Photo courtesy of Starz Film Center

Nothing terribly exciting happens in this film, and it tends to drag in parts. However, when you are in a relationship where you think you know your mate so well, sometimes it takes a few days alone together to realize you know nothing. This is where they keep your interest. The viewer gets the taste of intimacy that you only find in your own home.

Writer/director Maren Ade films the majority of the scenes in medium shots. You are part of the conversation and whispers. This personal assessment of a couple that is far from perfect and may not know each other as well as they thought is deep but not always interesting. With camera work and silence, it gets more into the characters heads, forcing the viewer to not only read the subtleties but also closely watch the character’s faces.

Through the film, Chris and Gitti seem to go through a lifetime of emotions from childish courting through age-old betrayal. It doesn’t seem like there would be enough time together to experience this range of emotion, but they do — another key to how new they really are to each other.

“You’re such a bad actor,” she says to him.

“Why?”

“You’re trying to put your arm around me. You never do that.”

Her pure shock that he wanted to walk down the street touching her makes you wonder how long they’ve been together and what will happen in their future. While invited to two pivotal dinners with a couple of aquaintances, it is then that you see the real test in the relationship.

Minichmayr and Eidinger are perfect for each other in this film. The chemistry is real and raw. The love scenes are filmed tastefully and privately in the dark. It’s almost embarrassing when they look at each other because you feel like you are invading someone’s privacy. Their connection is fitting for the film and for each other.

Viewers must be able to make it through all the movie’s subtitles with their eyes open. If you can get through some of the slower parts of the film, where you may just as well be watching someone’s personal home movies, it is an interesting examination of how a couple works, or a lot of the time, doesn’t work.

Adrien Brody, who put on 25 pounds of muscle for his role of Royce, was chosen to lead an elite group of warriors to hunt and kill the merciless alien race, known as predators, on their planet.  Brody says, “This is a game preserve, and we’re the game.”  Unfortunately, that was virtually the entire plot, but certain elements from the 1987 original were inserted into this version, such as the musical score.

After waking up and falling from the sky, Royce lands on the predators’ home planet, with other heavily armed people arriving shortly after, which commences the blood fest. Adrenalin can be felt rushing through your veins because this film is a “cat-and-mouse” game.  After managing to avoid booby-traps, the group runs into dog-like aliens and is attacked, but the aliens retreat after a whistle calls them.

Later on, the group meets Laurence Fishburne’s character, Noland, who warns them about an ongoing conflict between classic predators and “super” predators.  This is now a struggle for survival for the group.

After escaping from an abandoned mining station, where they originally hid with Noland, they make a break for ship they were told about when one of the predators catches up to them, forcing the character with a katana to stay behind and hold off the predator.  This scene seemed to originate from Sonny Landham’s confrontation scene in the original “Predator.”

After a major secret about Topher Grace’s character, Edwin, was revealed, it was up to Royce to kill the last “super” predator.
Overall, this film was relatively interesting, but some of the content wasn’t original.  With a $40 million budget, this film could have been better.  The new predator creatures were cool, and the art direction was solid, but the supporting cast, beside Brody, could have been better in terms of acting.  There was also some somewhat unnecessary sexual humor here and there.

As a whole, however, this film will satisfy “Predator” die-hards, as well as anybody looking for a film with plenty of action.  If you’re looking for a film that offers high-adrenaline action that will keep you engaged with the film the whole time, then this film will meet that criteria.  This was a good B flick, but it wasn’t anything extraordinary.

The villainous Gru (voiced by Steve Carell) tries to rope lovable orphans Edith (Dana Gaier), Agnes (Elsie Fisher) and Margo (Miranda Cosgrove) into his nefarious plans. Photo courtesy of Universal Pictures

Steve Carell is able to transpose his personality from flesh to cartoon through his character Gru.  Gru aspires to be the best villain in the world, so he plans on stealing the moon.  Getting in his way are the most adorable and intellectual girls you have ever seen on the big screen.

Agnes (Elsie Fisher), one of the little girls, instantly captures your heart with her adorable voice and sense of purity.  But the main representative of the girl’s side of this film is Margo, played by Miranda Cosgrove from Nickelodeon’s “iCarly.”

Cosgrove has come a long way from playing the little girl in “School of Rock” opposite Jack Black in 2003.  She headlines her own television show, stars in movies and has even released an album.  Cosgrove’s character Margo is the backbone of the three girls in “Despicable Me,” and she takes care of the other two.  Margo tends to be too realistic with her sisters, occasionally popping their bubbles when she feels it is needed.

The villain, other than Gru, is Vector, who is played by Jason Segel, who we know as the smooth guy from “I Love You Man” last year.  In “Despicable Me” he is Gru’s arch nemesis with a soft spot for cookies.  Vector out smarts Gru on occasion but doesnt think twice about his actions. Segel is hard to recognize in the film because Vector is pretty uncharacteristic from his normal personality. Segel described on his website that playing in an animated movie was freeing:

“All of a sudden you get to be something that has nothing to do with the fact that I’m a 6′ 4″, kind of lumbering dude … all of a sudden I could be 5′ 3″, wear an orange jumpsuit, and be nerdy. You know in real life I’m, like, SUPER good looking.”

“Despicable Me” hits the audiences’ hearts from all angles.  It has the bad guy who isn’t as hard as he makes himself out to be alongside the three cutest girls the silver screen has ever seen. Even though I haven’t mentioned it before, the utterly hilarious Minions who help out Gru almost steal the film. The Minions speak a different language, but it is still easy to connect to them and even want to take them home.

All in all “Despicable Me” is a fun movie that brings any audience member back to childhood.  If you have younger siblings or kids please take them to watch this film; it will not disappoint even for a second and will give them something new to talk about for weeks.

The problem is Shyamalan, who undisputedly had complete control over this film as director, producer and writer.  Before “The Village” viewers got ecstatic about Shyamalan’s movies and flocked to the theaters like sheep.  Shyamalan has hit the threshold with these films so instead of audiences getting excited about his productions they now wince in pain a little when hearing about his involvement.

“The Last Airbender” is not a total flop by any means, but with a $150-million budget, more is definitely expected.  The visual effects are great especially, in 3-D, and the fighting choreography is top notch.  The young actors pull off the fight scenes fairly convincingly, but the acting in this film is sub par to say the least.

One of the main enemies in the film, Prince Zuko, is played by “Slumdog Millionaire” star Dev Patel.  In Slumdog, Patel is mind blowing and even took home several awards and numerous nominations.   But in “The Last Airbender,” Patel is just another cast member under the direction of Shyamalan.  With the weak screenplay and awful direction of Shyamalan, Patel is forced to water down his performance to fit the rest of the movie.  It is a sad situation because audiences have seen both Shyamalan and Patel at their best, but neither could deliver in “The Last Airbender.”

“The Last Airbender” has the possibility of becoming a great trilogy like “Lord of The Rings” but not without better direction and screenplay.  For children this movie will be enjoyable unless they are big fans of the original Nickelodeon cartoon.

The characters look almost nothing like the original cartoon characters, and the character personalities don’t exactly match, either.  Shyamalan went out of his way to cast anything but Asian actors and a majority of Indian actors and extras, all practicing Kung Fu.  Dante Basco, who is the original voice over for Zuko in the cartoon, was interested in playing Zuko in the film, but was ignored by Shyamalan.  Basco is now boycotting the film for opening weekend, stating on his personal blog:

“It’s not fair at all; the tables are tipped unfavorably for ethnic actors.”

The last thing to touch is the retrofitted 3-D added to the film after its full production.  The 3-D in this film is totally unnecessary and takes away the clear and realistic technology we have come so far along with in the film industry.  Unless a film is made to be in 3-D all it does is make the film look like we are watching it out of a VCR.  After watching “Clash of the Titans” and “The Last Airbender” I say death to 3-D unless the movie is filmed with 3-D as a fore thought or it is a computer graphic cartoon for kids.

The film is based on M. Night Shyamalan’s  “Avatar: The Last Airbender,” an animated-television series — not to be confused with James Cameron’s ” Avatar” — which aired 60 episodes from 2005 to 2008 on Nickelodeon.

For thousands of years, four powers have divided the world into equal nations: the Water Tribe, Earth Kingdom, Fire Nation and Air Nomads. In each group only a few individuals, called Benders, have the ability to control their element using magic or martial arts. The nations coexisted peacefully until the Fire Nation initiates a war to control the world. Only one person is left who can manipulate all of the elements and stop the Fire Nation. But the Avatar has disappeared.

A century passes, and there seems to be no chance of stopping the Fire Nation’s conquest. Until waterbender Katara (Nicola Peltz) and her brother Sokka (Jackson Rathbone), happen to find the lost Avatar who has been encased in an iceberg for 100 years. The last airbender, Aang (Noah Ringer), is a twelve-year-old boy who must learn to master all of the elements, stop the Fire Nation’s rampage and restore order to the world.

Rated PG for violence, “The Last Airbender” is a live-action movie filled with fantasy and adventure. The film spans 95 minutes and is available in 2-D and 3-D. Check theater listings for times, including early 12:01 a.m. screenings the morning of July 2.

The film “Invisible Voices,” which debuted June 21, 2010, captures the essence of those who have to live with their disability and reveals the confusion, depression, everyday struggles, tears and even laughter.

While some of the cast members’ disabilities were caused by accidents, others were born with their disability or suffered a worsening of their condition over time.

Billy Allen, Sandy Lahmann, Rick Modderman, Rebecca Shields, Kevin Peti and Kelly Tobin all live in Colorado and make up the stellar cast of “Invisible Voices.” It is easy to associate them among the bravest of the brave for sharing their lives. From their family and friends leaving them, to their willingness to succeed, each of their stories make them powerful beyond measure.

Rick Modderman, who worked for a Wall Street-based brokerage firm, has lived with his paralysis for the past 22 years. Growing up as a child he led a normal life. He loved to party and played golf regularly. In high school, he played competitive golf and even planned on going pro.

One night, he and a friend decided to ride motorcycles in the dark. As Modderman caught up to his friend, he suggested they take a ride through the golf course where he worked and often practiced. These were roads that Modderman knew all too well so they agreed to go.

While riding along the golf trails, Modderman noticed the roads were darker than he thought. His friend had already sped along and was no longer in sight. He pushed his bike, trying to find his way back onto city streets, but his tires lost traction causing him to lose control of the bike.

As the bike fell to the ground, Modderman’s legs touched the back of his head, breaking eight ribs, and causing multiple lacerations, as well as paralysis.

It would take Modderman years before he could finally overcome the pain and depression and acknowledge the mobility of his lower limbs was gone forever.

Twenty-two years later, Modderman is now a regional sales manager for a medical-supply company based out of Denver.

“I would not wish to walk again, but for everyone that isn’t confined to a wheelchair [should] have to live life for three days in a wheelchair so they would have a new respect for the man or woman that has to spend the rest of their lives in [one],” Modderman says whenever he is asked if he wishes to walk again.

Rebecca Shields has lived her entire life legally blind. Throughout life she has managed to make a way for herself all on her own.

When her first son was born, the hospital threatened to take him away because of her disability. She refused to give her baby up for adoption and wouldn’t leave the hospital without him. The doctors kept trying to tell her it would be an unsafe environment for a newborn baby because both parents were blind.

No matter how hard they tried to coerce Shields into putting her child up for adoption she refused. Using the only option left, the hospital allowed her to take her baby home and assigned a social worker to do a follow-up report after the baby was released into the custody of both parents. When the social worker arrived she was completely amazed.

“This is the cleanest and safest house I’ve visited all week,” she said.

The social worker commended her for her courage and never returned. Since then, Shields has birthed two more kids and adopted two, as well. She manages to provide for her family, giving them the essentials that are needed for survival: food, water, clothing and shelter. She is undeterred by her disability but driven by it to accomplish more.

Her oldest now lives alone in an apartment and attends college. She has two that are in high school and one who is in junior high. She married twice, provided for her children and herself and she even took the time out to get herself a service dog named Rizzo.

“It’s time to take care of me,” Shields said.

“Invisible Voices” helps those who do not struggle with a disability to better understand those who have to live with disabilities every day.

To get your copy of “Invisible Voices” go to: Invisiblevoices.org and enter special code ADA2010 to get the special price of $25 until July 15, 2010.

Every place has their urban legends, and Staten Island is no different. As a kid in the 80s, living in Staten Island you knew the urban legend of an escaped mental patient who lived in the tunnels under the old abandoned Willowbrook Mental Institution who would come out at night and snatch little children. Or at least, that’s what your parents told you so that you would behave.

Though details may differ from family to family, you knew he was out there to take you away. This is the story the directors of “Cropsey” want to share with filmgoers.

Directors Joshua Zeman and Barbara Brancaccio both had grown up on Staten Island. Though they didn’t know each other, they each knew different versions of the Cropsey legend. They chose to look into the stories, attempt to find the truth and film this documentary.

In 1987 Jennifer Schweiger, a 13-year-old girl with Down syndrome, went missing and the community worked together to find her. The “boogeyman” from Staten Island seemed to be real. Schweiger was just one of five children who disappeared over the decade, and the community wanted answers.

Though the evidence in Schweiger’s case was circumstantial, when they found Andre Rand, a homeless man who lived in the woods around the abandoned institution, the neighbors pointed to him. Once they found Schweiger’s body buried in the forest where Rand slept, authorities felt it was enough to put him away.

During the filming, Rand was to be tried for another disappearance that happened 20 years earlier, so they actually had recent footage of him and contacted him during the trial. Rand is downright frightening. He had some of the scariest eyes in history and it’s quite clear that he is not all there. Why wouldn’t you blame the crazy guy with the psychopath eyes? One witness for the current case said, “He’s a creep. Just look at him.” He’s crazy so he must have done it.

It’s always interesting to research urban legends and see what parts of them may be true. However, ignorance is bliss. Some of the more disturbing parts of the film aren’t of the kidnappings but of the footage from a television exposé about the institution before it was shut down. To see the mentally ill children in that situation was truly heartbreaking. The fact that it took 10 years after the exposé to close it down was worse.

The footage of the filmmakers walking through the building at night is comparable to the likes of “The Blair Witch Project” except this is real. When different details such as the possibility of Satanists being involved in all the kidnappings start popping up, the viewer is left to question whether the right person is in jail or if he’s the only one that should be.

These people just want closure in their community and lives, and it’s hard to see if they will ever get it. Is it possible that the real Cropsey is still out there and they just haven’t found him yet? It’s difficult to look away from the film because you might miss part of the story. It would be a sin to miss this real-life mystery that keeps the viewer guessing.

The man is Salim Hamdan and they are asking the identity of his wife and daughter. What could be more frightening than being interrogated about your loved ones?

A scene from Laura Poitras' "The Oath." Photo courtesy of New Directors/New Films.

Hamdan was a driver for Osama bin Laden, and he was in prison for his alleged involvement with the September 11, 2001 attacks.  It is Hamden’s innocence that is so disturbing, as he is also the first man who faced the controversial military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.

Hamdan’s brother-in-law, Abu Jandal, is the central protagonist in the film as he tells his stories from his taxi cab and his home in Yemen.  As one of bin Laden’s former bodyguards, it is Jandal who introduced Hamdan to bin Laden in the first place.  Jandal seems like a warm, loving father, a truly religious man and caring person — not at all the kind of person you would believe would have anything to do with terrorism.  While Jandal lives with his wife and family in Yemen, Hamdan waits in prison, going through some questionable interrogations, writing letters to keep in touch with his family.

It is Hamdan’s letters that act as a ghost as they are read in voice-over through the film. Though Jandal is stoic throughout, he obviously carries the burden of his brother-in-law being in prison. Jandal’s current life is featured against press footage of Hamdan’s trial and his fight with the Supreme Court on his civil rights and prisoner treatment.

Jandal is difficult to read as he does a number of television interviews. His opinions seem to differ on who he is speaking to and, seemingly, who may be watching.

While he flip-flops on his opinions, he also tells an outright lie to one of his customers about the camera in the taxi.  He discusses how he has left the Jihad; however, he feels he still has a position where he should educate about it.

One of the scariest moments in the film is where he is speaking with some young men about Jihad.

“Why does Sheikh Osama love the guys, and why do they love him? Because he treated them like his sons, and they treated him like a father.  A lot of youth missed a father figure.  But they found it in bin Laden.  I was one of those men.”

It’s difficult to believe that bin Laden could have any humanity at all with the damage that he has done, but he served as a mentor to these young men.  He filled a gap in their lives.

“The Oath” is a civil rights movie first and foremost. Director Laura Poitras allows you to question the protagonist but lets you see his humanity at the same time.  She shows you how our country was looking for justice but allows you to see that we don’t always go about things the right way.  It is an open-minded view into the 9/11 attacks where she tries to show you all sides of the situation and gets you thinking about who we all are.

“The Oath” plays at Starz FilmCenter June 18-24.

Most experienced moviegoers would tell us younger generation movie watchers it has been decades since Hollywood produced a western film. After watching “Jonah Hex” it is impossible for us to disagree.  What happens when you have mediocre actors, an inexperienced director and terrible writers?  You get “Jonah Hex,” the hands-down worst film of the year.

Megan Fox in "Jonah Hex."

The actors in this film prove to viewers why they can never be taken seriously.  Megan Fox has already started the timer on the bombing of her acting career, but this film will cut the red wire and bomb it in advance. Fox shoes how unimportant she thinks acting is to being a movie star.  She plays a hooker in the film, which is unbelievable because of how amazingly gorgeous she is.  It’s hard for audiences to connect with her character because the writers forgot to explain why she is in love with Hex or what her purpose even is.

Josh Brolin plays Jonah Hex who is a rugged confederate army traitor helping out the American government.  In “No Country for Old Men” we all cheered for him while he ran from a notorious killer.  In “Jonah Hex,” however, viewers want the main character to fail just so the movie can end. Brolin tries his best to carry the film on his back but fails to say the least.

Simply put, “Jonah Hex” is awful.  This film should have never been made and makes me wonder how much money Hollywood producers have just sitting around waiting to be wasted.  If you don’t believe me, send your worst enemy to this film and see how much more the situation escalates afterward.  “Jonah Hex” is the longest 72 minutes ever recorded on film.

I not only dislike the film, but the fact that this film was even approved to be produced by filmmakers.  I don’t understand how this film has passed through so many people’s hands without being cut from being shared with the public.  “Jonah Hex” should anger its viewers because it is a direct attempt for Hollywood producers to rob viewers of their money for an exchange of 72 minutes of garbage. We must demand better from Hollywood so we never have to experience a film like this again.

In 2006 it was “The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift;” in 2008 it was “Never Back Down” and “Kung Fu Panda.” Towards the end of the film the main character goes from being zero to hero and makes an incredible comeback to become the drift king, tournament champion or savior of the village.

Jackie Chan and Jaden Smith in the 2010 remake of "The Karate Kid."

I know I’m missing a million other films that have a similar plot, but for me 1984’s “The Karate Kid” was the original.

Yes, the 2010 “The Karate Kid” is a remake, but the plot almost exactly reflects the original Mr. Miyagi version. Because it is, similar viewers won’t be disappointed. What makes this movie better than the original film is Will Smith’s son is the main actor.

Jaden Smith blows the audience away in this film.  Ralph Macchio as the original “The Karate Kid” was weak to say the least; the only thing that saved him was the great onscreen chemistry with Pat Morita.  But Smith has chemistry with everyone onscreen, which reaches far beyond chemistry into well-rehearsed skill.   Smith is far from riding the coattails of his father and mother, who are both blockbuster stars, but “The Karate Kid” is going to show Hollywood how much money the Smith household can bring to a film when hired.

Will and Jada Smith produced the film and promised to keep the film closely related to the original.  The Smiths showed audiences that remakes could be done well if delivered well.  “The Karate Kid” delivers its audience great acting, great writing and top-notch producing.

The only downfall I could find was Jackie Chan’s performance.  In “The Karate Kid,” Chan tries his hardest to play a decrepit man who can barely move.  But he’s freaking Jackie Chan!  No matter how much you pay Chan he can’t play a normal old man who doesn’t kick ass.  It’s a little too much to ask the audience to believe the former Bruce Lee stuntman can’t kick butt all day everyday.

When going to this film expect excellence.  It is a remake I know, but it was put together so well, and the actors perform so convincingly.  “The Karate Kid” is definitely not a hardcore-action film; it’s more of a film you can take the whole family to — little ones included.  Most family films you go to bore the major demographic, but “The Karate Kid” hits all the nails on the head.

Plot:

With “Sex in the City 2” (complete with the rumored cat fighting among the stars during production) set to hit theaters this summer, the “chick flick” genre is attempting to hold its own among the action, family-oriented and comedy movies already out and set to be released in the next few months.  However, “Mother and Child,” another movie also featuring a predominantly female cast, is by no stretch of the imagination just another chick flick.  But rather, it is a compelling melodramatic character study that is simultaneously both heart wrenching and heart warming.

Veteran writer and director Rodrigo Garcia is a pro at scripting and helming family-centric motion pictures, having written and directed many episodes of critically acclaimed HBO dramas like “The Sopranos,” “Big Love” and “In Treatment” and movies like “Six Degrees.”

The subject of adoption is the sun that the characters and their stories revolve around in this emotionally turbulent movie. Adoption is already heavy on the general public’s mind with high-profile celebrities like Madonna, Angelina Jolie and Sandra Bullock recently expanding their families through the sometimes-contentious legal process. And of course there is the highly controversial case of the mother who returned her adopted child to Russia. This film adds even more insight into the matter.

Annette Bening (“American Beauty”) plays Karen, an emotionally broken, bitter 50-year-old woman, who has never gotten over being forced to give up her daughter for adoption 35 years earlier. She has built metaphorical walls around her heart and life and is unable to form any meaningful relationships with anyone other than her elderly mother who constantly reminds her to “not get her hopes up” about anything resembling something positive or hopeful.

Eileen Ryan (“I Am Sam”) plays Nora, the woman who was given up for adoption and has grown into what appears to be a self-assured, accomplished attorney. But we quickly come to realize she is really just as emotionally damaged as her biological mother.  She uses her sexuality as a coping mechanism and seduces any man she can, including her new boss (Samuel L. Jackson), in order to gain a semblance of control in her world where she feels uneasy and abandoned because of her parental past.

Kerry Washington (“Ray”) plays Lucy, a young wife unable to get pregnant and desperate to adopt and achieve what she thinks is her lifelong dream of being a mother, at the same time silence the less-than-covert criticisms of her mother-in-law.

Not unlike the critically acclaimed 2004 movie “Crash,” the plot lines of “Mother and Child” intertwine in an almost-unnoticeable and never-contrived way.

Incredibly sexy, painful and touching performances by each of the lead actresses plunge you into the depths of their tempestuous character wells, making eyes water and lips curl as you ride the emotional mega-rollercoaster with them.

Screen veterans Jackson and Jimmy Smits, may have given this movie some of the best performances of their careers by simply reinforcing the stars of the film with superb low-key, realistic portrayals of the men who love and support the women. Also contributing a great performance to the supporting cast of characters is S. Epatha Merkerson (“Law and Order”) as Lucy’s protective but pull-no-punches mother Ada.

On the surface “Mother and Child” is an entertaining watch, if only for allowing the audience a chance to see the actors, both lead and supporting, in challenging roles that play against type and really display their acting abilities and skills.

But at the deeper, more emotional and cerebral core I believe Garcia was intentionally drilling to strike; his film is an incredibly woven cinematic work of art that demonstrates just how strong the bond that makes up the title of the film is — just in time for Mother’s Day.

Billionaire Tony Stark must contend with deadly issues involving the government and his own friends, as well as new enemies due to his superhero alter ego Iron Man.

Bottom Line:

You shouldn’t have to be a fan of comic books to enjoy a certain type of movie, but rather a good movie like “Iron Man 2” can make you a fan of the source material.

The Pre-Review:
I’ll let you in on a little secret — I’m a com-bo fanboy. For those who don’t know what that means, comic books are my guilty pleasure. From my pre-teens to my mid-20s I collected various comics like X-Men, The Avengers and Spider-Man. I’m a regular visitor to Marvel.com and keep up with the current comic storylines by reading Wikipedia and various websites dedicated to the events and happenings of the comic book world.

So, with all that said, let me tell you, I loathe most live-action adaptations of comic book series. Just a couple of recent examples off a long list of what I consider bastardized film versions of graphic novels would be the entire X-Men franchise and the “Superman Returns” movie from a few years ago.

There are a couple of inherent problems with making a first-rate movie based on any major comic book that few studios or directors take time to solve. If they attempt to cut corners and not address these issues, the movie will ultimately fail. However, a quality movie that appeals to both diehard comic book fans and casual movie-goers can be made without butchering the source material. As with any film, the right combination of writing, direction and acting can keep a movie from being pigeonholed the into direct-to-video category and move it into summer blockbuster fare like the 2008 movies “Iron Man” and Christopher Nolan’s hugely successful “The Dark Knight.”

As with most pieces of literature (comics or otherwise) adapted for film, Hollywood usually dumbs down the subject matter in hopes of drawing in a wide range of movie-goers and huge box office returns.

The other unavoidable problem with making a successful film based on long-running, iconic comic book characters and/or groups like “The Amazing Spider-Man.” “The Uncanny X-Men”  and the “Invincible Iron Man” is how do you condense 40-plus years of story lines and character development into a simple but comprehensive and contemporary piece of entertainment that’s only 90 minutes (or so) long in a way that is pleasing to both diehard, long-term fans and the broader audience that is just looking for a good movie? Just writing that sentence suggests how complicated the question is.

The Invincible Iron Man

The solution to both of theses problems is first finding a studio understanding of the intricacies and complexities of making a comic book movie to finance the film, like Marvel Comic’s own Marvel Entertainment Inc. and recruiting skilled screenwriters to adapt the source material and putting an accomplished director in charge who understands both his subject matter and it’s fans, plus the general entertainment needs of those not so devoted to the com-bo subculture.

These are the resources that know the most successful comics are ones that are more about the humanity of the people behind the masks rather than the actual super-powered persona that is known to the world. “Spider-Man” comics are more about Peter Parker and his struggles to fit into the world at large, and “Batman” stories are really about Bruce Wayne, a man who has some serious issues since his parents were murdered. In the same vein, “Iron Man” is really about a man struggling with his physical weaknesses and emotional demons and the toll that fight has on his life outside the armor.

The Review:
Based off his success with “Iron Man” in 2008, Jon Favreau is thankfully again the man at the helm of the sequel. The Hollywood vet has succeeded where most directors who tackle the comic book genre fail. Having played a supporting role in the financially successful but publicly lambasted comic book based movie “Daredevil,” Favreau understands the difficulty of pleasing both fanboys and the public-at-large with the same movie. In an interview with comicbookbin.com, Favreau said “I think [with] ‘Daredevil,’  a lot of effort was put into keeping it true to the books,  and I think tonally it never broke to the next level of success. It was certainly a successful film, but I think it could have done better if the audience was broader for it.”

"Iron Man 2"

With both “Iron Man” films Favreau and the screenwriters, including actor Justin Theroux (“Tropic Thunder”), have successfully navigated the choppy waters of “keeping true to the books” by piecing relevant and compelling plot lines from 47 years that the “Iron Man” character has been published into an entertaining motion picture.

“Iron Man 2” picks up where the first movie left off, with Tony Stark (again played by Robert Downey, Jr.) announcing to the world that he is Iron Man. With the obligatory fame that has come with that announcement, Stark is now an even bigger superstar than he was before practically oozing cockiness. The only thing bigger than his bank account is his ego, which understandably is inflated because all the good the hero has accomplished. Since his unmasking, the world has experienced the longest uninterrupted period of peace ever recorded. Furthering his public interest, and possibly his sense of self-worth, he fulfills his father’s dream by opening a multi-acre, 12-month-long technology showcase called “Stark Expo.”

Of course, not everyone is a fan of Stark and his suit. The U.S. government, lead by Senator Stern (Gary Shandling of the “Larry Sanders’ Show”), wants him to turn the suit over to the military as they consider it a weapon, which they, of course, would like to capitalize upon. Stark Industries rival and competitor, weapons developer Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell from “The Green Mile”), and other contractors have been trying to develop their own versions of the suit with embarrassing results, which Stark is quick to display.

Robert Downey, Jr. in "Iron Man 2"

Also rooting for Stark’s downfall is Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke of “The Wrestler”), the son of Anton Vanko, a disgraced scientist and former partner of Tony Stark’s father. For fellow comic enthusiast like me, you’ll recognize the younger Vanko as an amalgamation of two villains from Iron Man’s rouge gallery — Whiplash and the Crimson Dynamo. The banished father and son watch TV and see Iron Man showboat at the Stark Expo. Anton’s dying words to his son, “That should’ve been you,” fuel Ivan’s vendetta. Using blueprints their fathers drew up while they were still partners, Vanko successfully replicates the arc reactor technology (that both powers the Iron Man suit and keeps Tony Stark alive) and builds his own super suit of sorts with whip-like attachments harnessing the electrical energy.

Forming a perfect storm of enemies, Hammer, Vanko and the U.S. government conspire against Stark to cripple his reputation, company and superhero status. Meanwhile, paladium, a chemical byproduct of the technology that is keeping Stark alive, is poisoning him, killing him slowly, although faster each time he suits up. His impending death literally weighing heavy on his heart, so Stark begins to succumb to alcoholism, a storyline that was a pivotal to the character development of Tony Stark in the “Iron Man” comic book canon.

Despite all the serious subject matter, “Iron Man 2” provides plenty of humorous moments with plenty of funny and witty dialogue between Downey and almost anyone he shares as scene with. And Rockwell’s understated comedic rendition of Justin Hammer is at times the best non-computer-generated onscreen performance, but legendary comedian Gary Shandling is also amusing in the few minutes he’s onscreen as the pompous senator out to nail Stark.

Reprising and expanding on their roles from the first “Iron Man” movie is the director himself,  Favreau as Happy Hogan, Stark’s bodyguard and chauffeur and Gwyneth Paltrow, as Pepper Potts, Stark’s budding love interest and the newly appointed C.E.O. of Stark Industries. Both actors do a splendid job supporting the plot and making their character’s thread essential to the story’s advancement, especially in a high-powered action scene where the pair come to Stark’s rescue by driving a Rolls-Royce against the high speed traffic flow of a Formula 1 race.

Replacing Terrence Howard as Lt. Colonel James “Rhodey” Rhodes is the skilled actor Don Cheadle (“Brooklyn’s Finest”) who gets to make good on the character’s promise of “next time” in the first film bringing the character “War Machine” to life as both an adversary and ally to Iron Man in this film.

Those who saw the original know the computer-generated imagery was some of the best ever viewed before “Avatar,” and in this sequel the special effects are nothing short of spectacular, making the armored suits and battle drones featured in the films climatic battle scenes believable and dare I say, realistic?

Scarlett Johansson in "Iron Man 2"

A few years ago Marvel Comics took full creative control over their movie franchise by forming Marvel Entertainment Inc. The company is now overseeing production of several motion pictures over the next few years, many which include a crossing over of characters including Tony Stark/Iron Man from one film to another ultimately leading up to a 2012 movie about a team of superheroes called “The Avengers.”

Foreshadowing this crossover event in a special post-credit scene in the original “Iron Man” was Samuel L Jackson, who is leading that effort, reprising and upgrading his cameo as Col. Nick Fury from the original to a more supporting role in “Iron Man 2.”  Working with Fury and the counter-terrorism organization S.H.I.E.L.D. is Scarlett Johansson (“The Wolfman”) as Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff — a super sexy spy posing as Stark’s new personal assistant.

Favreau said in an interview he “learned that if you make a movie, make it something that you don’t have to be a comic book fan to enjoy.” He obviously learned his lesson well because “Iron Man 2” is a completely engaging and entertaining film for all audiences. Not to be confused with a stand-alone piece, this PG-13 movie is, at the least, part two of a trilogy, so those who haven’t seen the first movie should put it in their Netflix queue before going out and getting a kick out of this sequel.

Robert Downey, Jr. in "Iron Man 2."

The major fault in this movie is Ivan Vanko’s (Mickey Rourke) deep hatred for Tony Stark and Stark industries.  The film doesn’t go into great depth about why he is the enemy, how he got so smart or why he hates Stark so much.  But the film isn’t about Ivan; it’s about Iron Man and Stark.  The first “Iron Man” did not cover Yinsen or Razas characters very well either, but it was still a great movie and nominated for two Oscars.

Director Jon Favreau is underrated to say the least because he is not well known, even after directing the original “Iron Man.” In case you don’t know who he is, he was thrown up on in “I Love You Man” and tried to get a happy ending massage in “Couples Retreat.”  For some reason he always plays that guy in films — the jerk.  But when he is behind the scenes he produces, writes and directs, and his roster is impressive.  He produced and directed both Iron Man movies, wrote “Couples Retreat” and wrote and directed “Made” with Vince Vaughn.

The best job done behind the scenes is from writer Justin Theroux who kept actor Robert Downey Jr. from deterring from the dynamic character that is Tony Stark.  Like most sequels, the main character is faced with many questions and dangers, and “Iron Man 2” is no different. Stark goes through a lot in “Iron Man 2,” but Downey engorges into character and knocks it out of the park.  Downey is such a believable Tony Stark it’s hard to believe this character was created before the actor was born.

So to be clear, if you’re the type of audience member that expects things from a major budget film like Oscar worthy acting, screenplay, directing, character depth and deep inspiration, then you should trade your “Iron Man 2” tickets for Disney’s “Oceans.”  Now there’s nothing wrong with “Oceans;” it will teach you much needed information about the world beneath the sea and how devastating the oil spill in the Gulf will be.  But if you need a couple hours away from reality and you’re the type of viewer who doesn’t care what the budget of a film is only how entertained you are when the film ends, then you’re in luck with “Iron Man 2.”And try to stay after the credits for a nice little surprise.

It is impossible to see a remake nowadays and not compare it to the original version. The 1984 version of “A Nightmare on Elm Street” was scary at the time, and the scare tactics and the entire idea of a slasher who terrorizes victims in their sleep were original.  But this remake doesn’t add any new elements to the now 26-year-old plot.

Jackie Earle Haley in the 2010 version of "Nightmare on Elm Street."

First, the character development is almost non-existent even when viewers realize the true plot of the film.  This makes it impossible for the audience to really connect with or fear for any of the characters in the film.  “A Nightmare on Elm Street” starts without explaining what’s going on or how the characters got to the point their at.  Now some films go half the movie without explaining the roots of causes, but those films are simply better put together than this particular film.  By the time “A Nightmare on Elm Street” gets to explain the characters origins and motivations, they’re already dead.

Director Samuel Bayer is most notably known as a prolific music-video director who created the great Nirvana video, “Smells Like Teen Spirit.”  But what Bayer failed to carry into a full-length feature film was character development. With music videos, the viewers connect with the video through the artist’s lyrics.  In movies, the audience bonds to the movie through screenplay and plot since well thought lyrics are not involved.

On a positive note, actor Jackie Earle Haley takes over as the infamous Freddy Krueger, which was a much-needed update.  Robert Englund has played Freddy since the original film by Wes Craven, and it is nice to see the now 63-year-old actor hand up the glove and allow another actor to take over the character.  Haley takes this completely over with a powerful voice and morbid humorous commentary that screams Freddy.

Overall, this remake is what you make of it.  Fans of the original will not be let down because they know the back-story, but they may be disappointed in the lack of versatility in scare tactics.  New viewers of the Krueger films may be lost at first and may not be able to connect the dots well enough to have another cult following.

Zoe Saldana in "The Losers"

“The Losers” is much less violent and gory than “Kick-Ass,” but has better acting and funnier content for a broader audience.  “Kick-Ass” set the bar high” with Hitgirl, Chloe Mortez, kicking everyone’s butts the entire film. “The Losers’” leading lady, Zoe Saldana, strikes at Moretz with sex appeal she wont be able to reciprocate for at least a few years.

Saldana has been striking while the iron is hot lately with recent blockbuster films like “Star Trek,” “Avatar” and “Death at a Funeral.”  Saldana brings so much sexual energy to this film I personally want to warn readers to not bring their girlfriends to this film as a date; there isn’t much for the women to look at but plenty for the guys to watch. Director Sylvain White has definitely seen the best of Saldana like the rest of us who saw her in “Drumline,” in which she won the Best Kiss award from MTV alongside Nick Cannon.

White, as well as the writers, kept the comedic spirit of the comics in “The Losers” keeping to the original comic as much as possible.  The film is easy for audiences to relate to because it feeds on hopes that our soldiers will do the right thing.  This special operations team always does the right thing, and they always get the job done, even while having a good time.  “The Losers” cannot be bought or sold now that they have been double-crossed and work for themselves.

Some films are strictly made to just entertain their audiences, not to fulfill any serious needs or satisfy their audiences on any sort of deep level.  “Superbad,” “Zombieland,” “Tropic Thunder,” “Kick-Ass” and now “The Losers” are all good fun films made not to win awards or be praised by critics, but simply to entertain you.  If you would like to be entertained with some friends at the movie theater than “The Losers” is worth the money.

Ever since Mickey Mouse set foot on the big screen, it seems the magical world Walt Disney created has fascinated everyone. However, in the 80s, Disney started to lose its thunder and the animators were starting to fear for their jobs. In 1984, 200 people thought they were going to lose their jobs when they moved the “unsuccessful” animation studio off the lot. Ten years later, they welcomed the start of Pixar animation films and a new illustrious animation studio.

FROM LEFT: Peter Schneider, Roy Disney and Jeffrey Katzenberg as seen in Don Hahn's "Waking Sleeping Beauty." Photo courtesy of Starz FilmCenter

The film begins when the board of directors for Disney brought on Michael Eisner and Frank Wells to turn the studio around in 1984. With Roy Disney (former senior executive for The Walt Disney Company and Walt Disney’s nephew) at the helm, they also brought on Jeffery Katzenberg, and the battle of the egos began — as well as some of the most memorable animated films in Disney history.

They seem to be on a roll to becoming what they once were with “Waking Sleeping Beauty.” After the shocking death of Wells in a helicopter accident in 1994, Katzenberg was not going to move into the president position he was looking for, even though he assisted the studio in bringing in an enormous amount of success.

The film is honest yet humorous with some of the arguments literally drawn out by some of the animators, which makes the stories even funnier. What is truly interesting is seeing the names and faces of contemporary filmmakers, such as John Lasseter (now of Pixar fame) and even Tim Burton as a budding animator in 1984.

Where computer-generated imagery has pulled us into the future, it’s hard not to watch in awe as they show animators hand drawing some of the shots from films such as “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast.” Most of the animators didn’t have personal lives due to long hard hours, and they discuss how some suffered from carpal tunnel and could barely hold a coffee cup without shaking. Yet, their love of the career meant they were pushing themselves — they were not being pushed.

The film keeps you captivated from start to finish, and you get a little taste of what it’s like to be an animator in an environment such as Disney. The only thing that is missing is a supplemental film so you can follow the story further. Everyone loves to know the dirty little details of what seems like a fairy tale — why not know more? You have so many questions that you just want to see the next installment.

This is an honest look at animation history with many recognizable faces and moments. If you don’t already have a huge respect for what goes into animation, you will after you see this film.

Danny Glover, Martin Lawrence and Tracy Morgan in "Death at a Funeral."

“Death at a Funeral” is director Neil Labute’s second major film after “Lakeview Terrace,” and he does an excellent job keeping his many major stars from completely taking over the film.  Dean Craig was the leading writer for the film and original British film released in 2007 and also did a great job of keeping every character within their limits without taking over the full film.

“Death at a Funeral” is stacked with three generations of black film stars from Danny Glover and Keith David to Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Columbus Short and Zoe Saldana.  But surprisingly one of the funnier characters in the film was “Oscar,” played by actor James Marsden, who is accidentally slipped a hallucinogenic drug right before the start of the funeral.  Marsden’s character brings some of the most memorable moments to the film through clever raunchiness and classic over-the-top interpretations.  Marsden shows his tremendous versatility again with another random role.  In the past, Marsden has played roles like Cyclops in the recent “X-Men” movies, “the other lover” in “The Notebook” as well as the bitter-charming guy in “27 Dresses.”  But in “Death at a Funeral” Marsden plays a kooky character high on “life.”

“Death at a Funeral” brings to the forefront of audience’s minds the thought of how one would handle situations in the films context.  Everyone has a crazy family, but as always it seems during times of grief situations tend to escalate.  “Death at a Funeral” takes its audience through tough circumstances in a delightful manner, which helps viewers see themselves through the characters on the screen.  Although the film is surrounded by the death of a family member, it keeps its audience laughing and enjoying 90 minutes away from their daily grind.

For a different take on the film, visit McMillan’s Take:  Questionable remake; talent disappoints

Being green is a concept Hollywood obviously has taken seriously with remakes of “Clash of the Titans” already released this year and the upcoming re-imagining of “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and up to 75 more remakes and reboots rumored to be in various stages of production. A lot of these remakes have been plucked from the generations past, like “Creature from the Black Lagoon” and “Ghostbusters,” but the American version of “Death at a Funeral” is based off a British film made only three years ago.

Zoe Saldana and James Marsden in "Death at a Funeral."

This 2010 rendition stars Chris Rock (“I Think I Love My Wife”) and Martin Lawrence (“Wild Hogs”) as brothers, Aaron and Ryan, who discover their recently deceased father had a secret for which they are being blackmailed by a mysterious man named Frank (Peter Dinklage reprising his role of Frank from the original) at the funeral, which is held in the family home. The brothers’ efforts to keep the secret under wraps form one of the movie’s two simultaneous threads.

The other plot line is constructed from the attempts of siblings Elaine (Zoe Saldana of “Avitar”) and Jeff (Columbus Short of “Stomp the Yard”) to conceal the accidental drugging of her fiancé, Oscar (James Marsden of the “X-Men” franchise) who is nervous about attending the funeral and being put through the paces of Elaine and Jeff’s disapproving father, Duncan (Ron Glass). Trying to relax Oscar, Elaine gives him what she believes is Valium, but it is in reality a powerful designer hallucinogen that Jeff, a pharmaceutical student, has developed.

Despite the two comedic heavyweights Rock and Lawrence headlining “Death at Funeral,” Marsden’s performance is truly the funniest of the movie.

That being said though, what starts out as a potentially, really funny premise —self-conscious white guy, involuntarily hallucinating and seriously freaking out at an all black family function — becomes a really old and tired joke after awhile.

Most of the dialogue and scenes that are intended to be hilarious only come off as slightly amusing and thus disappointing, especially considering so many superstars of stand-up were cast as the films main characters.

Curiously enough though, Tracy Morgan (“30 Rock”) gives one of his best screen performances to date as family friend Norman (Danny Glover of “The Color Purple”). To his and the film’s credit, Morgan, for once in his career doesn’t try too hard at being funny, but instead allows the outlandish situations his character lands in to support a truly comedic execution of his lines.

Usually, with Tracy or Marsden onscreen, most of the movie’s funniest scenes are some of it’s most disgusting and disturbing moments, but they are so sporadically set throughout director Neil Labute’s (“Lakeview Terrace”) screwball comedy effort that you find yourself consciously waiting for the next laugh.

Regina Hall, Loretta Devine, Keith David and Glass do an adequate job as the supporting cast never outshining the films major players who at times seemed to be sleepwalking through their performances. If this film is the older and more mature Rock and Lawrence’s attempt at an ensemble blockbuster, the likes of “Ocean’s 11” and its sequels or the 1981’s “The Cannonball Run,” the result falls short of the benchmark by a pretty wide margin.

One could argue the fact that since both Rock and  Morgan are “Saturday Night Live” alumni is the reason why this movie feels so much like an extended “SNL” sketch in need of some heavy handed editing. But that point probably won’t generate as much discussion as the “should they have even remade this?” and the “is it racist or not to remake a movie with a predominantly black cast?” debates that have already sprouted up on message boards on the Internet.

It’s unfortunate that the society in which we live so many discussions about politics, economics, sports and even movies seems to degenerate into an argument about race. Outstanding performances usually transcend the conflict, but sadly, “Death at a Funeral” being so mediocre, just doesn’t provide that inspiring catalyst. It doesn’t even provoke many laughs, which is disappointing considering the talent associated to the names on the marquee.

For a different take on the film, visit Dominguez’s Take: Film looks at tough issues in humorous way

“Kick-Ass” first and foremost is not for children.  For some reason the profanity in the title doesn’t drop a big enough hint to idiotic parents; they still took their children to the screening then had to leave early because the film has too much violence and gore.  Now if your old enough to enjoy films like “Pulp Fiction” and “From Dusk Till Dawn” then you are going to love this movie!

Chloe Moretz in "Kick-Ass'

“Kick-Ass” underpromises and over-delivers in every aspect of the statement.  “Kick-Ass” is co-produced by Brad Pitt and features Nicolas Cage, but besides that it’s filled with a virtually unknown staff from the director, Matthew Vaughn and the lead actor, Aaron Johnson.  While Cage is in the movie he doesn’t exactly take over the entire film with his experience, and he can be forgotten after viewing.

This film is full of memorable and quotable screenplay that begs to be laughed at.  The references in “Kick-Ass” to other superhero movies are some of the most entertaining elements of the film alongside unpredictable plot points.

What really sets this film apart from other gory comical films like “From Dusk Till Dawn” and “Inglorious Basterds” is that “Kick-Ass” goes where Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino don’t have the guts to go.  Instead of having a full-grown adult hero committing hideous acts of murder for the greater good, children are providing the gore and profanity.

“Kick-Ass” will show Americans that children who cuss and act violently are hilarious because not only is it unconventional but it’s also unheard of.  Even Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) in “Zombieland” is more reserved than Hitgirl from “Kick-Ass.”

I wouldn’t suggest this film to my great aunt Edna, but I would say all college students and young-hearted audiences ready to laugh at characters who are dirtier than themselves as a child should see the film.  If you grew up laughing at “The Simpsons,” “Ren and Stimpy,” “South Park” or “Family Guy” you are going to love this movie.

“The Losers,” directed by Sylvain White, devises its own set of these crucial tactics of comic-to-film interpretation, creating incredible settings from places such as Bolivia, Dubai, Mumbai, New Mexico, Miami and Los Angeles — all actually shot from the versatile terrain of Puerto Rico.

Zoe Saldana, Chris Evans, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Columbus Short, Idris Elba and Oscar Jaenada in “The Losers.” Photo courtesy of Allied Integrated Marketing.

“The graphic novel is fantastic, period,” actor Columbus Short said. In the film, Short portrays Pooch, the multi-dimensional ammunitions expert. “From there, Sylvain did an excellent job of translating what was on the page to screen. I think it’s probably the closest translation I’ve seen from graphic novel to screen, and that alone is going to set it apart,” he said.

White revealed that each character is periodically transformed into their corresponding comic book image during various intervals of the movie, like when being initially introduced. In addition, the film’s producers created scenes that were motivated by color schemes, as done in comic books. Each new location is characterized by a new tone established through plays on light and design.

The film stars Jeffrey Dean Morgan (“Watchmen”) as the group’s hardened, vengeful leader Clay; Zoë Saldana (“Avatar”) as powerful Aisha; Chris Evans (“Fantastic Four”) as the technology guru Jensen; Columbus Short (“Stomp the Yard”) as livewire Pooch; Idris Elba (“Obsessed”) as the intense explosive specialist Roque; Oscar Jaenada (“Che: Part Two”) as a strong, silent sniper called Cougar; and Jason Patric (“In the Valley of Elah”) as the film’s wicked element Max, a classically twisted government operative bent on world domination who also betrayed the losers and marked them for death.

The movie is an explosive adaptation of the 2003 graphic novel written by Andy Diggle and illustrated by British comic artist Mark “Jock” Simpson.

The series itself is an adaptation from the original war comic “The Losers” written in 1970 by the late Robert Kanigher.

In Kanigher’s original version, the band of WWII anti-heroes self-labeled as “the Losers” are so called because each member felt personally responsible for the death of a comrade under their command.

The modern version is centered around five members of the U.S. Special Forces during the war on terror. One of the most notable character additions to the storyline is Aisha, a mysterious Afghan rebel who offers to smuggle the losers back into America, under the condition they capture Max.

“Once I read [the script] I thought it was amazing,” Short said. “It was a movie that was refreshing. We needed this; we haven’t had the fun action movie since [films] like “Lethal Weapon” and “Bad Boys,” and it had that tone that was new and fresh.”

The Losers opens in theaters April 23.

Bottom Line:   While the special effects dress this remake into something grand, newer and cooler doesn’t always mean better.

In the age when movie studios pan the comic book/graphic novel genre for blockbuster gold and cult classic TV shows and movies are remade in hopes of lightening striking twice, it was probably inevitable that the vintage 80s stop-motion animation rich film “Clash of the Titans” would get today’s Hollywood treatment.

When I saw the original in theaters way back in 1981, I left the theater as an awe-struck 8-year-old with a new appreciation (maybe obsession) for Greek mythology.  For its time, “Clash of the Titans” pandered to every little boys fantastical imagination of saving princesses by fighting off monsters with swords and shields, helmets of invisibility and of course, robotic owls.

The Warner Bros. remake brings that same magic (and probable merchandising campaign) to today’s pre-pubescent, testosterone-filled wanna-be heroes-for-hire with a new millennium American attitude.

Sam Worthington as Perseus in the 2010 remake of "Clash of the Titans."

Screenwriters of both films took several liberties with the source material, (a common practice when adapting novels to motion pictures) so many literary scholars may not appreciate the Hollywood interpretation of the myth of Perseus. But to keep this in perspective, this is not a historical biopic.

In this account, the hero Perseus (“Avatar’s” Sam Worthington) is the unknowing love child of Zeus (“Darkman’s” Liam Neeson), the king of the gods who has been an absentee father in Perseus’ life. Shortly after his birth, his mother’s husband, King Acrisius (“City of Life’s” Jason Flemyng), casts mother and son into the sea where they are found by a fisherman who eventually marries Perseus’ mother and raises the boy like his own. Twelve years later Perseus witnesses the death of the only family he’s ever known by his fraternal uncle, Hades the god of the underworld (Ralph Fiennes of the “Harry Potter” franchise).

Thus begins the contemporary version of a hero’s journey as Perseus sets out to avenge his family’s deaths at the same time rescuing the distressing damsel. Throughout his trek, he encounters dreadful and deadly beasts, which are literally the sort that legends are made of.

COOT is a greek myth bastardized into an archetypical superhero movie thanks to director Louis Leterrier who helmed the reboot of Marvel Comics’ “The Incredible Hulk.” Comic book movie fans can look to this as silver screen spring training for this next month’s “Iron Man 2.”

The original COTT has weathered the ages pretty well despite having special effects that, at the time of its release, were awesome but are now light-years behind what animators are capable of creating onscreen today. The plot is well, classic Greek mythology and good story telling doesn’t get much better than that.  Special effects, on the other hand, rule the day in this adaptation. The monsters of the original are now bigger, faster and badder. The Greek gods on Mt. Olympus are larger than life thanks to spectacular CGI visual effects. Surprisingly though, the addition of 3-D effects that pushed COTT’s release back by a week didn’t really lend any additional “wow” factor to the movies already-lavish backgrounds and settings. In fact, with the furious pacing and extremely close camera angles in some action scenes, the 3-D effects are at best distracting.

Greek mythology will always make great Hollywood fodder because the legends are ripe with drama, action, romance and legendary monsters. But as technologies improve, studios will begin to reduce the tall tales that once captivated and inspired our imaginations when we actually had to (god-forbid) read them to 90-minute high-definition, 3-D-enhanced assaults on our senses. While “Clash of the Titans” may be fun for a very specific target audience – those made of snips of snails and puppy dog tails — very few X chromosome-bearing viewers over the age of 16 who aren’t into the latest computer-generated theatrical bells and whistles will find this movie very entertaining.

A Greek classic is just that, a classic. The first “Clash of the Titans” defied the odds and became a cult classic. Remaking that film is a classic example of not knowing when to quit while you’re ahead.

For a different take on the film, visit Dominguez’s Take:  Remake Worth Watching

The original 1981 “Clash of the Titans” starring Harry Hamlin was fairly epic for its day.  It had great backgrounds and even a nifty robotic owl as a main character.  This time around the fairly new director, Louis Leterrier, decided to ditch the robot owl and go with a newer, more believable set of characters that provide great entertainment for the entire length of the film.

Sam Worthington stars in this film, and if you didn’t already know, he is quickly becoming a key component to making a blockbuster.  Worthington was basically unknown until he played opposite Christian Bale in “Terminator Salvation” just last year.  Since then he has been part of the “Avatar” sensation that has swept the world.

In “Clash of the Titans” Worthington plays Perseus, the son of Zeus, destined to help the gods regain control of humanity.  Worthington delivers a great performance that, for the most part, is believable, except his Australian accent tends to slip through every once in a while.

“Clash of the Titans” has amazing sets with vivid tones and vibrant illumination.  Viewers can almost feel what the characters are going through as they watch the plot unfold.  The 3-D experience enriches these encounters, making the movie more believable to audiences, which in the past has been the leading complaint in mythological films like these.

The dialogue within the movie makes the viewers choose Perseus’ side and even want to root him on. The old “Clash of the Titans” was hard to follow unless you were taught Greek mythology in grade school.  Leterrier has done a great job connecting the audience with the plot, making the film more enjoyable for a broader range of viewers.

“Clash of the Titans” is a great kickoff to the summer blockbuster season and delivers everything it promises to its viewers — including this particular movie reviewer.

“Repo Men” is a futuristic movie about a world that has the ability to replace humans’ organs with just a signature.  The company that provides these services is The Union, which is full of smart, but cutthroat businessmen who have no remorse for the recipients of their organs.  When an organ recipient becomes delinquent on their loan payments, which can exceed $15,000 a month, The Union sends repo men after them, their life and mainly their organs.

Jude Law and Forest Whitaker in "Repo Men"

Jude Law plays Remy who is one of The Unions top repossession agents along with partner Jake played by Forest Whitaker.  After a malfunctioning defibrillator damages Remy on the job he becomes the recipient of a new heart from The Union.  With the outrageous payment plan and his inability to repossess from what he now sees as actual people, he has to run from his former teammates and most of all his partner Jake.

Most people would walk into the theater with judgments about connecting to such a far-fetched plot.  I know its pretty sick to think of the idea your old dentist, after non-payment, sending goons after your fillings.  But that’s what makes this plot so interesting, after all the plot, in a sense, can’t be too hard to believe, especially in our current economy. “Repo Men” shows its viewers that bad can always become worse.  This plot alters our reality by making Whitaker become a stone cold killer, and Law an action star.

Now after the plot has you thinking “what if,” the action and adventure in this movie will keep you on the edge of your seat even after the movie ends.  “Repo Men” is brilliantly bloody and action packed.  The themes in “Repo Men” are limitless because if the world ever got to the point where organs could be repossessed, it would be really fouled up, to say the least.  “Repo Men” does not have too much depth within the movie, but after watching viewers are left thinking “what if?”  Not many movies now days leave you afterwards thankful we don’t live in that movie world.

“Repo Men” was not directed or written by anyone who is note worthy as of yet.  But I honestly believe director Miguel Sapochnik and writers Eric Garcia and Garrett Lerner are going to be highly sought after now.  It would not surprise me if “Repo Men” becomes an instant cult classic; it blows away “I, Robot” and could even be competition for “Blade Runner.”  Watch out Hollywood because “Repo Men” is coming with crazy ideas, great action and sense of adventure that truly keeps its audience guessing what could possibly be next?

For a different take on the film, visit McMillan’s Take:  Action tear-jerking romance makes great date movie

“The Bounty Hunter” is about journalist Nicole Hurley, played by Jennifer Aniston, who is uncovering a story about a recent suicide.  While working on the story Nicole’s ex-husband, former cop who became a bounty hunter, was sent out to do every ex-husband’s dream — arrest his ex-wife.  Gerald Butler plays Milo Boyd, the bounty hunter luckily assigned to taking custody of his former wife — or so he thinks at first.

The plot gets a lot more complex but doesn’t sway its audience to love or hate the film.  Most viewers will watch this movie to see either Gerald Butler or Jennifer Aniston be goofy, yet sexy at the same time.  Unfortunately, the chemistry between the two actors on the screen doesn’t exactly click consistently throughout the hour-and-46-minute film.

The most disappointing aspect of “The Bounty Hunter” is that Aniston is proving to audiences she can only play one character, which is Aniston. The only movie Aniston has acted in that has been a dynamic character was in 2005’s “Derailed” where she was not the cute, bubbly girl next-door, but a more deceptive and dark woman.  Aniston is still great at being every man’s dream girl who is gorgeous, funny, oh, and gorgeous.

Gerald Butler, on the other hand, has proven how dynamic of an actor he can be.  Butler has played everything it seems from the phantom in “Phantom of the Opera” (2004) to King Leonidus in “300” (2007).  Regrettably, Butler plays the same lovable sleaze ball he played opposite Katherine Heigl in “The Ugly Truth.”

Viewers who want a different kind of romantic comedy will not love “The Bounty Hunter” unless they are ecstatic fans of either Aniston or Butler.  This film offers no depth but only hit and miss comedy taglines that even when working aren’t new or unique.

But what is normal? The film “Off And Running,” follows Avery and her family, to show diversity is everything, and who you are now is just as important as where you came from.

A high school junior and track star, she is currently looking at her college opportunities. When she starts questioning her African-American roots, she begins to search for her birth mother. This takes Avery, and the viewer, on a mental rollercoaster you just don’t expect to experience.

Her family, nicknamed “The United Nations,” is as diverse as their namesake. Two Jewish lesbian mothers, Tova and Travis, who met at a single parent’s group, combined their two families with Avery, her brother Rafi, who is of mixed races, then adopted younger brother Zay-Zay, who is Korean. The mothers truly care for the children they have been blessed with and are willing to do almost anything to help them succeed in life, including searching for their birth parents.

While Avery begins focusing on contact with her birth mother, Rafi sets off for Princeton to study molecular biology and Avery loses her biggest confidant in the house. She begins to spiral downward and watches her future possibilities quickly drift away. What she does to redeem herself is both surprising and inspiring. This film should be required viewing in every high school.

Avery’s story is special. It shows that once you realize what is truly important in life, you can create a future for yourself and you can turn around from a wrong turn. You can succeed. There are so many kids out there who don’t realize they have options and they simply lose out on the future they deserve. These are the kids you normally hear about.

Avery had it all, she lost it all and she got it back. Her family was always there for her and it took this journey for her to figure it out. But she got there, and when she did, she knew exactly who she was.

Plot: In the near future, humans prolong their lives with artificial organs purchased on credit, but if you can’t make your payments, the organs are reclaimed by repo men with extreme prejudice. Remy, one of the best organ repo men suffers a near-fatal injury and awakens to find himself fitted with top-of-the-line heart replacement — as well as a hefty debt.

Bottom Line: Repo Men is a great first date movie. It has the plenty of martial arts and guns for him and the tear-jerking romance for her and an abundance of laughs for both.

By now it’s no secret Avatar is the biggest grossing movie of all time. Up until last week, it was a movie I had not seen, or at least, so I thought. Apart from the groundbreaking, absolutely astounding graphics, special effects and 3-D effects, the movie itself is a familiar tale. Someone once summed it up to me (very aptly) as (Spoiler alert! – kinda) “Pocahontas in Outer Space. “

Feature film freshman Miguel Sapochnik’s film “Repo Men” has had the burden of overcoming a growing Internet comments-board controversy, in which fans of the cult favorite film “Repo! The Genetic Opera” claim Sapochinik’s movie, based off of a novel by Eric Garcia, “The Repossession Mambo,” is a “blatent rip-off” of “Repo!TGO,” as fans call it.

The meat of both movies is the not-so-unimaginable premise that in a not-too-distant future, a company has solved the world’s problems of long organ transplant waiting lists by perfecting, manufacturing and leasing artificial organs. But that’s pretty much where the similarities of the two movies end.

In “Repo Men,” the company is the Union, and their products are called artiforgs. These babies are literal lifesavers, and Liev Schreiber (“The Omen”) plays Frank, the smooth-talking sales manager who markets them as such. Like any good salesman, Frank offers convenient financing on the pricey artiforgs with a low APR of “only” 19.6 percent. Add in the “generous” 96-day grace period and customers are willing to pay an arm and leg for a much-needed liver.

However, once that grace period expires, The Union sends their highly trained collection staff to retrieve the organ — at no cost to the customer of course, well, except for the liver — plus the aforementioned arm and leg and probable loss of life.

See, the best of Union’s highly trained collection staff is Remy and Jake (“Sleuth’s” Jude Law and “The Last King of Scotland’s” Forest Whitaker”). They are life-long friends and former military men currently without a war to fight. They have fallen in love with the repo man profession because it gives them opportunity to do what they do best: kill.

But as with every workaholic, Remy’s dedication to his job is beginning to interfere with his relationship with his family. His wife is nagging him to transfer to the sales department — a move that not only jeopardizes the status quo Jake is comfortable with, but also their friendship. Forced to make a decision that will either cost him his wife and son or his best friend, Remy reluctantly chooses to make the transfer, after doing the proverbial “one last” repo job.

Up to this point, “Repo Men” plays as an amazingly funny dark comedy. Despite the bloody and graphic repossessions, the first 30 minutes of the film are full of laugh out loud moments. Working from a screenplay written by the original novel’s author and television’s “House M.D” writer Garrett Lerner, Law and Whitaker demonstrate an on-screen chemistry missing from some of the best buddy cop films.

As Remy goes to do his last repossession, the movie almost seamlessly shifts moods, showing a rare glimpse at the emotional side of a science-fiction character’s story arc. He must repossess the artiforg heart from T-Bone (Wu-Tang Clan’s RZA), a musician he’s long admired who is tragically delinquent in his payments. But during the procedure, a bit of an on-the-job accident occurs leaving Remy knocked out cold.

When Remy awakes from a coma, he is distressed to find he now is the owner of a top-of-the line Union artificial heart, complete with the huge price tag. Ironically though, he no longer has the heart to do the Union’s dirty work and quickly falls behind on his own payments. Even more ironically, his ex-partner, Jake is the repo man eventually assigned to retrieve the heart.

From here, “Repo Men” transitions effortlessly between being graphically violent, grippingly sad and surprisingly romantic, all the while keeping itself grounded in sinisterly dark humor. Helping Remy elude his former partner is Beth (Alice Braga of “I Am Legend”), a sort of new millennium “Bionic Woman” with more artiforgs than organic parts. Both she and Schreiber showcase what talented supporting actors can do in a well written role.

Shot on location in Canada, the un-named city that offers cover to Remy and Beth looks a lot like a futuristic Manhattan — on steroids. Almost as complementary to the film as a supporting actor is the splendid soundtrack featuring a diverse assortment of artists from Rosemary Clooney to Method Man.

For movie lovers with complex tastes, “Repo Men” is a theatrical gumbo simmering with wicked humor, complicated relationships, well-choreographed martial arts, tear jerking romance and wince inducing gore. Add in popcorn and sodas and you’ve got a date both him and her will enjoy. Fans of films like “Fight Club”, “Kiss of the Dragon” and even “Titanic” will all find something to enjoy throughout this film’s 111-minute runtime.

For a different take on the film, visit Dominguez’s Take: Could-be cult classic leaves viewers thinking ‘what if?’

Bottom Line:

From the trailers to the closing film credits, Paul Greengrass’ new political/action film “The Green Zone” blurs the line between reality and fiction, mainly with a lot of shaky handheld camera work.

From the U.S. versions of the trailer for “The Green Zone” you expect to see a sort of “Jason Bourne- goes- to-Iraq” action thriller. After all, as the promos say, it is from Paul Greengrass, the director of “The Bourne Supremacy” and “The Bourne Ultimatitum,” and it stars Matt Damon, the man who is probably more synonymous with the Bourne character than even Robert Ludlum, the author of the Bourne series.

Matt Damon as U.S. Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller in "Green Zone."

The truth of the matter is the movie plays less as an action thriller with political overtones, but more of a HBO docudrama.

“The Green Zone” is a fictionalized account of the critically acclaimed non-fiction novel “Imperial Life in the Emerald City” by former Washington Post journalist Rajiv Chandrasekaran, which chronicles the lives of civilian leadership of the American reconstruction project in Iraq in the days following the invasion of Iraq. These civilians lived in the green zone, an area behind the secured walled-off enclaves of what used to be Saddam’s palaces — thus the name of the film.

“Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly, yet our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. “  – President George Walker Bush, March 19, 2003

The above President George W. Bush quote is the heart of the film’s plot with Matt Damon playing Chief Army Warrant Officer Roy Miller, a duty bound soldier in charge of a team tasked with hunting weapons of mass destruction. Miller’s problem though, is the so-called intelligence on where these WMDs are is faulty. Every site he and his team risk their lives to search and secure is not what they have been told it should be.

Miller complains to his superiors, but his frustrations fall on deaf ears. The only person listening to him is Martin Brown (“Harry Potter’s” Breeden Gleeson), a CIA official whose agenda is to prevent civil war from breaking out among the now government-less Iraqi citizens. In his eyes, striking a deal with General Al Rawi, (a fictionalized version of the notorious Jack of Spades from Saddam’s régime) is both Iraq’s and America’s best hope for a peaceful transition of power.

But Pentagon official, Clark Poundstone (“Little Miss Sunshine’s” Greg Kinear) is dead set in installing a formally banished Iraqi politician as the figurehead of the US sanctioned democratic government. If Miller keeps digging into the truth about the supposed existence of these weapons of mass destruction, he may just uncover a conspiracy that threatens the credibility of the U.S. government. After all, the invasion, occupation and resulting deaths of both American and Iraqi soldiers and citizens were only deemed necessary because of the alleged imminent threat Saddam and his WMDs posed to the world.

Amy Ryan (“The Office”) plays the Wall Street Journal reporter Lawrie Dayne, who unwittingly serves as a pawn for “the administration,” generating  public support for the war by reporting the dis-information Poundstone feeds her in the form of leaked top-secret documents and briefs from secret meetings with a  mysterious source code-named Magellen.

A lengthy (albeit fictionalized) rehashing of fairly recent history is part of problem with this movie. We know the story too well already. Despite Karl Rove’s recent memior, we know we were lied to by an administration dead set on going to war for whatever reasons. The role of Clark Poundstone is an assemblage of real life players in Bush’s administration like Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney who had no idea civil war and insurgency would complicate and prevent a quick and easy end to a war that is still being fought today.  Real suspense only occurs late in the film when Miller races against a bad-ass Army Special Forces soldier Briggs (“Black Hawk Down’s” Jason Isaacs) to find The Jack of Clubs who will either expose the truth (to Washington’s dismay) or be as bad of a villain as Hussein was.

Greengrass and Damon worked well together in the Bourne films and bring some of that energy to this movie. Greengrass’s signature shaky hand-held camera work helps capture a grittiness of the Iraqi dessert, even in scenes comprised of mostly dialogue. But the lack of focus and stability tends to be a bit much during the films few action sequences. But yes, during those scenes, Greengrass allows Damon to unleash a few flashes of that kick-ass character Bourne is known for!

There will be people who enjoy this movie for the political drama it is. I could actually see a film franchise develop out of the Miller character, like the Jack Ryan character of the Tom Clancy novels. But producers have to have enough faith in the intelligence of their audiences and be upfront with the marketing and packaging of their product. “The Green Zone” is hurt by the same problem that defines the plot:  Deception.  Like the faulty intelligence given to Miller, the trailers and promos insinuate one thing to get audiences in the theater only to find out that it’s a different story.

For a different take on the film, visit Dominguez’s Take: ‘Green Zone:’ not just another war movie

Paul Greengrass has directed past films like “The Bourne Supremacy” and “The Bourne Ultimatum,” which have the same type of anti-government corruption plot as “The Green Zone.”

Matt Damon as U.S. Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller in "Green Zone."

So why do Greengrass and Damon participate in films like these?  Well, because it is entertaining to see heroes’ fight for justice, especially against a government audiences know isn’t perfect.

Lets face it, war movies interest Americans, and as of late we don’t like to see perfect, cookie-cutter soldiers. We would much rather see hard-nosed soldiers who fight for what they believe in, especially if the enemy is ourselves.

“Green Zone” is coming out six days after the “Hurt Locker” raked in at the Oscars and Greengrass and Damon know what audiences like to see.  “The Bourne Identity,” the last Jason Bourne installment, grossed over $227 million in the United States, and “Green Zone” shouldn’t do any less.

The movie is automatically recognized as a Greengrass-directed film because it is filmed terribly. Not terribly in the sense the movie is bad, but terribly in the sense Greengrass forgot to pack his tripod again.  The camera is almost never steady but more in the hands of a lunatic who somehow works to add dramatic effect.

The plot is well formatted and perceived by audiences as truthful, although it does not claim to be.  Damon plays a U.S. Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller who has been assigned to find WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction).  After flipping over one-too-many rocks to find nothing, and risking his men’s lives to do so, he seeks out the truth through his own means.  He is helped by questionable (to say the least) character types that lead him down a rabbit hole he wished he never climbed into.

Audiences who enjoyed the Bourne movies are going to love this film. Even though Damon doesn’t play the same character, he still does a fantastic job of making audiences connect with his mission — and the mission is always the truth.

For a different take on the film, visit McMillan’s Take: ‘Green Zone:’ trailer gives faulty intelligence

The film is set in Connecticut with a ghostwriter (Ewan McGregor) assigned a huge sum of money to write memoires of a former British prime minister (Pierce Brosnan), who is being investigated for war crimes committed during his time in office.

Pierce Brosnan (Adam Lang) and Ewan McGregor in The Ghost Writer

Instead of constructing an intricate plot that is fun to watch unfold, Polanski beats his audience over the head with obvious clues of the big picture.  The entire plot is boring and uneventful. Polanski fails to connect his audience with a sense of meaning for the entire film.  Throughout the movie, it is hard to reason why you care about what is going on, or even about the characters. McGregor tries his hardest to save the film with sometimes-clever dialogue, but fails to grab the audience because of the thick layer of boredom that fogs viewers’ brains.

“The cure for insomnia” is a statement used by McGregor to describe the former prime ministers memoirs, but it would be better suited to describe this film.

The saddest thing about the film is it could receive praise by the Academy of Motion Pictures and Sciences because, somehow, the predictable ending satisfied older viewers, mainly because Polanski knows viewers love feeling intelligent.  Younger audiences will find this film as an insult to their intelligence for even attempting to astonish them with the ending.

As a collaboration between director Michael Palmieri and photographer Donal Mosher, the photography and camerawork were beautiful, but the family’s story was depressing and not a whole lot else. It feels like someone just filmed the neighbors down the street, only with better equipment than your average home video camera.

Mosher filmed his family following four generations and showed how they relate with each other. Don and Dottie are the patriarchs of the family and they have a foster child living with them who is anything but trustworthy. You feel for Dottie while she firmly believes family is everything and tries to keep everyone together. Don is a Vietnam vet who has definitely been scarred by the war and his past as a police officer.

Some of the most upsetting footage is of the 11-year-old granddaughter, Desi, who is much more mature in her understanding of life around her than she should be. Where it might be beneficial to be this self-aware, it seems as though the whole family has been forced to grow up too fast. Teen pregnancy with marriage to an abuser crosses generations as the mother, Donna, sees her own daughter, Daneal, following in her footsteps of poor choices.

The tone is melancholy, and life in this town seems so gray. There is little eye contact from the interviewees, but every once in a while you get one good shot and it seems you can see into their soul and feel their pain.

Flashbacks of Daneal growing up shows a sweet, innocent little girl who is loved by her family, and it is almost more heartbreaking than the current footage of a custody battle with her abusive ex over her daughter.

It’s hard to decipher what exactly the filmmakers were trying to achieve. The family is depressing overall as the grandparents watch the downfall of their eldest granddaughter. It’s not that the film is bad, it just doesn’t seem to deliver any real message or story. Is it there to educate? Is it there to bring awareness of some sort? It doesn’t seem that way. At the end of the film, you see Desi understanding the life her sister and mother have chosen and seems to be learning from it.

The most that you can hope for in this film is that she does change the pattern for herself and make some better choices. She’s a quiet star in the midst of a terrible storm.