"Rise of the Guardians" is a new spin on some old-fashioned characters!

Copyright Dreamworks Animation

After being banished by the forces of good centuries before, the Boogeyman returns to terrorize the children of the world with fear. That is, unless a group of legendary protectors -- Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Sandman, and Jack Frost -- can band together to stop him, in Rise of the Guardians.

The story follows Jack Frost (Chris Pine) and his induction into The Guardians. A mischievous character, Jack is also a lonely boy with no memory of his former self. Regular people pass right through him as if he were a ghost; he simply yearns to be seen and believed in. When called upon by Santa, he is reluctant to join, but gets swept up in the action when he discovers that the Boogeyman (Jude Law), aka Pitch, may hold the key to unlocking his past.

Review: "Skyfall"

Image © Columbia Pictures and MGM

After 22 films, the James Bond franchise is a known commodity. That's exactly why some fans enjoy it. I wouldn't blame the filmmakers if they simply relied on a parade of beautiful women, tuxedos, martinis -- shaken, not stirred -- and the famous Aston Martin to land a few hundred million buck for the series' 50th Anniversary. Toss in a few action scenes and call it a day, right? Luckily, while all of those ingredients are included, this series is not simply reheating the same old dish for moviegoers. With excellent direction by Sam Mendes, and a terrific script by John Logan, Neal Purvis, and Robert Wade, Skyfall is able to pay homage to the familiar while creating something that also feels fresh.

The List of Six: Directors Who Could Tackle a New "Star Wars"

With today's news that Disney has reached an agreement to acquire Lucasfilm Ltd. and its subsidiaries for (roughly) $4.5 billion, Star Wars fans are in a frenzy. It was the simultaneous announcement that a new Star Wars film is being planned for 2015, however, that has created a buzz unlike anything I've seen before.

While the acquisition made new films inevitable (you don't buy a company just to capitalize on its past successes), it is a surprise to find out that the new trilogy of films will be based on Lucas' own story treatments for Episodes VII - IX. As Lucas is officially retiring next year, leaving the day-to-day operations to his Co-Chairman, Kathleen Kennedy, it is Kennedy who will be shepherding these new films to the screen as Executive Producer.

In a video that accompanied the press release, Kennedy and Lucas discussed the future of Star Wars, and revealed that they have been working on this for some time, already in the process of meeting with writers to develop scripts based on Lucas' treatments. Lucas will not direct the new films, but will continue to be involved as a Creative Consultant.

So the real mystery is, who will they get to direct the films? Will it be a different director for each movie, or will they entrust a single person for all three films? Regardless of what they choose to do, I think it's a safe bet that directors who already have a marquee name (Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, David Fincher, J.J. Abrams, Guillermo Del Toro, etc.) won't be involved for a variety of reasons. The Star Wars franchise is the star, for better or worse, and you're going to see a choice that is either an up-and-coming director, or someone from the world of animation, or special effects. Not to mention that with an already looming 2015 release date, the candidate will need to be available very soon. Here are six directors who might be a good fit . . .

Dave Filoni

Qualifications - Showrunner for the current Star Wars: Clone Wars television series

I don't watch the show, but Clone Wars has adamant defenders who say that it's what the prequels should have been. I don't actually see Filoni getting the job, but if you think this guy isn't going to toss his hat into the ring . . . you're crazy. Stranger things have happened too. He's well liked at Lucasfilm and with the Clone Wars coming to a close soon, his schedule should be open.

Thor Freudenthal

Qualifications: Hotel for Dogs, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, the upcoming Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

The dark horse on my list is a man named Thor. Other than sharing his name with a member of "Earth's Mightiest Heroes," Mr. Freudenthal is a man who will be on everyone's short list if the new Percy Jackson sequel is any good. Taking over an already-established franchise is never easy and he's going to have that experience under his belt. It will make Kathleen Kennedy look like a genius if she hires this guy and he pulls it off.

Shawn Levy

Qualifications - Night at the Museum, Real Steel

Levy cut his teeth by working on family films and television, and Real Steel is a great example of how the whole can exceed the sum of its parts. He was developing a remake of Fantastic Voyage for James Cameron and 20th Century Fox, but has left that project. His newest film, The Internship, with Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn, is already in the can, so he should be free to jump into Star Wars if given the chance. Plus, he's a USC graduate, which is Lucas' alma mater, and has rubbed elbows with George socially.

Genndy Tartakovsky

Qualifications: The original Clone Wars animated shorts, Samurai Jack, Hotel Transylvania

If anyone on the list is due for his live-action break, it's Mr. Tartakovsky. For years, he was developing a sequel to The Dark Crystal that never came to fruition. Judging by his work on Samurai Jack, it's evident that he understands how to handle mythology in storytelling, the dynamics between good and evil, and how to tell a story visually -- something that has always been important to the concept of Star Wars. He could be an inspired choice.

Brad Bird

Qualifications: The Iron Giant, The Incredibles, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol

Bird has the ability to balance action and story, but he's also proven that he can make a film with soul. Not convinced? Just check out the climactic scene of The Iron Giant.  Plus, he's only got one project that he's attached to at the moment, an earthquake film called 1906. That film is his baby, which means he can put it on hold indefinitely and not lose the rights. There may not be a better choice on the list. If you love Star Wars, Mr. Bird, the fans would like to draft you right away.

Rupert Wyatt

Qualifications: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Talk about a knock-'em dead surprise hit! No one expected Rise of the Planet of the Apes to be half as good as it was. Wyatt smartly put the story first, but was also able to integrate state-of-the-art character animation seamlessly. He recently exited the Apes sequel and has no future projects listed on IMDB right now. It would certainly be exciting to hear that Wyatt signed on to kick off a new trilogy.

************

Obviously, there are other good candidates out there, and some very interesting possibilities. Frank Darabont (The Shawshank Redemption, The Walking Dead) and Joe Johnston (Jurassic Park III, Captain America: The First Avenger) are established directors with ties to Lucasfilm. Rian Johnson (Looper), Duncan Jones (Source Code) and Neill Blomkamp (District 9) all come from a gritty, more independent background, and have made cool science fiction films recently. There's also somebody like Ben Affleck, who was rumored to be courted by Warner Brothers for a Justice League film. His filmography is solid and he's a total Star Wars fan. Chances are, it won't be any of these people, but it's always fun to speculate.

Who would be your top choice to make the next Star Wars? Discuss here on on facebook.

Review: "Dredd"

Fondly or not, many will remember the Sylvester Stallone version of Judge Dredd, but this new Dredd bears little resemblance to its predecessor. Pete Travis (Vantage Point) directs the film from a script by Alex Garland (Sunshine), based on the stories from British comic series "2000 A.D." Keeping things simple and contained, the filmmakers are able to find the right tone for this relaunch of the character, while providing plenty of action and gore. The result is lean, stylish, and solidly entertaining.

Dredd (Karl Urban) is the most famous and feared street judge in Mega-City One, a sprawling post-apocalyptic metropolis that runs from Boston to Washington D.C. He's paired up on a routine homicide call with a young rookie named Anderson (Olivia Thirlby). After arriving at a large high-rise apartment complex called Peach Trees -- which houses 75,000 residents -- and making a successful arrest, the two judges are targeted by Ma-Ma (Lena Headey), the city's most powerful drug kingpin. It turns out that the suspect Dredd has in custody, a man named Kay (Wood Harris), knows too much about Ma-Ma's organization to be taken alive. She shuts the building down and announces to the residents of Peach Trees that no one will be allowed in or out until the judges are dead, sending every gun-happy thug in the place after them.

The plot might seem very familiar to those who have seen the latest Indonesian import, The Raid: Redemption, another pulse-pounding, action film that features the same type of premise: good guys trapped in a high-rise building that is home to a drug lord and tons of unsavory people loyal to him. It's a fair comparison, but no more relevant than noting the similarities between Casablanca and Barb Wire.

Ma-Ma controls the distribution of the newest power-drug, called Slo-Mo, which creates the euphoric sensation that time is passing at one-tenth its normal speed. A lot of emphasis is placed on Slo-Mo in the film, with many scenes showcasing the effects of its use, but its real function is one of style -- a practical reason for the filmmakers to use tons of slow motion -- and if Ma-Ma was a heroin dealer, the story would not change. Dredd mentions to Anderson that he's heard of Slo-Mo, but the judges' are not there for Ma-Ma, nor are they waging a war on drugs. But, once the shooting begins, Dredd and Anderson have no choice but to fight it out, dispensing "justice" to anyone who crosses their path.

Urban, who wears a helmet covering most of his face throughout the entire film, brings Dredd to life through body language and attitude, grumbling through lines like a futuristic "Dirty" Harry Calahan. Dredd is a cold, but effective instrument of the law: seasoned, patient, and deadly. Anderson, on the other hand, is a potential liability in the field. Having not met the minimum requirements to become a judge, she is being given one last shot because of her psychic ability. Thirlby is a bright young actress who is careful to never overplay the young judge's weaknesses, and is given a few nice moments to shine. Headey has played tough characters in the past and does a nice job with the thinly-drawn Ma-Ma. With false teeth and a large scar on her face, she brings a surprising amount of menace to a female character in a testosterone-laden film where shooting someone six times in the chest is one of the tamest ways to die.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = B-

Review: "The Master"

Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood) doesn't make movies at a high rate of frequency, but when he does, the end result is always a film worth watching, dissecting, and discussing. His new film, The Master, stars Joaquin Phoenix as a struggling WWII veteran named Freddie, who is plagued by alcoholism and ruled by his most basic impulses. He is taken in by Lancaster Dodd, played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, the charismatic leader of a movement simply known as The Cause. Amy Adams is Dodd's wife, Peggy, a woman who clearly believes in her husband and his teachings, but is wary of his interest in and affection towards Freddie.

It has been much publicized that Dodd and The Cause are loosely based on L. Ron Hubbard and the early days of Scientology. While this is true, and there are some very specific references to the church, Anderson spends little time chronicling the rise of The Cause, instead focusing on these two men, each with his own struggles, coming together at the specific moment when they needed each other most. At least, that's what Anderson would lead you to believe. There is, however, a sense that the events in the film are simply a diversion -- a bump in the road of their personal journeys -- and the audience's satisfaction will vary regarding where the story leaves each man in the end.

The performances are nothing short of amazing though, which is something we've now grown to expect from a P.T. Anderson movie. Phoenix, especially, has taken Anderson's writing and created a shaggy, troubled, and stunted character that is impossible to look away from. The amount of mileage on his face is scary, and I can't imagine a world where he isn't nominated for an Oscar at the end of the year. Hoffman's work as Dodd is equally impressive; he displays a suave nature wrapped around a sometimes explosive rage, lashing out against anyone who would question him. Adams, the good wife, is always there to settle and refocus his energies. Hers is the performance that will garner the least praise, but the women who could keep up with such powerful acting heavyweights are few, and Adams deserves a lot of credit for keeping things interesting towards the end. The rest of the cast is filled with great supporting work from Jesse Plemons, Laura Dern, and Kevin J. O'Connor, among others.

From a technical standpoint, the film is nearly flawless, once again placing Anderson in an elite class of working filmmakers. Shot on large-format film and presented at select theaters in 70mm, The Master is visually breathtaking. Close ups of the actors' faces seem to capture shadow and light in truly remarkable ways, creating rich atmosphere and an almost noir-ish quality. The music by Johnny Greenwood brilliantly captures the edgy, unpredictability of the film, and the costume design and art direction capture the post-war era perfectly.

This is not a film concerned with moving story forward using traditional means. There is no formulaic point "A" to point "B" plot devices for comfort, or chases, guns, and explosions just to keep those with short-attention-spans interested. The Master is the work of a world-class filmmaker who refuses to give the audience any easy answers, challenging them to find meaning from the incidents onscreen. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure how I feel about the story, but ultimately the experience filled me with enough curiosity, emotion, and admiration to know with certainty that I'll be revisiting it very soon.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = A-

Review: "The Bourne Legacy"

Expanding on the idea that Jason Bourne's actions would set off a chain reaction of preventative cover ups within the intelligence community, The Bourne Legacy lies just outside the edges of the frame of the first three films, focusing on the elimination of agents from a different program called Outcome.

Jeremy Renner stars as Aaron Cross, aka Outcome #5, aka Kenneth Kitsom, a genetically enhanced operative who escapes elimination and is on the run from a government that feels it is easier to kill him than explain his existence. In order to stay in top physical and mental condition, Outcome agents must take a series of drugs that heighten their abilities, and Aaron is nearly out. He saves a scientist played by Rachel Weisz -- another of the intended casualties from the Bourne fallout -- with the hope that she can help him.

Many of the control-room characters from the previous installments make cameos in this film, but their presence is merely connective tissue, and has no relevance to the Aaron Cross story except to provide context. Edward Norton plays Eric Byer, the man charged with evaluating the risk, cleaning up the mess, and ultimately, shutting down the program. Norton has a knack for portraying intelligent, calculating characters with slightly grey morals, and his skills are put to good use here. As with the David Strathairn and Joan Allen characters from the previous films, he's not out in the field, but in an office, looking at images on computer screens -- emotionally detached from his targets. While the film makes an effort to tie the Norton and Renner characters together, the backstory seems unclear and the connection never pays off . . . at least, not in this film.

Tony Gilroy (Duplicity, Michael Clayton), who wrote all three previous Bourne pictures, directed the film, from a script he co-wrote. From a technical standpoint, the film is well made and continues in the tradition of the franchise with lots of handheld camerawork and fast-paced cutting -- less aggressive than Supremacy or Ultimatum, which were largely shaped by their director, Paul Greengrass -- but still recognizable as similar in style. Legacy most closely resembles the first film in the franchise, Doug Liman's The Bourne Identity, from the whispering, behind-closed-doors feeling of Norton's operation to the pseudo-romantic pairing of Renner and Weisz.

The film features top-notch stuntwork with plenty of gunplay, chase scenes, and hand-to-hand combat, and Renner is a capable action star (definitely one of his strengths), but you may not find Aaron Cross to be as likable as Jason Bourne. Although both characters have self-preservation in mind, Bourne's predicament was the result of his conscience -- a trait audiences love -- whereas Cross is just looking for his fix. Renner plays Cross as sympathetically as possible, but his only reason for fighting is to make sure his IQ doesn't drop if he misses his little blue pill -- not quite as admirable as doing the right thing.

The producers are hoping that this film will kick off another series of Bourne-less stories featuring Renner. While I don't mind the idea of what many are calling a side-quel, I really hope they can find a more compelling reason for Cross to get back into action than just "the government wants him dead." He needs a reason to come out of hiding; something that puts more of a good-guy streak into the character. In the end, fans who love the concept and style of the Bourne franchise will find some enjoyment in this picture, even if it's a "one step forward, two steps back" approach.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C+

Review: "Total Recall"

If you thought Total Recall (1990) needed updated effects and an abundance of overly long action scenes, then you will absolutely love Total Recall (2012), my friend. LOVE it.

Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a factory worker who travels through the planet's core everyday to a dead end job at the other end of a post-apocalyptic world. Even though he returns home each night to his beautiful wife, Lori (Kate Beckinsale), the feeling that he was meant for more gnaws at him constantly. He decides to visit Rekall, a company that specializes in memory implants, for a better-than-life dream vacation, but the experience goes awry, and Quaid becomes a wanted man -- unable to trust anyone, even his own memories. On the run from both the police and his wife, he is aided by Melina (Jessica Biel), a resistance fighter who may be the key to discovering who he really is.

Len Wiseman, who directed the first two Underworld movies and Live Free or Die Hard, takes the helm for this remake of Paul Verhovan's 1990 film, which starred Arnold Schwarzenegger. Wiseman is  a nuts-and-bolts action director with a dark and gritty visual sense and a fairly straightforward shooting style that is free from heavy reliance on shakey camerawork. That's a plus, but while the action scenes are confident, they are often overly long. During one particular scene that involved a fight sequence where the characters are jumping between a series of elevators moving in every direction, my mind wandered, and I couldn't stop thinking, "where could all these elevators possibly be going?"

The story, inspired by Philip K. Dick's "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale," has tons of potential to be mind-bending and keep the audience guessing, but instead, the film settles for being just a propulsive action flick. There's nothing wrong with good action-for-action's-sake filmmaking (see The Raid: Redemption), but you don't need Dick's story to do that. Go write your own futuristic secret agent movie and leave the intellectual science fiction to filmmakers who are interested in telling those stories. The fact that Wiseman references Blade Runner (another, better Philip K. Dick adaptation) throughout the film, only makes me wonder how he could be such a big fan of that film and never learn anything from watching it.

In the end, Total Recall (2012) is not as guilty of being a bad movie as it is of being a missed opportunity, a waste of good material. I wouldn't begrudge anyone for enjoying the film for its slick visuals and nonstop action, or for Kate Beckinsale's now-textbook female terminator performance, but I can't wholly recommend it because it takes a smart premise with interesting ideas and ignores them, while the actors chase each other around and around and around.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C-

Review: "Moonrise Kingdom"

In Moonrise Kingdom, two 12-year olds, Sam (Jared Gilman) and Suzy (Kara Hayward), run away together during the summer of 1965. Sam's scoutmaster (Edward Norton), Suzie's parents (Bill Murray and Frances McDormand), and the town's police captain (Bruce Willis) are frantically searching for the two puppy-lovers as a huge storm approaches their small island community.

This is a meticulously crafted picture from Wes Anderson, the director of Rushmore, The Royal Tennenbaums, and Fantastic Mr. Fox -- all films that share a thematic connection to this new picture. In a way, it seems that Moonrise Kingdom is the culmination of more than a decade of filmmaking by Anderson, both as an exercise in style and as an exploration of the dysfunctional relationships between children and their parents.

The adult cast is uniformly good with Norton being the standout. He understands the cadence of Anderson's style, and it would not surprise me to see them collaborate again in the future. Bill Murray and Frances McDormand are as reliable as ever, and Bruce Willis may surprise you with his empathetic performance. Jason Schwartzman, Tilda Swinton, and Harvey Keitel also have small roles and are very enjoyable for their short time on screen.

Visually impressive, Anderson approaches every frame of film like a blank canvas, filling it in like a painter would. His camera movement and compositions are precise, and the costumes, set design, and music are all carefully chosen. One gets a sense that he agonizes over every detail, from the way a character hangs a cigarette out of his mouth to the choice of font and color for every title credit.

If there is a failing to Moonrise Kingdom, and Anderson's films in general, it is that his authorial stamp has been increasingly squeezing the spontaneity out of the performances, to the point where everyone is playing the straight-man in a film where the audience is dying to see someone acknowledge the ridiculousness. Even the kids are emotionless -- more like mini-adults than children. It's kind of cute when it's Macaulay Culkin in Uncle Buck, grilling John Candy with question after question, but when the entire cast behaves that way for the whole movie . . . it can be slightly off-putting.

I still loved the movie, but it won't change your mind about Wes Anderson as a filmmaker. His work has such a specific taste and style that the stories may change, but the feeling you get sitting through each one remains a consistent experience. If you love Anderson's films for that handmade, meticulously crafted quality, I highly recommend Moonrise Kingdom, a film that is perhaps the director's magnum opus, even if it's not his best movie (Rushmore still wears the crown).

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = B+

Review: "Safety Not Guaranteed"

A curious ad in the personal section of a local newspaper spurs three magazine staffers to investigate the man who placed it. Jeff (Jake Johnson) is the writer who proposes checking into the ad as a potential humor piece. He brings along Darius (Aubrey Plaza) and Arnau (Karan Soni), two interns that he can push the workload onto, while he uses the trip to reconnect with an old girlfriend. With little difficulty, the two interns track down Kenneth (Mark Duplass), a damaged, but likable supermarket employee who is looking for a companion to travel back in time with.

Nothing works out the way each character expects and what begins as a funny, little human-interest story turns out to have a significant impact on all their lives. Darius poses as a candidate for Kenneth's time-traveling adventure in order to get Jeff the story, but what should be easy to dismiss as crazy is not, and Kenneth begins to win her over. Aubrey Plaza and Mark Duplass aren't your typical romantic comedy pairing, but that helps lend itself to the underdog quality of the film.

Combining elements from many genres -- science fiction, drama, comedy, romance, paranoid conspiracy thriller -- with an off-beat indie sensibility, this is a nice debut feature from director Colin Trevorrow and writer Derek Connolly that keeps you guessing until the very end. Plaza, Duplass, and Johnson are terrific -- all finding the humor, the heartbreak, and the humanity in these characters, who are all heavily shaped by regret. I especially like that Jeff and Kenneth are two sides of the same coin, both longing for a second chance at happiness -- desperately looking to the past as a way to change their future.

Funny, charming, even suspenseful at times, Safety Not Guaranteed reminds us that there are no sure bets in life, love, or time travel.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = B+

Review: "Seeking a Friend for the End of the World"

After man's last ditch effort to stop it has failed, a gigantic meteor is going to collide with our planet, destroying all life on Earth. The end of days is quickly approaching. What will you do with the last few weeks of your life? That is the subject of the new film, Seeking a Friend for the End of the World, starring Steve Carell and Keira Knightley.

Dodge (Carell) is alone; his wife ran out on him as soon as the news broke -- presumably to spend her final days with someone else -- and although his friends want to set him up with someone so that he won't be alone, Dodge can't get over his wife leaving him. He meets Penny (Knightley), a young British girl who lives in the same apartment building, and the two form an unlikely bond. She has missed the last commercial airplane flight back to her home and may never see her family again.

Whereas the rest of planet Earth seems to be treating their final time as a cross between the free love of the late 1960's and the chaos of the L.A. riots, Dodge and Penny are seemingly alone in their loneliness. So when Dodge decides to take a chance on tracking down an old flame, he strikes a deal with Penny -- if she helps him get to where he needs to be, he will help her find a way back to her family before the world ends.

The phrase "opposites attract" is certainly something that has been proven true in the past, both onscreen and off, but the likelihood of these two people getting together is so small that it puts a lot of pressure on the film (and performers) to make it believable. Unfortunately, it's not. It doesn't help that Dodge is the least interesting character in the entire movie. He's closed off, bruised, awkward socially -- a doormat, hoping to be as anonymous as possible -- just a minor variation of the same character Carell has played in many films before (Dan in Real Life, The 40-year old Virgin, Crazy Stupid Love), only this time he has even less to do, less to say, and is simply less engaging overall.

Also, the movie never finds a consistent tone, wavering between sentimentality, both lighthearted and broad humor, and brief stings of deadly seriousness. It's asking a lot of an audience to swing in that many directions and would take an extremely seasoned filmmaker to link those together. First-time director Lorene Scafaria (who adapted the screenplay for Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist, a film that really masters its tone) is ambitious to take on such a task, but not wholly successful at doing so here.

There are funny and touching moments in the film that work individually, but Seeking a Friend for the End of the World never seems to gel as a whole or connect its characters in anything other than a circumstantial way. I give it points for trying, but it would have been better to stick to heartbreaking with a touch of comedy (or just go completely outrageous). Instead, the film is at best a sometimes charming, sometimes funny film, or at worst, a sometimes dull and often predictable mess.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C-

Review: "Ted"

A young boy with no friends wishes for his teddy bear to come to life so they can be best friends forever, and magically, that's exactly what happens. Ted (voiced by "Family Guy" creator Seth MacFarlane) and John (Mark Wahlberg) grow up playing together, being Thunder-Buddies for life, and later on . . . drinking, getting high, and partying together. John strikes gold when he meets Lori (Mila Kunis), a beautiful young woman and a successful professional who for some reason doesn't seem to mind that John has zero career potential and spends most of his time getting baked and watching Flash Gordon with Ted. After four years, however, Lori finally wants more, and the couple is ready to take their relationship to the next level, but John's friendship with Ted will threaten to tear them apart.

MacFarlane, who also co-wrote and directed the movie, is hilarious as Ted, and the film will certainly appeal to fans of his work on "Family Guy." If being funny is all you need out of a movie, Ted has plenty of laughs to get by on, including a guessing game that provides Wahlberg a chance to make the Micro-Machine Man proud, a hysterical hotel room brawl, and the two partying with their favorite celebrity -- a cameo that will delight fans of a particular eighties camp-classic. Ted is raunchy and irreverent, a comedy that insults every single possible demographic, using language that would make Andrew Dice Clay howl with laughter.

From a more critical perspective, Ted features strong writing, but throws in two unnecessary attempts at creating a villain for the piece and falls apart in the last act. In the end, it's just another lazy comedy with no real consequences for its characters' actions. A film that represents the reality for a growing number of people who are working dead-end jobs and perpetually avoiding adulthood, Ted has keenly observed its target audience, but has nothing of value to say to them.  Like John and Ted, the film has no ambition except to have a good time.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C+

Review: "Brave"

Merida is a headstrong princess, who prefers the free life of a warrior to the discipline and etiquette that comes from the life of a future queen. Her father, Fergus, encourages her and takes pride in his daughter's spirited nature, while her mother, Elinor, is attempting to prepare her for the expectations that come with nobility. This is frustrating for Merida, creating friction between the two women and a longing by Merida to somehow change her mother's traditional way of thinking. It is this contentious relationship with her mother, which will set in motion a series of events that will irrevocably change the two of them forever.

The marketing campaign for Brave has avoided spoiling the mid-movie twist at all costs, so I will not do so here, but like Wall*E, this film is sort of split down the middle, with the first half building towards one pivotal moment that will springboard the story into a new direction. The previews and TV spots have hinted at a larger thematic canvas, one filled with magic, myths, and legends, using quotes from the film that contain words like "fate" and "destiny," which I found to be a bit misleading. If you are expecting this to be The Great Pixar Fantasy Movie, you will be disappointed.

Brave is really about identity, how we hold our identity dear and the fear of losing that identity. Merida is afraid of getting married because she views it as something that does not fit who she is and how she sees herself. The fairy tale twist takes the character of Elinor, and places her into a situation where she also fears the loss of her own identity, while simultaneously placing the two of them in grave danger. As a result, they will both see each other in a new light as the film races towards its epic conclusion.

While it is commendable that the film does not fall into a typical fairy tale mold, relying on a romantic prince to save the day, that's actually part of the problem. Merida is a strong character, but the second half twist renders her defiant traits almost completely irrelevant to the story being told. Also, with so much time spent building her up as an archer, Merida's sensational skill with a bow is never a factor during the final stretch. With the exception of providing a resolution to the mother-daughter spat, the second half pays off none of what is set-up in the first half.

Is Merida fated to be like her mother, or is she destined to be something else? This is really a red herring because the film isn't interested in answering that, and the story takes a dramatic turn into territory where those questions no longer matter. Ultimately, Brave has, at its center, a strong character with which to tell a story, but its story falls short of being worthy of that character.

Story issues and production troubles aside (originally titled "The Bear and the Bow," Brave underwent significant rewrites, and the original director, Brenda Chapman, was ousted and replaced with Mark Andrews), the film is still able to deliver strong characters, solid laughs, and amazing visuals. This is a film that will most likely appeal to children in much the same way that the later Shrek films did, but may be just as disappointing to adults. The first half of Brave is very promising, but the second half feels like a different film altogether, one filled with uncharacteristic silliness, slapstick comedy, and a soft-serve "careful what you wish for" moral goo at its center.

Whether it's fair or not, we have very high expectations for each new Pixar film. That is what you get when you consistently produce exemplary product. Their past successes have elevated material beyond what was thought possible. Like Brave, both Toy Story 2 and Ratatouille were famously "in trouble" before their release, only to be triumphant -- commercially and critically -- upon release. This is the first film they've made that feels interchangeable with the typical Disney and Dreamworks animated efforts -- two studios that have raised their game recently (Tangled from Disney, How To Train Your Dragon from Dreamworks), in an effort to compete with Pixar.

It's not going to get any easier for them either. With two key members of the company's core creative team moving on to live-action moviemaking (Brad Bird - Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, Andrew Stanton - John Carter), and John Lasseter now heading Disney's animation, Pixar needs to show us that they can find new storytellers who can uphold the legacy of the company. Unfortunately, Brave is a misstep that they will need to learn from. 

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C

Review: "Rock of Ages"

Based on the broadway smash hit, Rock of Ages is that all-too familiar story about a small town girl with dreams of making it in the big city. Sherrie (Julianne Hough) leaves Oklahoma for Hollywood where she meets Drew (Diego Boneta), an aspiring singer working at the biggest club on the Sunset Strip, where the legendary rock group, Arsenal, is ready to light up the stage for one final show.

It's hard to believe that in 1987, the year the story takes place, moral crusaders would still be trying to put an end to the "evil of rock 'n roll" -- especially since gangster rap was getting big at this time -- but the mayor's wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones) wants to clean up the streets and shut down the club. Her protesting seems much more appropriate for a 1950's era story, rather than this nostalgic look at the late 1980's hair band era, but she is also driven by a personal vendetta against Arsenal's front-man, Stacee Jaxx (Tom Cruise).

The club's owner (Alec Baldwin) and manager (Russell Brand) are depending on the big show to help rescue their business from looming debt, but Jaxx's manager (Paul Giamatti) is hard at work screwing them out of the take. If Zeta-Jones' character represents the puritanical opposition towards the rock 'n roll lifestyle, Giamatti's character is definitely the opportunistic devil inside. He's pulling triple duty by screwing the club, leeching off of Stacee, and trying to lure Drew into selling his soul for a chance at fame.

The musical numbers are supposed to be the highlight of a movie like this, but while numerous, the retooled versions of classic eighties hits from Poison, Def Leppard, Journey, Foreigner, and Twisted Sister among others, have lost their original punch. Also, the Glee-style mash-ups -- where two songs are sung together -- only work well once, as Zeta-Jones belts out "We're Not Gonna Take It" against Russell Brand's rendition of "We Built This City."

Lackluster musical numbers aside, the film's real failing is not developing the romance between Sherrie and Drew enough. Hough and Boneta are fine performers, but their story is thin, and stretched out "like butter over too much bread." You may be rooting against Giamatti's or Zeta-Jones' characters, but you're never pulling for the young couple to be together, the way you do for Danny and Sandy in Grease, for example.

The best scenes in the film belong to Cruise, who is electric as Stacee Jaxx. Looking back at that famous scene in Risky Business, where he dances in his underwear, it may have only been a matter of time before Cruise ended up in a musical. His version of a burnt-out rocker past his prime, finally having some truth thrown in his face by a young Rolling Stone reporter (Malin Ackerman), is the reason to see the film (if you see it at all). It's a character type that Cruise has never played, and he seems to have a lot of fun in these smaller roles (remember Magnolia and Tropic Thunder?). There's an intensity to his scenes with Ackerman that the rest of the film never manages to duplicate.

Musicals are few and far between these days, so it would be easy to get swept up in the nostalgia of Rock of Ages, but the film favors jamming in a few too many songs, and taking a less-is-more approach to the story. The experience is comparable to watching a well-meaning cover band . . . the notes are in the right place and the words are in the right order, but it just feels a bit lacking.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C -

Review: "Turn Me On, Dammit!"

Alma (Helene Bergsholm) is a sex-obsessed, 15 year-old girl living in Skoddenheimen, Norway. Her mother (Henriette Steenstrup) is at wit's end, not knowing just what to do about Alma's constant self-gratification and escalating phone sex bills. Saralou (Malin Bjorhovde), Alma's schoolmate and best friend, wants to move to Texas in order to fight against capital punishment, and writes letters to death-row inmates in her spare time. The two girls envy Saralou's sister, who at college in the big city of Oslo, and have such contempt for their small town that they routinely flip-off the road sign with its name as they ride by it each day on the school bus.

Alma has a crush on the boy down the road, Artur (Matias Myren,) who suggestively pokes her with his naked, male body part at a party one night. What might seem like a dream come true for her turns out to be awkward and unromantic. When Alma returns to her friends with the embarrassing details, the others don't believe her, and Artur denies it when confronted. She is branded a liar and ostracized to the point where even Saralou can't be seen with "dick-Alma."

A film with the title, Turn Me On, Dammit!, may sound like it would be full of graphic material, but it's handled in a sweet, playful way, with very little nudity or actual sex. Alma may be thinking about sex just as often as a boy would, but isn't getting any more action than her sex-crazed, teenage male counterparts. Her hilarious daydreams (featuring just about anyone) feature lots of explicit talk -- things she's used to hearing on the phone-sex line -- but stop short of her getting physical with anyone, except Artur, who appears in much more romantic fantasies.

It's not surprising that the film's director, Jannicke Systad Jacobsen, comes from a background in documentary filmmaking (this is her first narrative feature); the visual style is naturalistic and she uses non-actors to fill many key roles, which helps give the film its realistic feeling. Turn Me On, Dammit! is a sensitive, but funny look at a subject that is rarely handled well (or at all) in American film: the burgeoning sex drive of a teenage girl. Too often, all we get is the subject from the male point of view, with the perspective that "scoring" is an exclusively male agenda.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = B+

Review: "Snow White and the Huntsman"

The second Snow White film of the year arrived in theaters this week and it couldn't be further apart in tone from Tarsem's Mirror Mirror, which starred Julia Roberts as the evil queen and Lily Collins as Snow White. Whereas that film was light and comedic, Snow White and the Huntsman is a dark, visually rich, full-blown fantasy that strives to come much closer to its Grimm beginnings.

Locked up in a castle tower ever since her kingly father was killed, Snow White (Kristen Stewart) is at the mercy of her stepmother Ravenna (Charlize Theron), an evil queen with supernatural powers. The queen is obsessed with youth and threatened by anyone whose beauty could surpass her own, so when her magic mirror slaps her in the face with the old "you are no longer the fairest" bit, she must literally eat Snow White's heart in order to retain her immortality.

Snow escapes, however, and is chased into the dark forest, where the queen's men are too afraid to follow. Enter the titular huntsman (Chris Hemsworth - playing it like a blue collar version of his character, Thor), who is forced by the queen to capture and return Snow for the queen's heart-y feast. Of course, no one could resist the charms of Kristen Stewart (Ahhahahahahaha!), and the huntsman quickly becomes her protector as they navigate the dangers ahead.

It isn't until the second half of the film that we get our first glimpse of the dwarves, who, in a bit of Benjamin Button-style trickery, are played by some very recognizable non-dwarfs (with Bob Hoskins, Ian McShane, Toby Jones, Eddie Marsan, and Nick Frost among them). Also arriving late in the story is William (Sam Claflin), the son of a nobleman and a childhood friend of Snow White's, who hopes to rescue and marry her. Unfortunately, for both the dwarves and William, as the film rolls to its final act, there isn't much for them to do, and it feels as if they're simply there to be checked off the list of required fairy tale characters. Since the huntsman easily serves that double role of protector and love interest, the best scenario would have been to cut William out of the story completely.

Charlize Theron is outstanding as the soul-sucking, wrinkle-obsessed, vampiric Ravenna. She plays the obsession, paranoia, and madness to extreme levels, but there's also a modicum of real-world hurt underneath it all. In many ways, she's a sad character, trapped within a cycle she cannot break free of. On the flip side of that, Kristen Stewart is serviceable in the title role, but is never able to fully convince the audience to believe in her the way the characters in the story do unreservedly. Whereas the queen does some pretty terrible things, our heroine never really does anything equally good. Dramatically, the filmmakers are relying on us to project our idea of purity and goodness onto her.

There's a lot of imagination on display from first-time director, Rupert Sanders, who almost overcomes the poorly-crafted screenplay with his impressive visuals. The design work that went into the dark forest, the queen's army, the magic mirror, and the fairy-meadow are all standouts that help the film wow the audience in the way that a fantasy movie should. Snow White and the Huntsman takes itself seriously, and while there are a few moments of levity, it maintains a consistent tone and keeps things moving with a sense of urgency.


"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C+

Review: "Men in Black 3"

A dangerous criminal named Boris "The Animal" (Jermaine Clement) escapes a top-secret lunar prison forty years after Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) put him there. He's come back to Earth to seek vengeance on K for shooting his arm off, putting him in prison, and causing the extinction of his race. His intention is not just to kill K, but to travel back in time to 1969, the year K put him behind bars, in order to reverse those events completely. 

Boris' plan is successful, and Agent J (Will Smith) wakes up one morning to a world where K has been dead for forty years. Just as soon as J can piece things together, an invasion by Boris' now non-extinct race threatens to destroy Earth. In order to save his partner and stop the invasion, Agent J must also travel back to 1969 to help the younger Agent K (Josh Brolin) defeat Boris and restore the timeline.

There's a lot that works in the film. The whole sixties setting is rich with period detail; from the props, cars, and costumes to the sweet retro designs used for alien visitors at MIB headquarters; and the film's finale takes place at Cape Kennedy for the launch of Apollo 11, which is a nice touch. Boris is easily the best villain in the series, and Brolin is having a lot of fun being less of a stick-in-the-mud than Tommy Lee. His younger K is able to retain the curtness of Jones' manner without the stuffiness.

What doesn't work as well is the dumb movie-logic that the filmmakers employ to keep this train on the rails. There are at least two major (MAJOR) plot points that stick out like a sore thumb with a few little leaps of faith thrown in for good measure. Not to mention an ending that slathers on an emotional payoff that isn't fully earned, using one minor throwaway character to give deeper understanding to another main character, that provides emotional closure for a different character. Are you following? No? Well, now you know how I felt watching the film. 

Ultimately, MIB3 doesn't make the case for a MIB4, but it is better than MIB2, although not as good as the original MIB. If you're a Men in Black fan, go see it. If you're a die-hard Will Smith fan, go see it. If you are debating between this film and Battleship, see MIB3. If you're just looking for the best two hours at your local cineplex this summer . . . go see The Avengers.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C

35 years of "Star Wars"

Star Wars was the first movie I ever saw at a theater. The second half of a drive-in double bill, my parents piled the family into a rusty old baby blue station wagon and set off, not knowing that it would change me forever. There are flashes – images from that night – that are so clear to me even now. I was bopping up and down with excitement in the back seat as the film played. The laser bolts, spaceships, robots, and aliens captured my imagination like nothing else before or since.

After that night, I spent most of my time with Star Wars. I had the toys. I had the lightsaber. I had the posters, tee shirts, bed sheets, curtains, lunchbox, notebooks, pencils, comic books and records. You name it, I probably convinced my parents somehow to get it for me. It was easy because it was so popular that the merchandise was everywhere, but I wouldn’t have cared if everyone else hated it. I lived it . . . breathed it . . . LOVED it!!!

Although there is photographic evidence of me dressing as a cowboy or Superman or Spiderman for Halloween, it seemed like I was Darth Vader about ten years in a row. In fact, sometimes I’d just dress up like Vader for the heck of it. I just liked being in the costume.

Before you could reasonably buy a VHS copy of Star Wars, we taped it off television, with the commercials, and I ruined that video by playing it so often. Daily, I think. For a while, I kept track of how many times I had watched it, but stopped . . . somewhere around four hundred. Needless to say, I was obsessed.

As I grew older, and the years passed after the release of Return of the Jedi, other interests popped up, of course. The toys went into boxes and were placed in the attic or basement, but the love for Star Wars was always there. Occasionally, I would meet someone and discover that they also had a passion for “a galaxy far, far away,” and talking about it with them or just quoting it with friends was a great joy.

Although there were times when it seemed that Star Wars would never return to mainstream popularity, of course, it did. The novels and comic books picked back up around 1992, and their success showed that we were waiting and hungry for more; the fans had never let go.

I dug out all my old toys and displayed them on a bookcase in my bedroom. I started collecting the few new items around, but that wasn’t enough, so I began going around to antique dealers, comic shops, and flea markets looking for more Star Wars. I amassed quite a collection of vintage products still in their original packages. Around 1995, a new series of Kenner action figures came out, the original films were re-released on VHS “one last time,” and George Lucas announced that he would once again be returning to the director’s chair to continue the series.

It was at that point that everything was kicked into hyper-drive. The Special Edition Trilogy was released in 1997 with new scenes and improved special effects, and the prequels went into production with the first new film to debut in 1999. Once again, Star Wars was everywhere . . . and I couldn’t have been happier. I chose to stop collecting in 1999 after seeing the sheer volume of products that were going to come out for Episode I, but once in a while, when the situation presented itself to get something really cool, I may have picked up an item or two since then. Peter Pan’s not the only one who never wants to grow up.

From that point on, it’s kind of a blur. Adulthood does that to you, I suppose. I have some terrific memories from the prequel era and wouldn’t trade that experience for anything. “Haters” be damned! I love the prequels, even if it’s for what they gave me more than for what they are. And that’s really how I feel about Star Wars in general; I cherish the shared experiences that I’ve had with some pretty awesome people (you all know who you are) and for that, as much as for the movies themselves, I think I owe George Lucas a big hug if I ever meet him.


Thirty-five years really crept up on us, didn't it? Well, it did for me, at least. I used to think that I'd write a book one day about memories growing up in the Star Wars generation. Maybe I'll still get around to that, but for now, sharing these few thoughts today seemed appropriate. 

"The force is strong with this one."

Review: Tim Burton's "Dark Shadows"

The very idea of Tim Burton tackling a movie based on Dark Shadows -- the trailblazing soap opera that included vampires, witches, and ghosts -- with Johnny Depp starring as the main vampire character, seems like a perfect match of filmmaker, star, and material.

After all, Depp and Burton had made seven previous films together that all seem to run to the slightly twisted, darker side; movies that are filled with demon barbers, headless horsemen, and the like. While I have mixed feelings about their body of work together, there is no denying that Depp has been the peanut butter to Burton's jelly over the years. They obviously share a passion for this type of material and their output has yielded some of Burton's most successful films and some of Depp's most memorable creations.

In this newest collaboration, Depp plays Barnabas Collins, a man of wealth and privilege who is brought to America when his family expands their fishing business. After he spurns the advances of a young servant named Angelique (Eva Green,) his family is cursed, his fiance commits suicide, and he is transformed into a vampire. Convinced that Angelique is a witch and responsible for this recent turn of events, he confronts her, only to be locked away and buried alive for nearly 200 years. When he is accidentally unearthed in the 1970's, Barnabas returns to the Collins estate, only to discover that his family has fallen on hard times, and that Angelique has built a rival company that has essentially put them out of business.

What follows is a series of underdeveloped plots and subplots, including Angelique's advances towards Barnabas and her attempts to crush the Collins family business; the arrival of Victoria Winters (Bella Heathcote) who may or may not be a reincarnation of Barnabas' lost love; the attempts by Dr. Julia Hoffman (Helena Bonham Carter) to cure Barnabas of his vampirism; and Barnabas' attempts to adapt to 1970's American culture. The list goes on and on. It's simply more than any two-hour movie could satisfactorily juggle, and some characters and plotlines are anemic or lost altogether.

Depp's over-the-top characters can often leave other performers behind, but Green is up to the challenge, and she has no difficulty holding her own as Barnabas and Angelique go toe-to-toe. They work well together, and seem to be having a lot of fun in the process. Green is tuned in to the right frequency -- her grinchy smile eerily resembles something akin to the characters in Burton's animated works -- and the movie benefits from having a strong adversary for Depp, who is at his quirky best. That scene from the trailer, where the two destroy a room during a supernatural love-making session, is one of the film's highlights.

I also enjoyed Michele Pfeiffer's work as Elizabeth Collins Stoddard. She's cunning and gutsy, a willing partner to Barnabas, but strong enough not to blindly give up her role as head of the family after he returns. (Attention Hollywood: Pfeiffer should be working more often.) The rest of the cast -- including Chloe Grace Moretz as Carolyn Stoddard, the angst-y teenage daughter of Elizabeth; Johnny Lee Miller and Gulliver McGrath as Roger Collins and his son, David, who are both trying to get over the recent death of David's mother in their own ways; and Jackie Earl Haley as the family caretaker, Willie Loomis -- are good, but underused.

The film builds to a wild finale that is just plain ridiculous. It discards characters left and right -- missing one important character almost entirely and making a key revelation about another seem like a punchline -- as it attempts to tie up all the loose ends in the story. I can't imagine being a fan of the original series would've made it play any better. It didn't ruin the film for me, but it didn't end on a high note either. Ultimately, fans of Burton and Depp will find enough to enjoy in spite of the film's shortcomings; Dark Shadows is flawed, but executed with flair. There are some great visuals, and Burton keeps the tone playfully between Sleepy Hollow and Beetlejuice, which kept me entertained even as I scratched my head over the narrative choices and storytelling blunders along the way.

"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = C

Review: "Lovely Molly"

I'm not a huge horror fan and don't devour everything in the genre. I usually wait until I hear great buzz on a horror film before seeing something because there's so much out there (especially in this genre) that's just poorly made and exploitative. This film was recommended by a friend who was close to the production and saw an early cut. When the Maryland Film Festival included it as part of their late night programming, I couldn't resist checking it out. Did it live up to my friend's hype? Absolutely. I'm glad he's beating the drum for this little film because it's smart, stylish, and scary.

Lovely Molly was directed by Eduardo Sanchez, one half of the creative team that began the found footage horror craze with The Blair Witch Project back in 1999. While this film isn't bound by the same stylistic conventions, it does playfully acknowledge them by beginning the film the same way "Blair Witch" did - with the videotaped confession of a terrified young girl - in this case, Molly.

Molly (Gretchen Lodge) and her husband, Tim (Johnny Lewis,) are newlyweds who have just moved into her family's old country home after years of vacancy. What would normally be a place of comfort and fond memories for most people begins to stir something darker within Molly and unusual things start to occur immediately after they've settled in. Once it begins to go beyond the typical strange noises and open doors, Molly is convinced that the house is haunted. Since she has had mental health issues and problems with drug abuse in the past, neither Tim nor her sister, Hannah (Alexandra Holden,) believe that she is being tormented by a malicious spirit; they think she's either using again or ready for the looney bin.

Gretchen Lodge as Molly

The filmmakers are careful not to let the film be dragged down by over-explaining things. They allow Molly's backstory to come into focus gradually by doling out the exposition sparingly, and using plenty of visual cues in place of it where they can. It's an effective, intelligent approach that works by giving characters and the audience time to react to what's happening with each new revelation.

The film has drawn comparisons to last year's creepy hit Insidious, but while both films strive to make you squirm rather than squeal, Lovely Molly has a grittier, more independent feel. It also recalls the supernatural horror of the seventies - films like Rosemary's Baby and The Entity - where the female victims were usually dismissed as being crazy.

Like those films, the success of Lovely Molly hinges on the performance of a young female lead and Gretchen Lodge delivers a strong performance. The story begins with Molly as the picturesque young bride; a woman with a wonderful new life ahead of her. As the evil asserts itself, however, she slowly transforms into a deeply disturbed, possibly possessed, degenerate - capable of unspeakable deeds - and Lodge is game for everything the film requires of her.

The lighting, camerawork, sound, and pacing are solid. It's pretty lean filmmaking, actually. What the film lacks is that striking imagery that really sticks with you. Ultimately, that's a minor complaint though; I felt it was hitting the right notes and pushing the right buttons. The film is a slow burn, more focused on creating uneasiness and keeping you off-balance than making you jump out of your seat. It's confident, moody, and features a fearless performance by its young lead. Fans who prefer tons of gore and loads of laughter in their horror may find that Lovely Molly isn't their thing, but for those who enjoy a nice, tense, supernatural yarn with a little heft . . . it may be just the ticket.


"Setting the Frame" Film Grade = B

Review: "American Reunion"

After 13 years, two sequels, and a string of direct to video spinoffs, American Reunion brings the American Pie series to the finish line, coasting on fumes. With a healthy dose of nineties nostalgia, it brings all the key players from the original film back for another helping of bad behavior, half-witted hijinks, and uncomfortable father-son chats.

Time has been mostly kind to the young actors, who seem to have no problems getting back into character for one more go at it. Jason Biggs and Alyson Hannigan return as Jim and Michelle, who have been in a sexual rut since their son was born. The reunion gives them a chance to get away from the daily grind in an attempt to rekindle some passion. Eddie Kaye Thomas' character Finch has been traveling the world, but somehow finds his way back to East Great Falls for the event. This go-round he's finding love with an old classmate and leaving the memory of Stiffler's mom behind him. Sean William Scott has had (arguably) the most success of the original "Pie" gang and after seeing him in so many films since, I have gained a little more respect for how he gleefully wears "The Stifmeister" like a dirty t-shirt that he has to constantly rescue from his mother's trash can. Stifler's in-your-face personality served him well as the popular high school jock, but is making life a bit difficult for him as he serves as the low man on the corporate totem pole. Thomas Ian Nicholas and Tara Reid are back as Kevin and Vicki, but neither one has much to do here. Like some of the more peripheral characters (Sherman, Nadia, etc.) they're really here just so the film can boast that the whole gang is back. Chris Klein skipped out on American Wedding, but returns here as Oz, the hunky sportscaster with GQ looks and an "aw shucks" softer side that the women really go for. He seems to have the life he always wanted, but a part of him has never gotten over Mena Suvari's character, Heather, who has also returned, new boyfriend in tow for the gang's 13th reunion.

What school has a 13th reunion anyway? The original film did come out in 1999, but it bugged me a little that they felt the need to be so literal about the passage of time. If they had waited one more week, they could've released the film on Friday the 13th to drive the point home. That may have been more fitting because at one point during the film, while the characters are at a high school party talking about Twilight around a campfire, I was literally hoping that Jason Vorhees would show up and use this aging group of turds-and-nerds as target practice, Crystal Lake style.

I digress.

This is one of those series that has bought into its own formula and if you've seen the first one, you already know what to expect. Sort of like comedic comfort food for the "millennium teens," I suppose. The characters haven't changed any, which is a shame, because the fascinating thing about reconnecting with old friends is seeing how they've grown and become different versions of the people you once knew. There's a half dozen different ways they could've made this picture more interesting, but Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg, the duo responsible for both writing and directing the picture, didn't have enough confidence to bring much fresh material to the project. It would've been nice if they had allowed the movie to grow up a bit with the audience, giving viewers the chance to empathize with characters who are just figuring out how quickly time flies, and that adulthood kinda sucks.

What you're left with is a missed opportunity, a movie that has some funny moments and will feel cozy and familiar to those who love the first film, but won't leave you with anything more memorable than the second and third installments. While the film does leave open the possibility of more "reunions," its ending does feel like a conclusion to the series in many ways. If, however, the film is an overwhelming box office success, we could be in for American Pie: The Musical or Divorce American Pie Style. Unlikely though, as the film offers us nothing more than a piece of the same old pie.

Review: GOON

Doug Glatt (Seann William Scott) is one of those guys you love to have on your side. He's not especially bright, but he's easy-going, tough as nails, and loyal to his friends. He works as a bouncer in a local bar and likes to hang out with his pal, Ryan (Jay Baruchel), who hosts a public access television show about hockey called "Hot Ice." While attending a semi-pro game one night, Ryan's heckling gets Doug involved in an altercation where he knocks a player out cold. As a result, Doug gets a call for a tryout to be the team's "enforcer" - the guy whose job is to hit hard and sacrifice himself for the good of the team. Although he is a terrible hockey player, Doug excels at fighting, and his reputation quickly earns him a contract with the Halifax Highlanders, a farm team for the NHL.

Life becomes more complicated for Doug after arriving in Halifax. Although he feels that his life finally has purpose, his parents don't approve of his choice of profession or his nickname, "Doug the Thug." His new teammates don't get along with each other, and his coach doesn't take him seriously. Even their star player, an NHL burnout named Xavier Laflamme (Marc-Andre Grondin) resents Doug because Doug's presence puts pressure on Laflamme to rise back to his former glory. The one bright spot is a new girl in his life named Eva (Alison Pill) who loves the hockey players and is drawn in by Doug's softer side, but already has a boyfriend. That's just this guy's luck.

As Doug's reputation grows, so does the anticipation for his eventual meeting with hockey's reigning god-of-war, Ross "The Boss" Rhea (Liev Schreiber), who is back after a long suspension, playing for a rival team. Rhea's career is on the decline just as Doug's is taking off - a movie cliche to be sure, but an effective one. The entire film builds to that moment, when the two men will shake off their gloves and square off at the center of the ice.

Hockey's draw for the casual fan is the physicality and occasional violent eruptions, which the filmmakers take full advantage of for comedic effect. Many fights only last a few seconds, but each one has a little twist that distinguishes it from the others. The film portrays the role of the "enforcer" as a necessary component for success in the sport. Something readily accepted by Doug, who explains, "If they need me to bleed, they I'll bleed for my team." And bleed he does.


The story, from a book by Doug "The Hammer" Smith and Adam Frattasio, is based on the minor league exploits of Smith. The film was directed by Michael Dowse (Take Me Home Tonight) and written by frequent Apatow contributors Evan Goldberg and Jay Baruchel. Ultimately, there's a very real love for hockey on display in the film, but this is not a case where you need a working knowledge of sports jargon like red lines, blue lines, and power plays. Goon may rely too heavily on the conventions of the sports movie, but it's pleasant enough to mildly recommend on the strength of a few good laughs and a surprising amount of heart.