The Number 23

The Number 23 1/2*

Directed by Joel Schumacher
Written by Fernley Phillips

Starring:
Jim Carrey as Walter Sparrow/Fingerling
Virginia Madsen as Agatha Sparrow/Fabrizia
Logan Lerman as Robin Sparrow
Danny Huston as Isaac French/Dr. Miles Phoenix
Lynn Collins as Suicide Blonde/Mrs. Dobkins/Young Fingerling's Mother

95 Minutes(Rated R for violence, disturbing images, sexuality and language).
-----------------------------------
Whatever happened to Jim Carrey? There was a time when Carrey was one of the biggest actors around-and he proved that he could do the silly facial reactions as well as brilliant drama. But his last two films, this and "Fun with Dick and Jane" spanned a strong comedy based film and a strong drama based film, and both of them were complete duds. It's come to the point where I am wondering what he is thinking. And his future resume isn't filled up with other projects. If he is going to only do the occasional movie, then he has to do one that is actually worth the time to watch and make. I suppose I could have been worried about this project right after seeing the director: Joel Schumacher. Schumacher has been around for an eternity, and he only has two or three films that are even worth the effort. After singlehandingly killing the first "Batman" franchise, and somehow convincing Anthony Hopkins to team up with Chris Rock, it was no wonder that he managed to get Jim Carrey to appear in this, reciting horrible dialogue, and being involved in a plot that could have been intriguing, but becomes boring, somewhat impossible, and then throwing on a twist that is probably included in a book called "Screenwriting 101."

In "The Number 23", Carrey plays Walter Sparrow, and today is his birthday. February 3rd. Or 2/3. Walter is a dog catcher, and he parks his truck in front of his job until he is called. On this day he is called a minute before he is supposed to punch out, mainly because his boss has a mean streak with him after he refused to sleep with her at a company Christmas party two months earlier. Carrey tries to catch the dog, which bites him an escapes, making him late to pick up his wife. His wife,Agatha, while waiting, walked into a used book store, and came across a book called "The Number 23," written by Topsy Kretts. She buys the book for Walter who reluctantly reads it. While reading it he begins to find parallels to his own life. The book is about a detective named Fingerling, who got the name after reading a children's book called "Fingerling at the Zoo." Walter has that book in his attic from when he was young. The book then gets more and more violent, scaring Walter who begins to have dreams of him killing his wife just like the character in the book. He then begins to see connections to the number 23 everywhere-in personal life and in history. His birthday, 2/3, his drivers license, social security number, everything adds to 23. The day of the sinking of the Titanic, the fact that Hiroshima bomb was dropped at 8:15(8+15=23), as well as facts about math and the human chromosome count-all 23. This number begins to control Walter, driving him to obsession and eventual madness, making him a danger to himself and his family.

It is an intriguing plot, and some of the connections to the number 23 are kind of neat. I didn't know that this number is an actual real life obsession that some people are really serious about. But this interesting concept was turned into a script that is silly and doesn't make much sense from the get go. We start off with this dog, which the Walter character claims is extremely important in what happened. It makes sense-the dog bit him, and then ran away making Walter late for meeting his wife starting the whole chain of events-but the dog's presence in moments that are also imperative to the plot do not add to anything, and is more filler or just the script trying to act more mysterious than it really is. And in addition, after the lame plot is explained in painfully strong detail for twenty minutes, the original foundation for how the number 23 entered Walter's life is never explained. The script expects us to just accept the lack of any beginning, but it is a gaping hole that cannot be filled. So many of the lines were laughable, and I'm surprised that the actors were able to say them with a straight face("No officer, it's ok. I looked up every 23rd word on every 23rd page" was my personal favorite) as well as the name of Walter and Agatha's son-Robin Sparrow. Get it? Robin Sparrow. Because they are both types of birds. Ha. . . From time to time there are little background connections to 23-for example Walter wakes up one night at 11:12, 11+12 is 23, but those little details are more directing tricks as opposed to things that were in the script. And I'll admit that whenever a number, or a set of something appeared on the screen I would try to figure out in my head how they added to 23-and even though I didn't catch all of them I'm sure they did.

Carrey's acting is half good and half a joke, and it's when he playing Walter where he is somewhat believable. When he is playing Walter he drives into obsession well, trying to create a three dimensional character out of a paper thin script concoction. When he is playing the detective Fingerling in the book portions of the film, he has the visual appearance of Ace Ventura, and the voice of The Mask. Those scenes were also ridiculous, trying to show a film noir type of tale with a really low budget. This is not "The Black Dahlia" which probably had a lot of money to spare, but more of a low budget project that was probably saved by Carrey's presence. Virginia Madsen is appearing here for the second time in the last week, and both performances do not exactly highlight her Oscar nomination(and what should have been her win) two years ago. Little bits from Danny Huston are welcome I suppose, but there is just something about this that annoys me. Whenever he pops up somewhere I don't know if I should be happy or angered. "The Number 23" is a silly thriller, and one that seems to think that the audience has an IQ of 23. By the end I was happy to jump out of my seat and get out of the theatre. I have always enjoyed Carrey's dramatic turns, but "Eternal Sunshine" or "The Majestic" this is not. Luckily we have a new David Fincher flick next week, a master of the thriller. Maybe in his hands the awful script for "The Number 23" could have been somewhat decent, though I highly doubt that would be even possible.

Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider **

Directed by Mark Steven Johnson
Written by Mark Steven Johnson

Starring:
Nicolas Cage as Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider
Eva Mendes as Roxanne
Donal Logue as Mack
Wes Bentley as Blackheart
Peter Fonda as Mephistopheles
Laurence Breuls as Gressil
Daniel Frederiksen as Wallow
Mathew Wilkinson as Abigor
Brett Cullen as Barton Blaze
Matt Long as Young Johnny Blaze
Raquel Alessi as Young Roxanne Simpson
Sam Elliott as Caretaker

111 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for horror violence and disturbing images).
---------------------------------
There are two ways that a beginning superhero movie could go-the direction of "Spider-Man," or the direction of "Daredevil." There is also a third option-the direction of "X-Men," which managed to have a lame start, a brilliant middle, and a lackluster finale, but those are rare to come by. "Spider-Man" had a great series, almost amazing. There is so much anticipation in my head for the third "Spider-Man" movie, the art house crowd wouldn't believe it. And then there is the direction of "Daredevil," which made one awful film and than disappeared off the face of the Earth. "Fantastic Four" should have taken the second road, but sadly the people at Fox have decided to let us venture yet again into the lives of "Fantastic Four." I predict that "Ghost Rider" will go down the road of "Daredevil," and that this will be the first and last journey with Nic Cage into the life of Johnny Blaze.

"Ghost Rider" starts off with Young Johnny Blaze, a motorcycle stuntman just like his father Barton. Johnny is in love with Roxanne, and the two of them plan to run away together the next day. However that night Johnny finds out that his father has cancer, and he is given the chance to ensure that his father lives if he sells his soul to a mysterious man that comes in randomly. Johnny sells his soul for his father's life, and while his father is cured of cancer he dies in a motorcycle accident the next day. Johnny learns that the man he sold his soul to will call him when needed, and until that day Johnny is protected by evil-he does amazing jumps on his bike and never even gets hurt. Now Johnny is in his thirties or so, and by chance he meets Roxanne again who is now a news reporter. He gets her to agree to go out with him, but that night he is summoned by a devil, who wants him to collect the demon Black Heart, because now he is the devil's bounty hunter. At night, in the presence of evil, he isn't Johnny Blaze anymore-he looses his look, becomes a face with a skull on fire, and rides a burning bike. He is Ghost Rider!

"Ghost Rider" has some decent effects, but it suffers from it's campiness. At times it is just a little too over the top, and laughable. There is one scene that sticks in my head to how incredibly stupid it was. When Roxanne is sitting in the restaurant, waiting for Johnny to come for their date, she takes out her cell phone to see the time, and then she takes out a Magic Eight Ball-it's a joke with her trying to see if the ball tells her that Johnny is the right man for her. It's a silly visual gag, and something that I would expect for "Epic Movie," or a parody of superhero films. "Ghost Rider" is a campy, B grade superhero flick-something with a much lower budget than "Spider-Man" or even "Hulk," and it shows. Nicolas Cage is not at his best here, and his amazing four of "Matchstick Men," "Adaptation," "Lord of War," and "The Weather Man" is clearly finished. Cage is a huge fan of "Ghost Rider," so it's obvious why he wanted the role, and it's easy to see that he is just having a job time. Other reasons why the "Ghost Rider series won't skyrocket are the lack of a diverse villians. Ghost Rider fights demon after demon, and doesn't offer an amazing selection of bad guys like Spider-Man and Batman can. And lastly, the relationship between Johnny Blaze and Roxanne is unbelievable, and the audience doesn't really care about it. In "Spider-Man," the Peter Parker/Mary Jane Watson romance unfolds like a soap opera, but the one in "Ghost Rider" had no conflict. The only conflict was that Ghost Rider doesn't want a woman for the other demons to steal away with there is strife. Ghost Rider just isn't complex enough-this film knows that, and tried to make the viewer not see that with campy visuals and a script with more humor than nail biting. I doubt there will be a "Ghost Rider 2," and even though this does have some moments of entertainment and some decent action, it isn't anything to go out of your way to see. Cage needs to hire back whoever was his agent for three years and get out of this slump.

Breach

Breach ***

Directed by Billy Ray
Written by Billy Ray, Adam Mazer, and William Rotko

Starring:
Chris Cooper as Ryan Hanssen
Ryan Phillippe as Eric O'Neill
Laura Linney as Kate Burroughs
Caroline Dharvernas as Juliana O'Neill
Gary Cole as Rich Garces
Dennis Haysbert as Dan Plesac
Kathleen Quinlan as Bonnie Hanssen
Bruce Davison as John O'Neill

110 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for violence, sexual content and language. )
----------------------
The movie God's must be smiling in the sky. Finally, the underrated Chris Cooper who did brilliant jobs in both "Adaptation," for which he won the Academy Award, and "American Beauty" has finally been given a headline in a Hollywood movie. Seeing the name Chris Cooper as the first billing of a movie is enough to drag me into the theatre, no matter what the film is. Even if he co-stars Ryan Phillippe. But "Breach" ends up being a suspenseful and intriguing spy film, and one that you don't want to stop watching. It also had one of the most chilling endings I've seen in a quite some time, and with only three little words Chris Cooper ends up proving once again what a fine talent he is. I am hoping deep down that "Breach" is a strong success, because maybe some more roles will open up for Cooper. The Oscar isn't enough to give him the boost that he deserves.

"Breach" has Cooper as Ryan Hanssen, who doesn't know that he is the center of an FBI investigation for years. Hanssen is an agent, but he is suspected of working for the other side, and may or may have not been giving the Russians military secrets and codes for years. Hanssen also doesn't know the secret of the promotion he just received, or the fact that his newest worker Eric O'Neill is undercover within the agency, answering to Kate Burroughs, and keeping a close watch on Hanssen. Hanssen is also known as being a sexual deviate, and records intercourse with his wife, and watches various videos with Catherine Zeta Jones in them. Eric has a problem though. A few of them, really. For one thing, he isn't allowed to tell his wife about Hanssen's true identity, but means that every now and then he has to lie to her about something-where he was all day, why he didn't pick up him pager, etc. The second problem is that he doesn't see anything wrong with Hanssen. Hanssen seems like a first class citizen too, on the outside. He goes to church everyday, and this is a different kind of church. In this church, the worshiper kneels down for the entire service, as a symbol for supreme worship. Hanssen's grandchildren love her, and he seems to love them. He has a beautiful home. "Faith, family, country-those are the only things that matter," he advises Eric. But the pieces are there-Hanssen may have a big and important drop off coming up, and Eric needs to give things to the FBI for more investigation-all under the watchful eye of Hanssen who has the memory of an elephant, and could tell if someone moves something in the slightest way.

"Breach" boasts two fine performances and one tolerable one. Cooper is excellent as usual, and Laura Linney does a nice job as the tightly wound FBI agent in charge of the investigation. And then there is Ryan Phillippe, aka The Former Mr. Reese Whitherspoon. Phillippe just isn't the type of guy that I would have in mind for this, or any, role. He overdoes it at times, and he is the only weak spot in the cast. I could tell this just from seeing his name on the poster-he hasn't exactly given a worthy performance in anything he's done, perhaps with the exception of "Crash." This is just good storytelling, even though sometimes the script does have situations that are a little unbelievable. And at times everything was almost too easy as well. There are times when Eric has to trick Hanssen into going places for a certain amount of time so that he could download important information off his computer. In one of those scenes, there isn't a proper amount of tension because Hanssen is away for so long. In another similar scene, Eric has to take Hanssen away from his car for a certain amount of time so that the FBI could encase wires all over it. Eric decides to ask if he could go for a tour of some building, but when they falls through it seems like there will be a tense moment with Eric and Hanssen going back while the other FBI agents try to fix Hanssen's car with time running out. But luckily for Eric, and not the viewer, the two of them get stuck in traffic, giving the FBI loads of time to make everything right again. There could have been a bit more tension, and in the end those situations just seem like a waste. All set-up and no payoff.

"Breach" is a spy movie, and the second spy movie in the last two months. Unlike last years "The Good Shepherd," this one has a little more action but not as much character development. The only real development that comes out of it is through the marriage of Eric and his wife Juliana, but the scenes of Eric's home life were somewhat painful to watch, with the overacting of Caroline Dharvernas(who plays his wife), as well as the eye rolling character of the poor woman who has to stay home alone. This worked well more with Eric and Hanssen's dialogues, and the creepy interrogation that Hanssen gives. I understand that everything that Hanssen does is just a line that was written down, but Cooper has that way of looking at the camera that makes it seem like it's looking at you, and you fear him almost. And he molds his character, which could have been just your average bad guy in a cop flick, into a sympathetic gentlemen, who you almost wish didn't turn his back on his country, because he's so damn believable as a nice guy. "Breach" is fine entertainment, and a decent spy flick. Hopefully it'll spread the name of Cooper as far as he deserves.

Gray Matters

Gray Matters **

Directed by Sue Kramer
Written by Sue Kramer

Starring:
Heather Graham as Gray
Thomas Cavanagh as Sam
Bridget Moynahan as Charlie
Molly Shannon as Carrie
Alan Cumming as Gordy
Sissy Spacek as Sydney
Rachel Shelley as Julia Barlett

96 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for some mature thematic material, sexual content and language. )
------------------------------------
"Gray Matters" is the hundredth gay/lesbian movie to come out in the last few months. I haven't seen the other ones, with the exception of "Puccini for Beginners," but I can assume that it doesn't trend new grounds. It is mostly the script that is at fault here. Heather Graham is delightful as her character-fresh, witty-that nervous paranoid woman that Diane Keaton plays in every role. But "Gray Matters" fails as a story of self discovery and awakening, and is a typical romantic comedy that ends on a happy note even though the main character is still a little upset. And you could say that it is a romantic comedy for the girls AND the guys, because let's be honest with ourselves. Which man WOULDN'T want to see Heather Graham make out with Bridget Moynahan?

"Gray Matters" introduces us to the perfect couple-Gray and Sam. They dance in perfect sync with one another, they live together, they eat the same food, they finish each others sentences. The only problem is is that they are brother and sister, and have been constantly mistaken for a romantic couple to people that are unaware of the blood between them. They are both out of the dating world at the moment, and they decide that they should set each other up. Sam will find a nice man for Gray, and Gray will find a nice woman for Sam. And then at the dog part one morning they meet Charlie, a attractive young woman that Sam has an instant liking for. The three of them go out that night and the next day Sam returns to the apartment with news that him and Charlie and going to Vegas that weekend to get married. Gray is a little shocked by the news, and believes that she is just upset because she is losing her brother to another woman-who wouldn't be a little upset? And then in Vegas, Gray and Charlie go out for a night on the town, where Charlie gets completely drunks, kisses Gray, and then passes out. The next morning she doesn't remember any of it, but Gray certainly does, and what's worse is that she kind of enjoyed it. Gray begins to find herself attracted to women, and even though Sam and Charlie get married, she still wishes that she could be with her. Her shrink says that she's just upset about her brother's marriage, but Gray knows that there is something more here, and she wishes that she could make herself straight again.

Every character in "Gray Matters" has their own part-there is the romantic interest(Charlie), the best friend, the shrink, the scary boss woman that everyone fears, and then the outsider that does love the hero. All of the actors do put their best in, which is somewhat difficult with the material they have been given. I already mentioned that Graham does a good job here, but so does Alan Cumming, as the taxi driver friend that has a thing for Gray. And Molly Shannon offers the best lines in the whole film as the best friend. There is one scene where she questions Gray about what she was never attracted to her, and Shannon plays comedy so well and so natural that it's not even like I'm watching a character anymore. Moynahan does a decent job, but sadly Cavanagh acts like he's still on television. And finally there is Sissy Spacek, and when someone says that a role by Sissy Spacek could have been played by anyone, it is not a good sign for Sissy Spacek. Why she agreed to do such a bit part with such a bland script is beyond me. "Gray Matters" is somewhat entertaining at parts, and the final scene did go in a direction that I wasn't expecting. But a lot of the time the script doesn't get off the ground of a sitcom, and there are situations and moments that seem fresh out of an episode of "Friends." It isn't that this is a bad film, but it is somewhat pointless and not needed at all. Perhaps seeing last year's "Imagine Me and You" would be a better choice-a similar story of discovery that plays a little more sophisticated than "Gray Matters."

The Astronaut Farmer

The Astronaut Farmer ***

Directed by Michael Polish
Written by Mark Polish and Michael Polish

Billy Bob Thornton as Charles Farmer
Virginia Madsen as Audrey "Audie" Farmer
Max Thieriot as Shepard Farmer
Jasper Polish as Stanley Farmer
Logan Polish as Sunshine Farmer
Bruce Dern as Hal
Mark Polish as FBI Agent Mathis
Jon Gries as FBI Agent Killbourne
Tim Blake Nelson as Kevin Munchak
Sal Lopez as Pepe Garcia
J.K. Simmons as Jacobson

102 Minutes(Rated PG for thematic material, peril and language)
-------------------------------
"The Astronaut Farmer" does play it safe with a simple story, simple characters, and a simple conflict-resolution, but it looks beautiful, it is well acted, and it gives you that warm and fuzzy feeling inside when it's over. It isn't a perfect film-oh not even close-and it has multiple scenes where you know exactly how it will pan out. But it doesn't bash the viewer over the head with minutes and minutes of speeches from the hero over the bad guys, or large emotional arcs that seem like your watching a bad soap opera. Somehow, the Polish Brothers have crafted an uplifting tale, and at the same time made it seem like I was watching something that I had never seen before.

Billy Bob Thorton plays Charlie Farmer, who has a dream of going into space. To try and build upon that dream he has been building a large rocket ship in his farmhouse, with the intention to launch when he has enough fuel. Because of the amount of money to build the rocket, Charlie is in strong debt on the house, with the bank intending to close the property. Nonetheless, Charlie doesn't let the bank stand in the way, and continues to figure out a way to launch. When he contacts a man over the Internet who may be able to get him some fuel, Charlie is caught by the FBI who become suspicious of his activities. The FDA and the government step in to see if he is building a weapon of mass destruction. (Which led to the most humorous line of "No sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction you wouldn't be able to find it.") Charlie also has problems with his family now, because his wife Audrey begins to feel that Charlie is putting his dreams over his family, and cares more about building the rocket and going to space than being able to feed them.

It's very clear who the good guys and the bad guys are here, there isn't any subtle character studies, and there are the standard secondary characters(including the two bumbling and inept FBI agents). But in the end, "The Astronaut Farmer" is a nice little film. It is entertaining, hopeful, and offers a nice little story about the difference between a dream and an obsession. Is Charlie hopeful, or is he just loosing his mind? It isn't for everybody, but it is decent entertainment for a Friday or Saturday night. The visuals are also worth the trip. The Polish brothers paint some beautiful portraits and some amazing landscapes of the farm-especially during a funeral scene where everything seems to be taken from afar, showing the vast farm for what it really is: a wonder to behold. Don't expect to be blown away with a new story, but for a nice script and some truly great performances(especially by Billy Bob who manages to get through the entire film without saying the "f" word. It is films that these that continue to justify his Academy Award.

Starter for 10

Starter for 10 **1/2

Directed by Tom Vaughan
Written by David Nicholls based on his book.

Starring:
James McAvoy as Brian Jackson
Rebecca Hall as Rebecca Epstein
Alice Eve as Alice
Elaine Tan as Lucy
Benedict Cumberbatch as Patrick

96 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for sexual content, language and a scene of drug use.)
---------------------------------
"Starter for 10" is in fact two films for the price of one-one very funny and interesting, and the other one not so much. I think that the fatal problem with it ends up being the romance subplot, which is a trifle more sophisticated than a typical Hollywood romance film(this one is British), and it's clear as to how that portion of the film will end-while the second half is a bit more unpredictable. This is more of James McAvoy, and if he wasn't so good in "The Last King of Scotland" a mere six months or so apart from this one I wouldn't have minded his rather bland turn here. The one word review for "Starter for 10" would probably be "diverting," because it is exactly that. A mildly entertaining diversion for about ninety minutes where you won't walk away thrilled nor blown away. It's just romance.

"Starter for 10" introduces us to Brian Jackson. All his life he would watch those game shows with his dad, and always developing a thirst for general knowledge. He always liked the feeling of knowing everything-of knowing a lot in a wide range of topics. Brian decides that the best place to go to university, and he leaves his widowed mother, and his two best friends behind-while one of his friends just gives him one piece of advice-"Don't become a wanker." Brian knows that he'll be in for something strange at university, especially when his two roommates let him in while wearing dresses. A few hours later he meets Rebecca Epstein, a young Jewish woman which has Brian all flustered because he never met a Jewish woman before. And on the way home from the party he sees a flyer for the "University Challenge," a quiz show on national television which tests general knowledge categories. Brian goes and meets the devoted Patrick, who has lost three years in a row to the same team. our people take the test, and only three of them can make it and Patrick is the loser. But because of an accident with one of the other team mates he ends up making it, and becomes the star player. His only problem is that he is attracted to Alice, the blonde bimbo on the team who has had more boyfriends than Brian probably has pairs of socks, and even though they did go out once, and even though they seem like they would be good friends, we know that they are never meant to be-a factor that Brian doesn't seem to understand even when him and Rebecca have the best New Year's Eve ever. And then there is the looming University Challenge coming up, where Brian decides that he must wow Alice with his advanced general knowledge.

Now the game show elements were somewhat fun, and very witty-especially Patrick's rivalry with the other team that they have to play. And there is a nice turn of events with that subplot that I was pretty shocked about. But it is the deadly romance bit that killed it for me. In the beginning it wasn't too bad, but as it slowly engulfed the plot I began to roll my eyes. That and the horrible, over the top, music made the music in "Shopgirl' seem mellow. I suppose that James McAvoy is charming enough for a leading man, and Rebecca Hall is quite beautiful, but the little chemistry that they had in the few scenes that they had together was not convincing enough, and the presented relationship between Brian and Alice was somewhat annoying. "Starter for 10" has plenty of sitcom moments(seeing Alice's parents nude in the kitchen while stoned!), and soap opera drama scenes(Brian saying the wrong girl's name while he is kissing the right girl!), but also enough nail-biting suspense to make it all worthwhile. It is an amusing little ditty that will become a footnote on McAvoy's resume-way way down the list after "The Last King of Scotland," and even "Rory O'Shea Was Here." It isn't anything that you should drive out of your way to go see, but if you need something light after all the heavy Oscar contenders, than this is probably a decent choice. Those who aren't fans of the quirky British humor should be warned too-the strange cross-dressing bits may come as a surprise.

The Abandoned

The Abandoned *

Directed by Nacho Cerda
Written by Nacho Cerda, Karim Hussain, and Richard Stanley

Starring:
Anastasia Hill as Marie
Karel Roden as Nicolai
Valentin Ganev as Andrei Misharin
Carlos Reig as Anatoliy

94 Minutes(Rated R for violence/gore, some disturbing images, nudity and language.)
-----------------------------
Way back in November there was this little film festival called the "After Dark Horrorfest," where selected theatres showed eight films that were supposed to be "too much for regular audiences too handle." Real disturbing and creepy stuff, it was supposed to be. But the catch was that the films were not being released wide, and the only real chance to see them on the big screen was during that weekend. I did not attend a single film during the weekend, and when asked why I wasn't going to Horrorfest, I replied that I had no interest in seeing films that were not good enough to be released directly to people. They were obviously direct to video calibur, and not worth my time. Plus there were other things to see that weekend. "The Abandoned" is one of the films from the Horrorfest weekend, and it is somewhat the "winner" of the them all. It was the audience favorite, and Lionsgate had a hand in releasing it to about one thousand theatres this weekend. After seeing "The Abandoned," and learning that it was the best film at Horrorfest made me wonder how horrible the other films could have been if this was declared the winner. "The Abandoned" ends up being a trash film-it doesn't have a nice visual look at all, the acting is poor, and the scares aren't really there. It has a story that could have been creepy if the atmosphere was right, but the low low low production values just kill any of those chances, however slim they were.

"The Abandoned" begins with the middle aged woman Marie finding out information about her birth parents. It turns out that they were murdered, but there is still some property left over that she given(gee, what kind of horror flick do you suppose this is?) Marie was abandoned as a baby, and she wants to find out a little bit more about where she came from-her parents, their history, why they gave her up, etc, and she figures that the best place to find answers is to go to the home where everything would have happened in. Marie goes to the property, and suddenly begins to find that it isn't what it seems to be. For one thing, every now and then she sees herself in zombie form, walking really slowly across the room with large white spaces where her eyeballs should be. And then she learns that whenever you attack this zombie creature, whatever pain that is inflicted on it becomes inflicted on herself. Marie learns this the hard way from her companion Nicolai who ends up shooting the zombie him, only to findm a bullet in his leg. It also turns out that Nicolai may or may not be a brother to Marie, and the two of them become stuck in the mystery of the house, where they discover that they are about to live in a recreation of the night their parents were murdered-and fate will allow it the chance for them to die just like they were supposed to forty years ago.

"The Abandoned" was praised at Horrorfest for being suspenseful, and actually creepy. I'd say that this film had the POTENTIAL to be suspenseful and actually creepy. There are some moments that, if done better, could have been gripping. There are long moments where Marie walks around the house, and the scene could have been effective with the right amount of tension, maybe no music. Perhaps it was the time of day that I saw this, which was 11:40 in the morning, but there was nothing scary about this. Just a little gross-seeing the dogs rip about the dead body of that one character was just not something that I needed to see, or seeing Nicolai try to pull the bullet out of his leg, and then burning the wound was just horrifying. The visual look makes it clear that this production did not have a lot of money to burn. The entire thing has this grainy look to it that is clearly not intential or done to give the film a certain look. It was just cheap. "The Abandoned" is direct to video quality, and clarifies my theory that Horrorfest was just a bunch of films that were not good enough to be released across the nation. Hopefully audiences WILL abandon this picture, and see something more worthwhile over the weekend.

Hannibal Rising

Hannibal Rising *

Directed by Peter Webber
Written by Thomas Harris, based on his novel.

Starring:
Gaspard Ulliel as Hannibal Lecter
Rhys Ifans as Vladis Grutas
Gong Li as Lady Murasaki Shikibu
Helena Lia Tachovska as Mischa
Dominic West as Inspector Pascal Popil
Aaron Thomas as Young Hannibal Lecter
Kevin McKidd as Petras Kolnas
Richard Brake as Enrikas Dortlich

117 Minutes(Rated R for strong grisly violent content and some language/sexual references.)
------------------------------
In afterthought, the Hannibal Lector movies are nothing amazing. "Silence of the Lambs" is a great film, indeed, but I still have my doubts of if it should have won Best Picture in 1991. And then there was "Hannibal" which was a terrible and dull sequel, especially after such a long wait between films. And then "Red Dragon" was decent, but not especially memorable. And now there is "Hannibal Rising," the fourth film in Thomas Harris' series, and the story that is supposed to start it all. Harris wrote the screenplay for a change, but that doesn't help the story material, and in the end this prequel of Hannibal is a lifeless and pointless installment in the series, that made me want to never know the origins of Hannibal Lector, who was voted by AFI as the most creepiest villain in film history. One problem, and pretty much the biggest problem, is the lack of Anthony Hopkins who made the other three films worth seeing the most. Hopkins won an Oscar for a mere twenty minutes of screen time in "Silence of the Lambs," and it is clearly one of the most talked about and parodied characters in history. But there is no Hopkins to be found-instead we have a young Hannibal trying too hard to sound like Hopkins.

"Hannibal Rising" starts off with young Hannibal trying to protect his sister Mischa from the people that killed the rest of his family in World War II. After his family is killed the killers decide to take coop in his home, and they find Hannibal and his sister, chain them up, and then decide what to do with them. Eight years later, Hannibal is living in an orphanage still upset about the loss of his sister. He doesn't talk much, except for in the middle of the night when he has horrible dreams of the past. The first forms of violence that spark form him is when he beats up a bully that was making fun of him. Years later he is at a medical school in France, where he meets Lady Murasaki , who teaches him how to use a sword. Hannibal continues to have nightmares about what the men did to his family, and mostly his sister, and he decides to use his knowledge of the sword to get his bloody revenge.

One thing that struck me halfway through the film was that there is nobody to root for. We can't root for Hannibal, because even though this is a story of redemption, we know what Hannibal becomes and what he is, and for that he will always be a villain. It would have been a nice touch if Harris was able to create a human quality to a character that we always saw as evil, and maybe at the same time given us the chance to see the previous films in a new light. But instead he doesn't try to be arty in any way at all-just trying to up the body count as much as possible. In continuing the theory above, we also can't root for the people that Hannibal is trying to kill. They are almost as bad as Hannibal is, but the audience is incapable of showing any compassion for Hannibal's situation, and we end up being onlookers that wish they were looking away. In the other three Hannibal films we've had a detective to root for, and there is a detective character present here, but he is only around for two or three scenes that he is more of an extra than a main character. "Hannibal Rising" is just plain lifeless-and it seems like no effort went into the script or the film as a whole. It is proof that we don't need any more Hannibal films, and if we do we need Hopkins to balance it out a bit more. Hopkins is Hannibal, and you could only imagine what the film is like without him. Think about it. Watch "Silence of the Lambs," and skip all the scenes with Lector. Gaspard Ulliel may be named Hannibal Lector here, but he isn't the Hannibal that we know and love, and the one we know that we love to hate. "Hannibal Rising" is easy to pass, and let the origins of Hannibal Lector to remain a mystery.

Music and Lyrics

Music and Lyrics ***

Directed by Marc Lawrence
Written by Marc Lawrence

Starring:
Hugh Grant as Alex Fletcher
Drew Barrymore as Sophie Fisher
Brad Garrett as Chris Riley
Haley Bennett as Cora Corman
Kristen Johnston as Rhonda Fisher
Campbell Scott as Sloan Gates

104 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for some sexual content.)
---------------------------
"Music and Lyrics" is, by definition, a "cute" movie. It is a tolerable romantic comedy, with many funny moments, but at the core it is really just Hugh Grant being Hugh Grant in every single Hugh Grant movie in the last twenty years, romantic comedy cliche scenes, and an ending that is so extraordinarily Hollywood that I'm surprised it wasn't just stock footage. But it is a decent and entertaining little flick, and one that doesn't torture the viewer. It doesn't seem like I've been battered over the head with the same old thing, and it is quite an enjoyable ride. "Music and Lyrics" seems to have been created just for the Valentine season. It is the only real reason why it is out. There is no way that Marc Lawrence sat down to write a groundbreaking new screenplay about a couple falling in love, and he hasn't. But he's created an enjoyable date movie, one that is "cute" without being impossible to watch, and a comedy that is almost to the point of being satire. This is a perfectly fine effort, and a better Valentine's treat than "Daddy's Little Girls."

"Music and Lyrics" begins with a bang-a mock music video with Hugh Grant in complete 80's garb-complete with hair style, leather pants, and pink visuals. It turns out that he is Alex Fletcher, the second most popular singer in the 80's band POP! which was extremely popular before the lead singer left them and took the remaining songs to create a solo album. Now Alex is on his own, living from lady to lady, trying to perform wherever he can to pay the rent. And he gets tiny gigs at amusement parks, class reunions, etc. And then he is hired by the biggest pop sensation in America, Cora, who wants Alex to write a hit song for her in a week. She has a title in mind, and the rest is up to Alex. Writing lyrics had never been a strong point for Alex, but he can write a damn good melody. And he is in luck when he meets Sophie, the woman watering his plants for a few days while is regular plant lady is away. Sophie can write a great lyric, and really quick, so Alex enlists her help in writing the song for Cora. And so it begins, as Alex and Sophie begin to write the pop song for Cora, and at the same time beginning to fall in love.

It's obvious how this story will end, unless this is your first movie ever. There is no surprise in the story of "Music and Lyrics," but there are some surprises in entertainment. Some of the jokes on 80's music were actually very funny, and not just the video at the start. There is also what has become of Alex-and he's in the running for a spot on "Battle of the 80's Has-Beens," where a bunch of former 80's pop stars all get into a boxing ring for the chance to sing a song. This includes Frankie Goes to Hollywood and Tiffany. And Alex's trademark hip thrust, and the fact that he still does it when he is forty, is amusing and somewhat witty. Drew Barrymore and Hugh Grant are off doing their Drew Barrymore and Hugh Grant. Barrymore is on her full "paranoid and cutesy" best, and Hugh Grant doesn't stop the witticisms and constant one liners. Grant has been doing this type of role for so long that I wonder if he is able to just aid-lib a little bit on some of the lines. Not all of it can be in the script, unless Grant was in mind for the role. Oh wait. . . Grant is in mind for every role like this ever created-he just can't manage to do them all. Supporting characters like Kristen Johnson(from the great "3rd Rock from the Sun") as Sophie's sister who holds a teenage crush on Alex for years are never not funny, and a welcome addition to the main story. Johnson was so excellent on "3rd Rock from the Sun" that she is pretty much a welcome addition to anything she's in. Brad Garrett as Alex's manager is decent, but I'm not a huge fan, and Campbell Scott irritates me in every single movie he's in, and this one is no exception. At least he's supposed to be irritating here.

My only real problem with "Music and Lyrics" is the final ten minutes or so. It's after the usual scene for the fledgling couple has an argument that could risk their entire relationship, and it's when the man decides that he must get the woman he loves back. It's extremely Hollywood, and typical of something like this, but I had a little more faith in this one. I was hoping for a more "50 First Dates" ending, where everything ends up alright but it's done in a way that wasn't your standard resolution. "Music and Lyrics" is cute, predictable fluff, but what makes this one different from the other romantic comedies around is that this one is somewhat entertaining, and not a chore to watch. And once again, it's worth seeing for the opening three minutes alone. So sad, and yet so true. . .

The 2006 Academy Award Nominated Shorts-Animated

The 2006 Academy Award Nominated Shorts-Animated ***1/2

Once again, Magnolia Pictures is giving us the chance to get a glimpse at the short films nominated for Oscars. This is one of my favorite events every year-digital prints of the five short films in both the Live Action category and the Animated. The only downside is that it is two programs for the price of two. If you want to see them all, you have to pay twice, but it is well worth it. In the animated category-

LIFTED-Directed by Gary Rydstrom(United States)
The yearly Pixar short of an alien getting evaluted on his abduction skills, and failing horribly. This is my personal pick for Best Animated Short-a short and refreshing trip that is better than "Cars" was-and the visuals are, as usual, very impressive. This will be playing before the new Pixar movie this year.

THE DANISH POET-Directed by Torill Kove(Denmark)
The longest of the five, and the most dense, "The Danish Poet" tells the story of a poet who goes on a trip and falls in love-only to have destiny, fate, and another man break the couple apart. The visuals and narration make this out to be something that is from a storybook, but this fairy tell isn't anything groundbreaking or overly witty. It is good, though, has a lot of heart, and seems to have a lot of effort well used. I loved it.

THE LITTLE MATCHGIRL-Directed by Roger Allers & Don Hahn(United States)
A depressing little tale, in the vein of "Grave of the Fireflies" is Disney 2-D animation at it's best. This has the look and feel of a classic Disney tale. "The Little Matchgirl' tells the tragic story of a little matchgirl who uses the last few matches she has to keep warm, and to also reveal her dreams of family and a home to call her own.

MAESTRO-Directed by Geza M. Toth(Hungary)
Nothing special, and doesn't have a comic moment until the very end, "Maestro" shows an animal getting ready to perform for his big show, which ends up being something very surprising. Amusing, but not Oscar material.

NO TIME FOR NUTS-Directed by Chris Renaud & Michael Thurmeier (United States)
The litte rat Scrat from "Ice Age" is back once again, and he still can't seem to keep his hands on that acorn. And this time he finds a time machine, and ends up getting shifted through time. "No Time for Nuts" is a very funny time travel story, and constantly entertaining.

On the whole it was strange to find that the animated shorts were better than the live action. Usually it's the other way around, with the animation being a mixed bag. All the animation this year is short and sweet, and we never get the time to get bored with any of them-last year there were two that were almost unbearable. And since Magnolia wants to divide them into two programs, and the animation only adds up to about forty five minutes, they've decided to put some of the other contenders in the second half of the program. I wouldn't replace any of the films above with the following.

ONE RAT SHORT-Directed by Alex Weil(United States)
The ballad of two rats-one a test rat and the other a subway rat. The story is a little blase, but the visuals are perfect, with amazing detail on the rats.

THE PASSENGER-Directed by Chris Jones(Australia)
A young boy gets on a bus on a rainy day, only to sit down next to a fish that turns into some kind of creature. Passable, but doesn't hold attention well.

WRAITH OF COBBLE HILL-Directed by Adam Parrish King(United States)
The most heavy of this set, telling the story of Felix, a young boy from a deadbeat Brooklyn home-with a mother who doesn't feed him. Felix ends up getting entrusted with the keys to the grocery store next door, and every night goes inside to take some of the food with his friends. "Wraith of Cobble Hill" has some good topics to discuss, good old fashioned animation, and a decent story.

GUIDE DOG-Directed by Bill Plympton(United States)
My third trip to "Guide Dog" after seeing it attached to "Hair High" and "F*ck." And if I see "The Animation Show 3" I'll be seeing it there too. "Guide Dog" is about a dog that that see a Help Wanted sign in a window, and signs up to help the blind. But this dog is dangerous wherever he goes, and kills all of his clients. I love "Guide Dog" very much, and I loved Plympton's first "Guard Dog" even more. It is a shame that this one wasn't nominated for the Oscar, because it is very funny short from a master.

A GENTLEMAN’S DUEL-Directed by Francisco Ruiz Velasco and Scott McNally(United States)
Not very funny, and a little annoying, "A Gentleman's Duel" tells the story of two rivals trying to get the attention of the woman with large breasts. The dirty humor here has the feel of animators saying to themselves "Ooooo, let's make a dirty joke in a cartoon."

The 2006 Academy Award Nominated Shorts-Live Action

The 2006 Academy Award Nominated Shorts-Live Action ***

Once again, Magnolia Pictures is giving us the chance to get a glimpse at the short films nominated for Oscars. This is one of my favorite events every year-digital prints of the five short films in both the Live Action category and the Animated. The only downside is that it is two programs for the price of two. If you want to see them all, you have to pay twice, but it is well worth it. In the live action category-

THE SAVIOUR-Directed by Peter Templeman & Stuart Parkyn(Australia)
"The Saviour" is a very witty and entertaining short about two door to door Mormans who are trying to convert a neighborhood. One of them ends up having a torrid affair with a young housewife who can't get pregnant with her husband, leaving her to look for comfort in the arms of another man. His Mormon partner becomes suspicious of him, though, when he realizes that he's never been inside the home of the woman whom he believes his friend is in the middle of conversion. This is my personal pick of the five for the Oscar, even though I doubt it stands a chance.

HELMER & SON-Directed by Soren Pilmark & Kim Magnusson(Denmark)
A father-son relationship in just about ten minutes, "Helmer and Son" has a son seeing his father in a retirement home, only to find that his father has locked himself into a closet and refuses to come out. It is short and sweet, but ultimately nothing new and kind of stale with story.

ERAMOS POCOS-Directed by Borja Cobeaga(Spain)
The most feature type film of the five, "Eramos Pocos" tells the story of a father and son whose wife and mother has left them. The two of them try to persuade the mother in law to do the household work, until the father finds out a horrible truth. This is my second favorite, a very well done little short film that does have the potential to becoming a full length film.

BINTA AND THE GREAT IDEA-Directed by Javier Fesser & Luis Manso(Spain)
My next to least favorite of the five, and sadly the one that I think is going to win. "Binta and the Great Idea" has everything that is needed to win an Oscar-story of poor children in Africa that want to go to school. Come on! It's politically correct, uplifting, and tells a relevant story. But it's somewhat dull, not entertaining, and was possibly the longest thirty minutes.

WEST BANK STORY-Directed by Ari Sandel (United States)
A terrible waste, and a horrible ending to the otherwise decent collection. "West Bank Story" is a mock of "West Side Story," only between Pakistan and Israel. It tries to be a satire of the Middle East conflict, fast food, and "West Side Story" but ends up being too painful, and made me wonder what it was doing in the nominee list. It just isn't funny, and very amateur.

All in all, the live action nominees left me a little uninspired this year. I recalled last years collection and it was a brilliant and depressing trip, but they were all almost masterpieces. This year is a mixed bag, and I could just recommend it. And sadly the best of the five come at the very beginning, and also my pick for the Best Short Film Live Action.

The Lives of Others

The Lives of Others ****

Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Written by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck

Starring:
Ulrich Mühe as Gerd Wiesler
Ulrich Turkur as Grubitz
Sebastian Koch as Georg Dreyman
Martina Gedeck as Crista Maria Sieland
Thomas Thieme as Minister Bruno Hempf

137 Minutes(Rated R for some sexuality/nudity.)
-------------------------------
Seeing "The Lives of Others" has changed my mind about what should win the Best Foreign Film Oscar. Since it was nominated in the category it was not yet released in the United States to the public, and before seeing it I was convinced that "Pan's Labyrinth" should be the winner. Now I'm not so sure, as "The Lives of Others" is easily more human, more emotional, and overall a better film. This could easily end up on my Top Ten at the end of the year. This is a history film, a human drama, a relationship story, and a story about a friendship that could have been-all tangled up into two and a half hours of constant tension, all without any blood, car chases, or action fight sequences, and it sucks the viewer into the story from the beginning. I did not take out my cell phone once to check the time, and when that happens it means there is something special happening on the screen.

"The Lives of Others" opens in 1984 in Berlin, Germany, a few years before the wall falls. We follow Gerd Wiesler, a respected, humorless and straightforward member of the Stasi. Wiesler is great at getting information from people, and teaches a class about how to catch if a person being questioned is lying or not. He comes up with the idea to monitor renowned playwright Georg Dreyman, as well as his girlfriend Crista Maria Sieland. Dreyman appears to be a good man, and he has never made a negative political statement about the GDR, but he is still suspected of leading a double life. And so Wiesler goes into their apartment when they leave and sticks wires all along the walls, under the paint and through the light switches, and begins his duty of listening to everything that happens in the house. Wiesler begins to follow their lives as if he was watching a television program-listening to their conversations, their love making, their arguments, etc. He learns that a high profile minister has his eye on Crista Maria, and would have her for himself if Dreyman wasn't around. She is very vulnerable. Eventually Wiesler stops listening to them, and decides to participant in things they do. He doesn't become obsessed with the couple, instead he gets a protective instinct to help them, as he tries to stop them from doing things that could get them into trouble, which is a constant jeopardy to his career.

"The Lives of Others" is a powerful character study of Wiesler, who is virtually in every scene even if it isn't a physical presence. When Dreyman and Sieland are having their conversations about themselves, art, literature, etc, we know that Wiesler is there the entire time. It isn't until about halfway through where we see that this observer and listener is becoming more human, and we only get examples of his humanity by the way he listens to them, and what he types on his massive report to the second man who comes in at nights to take over. Wiesler basically wants the type of relationship and lifestyle of the one he is hearing. He lives a life of solitude-going home to a standard little apartment, and only being with women who time he has to pay for. And while he is working he hears what is to him an ideal lifestyle. It has to be made clear that Wiesler isn't like Robin Williams in "One Hour Photo." He isn't obsessed with the couple-he doesn't create a shrine for them. He is more obsessed with protecting them, and allowing them to be with each other-something that he never experienced. And this transformation is a slow one, but is ultimately the core of the film.

I have only seen four of the foreign film nominees as "After the Wedding" isn't released here until the end of March, but it is clear which one I will be rooting for. If "Pan's Labyrinth" ends up winner, I will be happy-it was my number two of last year. But it is "The Lives of Others" that packs a more emotional punch, and tells a story that is full of more heart and develops it characters more than "Pan," which was phenomenal, but more of a visual masterpiece. This film is going strong in Europe, and it easily deserves all of the attention that it has been getting. Lastly, I'll mention the ending, or endings. At one point it may have seemed tedious. After the emotional climax we get 4 Years Later. . .and then two years later. . . and then two years later again. In the hands of a lesser film maker it may have seemed too extended, and it may have had the "Lord of the Rings' feel of too many endings. Instead each one had a part in the final ending, which will bring a smile to everyone's face. It is the only place to end this-a happy ending to a story that is very tragic, and one that is full of hope. "The Lives of Others" is the only film out there at the moment that is truly a must-see. Good luck at the Oscars. . .

Avenue Montaigne

Avenue Montaigne ***

Directed by Daniele Thompson
Written by Daniele Thompson and Christopher Thompson

Starring:
Cecile de France as Jessica
Valerie Lemercier as Catherine Versen
Albert Dupontel as Jean-François Lefort
Laura Morante as Valentine Lefort
Claude Brasseur as Jacques Grumberg
Christopher Thompson as Frédéric "Fred" Grumberg
Dani as Claudie
Sydney Pollack as Brian Sobinski

106 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for some strong language and brief sexuality.)
---------------------------
"Avenue Montaigne" works like a French Robert Altman, and is a delightful and welcome trip to France all the way. While it doesn't paint as massive as a scale as the late Altman would have done, it does connect several characters, all through the eyes of a cafe waitress on Avenue Montaigne. What this film manages to do is bypass any form of pretension, which seemed like it would be covered with from the advertisements. "Avenue Montaigne" doesn't pretend to know everything, and is chocked full of innocence and charm. It is a different type of French comedy-it is much more light, and not the usual farce and over the top story lines that many French comedies end up being. And considering that it is European, there is no nudity at all, and there is only one tiny brief hint of sex. There is still smoking though, and because it is European, nothing can be done about that.

"Avenue Montaigne" centers around a small cafe that is very popular being it is across the street from an art gallery, a concert hall, and a performance theatre, so there are always various people coming in-actors, actresses, stagehands, managers, guards, etc. Here comes in Jessica, a young woman raised by her grandmother who constantly is telling the story of how she loved luxury, but could not afford to live a life of it. She needs work, and after much resistance by the owner because women never had work at this cafe, she is hired for a trial run-mainly because on the 17th there is an art auction, a concert, and an opening of a new play, so it is sure to be very busy. And then we are introduced to the people involved in those three events. For the art auction there is Jacques Grumberg who is selling his entire art collection, even though his son Frederic is upset by some of the things he is selling. For the concert there is the piano player Jean-François Lefort who is tired of playing in front of all these people, and would rather settle down and play in smaller venues-hospitals, retirement homes, etc. And for the play there is Catherine Versen, who is a soap opera actress that doesn't want to star in any more awful comedy plays, or that soap she's on for that matter. She is trying to get a role in the new film by Brian Sobinski(played by Sydney Pollack, which was somewhat distracting to find him here). And all of these people somehow get connected to Jessica, who is a little way manages to change their lives on a big scale.

"Avenue Montaigne" will not change the world, or even be remembered in a few months, but it is consistantly amusing, witty, and always charming. It's one of those films that will slowly have viewers over the next few years, as people will discover it by chance, by accident, or by word of mouth. Cecile de France is always delightful(even with the stick of barbed wire in "High Tension" she was radiant), and actresses like Valerie Lemercier and Laura Morante showcase their talents well. Especially the former, Lemercier is great as the bored actress Catherine Versen, whose boredom and nervousness makes for very good comedy. "Avenue Montaigne" is a pleasant little comedy that doesn't offer anything new, isn't groundbreaking, but makes for perfect entertainment, which is all we need sometimes.

Bridge to Terabithia

Bridge to Terabithia ***

Directed by Gabor Csupo
Written by Jeff Stockwell and David Paterson, based on the book by Katherine Paterson

Starring:
Josh Hutcherson as Jesse
AnnaSophia Robb as Leslie
Zooey Deschanel as Ms. Edmonds
Robert Patrick as Jack Aarons
Bailee Madison as May Belle
Lauren Clinton as Janice Avery

95 Minutes(Rated PG for thematic elements including bullying, some peril and mild language.)
----------------------
For lack of time, the following is a minute review. . .

"Bridge to Terabithia" is easily the best children's flick around, and possibly even the best to find in the mainstream crowd. And it sad part is that it was marketed all wrong. I read the book back when I was in the fourth grade or so, and the only thing I remembered was the ending-so it was kind of like rediscovering it on a clean slate. This is marketed as an action/adventure story, more in the vein of "Chronicles of Narnia." But those who go in expecting this will be sadly disappointed, but should be happy with the outcome. What we get instead is a beautiful story of friendship, love, loss, and even honor. And it ends up being even a little better than "Narnia."

The film centers on Jesse, the outcast in school and his family. His sisters tease him, he is bullied at school, and his parents don't really say anything about either. He is adored by his sister May Belle, but that's about all. And then in school he meets the new girl, Leslie, who is thrown aside by everyone in school because she doesn't have a television-and the fact that she is smarter, brighter, and can run faster than anybody else. And the two form a friendship, a very close one, because the truth is they both need each other. And then they form a magical place in the woods called Terabithia, which they could only get to by swinging across a rope in the creek behind their houses. Here they have their adventures, cool off from the pressures of life, and get to be with each other, which is all they need.

Josh Hutcherson and AnnaSophia Robb carry the film perfectly, and the entire thing does root itself into their acting. This is overall a good movie, not perfect, but something better to see than anything else. For kids especially, enough of "Night at the Museum," and more "Bridge to Terebithia." And bonus points for sticking Zooey Deschanel in the cast, who manages to make "cool" of every single character she plays. "Bridge to Terabithia" is my recommendation for anything around-warm enough to melt the coldest heart, and sad enough to open the floodgates.

Antibodies

Antibodies **1/2

Directed by Christian Alvart
Written by Christian Alvart

Starring:
Norman Reedus as Polizist Schmitz
Christian von Aster as Polizist Wagner
André Hennicke as Gabriel Engel
Heinz Hoenig as Seiler

127 Minutes(Not Rated-Nudity, Sex,Strong Language, Violence)
-----------------------------
For lack of time the following is a minute long review. . .

"Antibodies" is entertaining and somewhat engrossing, but it is killed by it's similarities to what appears to be its source material, "The Silence of the Lambs." It is almost ridiculous how similar the two are. We have the dedicated cop, who fears the world and is scared that his son will end up drifting over to the side of the villains one day. The dedicated cop is looking for a killer in the town where he lives, and he figures that the only way that he could find out who the killer is, is to go question the last serial killer in the area caught-the sick and twisted Gabriel Engel. Engel is in his cell, wheelchair bound and fixated on his child predator killings, and doesn't delve into information until the cop answers some questions-one of them being "What do you think about when you have sex with your wife?" We then follow the manhunt, with Engel being the guide.

This not only has a similar story to "Silence of the Lambs," but often does a few directing tricks similar as well. One of them being the cop talking to the criminal in his cell, and the camera jumps from person to person as they speak, but everything in the background looking the same except for the face of whose talking, bringing up the notion that cop and criminal are the same. "Lambs" did this, only did it better. Engel even says upon his first meeting with the cop, "What did you expect, Hannibal Lector?" At least they pay tribute. . .

That being said, "Antibodies" is somewhat engrossing, and does have a few worthy twists, but it too crowded with images from the former film. Alvart is a talented director, and does have a few original tricks up his sleeve, but a more original story is needed as well. This is a good cop thriller, has moments of true creepiness, and Gabriel Engel is indeed one of the most evil film characters in a while. Worth checking out, unless you've seen "Silence of the Lambs."

Bamako

Bamako **

Directed by Abderrahmane Sissako
Written by Abderrahmane Sissako

Starring:
Aissa Maiga as Mele
Maimouna Hélène Diarra as Saramba
Balla Habib Dembélé as Falaï

118 Minutes(Not Rated-Nothing Objectionable)
--------------------------------
For lack of time, the following is just a minute long review. . .

"Bamako" has a message and a point, and it doesn't mind drilling it down the viewers throat in 118 long and painful minutes. I checked my watched multiple times here, and after the first ten minutes it was a fight to keep my eyes open. "Bamako" isn't entertaining in any way-and I don't even think it was supposed to be. Instead it is a long and comprehensive essay on social injustice in Africa, as well as economic difficulties. It isn't subtle at all, and at times I'm surprised it wasn't just two hours of the director telling us the message one on one. There is interesting stuff to hear in this, but it isn't something to watch on a Friday night. I should know. I did.

"Bamako" somewhat follows Mele, a singer at a club in Bamako, Africa, who lives with her husband who is out of work. The two of them are on the verge of a break up. In the center of their courtyard where they live, a trial has been set up which is the fight between African civil spokesmen and World Bank and IMF, who are being blamed for Africa's troubles. While the trial goes on, life goes on in the courtyard.

At times it seemed like characters in the film were as bored with the trial as I was. At one point one character even states "I'm getting sick and tired of this trial." By that time I was nodding my head in agreement. "Bamako" does present both sides to the issue, clearly stating that it isn't one sides fault nor the other. On both sides in the trial there are both black and white people repersenting the respective sides, and then allows the verdict to be up to us after a violent conclusion. But by this point I didn't care enough. "Bamako" is far too long and far too preachy for it's own good. This is a film to watch in a class and not on the big screen, and not even a Danny Glover cameo as a cowboy could save it. Interesting stuff, but very dull to watch.

Because I Said So

Because I Said So **

Directed by Michael Lehmann

Written by Karen Leigh Hopkins and Jessie Nelson

Starring:

Diane Keaton as Daphne

Mandy Moore as Milly

Lauren Graham as Maggie

Piper Perabo as Mae

Gabriel Macht as Johnny

Tom Everett Scott as Jason

102 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for sexual content including dialogue, some mature thematic material and partial nudity.)

-----------------------

For lack of time, the following is just a minute long review. . .

"Because I Said So" stars Diane Keaton, doing what Diane Keaton has done for the last year. . . two years. . .ten years. . .career. . . The neutric and paranoid middle aged woman, also trying to be a colorful character. She was nominated for an Oscar for "Something's Gotta Give," and since then she has been trying far too hard to recapture why she was so great in that movie-and "Because I Said So" is evidence that she cannot. "Because I Said So" has her playing Daphne, a mother of three who has watched two of her daughters get married, and can't stand to see that the third one, Milly, has yet to even find a man she likes. She sets up her daughter with a man, in secret by placing a personal ad in the paper, and then watches as her daughter falls for another man. In addition, Daphne is not looking forward to her sixith birthday, and her other two daughters find that her actions towards Milly are just a way to cover up her feelings about her upcoming birthday.

"Because I Said So" has many moments that thinks they are funny and clever, and are anything but. One of these involves an adult website, Keaton, and a dog-and then the script has the audicity to put the gag in twice. Keaton is just starting to bore me with her typecast roles, and whenever she is in a trailer for something I cringe. Maybe she should start some new material. There isn't anybody really likable in the film either, and by the end I didn't care how any of the subplots were resolved. Well, that isn't true. I did care about one of Lauren Graham's patients, the delightful Stuart who gets hit in the head with a cake at the very end. Not a very good way to end the film, or a very good way to show the finale to one of the characters. The only decent character. The only one that you give a damn about. Two last things-that little kid is the worst actor around, and very annoying, and when one of the daughters states that the four of them sing, you know that there will be a scene where they all sing. And it's there. Oh trust me, it's there. . .

Unconscious

Unconscious ***1/2

Directed by Joaquín Oristrell
Written by Joaquín Oristrell, Dominic Harari, and Teresa Pelegri

Starring:
Leonor Watling as Alma
Luis Tosar as Salvador
Alex Brendemühl as Leon
Núria Prims as Olivar
Mercedes Sampietro as Sra. Mingarro

100 Minutes(Rated R for sexual content including dialogue, and some drug material.)
-------------------------------
After months of delay, "Unconscious" is finally released in the United States, and in the greater New York area, and to tell the truth, it was worth the wait. "Unconscious" is a wonderful movie, and one of the few films that have come out this year that is worth the hunt to go see. Even the art films haven't been very good, but if someone asks me what indie or foreign film to see, this is the one. Even the rest of the audience clapped after this one. It's funny, fresh, and very very clever, using some great source material, and taking the subjects of Freud and sociology and turning them into a fantastic mystery. It is also a great excuse to see Leonor Watling, who is not only a terrific actress but one of the most beautiful women in the acting game. Watching her is a constant delight, and thankfully she's in this for about two thirds of it.

"Unconscious" is the story of two couples. First there is Alma and Leon, two fans of Freud and even simply fans of literature. And then there is Salvador and Olivia, whose sex life is lacking, and the two of them are pretty much bored with each other. Olivia and Alma are sisters, and their father employs Leon and Salvador. Their father finds out that he has a brain tumor and will be dead in six months. He decides to leave his office over to Leon, which doesn't sit well with Olivia because she feels that her father favors Alma over her. One day, the very pregnant Alma comes to Salvador in a fright, claiming that her husband has left her. Alma is certain that her husband is either missing or dead, and she enlists the help of Salvador to find him. The two of them poke around through her husband's psychiatric thesis, which is the study of four hysterical women, and all or one of them may or may not know something about Leon. And along the way, Alma and Salvador come to truths about themselves and others, as Salvador confesses that he has loved her for years, only married her sister to be close to her, and wants to raise her child as his own, while Alma just wants her husband back, and to find out who a mysterious figure on the stairs was when she arrived home the day he left. . .

"Unconscious" great because it's fresh and because it's witty. This seems like a script that actually had a lot of time and effort put into it, and not something that was just slapped together. And it's very smart how the use of Freud and other various psychiatric theories were used to divide the film into certain sections. I am almost positive that some of it went over my head because I am not an expert on that sort of thing, but the jokes that were related to that which I did get were enough to fall in love with the script. In addition the characters are great, especially Alma, the neurotic yet lovable wife. Leonor Watling plays her brilliantly, and even when she is being a complete pain in the rear there is something so charming about her that you forgive her, and you almost laugh with her. There is just something about her that lights up the screen and makes you smile. The same goes for Salvador(only to a lesser degree), the bearded husband who just wants everything to be right, but at the same time probably enjoys all the time he spends with his best friends wife. The look is very well done, remaining consistent with the time this is supposed to be set-1913. Much of it tries to reenact old silent films of the day, and when going from scene to scene it appears like a old film changing reels, and whenever it goes from section to section, a little border appears on the edges like a curtain and stage to an old theatre play. Little touches like that didn't make the film seem "cute," but "sophisticated." "Unconscious" is a thinking man's comedy-it requires that you strictly pay attention and follow what is happening. It's easy to get lost, but there is enough happening and even to wash your eyes over that you won't get bored or tear your eyes from the screen. And for a film that is all about analysis, you shouldn't stress over this as much. It's just a light, enjoyable romantic comedy-it's a lot of fun, and it is easily the best film out at the moment.

Daddy's Little Girls

Daddy's Little Girls **

Directed by Tyler Perry
Written by Tyler Perry

Starring:
Gabrielle Union as Julia
Idris Elba as Monty
Louis Gossett Jr. as Willie
Tasha Smith as Jennifer
Tracee Ellis Ross as Cynthia
Malinda Williams as Maya
Terri J. Vaughn as Brenda

95 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for thematic material, drug and sexual content, some violence and language.)
------------------------------------
Back in 2005, hit play director Tyler Perry released a film version of his cross-dressing character, the gun-toting, loud, wise grandma Madea. The film came out at the end of February, on a weekend that people do not generally go out for the movies, and in a surprise victory, "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" grossed over twenty million dollars in its first three days. Since then we've been given an annual Perry, and in the one last year he decided to direct "Madea's Family Reunion," and now this year with "Daddy's Little Girls." They've all come out at about the same time every year, and they all haven't been very good. I've seen Tyler Perry on talk shows and interviews, and he seems like a generally nice good. Just a friendly, church going, ethical man, and it's obvious that he is because he fills his stories with characters just like him, and then characters that are the complete opposite. Perry is not a talented film maker or even a talented writer. His characters seem like characters for children, and his stories are stuff that we've seen before. His bad guys are over the top bad, the actors he puts are over the top acting, and the music he puts is often so loud and eye rolling that you hear better music on a daytime soap opera. "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" had it's moments, but it took more than stamina to sit through "Madea's Family Reunion." If there could be anything positive about this film it's that it's a notch about both of the two previous works, and maybe it's a sign of the future. Maybe Tyler Perry will get better. I just can't stand not liking his work-he's so damn friendly.

"Daddy's Little Girls" is about Monty, a down on his luck mechanic who is trying to save enough money to buy the shop from it's owner. At the same time he tries to visit his three daughters as much as possible. He can't raise them on his own, so he allows his mother in law to take care of them. However, she is dying of lung cancer, and Monty doesn't think that he could have the girls live with him. He doesn't have the space or the money, and he certainly doesn't want them to live with their mother, the horrible Cynthia who dates the five time convicted drug dealer boyfriend of her who has never spent a day in jail. Monty takes a job as the driver to Julia, a hot shot lawyer who has never lost a case, and who can't find anything nice to say. When there is an emergency with his kids, Monty is forced to drive to the hospital while she complains in the backseat. It turns out that there was a fire, and since Monty has been convicted in the past this is like a third strike, and the girls are sent to live with their mother and her boyfriend. Monty is horrified, and after being fired by Julia as her driver, he tries to enlist her as his lawyer. Julia is a little reluctant at first, but then once she realizes Monty's passion for his kids she decides to help him free of charge. And it isn't long before she starts to fall for him, much to the dismay of her two friends who doesn't want to see someone of her high social class dating a simple mechanic. Because that would be terrible. . .

The problem with Perry is that he treats his audience like children. His characters are either over the top good or over the top bad, with no in between. It seems like Monty can do no wrong. and every other guy is simply a fool-and this is highlighted during some of Julia's blind dates. One being a rude rapper wannabe, and the other being a married man. The bad guys are over the top as well, with Monty's ex-wife Cynthia being cruel, hitting the children and forcing them to stay in the bedroom, as well as her drug dealer boyfriend who never wears any proper clothes, speaks proper English, and is just a bad guy. Perry also likes to employ faith in all of his films, and this one is no exception, with extended church scenes and the such. I can admire him for showcasing Black pride, and even giving a little bit of a historical aspect in all of his films. However, these scenes never seem to work in the viewpoint of the entire film, and when they were in "Madea's Family Reunion" they were just torture. Perry's films always work like extended soap operas, with characters that are neither real nor interesting. I knew exactly how everything would work in this film, as I did in the others. But at least Madea was a funny character, and she was somewhat the only thing keeping the first two films together.

The acting is saved generally by Gabrielle Union, who is pretty much the only actress here with a name. Everybody else is either trying to hard, or looks as if Perry picked them off the side of the road and asked if they wanted to be in a movie. Union is very good as shown in pretty much all the work she's done, and she somehow creates a second and third dimension for Julia, something that was probably not in the script. Tyler Perry means well, but he just needs to tone his films down, and create characters that are probably more true to life. It is important to also show humanity to the bad guys, even just a little bit. Making them as he does makes it impossible for them to even be around. I found it hard to believe that the girls mother and boyfriend make life so miserable for them, and they didn't even say this stuff in court. There is evidence here that Tyler Perry is getting better, and "Daddy's Little Girls" is tolerable, but horribly cliched and somewhat ridiculous, like his other work. Perry claims that he wants to write about real life situations and events, but he crosses that line and dives into exaggerated fiction. Perhaps his next film, which I'm assuming comes out next year, will be better. I somewhat look forward to the next venture, because I always hope that it will be better t han the next. Like I said, he's just too nice a guy to hate, but his work needs serious work. This is easily the best film of the three, but the other two didn't exactly raise the bar all that high. . .

The Messengers

The Messengers *1/2

Directed by Danny Pang and Oxide Pang
Written by Mark Wheaton based on a story by Todd Farmer

Starring:
Kristen Stewart as Jess
Dylan McDermott as Roy
Penelope Ann Miller as Denise
John Corbett as Burwell
Evan Turner and Theodore Turner as Ben
William B. Davis as Colby
Dustin Mulligan as Bobby

84 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for mature thematic material, disturbing violence and terror.)
---------------------------------
It took me quite some time to finally watch "The Messengers," and two attempts. The first attempt I made it through about forty five minutes before I finally decided to just succumb to my sleep. I figured that I could just see it another time-free of charge. So I finally made it to the second time, and even though my eyelids got heavy once more, I somehow managed to pry them awake and sit through the whole movie. The thing is, it isn't an intolerable picture-I just happened to be extremely tired both times I tried to watch it. Yes, it's bad. It's not a good film. It's predictable, and very obvious, with more cheap thrills than I have fingers. But compared to some of the other horror efforts, "The Messengers" is almost to the point where it's halfway decent, which means that they were on the right track. The silly ending and the horrible "jump scenes" just took away, breaking any type of mood they tried to make. And the standard horror acting applies here, and I have decided to start a new rule: never hire Penelope Ann Miller for anything. She is easily one of the worst actresses around. I really can't find a positive attribute. She's not even worth looking at for eighty minutes.

"The Messengers" starts with a murder in a creepy house, so we know exactly where and when the action will take place. The same house, and a few years later. The family that ends up moving into the house is Jess' family, and the family has been going through some hard times. Jess was drinking one night, and on a trip to pick up her little brother Ben from the babysitter, she got into an accident. Ben hasn't talked since, and as a way to pick up a few extra bucks, the jobless father Roy buys a farmhouse, hoping that the upcoming harvest will turn things around for the family. Jess isn't happy in the new house-it's distant from everything that she knows, it's scary, and there are dead people that like to crawl around on the ceilings at night. Hell, even in the middle of the day. While she can sense a presence, the only person that could actually see the dead are Ben-but his young mind, of course, doesn't register what is going on. Her father hires Burwell, a drifter in the area, to help him with some of the farm work. But meanwhile, Jess finds that whenever she is alone she notices something in the house. And the bruises on her arm left from when the dead grab her become objects in her parents nightmares, as they believe that she is hurting herself just to get a little attention. How can she possibly convince her parents that the house is full of dead people? I don't know. . .

The Pang Brothers do go for a spooky atmosphere more than the usual jump scenes. I'm grateful that there was never a scene where a character is scared of a sound, opens a door and then it turns out to be a cat. Instead there was a scene similar with a raven, but no cats were found here. The actual dead people do not appear very much, but when they do they do the usual dead people stuff-crawling around on the floor at a super fast speed-mostly blue. And for a horror film, as usual, it doesn't expand the genre or do anything different at all. Perhaps it cares about the audience a little more. It even tries to set up a decent parent/daughter relationship subplot. But it's predictable, and about fifty minutes in you realize exactly how it'll end. And the way that it does end comes so out of the blue and randomly, even though it's the obvious way to end it. Does that even make sense? Kristen Stewart shows potential for a future as an actress, and she is even getting much better looking from her tomboy days in "Panic Room." I'll even go so far as to congratulate the musical score-the music made it tolerable to sit through one of the those opening credit sequences. I just cannot stand opening credit sequences for movies like this-a cast of names that nobody even cares about. Movies like this should just start with the movie.

But even with all of it's pros, "The Messengers" is another horror dud, establishing a certain mood in the first half, and then becoming a usual thriller int he second. I also like how they didn't really say the significance of the title-I figured it out a little while after. But it's silly, and extremely obvious which direction the story is going. The Pang's were on to something, and maybe if they didn't work within the Hollywood system of scare, scare, SCARE! they might have had a more decent product. I have a feeling they envisioned something a little different from what they ended up with, and it's a shame because there are moments in "The Messengers" where it wasn't torture to endure. It's not torture to endure. . . not really. It's just nothing special, nothing new, and nothing worth remembering.

Norbit

Norbit 1/2*

Directed by Brian Robbins
Written by Jay Scherick, David Ronn, Eddie Murphy, and Charles Q. Murphy

Starring:
Eddie Murphy as Norbit
Eddie Murphy as Rasputia
Eddie Murphy as Mr. Wong
Thandie Newton as Kate
Terry Crews as Big Jack
Cuba Gooding Jr. as Deion Hughes
Eddie Griffin as Pope Sweet Jesus

102 Minutes(Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual humor, some nudity and language.)
-------------------------------
Just two or three weeks after getting a nomination from the Academy, Eddie Murphy goes and screws it up by making "Norbit," a painfully unfunny two hours which brings Murphy back to an act that he did about ten years ago. The new age of Eddie Murphy that many thought would begin with "Dreamgirls" is dead already-and it hasn't even been two months. "Norbit" is a failure on every level that it attempts-it fails as a comedy because, simply put, neither the jokes nor the comedy is funny. It fails as a romance because it was ridiculous. It isn't even worthy of a little pure dumb fun at the movies. I don't think I laughed a single time in the entire hour and forty minute run time, and I was angry my cell phone battery was dead because I really wanted to know how much more time I had to sit through this drivel. Instead, I had to wait it out. I had to wait out every single painful minute.

"Norbit" introduces us to Norbit, the nice, sweet natured man whose luck is just a little down on him at the moment. As a baby, Norbit was abandoned and brought to Mr. Wong's orphanage. Norbit was raised with the others kids, but made real close friends with Kate-and they would do everything together, including going to the bathroom which is just a little strange. However, Kate was adopted by a couple, and Norbit was adopted too-only not by a couple, but by Rasputia, a rather large and scary looking little girl who decides that Norbit will be her boyfriend. Norbit is terrified of her brothers, three lumber salesmen, and eventually he ends up marrying Rasputia. At his wedding, her brother Big Jack threatens Norbit, telling him that if he ever makes his sister sad or angry, he will be killed. Norbit is picked on by Rasputia-who casually cheats on him with her dance teacher, is rude and crude, and not to mention-about 500 pounds, but claims that she is only 165. Norbit lives through this, even though the rest of the town can plainly see the problem. And then one day, when he is at the edge of his rope, he is reunited with Kate, who plans on buying the orphanage from Mr. Wong, who is getting old in the years. Norbit is elated by Kate's return, but not so happy when he finds out that she is getting married. From that moment on, Norbit begins to re-fall in love with Kate, try to get rid of Raputia, and also try to evade her brothers, who are plotting with Kate's fiancee to gain control of the orphanage, and turn it into a strip club.

"Norbit" isn't just bad, it's pitiful. It just isn't funny seeing Eddie Murphy don a fat suit in drag as much as you would think. It may be just me, but I never found the whole "drag" thing funny-unless it's done in a classy way like in "Some Like It Hot," or even "The Birdcage." In this case, it isn't funny, it's just a little creepy. I began to dread every scene with Rasputia, and it isn't because she is just a pain to be around, it's because it was painful to have to watch Murphy put himself through this. Considering he was just nominated for an Oscar, and also a big contender to go home with the gold, I hope that the Academy Award voters neglect to watch "Norbit," because if they did they might want to reconsider. Murphy should have timed this flick just a little better. Murphy plays three roles-the kind Norbit, the even Rasputia, and also the Chinese Mr. Wong-although him playing Mr. Wong took me about twenty minutes or so to realize. None of these roles offer anything special, or even memorable. Norbit is decent, but he is supposed to be. Rasputia and Wong are supposed to be funny, and they don't even do that well.

The supporting cast doesn't take any prizes home either. I may have not agreed with all the roles Thandie Newton has taken, but she is a decent actress. And what is Cuba Gooding Jr. doing here? Here's another actor that goes from Oscar gold to "Norbit." And. . . oh sorry Eddie Griffin. Nobody cares about you anymore. This isn't 2002. . . . you can go home now. I don't mind a good dumb comedy once in a while, but "Norbit" isn't comedic, it's just dumb. It's painful to watch. Oh, and it's so so long. It never wants to end. The last ten minutes especially drag on and on for what seems like an eternity. My eyelids got heavy, and when it was finally over I bolted out of the theatre like it was on fire. Oh how I hated "Norbit." It's not even the end of the second month of the year yet-there's still ten more left, and I already have a leading contender for the worst movie of the year. Shame on you Eddie Murphy. I almost want to smash that Oscar you might win next week just because of this. Avoid "Norbit" as if your life depended on it.

What Is It?

What Is It? ****

Directed by Crispin Glover
Written by Crispin Glover

Starring:
Michael Belvis as The Young Man
Adam Parfrey as The Minstrel
Steven C. Stewart as Dueling Demi-God Auteur and the young man's uber ego
Rikky Wittman as The minstrel's nemesis
John Insinna as The young man's outer sanctum friend and inner santum choking victim
Lisa Fusco as The young man's fantasy girl
Crispin Glover as Dueling Demi-God Auteur and The young man's inner psyche
Cheryl Brown as Outer Sanctum Mocking tormentor and walkie-talkie grabbing woman that cries later
Fairuza Balk as The Voice of the Snail

72 Minutes(Not Rated----Disturbing Content and Adult Situations)
--------------------
"What Is It?" is two things. Well, three things, actually. First it is the start of a trilogy that will obviously become a labor of love for writer/director Crispin Glover. It is the beginning of a subject that he cares about, that he is proud about filming, and something that will stay with him for a long while to come. Second of all, it is an unnerving delve into the subconscious, and one that makes more sense and one that you could care about more than David Lynch's "Inland Empire." And third of all, it is justification for Crispin Glover's participation in "Charlie's Angels" and "Epic Movie." How could he possibly pay for a film that has no big studio backing? He makes those horrible Hollywood flicks. Smart, Mr. Glover, very smart. "What Is It?" is indeed the directorial debut for Mr. Crispin Glover, and it is an ambitious project for such a talented man. And now, as Mr. Glover tours around the United States with his film in tow, he is creating this short hour and ten minute film into a three hour evening experience, and one that could be seen this weekend only in New York City's IFC Center. My rating for the film is four stars, the first four star film of the year, even though it isn't technically from this year. But this review will also explain what else Mr. Glover did with the evening, placing the film into a context that should be seen to fully get a glimpse at what he was going for.

The evening begins with Crispin Glover covered in a red light, and he starts with a reading of eight of his books, in a segment known as "The Big Slide Show." I did not know that Glover wrote books at all, but these beautiful small hardcover books were published in the 80's and early 90's. He reads in a perfectly dramatic voice, reading everything from the numbers on the pages to the footnotes on the bottom. It is almost comic, as he reads excerpts from "Rat Catching," teaching schools and headmasters how to catch rats, as well as "The New World" about an old man's journey through death. The books are all stylized like old Victorian type books-heavily illustrated with rather thick pages, photographs, and text that looks as if it was handwritten by Glover himself. Glover reads parts of eight of his books, never allowing it to become tedious or dull. He keeps the audience interested, makes them laugh during the most uncomfortable moments, and really does suck them in. The Slide Show was a perfect segway into the film, which came shortly after.

The film's story, if it even has a clear one, was described by Glover as "the adventures of a young man whose principal interests are snails, salt, a pipe and how to get home, as tormented by a hubristic racist inner psyche." If that isn't enough to get you interested, than I don't know what is. The entire cast is full of people with Down Syndrome. From what I could make of any plot, there is a young man who has an obsession with snails, and pouring salt over them so that they could shrivel up and die. Glover doesn't shy away from killing snails, even though in the Questions and Answers afterwards he's clearly states that he isn't an advocate for the death of snails. The young man goes out with his friends, and has a girlfriend of some kind, but his mind is haunted, and we get a visual interpretation of his mind as its worst. There are two Demigod's in his mind, dueling out to be number one. At the moment the psyche is taking over in the young man's mind, while the ego ends up sleeping in a clam like bed, getting touched by the various naked women all over the mind. And the mind is full of other things, from racist country songs about black people, to a white man in black face that claims that he is Michael Jackson, and finally to an image of Shirley Temple in front of a swastika(one of the greatest images that I will probably never see again. Glover was selling a poster for it after the film, but the 25 dollar price wasn't worth it. I bought a book instead.)

The film is shocking, and its great that Glover doesn't bother editing out anything that is extreme. He does not shy away from things that'll make you squirm and uncomfortable. Very much like David Lynch and Todd Solonez, two film makers that I admire very much-however Glover shows a little more compassion and care for his characters. Although there are moments where I don't exactly know what is happening, and I can't exactly grasp what relevance it has, every single frame of this film shows that Glover isn't basically masturbating on camera for himself, but he cares about his actors and their actions and their disease. I did not get the feeling of exploitation during any second here. When it comes to Lynch, there were moments during "Inland Empire" where I thought that it was too much, and in half the running time I felt like I just went through a dream-something that took "Inland Empire" three hours to do. And will it comes to Solonez, he has images and themes that make you squirm, but I never feel like he loves his characters-it's as if he pushes it to the limit. Two great film makers, but Glover tackles a similar style and does it somewhat better.

The night concluded with a Question and Answer, something that make me appreciate the film more. Glover's original intent on the film was to try and showcase those with Down Syndrome on film and to try to understand why they do not really show up in media often. He claims that the scene with the two Down Syndrome people kissing was the most controversial, mainly because people with Down Syndrome are never really shown as doing anything remotely like this-remotely human. And it is with this intention that I could see such care for these people-Glover doesn't want to show them with disrespect, but to show them just like you and me-like regular people. There was also clips and trailers for his next film, and the second in the trilogy, "It Is Fine, EVERYTHING IS FINE!!!" which is a journey into the mind of Steven C. Stewart, a real life Down Syndrome patient who appears here as the anti-character to Crispin Glover. It was his script, but he sadly died a month after filming ended. There will also be a third film in the trilogy "It Is Mine." While the latter has yet to be edited and completed, "It Is Fine, EVERYTHING IS FINE!!!" will be toured starting in November, and just appeared at Sundance a few weeks ago.

"What Is It?" will make you leave the theatre asking that very question, but that is exactly the point. It is a study on taboos in the media, and doesn't shy away from showing anything that could make you laugh in nervousness. It is not for everyone, but it should be seen, especially in the context of the Big Slide Show and Glover's Questions and Answers. He puts it at one point that there is a difference in seeing a film in the theatre, and seeing a film at home by oneself. There is an energy with numerous people that is not there with one person. Seeing this alone at home will take away from the experience and the various emotion and feeling. Glover has crafted a masterpiece, and is clearly gifted as a film maker. I am already making my plans to return home from college, wherever that may be, at the end of this year or the beginning of the next to see the second film here, one which Glover describes as being "the best film that I have ever or will ever work on in my career." I had the honor of meeting Glover afterwards and getting my book signed. I asked him why he agreed to do "Epic Movie" and he said that he just needs to keep working. I guess these films are one good thing to come from something like "Epic Movie." How ironic. . . . the worst film of the year ended up funding something great. It's funny how life goes full circle. . .

"What Is It?" is playing at the IFC Center on Feb. 9th, 10th, and 11th, at 7:30PM. Catch it this weekend before the opportunity is missing, and enjoy one of the best nights at the theatre that I have ever had. A true experience!