Good Luck Chuck

Director: Mark Helrich
Starring: Dane Cook, Jessica Alba, Dan Fogler, Ellia English, Chelan Simmons, Sasha Pieterse
Running Time: 96 Min.
Rating: R

** (out of ****)

I like to think I go into every film objectively, but who am I kidding? When you go into something like Good Luck Chuck there comes with it a certain set of expectations and not all of them are good. Especially when it stars two celebrities like Dane Cook and Jessica Alba who have so far proven themselves unworthy of being referred to as anything other than just "celebrities." This film does very little to change that and didn't go far at all in exceeding my already low expectations. I anticipated it being bad but I think what surprised me most was the manner in which was.

Cook is Chuck Logan, a dentist who in his adolescence has a hex put on him by a goth girl he rejected at a "Spin The Bottle" party in 1985. Now every woman he sleeps with falls in love and marries the next guy she dates after him. The secret gets out and girls are banging down his door. Of course, only in the movies would that be considered any kind of "curse." The only person who actually seems to recognize this is his best friend, Stu (Dan Fogler), resident plastic surgeon and pervert. That he's a plastic surgeon is a much more important detail in this film than it should be and a fact Stu not so subtly reminds us of throughout. Come to think of it, Stu is incapable of doing or saying anything "subtly."

The full effect of this hex is felt when Chuck meets and dates the clumsy but beautiful Cam (Alba) who he meets at his ex-girlfriend's wedding. She's prone to pratfalls, an unnecessary addition to josh Stolberg and Scott Glenn's already somewhat brainless script and a joke that's executed about 15 times too many during the course of the picture. It gets very, very tiresome. She's also a penguin keeper at the local zoo, one of the few details I enjoyed in the film. I like penguins because they're funny without ever trying to be, something you can't say about any of the humans in this picture. So now Chuck's problem is that if he sleeps with Cam he'll lose her for good. But how can he NOT sleep with her? It's Jessica Alba! So now Chuck (with help from Stu) has to figure out how to reverse this curse or at the least find some way around it. You probably won't be surprised to hear that the results of this are often vulgar and disgusting, lacking even the slightest hint of wit or intelligence on the part of screenwriters.

Considering the commercials and trailers for the film (which marketed it as a light romantic comedy) it really came out of left field how crude and crass it ended up being. There isn't a single scene that doesn't feature people either talking about sex or having it. Nearly every woman (except for Alba) appears topless and I was starting to think my copy of Good Luck Chuck was replaced with a soft-core porno. Don't get me wrong I'm not usually one to look a gift horse in the mouth but here it comes off strange and creepy. Besides the tone being way off, the way it's presented by director Mark Helrich is actually disturbing and uncomfortable. Imagine if a light, fluffy comedy like You've Got Mail was interrupted mid-film by a Boogie Nights training video. The obvious inspiration for this was raunchy R rated comedies like Wedding Crashers and Knocked Up, but all it does is succeed in imitating the misogynist spirit of the latter without any of the heart. In all fairness, even Knocked Up (which I didn't enjoy) was better than this. Not by much though. If your idea of a good time is watching Dan Fogler pleasure himself with a melon I'm sure you'll have a blast.

Jessica Alba is actually fine here. She's cute and adorable, which is really all she needs to be. She's in her comfort zone with this role and far from the biggest problem in the picture. But before she uncorks the champagne and starts celebrating not being awful for a change I still say she desperately needs to take this time off to sit down with her agent and have a long talk. In the past year or so you may have noticed the public's perception of her has slowly shifted from "She so hot!" to "Wow, she can't act at all." Unless she finds better projects with directors who will push her to improve as an actress she'll have problems because moviegoers are starting to catch on.

Cook, on the other hand, is woefully miscast. He has many critics but in his defense with this and Employee of the Month he hasn't exactly been given the greatest material or leading ladies. I don't think he's a bad actor but he's one that gives off a certain vibe and unless he's cast in the right role he won't be effective. He excels when playing a leech in a supporting role like in Mr. Brooks, but when we're asked to root for him as an underdog in a light comedy it doesn't work because he comes off as a womanizing creep. He has zero chemistry with Alba and they give off no sparks at all. Hilariously enough, he has better chemistry with the actresses who play the myriad of topless women who appear throughout the picture, one of whom (Chelan Simmons) is blessed with considerably more charisma and even looks better than Alba. She probably would have been a better choice for the lead.

The film's real horror is my old pal from Balls of Fury, Dan Fogler. It's never one person's fault that a movie fails but Fogler's performance here is as close as you're ever going to get. Every line of dialogue he shrieks and each word he yelps is like a hammer to the skull. The sole purpose of his presence in the film is to annoy the hell out of us. Mission accomplished. Scariest of all, this Tony-Award Winning star of stage and screen is actually set to play Alfred Hitchcock in the upcoming film, Number 13 later this year. The "Master of Suspense" is shaking in his grave I'm sure.

I have to admit there was one scene I found hysterical. It occurs toward the end and involves airport security. Although I'm not sure what it says when the actor playing the airport security guard gives a better performance than just about anyone else in the film. As bad as this movie is I'd still rank it above other comic disasters like Cook's own aforementioned Employee of the Month or something like The Heartbreak Kid because it did take risks and I wasn't bored. Just occasionally repulsed. The kindest thing I could say about Good Luck Chuck is at least it failed memorably, and not at all how I expected it to.

Death Sentence

Director: James Wan
Starring: Kevin Bacon, Kelly Preston, Garrett Hedlund, Matt O' Leary, Aisha Tyler, John Goodman
Running Time: 106 min.
Rating: R

**1/2 (out of ****)

If Sam Peckinpah's Straw Dogs were updated but lobotomized, we'd be left with something similar to Death Sentence, the latest film to put audiences in the uncomfortable position of cheering revenge killings. It takes a serious issue and exploits it for thrills and violence. Some of you may even be tricked into thinking you're watching something of value because of Kevin Bacon's phenomenal performance and your own perspective on the deep issues NOT being tackled by this film.

At times the movie is shameless and deplorable almost to the point where I had difficulty just getting through it. It's an unpleasant experience, but maybe that's how it was supposed to be. But as much as it pains me I have to say the film's almost recommendable because of that aforementioned lead performance and the fact it's well-made and frequently very exciting. But if anyone thinks they can convince me it contains an anti-violence message or is making any kind of social commentary I'm not biting. This movie is against violence about much as Scarface is a "Just Say No To Drugs" Public Service Announcement.

I, like many other film fans, try as often as possible to defend filmmakers against attacks from crazed watchdog groups looking to censor violence in cinema. It's times like this though when I feel let down and they make me look like a fool for doing it. Despite Bacon's best efforts to convey more this movie has only a single message and it's a scary one I can only hope audiences choose not to take home with them: When in pain and confronted with a problem, just pick up a gun and start firing. The message isn't intentional, but it's delivered nonetheless.

It's not that the movie doesn't acknowledge that the behavior is wrong. Of course it is. That's understood. The problem is in the way it's presented and glorified throughout the course of the picture while conveniently skimming past the real psychological ramifications of the situation. That it comes from the same director of Saw ends ups up being of little surprise because James Wan shoots this in a similar tone and style to that horror film. Except this time the story hits way too close to home to do that.

Nick Hume (Bacon) is a risk assessment executive with two sons and a beautiful wife (Kelly Preston) whose life is turned upside down when he and his eldest son, Brendan (Garrett Hedlund) stop at a gas station at the wrong end of town following a hockey game. While Nick fills the tank, Brendan runs in to get a drink and is brutally murdered by a street gang staging a hold up. If you've seen any of the trailers or commercials for this movie you know what comes next and it happens pretty much exactly how you'd expect it to. Other than Nick's testimony there isn't enough evidence to convict Brendan's assailant, much less even go to trial so he walks and Nick takes the law into his own hands, becoming a one-man vigilante killing machine hell-bent on revenge. At first he seems surprised at his own actions and in disbelief at what he's gotten himself tangled in with this vicious gang. But his feelings quickly wear off and we're treated to some spectacular shoot-outs and chase scenes, particularly a heart-pounding one through a parking garage that left me on the edge of my seat.

The movie is exciting and I really do see what it was trying do but unfortunately there's a feeling that there's a real disconnect between the intentions of Ian Jeffers screenplay (which is loosely based on Death Wish author Brian Garfield's 1975 novel) and what Wan shows on screen. They introduce a gut-wrenching scenario early on and make a promise of an involving drama, even book ending the film with home movie footage of Nick and his family. As each scene progresses though the movie turns uglier and moves further away from the thought provoking issue we began with and reveals itself to be more of an action vehicle along the lines of Crank or Shoot 'Em Up, except meaner in tone. There's a big twist about three quarters of the way through the film that caught me off guard but it exists only as an excuse to take the violence to even greater heights.

Part of the problem with this film is that there's no one worth rooting for. Our sympathy for Bacon's character dwindles by each passing second as he selfishly puts his family in danger and we certainly can't empathize with the gang members who murdered his son. The reaction to Nick's behavior from the other characters is strange. First of all, no one at work even seems to notice or care that Nick is walking around bruised and battered all the time for some strange reason. Even when a gang member shows up at work everyone seems to shrug it off as it being "just another day at the office." Does this guy have any friends? Shouldn't they be concerned he's involved in something deep and dangerous here? He also finds a way to murder gang members in broad daylight in a big city without anyone noticing or thinking to call the police.

Although I don't think I'd call the police either if I knew they'd be as laid-back as Aisha Tyler's Detective Wallis. She knows exactly what's going on yet only sporadically appears to give Nick a slap on the wrist and a stern warning. Um…he's murdering people. Shouldn't she arrest him? It's no wonder crime in this city is so bad. But the filmmakers can't be bothered with these little details because that would interrupt all the killings which have been so much fun to watch. There's another supporting character, a sick, depraved gun seller played by John Goodman who fits into this movie like a glove. He has a bizarre exchange with Nick that's actually the closest the film comes to exploring the issues that are simmering just below the surface.

I had mentioned Straw Dogs, the 1971 film starring Dustin Hoffman as a American mathematician traveling abroad whose wife is raped and terrorized by a gang of low lifes. I hesitate even invoking the name of that masterpiece in a review for this film but a comparison is valid. That movie explored the psychological impact of the event on its main character and we slowly saw the pain eat away at him until he couldn't take it anymore and slowly became what he hated most. Perhaps if Nick's character underwent a slower, subtler transformation like that the story would have had more of an impact. Instead he just starts killing people senselessly.

Bacon does his best with the role but if you want to see an intelligent Kevin Bacon film that deals with an important social issue seriously, rent The Woodsman instead. This isn't a meditation on revenge and I think it's fooled people into thinking otherwise because it's a controversial topic that inspires people to bring their own strong beliefs into the film with them. Any intelligence in the film is provided by those watching it and Bacon's dedication, not in the script or in Wan's over-the-top handling of it.

As frustrated as I am with the film it did provoke a very strong reaction in me which is never, under any circumstances, a bad thing. I'd much rather walk away from a film angry than feel nothing at all, which was the case with too many other movies this past year. It pushed my buttons so I have to give it credit for that.

I also have to credit to James Wan for not just falling back on the success of the Saw franchise and getting out after the first film to try other projects. It would have been easy for him to just sit back and coast on the success of that for the rest of his career. He's already proven he has one great film in him, but unfortunately this wasn't his second. Many critics unfairly and short-sightedly labeled Saw as "torture porn" but ironically that label may be better suited to this film. If you think about it, Saw actually had more to say about the value of human life than Death Sentence, which dishes out a different kind of emotional torture to its audience.

3:10 To Yuma

Director: James Mangold
Starring: Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Logan Lerman, Ben Foster, Dallas Roberts, Peter Fonda, Vinessa Shaw, Alan Tudyk, Gretchen Mol, Luke Wilson
Running Time: 122 min.
Rating: R

**** (out of ****)

Years from now movie buffs and film historians will look back on James Mangold's remake of the classic 1950's Western, 3:10 To Yuma as the rare opportunity to watch two acting legends square off. It'll rank alongside such memorable moments as the Pacino/DeNiro face off in Heat only this takes it a step further. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale don't just share one measely scene in this film.

We get everything we hoped for as two of our finest actors give each other and us everything they have for 2 straight hours and it's a testament to their performances that when it's over it's the story that's remembered most. You can add to that mix another actor who, if his work this year is any indication, may soon be joining their elite company, and we have one hell of a motion picture experience.

There are certain genres, like war and espionage films, I generally tend to stay away from because my interest in the subject matter is low. Westerns are a different story. I always had an interest in them but my exposure was limited and, with very few exceptions, they seemed to have gone out of style in the past two decades, making a bit of a comeback only recently. As I was watching this film it occurred to me just how much I missed them and how truly great and exhilarating they can be when executed well.

So for those tentative about going into Western, don't think of it as one. It could better be classified as The Departed, set in the West as it shares many of that film's qualities thematically. The best in the genre aren't about gunfights or cowboy hats, but are morality plays that explore the thin line between good and evil and the importance of standing up for what you believe is just. They're about honor. It seems simple and clichéd when I type it, but it actually isn't at all. There's nothing simple about this story or the characters in it, at least not in the way that this magnificent film grippingly presents it.

Dan Evans (Bale) is an impoverished rancher who lost his foot in the Civil War and is struggling to make ends meet for his wife Alice (Gretchen Mol) and two young sons. His situation worsens when his ranch is burnt to the ground by two henchmen of a man to whom Dan owes money. The next day while herding cattle Dan and his sons witness the violent robbery of a stagecoach by notorious outlaw Ben Wade (Crowe) and they discover the sole survivor of the ambush, seriously wounded bounty hunter Byron McElroy (Peter Fonda).

In desperate need of cash and about to lose his land to the railroad Dan agrees to join McElroy, Sheriff Butterfield (Dallas Roberts) and Doc Potter (Alan Tudyk) for a fee of $200 to accompany Wade to Contention where he'll be put on the 3:10 train to Yuma prison and await hanging. But Wade has other plans, as does his posse now led by his right-hand man, the psychotic Charlie Prince (an electrifying Ben Foster). Dan needs the money to keep his home and family together, but must also consider whether the reward is worth the price if his widow is left to care for their sons alone. Dan is just a crippled rancher, not law enforcement, and has no business being involved with someone as dangerous as Wade. The chances of him surviving this journey are slim to none.

Motivating Dan further, however, is the fact that his eldest son William (Logan Lerman) views his father as a weak coward incapable of standing up for himself. William is so disappointed and has such little faith in his father that the overambitious teen even continuously demands to come along for help despite his dad's adamant objections. Dan's involvement in escorting Wade to Contention with the rest of the men never goes where we think it will, nor does his complicated relationship with his son, or most importantly, his even more complicated relationship with the ruthless Wade. I can't say I was shocked how it all went down but I was shocked at how conflicted I became about the characters on the journey and how emotionally powerful the final minutes of this picture were.

Everything about this film is perfect and at its center is the relationship between Dan and Wade and how both actors choose to play it. They're not friends but they're not exactly enemies either and the casting of Crowe and Bale in these roles was brilliant and isn't done as a vanity project for the stars or a stab at stunt casting. It serves the material every step of the way. You can feel the tension as they're both on opposite sides of the law, but there's also strong mutual respect between two men who are really much more alike than different as far as their goals. How each go about reaching them is a different story. That mutual respect and tension changes in ways I won't reveal throughout the picture and the beauty of the casting choices is that you can't help but wonder if the complicated relationship between the two characters mirrored the one between Crowe and Bale on set (where supposedly they got along really well).

In one of the most memorable scenes the outlaw Wade joins the Evans family for dinner and Alice remarks that he Wade wasn't at all what she expected him to be. He's not what we expected either as Crowe manages to make this cold-blooded killer come off as polite, respectful, intelligent and even likable. Not too likable though and that's where it's to the film's benefit to have an actor like Crowe playing the role and knowing just how much is too much. Praising him is becoming old hat by now, but it's nice when a role like this comes along to remind us just how good he really is. He leaves it all right there on screen and this is one of his most subdued and nuanced performances.

It's also a rare treat to see Bale in a role we're not accustomed to: that of a weak, defeated man. He owns it and believably conveys his slow transformation throughout this journey. When this was over I had to wonder just how much longer Bale can continue giving performances like this (and the one in Rescue Dawn earlier in the year) without being recognized with an Academy Award nomination. There's no doubt he'll get one eventually and when the day comes it'll be that much more meaningful knowing he left behind a body of work that includes performances like this.

The relationship between Dan and his son is heartbreaking not only because of the boy's low opinion of his father but the prospect that this teen could one day turn into the man Wade has become. It's a very real and scary prospect that's alluded to many times throughout the film. Lerman plays William exceptionally, holding his own with the two best at the top of their games. It would be an intimidating situation for any young actor, but watching his work here you'd never know it.

As good as Crowe and Bale are though, they're both nearly upstaged by Ben Foster, whose threatening presence holds this movie captive. Every word he speaks and action he takes literally shakes you to the core. What's most amazing is his Charlie Prince doesn't even have all that much screen time over the course of the film but Foster makes every second of contained menace count. It's the quality, not quantity.

One of the great benefits of seeing so many movies is getting to follow the career trajectory of all these actors, some of whom really end up surprising you. I don't think anyone would have guessed that Foster, a graduate of such films as the forgettable teen comedy Get Over It, would morph himself into an actor of such force. When the Oscar nominations are announced on January 22nd one thing that would have me jumping out of my seat would be hearing his name announced as a nominee for Best Supporting Actor for his work here or his equally powerful turn in Alpha Dog early last year. Take your pick. Either performance is deserving.

Watching this film it occurred to me that James Mangold, dating all the way back to Cop Land over a decade ago, might be the only director who actually improves with each outing. Walk The Line may always remain my favorite film of his but there's little argument on my end that this is his personal best. Having not seen the original 1957 film (which itself was based on an Elmore Leonard short story) I've heard that this expands the scope of the tale, giving us more details and motivation. I believe it and if this wasn't such a crowded year, a film like this would usually be a lock for a Best Picture nod.

It's a throwback to a time in movies when the story, not computer generated special effects, were the reason audiences came to the theaters. It's all done right and feels authentic. Everything from Marco Beltrami's score to the gorgeous cinematography. There's even a Fonda in it for good measure. The return of the Western has to be one of the more positive developments to come out of Hollywood in recent years and I'm curious to see how the year's other big Western, The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford fares against this. It definitely has its work cut out for it. So those thinking of staying away from 3:10 To Yuma and writing it off just merely an accurate recreation or faithful re-imagining of a genre left for dead years ago, think again. This is the real thing.

2007 Year-End Awards

I have to say doing this really brought back memories (some traumatic) of the year in film for 2007. I can't say it was a great year but everyone has assurred me that's only because all the great movies have been released in the past two months and I haven't seen them yet. You'll get reviews of those in 2008. Before anyone says that I have 2006 releases on here let me point out that these awards include movies I either saw or REVIEWED in 2007.

You Liked it, I Didn't: 300, Hairspray, Waitress, Black Snake Moan

I Liked it, You Didn't: Spider-Man 3, Georgia Rule, Mr. Brooks

The Whole Country Liked it, I Didn't: Knocked Up

Most Overrated Comedy: Knocked Up

Most Underrated Comedy: Hot Rod

Most Underrated Drama: Mr. Brooks

Most Overrated Performance By An Actress in a Comedy: Katherine Heigl (Knocked Up)

Most Underrated Performance By An Actress in a Comedy: Leslie Mann (Knocked Up)


Worst Lead Performance By An Actress in a Comedy: Malin Akerman (The Heartbreak Kid)

Worst Performance By An Actor in a Dramatic Role: Matthew McConaughey (We Are Marshall)

Worst Lead Performance By An Actor in a Comedy: Dan Fogler (Balls of Fury)

Worst Supporting Performance By an Actor in a Comedy: John Travolta (Hairspray)

Best Summer Action Popcorn Movie: Live Free or Die Hard

Separated at Birth Award: Déjà vu, Premonition and Next

"Sorry, it wasn't THAT good" Award: Hot Fuzz

Most Polarizing Movie of The Year (TIE): Smokin' Aces and Shoot 'Em Up

Most Disappointing Movie of the Year: Saw IV

Funniest Comedy of the Year: Superbad

Unintentional Comedy of the Year: Fracture

The Robin Williams Award For Worst Comedy of the Year: Balls of Fury (barely edging out Williams' own License To Wed)

Most Overrated Clive Owen Movie: Children of Men

Most Underrated Clive Owen Movie: Shoot 'Em Up


Most Needlessly Convoluted Screenplay of the Year: Premonition

"I'm Hot But I Can't Act" Award (Tie): Jessica Alba (Fantastic Four: Rise of The Silver Surfer) and Jessica Biel (Next)

"I'm Hot, But I CAN act" Award: Sarah Roemer (Disturbia)

"I Need a New Agent" Award (Actor): Nicolas Cage (Ghost Rider and Next)

"I Need a New Agent" Award (Actress): Mandy Moore (License To Wed)

Best Cure for Insomnia: Angelina Jolie (A Might Heart and The Good Shepherd)

The Dame Judi Dench/Chronicles of Riddick Quick Payday Award: Julianne Moore (Next)

Should Be Nominated For Best Actor But Won't: Joseph Gordon-Levitt (The Lookout)

Should be Nominated For Best Supporting Actor But Won't: Jeff Daniels (The Lookout)

Should Be Nominated For Best Picture But Won't: Zodiac


Shouldn't Be nominated For Best Actress But Might: Keri Russell (Waitress)

Best "Torture Porn" of the Year: Hostel Part 2

Worst "Torture Porn" of the Year: I Know Who Killed Me

Most Welcome Return To Form: Kevin Costner in Mr. Brooks

Best Remake: Halloween

Worst Remake (TIE): The Heartbreak Kid and The Hitcher

The Whole Really is Greater Than The Sum of Its Parts Award: Grindhouse

Best Twist Ending: Smokin' Aces

Worst Twist Ending: Saw IV

Most Laughable Twist Ending: Perfect Stranger

Biggest Cheat of an Ending: The Prestige

Best Cameo: Alan Thicke (Yes, THAT Alan Thicke) in Alpha Dog


Best Performance as a Convicted Pedophile in a Motion Picture: Jackie Earl Haley (Little Children)

Best Performance by a Convicted Pedophile in a Motion Picture: Jeffrey Jones (Who's Your Caddy?)

Best Wardrobe Decision: Mary Elizabeth Winstead's cheerleader outfit in Death Proof

Worst Wardrobe Decision: Sharon Stone's fat suit in Alpha Dog

"There's No Way This Movie Can Be As Good as Its Trailer " Award: Across The Universe

Most Hilariously Titled Movie: In The Land of Women

Gutsiest Filmmaking: Craig Brewer for Black Snake Moan

Coolest Villain: Maggie Q (Live Free or Die Hard)

Lamest Villain: Wes Bentley (Ghost Rider)

Creepiest Villain: Frank Whaley (Vacancy)

William Hurt Award For Best Performance in a Single Scene: John Carroll Lynch (Zodiac)

Best Body Part: Megan Fox's tummy (and everything else) in Transformers


Worst Body Part: Lindsay Lohan's robotic hand in I Know Who Killed Me

Best Performance By a Director: Kevin Smith in Live Free or Die Hard

Worst Performance By a Director (TIE): Quentin Tarantino (Planet Terror and Death Proof), Eli Roth (Death Proof)

Guiltiest Pleasure of The Year: Shoot 'Em Up

Future Cult Trash Classic: Alpha Dog

Worst WWE Film: The Marine

Least Worst (I Refuse to say "Best") WWE Film: The Condemned

"Hollywood Fluff" Award: Ocean's Thirteen

"Wow, He Can Really Act" Award: Justin Timberlake (Black Snake Moan and Alpha Dog)

Best Score: Clint Mansell (The Fountain)

Movie I Desperately Wanted To See and Review But Didn't: Southland Tales

Sign of the Apocalypse Award: The box office success of films like I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry and Alvin and the Chipmunks.

Sign There May Still Be Hope: The box office failure of "timely" political dramas like Lions For Lambs, The Kingdom, In The Valley of Elah, and Rendition.

Movie I Most Enjoyed Reviewing: Disturbia

Movie I Least Enjoyed Reviewing: The Good Shepherd

Best Movie I Didn't See or Review (TIE): Bug and Breach

Movie I'm Most Looking Forward to in 2008 (Tie): The Dark Knight and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Shoot 'Em Up

Director: Michael Davis
Starring: Clive Owen, Paul Giamatti, Monica Belucci, Stephen McHattie
Running Time: 86 min.
Rating: R

**** (out of ****)

Whenever I review a film I ask myself one question first: DOES IT SUCCEED IN WHAT IT'S TRYING TO DO? For those perplexed by the star rating you see above I'd like to refer you back to that question. I am aware that Shoot 'Em Up is the most polarizing film of 2007 and I'm sure there are more than quite a few readers who would like to reach their hands through the computer screen and strangle me right now. But even those who absolutely despise the film can't argue that for what it is it's flawless. You may hate it, but you know it really gets the job done. It's the most appropriately titled film of the year and just seeing the title you probably know whether you're the type of person who would enjoy it. Who says there's no truth in advertising?

This is an overindulgent exercise in fearless, guerilla cinema and a glimpse into what happens when a studio takes off the handcuffs and removes any obstacles that could possibly make a movie not work. Everyone has free reigns and you almost feel guilty watching two actors of this high a caliber having so much damn fun. It's as if someone took Clive Owen's character from Children of Men and inserted him into Smokin' Aces, turning up the volume to the maximum degree.

The film is 86 minutes but it feels more like 6. It's so slickly edited and masterfully directed that excitement engulfs the screen in every single frame and not a moment drags. It may be the quickest movie I ever sat through and cinematic equivalent of injecting yourself with pure sugar. It's a crying shame that most actually took the film at face value and missed the funniest spoof of the action genre in years. Only it's smarter and more exciting than any of the John Woo films it's spoofing and could work not only as the best action movie of the year, but the best comedy. I was laughing so hard I was literally crying. It's pure joy from start to finish.

Opponents of this film have argued that if you took away the spectacular action sequences and the ballet of bullets that fill its running time you'd be left with nothing. Of course you would. That's the point. Let's be honest here: You don't go into a movie called Shoot 'Em Up expecting a deep meditation on life. But you know what? The plot is actually very good, the dialogue is sharp and there are some surprises. The movie opens with the mysterious and grumpy Mr. Smith (Owen) sitting on a park bench sipping his coffee and eating his carrot when he's unwillingly thrust into a dangerous situation involving a hitman known as Hertz (Paul Giamatti) and the pregnant woman he's after.

The movie gets down to business right away without pausing so much as a second to introduce any characters or take a breather. The level of forward moving momentum the story has is unmatched, which is well established in just the opening seconds. After delivering the woman's baby amidst a hail of bullets Smith is left to care for the infant that Hertz so desperately wants to get his hands on for a reason that will soon become very clear. The loner Smith calls upon the only help he knows, a lactating hooker (Monica Belucci) who he hopes can look after the child. With the determined Hertz and his henchmen on their tale things don't exactly work out as planned and what unfolds are some of the craziest, hilarious and memorable shoot-outs you'll ever see.

I love it when a movie shows me things I've never seen before and the action scenes in this film had me jumping up and down on my couch screaming. This Smith guy sure knows how to handle a firearm as he's able to shoot anything and anyone from some absolutely insane angles. I've actually heard some criticize this movie because the action is "implausible." Again... that's the point. Smith pulls a brilliant trick out of his hat involving a car windshield that just left me with my mouth wide open. Just when you think this guy can't possibly get out of a situation he'll pull off something else you haven't seen before.

It's really sick how many endlessly creative and inventive ways he finds to shoot people and director Michael Davis films it as if it's poetry in motion. And I haven't even mentioned the baby. He does most of this while carrying "it," as he so lovingly refers to the little one. As if the scenes weren't hilarious enough already. And the movie is smart too. Smart enough to cut to reaction shots of the baby as all this is happening. Smart enough to have the characters make little life observations like Smith complaining about how rich people drive or Hertz lamenting about his marital problems. Hertz's interaction and ribbing of his henchmen is classic. As clever as Smith is, Hertz is always right there along with him being the rare villain in this kind of movie who makes smart decisions. The cat-and-mouse game between them feels epic and losing isn't an option. It's just not in their nature. The movie doesn't let up even in its final minutes, ending in a parade of gunfire.

Usually after an actor is nominated for or wins an Academy Award their career can go in one of two directions. It can go the way of someone like Cate Blanchett, who's used it as a springboard to even more prestigious, Oscar-worthy roles, or it can go the direction of Nicolas Cage, who's used it to earn bigger paydays with mainstream blockbusters. But then I remembered… Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti have never won Academy Awards. Both have been nominated in the supporting actor category (for Closer and Cinderella Man, respectively) but lost. But it does sure seem like, based on their resumes, both should have Oscars by now.

Their names on the movie poster mean you're almost always getting something of high-class quality. Watching both of them together in this is a rare treat and is the equivalent of Tom Hanks and Phillip Seymour Hoffman headlining Saw V. It's ironic then that while they're supposedly "lowering" themselves in mainstream fare, Owen and Giamatti deliver two of their most entertaining performances. For some reason Owen gets some flack for playing the same role (that of Clive Owen) over and over again, but why complain when he does it so well? There's a scene in the film where we finally find out details of Mr. Smith's past and when we hear them it isn't anything we didn't already know. That's because we could read those details ON OWEN'S FACE AND THEY WERE PRESENT IN THE PERFORMANCE from the very beginning.

Giamatti doesn't look at all like your typical hitman, but that just enhances the mesmerizing, scene-devouring power of the performance. But the real joy of it is how despite being a sick, sadistic bastard he still gives off the vibe that this character would be a cool guy to go out and have a beer with. I was always a fan of Giamatti but this performance only increases my appreciation of his skills ten-fold. Who knew he had this in him? It was so much fun watching him let go, having such a good of a time. Forget about Sideways, he deserves a nomination... FOR THIS! I wouldn't mind seeing him tackle similar roles in the future provided he doesn't start abusing the privilege like Cage has. Monica Belucci plays the least important role in the film, but she does a fine job. She has a massive, drooling fan base and even they're given a special treat in this film. The movie has it all: Sex, violence, and, in one memorable instance, both simultaneously in the same scene. And it isn't hiding behind fancy airs or pretending to be something it's not. This is just balls-to-the-wall non-stop excitement.

Having never heard of the film's director, I looked him up and discovered that Michael Davis did direct another movie I liked, 2000's little-seen romantic comedy 100 Girls. This is about as far from that film as you can get. You may as well call this 100,000 Bullets. But I do think it says something that he's a director capable of making two such radically disparate films. How many filmmakers can claim to have two good titles in complete opposite genres on their resume? This guy is definitely someone to watch. I'm aware that I may take some heat for praising this when I bashed 300 but that film actually had the nerve to pretend it was something of substance when it was just a robotic videogame of killings. This is inventive, purposeful filmmaking. I'm not mystified why such a risk-taking film would show up on a lot of lists of the years worst. It'll probably be showing up on a list of mine too, just not that one.

Anyone who hates it owes me no explanation. I get it. It isn't for everyone. But so many movies these days are afraid to go all the way. This one pushes the envelope and just when you think it can't push it any more it goes even further. My only regret about the film was that I had a free pass to see it in theaters, but didn't. I'm sure it would have been twice as enjoyable on the big screen. It joins Crank as one of the best adrenaline fueled action rushes of recent years. If you loved that movie, you'll love this. Even if I'm afraid to know what it says about me that I enjoyed it this much.

The Heartbreak Kid

Directors: Bobby and Peter Farrelly
Starring: Ben Stiller, Michelle Monaghan, Malin Akerman, Jerry Stiller, Robb Corddry, Carlos Mencia
Running Time: 115 min.
Rating: R

** (out of ****)

The Heartbreak Kid is a flat, lifeless comedy that's easily one of the worst efforts of the Farrelly Brothers' previously successful careers. They can take pride in the fact that they didn't write the script this time so at least some of the blame falls elsewhere. At its center is maybe the most annoying, obnoxious character to appear on screen this year. Every second we spend with her is infinitely more painful for us than the almost equally unlikable main character in the film. Very early on I found myself impatiently counting down the minutes to when Michelle Monaghan would come in and attempt to save the film, thinking that she'd really have her work cut out for her this time.

Unsurprisingly, things get significantly better upon her arrival but it lasts only a fleeting moment, as the stupidity of the screenplay kicks into overdrive again just in time for the final act. It's here where a movie that started as just a somewhat realistically grounded exercise in stupidity makes a huge detour into insane fantasyland, taking all the actors with it. This is a remake of the 1972 comedy starring Charles Grodin and Cybill Shepherd and I don't think it's unfair of me to say, despite having never seen the original, that it must be far superior to this. It even seems to have been made with a certain degree of laziness and it's the first of the Farrelly films that should have gone direct-to-DVD. The only reason anyone could have any interest in seeing this is because of Monaghan, who deserves a medal of honor for somehow managing to give a good performance in a film this bad.

Eddie Kantro (Ben Stiller) is a single sporting goods store owner unlucky at love, drowning his sorrows at his ex-girlfriend's wedding where he's the unwitting subject of the groom's toast. That toast, and his seating placement at the event, are pretty much the only laughs we get during this entire picture. Unfortunately both are out of the way within the first five minutes and there's still over ninety left to go. With his father (Jerry Stiller) hounding him about his inability to find a good woman and settle down things do start to look up. After coming to the aid of beautiful young purse snatching victim, Lila (Malin Akerman) they eventually start seeing each other and he gives into temptation, marrying her on a whim despite having only dated her for a couple of weeks. It's on their way to the honeymoon that this movie goes straight to hell.

It soon becomes painfully obvious to Eddie (and unfortunately us as well) that Lila is a complete lunatic. Why this revelation is just now coming to the surface I have no idea. What were they doing the whole time they were dating? Lila's borderline psychotic tendencies are so over-the-top and unbelievable you'd think they'd have presented themselves right away. This isn't just a case of someone misrepresenting themselves. They go many steps too far when the lame-brained screenplay has Lila reveal all these irritating facets of her personality. No one would ever behave like this, but more importantly, it's not humorous. Sure, Eddie has to put up with it...but so do we.

Then there's the awful, grating performance of Akerman that deserves Razzie Award consideration. I could call her a Cameron Diaz clone (since she was only cast because of the slight physical resemblance) but that would be an insult to a talented actress with charisma. Even if you're not a Diaz fan, you will be after you witness Akerman's lifeless imitation of her. By casting a look alike the Farrelly Brothers hoped to recapture the magic of There's Something About Mary. Except that movie was funny.

It's on their honeymoon that Eddie runs into Miranda (Monaghan) and because she's so likable the film does have a little streak going in the middle act where it's actually quite good. The encounters with her feel real because she actually seems like a real person and for just a moment the movie accurately captures that feeling when you're on vacation and meet someone that completely floors you. Naturalness is a tough quality to convey but Monaghan makes it look easy, confirming suspicions that Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang wasn't a fluke and she deserves a promotion to the A-list.

Even her family seem like regular, everyday people not stereotyped movie characters. They interact with each other like real family members would and the jokes they shared amongst one another were funny, unlike much of the crude humor that permeates through the rest of the film. This got my hopes up that things were actually taking a more intelligent turn. Those hopes were smashed when the movie goes off the deep end reminding us that Stiller's character is a selfish, two-timing creep.

As bad as Lila is, Eddie's worse, lying, stringing her along, and seeing this other woman behind her back. Even worse he's lying to Miranda and her family, the only likable characters in the movie. And we're supposed to root for this guy? Of course the time will come when Eddie's double dealing is exposed to both women and the consequences were far stupider than I could have imagined in even my wildest dreams. The last half hour of the film is just a train wreck.

I'm sure I'm making this sound worse than it is only because I expect so much more from talents like Bobby and Peter Farrelly. The tone of the film is also off. It seems like a really lightweight romantic comedy but then, out of nowhere, an unusually crude or hurtful comment would come out of a character's mouth or something really gross would occur. The Farellys are usually good at balancing this type of thing, but here it seems like someone took a PG-rated script and scribbled profanities on it with a red magic marker. Comedian Carlos Mencia has a small, unfunny role in the film. I don't know much about him other than that I heard his comedy is supposedly edgy. Nothing about this movie is edgy.

I did realize something very important while watching this: Ben Stiller just isn't believable playing a nice guy. There's this undercurrent of nastiness to all his behaviors and mannerisms and he has problems conveying sincerity. It's been a trend throughout his career and if you look back, all his effective comic roles have been as villains. Even when he just cameos as a nefarious character (like in Happy Gilmore or The Cable Guy) he's far more successful.

Stiller has no chemistry with either of the female leads, something you could easily justify with Akerman, but that he has none with Monaghan is pathetic. No excuses on that one. She'd be able to create chemistry with a brick wall. By the end of The Heartbreak Kid I was thinking my time would have been better spent watching a career retrospective on professional wrestler Shawn Michaels. Yes, love blows. And so does this movie.

Eastern Promises

Director: David Cronenberg
Starring: Viggo Mortensen, Naomi Watts, Vincent Cassel, Armin Mueller-Stahl, Jerzy Skolimowski
Running Time: 100 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

It's something we've known for a while but Eastern Promises just further confirms it: Viggo Mortensen is one hell of an actor. He's actually such a strong, intimidating actor that his performance comes close to overshadowing and overpowering this film, making it difficult to care about the other characters half as much. This movie is all about Viggo…and the violence. It's something director David Cronenberg is quick to remind us of in every single frame of this film, sometimes in more excruciating detail than we feel comfortable watching. As thrilling as it is sometimes, there may be some confusion as to what audience this film is for. The excessive male nudity is likely to turn off (straight) male audiences, while the brutal violence and gore would cause the female audience to hit the stop button on the remote. As is, it's a very good, absorbing crime film that benefits greatly by having Cronenberg at the helm.

Previously a cult horror director, Cronenberg has lately taken baby steps toward the mainstream, or at least as close to the mainstream as someone like him can get. Reuniting with Mortensen, whom he directed in one of 2005's best films, A History of Violence, he has has this gift for depicting violence in the harshest, most realistic way possible. It was present in even his earliest work. That's definitely on grand display here, even if the film is somewhat clichéd and gives us a take on the mob genre we've seen before.

I can't help but laugh just a little when I see it on many year-end top ten lists because it really is just a one-trick pony, as entertaining and over-the-top as it may be. But at least it's a film of substance and can't be categorized as "Hollywood fluff," a term I've been using a lot these past couple of months to describe the unusually high level of lightweight studio offerings. No one could ever call Cronenberg's films "lightweight." Plus, it earns bonus points for containing what's easily the most exciting (and uncomfortably homoerotic) fight scene of the year. You'll never want to enter a men's locker room again.

Anna Kitrova (Naomi Watts) is a midwife at a London hospital who successfully delivers the baby girl of a hemorrhaging teenager who ends up dying on the table. She leaves behind no identification other than a diary, which contains a business card, that leads her to a restaurant fronting for the Russian Mob. The owner, Semyon (played with subtle menace by the great Armin Mueller-Stahl) offers to translate the diary, which is written in Russian. He obviously isn't doing this out of the kindness of his heart and is hiding something I probably shouldn't reveal in this review.

Unwise, emotional decision-making puts Anna in over her head and she finds herself face-to-face with Nikolai Luzhin (Mortensen), the chauffer of Semyon's insane, drunk son Kirill (Vincent Cassel). What's so amazing about this partnership (you couldn't call it a friendship) between Nikolai and Kirill is how Nikolai not only puts up with this guy, but knows exactly how to handle him, showing more patience than anyone else would in that situation. Even when our patience for his behavior starts to run out, Nikolai becomes even calmer and more tolerant, defending his unstable actions to Semyon. There are weird, creepy homosexual undertones to their relationship that the film teases but mercifully doesn't fully explore, even when we increasingly fear it will.

This Kirill guy is definitely off his rocker and many times during the film you're not sure whether to laugh at his actions or cringe in fear. Casell (who's done strong supporting work in films like Derailed) chews into this role like it's a three-course meal and more than holds his own scene-for-scene with Mortensen. No small achievement. Aside from a twist late in the film which is a surprise but hardly a shock, the script mostly follows the predictable pattern for these types of films and doesn't contain a lot of twists and turns. But it's worth mentioning that the person I was watching this with and I were taking bets as to which characters would survive until the end of the film. Both of us were way off.

It's tough to believe the Viggo Mortensen we see here is the same man who played Tom Stall in A History of Violence two years ago. This film isn't anywhere close to being as psychologically deep or complex as that near-masterpiece, but Mortensen's performance is just as subtly powerful, in a far different way. As I was watching the brutal, bloody shower fight scene I was wondering to myself why he was having such a tough time finishing these guys off. Then it occurred to me that this guy isn't the invincible fighting machine that Tom Stall was.

It was tough for me to let go of that notion, just as its tough to shake any character Mortensen has played throughout his career. I'm sure I'll have the same problem with this one. It seems in the past couple of years he's really turned that corner and shot to the top of the list of our best actors, mastering the ability to believably slide into any role. Cronenberg gives him center stage again here and he owns the film with his trademark quite intensity. He radiates a calmness that's scary because you're always aware of the possibility that he could explode. He deserves a Best Actor nomination for this.

Naomi Watts, on the other hand, doesn't fare as well but that's only because Steve Knight's screenplay requires Anna (as well as her hotheaded Russian-born uncle, played by Jerzy Skolimowski) to make head-scratchingly stupid decisions in order to service the drama of the story. I didn't believe they were unrealistic decisions that someone in her similar situation wouldn't make, but it did make it more difficult to root for the character. Caring more about the villain than the heroine didn't help. The movie doesn't force the issue of some kind of a deep relationship between the two lead characters, which was probably a wise move. Watching this though it occurred to me that Watts just might be one of my favorite actresses because even when the material isn't up to her talent level she's always compelling to watch. There are a lot of beautiful movie stars but I could only count on one hand how many are also great actresses. She is.

With its heavy gore (even the opening scene is brutal) and male nudity this film would have been pure B-level camp if anyone but Cronenberg was behind the lens. With all the crazy stuff that goes down here this really should pass as a comedy (at least on paper), but he finds a way to not only make it dramatic, but at times terrifying. Cronenberg's career has gone in an interesting direction because, unlike a Sam Raimi, as he's edged closer to the mainstream he's found a way to appeal to more audiences without sacrificing any of the elements that brought him there. This time he just didn't have a strong enough screenplay to support him but it should be very interesting to see where he decides to go next. You can say what you want about Cronenberg, but he's no sell-out. Eastern Promises could stand as a shining example of standard material being elevated by a great director and terrific performances to appear more important than it actually is. The film is far from perfect but you won't be able to look away, as much as you'll want to.