Avatar

First a disclaimer. I have not seen this movie in 3D. I am hoping that the rumored re-release gives me an opportunity to view it the way James Cameron intended it to be. This is so far one of the toughest movies I have had to review yet. And the feedback from those who have seen the movie in 3D has been tremendously positive.

So where to begin? Where to begin with James Cameron's box office king, Avatar? Let's begin with the director himself. Most people know Cameron from his previous box office reign with a little movie called Titanic. He created the Terminator franchise, gave us one of the most popular sci-fi movies ever in Aliens, showed us wondrous visions in The Abyss, and had Jamie Lee Curtis hanging from a helicopter in True Lies. Why is it then that out of all of his movies, Avatar feels the least original?

I'm not going to go into the plot itself. I feel most already know the story. The story is filled with cliches that we have seen time and time again. There's man versus nature, and science versus the military. Great themes but this is all too familiar territory. There is the protagonist trying to integrate his way into a foreign society and finally winning them over with, of course, his true self inside. Halfway through the movie, I realized I had seen it before. It was called Dances With Wolves.

The performances are horrible. I do not know what the big interest in Sam Worthington is. He has been cast in blockbuster after blockbuster, from Terminator: Salvation to Avatar to Clash of the Titans. He is the new Gerard Butler. The problem is Butler brings a lot of screen presence, something Worthington lacks greatly. He cannot act. And what happened to Giovanni Ribisi? This was his worst performance yet. And Michele Rodriquez? Another horrible acting job. Cameron should know better then that. The only two notables are Stephen Lang and Zoe Saldana. Lang plays the gruff army commander and Saldana is our main Na'vi character. But what is up with the cast anyways? James Cameron knows the anticipation for this project is huge. So why not get a Gerard Butler or two to star in your movie instead of B-listers and no-names?

Then there is the Na'vi themselves. There are times when they look very very odd. It may be the blue tint of the skin, but sometimes they look like big violent Smurfs. Sigourney Weaver's Na'vi body is horrible looking. The faces of the Na'vi are cartoony. Which comes off very poorly in scenes that require a lot of emotion. And the way the Na'vi interlink with the animals and trees through their hair braids is.......well.........really flippin' weird.

Wow, looking up at the previous paragraphs, that is a lot of negative stuff. Well. let's get to the good then.

The world of Pandora is amazing. And this is where Cameron delivers. I have to admire a director who refuses to compromise his vision because the technology does not exist. Instead, he opts to develop the tech himself. That's serious film-making. And that is why, visually, this film delivers. In Pandora, Cameron may have created his most original character yet. The jungles are lush. The animals are bright and colorful. The water and sky clear and refreshing. You want to be there, to visit this world yourself. And then there are these epic scenes of action and disaster. World Tree being destroyed and the last great battle was breathtaking to see. I watched them over and over again, trying to make sure I did not miss anything, but always finding something I did miss. And this is what saves the movie and makes it watchable. I have not seen the 3D version. But I cannot imagine seeing it that way. The 2D is more then adequate enough.

Avatar is now the all-time box office king. I do not know if that is saying much nowadays. With rising ticket prices and 3D surcharges, it is not hard for a movie to gross $100 million anymore. If one were to factor inflation into the mix, Gone with the Wind is the all-time king, domestically. Gone with the Wind is the anti-Avatar, a movie strong on story and performances. But both are strong representatives of the power of Hollywood and the different perspectives in what we find entertaining.

Grade: B+

Observe and Report

Observe and Report is a movie that I believe suffers from an identity crisis. On one hand it, it tries to be a sillier version of Taxi Driver. And on the other side, it tries to be a dark twin of Paul Blart, Mall Cop. So what exactly is it? Well, I'm not really sure. And I do not believe director Jody Hill is really sure either. I do know for sure that Observe and Report is one of the zanier movies I've seen in quite a while. It's a twisted film, sometimes in a very dark way, and sometimes in a very witty way. And it is this mash-up of genres and styles that hurts the movie overall.

Seth Rogen plays Ronnie Barnhardt, a security officer at a large shopping mall. Ronnie takes his position very seriously. Very very very seriously. He has a small team of officers that work under him and when a serial streaker targets the mall, it is up to Ronnie and his crew to take him down. Seemingly by any means necessary.

Rogen stretches his acting chops a bit here, and it is interesting to see. But it is the always changing style and focus of the movie that wastes Rogen's effort. Consider my two favorite scenes in the movie: The first is Rogen taking out a group of drug pushers. It is full of blood and violence, and is shocking seeing Rogen beating up the dealers with such force. Now couple it with an earlier exchange between Rogen and new popular comedian Aziz Ansari at Ansari's kiosk. They exchange "F--- you" over and over again in a variety of styles and tones. Two great scenes from very opposite ends of the spectrum. But the middle ground between the two scenes is not very good at all. In fact, the film shifts so suddenly between comedy and dark drama that it is jarring at times to watch.

And we are presented with so much to take in with the main plot and sub-plots. There is Ronnie's alcoholic mother, Ray Liotta as the serious police officer, all the females that Ronnie looks after, the streaker, and Ronnie's security force. Ronnie also battles the police, his boss, his co-workers, his girlfriend, drug dealers, Ansari, and pretty much everyone else who enter the mall. It's no wonder that he starts to lose his mind a little. I started to by the end. Then there is Ronnie breaking a serious law at the end of the movie with a handgun. Again it is very jarring to see. I didn't expect him to do anything remotely like that. But Hill uses it to basically set everything back the way it was at the beginning of the movie. Which felt very forced to me.

There are some good scenes in Observe and Report. But they are lost amid the bedlam that Jody Hill has strung together. I know Hill is one of the creative forces behind Danny McBride's Eastbound and Down series. I hope that series and his first film, The Foot Fist Way, serve as a better representation of his work.

Grade: C-

The Road

The Road, is John Hillcoat's adaptation of the Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name. Hillcoat was the director of 2005's moody western, The Proposition and he really brings the moodiness to this latest film that tells the very bleak, despairing story of a father and son.

Something has happened to the world, leaving it in smoldering ashes. Only a few survivors are left, scrounging for food and trying desperately to stay alive. A man (Viggo Mortenson) travels the roads with his son (played by Kodi Smit-McPhee). They are starving to death, and hope seems to slowly fade away. Cannibalism is very rampant in this new world, and the man uses all his strength to protect his son from the horrors of the road. Everyday, the man faces a decision: Does he follow his wife and commit suicide with his son, or does he cling to the hope that they can find a safe place in this horrible world?

Hillcoat does a good job of bringing the story and world of the novel to the big screen. Of course there are differences, which we will get to in a bit, but the technical aspects of the film are well done. The surrounding areas look very burned out, and the sky and ocean is gray. The only colors in the film come from fires that spontaneously erupt from the ground and, curiously, cans of food. Fire and food, messengers of hope? I liked The Proposition, and Hillcoat is starting to really come into his own with a very unique style of directing.

But it is the performaces that really drive the film. Mortenson has always been an actor who really jumps into a role and he does here with abandon. Apparently, he would sleep outside for days in the same clothes to get the appearance of a homeless man and starve himself to lose weight. Viggo has one of those faces that brings great presence to the screen, see his roles in Lord of the Rings and History of Violence. He also provides a voice-over for a few scenes of the movie, and his voice lends itself very well. If Mortenson is good, Smit-McPhee is amazing. He really delivers as the main focus of the film. I cannot imagine how hard it is for a child actor to play this part. This is a serious movie, and required a lot of intensity for the role. Charlize Theron plays the boy's mother and only appears in flashbacks and does a fine job. Robert Duvall has a cameo in the movie and his scenes are very memorable. You get the feeling when Mortenson is sharing the scene with Duvall, Viggo understands he is working with one of the all-time greats. And Duvall is probably the best performance in the movie, doing so much with so little.

The film shows a lot of flashbacks to before the son is born. This is quite different from the novel, and I feel makes the movie inferior to the book in a huge way. The novel focused solely on the father and son. By bringing the mother more prominently into the movie, it feels like a bit of the focus shifted from the man and son to the man and his wife, and weakens the main story.

I remember reading The Road for the first time. I was still new to McCarthy's works. I picked up the book at the library during my lunch break, and was finished by 8pm that night. It was an amazing read. McCarthy's writing is simple, but very course, much like a post-apocalyptic Ernest Hemingway. The beauty of the novel is not just the story but the way it is written. This is something which is lost in the film translation.

Overall, The Road is a good movie. And I like it. But I also do not like it. I think the novel is so superior that upon finishing the movie, I felt disappointed. The performances are still amazing to see though, and it is well worth watching. As a father myself, I do not feel I can watch this movie again. It is a very heavy movie, at times utterly depressing. But at the end of the film, there is still that flame, that "fire" of hope to hold on to.

**Bonus points to who can tell me (without looking it up), who plays the man on the beach at the end of the movie. I had no idea until I saw some of the bonus features and the actor was revealed. Very cool.

Grade: B

Hall of Fame inductions

Hello,

Beginning July 1st, Working Title will begin inducting movies into it's Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame will be especially reserved for films which I feel are the cream of the crop, the best of the best. They will represent a wide range of movies from all-time classics to a few notable movies which may very well surprise you. The goal is to induct 1 movie every month, making it 12 movies a year. I have been wrestling the past week with what is going to be our very first induction and feel I've chosen a worthy flick to start the blog off right. I'm sure there will be some controversy with my picks. Again this is only my opinion on what I think are the truly great films. But hey, I want to drum up some discussion, so feel free to argue with the choices or any of the reviews. With our grading system, it seems logical that Hall of Fame movies would garner an A+ rating. And yes, all Hall of Fame movies will be rated A+, but not all A+ movies will be Hall of Fame worthy. So then what is the criteria for the Hall of Fame? Let's see if we can break it down:

1- Sustainability: Simply put, does this movie stand the test of time? Will what was great in 1932 still be great today? Can this movie still be enjoyed with multiple viewings? Most Hall of Fame movies should hold up to this category.

2- Quality: Top notch performances, direction, technical effects. plot, etc. Does the film deliver most of these elements?

3- Innovation: There are some movies that changed the face of movie-making. These films should be considered Hall of Fame worthy.

These are the main three points. And I am sure we will explore others as we look towards what truly makes a film a great film, worthy of our highest honor.

Let me know what you think the elements of a Hall of Fame movie are.

Peace and Happy Father's Day to all.

Mike

Moon

Moon is the amazing debut feature film from David Bowie's own offspring, Duncan Jones. In Moon, Jones has crafted easily one of the best science fiction movies in the past decade. What is great about the film is the simplicity Jones brings to what becomes a very complex plot. It feels like instead of being a new kid on the block, Jones has been living in this realm for years.

The movie focuses mainly on two characters, with only one being actually alive. Sam Bell is fulfilling a contract to run a mining station on the moon. His only companion is a robotic assistant named GERTY. It is a lonely life which Sam fills adequately with the routine inspections of the mining station and his unique bond with GERTY. But then something extraordinary happens and Sam finds that not everything is as it seems.

As I stated earlier, the movie is very simple in its setup and progression. It is the performance of Sam Rockwell who plays Bell that lends to the complexity to the film. Rockwell is simply outstanding, and without giving to much away, he plays extremes within his character easily, shifting gears when asked and giving the viewer much more then we think we need. Which is not surprising. I feel Rockwell is one of the most underrated actors working in Hollywood today. His range is immense. Look at two other movies he has been in: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. Two roles from films on opposite ends of the spectrum and Rockwell delivers a solid performance each time.

Jones has said in the past that this movie was written with Sam Rockwell in mind. They wanted to work with each other and Jones began work on what would eventually become Moon. He is an admitted Sci-fi nerd and the are plenty of homages to past sci-fi films, most notably Blade Runner and 2001: A Space Odyssey. Gerty (voiced by Kevin Spacey) is the more compassionate side of HAL 2000, if it is believed that HAL is capable of compassion (fodder for a future essay perhaps?).

Jones is already hard at work on his second feature, which again seems to be based in science fiction, titled Source Code. I am excited at the prospect of seeing another completed film from this young man. His future seems very very bright.

**On a side note, the Moon DVD also has Jones' short film, Whistle. Check it out. It's a very interesting, well-executed flick.

Grade: A

Funny People

Funny People is the latest movie from popular writer/director Judd Apatow. For the past few years, Apatow has been box office gold with his raunchy 80's throwback comedies. He has been the driving force behind hits such as The 40 Year Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up, and Pineapple Express. However, Funny People shows a different side of Apatow as it marks his first foray into more dramatic fare. Don't get me wrong, there are still plenty of Apatow trademarks as his T & A jokes have a huge audience.

Adam Sandler plays comedian George Simmons, who has just learned he has a terminal disease and does not have long to live. Seems Simmons was kind of a jerk to everybody when he became a star and does not have any close relations at all. The knowledge of dying leads him to take a young comedian under his wing named Ira Wright, played by Seth Rogen. Wright becomes Simmons confidant and eventually his only friend. But this proves to be challenging for the starstruck Wright as Simmons has no idea how to relate to people, hurting Ira and those closest to him over and over again.

And I think that is really the problem with this movie. Are we meant to be compassionate for Simmon's predicament? That's hard to fathom when your main character is a whopping jerk. Throughout the whole movie I found myself telling Ira he should tell George to just stick it. That it was not worth it. Simmons seemed more interested in passing his suffering along then genuinely trying to atone for his past mistakes. In the end, Apatow tries to give us the payoff that eventually comes with this type of movie, but by the time it plays out, you find that you just don't care. And, boy, does this movie play out. I thought it's 2 1/2 hour runtime was about 40 minutes too long.

There is not many surprises in the cast itself. Sandler is basically asked to play himself. Rogen is what Rogen always is. Sometimes funny, sometimes boring. He did drop a lot of weight before this role and my first reaction was "kudos!", he looks good. Jonah Hill is becoming tiring the more I see of him. It was surprising to see Jason Schwartzman and Eric Bana in this though, and they are some bright points, especially Bana.

There is a line at the end of the movie where Simmons basically says to Ira: Hey, I'm new at this. I'm still learning.

Maybe that is the excuse we should give Apatow on this flick. It is a break from his normal formulaic movies. Hopefully, the next one is better.

Grade: C

Zombieland

I like zombies. I mean, what's not to like? They are not a bunch of depressing emo goth wanna-bes like vampires, nor are they dirty, boring blah-blah-blahs like mummies. And they are not angry, scratchy, overly aggressive dirty beasts like werewolves. Nope, they are just hungry. For human flesh.

Director Ruben Fleischer (who worked as a writer and producer on Rob Dyrdek's "Fantasy Factory". Awesome.) has delivered a humor filled romp of a zombie movie. Zombieland is quirky and fun, much like it's older cousin, Edgar Wright's Shaun of the Dead. Most zombie movies are horror filled gore fests, meant to shock viewers with their bloody renderings of cannibalism. Zombieland is filled with the same gore, but does not take itself or it's genre seriously. Instead it opts to entertain not with cheap scares, but original dialogue, sweet relationships, and some good old zombie-killing action.

Woody Harrelson plays Tallahassee, a rough and tough zombie apocalypse survivor, who hooks up with Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), a timid clumsy wanna-be rough and tough zombie apocalypse survivor. The end result is a weird but funny Laurel and Hardy duo who spend most of the movie killing zombies in unique and funny ways, looking for the last surviving Twinkie, and developing a relationship with the sister duo of Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin, who keep conning our tough guys out of their transportation. Throw in a great cameo by Bill Murray and you got yourself a good flick. I mean, Bill Murray and Woody Harrelson in a zombie flick. What else do you want?

Fleischer shows a lot of promise as a young director. He is able to mesh comedy and exciting action with scenes of genuine emotion. There is a great sequence at the end with Harrelson shooting zombies from a roller coaster! I look forward to seeing what else he delivers, especially with the inevitable Zombieland 2.

It's funny how zombies have evolved in cinema since the release of Romero's Night of the Living Dead. You have your classic zombie movies, filled with social commentary and dread of the future. Then you get zombie hybrids in 28 Days Later and the Resident Evil video game franchise. And now we have funny zombie films, filled with homages to the classics of the genre. I do not know about you, but I kind of like the new humor-filled movies. It's a nice break from the norm.

Grade: B

The Rock (Criterion Collection)

About a year ago, I decided to purge the greater part of my DVD collection. It had grown huge over the past 8 years, and somewhere along the line a focus on quantity over quality became evident. I was pushing over 300 discs and growing steadily. Many of the movies sat on the shelf, waiting for what I always thought would be repeated viewings. So the kids and I had a rather large yard sale and by the end I had pared the collection down to about 70 discs. Many of them are my favorites, movies I watch annually. Some are classic movies, treatises on film-making, meant to be studied over and over again and shared with others. Recently I've begun making moves to expand my collection again. This time with a straight eye and focus on quality. And whenever one seeks quality in their DVDs, one ultimately finds themselves searching the catalog of the Criterion Collection.

Criterion has been releasing films for years (first as Janus, and then also under their Essential Art-House Collection). They pride themselves on choosing only the best, and giving them the most technical sound presentation possible. Their catalog is very diverse, ranging from domestic films to foreign cinema from around the world. They choose classic films such as Fellini's 8 1/2 (1963), Renoir's Grand Illusion(1937), and Kurosawa's Seven Samurai(1954). But you will also find some more recent and mainstream choices such as Chasing Amy(1997), Armageddon(1998), and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button(2008). Their 3-disc release of Terry Gilliam's Brazil is arguably the greatest DVD release ever.

Michael Bay's The Rock has also been given the Criterion treatment. And what a treatment it is. With a new digital transfer approved by the director himself, 5.1 Dolby Digital and DTS surround sound, and special commentary by Bay, producer Jerry Brukheimer, and actors Nic Cage and Ed Harris, The Rock is a great addition to any DVD collection.

Michael Bay is one of the most polarizing directors in Hollywood today. Serious cinema enthusiasts hate his all-flash, no depth approach to film-making. However, everyday movie watchers love Bay as his movies have grossed trillions at the box office. I have found myself evolving from one of the former group into a member of the latter. Love him or hate him, I believe Michael Bay knows how to entertain you. And The Rock is entertaining.

Ed Harris plays a war general, tired of seeing his men fall victim to special missions and then having their families cheated out of needed benefits and even recognition for their valor. So what's a general to do? How about put together his own special ops force, steal some missiles loaded with the world's deadliest gas, and take 80 hostages at the famous Alcatraz prison, which has now become a tourist attraction. Harris gives the government 48 hours to transfer 100 million dollars into an account for his fallen men. That's 48 hours that Goodspeed (Nic Cage), Mason (Sean Connery), and a team of navy seals have to infiltrate "The Rock", disarm the missiles and save the hostages. What follows is the cinematic equivalent of seeing your favorite rock band in concert.

Bay has been called "the master of action." And deservedly so. The actions scenes in The Rock are some of the best ever filmed. The car chase through the streets of San Francisco uses a Ferrari, Hummer, trolley car, handicapped olympians, a dozen police vehicles, a water delivery truck, several explosions, a cell phone call, and the requisite little old lady crossing the road. The scene is a virtuoso of style and energy, but still has a tongue-in-cheek feel to it. And that is why Bay is a good director. I believe he understands that he is not the next Hitchcock or Kurosawa, but neither does he try to be. He keeps things simple. His main goal is not these deep, emotionally intense films, but films that deliver on their promise to entertain you. Some directors use shock to entertain, some use humor, some use historical fiction. Bay uses explosions and testosterone fueled characters to entertain, and the audience loves him for it.

He has blown up police vehicles and the KKK in his Bad Boys franchise, a large asteroid in Armageddon, futuristic flying machines in The Island, Pearl Harbor in, uh, Pearl Harbor, and large awesome robots in Transformers. He also directed Lionel Ritchie's "Do it to me" video, and ended up blowing up Ritchie's career. And now he's blowing up Alcatraz in The Rock.

The Rock is a great joy ride of a movie. It's filled with quality performances, intense editing, and lots and lots of action. It's fun. It's a popcorn flick. It's not going to leave you emotionally drained by the end. However, you will probably want to start a car chase along the streets of your hometown. That looks like a lot of fun.

Grade: B+

Mutant Chronicles

Mutant Chronicles is a small sci-fi flick with big aspirations. Unfortunately, it falls way short of these aspirations. The film shows some promise but the plot and acting is so sordid and dry, you find yourself wincing a few times, trying to choke down your popcorn.
The plot takes place in the distant future. The world is governed by four large corporations (apparently Sony and Google have folded sometime between) who are constantly at war with each other for precious resources. As armies collide on a murky wasteland somewhere, the battle awakens a machine(!) that changes humans into violent bone-bladed zombie killers. A task force is assembled to go deep into the ground and destroy said zombie making machine. Oh, and there are zombies everywhere....
Well, let's start with the good. Little known director Simon Hunter does his best with what he has. The majority of the film is shot digitally, which leaves Hunter open to really push the envelope visually. And there are some really interesting visuals in this movie. A lot of the military tech actually has a retro feel to it. The settings allude to a World War II, steampunk sort of feel. The blood is very visceral and bright red, which contrasts heavily with the murky CGI. It is always dark in this future, and raining a lot. Although there are some scenes where the CGI misses heavily, most of the effects hold up well against other movies within the genre. So good job, Simon Hunter. You may get to direct another movie yet. (And according to IMDB, he's got something called CURVE in development.)
And now the bad. The one aspect of the movie that looked to be strong was the cast. First impressions: Great cast for a sci-fi zombie flick. We have Thomas Jane, Ron Perlman, John Malkovich, Sean Pertwee, Devon Aoki, and Pras(!) from hip-hop group the Fugees. But this is where things fall apart. The acting is horrible!!!! I feel Jane is one of those actors that everyone is doting on, right up until they actually see him in a movie. Then it's kind of like, ewwww okkkkayyyyy. I mean he was serviceable in the Punisher, and the Mist is an awesome movie but not because of his acting ability. He spends most of the movie barking his lines at everyone and looking very distraught. Perlman is his trademark self. He's always been good in these kind of roles. Aoki and Pras are fill-ins. Pertwee is blah. And then there is Malkovich.
First of all, how the heck did John Malkovich even end up in this movie? I mean, he was in Burn After Reading and the Changeling which were both released the same year as Mutant Chronicles. ????????? He is the WORST actor in this movie. I read some reviews which believed him to be drunk or high when he filmed his scenes. I think he was sent the wrong script, ok'd the part, got to the set, saw what it was, said screw it and made up everything after that. At least he's got Transformers 3 on the horizon.

If you are a fan of MST3K, and are looking for some joke-filled commentary fodder, this is the film for you. But only if it is still in the special $1 rental section at Backstage Video.

Grade: D+

Band of Brothers

I was going to start this blog with a review of the current all-time box office king, AVATAR. And we will get to that review and plenty of other reviews, but I've been on a tangent of thoughts and feelings regarding another piece of work. I've started HBO's miniseries, Band of Brothers. This is my second time through the boxset and some interesting thoughts are coming to the forefront this time around. Especially on the topic of, well, courage. And bravery. And sacrifice.
For those of you unfamiliar with Band of Brothers here's a quick rundown: Band of Brothers was originally a book written by Stephen Ambrose. It details the true exploits of the para-troopers of Easy Company of the US Army 101st Airborne. Easy Company was at the forefront of most of the huge operations in the war and became known as the go-to company when the tough missions came about. They set precedents in field operations. Let me say that again. They set PRECEDENTS in field operations....that means the plan of action they came up with during missions were later taught in training courses. Heady stuff.
I have just finished the 3rd disk in the set which includes the Battle of the Bulge. Easy Company sets up a perimeter around the city of Bastogne and become surrounded by German tank divisions. It is the dead of winter and they are almost out of ammo, medical supplies, and food. They also do not have the appropriate clothes for the weather. The weather is so harsh that German and American soldiers keep running across each others front lines.
Imagine that for a second. You are freezing and hungry, buried in a foxhole. You have a handful of bullets left and you can hear the enemy 50 yards away singing Christmas carols. The medic keeps coming around to see if anyone has their personal first aid kits because he does not have enough morphine or supplies to help you if you get shot. The higher ups keep dropping supplies but because of the weather the drops land behind enemy lines. Imagine that is you and ask yourself, how would I act under these circumstances?
Before each episode the surviving members of Easy Company talk about what it was like to experience these things. One survivor talks about fear, and how if you let it, fear would ruin you and you could not function at all. They talk about accepting the fact that they were going to die. And how your ability to think through all the fear is what enables you to survive.
As I continue to watch, I keep asking myself "Could I do that?" And the one thought that keeps running over and over in my head is: "That could have been me." But the simple fact of my birth date kept this from happening. I am afraid of war and have no desire to ever participate in one. And I am thankful that I hopefully will never experience one in person. To make choices in a matter of seconds that decide life and death is unfathomable for me and to many of us. We are unable to relate to anyone who has been in a war, or a firefight, or even, for some of us, a simple fistfight. But even through all the fear and thankfulness of not being in a war, there is always that little part of me that keeps coming back to "Could I do that?" or, more importantly, "Am I good enough?" Am I strong enough to face my fears and still think in a rational way, still act in a rational way, all while under the threat of death? I think, for men especially, all of us want to know the answer to this question. Do I have what it takes? John Eldredge wrote in his book, Wild at Heart, that men have a inner desire to seek a battle and fight for something, to focus our strength into protecting that which is most valuable to us. In many ways we are each fighting little battles everyday. We fight to stay true to ourselves, and protect our families and our homes. But for us protection takes the form of providing and upkeep. It's that true sense of battle that leaves us pondering, that mystery of warfare that makes us ask "Am I good enough?" It's a genuine curiosity, but one that you hope is never fulfilled.
As I continue journeying through each episode, I find myself thinking about the men of Easy Company and what they had to endure for our sakes and our countries, and it leads me to thinking about those who now are serving across the world, in Iraq, in Afghanistan. We take so much for granted that we tend to forget about these people. When you are getting up in the morning to eat your cornflakes and fetch the paper, there is someone somewhere having to face their own question. And the answer will, more then likely, lead to life or death.

Band of Brothers is a 10 part miniseries from HBO and was produced by Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg. It stars a huge array of actors most notably Scott Grimes, Damian Lewis, Ron Livingston(that guy from Office Space), and Donnie Wahlberg(NKOTB!). There are a lot of great movies that may lead you to the same thoughts and questions. Saving Private Ryan, A Thin Red Line, and The Hurt Locker are some good examples. But Band of Brothers is heads above all of these.

Grade: A

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to my new blog, Working Title Movies, a home for discussing and reviewing movies, both old and new. Each week, I'll post reviews of movies I am currently exploring and also share thoughts and analysis about select films. This is a pretty simple blog. I just like talking about movies. I do not want to go into deep analysis and write 18 pages regarding what was in Marcellus Wallace's briefcase or what Bill Murray said to Scarlett Johansson at the end of Lost in Translation.

I just like sharing ideas and thoughts regarding movies, and I think I know a good flick from a crappy one. And I know a lot hidden gems out there and would like to share them with you. So if you like movies, welcome. And if you do not like movies, I think I saw a nice blog down the way regarding kittens and yarn, and another blog over there about some dude's mission to eat at every waffle house in the USA.

I'll have different posts every week but they really break down into 3 things:

Reviews: I'll review a movie and then grade it. I'll be using the Entertainment Weekly grade of A-F. It's a little narrower in saying whether a movie is good or bad, unlike Ebert's 4 star reviews.

Hall of Fame: I'll induct a select movie into my personal Hall of Fame. It is only my opinion on what I think are super duper movies.

Essays: Thoughts and opinions on select movies, directors, Hollywood, etc.

I'll also have some poll questions and, who knows, maybe I can score an interview with Scorsese. He owes me one.

Comment all you want. If there is a movie you would like me to review let me know.

Peace.

Mike