Hancock

In a Nutshell: Didn't like it much, but I can't really put my finger on why. Just disappointing.

Quick Plot: Hancock is a depressed drunken "superhero" who earns more ire than good will from those he helps. Then one day, he saves the life of a PR specialist (and derails an entire freight train in the process), who makes it his mission to clean up Hancock's image and change his life for the better.

In Detail: I found this movie quite frustrating. I think it is one of those that tried to be several different things, and ended up doing none of them particularly well. The premise was fine, and I found the developments in the story itself really quite interesting. It was just the execution and support for the core story that seemed to be all over the place. They needed to pick a direction and go there whole-heartedly, but they never fully committed. And only Will Smith made the movie enjoyable in some fashion. He made the character much more complex than it had to be, with many subtle shades and genuine anguish over his situation. In most other actor's hands, you wouldn't have cared for Hancock at all, but Smith makes even this very unlikable creature evoke at least a little sympathy. Too bad that wasn't enough. As I said, I can't really put my finger on exactly what I didn't like, I just didn't care for it. It was, unfortunately, much like what I expected it to be from the initial trailers. This means I must give huge props to the marketing department who managed to release a commercial for the movie that showed it to be more of a "typical Will Smith movie" and got me in the theater against my better judgment. So, kudos to their marketing department for weaseling two extra tickets from us. This will teach me to listen to my instincts from now on.

Will I Buy It? No.

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.

The Bourne Ultimatum

In a Nutshell: Not a whole lot of plot, but it more than makes up for it with excellent suspense. One of the best nail-biters I've seen in a while.

Quick Plot: Jason Bourne is tired of living on the run with no memory. He wants to know who he really is, and he wants to be left alone.

In Detail: That pretty much covers it. Not a whole lot of plot to speak of, but that's okay. I don't mind if a film doesn't have a long detailed plot as long as it does well with what it has. On this front, the film does quite well. More Joan Allen (good), more Julia Stiles (good), and adding David Strathairn (good). And they really did build the suspense from one scene to the next. They would build it up and let it down, but not quite all the way down, then build it back up again. We really enjoyed it. Just sit back and let it roll; don't think too hard.

Will I Buy It? Don't know. I don't even know if we own the first one. It was good, I'm just not sure if we'd watch it over and over (besides, my parents own it, so we could borrow it if need be).

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

In a Nutshell: Disappointing. Not terrible, just not as good as Raiders or Crusade. Perhaps on par with Doom; better in some ways and not as good in others.

Quick Plot: A Soviet KGB agent seeks an ancient crystal skull, reported to have mind control powers. Indy must stop her, both to restore his reputation and to help a kidnapped friend.

In Detail: I honestly don't know what to say about this movie. It just felt... off. It was very strange. Most of the things that critics/reviewers liked about it were the parts I didn't care for, and most of the things that they thought were done poorly were the more enjoyable/important parts for me. The opening sequence, in particular, seemed almost to be a caricature of Indiana Jones movies, as though we weren't really supposed to believe what was going on. Some of that is fine, realizing that Indy can't do what he used to do with his added years (and mileage). It also broke a cardinal rule for me with this kind of "willing suspension of disbelief" film; if you establish the rules of your world as functioning in a particular manner, then you have to stick with your own rules! (Magnetism, for those who have seen it. That's all I'll say here.) Very unusual for Spielberg. To me, the film improved in the realm of believability after this segment, at least somewhat. Despite that, no one in the film seemed to really believe what they were saying, at least not most of the time, particularly on the looped segments (looping is when dialog has to be re-recorded after the scene has been filmed, usually due to excessive background noise of some sort; think dubbing). It did have its moments, don't get me wrong. Some scenes were done very well, and I thought they did an excellent job of lending some weight and importance to Indy's activities since we last saw him. But the pieces of this movie just didn't seem to mesh as well as in previous films. To address the two other primary concerns I have heard from many people: 1) I had no problem with the CG effects in the movie, so don't worry too much about what you have seen in the previews. I was fine with what they did, generally speaking. And 2) yes, Cate Blanchett is a one-sided character, but she is meant to be, much like the high priest in Doom. Given that, she does it well. Just don't expect a deep and multi-layered performance; it was never intended that way.

Will I Buy It? Probably, but more because we feel compelled to than because we liked the movie. ::heavy sigh::

Premonition

In a Nutshell: Wow, not at all where I thought that movie was going to go. It was one of those strange movies where I thought it was quite good, but I'm not sure if I liked it.

Quick Plot: A wife and mother lives the days before and after her husband's fatal accident out of order. Can her foreknowledge of his death help her prevent it?

In Detail: This really did not turn out to be the movie I was expecting. From the previews, I thought they were going one way with it, and it didn't turn out that way at all. More like a chick-flick thriller, if you can imagine such a thing. Not in a bad way. I like chick flicks! And it certainly kept me guessing. My best friend and I went to see it while she was visiting, and about half-way through, I leaned over to her and said "my brain hurts!" She just nodded in agreement, LOL. I spent much of the movie going, "okay, but wait...." Lots going on, lots to keep track of, if you like that kind of thing. I still have one little issue that I can't quite make fit, but I'll live.

Will I Buy It? Probably not. Worth renting (we did the dollar theater, and it was definitely worth more than that) or catching on television, but don't go out of your way.

The DaVinci Code

In a Nutshell: Better than I was expecting (haven't read the book), but the reveal came *way* too early.

Quick Plot: Robert Langdon is drawn into a mystery full of symbols and danger, as a violent sect tries to destroy The Holy Grail.

In Detail: I had something here about the politics of this whole thing, but I deleted it. I'll just leave it at this: this is a work of fiction, both the film and the book. A well researched one putting forth an intriguing theory, I'll admit. Kind of like the one about men never really landing on the moon and all the footage being faked. Believe it, don't believe it, it doesn't matter. You have to decide for yourself. Okay? Now then, where were we? Ah, yes.

I found this quite an enjoyable movie. Must more a suspense film than a mystery film, which surprised me. And it stars Alfred Molina, which long-time readers of these musings know is a huge plus in my book! Ian McKellen is his usual grandiose and glorious self. I still think Tom Hanks was not the best choice for Langdon, but he managed better than I thought. You see, The DaVinci Code (which I have not read yet) is the *second* Robert Langdon novel. The first, which I have read, is Angels & Demons, and I loved it! So I was familiar with the character already. (BTW, everyone I know who has read both novels prefers A&D to Code.) He did a decent job here. The female lead was just sort-of there. Didn't love her, didn't hate her. But to be the female lead, I think she should have been a little more... engaging? Oh well. But as I said at the beginning, my biggest bone to pick with this movie is the reveal. I thought the whole thing was given away much much too early, though for once, DH didn't pick up on it. (Strange. He usually gets it before I do. He had The Sixth Sense figured out by the time Willis and Osment first met!) He did have it figured out by the end, but I felt like they had out and out *told* you much earlier than that. Took much of the tension out of the rest of the movie, but it was still a fun ride.

Will I Buy It? I don't know. Probably not, though I said that about National Treasure, I think, and ended up watching it so much on television that we now own it and watch it frequently. Guess we'll have to play wait and see on this one. I still say probably not, though.

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!)