Cast:

Aaron Johnson as Dave Lizewski / Kick-Ass

Chloe Moretz as Mindy Macready / Hit Girl

Nicolas Cage as Damon Macready / Big Daddy

Mark Strong as Frank D’Amico

Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Chris D’Amico / Red Mist

Lyndsy Fonseca as Katie Deauxma

Clark Duke as Marty

Evan Peters as Todd

Deborah Twiss as Mrs. Zane

Sophie Wu as Erika Cho

Garrett M. Brown as Mr. Lizewski

Elizabeth McGovern as Mrs. Lizewski

Kofi Natei as Rasul

Omar A. Soriano as Leroy

Xander Berkeley as Detective Gigante

Omari Hardwick as Sergeant Marcus Williams

Johnny Hopkins as 1st Gang Kid

Ohene Cornelius as 2nd Gang Kid

Michael Rispoli as Big Joe

Corey Johnson as Sporty Goon

Kenneth Simmons as Scary Goon

Anthony Desio as Baby Goon

Carlos Besse Peres as Buttons

Randall Batinkoff as Tre Fernandez

Dexter Fletcher as Cody

Russell Bentley as Medic

Jason Flemyng as Lobby Goon

Tamer Hassan as Matthew

Yancy Butler as Angie D’Amico

Adrian Martinez as Ginger Goon

Val Jobara as Nervous Goon

Tim Plester as Danil

Joe Bacino as Posh Goon

Hubert Boorder as Oscar Juarez

Craig Ferguson as Himself

Quinn Smith as Big Mean Boy


Directed by Matthew Vaughn


Summary:

Fun and entertaining in all the ways a violent R-rated action flick should be, but its unfocused structure creates a lull that almost kills the movie.


Story:

Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) is a young comic book nerd who decides that he should try to become a real-life superhero so he puts on a costume and goes out to fight crime, encountering other heroes like the father and daughter team of Big Daddy (Nicolas Cage) and Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz), and Red Mist (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), while at the same time making himself the target of angry mob boss Frank D’Amico (Mark Strong).


Analysis:

The problems adapting comic books and graphic novels to the screen are many, and it usually comes down to how faithful/reverential or not a filmmaker is to the source material. Matthew Vaughn and his screenwriter/producer Jane Goldman haven’t veered too far from Mark Millar and John Romita Jr.’s irreverent take on superheroes, maintaining the dark humor and violent action that made it such a hit. The eight issues of the first volume were a tight package that worked both serialized over two years and as a quickly read collection. Vaughn’s movie is generally best when it brings scenes directly from the page to life, and it’s far too obvious when the movie deviates from the comics, because it’s often where the pace drags to a halt. If you haven’t read the comic than maybe this won’t be so obvious, but this may be one of those cases where not reading the graphic novel beforehand will help not to set expectations too high.


The first half hour is almost identical to the comic where we learn how high school loser Dave Lizewski–well-played by Johnson–decides that he can do what he sees heroes doing in comic books only to have his first outing turn disastrous and nearly fatal. Months later, Dave has undergone extensive surgery and been retrofitted with so much metal inside him that he can no longer feel pain, and having not learned his lesson, he’s back on the streets to fight crime. Despite his enhancements, the self-named Kick-Ass is a complete disaster with a few skills, which becomes even more painfully obvious when he encounters the father-daughter team of Big Daddy and Hit Girl (Nicolas Cage and Chloe Moretz) who have been cleaning up the streets of crime, working far more covertly than Kick-Ass. Eventually, he meets and teams-up with Red Mist, a similarly minded and less than competent hero on the scene and the two are all over the news.


If you’ve read the graphic novel, you’ll pretty much know the story above as well as some of the key “surprises,” but the movie’s problems are most obvious as it enters the second act and starts deviating from the comic book. We won’t get too deep into those differences for those who haven’t read the original, but most of the decisions that falter involve changing the structure. For instance, the secondary characters are introduced much earlier in the story, cutting between them and Dave/Kick-Ass, which takes away from the big shocker when he learns about them for the first time. He still reacts the same way but by that point we already know who they are, more or less. “Kick-Ass” works when it’s told through Dave’s eyes, so to continually break away to try and develop other characters causes the movie to lose its focused point-of-view. Obviously, it’s a simple story that needs fleshing out to work as a movie, but so much needless characterization is added that the movie hits a serious lull after the first 45 minutes.


Part of that problem is the inevitable fact that Chloe Moretz’s Hit Girl completely steals the movie from the very second she shows up on screen, just like in the comic book. Like Uma Thurman’s “Kill Bill” character “The Bride” if she were 25 years younger, cutting a violent and bloody swath through the bad guys while swearing up a storm, her scenes have to be seen to be believed, because it’s akin to the first time you saw Bruce Lee or Jet Li or Jackie Chan in action.


It’s another great example of Vaughn’s skills at casting, which are second to none, as seen by his previous two films and earlier productions. British actor Aaron Johnson does a fine job playing a typical American high school outcast, creating such a relatable main character, both in costume and out, especially during his skewed origin story, the parallels to Spider-Man being emphasized by Vaughn. Nic Cage’s performance as Big Daddy is just odd even by Cage’s standards. It’s certainly entertaining to see him in the überhero role, but he tends to ham it up, at times being so clearly influenced by Adam West’s Batman that it seems out of place in the overall tone of the movie. Mark Strong has proven his skills as a villain countless times now, but his Vic D’Amico is very different from ones he’s played before, yet equally memorable, because he plays it just over-the-top enough to work. (There’s little question that Strong is well on his way to becoming one of those venerable actors like Stanley Tucci who is good in anything and everything they do.) Christopher Mintz-Plasse probably wasn’t the best casting choice for Red Mist, since he plays up the “McLovinesque” super-nerd aspect of his character too much; that’s actually the entire joke about his character but he inadvertently makes Dave seem much cooler by comparison.


Otherwise, it never feels like Vaughn is trying very hard to create his own visual style or directorial identity. So much of the best parts of the movie are taken verbatim from the comic while others pay tribute to other filmmakers, especially Quentin Tarantino. The violent action scenes are nothing short of amazing, but it doesn’t help that while a katana-wielding Hit Girl takes out bad guys, Vaughn uses similar ’60s surf music to “Kill Bill.” In another scene, Vaughn swipes music used in “28 Days Later” to build tension during one of Big Daddy’s key fight sequences. One presumes anyone interested in an ultra-violent R-rated action flick like “Kick-Ass” will already be familiar with Vaughn’s lack of originality. (Those two musical cues are the worst culprits, and the other musical choices range from the inspired to the insipid.)


At a certain point, the movie needs to get serious, but Vaughn spends so much time with the snarky humor, it’s hard to take the tenser third act moments seriously. Fortunately, it all ends with a bang, like a shaky gymnastics routine that delivers such a perfect landing, you immediately forgive those moments that didn’t work. It’s the best way to win back the crowd with an action-packed blow-out that allows Hit Girl to take out more of D’Amico’s goons in her inimitable way. It’s just a shame we don’t arrive at that point earlier; cutting out twenty minutes of needless characterization for the secondary cast would have made this a much better action flick.


The Bottom Line:

As a stand-alone movie, “Kick-Ass” works similarly to the comics, offering snarky fun and violent entertainment that retains Millar’s sick sense of humor throughout. The first half hour is amazing in that respect, as is the ending, but there’s a lot of needless storytelling fat in the middle that comes close to ruining the movie. With that in mind, we recommend you see and enjoy the movie but then go to your local comic shop and shell out $25 for the hardcover to see how this story can be told more efficiently.

Cast:

Sam Worthington as Perseus

Liam Neeson as Zeus

Ralph Fiennes as Hades

Jason Flemyng as Calibos / Acrisius

Gemma Arterton as Io

Alexa Davalos as Andromeda

Tine Stapelfeldt as Danae

Mads Mikkelsen as Draco

Luke Evans as Apollo

Izabella Miko as Athena

Liam Cunningham as Solon

Hans Matheson as Ixas

Ashraf Barhom as Ozal

Mouloud Achour as Kucuk

Ian Whyte as Sheikh Sulieman

Pete Postlethwaite as Spyros


Directed by Louis Leterrier


Summary:

While the original “Clash of the Titans” still stands as a better-scripted movie, the new version definitely has areas where it excels, particularly in action scenes involving Pegasus and the Kraken. The 3D is lacking in a lot of respects but the movie is still worth seeing with the effect.


Story:

This film is based on the Ray Harryhausen film from 1981 that, as you know, was based on the original Greek mythology.


Orphaned as an infant, Perseus is found and adopted by a hard working fisherman named Spyros. Despite living a meager existence, Perseus is happy with his life. But when the city of Argos defies the Greek gods, their supernatural wrath is brought down on the people. Perseus’ family is killed in the ensuing battle led by Hades, the god of the underworld and brother of Zeus.


Hades is eager to punish the humans for turning away from the gods. He prompts Zeus to allow him to torment humanity in an effort to get mankind to return to adoring them. Zeus, reluctantly, agrees. So when the king and queen of Argos spit in the eye of the gods, Hades gives them an ultimatum – sacrifice the Princess Andromeda to the sea monster called the Kraken or it will destroy Argos.


Eager for revenge against Hades for killing his family, Perseus looks for a way to foil the gods and kill the Kraken. But he’s quickly surprised when Hades reveals who Perseus’ real father is – Zeus. This only makes Perseus more determined to spite the gods and save Argos. But will he do it as a man or as a demi-god?


“Clash of the Titans” is rated PG-13 for fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief sensuality.


What Worked:

I have to be upfront that “Clash of the Titans” is one of my all-time favorite films. I loved it as a kid for the Ray Harryhausen creatures. It introduced me to Greek mythology. Despite loving the original so much, even I will admit it has its cheesy moments. I even wondered for the last 29 years what kind of remake you could create with CGI animation. So it was with great anticipation that I watched the new “Clash of the Titans.”


The new movie is without a doubt better in some respects. The scenes with Pegasus are really cool and, I believe, capture what Harryhausen wanted to do with his stop-motion animation. As Pegasus takes flight with Hades’ bat-like creatures pursuing him and Perseus, they fly in and out of the city and among the Kraken’s tentacles. It’s a fantastic sight, especially in 3D. I also think this new Kraken is a worthy successor to the original. The design is quite cool and when the creature rises out of the water, it is the highlight of the film. (It makes you wonder what the possibilities are for the new Godzilla movie.) The new giant scorpions are also a lot more menacing than the original. The battle with them is also one of the better action scenes of the movie.


The new Medusa was a bit of a mixed bag. I liked the fact that she was faster and there are some great moments where she pursues Perseus through the ruins of the temple. They also retain the fact that she’s an archer and picks off multiple soldiers from the shadows. I did think the original Medusa was a lot creepier and I think the original scene built up the suspense a lot more while emphasizing better the fact that Perseus can only defeat her by looking at her reflection in his shield. This is almost lost in the new version. But overall it’s a good remake of the scene.


The original “Clash of the Titans” essentially took the original myths, put them in a blender, and got a script that was a mix of Hollywood ideas and original Greek mythology. This new version similarly takes its own liberties with the myths and makes its own additions. A major new change is the addition of Hades to the story. He’s the driving force behind the conflict this time around and it does fit the original mythology to some degree. I think casting Liam Neeson as Zeus and Ralph Fiennes as Hades worked quite well. It was in the middle of one of their scenes together that I realized they were reunited from “Schindler’s List,” and you just have to laugh at little at the fact that they are now dressed as Greek gods. But overall it works.


As for the rest of the casting, Sam Worthington makes a good Perseus considering the script he was given. If you want someone tough with a chip on his shoulder, Worthington fits the bill. Alexa Davalos is also good as Andromeda, but she’s barely in the movie. Gemma Arterton is in the film a lot more as Io and she does a fine job with what she’s given.


What Didn’t Work:

Overall, I think there were a lot of missed opportunities with this “Clash of the Titans” remake. First of all, I think the original version had a better script. In it, Perseus falls in love with Andromeda, marries her, and then goes on his quest to save her and the city. It’s a much more classic, romantic tale. This time around Perseus is simply pissed off, thumbing his nose at the gods, and out for revenge. In fact, he has no romantic interest in Andromeda whatsoever. Their final scene together is incredibly unsatisfying.


The original script had better pacing, too. The quest was neatly laid out and made a lot more sense. Here, everything seems random and rushed. Literally in the space of 5 minutes Perseus is trained in swordfighting, gets a gift of a sword from Zeus, finds Pegasus, and has his first encounter with Calibos. It didn’t flow smoothly.


This new script seems all about emphasizing that the humans are sick and tired of following the gods. And if you didn’t get that, you’re reminded of it every couple of minutes. It’s a theme that’s driven into the ground to the point you start feeling the movie has a distinctly atheistic tone. Yet there are bits of the script that seem inconsistent with this established theme. For example, in one scene a soldier tells Perseus that he should use the gifts that the gods gave him to save the day. In a scene a few minutes later that soldier says he wants to ’spit in the eye of the gods.’ Huh? And through the whole movie Perseus says he wants to be human and not like the gods. Yet instead of falling in love with the human Andromeda (like in the myth), he falls in love with fellow demi-god Io. It’s inconsistent.


I also felt some characters were underused. Besides Andromeda being barely in the movie, I thought Calibos was really a waste. In the original movie Calibos was driven by jealousy since he was the former fiancé of Andromeda and the gods cursed him. He was the complete opposite of Perseus and that jealousy is what drove him to foil Perseus’ quest. In this new version he’s Perseus’ stepfather and he only pops up twice to attack the adventurers. There’s nothing more to his character. You could have cut him from the movie and it would have made no difference to the core story. The addition of the new Jinn character was also unnecessary, as he added nothing to the plot. The same is true with two warriors who functioned as little more than a weak attempt at adding comic relief.


There were other scenes in the movie that simply did not work. For example, our heroes battle the giant scorpions only to later actually ride them in a caravan. It didn’t work. There’s also a hippie religious zealot in Argos that spends much of the film ranting and raving. In the grand finale, the awesome scenes of the Kraken are mixed with scenes of this religious nut freaking out. It drove me crazy. And while the movie wisely cut Bubo the mechanical owl from this version, he does make a brief cameo as a joke. In some respects it’s amusing, but it really didn’t fit in this film. It should have been an Easter Egg on a DVD.


This leads us to the issue of the 3D. As you may or may not know, this movie was originally filmed in 2D then converted to 3D rather late in the game. James Cameron labeled “Clash of the Titans” as a case of 3D done poorly. Initially I didn’t expect to see any difference, but as the film progressed I have to admit that some things did look a tad off. It was kind of like looking at an image through a glass bowl. The image looked like it was warped to simulate 3D. But at the same time, there were other scenes that looked fantastic in 3D like the Kraken and Pegasus scenes. I got the feeling that if Louis Leterrier knew from the beginning that this would be a 3D movie, he might have done it differently. The end result of this film is that it doesn’t add significantly to the theater experience. That being said, I still think it’s worth checking out in 3D and I think older 2D films like “Star Wars,” “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” “Jaws,” or “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” are very much worth converting to 3D.


The Bottom Line:

As you can see through this entire review I compared the new version of “Clash of the Titans” to the original again and again.I think my love for the earlier film definitely biased my review. But as we walked out of the theater, I found that the people who had never seen the original film liked this new one a whole lot better than the people that were fans of the original. So if you haven’t seen it, then I think you have a much better chance of enjoying it. But I still recommend that fans of the original check it out and do so in 3D. It’s kind of like seeing a new production of a favorite play of yours. It’s always interesting to see how it is reinterpreted by someone else.

Cast:

Sam Worthington as Perseus

Liam Neeson as Zeus

Ralph Fiennes as Hades

Jason Flemyng as Calibos / Acrisius

Gemma Arterton as Io

Alexa Davalos as Andromeda

Tine Stapelfeldt as Danae

Mads Mikkelsen as Draco

Luke Evans as Apollo

Izabella Miko as Athena

Liam Cunningham as Solon

Hans Matheson as Ixas

Ashraf Barhom as Ozal

Mouloud Achour as Kucuk

Ian Whyte as Sheikh Sulieman

Natalia Vodianova as Medusa

Nicholas Hoult as Eusebios

Vincent Regan as Kepheus

Polly Walker as Cassiopeia

Katherine Loeppky as Aged Cassiopeia

Luke Treadaway as Prokopion

Pete Postlethwaite as Spyros

Elizabeth McGovern as Marmara

Sinead Michael as Tekla

Ross Mullan as Pemphredo

Robin Berry as Enyo

Graham Hughes as Deino

Martin McCann as Phaedrus

Rory McCann as Belo

Kaya Scodelario as Peshet

Alexander Siddig as Hermes

Tamer Hassan as Ares

Danny Huston as Poseidon

William Houston as Ammon

Jamie Sives as Captain

Nina Young as Hera

Jane March as Hestia

Nathalie Cox as Artemis

Agyness Deyn as Aphrodite

Paul Kynman as Hephaestus

Charlotte Comer as Demeter


Directed by Louis Leterrier


Story:

Perseus (Sam Worthington) was raised by a fisherman’s family unaware that he actually was the bastard son of the God Zeus (Liam Neeson), but when Zeus’ nemesis, the God of the Underworld Hades (Ralph Fiennes) kills Perseus’ adopted family, he swears vengeance on the God and leads a quest of warriors to face Hades’ minions in order to save the city of Argos from the Kraken, which the Gods have promised to unleash if they don’t sacrifice the beautiful princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos).


Analysis:

The 1981 Greek mythology epic came out at the perfect time so that the products of the drug-induced free love of the ’60s were at the perfect age where they could appreciate the cheesiness of having an Oscar-winning actor proclaim lines like “Release the Kraken!” There isn’t as much cheese in Louis Leterrier’s remake, but it hasn’t completely lost the charm of the original even if it tries harder to be taken seriously and mostly works in that regard.


Wisely, they’ve created a far richer story to begin with, particularly in the reason for Perseus to go on such a dangerous quest, rather than just trying to save Princess Andromeda, and it’s a great set-up for a story told during a time when humans are starting to lose their faith in the Gods.


It takes a while before Sam Worthington finds his footing as Perseus, because there’s some horrendous overacting during the film’s first act, but where things really take off is when he’s joined by a band of merry (and not so merry) warriors with Liam Cunningham and a pair of hunting brothers providing enough levity to keep things light once the journey begins. Gemma Arterton is fantastic as the enigmatic Io, an immortal sent to protect and advise Perseus, and though her best moments are scattered throughout, the two of them clearly have strong chemistry. Mads Mikkelsen is equally enjoyable as Draco, the leader of the Argos army, and he really delivers in the action scenes.


Unlike the original, we’re not bouncing back and forth between earth and Mt. Olympus, which means the grandstanding of the Gods is mostly at the beginning and end. Either way, you can do far worse for Zeus and Hades than Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, two fine actors who make more out of the roles than Laurence Olivier did in his day. Fiennes is quite ferocious as Hades, making a couple spectacular FX-driven entrances that would make his Voldermort alter-ego jealous. Otherwise, it’s a fairly large ensemble of characters, many of whom appear in flashbacks or in the background as “the other Gods.”


With a title like “Clash of the Titans,” everything has to have an epic scale and that’s certainly the case with the fantastic settings used to establish this world from Argos to Mt. Olympus and the real-world locations where the band of warriors end up really enhances the experience.


Undoubtedly, the creatures need not only live up to Ray Harryhausen’s earlier work in the original movie but also to the CG breakthroughs in the 28 years hence, and this is where Leterrier’s team really delivers with creatures that have real weight and substance. The Scorpioks aren’t just giant CGI scorpions, instead maintaining the look and feel of some of the wildest ’50s movie monsters. Similarly, the Medusa is done in a believable way by combining a live actor with serpentine tail and “head snakes” but just imperfect enough to remind us of the original. Having real actors portraying creatures like Jason Flemyng as Calibos makes a huge difference in allowing their interaction with humans to be believable, his two sword battles with Perseus really working well. Even small details like the way Pegasus gallops off rocky mountains in flight adds to the way Leterrier realizes how characterization is just as important to the creatures as to humans. Calibos, the Medusa and the Kraken all have their origins explained, which wasn’t the case in the original movie, and at times, all of that exposition does slow the first half of the movie down. Fortunately, there’s enough action later on to make up for it.


Some of those action scenes might be edited a bit too quickly to follow at times, but it’s all well-choreographed. The warriors’ encounter with the Medusa more than lives up to the original, leading to an even more satisfying pay-off when the Kraken is unleashed. This isn’t a cheesy Claymation monster either, but one of the largest, fiercest creatures we’ve seen on screen since Peter Jackson’s “King Kong,” essentially what anyone can hope for in what becomes a giant monster movie. (Whoever directs the proposed “Godzilla” remake would be wise to use “Clash’s” CG team.)


There’s already been a lot of chatter about Warner Bros.’ decision to convert the movie into 3D after the fact, and besides the general annoyance by those who realize it’s little more than a money grab, the 3D doesn’t necessarily look bad or distracting, just that it’s so minimal it almost feels unnecessary. It’s hard not to fixate on the fact there isn’t that much of a difference whether you’re wearing the glasses or not, but at least they don’t go overboard with it, which has often been the case. In fact, it’s a shame they didn’t make more of an effort to release the movie in IMAX, which would have made a much bigger difference in one’s theatrical enjoyment of the scope Leterrier and his team were going for and achieved.


The Bottom Line:

Regardless of that, you still end up with a thoroughly entertaining and fun adventure that delivers exactly what is expected from a movie called “Clash of the Titans,” nothing more or less, and certainly a movie that true fans of Greek mythology will appreciate. What Leterrier has done with the source material is even more impressive when you realize the movie only began filming a year ago, an achievement that would normally be unheard of considering the movie’s dependence on CG to work as well as it does.

Cast:

Sam Worthington as Perseus

Liam Neeson as Zeus

Ralph Fiennes as Hades

Jason Flemyng as Calibos / Acrisius

Gemma Arterton as Io

Alexa Davalos as Andromeda

Tine Stapelfeldt as Danae

Mads Mikkelsen as Draco

Luke Evans as Apollo

Izabella Miko as Athena

Liam Cunningham as Solon

Hans Matheson as Ixas

Ashraf Barhom as Ozal

Mouloud Achour as Kucuk

Ian Whyte as Sheikh Sulieman

Pete Postlethwaite as Spyros


Directed by Louis Leterrier


Summary:

This reimagining of the 1981 classic falls flat on almost every level - the characters, the creatures, the story, the music, and on and on. You can see the film they were trying to make if you look hard enough, but it’s a mighty struggle… and no thanks to the ham-handed ‘3D’ experience.


Story:

The new “Clash of the Titans” centers around the same core characters as the Desmond Davis-directed original, with the notable addition of two major roles - Hades, played by Ray Fiennes and Io, played by Gemma Arterton. Perseus (Sam Worthington) is not the young romantic in this one. He is a cold, angst-filled demi-god bent on revenge after Hades, God of the Underworld, kills his adopted family after sinking their fishing boat during the sacking of Argos. Perseus learns he may be able to weaken and defeat Hades if he can destroy his pet - the Kraken. So for revenge, and not love, Perseus sets out on a similar quest to the original film, albeit with different motivations.


Analysis:

Full disclosure - I consider myself a fan of the original “Clash of the Titans.” So, yes, there will likely be some of you that think this review is just a case of sour grapes. So be it. But distancing myself as best I can from the original, this “Clash” is still not a good movie.


Let’s start the deconstruction with the characters. I hazard to guess you will not care about one of them. Not one. Perseus is a buzz-cut gladiator with one gear - mad. (And where did he get that haircut anyway? A feat no one else, not even the Gods, could manage in this film.) Io is a cold, meaningless narrator-type brought in as a love interest to Perseus. Andromeda (Davalos) is given little to do but charity and possibly die. Zeus (Neeson) is the bi-polar father of man that offers to forget man and forgive him in almost the same breath. Hades is a conniving, Denethor look-alike that at his weakest early on had more in common with Little Nicky than Lucifer. Fiennes’ Voldemort from the “Harry Potter” series is more assuming, off-putting character. The only character you might have some feeling for is Spyros (Postlethwaite), but he is only in the first 20 minutes of the film.


The creatures? The Kraken is ok, but never given much definition beyond a few giant tentacles and a small, Rancor-like head and toothy maul. Pegasus is black, but fine other wise. Medusa is a mess. The decision to make her ‘pretty’ did not translate well to the screen. It made her look like a cheap video game cut scene character… and for a tragic figure, she sure is in a good mood. What’s with all of the laughter? The Calibos bloodline is all fouled up and he’s also reduced to looking like the third orc from the left from any generic “Lord of the Rings” knock off. The Djinn were new characters, kind of desert nomads that looked like they were made from driftwood - kind of the bastard children of the Ko-dan from “The Last Starfighter.” Charon? Nope. Surely they got Cerberus right? Maybe, but he’s not in the movie. Bubo?! Yes! Bubo looks good… because he is exactly the same, but sadly reduced to the equivalent of a Jay and Silent Bob fart joke. The only creatures I thought were a marked improvement from the original were the Stygian Witches, but their new ‘eye’ was a setback for them, and the scorpions, which play a bigger role in the film.


The music? Uninspired. Going back and listening to the rousing score from the original–its brass-heavy heroic themes that were over the top, but completely hummable—was a real treat after hearing the music in the latest movie. I can safely say that I cannot remember one measure from it. It added absolutely nothing to the film… and given the grandeur of the source material, that’s sad.


The 3D experience? Don’t bother. This was a post-shoot 3D job and it is not a good one.


I could go on, but I think I’ll stop here. I didn’t really touch on the specific changes to the story from the original, but you can get the idea from the descriptions above that they are numerous. I think there is a good movie buried deep within the idea of this reimagining, but director Louis Leterrier and his crew did not come anywhere close to finding it. In the end, I recommend you stay home and watch the original. Maybe if we all concentrate hard enough, it will be like the 2010 “Clash of the Titans” never happened.

Cast:

Julianne Moore as Catherine Stewart

Liam Neeson as David Stewart

Amanda Seyfried as Chloe

Max Thieriot as Michael Stewart

R.H. Thomson as Frank

Nina Dobrev as Anna

Mishu Vellani as Receptionist

Julie Khaner as Bimsy

Laura DeCarteret as Alicia

Natalie Lisinska as Eliza

Tiffany Lyndall-Knight as Trina (as Tiffany Knight)

Meghan Heffern as Miranda

Rosalba Martinni as Maria


Directed by Atom Egoyan


Story:

Catherine Stewart (Julianne Moore) suspects her college professor husband David (Liam Neeson) has been cheating on her by sleeping with his students, so she hires a pretty young escort named Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) to try and seduce him to see if he falls to her sways. What Catherine gets instead is a tangled web of deceit as Chloe has her own plans for the couple.


Analysis:

Ever since he appeared on the independent film scene–it’s now been 26 years since his debut–Canada’s Atom Egoyan has shied away from the mainstream, only a few times delving into the thriller genre. With “What Lies Beneath,” he channeled Hitchcock, but with “Chloe,” a remake of French film “Natalie” adapted from a script by Erin Cresida Wilson (”Secretary”), he taps into more modern thriller fare, particularly the erotic thrillers of the ’80s and ’90s.


When Liam Neeson’s David Stewart doesn’t return home as scheduled from a business trip, his wife Catherine (Julianne Moore) suspects he’s been sleeping with a student. Having met a beautiful young escort in a bar, she approaches her with a proposition: seduce her husband and tell her all the details. This plan quickly turns sour as Catherine becomes equally disgusted and fascinated with the explicit details Chloe shares about her encounters with her husband. Soon, Chloe gets herself more entangled into all aspects of Catherine’s life, showing up unexpected at her job, seducing her son (played by Max Thierot) and even making strong advances at Catherine herself.


Atom Egoyan is a terrific filmmaker, but he still hasn’t quite got the right formula for making movies that might appeal to widespread mainstream audiences, at least outside Europe and Canada, as parts of “Chloe” probably won’t play to the suburban and rural audiences that go see studio-based thrillers. What keeps it firmly in “Egoyanland” is the growing relationship between Catherine and Chloe that ultimately ends with the two of them in bed in an erotically-charged scene that might shock those familiar with Seyfried’s squeaky clean image.


The thriller aspect mainly comes into play in the last act as Chloe starts manipulating and playing mind games with Catherine, and that’s where the film’s “Fatal Attraction” influences become more evident, even as the movie starts feeling derivative. The Sapphic nature of the relationship between the mixed-up Chloe and the confused Catherine does keep things generally more interesting even when the film drags.


Once again, Egoyan has gotten amazing performances out of his cast. Moore is terrific, as is Seyfried, two generation of actresses really bringing their A-game to every scene together, and Egoyan’s camera just loves them and makes them both look amazing on screen. Liam Neeson unfortunately finds himself outnumbered but comes across better than he has in similar films like “The Other Man.” Thierot has a number of good scenes with Seyfried, as Catherine’s teen son finds his own connection with the enigmatic Chloe.


It’s hard to describe the film’s distinctively stylish look, but Egoyan is clearly a director with an eye for dressing up the sets and the actors to complement the visual aesthetic of the film. Every shot seems to have been crafted to perfection down to the tiniest detail with a much brighter and whiter look than we often see in thrillers compared to the normal shadowy noir that filmmakers tend to prefer. Egoyan’s regular composer Mychael Danna does a good job creating the proper mood but taking a different approach than “What Lies Beneath.”


The Bottom Line:

With “Chloe,” Atom Egoyan dips his toe into the mainstream thriller pool and wades further into that territory than normal, but just stops short of fully submersing himself with a premise that probably would have been too strange for any major studio to greenlight. Still, he’s a talented visual filmmaker who gets fantastic performances from his actresses. Watching Seyfried come into her own as an actress going toe-to-toe with a powerhouse like Julianne Moore is thoroughly satisfying.

Cast:

John Cusack as Adam

Clark Duke as Jacob

Craig Robinson as Nick

Rob Corddry as Lou

Sebastian Stan as Blaine

Lyndsy Fonseca as Jennie

Crispin Glover as Phil

Chevy Chase as Repair Man

Charlie McDermott as Chaz

Lizzy Caplan as April

Collette Wolfe as Kelly

Aliu Oyofo as Nick at 17

Jake Rose as Adam at 17

Brook Bennett as Lou @ 17


Directed by Steve Pink


Story:

Four friends whose lives haven’t gone the way they planned converge on a ski resort for a weekend of partying, only to end up in a time machine disguised as a hot tub, which sends them back to the year 1986, giving each of them a chance to change a decision that led to their current situation.


Analysis:

Every once in a while, a comedy comes along that’s so outlandish and ridiculous you have to take notice just because you wonder to yourself “How on earth was this greenlit?” That’s not to say “Hot Tub Time Machine” is bad, quite the contrary, but the fact that its central premise is exactly what it sounds from the title makes you realize that the emphasis is on the first word of “high concept.” Then again, some may have thought the same thing when someone came up with the idea to put two dumb surfer dudes in a time machine or sent two stoners to find White Castle, and if nothing else, “Hot Tub Time Machine” should achieve similar cult status, even though there’s much more plot and heart involved in this movie, rather than merely relying on sophomoric humor for teen males… not that there’s anything wrong with that.


The decision that leads the central characters to their lesson in time travel comes about when Rob Corddry’s Lou ends up in the hospital after what his friends Adam and Nick think is a failed suicide attempt. The three friends have drifted apart since a fateful weekend at a ski resort 25 years earlier where they each made a decision that would forever change their lives. Hoping to cheer Lou up, they decide to return there for a weekend of partying, bringing along Adam’s shut-in nephew Jacob (Clark Duke). You can probably figure out what happens from there, as the four guys do a bit of excessive partying in a hot tub that malfunctions and sends them back to 1986.


The premise is beyond ridiculous and yet, it’s easy to relate to the idea of someone in their 30s or 40s wanting to go back in time and change a decision made that could remove the problems they’ve had in their life since then. Essentially, it’s a nostalgic throwback to the comedies of the ’80s like “Porky’s” and “Meatballs” if the young characters from those movies were revisited 25 years later. It’s a raunchier version of “The Big Chill” or “Peggy Sue Got Married” for the fraternity set. As much as there’s a strong plot amidst all the silliness, those looking for the type of raunchy humor typified by Apatow and Philips shouldn’t be disappointed either.


Either way, you couldn’t find better genius casting than John Cusack in the role of Adam, as he brings a familiar warmth and likeability to the role that makes it easier to relate to his problems with women. Cusack is so good at playing “the guy women break up with,” his casting is ironic on multiple levels, and the movie constantly plays up on that fact. Similarly, the casting of Chevy Chase and Crispin Glover was clearly done to bring another layer of nostalgia to the older audiences who remember them from the ’80s. Glover offers some of the craziest moments as a disgruntled bellboy who lost an arm in an accident, their time jaunt giving the four friends a chance to see that accident first-hand, a running gag that Corddry plays up for the biggest laughs. Chase pops in and out as a “hot tub technician” who seems to know more about what happened than he’s letting on.


Clark Duke tends to be the funniest guy in any movie he’s in, but not in the case where he has to contend with the one-two punch of Craig Robinson and Rob Corddry, who are hilarious either when alone or together. With a ridiculously-coiffed afro, Robinson’s Nick was once in a hot band who were poised to break it big before he gave it up to get married, but he’s now so hen-pecked he’s unable to cheat on his wife though he’s convinced she had an affair. Lou was beaten up badly 25 years earlier because his friends didn’t show up, and he’s in danger of reliving that horrible night if he doesn’t fix history. Essentially a character along for the ride with the least to gain, Duke is at his best when acting as a foil for Corddry, who never wanted his friend’s nephew to come along; their consistent squabbling does have a strong pay-off by the end.


Sometimes, the ’80s nostalgia is a little overbearing and heavy-handed like the guys’ first realization things aren’t right with a scene so packed with ’80s references it’s hard to accept the joke at first. Other times, the film scores with gags that pay loving tribute to ’80s classics like “Red Dawn”–uncoincidentally being remade by the film’s distributor MGM–or the clever use of Motley Crue in the closing credits.


It’s not a perfect movie by any means–Steve Pink does a competent job keeping it all flowing and keeping his cast reined in when necessary–but for a comedy that has such an outlandish premise, it always sticks to its guns in terms of maintaining its premise that time travel via group bathing is possible. As silly as it sounds, every gag is always delivered with a wink, because everyone involved is in on the joke that none of it is meant to be taken seriously.


The Bottom Line:

“Hot Tub Time Machine” certainly won’t be for everyone, but if you’re able to appreciate cult comedies like the first “Harold & Kumar” or “Dude, Where’s My Car?” or “Eurotrip” for what they are, you should have some indication whether you’ll be able to appreciate what is a consistently fun and genuinely funny movie.

Cast:

Jay Baruchel as Hiccup (voice)

Gerard Butler as Stoick (voice)

Craig Ferguson as Gobber (voice)

America Ferrera as Astrid (voice)

Jonah Hill as Snotlout (voice)

Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Fishlegs (voice)

T.J. Miller as Tuffnut (voice)

Kristen Wiig as Ruffnut (voice)

Robin Atkin Downes as Ack

Philip McGrade as Starkard (voice)

Kieron Elliott as Hoark the Haggard (voice)

Ashley Jensen as Phlegma the Fierce (voice)

David Tennant as Spitelout (voice)


Directed by Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders


Summary:

“How to Train Your Dragon” is an amazing 3D ride that will impress both kids and adults. This film does practically everything right and ends up being one of the best films I’ve seen in 2010. Any fans of Vikings or dragons are required to view this.


Story:

This film is based on the book by Cressida Cowell.


Hiccup is not your typical Viking. While his father Stoick is big and tough, Hiccup is small and wimpy. While other Vikings are battling their archenemies, the dragons, with swords and catapults, Hiccup is designing mechanical devices to protect the village from the reptiles. While the other Viking kids fight fires in the village when attacked by dragons, Hiccup is stuck manning the blacksmith shop. In short, he doesn’t fit in.


When Hiccup tests one of his dragon fighting devices in battle, he manages to take down one of the most deadly and rare dragons known to the Vikings. But when faced with the option of killing the wounded creature, he finds himself unable to do so. Not only that, he starts studying and helping the creature survive and regain flight. Hiccup soon learns that everything they thought about dragons was completely wrong. But when the world of the Vikings and the dragons collide again, which side will Hiccup take?


“How to Train Your Dragon” is rated PG for sequences of intense action and some scary images, and brief mild language.


What Worked:

Simply put, I was blown away by “How to Train Your Dragon.” I wasn’t expecting much from it, but as it played on the big screen I found myself quickly drawn into the story. As it progressed, I kept thinking, “Surely they’re going to screw this up somehow.” But the movie just kept on doing everything right up until the end.


First up is the animation. I saw this film in 3D and was quite impressed by it. This is a case of 3D done right. When the dragons take flight, it’s absolutely breathtaking and as impressive as any of the flying scenes in “Avatar.” As Hiccup and Toothless dive toward the ocean and fly around rocks, it’s like an amusement park ride. There are also some incredible scenes like when a cave is opened up and we see hundreds of dragons on the walls inside like bees. Or we see Vikings enter a cloud of fog and then the shape of a dragon attack them. But even when you have a Viking simply standing there talking, you can’t help but marvel at all the hairs on his coat, his bushy beard, and horned helmet. The 3D takes your appreciation of the animation to a whole new level. That animation is complimented by fantastic creature and set design. All of the dragons look amazing. (I noted that Toothless looked quite a bit different design-wise from all the other dragons. I actually thought he looked a little like Stitch from “Lilo & Stitch.” Sure enough, director Chris Sanders was writer, director, and voice of Stitch.) Combine them with the incredibly cool Viking houses and longboats and you have a visually impressive film.


The story is also good. It’s a pretty basic tale told over and over again. You could compare it to everything from “The Black Stallion” to “E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial.” But it’s told in a way that makes it seem fresh. You see Hiccup torn between two worlds. You see him try and win the affection of his father. You see him go from hating the dragons to loving them. It’s a predictable but fun journey. I was also particularly impressed with the grand finale. It’s a dragon battle as impressive as any you’ve ever seen.


The voice cast is quite good. I never would have thought of Gerard Butler when casting this film, but his voice perfectly suits Stoick. (He has a hilarious scene with Hiccup where he reveals where their Viking hats came from. I won’t spoil it here.) His Scottish brogue is well complimented by Craig Ferguson as Gobber. A lot of familiar names make up the Viking kids. They include America Ferrera as Astrid, Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Fishlegs, and Kristen Wiig as Ruffnut. But the most notable is Jonah Hill as Snotlout who, it feels like, does a little improvisation with his lines and that makes him stand out.


I also need to point out that the score by John Powell is first rate. It has been a long time since a movie score stood out to me, but this one did. The music as the dragon soars and does battle is just really great and perfectly compliments the story and animation.


The mark of a good family film is one that entertains both the kids and the adults. My kids loved it and so did I. Being a fan of both dragons and Vikings, it’s like they made this movie for me. But this movie was fun and exciting enough that adults can go see it without the kiddies and not be ashamed. It’s that much fun. Anybody that loves science fiction or fantasy should go check it out.


What Didn’t Work:

I don’t think the marketing of this film was done very well. The ads before it was released didn’t get me very excited. Now having seen the film, I can say the ads I’m seeing now still don’t do the movie justice. I have to give them some credit for not spoiling some of the exciting moments in the finale, but overall I have to say you should ignore the ads and just go check it out. Hopefully it performs well at the box office.


I also have to say I’m a little torn on the voice acting of Jay Baruchel as Hiccup. In some respects he perfectly fits the character due to his wimpy, occasionally pathetic voice. But other times his voice is so flat and lifeless you can’t help but wonder what the character would be like with another voice actor. Sometimes Hiccup seems to need more excitement and wonder in his voice, but it isn’t quite there. This is nitpicking, I admit.


I’ll also add that I thought the film needed a bigger scene where Hiccup flies on Toothless for the first time. Rather than having a big, emotional, exciting ‘first flight’ moment, it is jammed in a montage scene and is almost an afterthought. Fortunately later flight scenes capture the wonder and excitement, so this is yet another nitpick of mine.


I’ve had several parents ask me if this movie was appropriate for their kids. To that I’d say that there are a few intense moments where our heroes are menaced by the dragons. There’s also a massive final battle with a scary dragon that may freak some little kids out. My 5-year-old dove into mommy’s lap during the screening. So parents of sensitive kids may want to be on alert.


The Bottom Line:

I went into “How to Train Your Dragon” hoping to get a family film that I would enjoy with my kids. I walked out thinking I had seen one of the best films of 2010. Go check it out!

Cast:

Zachary Gordon as Greg Heffley

Robert Capron as Rowley Jefferson

Rachael Harris as Susan Heffley

Steve Zahn as Frank Heffley

Connor Fielding as Manny Heffley

Owen Fielding as Manny Heffley

Devon Bostick as Rodrick Heffley

Chloe Moretz as Angie Steadman

Karan Brar as Chirag Gupta

Grayson Russell as Fregley

Laine MacNeil as Patty Ferrell

Alex Ferris as Collin

Andrew McNee as Coach Malone

Belita Moreno as Mrs. Norton

Rob LaBelle as Mr. Winsky


Directed by Thor Freudenthal


Summary:

Some good laughs and strong performances make “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” a film that will entertain kids while not boring parents to death.


Story:

This film is based on the book series by Jeff Kinney.


Greg Heffley is about to start middle school, but he has a long list of concerns about doing so. He has yet to hit his growth spurt, so he looks like a boy among apes. He has an older brother that terrorizes him and has told him nothing but horror stories about the middle school experience. He has no idea which extracurricular activities to take. And most disconcerting is the fact that his best friend Rowley Jefferson still acts like an elementary school kid.


Greg comes up with a plan to become the 19th most popular kid in school. However, every step of his plan utterly backfires. Whether it’s mistakenly choosing the wrong after school activities or being shown up by the girls, his 6th grade year turns into utter disaster. Can Greg redeem himself by the end of the year?


“Diary of a Wimpy Kid” is rated PG for some rude humor and language.


What Worked:

My kids were fans of the “Wimpy Kid” books, so I was curious what they would think of the movie adaptation. Sure enough, they loved it. I don’t think I’ve seen them laugh so hard at a screening. After it was over, I asked them how closely the movie stuck to the original story. They then began rattling off a number of differences. Some were minor, but some of the other changes actually ended up being some of the funnier moments of the film. So I think fans of the book series will enjoy this movie.


There’s no question this is geared towards kids. The humor, characters, and situations are all designed to appeal to elementary kids about to go to middle school and kids currently in middle school. But fortunately there’s a fair amount here to entertain adults. You’ll either identify with your own trials and tribulations in middle school or you’ll identify with the parents who have to deal with the kids. But even I will admit that my wife and I laughed at some of the pee and booger jokes in the movie. Yes, they’re low forms of humor, but when set up correctly they work. A number of laughs come from seeing the older brother Rodrick terrorizing Greg. The rivalry escalates into the aforementioned pee incident that I won’t spoil further (and which I’m told was not in the books). Another source of laughs is the dorky kid Fregley who has a memorable Halloween costume and sets up a great booger joke. So while everything is for kids, adults may find themselves rediscovering their inner middle school kid and laughing at the gross out humor along with them.


I have to say that I was impressed with Zachary Gordon as Greg Heffley. He had the right mix of likeability and mischievousness to make him a believable character. He’s cocky without being too much so, and he screws up just enough to still be sympathetic. I think this is an actor you’ll be seeing a lot of as he gets older. Robert Capron was also good as Rowley Jefferson, the childish best friend. He’s like a kid-sized Chris Farley. Rachael Harris and Steve Zahn make a great team as Greg’s parents. A lot of kid’s movies and TV shows make the adult characters out to be morons (and there is some of that with the teachers in “Wimpy Kid”), but these two manage to come across as competent and likable. They’re one of the better parent portrayals I’ve seen in a while. Chloe Moretz is also good as Angie Steadman. I just saw her as Hit Girl in “Kick-Ass” last week and I have to say I’m amazed by the contrast in characters, though she certainly is good at playing characters mature beyond their years. Unfortunately her character doesn’t get a whole lot to do and I understand she wasn’t in the books either.


What Didn’t Work:

While I praised the film above for giving some laughs to adults, I do have to admit that there are long stretches of this film that will only appeal to kids. Those stretches are either not all that funny or they’re predictable. I’d even say that it takes about 30 minutes of running time before the movie really kicks in and starts generating good laughs. It’s these ‘Just OK’ parts of the movie that drag my rating down. Fortunately there are plenty of moments that come along and pull the pacing back up to speed and generate good laughs. You just have to stick with the movie long enough to get to them.


The Bottom Line:

“Diary of a Wimpy Kid” is a movie that kids will love and parents should enjoy without being bored to tears. It’s worth checking out in theaters if you have to entertain some kids over Spring Break.

Cast:

Jude Law as Remy

Forest Whitaker as Jake

Alice Braga as Beth

Live Schreiber as Frank

Carice van Houten as Carol

Chandler Canterbury as Peter

Joe Pingue as Ray

Liza Lapira as Alva

Tiffany Espensen as Little Alva

Yvette Nicole Brown as Rhodesia

RZA as T-Bone


Review:

Health care is on everyone’s mind these days; how much it costs, how much it’s going to cost, who’s going to pay for it. Should it be institutionalized or privatized. We all know where this is headed, a future world were people get their replacement organs from giant private conglomerates at exorbitant rates. And if they fall behind in their payments, company “Repo Men” come to collect.


Oh violence, is there any socio-economic problem too difficult for you to solve?


I am tremendously split on this film. On the one hand it is extremely, possibly intentionally, silly with a ridiculous premise and severe pacing issues. On the other it has an absurd sense of humor that action movies hardly ever attempt. In the end, it’s probably too idiosyncratic to appeal to too many people.


We can set aside for a moment the ridiculous nature of the premise. It’s the style of these kinds of sci-fi metaphors to boost their examples to extreme levels that may seem perfectly reasonable to a 15-year-old but are impossible to sustain disbelief in once you’ve been out in the real world. It is possible to take an extreme like that, like Alfonso Cuaron’s “Children of Men,” and make something tangible and real out of it.


Good satire can work that way, but action movies have not traditionally been the best vehicle for satire, and an action movie is certainly what director Miguel Sapochnik wants “Repo Men” to be.


The Union is the biggest and best of all the artificial organ companies, and Remy (Jude Law) is the best of The Union’s repo men. Having little conscience, a morbid sense of humor and apparently a high tolerance for blunt force trauma, it’s as if he was made for the job. Besides, the poor saps who buy the stuff know what they’re getting into, don’t they? Artificial hearts aren’t cheap and who’s going to pay for it? The government?


The problem is, it’s not particularly good as an action movie. The set up is fairly routine: his wife wants him out of his dangerous if lucrative line of work, but then Remy makes the classic mistake of taking ‘one last job’ and we all know how those always turn out. Soon he’s the recipient of an artificial heart of his own, but rather than making it easier to do his job it actually makes it quite a bit harder as for the first time he actually begins to feel something for his ‘clients.’


It’s a trite, overused set up for an action movie but if the craftsmanship is good enough in the set pieces you can usually get over it. Making his feature film debut, Sapochnik doesn’t quite have the experience to pull that off yet, or the talent to get over his lack of experience, leaving us with action beats that are short and perfunctory for the most part. There are some flashes of visual wit and charm, but they’re more like precursors of good things to come rather than elements of a good movie now. There is an entertaining big fight towards the end as Remy has to rely on a bag of carpenter’s tools to break into a high security fortress, but a lot of good will has been lost by then.


Part of that is because it’s very episodic. A lot of writers have made a lot of hay out of film’s pretty stringent use of the three-act structure, but there are lot of good reasons it’s stuck around as long as it as. In particular it allows for a steady building of tension in a medium where, for all practical purposes, your time is extremely limited.


Sapochnik and screenwriters Eric Garcia and Garret Lerner (adapting Garcia’s novel) have decided to fly in the face of convention though, creating a film that ebbs and flows more like a novel. It’s an interesting choice, but it doesn’t really work, again because he’s cramming it into the skin of an action movie. These kinds of films really need a constant state of rising tension and danger in order to deliver a satisfying payoff, not the fits and starts movement “Repo Men” delivers.


That said, there actually is, if you’ll forgive the pun, some real heart in “Repo Men,” at least as far as relationship with fellow repo man Jake (Forest Whitaker) goes. Jake is like the simplified version of Remy, not interested in anything but doing his job and having fun for as long as it lasts. He’s honestly conflicted about what to do about Remy’s refusal to do his job and what it will mean for him, and Whitaker does a good job bringing that out. We care for Remy because Jake cares for him.


“Repo Men” also has a wonderfully ridiculous sense of humor, though it may not play with everyone. Still for all its faults, I don’t think any movie where an 8-year-old (Tiffany Espensen) performs grisly knee surgery with the joy of a day at double dutch can be all bad.


Not everyone’s going to like that sort of thing, though, and outside of Jake and a few excellent douchebag moment with Liev Schrieber the performances are too flat to draw anyone in. The reality is, this movie was filmed going on two-and-a-half years ago and that usually doesn’t bode well for your average theater-goer’s enjoyment. It’s too weird, too unfocused to have anything but cult film written all over it. If you like strange, dark humor and can sit through a lot of boredom to get there, you might like it about as middling as I do. Most people won’t be able to put up with it that long, though.

Cast:

Matt Damon as Roy Miller

Greg Kinnear as Clark Poundstone

Khalid Abdallas as Freddy

Brendan Gleeson as Martin Brown

Amy Ryan as Lawrie Dayne

Jason Isaacs as Major Briggs

Yigal Naor as Al Rawi


Review:

Lots of people early on labeled the Iraq War this generation’s Vietnam. The comparisons are as obvious as they are misleading: the political certainty of the invasion; the moral ambiguity of it’s aftermath; the uprising of the local populace and seemingly unending arrogance of US policy makers. There are a lot of differences as well, but certainly the way Hollywood has taken to Iraq and what it says about America of today (or at least America’s leaders) is every bit the same as the way it handled Vietnam.


Paul Greengrass’s highly fictionalized adaptation of Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s appraisal of occupied-Iraq (and her occupiers) is the latest, but far from the best or most insightful. Mediocre and painstakingly obvious would be more descriptive. It’s title and source material aside, “Green Zone” isn’t particularly interested in life in the Green Zone except as fodder for it’s overwhelming desire to point fingers about everything that went wrong with the Iraq War.


Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller (Matt Damon) is the kind of guy you really want to be a soldier. Smart, dedicated and tough, willing to do what needs to be done to accomplish his mission. He’s definitely the kind of guy you want looking for weapons of mass destruction in a war zone. Unless of course you have vested interest in WMD’s never being found.


Greengrass’s “Green Zone” is about half political thriller and half action thriller and unfortunately it’s only successful at one of those halves. Doubly unfortunate, the half that does work isn’t the part he’s interested in.


After his third high value WMD target comes up empty, Miller starts to think the unthinkable for a country that built it’s case for war on those very weapons. That the intelligence isn’t just bad, but that the people giving the intelligence out may in fact know it’s bad if not out and out false. The only way to find out is to find the secretive ‘Magellan’ the Pentagon’s main source for WMD data.


After a local (Khalid Abdallas) cuing Miller into a local Ba’athist general in the area brings the CIA and Special Forces landing on his simple little war, Miller realizes there is more going on than he’s being told.


Just in case you don’t get what Greengrass and screenwriter Helgeland are hinting at, they’ve decided to spell it out, ad nauseum. That the U.S. lied its way into the Iraq War using WMD as a stalking horse, and then screwed up post-invasion by arrogantly refusing to learn anything about the country it had occupied.


There is certainly some truth to that, but there’s also a great deal of cynicism. And while no one ever lost money beating against the cynicism involved in the Iraq War, Greengrass seems intent on giving it the old college try. Incompetence and/or negligence aren’t enough you see. Something that has gone as badly wrong as Iraq must have been the product of purposeful misinformation and criminal ass-covering.


With no story in the real world along those lines appearing that seems actually plausible, Greengrass and company have done the next best thing and created the Hollywood fantasy of the discovery of that story. How much you’re going to like “Green Zone” is going to depend a great deal in how much you already subscribe to that opinion, because you’re going to spend quite a lot of time hearing about it. When the film does buckle down to act like a real thriller it does quite a good job of it, but you’re more than likely to have lost patience with it by that point.


Instead we get Miller, as the stand in for your average soldier most likely to be hurt by these kinds of manipulations, bouncing back and forth between the local CIA agent (Brendan Gleeson), a reporter more interested in stories than facts (Amy Ryan) and a Pentagon official (Greg Kinnear) roughly standing in for Paul Bremer, as he tries to figure out Magellan’s identity.


On the one hand it’s not particularly fair to judge the film by its politics rather than its qualities as a movie. On the other hand its politics are so inseparable from its own identity that’s probably impossible. Which wouldn’t be so bad if weren’t so hamhanded about the whole thing.


It’s not enough that the antagonists are wrong, they’ve got to be unremitting douchebags who really do deserve anything awful that happens to them. You know, just to make sure you know just how wrong they are. It’s impossible to shake the feeling that “Green Zone” has bought in too heavily into it’s own bullsh*t. If you don’t happen to agree with the filmmakers about the war, they’re going to make you believe. If you agree already, you’re likely to feel insulted by Greengrass offering up something that’s every bit the whitewash WMD’s were and treating it like real truth.


Eventually Miller gets a line on the mysterious Magellan and sets out to bring him in, to set things straight once and for all, initiating a fantastic chase replete with gun battles, car chases and exploding helicopters. Not to mention Greengrass’s trademark shaky handicam work. It’s sad to see a talented director reach the end of his bag of tricks, but I think we’re seeing it here.


What’s really sad is I can’t help but feel that the filmmakers think they’ve probably delivered some sort ambiguous, introspective accusation against what happened in Iraq. It’s not.