Entertainment Reviews

Deja Vu is the latest thriller to explore the “what-ifs” associated with manipulation of past events and the resulting changes from tampering with time. Starring Denzel Washington, Val Kilmer and Jim Caviezel, Deja Vu is intense and thought-provoking, in both its narrative style and execution.

Set in post-Katrina New Orleans, the story follows Denzel’s character Doug Carlin (pronounced car-lean) as he attempts to piece together a murder and a terrorist attack on ferry boat that appears to be linked to the same perpetrator. The investigation is further complicated by the supposed appearance of Carlin’s fingerprints at the crime scene he has not yet visited, along with cryptic messages and hints suggesting another presence may be at work. Carlin is asisted by FBI agent Val Kilmer, who introduces him to satellite technology that is able to record past events and then strung together to piece together to watch the crime unfold. Once the perpetrator is apprehended, Carlin is faced with a moral dilemma: let justice run its course, or try and manipulate the past to stop the murder and terrorist attack.

Fans of sci-fi time travel movies such as 12 Monkeys will definitely get a kick out of Deja Vu. This movie certainly is one of the beter offerings of to explore time manipulation as the set up is unexpected, the story contemporary and an interesting look at whats right and whats just. Since the time-travel sequences are very sci-fi lite, this movie is highly recommended for for its fast pace, excellent cast and unpredictable story; also for anyone who’s a Denzel fan, as this is one of his better movies.

Think of The Nutty Professor. Now change the roles of the main actor and actress, stir a little bit of attitude, and you end up with Norbit. Eddie Murphy is used to playing role — multiple roles — in one movie. Norbit is the same. One man movie. If you liked the Nutty Professor, then trust me, you will like Norbit. However, don’t let it fool you. The story line is not the same.

The movie is about Norbit, a geeky orphan who grew up with Chinese caretakers. Norbit buddies up with a fellow orphan, Kate Thomas (Thandie Newton, The Pursuit of Happyness). When Kate leaves, Norbit is alone to face the world. During school, Norbit meets Rasputia who treats Norbit the way the Step Mom treated Cinderella. Norbit takes the bashing until he meets up with Kate after a very long time, and that is when the fun begins.

But check it out; the movie had its funny moments. Murphy can pull off the one movie stage, and he does it pretty good. Eddie Griffin was also in the movie to provide comedy relief. The storyline however, lacked depth. Then again, this movie was not about the storyline, but instead it was about comedy, and mission accomplished.

Parents, I would advise caution when thinking to view this with your children. Don’t worry, it is not worse than Nutty Professor, so lets use that as a bench mark. I will say this; Norbit was probably lighter than Nutty Professor in terms of crude humor. The real comedy of Norbit came when seeing Murphy play Rasputia. His third character, Mr. Wong was also another humorous addition to the movie. Definitely a movie worth watching for laughs.

This movie brings entertainment to the TV set, and it is not those types of movies in which you need to watch it in a group to find funny and laughable. This is a movie that is humorous on it’s own. That is true comedy. Definitely worth checking out.

When you think 0f Wesley Snipes you will always think of complicated plots because those are the types of movies he is always in. The Contractor is going to be released in stores in a couple of hours, and to no surprise, it is the same type of movie. Wesley Snipes plays a good guy, and gets himself into a bad situation. Not always a bad thing, but when a movie has no substance, then there is a problem.

The Contractor is about an assassin, James Dial (Wesley Snipes) who goes to London on the orders of his old employers, and assassinate one of the most notorious terrorists. Playing by the Moscow Rules, Dial is forced to run and hide, while all of Britian is looking for him. As if things are not already bad for Dial, the lead  investigator for the police, Windor (Charles Dance, Gosford Park), is murdered, and Dial is set up to take the fall.

With a storyline like that, you start to expect  a lot of action and substance. Unfortunately, I am sad to say I barely found any. The movie was slow, dull, and boring.  Unlike other conspiracy theories Snipes has participated in, (Murder at 1600, The Art of War, U.S. Marshals (Special Edition)) this movie was not able to build the viewers anticipation. There was no sitting at the edge of your seat. No suspense was made in the movie. If the action was good in the movie, it would make up for everything else it lacked in, but it didn’t have that either!

At the end of the movie, you wonder what is the point of the movie. There is no action. No drama. No suspense. No comedy. WHY WAS THE MOVIE MADE? What’s the point I ask? Very Disappointed by the movie. No wonder I don’t remember seeing this movie on the big screen.

The Good Shepherd, Robert DeNiro’s latest directorial offering since A Bronx Tale, is a fictionalized account about the rise of counter-intelligence CIA.  The movie unfolds using a present-past juxtaposition style of narrative, with the present beginning in the hours before the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, and the past as Matt Damon’s character Edward Wilson being “tapped” by the Skull and Bones secret society at Yale.  In perhaps the most muted role of his career, Matt Damon’s performance portrayal of Wilson (a composite based on two real-life people) is a once quiet, reserved, and spooky.

 

The film follows Wilson’s ascent into the world of counter-intelligence, which includes secrets, double-crosses and brutal interrogation techniques, and at a running time of two hours and forty-eight minutes the film is a drawn out affair, low on action and high on paranoia as Wilson’s world slowly collapses around him.  The movie does raise a few interesting questions surrounding the political climate of the United States at the time, such as the purported mafia involvement with the invasion, as well as President Kennedy’s dissatisfaction with the results, but the film does not try to further explain or resolve these issues, which should be integral to the core of the story, since the CIA was responsible for organizing and executing the plan.  Instead, these threads are instead treated as afterthoughts, in case the producers and director were afraid of raising any anti-American sentiment, especially in the real-life present-day Unites States.

 

Angelina Jolie appears early on as a seductress and spends the rest of the movie appearing miscast as a neglected housewife, the film also has appearances by Alec Baldwin, William Hurt, John Turturro, Billy Crudup, and Robert DeNiro (in a bit role).

 

Aside from the excellent production values, the film is a brave attempt at revealing the secrecy and loyalty necessary to succeed in the world of spies and international turmoil.  It appears that DeNiro wanted to use a narrative style similar to that of The Godafther II, whose contrasting storyline between the past and present mirror how one character’s progression parallels his father’s rise to power.  The Good Shepherd tries to borrow this tactic, but the film at times feels disjointed, and the changes in pace, along with the long running time lack of action and slow-boiling intensity, viewers may find themselves asking what they have spent nearly three hours watching. 

 

Just saw Die Hard 4 yesterday. Good Movie. Review on that coming out later. After watching that movie, I try to make sure I don’t have any errors in my typing to avoid pressing Delete. If you want to know what that means, go watch the movie. Now for the review.

When you think of Ben Stiller, you think he is going to just act stupid or very arrogant. Those are the types of characters we are used to seeing him play on the big screen. I was quite surprised to see him play a more balanced human being.

This movie was done with quite a lot of imagination.One is going to need a lot of imagination to pull of a T-Rex acting like a puppy dog. When watching the movie in the beginning, you feel the movie is not going to go anywhere, however, it had a nice ending at the end. There were times where the movie was slow, and could have moved the story along, however it is a movie the family will enjoy. 

Kids are definitely going to enjoy it. Very funny to see how Stiller interacts while on his job. If you are into the serious movies, then this movie may not be for you. This movie is geared more to kids, than adults. However, if you are looking for some laughs, then this movie will not be a bad choice. A movie I would say can be watched over and over again.

Alright, after watching Flags of our Father, I now wanted to really read up more about the history of the battle of Iwo Jima.  It is interesting, while thinking about this battle for the past few days, I read the headline on Yahoo! about the Defense Department continuing the search for the body of the marine who filmed the flag-raising. Now to the Review:

Flags of our Fathers is not what I thought it would be. I thought after watching Letters of Iwo Jima, Flags of Our Fathers would be symmetrical to the movie in the sense it will be showing the battle from the American perspective throughout the movie, but I was wrong. It is a completely different story. It is not totally about the battle; instead it is about how the flag raising helped entice the war effort at home.  I think it is now pretty evident I don’t read the back of the DVD cover before I watch the movie, and I feel it is better that way because I now have no expectations about the movie.  One thing I liked about this movie was the way they went back and forth between the

United States and the battle. How they showed different scenes in the beginning that didn’t make sense, but the puzzle starts coming together as the movie goes on.  That direction the movie took really made it much better and much more appealing to watch. It is interesting to know one photo can make the difference.  I said it before, and I will say it again, but Clint Eastwood has really established himself as a superb director with excellent topics. The ending became a little too incomplete and rushed, not allowing viewers to understand how the lives of the three starts turned out after the war.

This movie does not show the battle on theIsland as much as Letters of Iwo Jima did, which in my opinion made the movie better, but coming from a history background, I think all those history buffs out there would like this movie. It not only depicts what the atmosphere was like for the soldiers, but it also showed what the mindset was of the politicians at home. I would not be surprised if I see this movie being shown in U.S. History classes as a reference to World War 2, but as for right now, I would suggest this movie as a must see for those who are interested in this country’s history and World War 2.

The First Post on this blog will start out with a Movie Review. One thing about this movie is I like War movies, and I have respect for Director Clint Eastwood. I have always been fascinated with America’s History, and World War 2 is one of them.

Letters From Iwo Jima is a movie from the Japanese persepctive about the Battle of Iwo Jima in which the Americans won the battle. Some call it a turning point in the War against Japan. The movie was nicely made, slow at times, but it was an eye opener that did not misrepresent history in my opinion. When reading the history about the war in school, you began to feel as if the Japanese men had no soul and that they were savages. A non-stop destruction force, who did not care about humanity. I believe this movie made you think twice. The Japanese were big on honor, and this movie showed just that. This movie had a good character building in the sense they showed that the soldiers that fought for the empire where just common bakers and tradesmen. That these soldiers were not special elite soldiers, who all night and all day fight and train. In my opinion, they were just like you and me. If you felt when reading history that these people were not afraid of war, then watch this movie and learn!I felt that this movie was good in the sense it made you feel as if the American’s were the bad guys, while the Japanese soldiers were the good guys. Throughout the movie, you would hope for the Japanese to survive. General Tadamichi Kuribayashi, who was played by Ken Watanabe really showed character as a general who cared for his soldiers. One thing that impressed me about the General’s Character, which gives me a lot of respect for the General, is the fact that he did not hide behind his troops, that at the end, he was in the front.

Yeah, this movie would not interest people who are not history buff like me. in fact, if you want to see the american perspective of this battle, then I would recammend Flags of our Fathers, which is also directed by Clint Eastwood. That Review will come later.

I wish this movie was a little more fast pace. I probably could not see myself watching this movie over and over, but it was one of those movie you just had to see one time. When watching this movie I had a dislike for Japan, not because they were America’s enemy, but because of how abandoned they made their troops feel.

Next Review will be Flags of Our Fathers.