The Informant!

Why would Mark Whitacre (Matt Damon), a business executive making 350 thousand dollars a year, basically volunteer to become The Informant! on his own company, for the FBI? Would you?

The Informant! is a true story about a very smart man named Mark Whitacre. With a PH D from Cornell, Mark was President of the BioProducts Division of Archer Daniels Midland, a fortune 500 company based out of Decatur, Illinois.

In the early 90's Mark begins to inform the FBI that ADM has been illegally price-fixing lysine. Over the next several years Mark wears wires and does anything he can to help the FBI build a case against ADM. However, without giving too much away, over these years Mark has been constantly lieing and even doing a little scheming of his own.

When it's all said and done Mark believes that he was doing the right thing the whole time and that he will be able to keep his job at ADM. I would describe this character as a delusional pathological liar, yet brilliant. A genius nut ball. A criminal. A sum bag trying to be noble.

It was a good movie and a very interesting story but there was nothing really special about it. A little funny but not laugh out loud. Matt Damon had a top notch performance playing the quirky Mark Whitacre, but I really ended up hating this character.

The Informant! is a film with a great performance from Matt Damon and great directing by Steven Soderbergh but that's not enough for me to say it was a great movie. I'm glad I saw it but I won't be adding The Informant! to my collection.

Trailer

Public Enemies

John Dillinger...An American gangster... A man that I don't know much about but am very interested in. What a great idea for a film. Public Enemies, a Michael Mann Film, starring Johnny Depp as the notorious John Dillinger. I couldn't have been more excited but, I am sorry to say, I was very disappointed.

Michael Mann is one of my favorite writer/directors still doing it today. Mann has created a few masterpieces of his own including Heat and The Insider, making him, in my opinion, one of the best film auteurs of our time. Public Enemies is simply not one of his best pieces of work. His decision to use digital and mostly hand held cameras was plainly a bad choice. It didn't capture the essence of the 1930's and turned out to be a distracting film tecnique that took away from the movie.

Public Enemies seemed to begin towards the downfall of Dillinger's illustrious existence, and it seemed to take place over a very short period of time. I feel like this made the character development in this film very poor. You don't really get to know John Dillinger and the film didn't do a good job explaining why he was Public Enemy #1 opposed to Babyface Nelson or anyone else in his crew.

John Dillinger was a depression era bank robber whom the public admired. He only stole from the banks and he cared about the community because they were the people that he hid out amongst. I know that is how it really happened but it just felt like a really cliche storyline. Just another Jesse James.

The film became repetitive.....He gets caught, he escapes, he gets caught again, he escapes again, and then he dies. Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) the lead agent assigned to track Dillinger down seems to always be a step ahead of him. John Dillinger did not come across as a criminal mastermind at all. And in the middle of all that they throw in a kind of dull love story.

Despite my previous comments, I didn't exactly hate the film. I thought it was well acted and some of the shootouts and jailbreaks were very good. They were not few, but they were short and far between. Bottom line, I didn't really learn much about Dillinger that I didn't already know. I felt like the trailer basically shows everything in the film. It was poorly directed, the screenplay was weak and I would recommend waiting for DVD to see this one.

Trailer

Star Trek

I can't claim to be a Star Trek follower, in fact I haven't seen any of the original Star Trek series. Despite my lack of familiarity with Star Trek, I absolutely loved this film. It is everything you want from a summer blockbuster and seeing it on an I-MAX screen was amazing.

Star Trek was action packed from beginning to end. There wasn't one boring scene in this film. It composes a great introduction to the characters and the story, and it sets itself up perfectly for at least one sequel. I can't emphasize enough, how great the I-MAX experience is. I am going to make sure and see everything available in I-MAX in I-MAX.

The story revolves around James T. Kirk, a rebellious, arrogant young man who is destined to join Starfleet and become captain of a Star ship. Chris Pine was born to play the role of James Kirk and he created a character that is hard not to love.

James Kirk's counterpart is undeniably Spock; a brilliant young man who, throughout his life, has struggled with the fact that he is half human, and half Vulcan. The movie did a great job showing the effect that this simple fact had on Spock, even going back to his childhood.

The villain is Nero, played by Eric Bana, a Romulan (dude from the planet Romulus), who has traveled back in time, due to a black hole, and has far superior technology than that of Starfleet. Nero is creating black holes in the center of planets and these black holes are destroying these planets entirely. Along with their entire crew, Kirk and Spock must stop Nero before he destroys Earth.

The special effects are state of the art, making the visuals absolutely dazzling. The entire ensemble cast delivered, including a cameo from the original Spock, Leonard Nimoy. One of my favorite characters had to be Scotty, a transporter genius played by the hilarious Simon Pegg. I thought Star Trek was a great summer blockbuster and I am looking forward to the sequel.

Trailer

The Sting

Paul Newman and Robert Redford make up the legendary duo of Henry Gondorff and Johnny Hooker in George Roy Hill's The Sting. The two play the best con artists the big screen has ever seen. This classic film has become inspiration for many others such as the Ocean's Trilogy. A con film with twists and turns around every corner. The Sting won 7 Academy Awards in 1974 including: Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay.

When a young grifter's partner and friend is killed by Chicago mob boss Doyle Lonnegan, (Robert Shaw), he teams up with legendary con artist Henry Gondorff to exact his revenge. Henry asks him "why do you want to get him so bad kid?". And Johnny replies "because I don't know enough about killing to kill him."

Hooker's partner Luther was well known and loved by many Chicago grifters and they all wanted to help Hooker execute the "big con" against the dangerous Doyle Lonnegan. The goal is to get a large sum of Lonnegan's money without him knowing that it is them who took him. A crooked cop, along with some FBI agents are just a couple of the obstacles that stand in their way.

The Sting is just an all around fun movie. I think that Paul Newman and Robert Redford delivered outstanding performances as Henry Gondorff and Johnny Hooker. I first saw Paul Newman and Robert Redford together in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, a film that I absolutely love, and after seeing them together in The Sting I think they have become one of my favorite acting duos.

The Sting is a great film, a classic. I have to give props to my dad for recommending this movie to me. He has always supported my love for films and encouraged me to write about them. For that I am forever grateful. Before he mentioned The Sting I really hadn't heard anything about this film and, maybe to your surprise, that makes me happy. It makes me feel like even though I have seen more movies than the average person; everyday there is still a possibility that I will discover a great film.

It's crazy to think that films have only been around for about 1 hundred years and it makes me wonder how many good movies will be forgotten over time. I believe that the great films will live forever but I feel bad for the next generation, in the sense that it is going to be a lot harder for them to catch up with all the films from the past than it was for me; and there are still plenty of films that I need to see.

The Sting is a great movie from the past and I hope it lives on forever. So, check it out.

Trailer

Watchmen

Based on the graphic novel by Alan Moore, Watchmen is the first must see film of the year. I never read the graphic novel and I knew nothing about the Watchmen, but from the trailer I though it looked awesome. It was directed by Zack Snyder; an innovative director whose previous works include 300 and Dawn of the Dead (2004). I really wasn't a big fan of 300 but I thought Dawn of the Dead (2004) was a very good zombie movie so, I wasn't quite sure what to expect.

Watchmen is set in version of a 1985 America, in which America is on the brink of a nuclear war with Russia. A war that would ultimately conclude with the end of the world. When the film begins the Watchmen are a group of ex-superheros. When one of them is killed, a few of the others, led by Rorschach, begin to investigate the murder of their friend and believe that this murder was just the beginning of an attempt to kill them all.

The film moves along with flashbacks and narration from Rorschach's diary that gives some of the background of each of the Watchmen. I thought the film did a great job of giving some insight into each of these characters personalities. Rorschach was, by far, my favorite character and I thought Jackie Earle Haley did a great job playing this character. One of my favorite lines of the movie was "I'm not stuck in here with you....you're stuck in here with me". This line was perfectly delivered and really illustrated how badass Rorschach was.

It only seemed like one of the Watchmen had actual super powers. Dr. Manhattan came to be from a science experiment gone wrong. He had the power to control all matter, so basically he can do anything and everything. The rest of the characters just seemed to be exceptional fighters. Besides that there was no evidence that they had any powers. I absolutely loved all the action scenes and I think the violence was very well done.

Besides the spectacular action scenes, I think this film was somewhat a criticism of human nature. I think the scene where the Comedian jumps into the street during the riot personifies my point. Also the comedian specifically says "mankind's been trying to kill each other off since the beginning of time. Now...we finally have the power to finish the job." It seemed to be a theme that ran through the movie and I feel like it gave the film more of a purpose than just a bunch of superheros running around fighting crime.

Watchmen was an epic film with a running time of 2hr 42min but I enjoyed every minute of it from beginning to end. Some of the criticism i hear from the graphic novel lovers is that Ozymandias was supposed to be a hardcore character but in the film he looked like a wimp. I agree that it probably was a bad casting decision but I don't think it really hurt the film.

Watchmen is one of my favorite super hero movies of all time. I think it is 2nd to only The Dark Knight. It is a work of art and I'm hoping to catch it in IMAX before it leaves theatres.

Trailer

No Surprises at 81st Annual Academy Awards

I can't say that I didn't see this coming, but to me, this was a disappointing night. Can someone please explain to my why the best movie of the year was not even nominated for Best Picture, Director, or Screenplay? As the second highest grossing movie of all time, The Dark Knight was clearly snubbed this year at the Oscars and it was just sad to see.

Slumdog Millionaire? Wait did you say Slumdog Millionaire? Are you serious? The more awards this film wins, and the more I hear people hailing at it's greatness, the more I hate this movie. Don't get me wrong, when I first saw this movie I liked it. I thought it was well directed but I just felt like the screenplay was a little out there. I thought the musical rendition summed up this film very well, CHEESY. Some say that Slumdog Millionaire is inspirational but I believe that in order to be inspiring a film needs to believable.

Slumdog Millionaire walked away with 8 Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Adapted Screenplay. I think that writing is one of the most important, and maybe the most important part of film making. There is no way that Slumdog Millionaire had a better screenplay than The Dark Knight. Each character in The Dark Knight faced moral dilemma in decisions that had to be made. I did not see as much depth in the characters from Slumdog Millionaire and it didn't look as though much thought was put into the ending. Yay, its so perfect, he got the money and the girl...Come on.

I did end up seeing The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and I wasn't a huge fan but I want to give it another viewing when it comes to DVD. I also never got around to see The Reader, The Wrestler, or Frost/Nixon but for what I did see here is the way I thought the night should have gone. Out of what was nominated and what I saw I definitely think that Milk should have won Best Picture over Slumdog Millionaire. Milk is a truly inspirational film and it hard for me to understand how anyone, who saw them both, could think that Slumdog Millionaire was the better film. Milk was a harder film to distribute in America despite the fact that it is an American Film, with big name actors, and a big name director. Milk never received a wide release and I think this is due to the homophobia that sadly still exists in our society.

Sean Penn won best Actor for his performance in Milk. I was happy with this award but I didn't get to see The Wrestler and I hear that this film would not be what it was if it wasn't for a tremendous performance by Mickey Rourke. Personally I think that Clint Eastwood should have been nominated for Gran Torino, at least over Brad Pitt's performance in Benjamin Button. I don't think Brad Pitt's performance was bad I just liked Eastwood's better. Sean Penn gave a great speech, one of the highlights of the night, in which he gave Mickey Rourke props, and he also addressed proposition 8.

Kate Winslet won Best Actress for her performance in The Reader. I was happy about this even though I have not seen the Film. Kate Winslet has been one of the top actresses for a few years now and it was her time to win. I thought she was amazing in Revolutionary Road and maybe this Oscar is for the two great performances this year, The Reader and Revolutionary Road. Anne Hathaway was brilliant in Rachel Getting Married but I'm sure she will be back at the Oscars very soon.

Danny Boyle won Best Director for Slumdog Millionaire. Personally, out of what I saw and what was nominated, I would have voted for Gus Van Sant for Milk but I think Danny Boyle was a worthy recipient. Slumdog Millionaire was beautifully directed. I had more of a problem with the writing. I feel like I could go on about the Oscars forever but for a full recap click here.

Paths of Glory

Written and Directed by Stanley Kubrick, Paths of Glory dipped into an aspect of war that is not too often explored. This anti-war film is set in 1916 and loosely based on the Battle of Verdun, for a French stronghold; but the film really centers around the dysfunction within the French army. Stanley Kubrick was only 28 years old, with a minimal budget of less than $1 million, when he created his first masterpiece in Paths of Glory.

Paths of Glory takes place during WW1 and begins in the French trenches as they prepare to charge and conquer the "Ant Hill", an impossible mission that is destined for failure. There was a very important scene at the beginning of the film that set the tone for the entire film. When General Mireau tells Colonel Dax (Kirk Douglas) he must lead his men in this suicidal mission, with no support, Colonel Dax inquires about how many casualties the General anticipates. The General responds "5% killed by our own barrage, 10% going through no man's land, 20% going through the wire, and 25% in actually taking the ant hill."

The German gunfire was just too heavy and the French end up retreating, despite the Generals orders. As you can imagine the General was not happy with this result, so he ends making 3 men stand trial, under penalty of death, for cowardice. He wants to set an example for the whole battalion, but Colonel Dax defends his men and is willing to do anything he can to make sure that this does not happen.

I think it is ironic that the General, who was not in the line of fire, is accusing his own men, who were risking their lives, of cowardice. Instead of being concerned with the Germans, they were spending their time sending their own men to trial, and possibly execution. It was absurd to me that the only person who seemed to be thinking logically was Colonel Dax.

I absolutely loved the ending of this movie, with a German woman singing in a pub. You have to see it to know what I mean but it really brings out the fact that there is value in every life, a human aspect that can so often be forgotten in war, and was definitely forgotten by General Mireau.

Paths of Glory was well written and beautifully directed. Because of the critical assessment and the shame this film brought on the French military, it was banned in France and Switzerland for almost 20 years (until the mid 70's). This film is a work of art and Kirk Douglas delivers a superb performance as Colonel Dax. Definitely one of the top 5 war films of all time and one of Kubrick's best.