still handled very well. I am a bit irritated with how a couple of other things were handled, but nothing I can expound on here. Email me if you've seen it and you want to know. Had this been the first in the series, people would be raving about how wonderful it is. But with the bar set so very high by the first two, it was simply too much to live up to. And one more thing: WATCH TO THE BITTER END OF THE CREDITS!!! It will knock your socks off.

Will I Buy It? Most likely.

Holiday Inn

In a Nutshell: Cute premise that unfolds in a very standard fashion, typical of 40s rom-coms. Still, it's Bing Crosby and Fred Astaire; how bad can it be?

Quick Plot: A singer separates from his dancing partner to open a country inn that is only open on holidays, with themed shows for each one.

In Detail: An enjoyable 40s musical rom-com, interesting in the premise department, but rather boring in execution. There are some interesting historical aspects to it, though, like Roosevelt's attempt to change the date for Thanksgiving, or Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's Birthday being separate holidays (i.e. no President's Day). Also, the war footage shown during the Independence Day number was from World War I, with biplanes and everything! The film was only made in 1942, so there probably wasn't much WWII footage to go around yet, certainly not in Hollywood. And if you do get a chance to see it, keep this in mind while watching the drunk dance: legend has it that Astaire had two drinks of bourbon before the first take, and one drink of bourbon before each additional take. The 7th and final take was the one used. Method dancing, anyone? LOL A good one if you like these kinds of movies, but not the best example of the genre I've seen.

Will I Buy It? Unlikely.

Addendum: The more I see this one (it has started popping up on our movie channels), the more I like it. If I can find it for a good price on DVD, I'll probably get it.

An Ideal Husband

In a Nutshell: Excellent! Totally my kind of movie. Charm, wit, twist and turns, beautiful people saying wonderful words, and with delightful British accents to boot. What more can you ask for?

Quick Plot: A conniving woman bent on increasing her own wealth uses cunning and blackmail to convince a former acquaintance to push a detrimental building plan through Parliament, wreaking much havoc on his reputation and his marriage.

In Detail: I do believe that this is the first Oscar Wilde production I have ever seen, and if they are all this good, then it will certainly not be the last. Superb casting, exceptional delivery, and stunningly beautiful to behold, this is simply my kind of movie. They just don't write banter like this anymore. I am out of compliments to give to the cast. Let's just say they were all amazing and leave it at that. I will provide you with their names, though, in case you have forgotten who is in it (it *has* been quite a while since this film was out): Julianne Moore, Jeremy Northam, Cate Blanchett, Minnie Driver, and Rupert Everett. Not to stereotype, but this is very much a Victorian chick flick, and I'm not sure how much a "traditional" male would appreciate it. But if you like snappy and fun dialog driven period films, this one is a definite must! It is quite a slow movie, but that is in no way a bad thing! It gives you time to digest the performances and all of the glorious words being used. This is not a movie to watch with lots of background noise; you have to *listen* or you'll miss most of the good stuff. And it is so worth it!

Will I Buy It? Yes! Though it is on the "to buy when we have the money" list, not the "rush out and buy it immediately" list.

Serenity

In a Nutshell: Great fun! Especially for the sci-fi or action genre fans. Definitely makes me want see Firefly (the canceled TV series the film is based on).

Quick Plot: The crew of Serenity take on a fugitive passenger with surprising capabilities, and her nameless pursuer will stop at nothing to get her back.

In Detail: First, allow me to state that I have never seen a single episode of Firefly, the television show on which this film is based, so I was not sure if I would understand much of what was going on. We followed along just fine. I do think there were parts where I was missing something, and I'm sure there was much subtexting and many subtleties that went right over my head, but overall, it was a very enjoyable ride. This is going to sound ridiculous at first, but I hope you will understand what I mean: it really is more of an action film set in space than a "sci-fi film" per se. And quite a good action flick at that; just turn off your brain and let it ride. The characters are interesting, the dialog is snappy if a little (intentionally) odd in cadence (though many of the best lines were used in the previews; I hate that!), and the fight sequences are exceptionally well filmed, edited, and choreographed (I genuinely believed she was kicking their butts!). You may recall that I was highly critical of the way the fight sequences in Batman Begins were shot. Had it been done this way, it would have rocked the house! Seriously, all action films should take notes from how these fights were done. A few of the plot points had the feel of being a checklist of things that needed to be addressed after the series was abruptly canceled, but as someone who appreciates when film makers pay homage to the source television material, I have no problem with that, and most of it did end up being relevant to the story presented in the film. Truly the best compliment I can give this movie is that it makes me really want to see the television show.

Will I Buy It? I'm thinking about it. I'd like to see it again to decide if it is something we'd watch over and over. It is definitely our kind of film, and if we ever see Firefly, we might be more inclined. It is currently on the "maybe" list.

Addendum: We have since seen the series, Firefly, and it is one of our all time favorite series ever. We watch the whole series (14 episodes) 1-2 times a year, we love it so much. So yes, we bought the movie, though it is much harder to watch now.