Determined To Succeed

“The Book of Eli” & “Legion” – Three Buckets of Popcorn out of Four for “The Book of Eli” and Two-and-three-quarters Buckets of Popcorn out of Four for “Legion”

Writing these reviews was tough. I saw both of these movies on the same day without even thinking both were primarily about the same thing – the salvation of humanity through faith (or at least some aspect of faith). The reason writing this review was tough is because I can’t really write separate reviews. Well, OK. I could write separate reviews but both are so similar in message that I feel compelled to join them both into one.

Let’s start with the plots of each:

In “Legion,” an out-of-the-way diner in Paradise Falls (get it?) becomes the unlikely battleground for the survival of the human race. When God loses faith in humankind, he sends his legion of angels to bring on the Apocalypse. Humanity’s only hope lies in a group of strangers trapped in a desert diner with the Archangel Michael (Paul Bettany) as their only protection.

In “The Book of Eli,” Eli (Denzel Washington) has been on a journey for 30 years, walking west across America after a cataclysmic war that turned the earth into a total wasteland. The world has become a lawless civilization where people must kill or be killed. The barren roads belong to gangs of cutthroats who rob and kill for water, a pair of shoes, a lighter, or just for fun. Eli is a peaceful man who only acts in self defense, and becomes a warrior with unbelievable killing skills when he is challenged. After the war and the “Big Flash”, Eli was guided by a higher power to a hidden book and given the task of protecting the book and taking it to its final destination. Eli guards the book with his life, because he knows that the book is the only hope that humanity has for its future.

Separately, I liked “Eli” more than I liked “Legion.” I thought it had better action and wasn’t as silly as “Legion.” “Legion,” while having some cool special effects (like an ass-kicking, fanged grandma who’d just as soon kill ya and eat ya as to look at ya, and angels’ wings used as both flying mechanisms and shields against bullets) was silly at times, had big, gaping logic holes and acting so bad at times it was laughable. Kind of like 80s movies but with a higher budget and better cast. Eli had seemingly big holes, too. That is until the very end when the secret of the movie is revealed and all makes sense very much like “The Sixth Sense.” What prevents me from liking “Eli” more was its blatant stealing of “I am Legend,” “Mad Max” and “Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.” Even the bad guy (played by Gary Oldman) who runs the only decent human town left reminded me too much of the fantastic Tina Turner in “Thunderdome.”

What struck me most about both films is the subtext of humanity, its need to be saved and us always looking to something to save us. In “Legion,” God, Himself, has lost faith in humankind and He and the survivors in the diner NEED a baby to be born (presumably the Christ child reborn) as proof mankind can be saved. In “The Book of Eli,” salvation is an actual book carried and protected by Eli. Further, Gary Oldman’s bad guy will stop at nothing to have it because of the power it will have over those looking for salvation, strength and hope in post-apocalyptic times. “Eli” also had some cool subtextual things to say about televangelists and their use of their respective pulpits to gain false power over people – people who seemingly need it the most.

Is humanity that far gone? On some days I would say yes. I mean how can televangelist Pat Robertson dare say that the tragedies of Haiti and Hurricane Katrina were brought on by the people themselves? Bastard. How can there be suicide bombers in the Middle East, people shooting up former places of employment and Osama bin Laden (bigger bastard) if the world weren’t in need of saving? I wish I knew. But I also know that people have been, are and can be not just good but great and that that greatness comes from their hearts, minds and souls.

As entertainments, both movies are pretty cool. I would readily watch “Legion” at night on cable (unlike the abysmal “Daybreakers” which should have all its prints destroyed) and I’d watch “The Book of Eli” anytime. It’s good. Not great, but good.

As for humanity, I really do hope I see in my lifetime such a great good I can go to my final resting place knowing the world will be OK. Even though close to $500 million has been donated to Haiti I want to see it finally get to its people. I want to see Port-au-Prince and New Orleans and the 9^th Ward rebuilt stronger than ever. I also want to see the world’s poor peoples have fresh water, fresh foods and a chance at real life and not just survival. I want to see hatred go away, at least a part of it. And I want to see people unite not just because of a tragedy like Hurricane Katrina or Haiti but because we WANT to.

That is the faith people need in and of themselves. That is of what both movies speak. That is the truest hope for all humankind and that is the strength we will need to prove to God in “Legion,” to prove to Oldman’s character in “Eli” and to the rest of people out there who have lost their faith.

We have it. It’s just waiting for us to finally use it not because we have to but because we finally WANT to.

“Legion” – Rated R for strong bloody violence, and language.

Runtime: 100 min

Paul Bettany     …         Michael

Lucas Black      …         Jeep Hanson

Tyrese Gibson   …         Kyle Williams

Adrianne Palicki            …         Charlie

Charles S. Dutton          …         Percy Walker

Kevin Durand   …         Gabriel

Jon Tenney       …         Howard Anderson

Willa Holland    …         Audrey Anderson

Kate Walsh       …         Sandra Anderson

Dennis Quaid    …         Bob Hanson

“The Book of Eli” – Rated R for some brutal violence and language

Runtime: 118 min

Denzel Washington        …         Eli

Gary Oldman    …         Carnegie

Mila Kunis        …         Solara

Ray Stevenson  …         Redridge

Jennifer Beals   …         Claudia

Evan Jones       …         Martz

Joe Pingue        …         Hoyt

Frances de la Tour        …         Martha

Michael Gambon           …         George

Tom Waits        …         Engineer

Run For Your Life From “Daybreakers” – ½ Bucket of Popcorn out of Four

Oh man. I am shaking my head right now trying to figure out how to sink my teeth into this review of “Daybreakers.” I always jump at the chance to see vampire flicks but after seeing this one I ran from the theater like a bat out of hell.

In the year 2019, a plague has transformed almost every human into vampires with the remainders on the run from companies who harvest their blood to sell to the population.. Faced with a dwindling blood supply (you can only drain humans so much, after all), the fractured dominant race plots their very survival as those who go “blood deprived” start to devolve and attack their own mutating into horrible creatures known as “subsiders.”  Meanwhile, a researcher (played by Ethan Hawke – what the hell happened to him!) works with a covert band of vamps and humans to find a way to save human and vampire kind.

Where do I begin with this mess of a movie? I’d thought this movie would have some bite to it. I mean it’s got a decent cast (Dafoe, Hawke and Neill) and I totally eat up vampire flicks (except for the insipid tween-age “Twilight” movie series that is) but what in God’s name were they thinking with this script? This movie is the worst I’ve seen in a long time. Did the filmmakers think we’d all be drunk or something seeing this boring, vapid vampire flick? “How much better on paper this must have looked and sounded” is what I’m thinking. How else could they get those guys in the same movie that steals blatently from good movies like “The Matrix,” “I Am Legend,” “Zombieland” and more.

You really wanna know how bad this movie was? I almost walked out, and I never do that. Ever. There are two reasons I am giving it ½ star (or ¼ star per reason). 1) because of the “cure” they find. It worked enough for me when almost nothing else did. 2) because it is not the worst movie I’ve ever seen, or even saw last year. That honor goes to a very little known flick I purchased on DVD called “Immortal” – a part bad CGI, part live action all craptastic movie featuring the Egyptian god Horus, a Blade Runner rip-off society and Charlotte Rampling. It was a zero-bucket-of-popcorn flick.

As for “Daybreakers,” run back to your coffins and hide from this one. Even when it starts showing up for free on cable. I felt drained after watching this waste of an hour-and-a-half of my life.

And to the filmmakers – “fangs for nuthin’” guys. Your movie – wait for it – sucks.

Rated R for strong bloody violence, language and brief nudity

Runtime: 98 min

Ethan Hawke    …         Edward Dalton

Sam Neill          …         Charles Bromley

Willem Dafoe    …         Lionel ‘Elvis’ Cormac

Claudia Karvan …        Audrey Bennett

It’s Not Complicated to Like “It’s Complicated” – Three Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

Have you ever wandered through an art gallery and wondered why beautiful works of art can sometimes have such generic and silly names. Like “fruit in bowl,” or something like that. Well, the same is true in Hollywood when it comes time to name their “works of art,” the movies.

I want the job at studios to come up with these generic, middle-of-the-road but resonant titles for films. Take for example the ones that pop immediately into my brain:

“Something’s Gotta Give”

“As Good As It Gets”

“Anywhere But Here”

“Nobody’s Fool”

“Where The Heart Is”

All of these are examples of titles ripped from the headlines of life, clichés and catch phrases we use around the water-cooler. Hence why they are called upon to be movie titles. Easy recognition of the basic plot (or feel) of the film.

Now we have “It’s Complicated,” a film that is way better than its title-us genericus.

During her son’s college graduation, Jane (Meryl Streep) hooks up with her ex-husband, Jake (the hilarious Alec Baldwin), who’s married to a younger, yet higher-maintenance woman (Lake Bell). During the process of being her ex’s mistress Jane also finds herself attracted to her architect, Adam (Steve Martin).

Movies like this are so easy. You know what you’re getting as soon as you see the previews. Hell, even the poster alludes to the hilarity that ensues during Streep’s relationship with Baldwin (who is sure to be Oscar-nominated for Best Supporting Actor in this role). But any film that knows what it is and doesn’t try to be more is OK in my book, no matter what genre it rests. This movie is no exception. Light-hearted romantic comedy – check. Likeable, attractive stars – check. Obligatory set-ups for hilarious situations – check. Mid-point conflict – check. Resolution – check.

See, no surprises. The charm of this film lies in its cast. Streep is so easy to like and she is radiant in the role of Jane. Baldwin is awesome and Jake and Steve Martin in this film reminds me why I like him as a performer. He has a great ability to be way over the top or as low key/forgettable as he needs to be – a sign of a good actor. And he is very charming as a divorced man getting his dating legs back with Jane. But the one who almost steals the movie is “The Office’s” John Krasinski as Streep’s son-in-law. His delivery of lines and looks given the actions around him is priceless.

Is this film high art? No. It’s cheesy Hollywood-y “rom-com” but it’s actually worth the price of admission, especially for a light break on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon.

And like I said sometimes bland titles lead to some pretty enjoyable works of art.

Rated R for some drug content and sexuality

Runtime: 120 min

Meryl Streep     …         Jane

Steve Martin     …         Adam

Alec Baldwin    …         Jake

John Krasinski   …         Harley

Lake Bell          …         Agness

Mary Kay Place            …         Joanne

Rita Wilson       …         Trisha

Definitely Get On Board and See “Up In The Air” – Four Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

Live long enough in this crazy world and you might get let go from a job. I know it sounds harsh, especially in this economy, but it is, unfortunately, a reality. One yours truly has lived through twice now (and as recently as August 2009). And no matter whether you are let go, fired, laid off, downsized, terminated (insert your language of choice here), there’s nothing that takes away its initial sting even if at the end of it all you feel “vocationally liberated” as I did (a weird mixture, indeed).

But as I sat and watched George Clooney tell people their services are no longer needed I felt that weird mixture again because “Up In The Air,” one of the best movies of 2009, does such a great job of using someone with no personal connections whatsoever, not even to his own family, .to give a “human dignity” to job loss.

Clooney plays Ryan Bingham whose job is to fire people from theirs. His home is in the hotels in which he stays, in the airports in which he gets his free sushi and drinks and in the planes in which he travels. He’s truly portable, living out of a suitcase and loving every second of it. His boss hires arrogant young Natalie (Anna Kendrick, a shoe-in for Best Supporting Actress) whose developed a method of video conferencing that will allow termination without ever leaving the office, essentially threatening the existence Ryan so cherishes. Determined to show the naive girl the error of her logic, Ryan takes her on one of his cross country firing expeditions, but as she starts to realize the disheartening realities of her profession, he begins to see the downfalls to his way of life just after he’s met the frequent-traveler woman of his dreams (Vera Farmiga).

I cannot say enough about this movie. The performances are stellar, especially by the three leads. George Clooney is always likable on-screen even when he plays a bad guy (“From Dusk ‘til Dawn”), and it is that charm he emanates that makes you root for him so. You want him to be happy, and after he meets Farmiga’s Alex you really want him to give up his lonely life and settle in a place he can truly call home. You also want Kendrick’s Natalie to fail in her video conferencing. Not because she’s unintelligent but because it (all puns intended) flies in the face of Clooney’s lifestyle. Plus, Natalie represents so many self-entitled young assistants out there these days who think an e-mail, text message or video conference replace actual human contact – a handshake, face-to-face meeting. Hell, even a phone call. That their way is better and more efficient when all it does is further the disconnect between us humans even in situations involving termination.

One of the things I loved most about this movie is the absolute chemistry between Very Farmiga and George Clooney, who could very well make more movies together and I’d go see ‘em. They are cute, sexy, romantic, and just as busy as the other in this film – perfect for each other with glitches that you’ll have to see the film to understand.

I can’t say as I’ve seen many perfect movies in 2009 but this is one of them. The irony is ultimately “Up In The Air” will be an in-flight movie, catering to those who sacrifice their time away from their own homes, beds and loved ones in pursuit of work excellence. I am curious as to what they think of this movie. I’m sure it hits very close to home for them. Traveling these days is far from easy, particularly with even tighter restrictions on security and air travel. How people can do that for so long – my heart goes out to them. It can be lonely indeed, no matter how much per diem a company gives for hotel dinners or how many miles you get to keep. This movie makes you feel that if you didn’t already.

And Clooney’s Bingham may achieve millions upon millions of miles of air travel but in the end it only leads him nowhere where his only family is whoever happens to be sitting next to him on his next flight to God knows where…

Rated R for language and some sexual content

Runtime: 109 min

George Clooney…Ryan Bingham

Vera Farmiga…Alex Goran

Anna Kendrick…Natalie Keener

Jason Bateman…Craig Gregory

Amy Morton…Kara Bingham

Melanie Lynskey…Julie Bingham

J.K. Simmons…Bob

Sam Elliott…Maynard Finch

Danny McBride            …Jim Miller

Zach Galifianakis…Steve

Like the Poem “Invictus” is Inspiring

Three-and-a-Half Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

What inspires us all towards success? What would inspire you? And, more to the point, what would inspire you to win despite all the odds stacked against you?

The answers are different for all of us and are different depending on the aspect of life to which they’re applied. But winning no matter how hard the challenge is a universal theme in which we can all share and admire.

This is the theme of Clint Eastwood’s latest film, “Invictus.” The film tells the true story of how Nelson Mandela joined forces with the captain of South Africa’s rugby team to help unite their country. Newly elected President Mandela knows his nation remains racially and economically divided in the wake of apartheid. Believing he can bring his people together through the universal language of sport, Mandela rallies South Africa’s rugby team as they make their historic run to the 1995 Rugby World Cup Championship match.

I have seen many uplifting sports films in my day (“Rocky,” “The Rookie,” “Miracle,” the list goes on) and this does fit into that genre. But what makes this film so great is the performance given by Morgan Freeman, an actor of such stature and excellence he really makes you believe he IS Mandela. His movements, speech and mannerisms – everything. He deserves a Best Actor nod from the Academy for this performance.  It is, in a word, great.

Clint Eastwood is a brilliant director. That much is certain. But I love that he loves Freeman. The two just fit. They seem to understand each other and, therefore, give that back to the audience with films and characters that are amazing to watch and hard to forget.

I do not know if you are familiar with the story of Mandela and the South Africa rugby team but in reality President Mandela gave South African national rugby team captain Francois Pienaar an extract from Theodore Roosevelt’s “The Man in the Arena” speech from 1910 before the start of the Rugby World Cup. The name of the movie “Invictus” comes from the poem Mandela carried with him inside his jail cell under apartheid to help him get through, and Freeman gives it to Matt Damon (as team captain Pienaar) for inspiration.

Below is the poem in its entirety. See if these words written by English poet William Ernest Henley don’t inspire your heart to win the same way it led a man and his nation to the freedom his soul knew was coming…inevitable and strong.

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

Morgan Freeman…Nelson Mandela

Matt Damon… Francois Pienaar

Tony Kgoroge…Jason Tshabalala

Patrick Mofokeng…Linga Moonsamy

Matt Stern…Hendrick Booyens

Julian Lewis Jones…Etienne Feyder

Rated PG-13 for brief strong language.

Runtime: 134 min

“Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire” – Three Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

I really struggled with writing this review for two reasons.

One, it’s hard to write a review of movies based on such harsh subject matter that the lines between reviewing an entertainment and commenting on a reality sometimes blur.

Two, I am going to go against the grain on this one and go on record as saying while I thought this picture was “good” (again, hard to think of it in terms of it being an entertainment) I wasn’t all that impressed with it.

In 1987, an obese, illiterate and black teenager, Claireece “Precious” Jones (Gabourey Sidibe), lives in the New York City neighborhood of Harlem with her dysfunctional family. She has been raped and impregnated twice by her own father, Carl, and suffers constant physical, mental and emotional abuse from her unemployed mother, Mary (Mo’Nique). Inspired by her new teacher Ms. Rain, (Paula Patton), Precious begins learning to read. Precious also begins to see a social worker, Mrs. Weiss (Mariah Carrey), who helps Precious see that she can turn her own life around.

On the good side, I could see the reality in Sidibe’s performance, and for anyone whose seen her do interviews she is SO not Precious. Her performance should get her an Oscar nomination because the Academy loves films and characters like this. It is also an uplifting story that I’m sure (and hopeful) people will see and have it inspire them to make changes in their lives if things are bad (or worse) for themselves.

On the bad side, to me this film is a fairly standard uplifting tale. I mean, seriously. The only people who would not want Precious to get out from the tyrannical rule of her bitch mother are just heartless shells of people I’d have nothing to do with anyway. Who wouldn’t want this girl to succeed? She has nowhere to go BUT up in this case, and that is sad, indeed.

My main problem I guess comes not from the film but with so much attention being given to Mo’nique’s performance, not that it isn’t stark or affecting (any performance where I want someone to get theirs is a good one). The problem I have is that people are willing to throw awards at performances by African-Americans for such negative, downtrodden and unromantic roles it almost seems like THAT’S the only reality people expect to see instead of seeing the other realities that truly are. And what if she was in, say, “It’s Complicated” instead of Meryl Streep? Would awards people even care? Ok, enough of my soap box.

Should you see “Precious?” Sure. It’s a good film with a good message, and you should see it before the Oscars. Also, Lenny Kravitz and Mariah Carey are great in this film (even though you see little of them and hardly recognize them). But as an “entertainment” it doesn’t compare to other harsh “slice-of-urban-life” films like “Boyz ‘N The Hood” or “8 Mile.” Sure it’s good, but there are better.

Gabourey ‘Gabby’ Sidibe… Precious (as Gabourey Sidibe)

Mo’Nique… Mary

Paula Patton…Ms. Rain

Mariah Carey… Mrs. Weiss

Sherri Shepherd …Cornrows

Lenny Kravitz…Nurse John

Rated R for child abuse including sexual assault, and pervasive language.

Runtime: 110 min

Unraveling the Mystery of “Sherlock Holmes” – Three Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

You know what’s weird? I see movies the same way I meet people. I get an instant first impression and that usually is how I think of that person/group of people from then on. When I see movies it is like meeting a stranger and you get that “am I gonna like him/her” question in my mind.

The first time I saw “Sherlock Holmes” I wrote it off as a more-action-than-substance winter tentpole pic (industry speak for winter blockbuster). I found the dialogue in the first third, particularly by Robert Downey, Jr., so hard to understand I just waited for the next action sequence to happen to wake me up from the naps I was taking in the theater.

Here’s the plot: after finally catching serial killer and occult “sorcerer” Lord Blackwood, legendary sleuth Sherlock Holmes and his assistant Dr. Watson can close yet another successful case. But when Blackwood mysteriously returns from the grave and resumes his killing spree, Holmes must take up the hunt once again. Contending with his partner’s new fiancée and the dimwitted head of Scotland Yard, the dauntless detective must unravel the clues that will lead him into a twisted web of murder, deceit, and black magic – and the deadly embrace of temptress Irene Adler.

Watching a film in which its lead was mumbling really created a bad first impression in my opinion. I thought the new guy was kind of weird, to himself and boring. But I gave this flick a second chance, and I’m glad I did, especially in a setting with better sound so I could actually hear the dialogue and, therefore, become more engaged with what was going on. It was then that the movie opened up a bit for me and I “got it” more. The only other time in which that happened was with the 1996 Tom Cruise pic “Mission: Impossible.” Most people wrote the film off as too convoluted, boring, kind of into itself…

…see the correlation?

I ended up loving “Mission: Impossible” for the same complexity that people attacked and it was a better film for not giving into simple action conventions. It was a thinking person’s thriller, and so is “Sherlock Holmes.”

Seeing this film a second time was something about which I think Sherlock Holmes would approve. It is when you can step in closer and see (and hear better) the details that you actually get the best impression of all.

Robert Downey, Jr…..Sherlock Holmes

Jude Law… Dr. John Watson

Rachel McAdams… Irene Adler

Mark Strong… Lord Blackwood

Eddie Marsan… Inspector Lestrade

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, some startling images and a scene of suggestive material.

Runtime: 128 min

“THE BLIND SIDE” – Three Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

I may only be 39 years old but I’ve seen a lot of movies. Enough movies to be able to know when something is “formula,” the perfect blend of enough sap, schmaltz, drama, laughs and uplifting ending that make a movie a cookie-cutter hit.

But something funny happened after watching “The Blind Side.” I realized how much I liked it.

“The Blind Side,” from the 2006 book of the same name, tells the story of Michael Oher, a homeless African-American youngster from a broken home, taken in by the Touhys, a well-to-do white family led by Leigh Anne Tuohy (Sandra Bullock) who see in him not only athletic potential but someone who is different than he appears. At the same time, Oher’s presence in the Touhys’ lives leads them to some insightful self-discoveries of their own. Living in his new environment, the teen faces a completely different set of challenges to overcome. As a football player and student, Oher works hard and, with the help of his coaches and adopted family, becomes an All-American offensive left tackle eventually drafted by the NFL.

In Hollywood, stories don’t come any more gift-wrapped than that. But there are three things that set this film apart from all the other cookie-cutter “hits” churned out by Hollywood. And they are (in this order):

1)      Sandra Bullock whose portrayal of Leigh Ann Tuohy is sure to lock her in for an Oscar nomination.

2)      Quinton Aaron whose performance as Oher is so affecting I wanted to take him in and shelter him from his lonely, desolate world.

3)      Director John Lee Hancock, whose ease with material such as this somehow brings out the humanity in such stories (like he did with the Dennis Quaid movie “The Rookie.”

“The Blind Side” is one of those films that does reinforce through its telling of a true story that sometimes the universe does conspire to make wishes and dreams come true, and those who are meant to find victory do find it sometimes with the help of some kind of intervention (divine, chance, karmic or otherwise). Is this movie formulaic? Yes, but who doesn’t want to see a movie like that every now and then? I know I do because, sappy, schmaltzy, predictable or not I (specifically my heart) am a sucker for that stuff.

Can you wait to see this movie on the small screen? Yes. You do not truly need to see it on the big screen. In fact, the intimacy that you feel between the family as it gets to know Michael and as Michael gets to blossom, himself, is actually better played on a TV screen. It makes you feel a part of it and the film is richer for it.

The question you have to ask yourself after watching any film is whether or not you would watch this (or any) movie again? The answer to that lies in the same question uttered by Russell Crowe in “Gladiator:” “were you not entertained?”

And my answer is yes, fellow gladiators. I was, indeed, entertained.

Sandra Bullock…Leigh Anne Tuohy

Tim McGraw…Sean Tuohy

Quinton Aaron…Michael Oher

Jae Head…S.J. Tuohy

Lily Collins… Collins Tuohy

Ray McKinnon…Coach Cotton

Rated PG-13 for one scene involving brief violence, drug and sexual references.

Runtime: USA:128 min

“AVATAR” – Two-and-a-Half Buckets of Popcorn out of Four

Oh man. When am I going to stop buying into the hype generated by Hollywood over films supposed to herald the next great age of filmmaking? I fell for it once with George Lucas’ “Star Wars: Episode One – The Phantom Menace,” a film that patted itself so heartedly on the back for its ground-breaking special effects but so lacked story I don’t care of I ever see it again.

And I am one of the biggest “Star Wars” fans I know (the original, non-Special Edition trilogy, please and thank you).

Now here comes James Cameron’s “Avatar,” a film that visually is everything “Phantom Menace” wanted to be but sits right along side it as a movie so devoid of real characterization, compassion and humanity I can say now that I’ve seen it I don’t ever need to see it again.

In the future a paraplegic marine veteran, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), decides to take his deceased brother’s place on a mission to the distant world of Pandora is brought to Pandora, a planet inhabited by the Na’vi, a blue humanoid race with their own language and culture. Sully starts out as a military grunt whose mission it is to infiltrate the Na’vi to get them to relocate so that humans can get their hands on a precious material stupidly named “unobtanium”scattered throughout their rich woodland. However, after living among them, falling in love with one of them and learning of greedy corporate figurehead Parker Selfridge’s intentions of driving off the Na’vi by any means necessary including extermination, Jake decides to fight for the survival of not just the Na’vi but for Pandora, itself.

Sounds good, right? Meh. It is and it isn’t.

I place the blame for the film’s utter lack of heart on the film’s writer and director, James Cameron. As writer and director of some of the best futuristic/Action/Adventure films of all time (“Aliens,” “Terminator,” Terminator 2: Judgment Day,” “True Lies,” and “Titanic”) he should know better. He may have created a new reason to see films on a big screen (and this one should be seen on the biggest, best screen you can if you go) but the reason I will watch his other films any day of the week with no arm twisting what-so-ever is because at the center of the action lay human stories and characters we care about. In other words, better writing and less dependency on special effects.

This film is two hours and forty-two minutes long but I wanted twenty more minutes. I wanted my backstory to explain the following:

1)      What happened to the Earth that was so horrible we needed this “unobtanium” so badly we were willing to kill for it?

2)      What the hell happened to any renewable sources of energy like solar power, or even human-made nuclear power? And why weren’t those options?

3)      How long had we tried to diplomatically negotiate with the Na’vi for their “unobtanium” and why wasn’t that working? Was it because Pandora somehow “needed” it’s minerals (a detail mentioned but never fully explored in the film)?

4)      What is the backstory of this horrible “company” that wants “unobtanium” so bad?

5)      Why did this company hire mercenaries to carry out the raids on the Na’vi? Did world governments not want official military action?

6)      And if we didn’t give a rat’s ass about the Na’vi people why not just nuke ‘em from space (ala Hicks/Ripley from “Aliens”) and just take it afterward?

Grrrrrr.

There has to come a point in every movie that filmmakers allow you to get on the train. It helps you enjoy the movie more, explain the movie more and make you feel more a part of the story and experience. There was no way in “Avatar” to understand how we got to what we have to accept as the beginning of the film. Cameron doesn’t stop the train to let us on. Instead he just throws you into his special effects-laden story and expects the visual effects slight of hand to distract you from what is missing – an actual movie you care about.

Shame on you, James Cameron. You are a better writer and filmmaker than that.

When I was in line to see “Avatar” I decided to have some fun. I approached the young kid selling tickets I asked for “The Empire Strikes Back.” Instead of a smirk he actually looked it up in his system and said “I’m sorry, sir. I don’t see that movie here.” I asked him how old he was and he answered 17. Moreover, he had never heard of “The Empire Strikes Back.” I was so shocked I turned to the people in line behind me and shouted “He’s never heard of ‘The Empire Strikes Back!’”

The reason I’m relaying this tale is because I weep for this kid, and his and future generations of movie goers, who do not know the beauty of films like the original “Star Wars” trilogy, “Aliens,” etc., which told stories and made us care no matter how many guns were blazing. Hell, Sigourney Weaver, who is also in “Avatar,” was nominated for an Oscar for her performance in 1986’s “Aliens.” What breaks my heart is that the mediocrity that is “Avatar” is all this 17-year-old kid has, and he will think it’s great.

And he would be wrong.

“Avatar” is great to look at. But afterward the film leaves the mind just as easily as you leave the theater. And why? Because it never visited your heart.

Sam Worthington…Jake Sully

Zoe Saldana…Neytiri

Sigourney Weaver…Dr. Grace Augustine

Stephen Lang…Colonel Miles Quaritch

Michelle Rodriguez…Trudy Chacon

Giovanni Ribisi…Parker Selfridge

Joel Moore…Norm Spellman (as Joel David Moore)

CCH Pounder…Moat

Wes Studi…Eytukan

Laz Alonso…Tsu’tey

Dileep Rao…Dr. Max Patel

Matt Gerald…Corporal Lyle Wainfleet

MPAA: Rated PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking.

Runtime: 162 min

An Animated Movie Weekend – “Princess and the Frog” and “Family Guy” Both Fun

Three-and-a-half buckets of popcorn out of four for both

There are times when even this action movie lover needs to take a break from the blow-em-up ease of bombastic blockbusters and take in the subtle beauty of animated films. Some of my favorite movies of all time are animated features – “Lili & Stitch,” the “Toy Story” movies and one of my top five films of all time – “The Lion King.” All of these are examples of how we can be reminded that being a kid is fun, exciting and wonderous even if we just turned 39.

So this weekend I decided to brave the theaters (at both the holidays and opening weekend) and see Disney’s newest animated feature, “The Princess and the Frog.” I cannot stress enough how wonderful this film is. Not only is it refreshing to see good old-fashioned hand-drawn 2D animation (as opposed to all the computer-generated 3D you get these days) but it’s great to see Disney move into the 21^st Century with its first African-American princess (Tiana) in a story that is every bit as enchanting as “Cinderella.”

Without giving too much away any good film, whether animated or not, can make you not only forget you are watching a movie but make you FEEL for characters only on-screen for a handful of minutes. Case-in-point, the opening few minutes of 2009’s “Star Trek.” Watch that and I dare you not to feel something. In the “Princess and the Frog” we are introduced to many characters in New Orleans but none as beautiful as the firefly, whose love is so pure for his beloved Evangeline (see the movie and you’ll know about who and what I’m speaking) that I dare you not to be moved by the film’s end. I triple dog dare you.

“The Princess and the Frog,” the first princess movie really since the “Aladdin” and “Little Mermaid” days, has wonderful messages for little would-be princesses. Hard work, not just wishing upon a star or asking rich parents, brings you what is most special in life. I really liked this message because so many of today’s youth seem to self-entitled to, well, EVERYTHING. But I do find it a bit off that they introduce the concept in a film featuring it’s first African-American princess instead of rolling it out in say it’s vast library of DVD animated princess adventures.

I wrestled with that for a bit, though. Is it a noticeable coincidence? Yes. But when I saw girls of all shapes, sizes and backgrounds seeing this film (and liking it judging by their exit comments) I was put more at ease and I let that element go. This is a wonderful film. It is the type of Disney magic that makes you wish upon that star at night.

And also makes you see fireflies in a whole new light.

OK, so after the warm and fuzzy that was “The Princess and the Frog” I hunkered down for a treat. The newest “Star Wars” spoof from the creators of “Family Guy” entitled “Something, Something, Something, Dark Side.”

I will say it now and take note of this – THIS IS NOT, I REPEAT NOT, FOR CHILDREN.

Two of my favorite entertainments in this world are “Star Wars” and Fox’s “Family Guy.” And it’s always a blast to see Seth McFarlane’s crew weave incredible pop-culture references into a show that features a talking, elitist dog who everyone can hear and a talking baby that everyone else can hear except his own family. But you can tell that McFarlane and crew LOOOOOOOVE “Star Wars.” Not just from their constant mention of it in the years since the show’s been on but because of 2007’s homage “Blue Harvest” (“Star Wars’ production title) and this film which riffs on the best “Star Wars” movie out there – “The Empire Strikes Back.”

Have I said enough that this movie is NOT for the kids?

There’s an absolute reason this film was released straight to DVD. It allows the “Family Guy” crew the chance to push the animated envelope by using language and situations that you could never (I REPEAT NEVER) employ on broadcast TV. And this film is all the better for it. “Something, Something, Something, Dark Side” is awesome, hilarious, irreverent, wrong (but right) and so worth repeated viewings that it’s going to be fun to watch this again and again just as I do its source material.

The animation which I thought was spectacular in “Blue Harvest” is ten-times better in “Something, Something, Something, Dark Side.” It’s absolutely unbelievable. I thought, at moments, I was actually watching “The Empire Strikes Back.” I will not spoil anything but the scene in the carbon freezing chamber is worth the price of the DVD. Totally. Not to mention that everything from the coming attraction trailers to poster art for “Something, Something, Something, Dark Side” are so lovingly done that I can’t help but get all geeked-up over it. They LOVE “Star Wars” and it shows.

Again, there is ADULT LANGUAGE in “Something, Something, Something, Dark Side,” so much so it should be “R” Rated. But as a bookend to my animated weekend this movie is a treasure…

…and I cannot wait for their inevitable “Return of the Jedi” spoof whatever that will be called.