A complex, multi-layered mystery adventure, Watchmen is set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of everyday society, and the Doomsday Clock -- which... A complex, multi-layered mystery adventure, Watchmen is set in an alternate 1985 America in which costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of everyday society, and the Doomsday Clock, which charts the USA's tension with the Soviet Union, keeps ticking closer to midnight. While superheroes are all around, they have been outlawed since the 70s with a few that are government sanctioned and still active. When the still active hero, Comedian is murdered, the masked vigilante Rorschach sets out to uncover a plot to kill and discredit all past and present superheroes. As he reconnects with his former crime-fighting legion, a disbanded group of retired superheroes, of which only one has true powers, Rorschach glimpses a disturbing conspiracy with links to their shared past and catastrophic consequences for the future. Their mission is to watch over humanity...but who is watching the Watchmen?

You waited for it, some longer than others, and now it is finally here. The un-filmable filmed, the un-adaptable adapted. So how is this stupendous superhero adventure with the ubiquitous marketing campaign? Eh, good and bad. Alan Moore created an incredibly effective and influential piece of literature and when asked about seeing Zack Snyder's adaptation Moore said, "I'm never going to watch this fucking thing." And after having seen the movie, I don't really blame him. It's not that the movie is bad--far from it--it's an incredibly faithful adaptation. It's just that Moore clearly put so much effort into his back stories, his character layers, and all the details the book so richly explores, you get somewhat of a cliff notes version in the movie. Snyder has done a fantastic job of recreating Moore's world and characters and, at times, the film is so faithful that it literally looks and sounds like the comic panels are moving in front of you.

But as with any adaptation omissions and changes had to be made, and while the new ending didn't really bother me much--it has the same general idea as the book--it was the left out details that left me feeling let down. There are flashbacks and character explorations but not enough and not to the extent I would have enjoyed. There is so much going on narrative-wise that I feel Snyder shortchanged some of the characters and their relationships, which makes it harder as viewers to connect with them emotionally. I didn't feel a Dreidberg/Laurie connection, it just happened. I never really felt like Laurie cared for the Doc--she just said she did. And because of that, it made the whole impact of the story less resonating.

But that's me nitpicking, because this is a pretty good movie. The Snyder slo-mo bad assenomics are back, and couldn't be more welcome. The action scenes take a break from today's standards of shaky hyper-realistic what-the-fuck-is-going-on editing, and actually shows us a well-orchestrated fights. The production design and visual effects capture the comic almost PERFECTLY, and pretty much all the actors nail their parts. I say pretty much all, because Malin Akerman, while far from the train wreck many critics would have you believe, just doesn't deliver. Who does? Good ol' Patrick Wilson does. Despite a somewhat simplified character, Wilson still managers to grasp hold of Nightowl/Dreidberg and plays him pretty expertly. And Wilson would be the highlight if it weren't for Jackie Earle Haley and Jeffery Dean Morgan. Haley absolutely drills each and every thing about Rorschach, from the voice, to the movements, to the stilted dialogue delivery. The man was clearly a fan and most definitely proved his Oscar nomination was no fluke--he is Rorschach. The same could almost be said about Morgan who delivers an extremely strong performance as The Comedian. He's good, he looks the part, and he takes the character who does despicable things and makes you like him in spite of it.

After all is said and done is the un-filmable unwatchable? I wouldn't say so. While the middle is a bit clunky, and the plot can get a bit murky, I feel it is a rewarding experience for both the Watchmen fanatics and uninitiated alike. But if you're completely unfamiliar with this world, don't go in expecting a wham bam action jam, because these characters and this story are far more than that. Who's watching the Watchmen? It seems like everyone, but if you really want to love and appreciate this story, you really should be reading them.

--Greg MacLennan

Bryan (Liam Neeson) has taken early retirement from the CIA in order to live closer to his teenage daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). Bryan's government work kept him away from Kim for much of her childhood, and he's now trying to make up for lost time. When Kim announces that she's taking a trip to Paris with her friend Amanda (Katie Cassidy), Bryan is apprehensive about her traveling on her own and his worst fear is soon realized, as Kim and Amanda are abducted upon their arrival in France. Bryan immediately springs into action, using his well-honed CIA skills to piece together clues from a single, frantic phone call he received from Kim. He hops a plane to Paris, determined to rescue his daughter before she falls off the grid completely.

District 13 director Pierre Morel knows how to make action work, and screenwriter Luc Besson knows a thing or two about writing bad asses. (see. Fifth Element, Leon: The Professional, Transporter) So when these two came back together for another go we knew something good would come of it. Throw in a pretty interesting cast of Maggie Grace, Famke Jansen, and the always impressive Liam Neeson and you have a recipe for awesome.

Make no mistake, Besson has his shortcomings as a screenwriter. He has two modes, good writer Besson (Leon, Angel A) and fun writer Besson (Fifth Element, Transporter). The latter Besson is sometimes guilty of uneven characters and somewhat silly plots, but the fun we have watching those movies far outweighs their problems. If I were to compare this script to one of his others I'd liken it most to Danny the Dog (Unleashed), but where Unleashed let up with some cutesy fun and humourous moments, Taken gets serious and hard to the core. Taken's story is silly and outlandish sometimes, but Neeson anchors the film with a truly spectacular performance. He is relentless as this man on a mission and he is brutal, he loves his daughter and will stop at nothing to get her back. Watching the film, it made me think what would have happened to Jason Bourne if he grew old and retired. I wouldn't call this a thinking man's movie, but if the trailer even slightly interests you or you are looking for just a really solid good time at a theatre, you'd be hard pressed to find a better alternative than Taken. Trust me.

--Greg MacLennan

Based on the Cornelia Funke (no relation to Tobias) novel, the story centers on a young girl(Sienna Guillory) who discovers her father (Brendan "I make any movies for money" Frasier) has an amazing talent to bring characters out of their books and into reality. After accidentally banishing his wife to the land of books, her father, Mo, sets out  on a nine year quest to bring her back, all the while being pursued by a villain he unleashed on the world. Mo and his daughter must try to stop the freed villain (Andy Serkis) from destroying them all, with the help her aunt and some storybook characters.

Sounds like a pleasant enough children's story right? And while the story's concept seems alluring, the execution is clumsy and ridiculous. The characters are no doubt cliff's note versions of their textual origins, and the films good intentions get muddied by the visual effect set pieces. And that's just the beginning. I'm sure Funke's novel doesn't share many of the films problems, and it no doubt seems like it could have been a Last Action Hero meets The Never Ending Story type film, but it just never comes together. To call the film bad is too easy, it's just less than mediocre. When you're an audience member, and it dawns on you what should have been done to correct so many of the films missteps, you know something is wrong. And that's just the storytelling of the film. The script does itself no favors, with it's clunky awkward dialogue. E.G., a nefarious looking fire dancer played by Paul Bettany chases down Brendan Frasier with the help of his ferrett side kick, and once he pins him in a darkened alley he leans into to our fairy tale hero and at an almost whisper says, "Read to me?" The suspension of disbelief can be strong, but sometimes dumb is just dumb.

That being said Paul Bettany does do a fine job,and Helen Mirren and Jim Broadbent offer some good comedic relief. Andy Serkis also seems to be making the most of his situation and though he sometimes borders on scene chewery, he is always enjoyable to watch. The visual effects, while superfluous, are relatively impressive, and the costume design isn't too shabby either. It's a shame such an intriguing sounding novel didn't turn out better, but it seems these characters might have been best served had they not been brought to life at all.

--Greg MacLennan

Tom (Jensen Ackles) returns to his hometown on the tenth anniversary of the Valentine's night massacre that claimed the lives of 22 people. Instead of a homecoming, however, Tom finds himself arriving to a copycat(or is it the revived corpse of the original murderer?) in the town, and he is suspected of committing the murders. The only person who seems to believe he's innocent is his old flame (Jamie King).

This is the first time modern 3D technology has been utilized to bring a horror movie to life, and I'm happy to report the sick and twisted minds behind this picture do not disappoint.  If you're going to the theatre this weekend with hopes of gimmicky jump out of the screen ridiculousness, you've paid for the right movie. On top of all the disgustingly grotesque perceived spurts of blood all over the audience, our fine director, Patrick Lussier, also thought the thought that's been boiling like a kettle int he front of our minds ever since we first saw what 3D could do. What if you filmed boobs? Not only boobs but boobs, butt and bush? Yes, that's right you gore whore slut hounds, this film achieves the rare trifecta of horror movie nudity and it's made all the better through the use of modern technology. But that's enough about that, you came to see if the movie is any good right?

Is this a good movie? Well, yes and no. That all depends on your measure of success for a film. Is it Gone with the Wind? No, but the film makes no pretenses about being anything other than a B movie gore picture, and a fun time for it's audiences, and on that it delivers. So I'd been willing to claim this film is a good movie, because it does exactly what it set out to achieve. Now with that being said, there are some real weak links in the acting chain (I'm looking at you Ackles), the story telling is pretty much generic, and some of the twists are just downright ridiculous. But when the final credits rolled, in 3D no less, I found myself not really caring. I just really enjoyed the retarded ride. You see this film is like going to a Wal-Mart when you're feeling blue, you can walk in and have zero expectations to display intelligence, and by the time you leave, you feel a bit better about yourself and you don't know why.

--Greg MacLennan

"Have you ever seen a one trick pony in the field so happy and free?
If you've ever seen a one trick pony then you've seen me"
- Bruce "The Boss" Springsteen

If you've gotten a chance to see the trailer, or hear Springsteen's song for Darren "I only make awesome movies" Aronofsky's latest, then you have heard an almost perfect description and feel for the film. Mickey Rourke, makes his comeback in this drama centered on retired professional wrestler Randy "The Ram" Robinson as he makes his way through the independent circuit, trying to get back in the big game again for one final showdown with his former rival.

Where to start with this incredible and moving picture? I don't know what it is about an Aronofsky picture that makes them stay with you, but he sure finds a way to climb inside and affect you with his art. Maybe it's his open endings, maybe it's his relatable characters, or maybe he's just a really great director. There's not a part of this movie that doesn't work, but you do walk away from it wishing there was more. The cinematography is intimate and real, the acting is some of the best of the year, and the writing is heart wrenching. Make no mistake, this is a simple intimate portrait of a man and is a significantly different film that Aronofsky has ever made, but it's still just as good, if not better, than his others.

Marisa Tomei proves her Oscar was no fluke with this picture, as she portrays a stripper/mom who receives regular patronage from Rourke. Evan Rachel Wood also delivers the goods as Rourke's estranged daughter, but the real star of the show is Mickey Rourke. Everything you have heard about how good he is in this is completely true. You see a knight slowly getting chinks in his armor until he has nothing left to protect himself with. You see reluctant vulnerability, and you see a fully-realized character, brought to life in a way only Mickey Rourke could do.

It's difficult to say The Wrestler is the type of film that would be nominated for best picture, because it isn't really. Aronofsky has toned down his visual flair and tells a simple straightforward story of an old broken down piece of meat. It's just a solid piece of filmmaking that will leave you better off for having seen it, and what else can you ask for?

Review by: Greg MacLennan

Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber, and Jamie Bell star as three Jewish brothers who escape from Nazi-occupied Poland into the Belarussian forest, where they join Russian resistance fighters and endeavor to build a village in order to protect themselves and others in danger. As more refugees come to the forest after hearing of these three heroic brothers, their situation worsens. There are German attacks, sickness, food shortages, and the Russians are real dicks to their Jewish brethren.  Sounds like it's got Oscar written all over it, doesn't it? Well, not exactly.

Aryan faced Daniel Craig (nobody thought brown contacts might "Jew" him up a little?) stars as the elder pacifistic brother. Craig exercises restraint, frustration, and gives an overall solid performance. Shreiber is also good as the hot-headed, out for revenge type, while Bell plays the more timid follower. The acting across the board is pretty excellent, and the story, which is based on historical events, is both incredible and profound. It's just not told in any new way, we've seen this kind of movie before, and unfortunately this type of story has been more aptly told.

Speaking of aptitude, I'm a general Edward Zwick fan. He did awesome work with Glory, The Blood Diamond, and The Last Samurai, but his work on this is nothing to turn your nose up to. However, for a man who has displayed such skill when directing action scenes in the past, he sure let us down with this one. Some of the action scenes are so poorly filmed you can barely tell what's happening or who it is happening too. Apart from those few missteps, he does do an overall acceptable job. It's difficult to say what is missing from Defiance, but something definitely is. Maybe the romantic angles were downplayed too much, or perhaps the hope inspiring speeches didn't have a big enough swell. The film is by no means bad and is well worth your time. It just fails to be exceptional. And I think with the pedigree involved with this film, people were expecting something really good, if not great.

Review by: Greg MacLennan

Many saw evil, they dared to stop it. At the height of WW2, a group of high-ranking German officers hatched a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler, and seize power of the military command in order to end the war. The operation was codenamed "Valkyrie", for the emergency plan that was meant to be used in case of a revolt against the Nazi government. These men sacrificed their lives for their failure, but they were some of the few who would not let the road to damnation be paved with apathy.

Say what you will about Superman Returns, but Bryan Singer is a good director, the man knows how to craft a fine film.  And yeah, so what if Tom Cruise has been using the same intense face for his past several films and coasting mostly on his celebrity, he's pretty good in in this movie. Oh and the supporting cast, it's totally awesome. Eddie Izzard flexing his dramatic muscle, Terrence Stamp being Terrence Stamp, Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighy, and Tom Wilkinson. It's an all star cast of conflicting accents, but it works. This is the same team behind the camera and script as The Usual Suspects, so despite the negative buzz preceding this film, rest assured it's good stuff. The pacing is perfect, as the films run time breezes by in a flash. The acting is across the board solid, the direction and everything else that went into making this thing is also top notch. It's tense, suspence packed fun, and you'd be hard pressed to find much fault with it, pending you have no Tom Cruise hang-ups. Now, I wouldn't go saying this bad boy is going to be bringing home any hardware come February, but it is one of the shining lights this Christmas's releases, something worthwhile if you don't feel like sitting through another Adam Sandler comedy or a bad Owen Wilson flick.

So yeah, Tom Cruise uses his regular accent, and so what if you already know the ending, (Spoiler Alert! Hitler lives!), it's a well acted, enlightening piece of filmmaking and I'd encourage interested parties to see it. Most folks are relegated to the idea that all German's during this period in history were all Nazi's or Nazi supporters, and this film lets us know that not only were there German's who were anti-Hitler, but also German's who were so adamantly against him that they laid down the ultimate sacrifice for their beliefs. So get over your preconceptions and give this one a chance.

Reviewed by: Greg MacLennan

Based on the F. Scott Fitzgerald story, director David Fincher takes the reigns to tell the curious story of a man who was born old, only to spend his life aging backwards. Now for Fitzgerald and short story purists, the film hardly resembles the original work, outside of the general plot and setting, but it was a short story with underdeveloped ideas and characters, so we will forgive. The tale takes place in New Orleans, where we find an ailing Daisy (Cate Blanchett) instructing her daughter read the journal of the unbelievable story of Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt.) The story takes us from his difficult birth, to a series of vignettes that show a man youngening through history. Many will bring Forrest Gump to mind, but I assure you, the comparisons aren't accurate. Though the two films share a writer, the case of Benjamin is far less sappy, gimmicky, and goofy.

Fincher seems to have taken the film out of his head and used all heart. Yes, the film is a love story, yes there are sweet and cute moments, but trust me, this film is heart wrenching. And everything about the film is pretty much absolutely perfect. Pitt and Blanchett are in top form, as is most of the supporting cast, particularly Taraji P. Henson, who plays Benjamin's adoptive mother, Queenie. The love, joy, and humor she shares with us is second to none this year. Well, as far as other movies are concerned. Brad Pitt deserves an Oscar--I don't think he will finally get one this year--but man does he deserve one. To see him layer on the makeup and CGI of an old man, while still conveying that childhood curiosity and innocence is something to behold. The same goes for his portrayal as he becomes an older soul in a much younger looking body.

Which brings us to the effects, which are spectacular. The way Fincher has blended the performance with the technology is jaw dropping. To see Brad Pitt, with his Thelma and Louise looks, walking around a screen is slightly eerie, but mostly incredible. Blanchett looks down right angelic in her younger, ballet dancer days, and old Benjamin is just astonishing to watch. Everything is great in this film, the screenplay, the pacing, the acting, the production design, the camera work, the cinematography. People who claim digital filmmaking loses soul need to watch this film.

With Benjamin, life isn't measured in the minutes, but in the moments. And in the grand scheme of things, the moment you get to spend with this film, will make you want to freeze it and make it last forever.

Review by: Greg MacLennan

Jim Carrey has a secret, and it makes us laugh. Jim Carrey goes around his daily life with that secret to hilarious results. Then someone important in his life finds out he has a secret, gets mad, and then ends up forgiving him so we can have a happy ending. No, this isn't the premise for Liar Liar 2: Pants on Fire, it's the basis for a lot of Jim Carrey movies, including his latest, Yes Man. Does the fact that this film is formulaic and generic totally rob it from any fun? No, far from it. I found myself chuckling several times throughout the film, but it makes you wish Jim would try some other form of humor and steer clear of the safe kind. I miss my Cable Guy Jim Carrey.

Carrey plays Carl, a recently divorced, socially retarded man in a dead end job. After an old friend urges him to go to a self-help seminar, he finds himself forced to say "Yes" whenever any opportunity is presented to him. He soon finds this "yes" lifestyle can reap wonderful rewards and continues on until he realizes "yes" isn't always the best answer.

There's good and there's bad in this film, but, suffice to say, Jim Carrey is back in good form. He makes zany faces, acts totally crazy, and you are actually laughing with him again, which is a nice change. Sadly though, despite the good performances, the plot just isn't anything special. What is special is Rhys Darby (Murray from Flight of the Conchords). I don't know if it's just me, but anything this guy said had me rolling in the aisles. Zooey Deschanel also does a fine job of making us all wish we could meet her in real life, because we are so certain we'd hit if off and fall madly in love if only we got the opportunity. Add in some Bradley Cooper, Danny Masterson, and a surprisingly funny turn from General Zod himself, Terrence Stamp, and you have yourself quite the enjoyable comedy.

Just remember to temper your expectations, I went in needing a laugh, and Carrey and company delivered. It's cute, funny, and disposable. Pretty much exactly what you need when you're desperately searching for a reprieve from too much family time this holiday season.

Review by: Greg MacLennan

Frank Martin (Jason Statham) is tired of the game, so much so that when we catch up with him he's busy living the quiet European life of classy cars, well tailored suits, and his solitary French police friend. He's since retired from the business on his own terms, and went out on top, having never failed to reach his destination. Well, that is until his walls come crumbling down, quite literally. A friend he referred an interested business partner to crashes through his swank Euro pad in the same fancy car coupled with some Euro bitch we know nothing about. As his friend takes his last breath, before exploding fantastically in an ambulance en route to a hospital, he tells Frank little. Frank is then left responsible for a naive young girl (like always) and is being forced to take one last job, forced because he is rigged to a special handcuff that blows him up should he exceed a specific distance from his car. The plot follows some sort of kidnap, government, chemical weapon mumbo jumbo that is best left far away from analysis. You only really care about how awesome Statham looks and with what grace he disposes of his foes, right?

Well dear Transporter friends, I've got some alarming news for you. Those of you left let down by the second films ridiculously over the top shenanigans won't be any more pleased with this outing. Olivier Megaton (yes, that's his real name) doesn't seem to possess any of the skills of the former directors Cory Yuen and Louis Letterier (Incredible Hulk). The fight scenes might be palpable had they been edited in some coherent fashion. This time, instead of graceful deliberate bad ass fight scenes, we get chopped together, what the fuck is going on, rubbish. Oh, and where there were some shreds of credibility in the first film, it gets thrown completely out the window between the floating cars in water and then landing them on top of train mayhem this bad boy has in store for you.

But it's not totally terrible. Jason Statham does look as awesome as ever and carries the same "I can kill you swagger" he always has. He's dudded up, as handsome as ever, and provides one of the most harmonious bringing the men and women together in the cinema moments I've witnessed. In one scene, Statham takes on a gang of thugs in true martial arts Statham-fashion using only his suit as a weapon. That's right ladies, the clothes come off as he dispatches of baddies in a truly unique fashion.

But aside from a few inspired moments the film has the most unattractive annoying Euro lassy riding shotgun, a dumb plot, and far too little of what made this franchise good in the first place. Not even Prison Break's Robert Knepper doing his best Gary Oldman from The Professional impression saves this thing.

Review by: Greg MacLennan