Still wanted. A watchable fighting video game inspired movie adaptation. At this rate we’re having, I’m going to name JCVD’s awful “Street Fighter” as the best fighting video game inspired movie adaptation. I haven’t seen “Tekken,” though, but I’m guessing that it would be around the same level of this ridiculously loud, and a pain-to-watch film. At least, in JCVD’s “Street Fighter,” the cast gets to pose as befitted their cabinet arcade machine characters counterpart they’re trying to portray. Unfortunately, there’s no such thing from “King of Fighters.” The film tries too hard to take itself seriously, and by doing so, failed utterly, completely, miserably.

Obviously trying to cash-in the arguably most popular character in the King of Fighters game for her (two) obvious reasons, Mai Shiranui, the film opens with Maggie Q, on her way out from the shower. As she blankly stares into the fogged mirror (with apparently nothing but a towel, I must add), she puts an earpiece (a cheap looking bluetooth earpiece by the look of it) and looks like transported to another place where she donned a fighting suit, which sadly nowhere near the semblance of fighting suit she was famous for. Then a fighting ensues. The fighting that was supposedly a part of a tournament called “King of Fighters.” However, if you had had an experience as a button-masher fighter before, by the look of this first fighting scene, you’ll know you’re in for a trouble.

“King of Fighters”’s universe is a huge one. A little more so because unlike most fighting games, you’ll usually get to pick a group of three characters whom somehow related. Story-wise, or blood-wise. Naturally, only a handful of these characters made into this screen and all of them, are almost painful to watch. Heck, even Maggie Q natural awesomeness couldn’t help this film. I was bored almost to a point where I considered to walk out of the theater.

And I thought “The Legend of Chun-Li” was bad.

The film spins a little sci-fi to its story. Now, sci-fi is a nasty beast to tame for a film. Almost universally, you must spent a considerable screen-time to explains the rule of a sci-fi you wish to convey to the audiences. Remember “Inception”? That film spends a lot of time to explain the dream world during Mr.DiCaprio and Ms.Page mind-bending scenes. This film also spends a lot of time to explain the rule of the world that enabled people, you know, transported through another world, euh, dimension by the means of a cheap-looking bluetooth earpiece. Only much much worse, and seemingly much much much much longer. No excitement whatsoever emanates from the film when Iori Yagami explained the nature of the three artifacts to a super hot but looks very super bored Mai Shiranui. At this point, the couple of guys sitting on my immediate left was soundly asleep.

And then there’s Ray Park as the film’s supposedly super-villain. He has a screen presence of an uncredited extras and made Lex Luthor in “Superman IV” thousands time more menacing. And his motivation? Implausible. In short, he was a complete waste of time. I can’t believe that this guy did Darth Maul in “Star Wars Episode I.” I guess time does change a man.

All in all, I think the men behind this film knows full well that they’re dangerously toying with the audiences’ patience and expecting them to be patient is a terribly long shot. You know it’s like expecting a pig could fly *and* shitting gold while it was airborne. Thus, the choice of super hot Maggie Q, and the presence of the lesbian fighters, Vice and Mature. It’s a very very cheap trick and it doesn’t work. If you didn’t shifted in your seat, or playing with your cell, or ever glancing at your watch, or fallen asleep, or simply walk-out of the theater, then I must see you in person because I think you’re a Zombie. Impervious to human’s emotions.

My rating: 0 / **** A sci-fi themed fighting video-game movie adaptation. Bad idea. It spends a terribly long time to explains the “world” and when the ball finally gets rolling, it was a huge disappointment. Stupid, uninteresting, cardboard characters and a laughable super-villain. Even the presence of Maggie Q, and Vice and Mature (don’t care about their respective real names) doesn’t help. If anything, they made the experience even worse.

So you buy a ticket to a film called a “Piranha 3-D.” Its posters, are often suggestive. They usually featured an open mouthed fish with rows upon rows of teeth, portrayed to be sharp enough to shred the fragile thing that is a human body to pieces. Then, you have a woman, scantily clad in a bikini. What’d you expect? Me? I expected nothing but these two elements combined into an enjoyable, no-thinking required exploitation monster film. Characters? Who cares? They’re going to die, anyway. Dialogs? Unless these fishes could talk, better keep it at minimum. Better put an extra effort on anguish screams of terror. Plot? If it’s plausible enough to have these fishes ripped a body apart, I’m sold. Yeah, this film is a definitely an exploitation film and putting it up there with films labeled by many as the best, the masterpiece, the breakthrough, the rules changing achievement might be an insult to many. But hey, I’ve managed to put everything aside and expecting nothing more from an exploitation film could offer and guess what? It doesn’t disappoint. In fact, this film is going to be my fourth entry of the year 2010 films that I’m most definitely going to buy its original DVD/Blu-Ray at the end of the year. Not necessarily the fourth best, but it’s going to be one of the films I’ll want to remember from the year 2010. Years from now, this film is going to be a cult classic. Well, according to me, at the very least.

The film opens in a ‘meh’ note. All the cheesy elements you’ve undoubtedly familiar with, if you’re a fan of a horror genre, are incorporated in the opening scene. Plus, the obvious, if not sloppy CGI work almost put me to a massive disappointment. However, when the opening scene ends and we see the first opening title for the first time, I was all smiles. Alexandre Aja knows full well about what he was offering to his audiences. That he intended to make an intentionally campy monster film, a homage, if you will, to the exploitation genre and he conveys the message, as well as an invitation to the audiences to have fun, simply with his choice of opening title card. Old school, cheesy, campy, and all the best and probably more from the B-movie genre. It promises of fun things yet to come, and the film kept its promises to the very letter, to the very minute.

What surprising from the film, and particularly shown the craftsman of Aja and his team behind the camera, is that the film actually takes care of its characters. As far as a horror slash exploitation films go, they’re pretty solid. Even down to the cast-types such as the unbelievably too handsome but socially-ousted and inherently-good teenage boy who helplessly in love with this sweet and ‘innocent’ girl who merely saw him as a ‘friend’ and instead dating a jock who visibly disliked the inherently-good teenage boy. Now, this is a personal note, but really, we, the inherently ‘good’ guys should be insulted with these kind of cast-types. In real life, well, in my version of a real life, if the girl I’m in love with doesn’t care about me even if someone had thrown a glass of soda in my direction, the girl in question was probably doesn’t worth to be desired. But as I was saying, even down to the cast-types, this film has more hearts than many films whose intentions are similar. To shock and gross. And then there’s Jerry O’Connell. Somebody give him an Oscar, please His last line of dialog will be much remembered

Lake Victoria is apparently a favorite destination among youths to spend their Spring break partying, and probably fornicating, under the Sun and under the water and once in a year, the town where Lake Victoria resides suddenly bursting with activity as thousands of college kids arrived by the horde and get naked or whatever. Shortly before, an earthquake hits the town and somehow, opened the sub-terranean lake below the Lake Victoria and exposing, for the first time in two million years, a throng of Piranha fishes. Naturally these fishes are violent, hungry and the kids, with their jiggling body under the water was nothing more but a breakfast, a lunch, or a dinner buffet to these creatures.

Once the film gets to the near end of its second act, the gore festivities are fired up and they’re quite gross and intense. Well, as far as the mainstream films allowed it to, that is. There are far more grosser films than this one, obviously, but they didn’t see the light of public distribution and only passed around in the hushed tone of secrecy. But this film had enough gross and shock. Body parts are a plenty, mangled meat are everywhere, red paints are used excessively, some ‘executions’ are quite creative, as was expected from Aja, but thankfully, in my opinion, never really ventured much into an over-the-top torture porn category.

The rest of the film is fairly straightforward. The good boy tries to get his girl, the mystery was more or less solved, the fate of its characters are determined, the girls gets their reason to buck naked and to illicit sexy feeling to this film (it worked) and of course, there’s a room for a sequel should the film received well enough to warrant such decision from the producers (it does). I mean, come on, once again, with that kind of premise, a title choice that was purposely wacky and campy, and a cheap-looking movie posters that came with it, what’d you expect? An epic?

My rating: *** / **** The film, quite intentionally, doesn’t take itself very seriously. Nor should you. It was a fun film, aimed to please the fan of shock and gore mainstream monster film. The film knows full well that it tries to accomplishes what B-films are trying to accomplish and as far as the expectation goes, the film worked well. Very well. You don’t like monster exploitation film? Don’t bother to waste your time with this.

Actually, to call this film a ‘remake’ or a ‘reboot’ of the original “Predator” released 23 years prior is semantically wrong. However, it does feel like it was a reboot and given the unfavorable percentage of failed remakes, reboots, prequels, or whatever, I was naturally exasperated when the project was announced. This film, however, is a proper sequel and for me, as I re-watched the original “Predator” immediately after this film, there is a noticeable lesser suspense from it than its original and I just can’t stop myself from staring at Mr.Brody’s beak-like nose up to a point where it became a nuisance. But that’s just me.

In summary, I enjoyed the first act but significantly less so afterwards.

“Predators” opens quite nicely, actually. It sets the mood of an unknown peril and promises a pleasant and gripping adventures ahead. We see Mr.Brody suddenly awaken as he was free falling. He then frantically tries to open his parachute. It opens narrowly as he crashes into the foliage and the ground below. Title appears, and at this point I was just slightly amused with Mr.Brody’s nose. Soon after he crash landed, Mr.Brody quickly acquainted with the rest of the ‘crew.’ A russian soldier equipped with a gatling gun, an Israeli woman equipped with a sniper rifle, a Mexican gangster, a Japanese yakuza, and others. There are in total eight strangers thrown away together in almost the same manner as the other, oblivious to what, where or why they were suddenly air-dropped into a forest unlike they’ve seen before (1). But of course, you who claimed to have a hobby watching films wouldn’t have to guess.

When it was announced that Robert Rodriguez produced this film, I was immediately giving the project the benefit of doubts. Sure, his works were for me, polarizing but at least he had worked on films he _really_ cared about. That, in itself, is a commendable quality and at the very least, the end results wouldn’t be insulting. And then, Nimród Antal sets to direct with Laurence Fishburne, Topher Grace, Alice Braga, Adrian Brody, and heck, Danny Trejo boarded the wagon. On paper, this alone looks very promising as Mr.Antal’s previous works has been in some way or the other brimming with potentials.

For me, the problem with “Predators” was as if I had watched two separate films. The first act, where the misfits ‘crew’ get acquainted with one another, trying to know each other and at the same time, recognizing their surrounding in order to probe to what they were dealing with, shows what Antal could do to invoke its audiences’ curiosity. He timed his shots deliberately, slowly but not too long, as he reveals the ’secrets’ of the ‘game’ in which the ‘crew’ was a significant part of. In fact, for me, the _best_ action sequence of the film came from this act and it has nothing to do with the nemesis.

The second act is when the ‘crew’ finally gets face to face with the nemesis. Though it still manages to provide a gripping sensation and a commendable trigger-happy sequence that was eerily looked like the one in the original “Predator,” it does seems to me that at this point, Antal was slightly confused on whence he’s going to take this film. On one hand, he tries to piqued our curiosity by concealed the nemesis for as long as possible but on the other, he knows that we’ve already known what the nemesis looked like and therefore concealing it for a bit longer would only made us grow more impatient. Well, at least, I was impatient. Thus, when he decides to reveal the nemesis, the end result was, for me, underwhelming. At this point, I was started to get disturbed by Mr.Brody’s nose.

The third act was even more fell apart that even Mr.Fishburne’s manic performance wasn’t able to coax the dreaded feeling that I’ve been brooded since the second act. I wouldn’t say much, but the third act, specifically the one-on-one final battle in the original “Predator” was _far_ more thrilling than in this film. And there’s that whole business about the character ‘twist’ (2). And at this point, Mr.Brody’s nose has become a nuisance.

My rating: *1/2 / **** I loved the first act, but the rest of the film doesn’t hold that well. I was particularly disappointed with the character ‘twist’ and the obligatory one-on-one battle at the end of the film. Loved: Mr.Fishburne’s manic performance, and most of first act. Not-So-Much-Loved: Almost entire third act. Hated: The ‘twist.’

(1) There’s actually a curious plot-hole related to this forest thingy. It probably just me, but right from this very moment, I wasn’t as interested to the film as I was before.

(2) It wasn’t really a proper twist, and I don’t feel like it belongs to the overall film. I was highly annoyed when the ‘twist’ was revealed.

Eyes for details. I would easily gave the high mark in that particular aspect regarding this film. It is, after all, something that Ridley Scott is famous for. The level of efforts to bring the 12th century England is commendable. Every chain of a chain mail, every nook of a castle, every feather of an arrow, all was wrought with careful attention. Alas, given such achievement, I would say that the film doesn’t really have much else to offer.

As was the norm in the film industry nowadays, the tale of Robin of Nottingham which was centuries old and has been retold many times through cinema, was rebooted and his origin reimagined in this film. We’re introduced to Robin Longstride (Crowe), an ordinary archer serving under King Richard’s infamous third crusade army. He can’t keep his mouth shut by the way, which if you asked me, at such a tumultuous time as medieval Europe, merely showcased his, for lack of better words, dumbness. One thing led to another, Robin and his sort of and would be merry men, travels to Nottingham, where Robin has to pretend to become some Knight and wedded to Marion Loxley (Blanchett). Meanwhile, in the high place of London, a certain knight, Godfrey (Strong) donned a double mask by disrupting the trust between the land lords and the King and at the same time, preparing the French army to strike at the heart of London amidst the impending Civil war he envisioned with his disruptive design.

In short, it’s a “Batman Begins” up until Bruce Wayne flies back to the Gotham and discussed about fear with his faithful servant, Alfred Pennyworth. In other words, “Robin Hood” is an incomplete tale that even if its runs more than two and a half hours, it felt a bit rushed at the end. Probably because somehow Ridley Scott had thought that we need more of that love story which supposed to be a mere backdrop to the tale during the second act, and the elaborate setup of the D-day reenactment with swords and arrows on the finale which I personally find, did not generate as much excitement as what I believed Mr.Scott’s had hoped to achieve on this setup.

I was largely indifferent with Russel Crowe. I loved his role in “American Gangsters” and I’m still really really hoping that they would continue the “Master and Commander” franchise. His role as Robin in this film is utterly forgettable. So was his supposedly love interest, Cate Blanchett even if I had often named her as one of my favorite actress by a considerable margin with most working actresses out there. During the second act, when the film shifts gear precariously into a romantic comedy genre as Robin and Marion skirted and eventually fall for one another, it was painful to watch. I don’t really see any chemistry between them. I mean, I *don’t* believe that Marion could fall for Robin. At all. In my point of view, Marion Loxley as portrayed by Cate Blanchett is too proud to fall that easily into Robin Longstride as portrayed by Russel Crowe.

That’s two miscasts. Naturally, since these two receives the top billing, there’s no point in mentioning others especially because there’s nothing to remember from the others given their limited screen time.

Further, if Ridley Scoot and Russle Crowe’s previous collaboration, “Gladiator,” had a tragic villain in the form of Joaquin Phoenix in his best role (really, why was everyone cheering for Maximus at the end of that film? They should cheered for Commodus!), this film doesn’t have any such superior quality. Mark Strong is uninteresting and his motivation is negligible at best. I mean, really, it all amounts to this. A formulaic script, a huge miscast on its two top billing, and an uninteresting villain? There’s really nothing to be commended from this film except as I had mentioned above, the details in which the film was made and obviously paid a careful attention to.

My rating: * / **** Fan of Crowe? Fan of a lash out action sequences? This one for you. I was pained as the film wade through its second act and as my wife had attested, the finale battle scene was dull, almost ridiculous, and prompted the film to rush to its conclusion. At best, this is not “Robin Hood.” This is “Robin Hood” part one and here’s hoping there’s no part two in the horizon.

We’ve all come to expect that films based on comic-book weren’t going to be about characters in black and white as it once was. A departure that more or less, or at least, in a way I had wanted it to, started with the “Dark Knight” reboot. However, apparently, we’re about to venture further into an established universe where superheroes are occupying the same time and plane in a planned mash-up where these big names collaborate into one huge gigantic team of superheroes. Of the two prominent universes, Marvel looks the more ready than DC and films such as “Iron Man 2″ was at least responsible to laid the groundwork for the eventual “The Avengers” film in the future.

Started off immediately from where the first film left-off (it should be still fresh in your memory, after all, it wasn’t that long time ago), “Iron Man 2″ introduces us to Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke in a badass role) in Moscow, a brilliant physicist with a history that related to Stark family. He imitated the Iron Man core in his underground lab with poster on Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) to let us, the clueless knows his intention on engineering the device. Meanwhile in the U.S. Stark was on a high note although apparently on the surface. Quickly, we introduced with slew of characters that made up the prominence of the film. Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell who is ah-some), Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), James Rupert Rhodes (Don Cheadle) and Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson in a bored stance). Events piled up, and more importantly, groundwork for the eventual “The Avengers” is being set-up with the introduction of agents from S.H.I.E.L.D, and eventually, it concludes with a high note where these characters concludes their respective conflicts.

“Iron Man 2″ tries to do many things at once. Resolving conflicts, laid the groundwork while trying to adhere to the characters established in the source material, and pleases the casual movie-goer going for nothing but a blockbuster that marked the start of the summer season. Mostly, the film didn’t disappoint. I particularly love the way the film wrapped up itself. From the Justin Hammer’s presentation in the Stark expo up to .. well, I’m going to let you see it for yourself. However, once the film finished, I was wondering and finally came to a conclusion that the film was made with that particular ending in mind, and the scenes that led up to it were more of an obligatory as it merely tries to set up the pieces for the grander plan according to Marvel rather than a necessity to drive a plot forward. For example, the scenes where Tony Stark drunk is nothing more but a hint of what yet to come, and kinda doesn’t fit that well in respect to the overall film’s tone. Fortunately, we have a strong horde of actors here, that even a crowded scenes, a so-so directing, and a lack of coherence in the plot won’t fail the film.

And that was the strongest suit from this film. Actors. Robert Downey Jr. is already on a high-roll since he starred in “Iron Man” and he rarely disappoints. Mickey Rourke is also one of those actors who making a come back with a bang. Here, he channels some of the energy from “The Wrestler,” and if you’ve seen the film, you know how badass he is. Heck, for the next couple of days, I’ll dye my hair with strand of silver, tied it up in a bun, chewed a perpetual toothpick and learns to speak Russian. That is how good he is in this film. Sam Rockwell is ah-some. Simple as that. Hollywood need to give him more roles. Even Don Cheadle and Gwyneth Paltrow is passable and able to keep up with Downey Jr. and Sam Jackson as always, is Sam Jackson. You can’t argue with him. You really can’t. My only disappointment lies on Scarlett Johansson. She looks bored and her acrobatic scenes weren’t that exciting anyway. Well, I loved her better when she’s blond, anyway.

For all it’s worth, “Iron Man 2″ is a pleasant watch and a good start for a summer season. It’s like “Transfomers” but with modest amount of mecha fighting, and far-far, up-and-away, better in every account performances.

My rating: *** / **** A jumbled scenes that merely exists for the benefit of the high note ending scene and laying the groundwork for Marvel’s ambitious project, “The Avenger.” Of course, it won’t stop you from seeing it anyway. Awesome horde of actors, though, that you could easily dismissed the film’s shortcomings. In short word, I liked the first film better.

From the beginning, the intention of this film was clear. It tries to give a somewhat satirical parody on many, albeit only a small fraction of social problems that were prevalent in the current Indonesia. Often, familiar monickers on the current happenings were thrown in and only made sense if you’re an Indonesian or had been living within the proximity of news about Indonesian at some length of time recently. Generally, I’m not a fan of this kind of film. They’re usually so full of themselves, and always pushing on their “message.” I had a relatively small threshold on how long I could endure such pretentiousness before finally giving up, by rolling my eyes and sigh out an exasperated sound. In that respect, I’d say that this film is a bit pretentious and some sections in the second act is a pain to sit through. Even so, I liked the way the film chooses to end itself and giving the recent competition from local film-makers, I came to a firm conclusion that if there’s anyone who could save Indonesian cinema, his name is Deddy Mizwar.

Reza Rahadian (I forgot his screen name) is fresh from college, and like most of college graduates, was hard pressed to look for a job. He eventually met with a juvenile pick-pocketer, and later introduced to their whole gang and their boss. He offered the result of his education to help organized the group. At first, he was alone, gaining a resistance and not surprisingly, an acceptance from the gang. He was later asked his friends to join in his cause only to be later, opposed by his dad, a religious figure that firmly disagree with whatever his son was doing.

At first, the real intention of the leading man for me, was unclear. Whether he’s there to help these juveniles to become a better pick-pocketer or to entirely switched to the good side, wasn’t really clear. Not until his friends joined in. I figured that this was because the leading man is less than capable to deliver something convincible. Anyway, my biggest problem wasn’t that. Somewhere in the middle, the film went too far by putting me on a wince inducing scene that went too long. I believe I’m not the only one who would felt this, but I guess that is a risk that you’d get when you employ that many child actors and putting them on a single scene. Not that I’m against child actors, but a decent child actors are terribly rare.

But apart from that, and that the film had often pushed a single keyword that at one point I almost wanted to check on Google to typed the keyword and see if this film came out at top, the film was quite good or terribly good if you compared it to other recent Indonesian film releases. Tio Pakusadewo steals every scene he was in and there are many witty dialogues that carry a bolder statement (and a smile) than the aforementioned keyword which shown what Deddy Mizwar is capable of doing but somewhat sorely missing at most of the length of the film. For the direction, especially during the third act (if one to ignore its convenient coincidence contrivances) was fluid and energetic enough to be enjoyed. Music by Ian Antono (I grow up with Ian Antono so it was a familiar tune for me) also helps to liven up the mood. And finally, the film also chooses to end its story wisely, kudos to whoever wrote the scenario on this film. It was a great way to finish this kind of film.

However, the after taste of that wince inducing scene sometime during the second act that eventually disrupt my level of enjoyment.

My rating: *1/2 / **** A bit low, but mind you, this is an unadjusted rating. I usually had a different rating system when it comes to an Indonesian film (which put this film at around **1/2 or ***) but decided to forego it. If you really love Indonesian film, you should at least give this film a benefit of doubt and see it. Maybe if this film has a healthy sales, more films that was at least this good were to follow suit.

The single keyword for this film was “korupsi” and its derivatives.

Update: it was Musfar Yasin who wrote the scenario.

With Paul Greengrass at helm and Matt Damon at the front, it is easy to think that this would be another Bourne look-a-like. I’d say it’s rather wrong. It’s rather inferior than the series. Well, at least for me because I had held the Bourne trilogy in a special pedestal as one of my favorite films of all-time. After all, without compelling adversaries and Tony Gilroy, a film literate wouldn’t be so quick to assume that a comparison should even be made. Even so, the comparison is mostly inevitable and this film will suffers the most if such comparison was made.

“Green Zone” is a yet another thriller sets in Baghdad. Chief warrant officer Roy Miller (Matt Damon) is in charge for leading the squad to secure the area suspected as WMD storage area. But, when his third search resulting zip results, he begins to question whether the intel he and his squad risked their life for is a really valid. Soon, he began asking questions. Attracting attentions from Bureaucrat Clark Poundstone (Greg Kinnear), CIA operative Martin Brown (Brendan Gleeson), Wall Street Journal reporter Lawrie Dayne (Amy Ryan).

This film is a fictional film based on (probably) non-fictional facts. It takes place in 2003, during the early U.S. occupation in Baghdad. In real life, the issue of WMD remains speculative as no WMD has yet been found. The film puts this issue forward by having a good solider, Miller questions his orders. Now, as the truth as we know it has been out in the open, we have pretty much figured out how the film is going to wrap itself up. Frankly, for me, to have such realization and to have our attention firmly toward Miller, his cause, and the eventual futility of his actions are a huge turn off that I spent most of the third act impatient. This is unlike, say, “Inglourious Basterds” that even if it’s based on non-fictional facts, it rewrites the history in such manner that was acceptable. “Green Zone” wasn’t like that, its issues, its messages, are meant to be delivered as firmly and as close as it was to its real world counterpart.

The film employs a typical Paul Greengrass out-of-focus and shaky cam. Now, I’ve learnt that not everybody shared as much enthusiasm as I was when faced with this method of picture taking. For instance, I was surprised that many disregarded the film “Cloverfield” merely because the way it takes its pictures. In this film, Greengrass’ style is mostly an asset. It amplifies the sense of urgency and magnifies the chaos of firefights and its action-oriented part. And with the help of John Powell’s score, I was hard pressed to let go the image of Jason Bourne whenever Matt Damon is on screen. This make it easy to liked and trust Miller more albeit the more I’ve got a glimpse of Jason Bourne in Damon the more I’ve grown upset because really, we’re in a different film right now. The film however lacks a competent adversaries that could shine through Damon’s star. It felt like and probably is, a sole vehicle to cash in Matt Damon as an action star. I’ve got no problem with it, mind you, but two, or more prominent performances in a film is always better than one.

All in all, “Green Zone” is a straight-forward thriller with a predictable ending that makes me sad and impatient during the wait that lead up to its final conclusion.

My rating: **1/2 / **** Perhaps I’ve grown tired with films that takes Iraq as its subject. For me, the film suffers because we’ve already know what is going to happen and therefore the events that led up to its final scene wasn’t all that pleasant a journey to wade through. As an action film, however, this film is enjoyable.

Despite of its misfortune due to the unfortunate death of its leading man, the film was, for me, holds surprisingly well. Sure, some of the early parts were a bit dragging but I think that is more because of the aforementioned incident, thus netting less materials for Terry Gilliam to work with. Once the film caught with its latter half, the film grows, with exceptional efforts by Jhonny Depp, and Jude Law, and to some extent, Colin Farrell in partaking the role left by the venerable late Heath Ledger.

This film is another take on dealing with the Devil goes sour. Dr.Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) made a bet with the Devil, Mr.Nick (Tom Waits) that whoever gets five souls first, had a claim for Dr.Parnassus’ own daughter, Valentina (Lily Cole). Dr.Parnassus was in part of and probably the owner of a traveling theater company. He employs a mirror in which people was able to get through and take a peek on Dr.Parnassus’ “imaginarium.” Here, the person who enters it gets a choice, either taking the offer from Mr.Nick and scored one for the devil, or taking the offer from Dr.Parnassus and scored one for the old man.

There’s no denying in the fact that the film felt a bit incomplete. Although to be fair, the way the film rewritten and edited to accommodate the untimely death of Heath Ledger, was sufficient enough that in case there’s someone in the audience who was yet unaware of the said news (gasp), she wouldn’t notice the gap. The way the film treats the sudden change of the character played by Heath Ledger was seamless enough. I’d say it’s a great job by Terry Gilliam to circumvent the misfortune he was having.

The ‘imaginarium’ part which occupies most of the latter half of the film was pleasant and superior to its first half. I was excited and there’s a sense of urgency emanating from the screen whenever the off-beat CGI and colors were dancing in the world behind the mirror. This is perhaps atypical Gilliam films to which I’m not entirely familiar and won’t consider myself as a fan. Choosing the simple world to describe it was, perhaps, a frantic carnival. That’s what I felt during the latter half and it was a good thing, really. However, the first half of the film was a bit overlong and on some events I felt no urgency from the pace which I’m quite sure, had Gilliam had more materials with Heath Ledger, it would be left on the cutting floor.

Jhonny Depp and Jude Law gave their best on channeling their respective antics in place of Ledger in the world beyond the mirror. I don’t know about you, but I’ve grown a bit weary with Depp’s swagger that almost all the time reminds me of his role as a certain captain. In that respect, Jude Law’s really shines on his scene beyond the mirror. However, Colin Farrell was fell a bit short. Well, I’d say he just really doesn’t cut it to be as crazy as the script requires him to be. On the other side of the mirror, Christopher Plummer is amazing. Somebody should give him a more challenging role in which he could really really shines. And Lily Cole, the heart shaped face lady, all I could say of her was, mmhh mmhh, I’m taking a note on her future roles, that’s for sure.

My rating: *** / **** Going through the first half might prove a challenge, but the latter half was, for me, making up a lot of ground for it. Surprisingly solid film, considering that its leading man was left perished in the middle of filming.

Despite all of its beautiful design, creatures, and perhaps a little peek into the rich, and supposedly gloomy imagination of Tim Burton, I was, in overall, underwhelmed by the film. It was more a Disney film than a Burton film, and its strong casts were mostly bland and forgettable.

Alice returned to the Wonderland and reunites with her childhood’s friends and foes. I’m not sure how many parts from the original work were altered in the film, for I’m not entirely familiar with the book. Even so, I’m quite certain that this film is somewhat a sequel from the original. It was Alice, almost in her twenties, back again through the rabbit hole to Wonderland, suggesting she had visited it before, and sides with White Queen to confront and dethrone the evil Red Queen.

The film is beautiful and vibrant with colors. But not most of the time. Despite of me saying that this film is more a Disney film than a Burton film, it’s still a Burton film, and sometimes the gloomy colors that was typical of his seeps through and when it does, it’s rather inevitable to ask whether we’re truly in Wonderland or that the title should be changed into a Gloomland instead.

Not that film wasn’t fun, or a terrible one. Cheshire Cat is far less formidable than it was in the trailer, and well, basically because I *love* cats, I often missed his dismissal off the screen. Anne Hathaway is pleasant to watch, and her contradictory gestures inviting a heartily laugh from yours truly here. At least she was having fun. But mostly, that was it. Sometime during the film, I felt an inexplicable boredom, the Red Queen doesn’t strikes me as extraordinary, and so was the rest of casts that were seemingly come and goes like a wind. And finally, I found that Jhonny Depp is rather disappointing for he merely channels whatever energy he has left from Capt. Sparrow’s persona. In that sense, despite his good efforts, this role of his wasn’t going into my history book as one of his better or memorable performances. Nor was this, his seventh collaboration with Tim Burton.

But, my main problem, and of why I’m not enjoying this film as much as I had expected to, is the title character herself. Alice as portrayed by Mia Wasikowska. Oh, she’s beautiful, easy on the eyes my mother used to say, but she’s just not convincing enough for me and times when she was mulling over her choice, or leading the scene? That’s when my boredom usually starts to strike me off guard. All in all, the film was an okay one, I’d say hardly anyone going to be wowed by its technical aspects. Well, at least not going to be anywhere near a level where Avatar was last year. And, bear in mind that the 3D stuffs were only applied afterward. So, it might not worth the money you spent to enjoy this film in 3D. Especially if you’re like me, thinking that 3D is not going to change the fundamentals of film making, at least yet, and more of a gimmick than a feature.

My rating: ** / **** I’m enjoying Cheshire Cat, and the White Queen. They both have a limited screen time, but they steal the scene every time.

Disregarding the fact that this film is the fourth collaboration between Martin Scorcese and Leonardo DiCaprio, “Shutter Island” is flat out, your usual thriller film. Sometimes it fails, when the script tried to pack all the valuable informations into one scene, but mostly, it’s solid, beautiful, vivid and engaging enough to watch. Sure, it was made easier by the assembly of powerhouse casts that made this film. However, I was quite hard-pressed to acknowledge the grandeur that usually comes with Scorcese’s flick. It was mediocre by his standard. While this is yet, a slightly above average film, I wouldn’t praise it as one of Scorcese-DiCaprio’s best efforts. Alas, against the other films based on Dennis Lehane’s novels (Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone), I found that this film was less fulfilling than the others.

Shutter Island is a mental correctional facility for the insane criminals. The only point on and off of the island is through a ferry. However, at one night, a female prisoner/patient, Rachel Solando, was nowhere to be found. U.S. Marshals Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio) and his newly appointed partner, Chuck (Mark Ruffalo) were sent to investigate. With the help (or the lack of) from the facility’s staffs, orderlies, apparently led by one Dr.Cawley (Ben Kingsley), the Marshals soon found themselves in a case that more than just a simple case of missing person, but goes almost as far as a certain conspiracy theory. On the other hand, Teddy, also has to battle his own monsters. His recently deceased wife (Michele Williams) at the hand of an arsonist, and his violent past as the member of the army that freed one of the Nazi’s concentration camp in Dachau.

To go beyond the above paragraph to describe the film would violate any enjoyment that you might had by watching the film unspoiled. But, tell you what, the mystery in this film is I think, far more subtle than it was in the book. For instance, the codes that Teddy found was only two lines in the film. Now I’ve read the book, and it actually worked in my advantage because I don’t really care about the mystery that Teddy and his partner had tried to solve because I already have a full knowledge about it. Therefore, I had stopped questioning about it and rather, soak in the visuals as they’re represented in the screen. Those little details when a character made an unmentioned mental note toward other characters, to which described a bit more in the book? They are a pleasure to watch and those nightmare sequences? They are amazing. It definitely beats any imagination I had when I read the book.

All in all, this film is actually nothing more than a well-made thriller with a piece of puzzle that will *not* make you brag had you guessed about it but not too easy to make you lost interest. In fact, I’m willing to bet that most of you had a pretty good idea on how things going to end way before the film ends. In that respect, the film’s finale is going to explains all the “whys” without ever relegating into a leeway logic and without giving you the sense that the film had cheated on you which is most of the time, is what differentiates between a solid thriller and a disastrously terrible one. Plus, with a solid cast led by DiCaprio whom I think, is getting better and better at Scorcese’s deft hand (from a man within the shadow of Day-Lewis in Gangs of New York to a solid leading man in The Departed and this film? Oh, he’s getting better, alright), Ben Kingsley, Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams, and my personal favorite supporting cast in this film, Jackie Earle Haley, this is a film that amidst the relative calm of February film climate stood out as one to made a comment to during your coffee break at the office. And that hint on the character’s choice at the end of the film? It’s beautiful. I love it.

My rating: *** / **** It’s not Scorcese’s best, but even if it wasn’t his best, it still came out as a solid thriller with a solid cast. Again, Scorcese bought the best out of DiCaprio. However, as one of the interblag’s reviewer had said, DiCaprio has yet bought the best out of Scorcese. And I have to agree on that one.