From the director of The Hills Have Eyes. Kiefer Sutherland stars as an ex-cop turned night security guard at a long-closed department store ravaged by fire, discovers that the store’s mirrors harbor a horrific secret that threatens him and his family.
{/rw_text} –>
OPENS: August 15, 2008 RATED: R (Bloody violence, Gore, Blood, Burn wounds) GENRE: Demons, Horror, Thriller, Asian Horror Remake
Based on the 2003 Korean horror flick, Into the Mirror, the American version, named Mirrors and starring Keifer Sutherland is a pill-popping, booze-swilling supernatural gore fest of the highest caliber. Fans of supernatural gore and slasher films will love this film, according to critics. Others? Not so much.
The 20th Century Fox film studio, in a sure-tell sign that it does not have faith in this movie, did not pre-screen it for critics. This usually means the studio thinks the film is a stinker and doesn’t want critical word-of-mouth to keep folks away from the theatres.
Among the biggest complaints by critics is that Mirrors relies more on shockingly bloody footage rather than suspenseful writing to create fear in the audience. There are scenes of bloody violence, bloody self mutilation and bloody death.
On the positive side. Other critics say this is exactly the type of film that fans of the Hellraiser and early Freddie Kruger movies have been craving – for a bloody good time.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Gore fans get their 2008 summer big budget movie
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Bloody violence may be a big turn off for non-gore fans
Not very scary for a horror film
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="New York TImes" value="4"}
"Offers several cringe-worthy set pieces and a sneakily nasty ending." – Jeanette Catsoulis
{/for}
{for=”Boston Globe” value=”3″}
“The money scene in Mirrors – the one the gore morons will lap up while the rest of us cringe in appalled disbelief – involves the hero’s sister ripping her own jaw off until it flops obscenely beneath her face, spurting blood everywhere. But wait, there’s more!” – Ty Burr
{/for}
{for=”Orlando Sentinel” value=”3″}
“It’s not laughably bad. It’s just not scary, a generally pointless thriller with motiveless murders at its heart and a most unsatisfactory resolution.” – Roger Moore
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-TImes” value=”3″}
“By the time the mirrors go after the watchman’s young family in the overwrought climax, the movie has gone from being harmlessly silly to inexcusably sadistic.” – Josh Larsen
{/for}
{for=”Buffalo News” value=”7″}
“It’s a hellish version of the British comedy “Are You Being Served?” set ravaged by fire and neglect, complete with charred mannequins but pristine mirrors.” – Joseph Popiolkowski
{/for}
{for=”IGN” value=”5″}
“Mirrors offers nothing new, but that’s not why it can’t be recommended since not every horror film can or should be expected to cover new ground. ” – Jim Vejvoda
OPENS: AUgust 15, 2008 RATING: PG (Violence, Smoking, Adult Situations) GENRE: Space Opera, Animation
A new Star Wars cartoon will debut on the Cartoon Network this fall.
Somebody at Lucasfilm got the bright idea to make a 90-minute introduction movie to kick the series off. That’s good.
Somebody (or somebodies) else at Warner Brothers in paring up with Lucasfilm got the bright idea of taking that made-for-TV film and dumping it out in theatres this weekend. That’s not-so-good.
The result? A hybrid computer animated film that is not up to par with what a movie-going audience expects when plopping over $8 to $10 a pop to see a film these days.
Among those panning the film, most noted a boring storyline and painful dialogue that insults fans of the Star Wars saga. Others called it a blatant money grab for George Lucas that insults the legacy of the franchise. Others said this film marks the death of Star Wars as a popular culture touchstone.
But others were not do fast to dismiss this film. As a kid’s film its fast pace and not-too-complicated story is perfect mindless last weekend before back-to-school fun for the pre-teen set.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Squarely aimed for the middle school audience.
Good preview of the upcoming TV series.
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Poor writing
Animation is stiff
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Newsday" value="1"}
"A money-making spin-off from the Lucas franchise, "Clone Wars" has all the magic and heart of a cereal commercial." – Rafer Guzman
{/for}
{for=”Space.com” value=”6″}
“If you’re looking for some solid action, that’s one thing this film will give you in spades. Just don’t look too closely at the characters themselves, and you’ll do fine.” – Steve Fritz
{/for}
{for=”New York Times” value=”6″}
“The Clone Warshas an uncluttered look and furious pace that make it more or less as satisfying as its wildly overdesigned predecessors.” – Nathan Lee
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Tribune” value=”1″}
“The film’s purpose is clear. It is a full-length teaser for the forthcoming TV series of the same name.” – Michael Phillips
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-Times” value=”3″}
“You know you’re in trouble when the most interesting new character is Jabba the Hutt’s uncle.” – Roger Ebert
{/for}
{for=”San Francisco Chronicle” value=”6″}
“The movie’s tone will probably send original-trilogy loyalists over the edge, the final shove that sends their Hoth Ice Planet action play sets into exile on eBay. Meanwhile, children will thrill at the notion that the latest part of the saga was made especially for them.” – Peter Hartlaub
{/for}
{for=”Los Angeles Daily News” value=”3″}
“Big disaster, this Star Wars cartoon is… The ugly-looking movie is a straightforward, unapologetic cash grab, taking footage intended to be part of Cartoon Network’s upcoming Clone Wars TV series and slapping it together to lure in those few who haven’t already torn up their fan club membership cards in disgust.” – Glenn Whipp
{/for}
{for=”Washington Post” value=”1″}
“Lucas fulfills his lifelong dream of completely dehumanizing his space opera, replacing it with a digitally animated style that is somewhere between cartoons, Christmas specials and panoramic paintings on the side of a van.” – Hank Stuever
Brendan Fraser is back, reprising his role in The Mummy franchise in the new film, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.
{/rw_text} –>
OPENS: August 1, 2008 RATING: PG-13 (Violence) GENRES: Horror Comedy, Action-Adventure, Fantasy
The heroes of The Mummy franchise returns — well not all of them, Rachel Weiss decided to forego this film, replaced by Maria Bello.
Film reviews are mixed. Many film critics hated The Mummy 3, citing that the film is dumb, violent and doesn’t take tell the audience a new story..
Other critics loved the film for those same reasons. Film Critic Roger Ebert says audiences comprised of fans fo this series will not be disappointed.
Sometimes people want mindless escapist adventure wit great special effects. Here, the film delivers.
Other critics say audiences should follow the example of the lead actress of the first two Mummy films – and skip this one as unneeded and unwatchable.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Great special effects
Film made for fans of the series
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Not much original; the plot is similar to the first film
Fraser is only 13 years older than the actor who plays his son, making the father/son dynamic awkward
Barrage of violence too scary for very small children. Adolescent boys, on the other hand, will love it.
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Wired" value="6"}
"A poor third installment to the Mummy series." – Ken Denmead
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Tribune” value=”3″}
“One Wow cancels out the last Wow, until the Wows start looking more like lowercase wows and soon the wows become merely eh, or worse, a string of low-grade, minimally inventive aggravations that fail even to hit the level of eh. They’re more like bleh.” – Michael Phillips
{/for}
{for=”Christian Science Monitor” value=”3″}
“This third “Mummy” movie takes us on a guided tour of the catacombs of ancient China and the peaks of the Himalayas, with a pit stop in postwar Shanghai. Anyone looking for a terrific summer popcorn movie should not hop on board.” – Peter Rainer
{/for}
{for=”San Jose Mercury News” value=”7″}
“Tomb of the Dragon Emperor is as stupid as it gets, with spear-carrying undead soldiers fighting men with 1946-era guns, yetis coming to the aid of humans and the phoniest-looking movie snow of all time. There’s also a trumped-up father-son schism that Rick and Luke must overcome.” – Betsy Pickle
{/for}
{for=”San Francisco Chronicle” value=”2″}
“The new installment, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, fails despite being given the best possible chance of success.” – Mick LaSalle
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-Times” value=”8″}
“Now why did I like this movie? It was just plain dumb fun, is why. It is absurd and preposterous, and proud of it. ” – Roger Ebert
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-Times” value=”6″}
“The film has its flaws: There’s plenty of lame dialogue, including a stomach-turning exchange in which archaeological terms such as “excavation” are applied to sexually desirable women. And the talents of two exceptional Chinese actors and martial artists, Jet Li and Michelle Yeoh, go underappreciated.” – Christy De Smith
A short story form Clive Barker's classic short story collection Books of Blood, the new film The Midnight Meat Train follows photographer Leon Kauffman (Cooper), who is working on his latest collection – documenting the late night life’s loneliness in the normally bustling New York City … until his camera catches evidence of the deadly side of the city’s subway system. Last stop: an abyss of pure evil.
{/rw_text} –>
OPENS: August 1, 2008 (Limited Release)
RATING: R (Gore, Nudity, Sexual Content)
GENRE: Horror; Supernatural Dark Fantasy; Gore
In the making of Midnight Meat Train, writer Clive Barker and director Ryuhei Kitamura set out to make the a film better than Candyman and scarier than Hellraiser.
According to horror critics, both goals were met.
The story is from Clive Barker’s seminal Books of Blood collection. Barker admits that the off-kilter title came to him after he ate a batch of marijuana brownies a couple decades ago.
Originally set to debut during the early summer blockbuster season, instead LionsGate decided on a limited release for the film before shipping it out on DVDs.
Of the positive reviews, director Kitamura’s English language debut is getting kudos for his stylish scenes and camerawork and his ability to maintain the sense of creepy dread that filled the original short story.
Also getting good reviews are actors Bradley Cooper, Vinnie Jones and Brooke Shields.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Called the best Barker film adaptation, ever
Top-notch cast and direction
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Only in Limited Release
Graphic scenes of violence, blood and gore will be too disturbing for most except die-hard horror fans.
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Fort Worth Business Press" value="8"}
“The Midnight Meat Train, adapted by screenwriter Jeff Buhler from a Books of Blood yarn, turns out to be one hellacious ride — forging deliberately into an abyss that, though naturally of the make-believe variety, nonetheless packs a lingering chill of unease.” – Michael H. Price
{/for}
{for=”Cinematical” value=”8″}
“Easily the best Clive Barker adaptation since the first Hellraiser film.” – Scott Weinberg
{/for}
{for=”JoBlo.com” value=”8″}
“ I thought that film was a blast and a half, and I’m happy to see that for his first American film, Kitamura seems to have been more or less given a free hand. The film positively oozes style.” - Chris Bumbray
OPENS: July 25, 2008
Rating: PG-13 (Gore, Violence)
Genre: Science Fiction; Supernatural Dark Fantasy
No Spoilers
David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson reprise the roles of Mulder and Scully six years after their long-lived TV series. The X-Files left the air.
This is the second X-Files movie, the first was released while the TV show was still in production and wasn’t necessarily loved by fans or by critics.
The second film, The X-Files: I Want to Believe, isn’t winning over many critics – unless they were die-hard fans of the show who miss seeing their favorite FBI agents verbally spar and chew through scenery. But some mainstream critics who were fans of the show felt disappointed that this new film failed to recapture the spark that made the series so special.
Of the positive reviews, most critics raved about Gillian Anderson – many lamenting that as an actress, Hollywood has been unfair to such a talent with intelligence, smoldering beauty and a screen presence that would have made her one of the biggest stars of the screen had she been born 60 years earlier.
Also receiving kudos are Duchovny and the supporting cast – particularly Amanda Peet as a young FBI agent with the same gusto that Mulder had when he was first introduced to TV viewers 15 years ago.
Of the not-so-kind reviews, most of the mud is being slung at writer-director Chris Carter for not delivering a film as good as it could have been. Some fear that die-hard fans will leave the film disappointed that a weak story overshadowed the stars and damaged the on-screen chemistry between the two leads.
Additionally, some were not pleased that the script skipped on the science fiction and dark fantasy elements that made the TV series its creepy best. Similarly, more than one critic derided the camera work as missing the film noir-type feel that audience have come to expect in an X-Files presentation
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Anderson shines
Duchovny at his witty, earnest best
Great supporting cast
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Doesn’t live up to its promise
Science fiction/supernatural element almost missing
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Newsday" value="8"}
"Duchovny and Anderson seem just right, too – she has one of the great faces in movies, and brings an earnest likability to Scully the Doctor. And Mulder is allowed to be Mulder – someone Duchovny can't escape any easier than Mulder can escape the lure of the unknown." – John Anderson
{/for}
{for=”San Jose Mercury-News” value=”7″}
“As smart and obsessed as ever, Mulder and Scully generate a lot of good will that helps “I Want to Believe” plow its way out of numerous narrative snowbanks. ” – Bob Strauss
{/for}
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Tribune” value=”6″}
“Anderson almost makes the new “X-Files” film, subtitled “I Want to Believe,” something to believe in.” – Michael Phillips
{/for}
{for=”Washington Post” value=”7″}
“A taut, well-acted, not very scary, not very hard to figure out serial-killer mystery revolving around two adults with trust issues.” – Michael Steuver
{/for}
{for=”The Boston Globe” value=”5″}
“The movie is less like an episode of The X-Files and more like the trashiest installment ever of Law & Order: SVU. Benson and Stabler have seen some loony stuff but nothing this sick.” – Wesley Morris
{/for}
{for=”Baltimore Sun” value=”6″}
“The X-Files: I Want to Believeresembles those TV-series reunions that bring the cast of a hit together for a not-so-special occasion.” – Michael Sragow
{/for}
{for=”Los Angeles Times” value=”4″}
“Even at its stride, The X-Files was a load of malarkey. But it was thoughtful malarkey and compulsively watchable. One could say the same about the first two-thirds of The X-Files: I Want to Believe before it spins out of control and into a delirious plane of awfulness.” – Jan Stuart
{/for}
{for=”USA Today” value=”5″}
“The film also skimps on plot; don’t expect the clever, intricate twists of the series. It feels like a wan version of the show — one that has lost its otherworldly edge.” – Claudia Puig
Billed in the tech press as Google's version of Wikipedia, Knol may offer writers of original content a whole lot more.
More control of their material, more freedom and, most importantly, more credit.
{/rw_text} –>
As I write this, I gotta admit that I am a fixture at Wikipedia. I’ve been an administrator there for years and have contributed to thousands of Wikipedia articles either as the original creator or in other fashions.
Within the past 24 hours, I heard that Google had launched its own wiki service called “Knol” (short for Knowledge as in “knol” is a unit of knowlege). Cute and weird – like most things Google.
Now, upon hearing of the Google-owned wiki, I immediately thought Google was launching its own online encyclopedia. So, I went over to check it out.
I was shocked by what I found. Shocked.
CONTROL ISSUES
It turns out Knol is not another Wikipedia. It is much, much more.
Google has been getting the reputation for being a media behemoth. But it sure ain’t acting like one with Knol. The biggest issue that came out and slapped me in the face about Knol is: CONTRIBUTORS KEEP THE COPYRIGHT TO THEIR WORK.
Yes, you read me right. If you contribute something to Knol – you keep the copyright – and may even prohibit other people from altering your work. Ever.
But if you WANT – and only if – you may release the material in a share-and-share-alike method similar to that of Wikipedia. But, that’s just an option – not a mandate.
We respect our users’ ownership of and responsibility for the content they choose to share. It is our belief that censoring this content is contrary to a service that bases itself on freedom of expression.
Unless you run your own site, or contribute to a small site like FanDominion.com – this is unheard of. When you contribute to any other major media site like Wikipedia, Yahoo Answers or even blog on Live Journal, you sign away most – or all – of your rights to your work. But, not so with Knol.
No Google Ownership of User Content. Google claims no ownership or control over any content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through the Service. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any content you submit, post or display on or through the Service and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate.
The control thing is cool enough – but it gets better.
UNFETTERED CREATIVITY
The next best thing is that Knol does not limit what you can post. You can write about whatever you want (as long as it isn’t hard-core porn, kiddie porn, bestiality or hate speech).
Wanna post your favorite recipe for tuna salad? No problem.
How about an opinionated guide to all 22 episodes of the short-lived 2001 steampunk SCI FI Channel TV series, The Secret Adventures of Jules Verne? Yup.
How about writing a how-to book on creating a fanzine? Yep. Even if someone else has written on the same topic – you can write your own and keep opinionated folks you disagree with from mucking up your take on the issue.
UNCERTAIN LIMITS
Although Google says users should not treat Knol as a blog, the open ended policy does not preclude folks from using Knol to host other forms of writing, such as short fiction, collections of original poems, lyrics, reviews, art galleries, opinion essays, fanzines, and anything else that is not pornography or hate speech.
EASE OF USE
Perhaps the best thing about Knol is how easy Knol is to use. Creating content on the site is literally easier than using many online email services.
And if you already have content written in Word, as a plain text file – or even as a PDF – you can simply upload that file into Knol from your hard drive and with minimal cleaning, you got an article on the web.
I used the service to post a couple of old recipes – and even uploaded some ancient college essays in word format that I had written in many years ago.
Both worked like a dream. You can check out my trial run on Knol by clicking this link. It takes you to my profile page – with a list of my articles appearing on the right hand side of the screen.
Some I even left open for you – or anyone else - to contribute to, while others I did not.
<!– {rw_good}
Allows you to keep all copyrights and control of your material
Bylines – take credit for what you create
Google hosts the content – but does not want to own it
Virtually no limits on what you can write about
Block others from being able to tamper with your creation
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
For being owned by a search engine, finding content via the resident search function is not easy on Knol
Navigation on the site is non-existent aside from “featured knols” which are mostly medical in nature
In “beta” which means it is subject to change drastically in the next few months
OPENS: July 18, 2008 RATING: G GENRE: Science Fiction, Comedy, Children’s Film, Computer Animation, Space opera
Reviewing the mainstream media reviews of the new animated film, Space Chimps, you can only come to one conclusion: whether you hate or love this film comes down to one thing – individual taste.
Although most critics panned this film as a pale entry in comparison to WALL-E or Kung Fu Panda, other well-respected critics are praising the film’s message and family friendliness.
One thing is for sure, opening against the new Batman move and Mama Mia! and while both Wall-E and Kung Fu Panda are still hot in the box office, Space Chimps probably will not be bre4aking any box office records.
Of the positive reviews, noted is the film’s pro-animal rights and humane message, and the comedic talents of the actors adding voice to the film. The include comic geniuses Adam Samburg (SNL), Cheryl Hines (Curb Your Enthusiasm), Patrick Warburton (The Tick, Family Guy), Kristen Chenowith (Pushing Daisies, Robot Chicken) and Kenan Thompson (SNL).
Although the good reviews are few and rather positive, the negative reviews are legion. Mostly noting the all-too-familiar plot line, the lack of any sort of suspense and no real dramatic climax to the story. Some critics are coming out and saying that this is a “comedy” that is just plain not funny.
Others say, that while the film is destined for success as a kiddie DVD, parents will avoid it like the plague.
In other words – it will probably be a minor cult hit among a core group of science fiction fans.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Inoffensive film with sight gags to amuse children
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Plot too complicated for young children
Plot too predictable for most adults
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Salt Lake Tribune" value="3"}
"After a summer of good animation (Wall-E and Kung Fu Panda), Space Chimps is a callous clunker.” – Sean P. Means
{/for}
{for=”Christian Science Monitor” value=”4″}
“Why would you take your kids to see Space Chimps, an uninspired animated feature about chimp astronauts, when you could take them instead to see Wall-E?” – Peter Rainer
{/for}
{for=”Minneapolis Star Tribune” value=”3″}
“Pretty much like the story of Kung Fu Panda. Only in space. With monkeys. And not as funny.” – Colin Covert
{/for}
{for=”Washington Post” value=”4″}
“Most adults like to think there’s still a little 6-year-old inside them. Well, mine isn’t talking to me anymore, not since I took him to Space Chimps.” – John Anderson
{/for}
{for=”London Free Press” value=”6″}
“It’s summer, you’ve got time off, the kids are bored and, under those circumstances, you could do a lot worse.” – Jim Slotek
{/for}
{for=”Seattle Times” value=”7″}
“The film’s witty, smart story reminds us that chimps (even if they’re not being shot into space anymore) are still involuntarily on the dangerous, painful front lines of research.” – Tom Keogh
{/for}
{for=”New York Times” value=”8″}
“Journalism is all about having the courage to write the truth even if it will get you mocked by your relatives and co-workers, so here goes: “Space Chimps” is hilarious.” – Neil Genzlinger
{/for}
{for=”Hollywood Reporter” value=”7″}
“The CG animation is nothing special, but the characters are surprisingly fun and the story is full of enough puns, wordplay and slapstick to elicit laughs from across the age spectrum.” – Kirk Honeycutt
Whether it's run-of-the-mill fanboy attention, rabid Batman fans, or ghoulish gawkers eager to see dead movie star Heath Ledger's final performance, The Dark Knight is set to be one of the biggest blockbuster movies of 2008.
{/rw_text} –>
OPENS: July 18, 2008 RATING: PG-13 (Violence) GENRE: Superhero, Fantasy
Three years ago independent film maker Christopher Nolan, best known for a little film called Memento, was picked by Warner Bros. to helm and write the big screen return of Batman.
Worse yet, Christian Bale, a British actor was cast in the lead role.
A skeptical but hopeful fanbase was pleasantly surprised when the movie opened as a smart ans serious treatment of the Caped Crusader – not the campy mocking treatment that has been done in past years.
So it was with great anticipation over the past few years that Batman followers looked forward to the release of The Dark Knight, Nolan’s sequel – which had the debut of Nolan’s take on the Joker as played by Oscar nominee Heath Ledger (Roar, A Knight’s Tale, Brokeback Mountain).
Then this past winter the unthinkable happened when Heath Ledger died in an accidental overdose from mixing prescription medications.
Because of this tragedy, The Dark Knight premiere became overshadowed as the last performance of a gifted young actor.
To a one, each mainstream media reviewer – and most fannish reviews – have focused on ledger and his performance. The consensus is that his turn as Joker is a success and exceeds any other actor’s previous attempt to inhabit the iconic role. Many – but not all – predict that Ledger will be nominated for best supporting actor when the Academy Award nominations come out next year.
Also of note, the addition of Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes, replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes. Most pointed out that Gyllenhaal’s acting chops, easy glamour and commanding screen presence show not only that Holmes was miscast in the role in the first film – but that Gyllenhall, maybe more so than her better-known brother Jake, is destined for a long career in the movies.
Of the few negative comments. Some reviewers didn’t line the 2 1/2 hour length of the film. Others said the film lost the edgy magic of the first film as it reached too far toward becoming an action flick. Still other negative comments focused on the dystopian, bleak atmosphere of Dark Knight.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Outstanding cast
Terrific writing
Possibly the first superhero movie destined to win in a major Oscar category
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Not for children because of extreme violence and scary scenes
At 2 1/2 hours, may be too long for some people
If you want an uplifting feel-good movie, you won’t get it
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Houston Chronicle" value="9"}
"Even without the sentimental distinction of being the late actor's last role, Ledger's performance as the Joker is the best thing about the movie." – Eric Harrison
{/for}
{for=”E!” value=”9″}
“It’s almost unfair to call The Dark Knight a sequel. Director Christopher Nolan has crafted a Batman film of such devastating impact, it practically obliterates the memory of its predecessors.” – Alex Markerson
{/for}
{for=”Salt Lake Tribune” value=”9″}
“ Ledger, tearing into his last great role, embodies the insane genius of The Joker – and of the movie.” – Sean P. Martin
{/for}
{for=”CNN” value=”8″}
“ In a summer when action overwhelms intelligence (and even good sense), here’s a movie that works on many levels.” – Tom Charity
{/for}
{for=”Washington Post – Family Filmgoer” value=”7″}
“Ledger walks away with the movie. His Joker is insane, evil, scary, funny and even pathetic in his psychopathic lack of feeling. He could give younger kids nightmares. This is not a movie for teens younger than high school age, let alone grade schoolers.” – Jane Horwitz
{/for}
{for=”Newsday” value=”8″}
“Ledger is wickedly brilliant as the Joker. He revels in his spaghetti hair and maimed-clown makeup, but it’s his delightfully nasty delivery and twisted posture that transform him into a force of nature. If Alfred Hitchcock was right that a film is only as good as its villain, that explains the success of The Dark Knight.”- Rafer Guzman
{/for}
{for=”Boston Globe” value=”8″}
“You come away impressed, oppressed, provoked, and beaten down, holding on to Ledger’s squirrelly incandescence as a beacon in the darkness.” – Ty Burr
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-Times” value=”10″}
“Because these actors and others are so powerful, and because the movie does not allow its spectacular special effects to upstage the humans, we’re surprised how deeply the drama affects us.” – Roger Ebert
{/for}
{for=”Salon” value=”6″}
“Looks as if it were made from a messy blackboard diagram with lots of circles, heavily underlined phrases (“Duality! Good vs. evil — in the same person! Kinship between hero and villain!”) and crisscrossing arrows that ultimately point to nothing.” – Stephanie Zacharek
{/for}
{for=”London Free Press” value=”9″}
“this shadowy opus of morality and identity bends the genre to new dimensions — hinging not on spectacle, but the yin-and-yang pathology of its hero and villain. It’s a gripping, gratifying high-wire act and a startling departure for a genre usually dismissed as effects-driven eye-candy.” – Kevin Williamson
{/for}
{for=”San Francisco Chronicle” value=”8″}
“The Dark Knight is by no means a complete success. But the more it reveals its dark heart, the better it gets, and at times it seems just a step away from achieving something extraordinary. In the end, it’s no leap forward, but it’s certainly a step in the right direction.” – Mick LaSalle
{/for}
{for=”USA Today” value=”10″}
“A more thrilling, intelligent, morally complex and masterfully crafted film than any summer blockbuster in recent years. It’s probably the best superhero movie to date.” – Claudia Puig
{/for}
{for=”Los Angeles Times” value=”9″}
“The Dark Knight may be the most hopeless, despairing comic-book movie in memory. It creates a world where being a superhero is at best a double-edged sword and no triumph is likely to be anything but short-lived.” – Kenneth Turan
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Tribune” value=”10″}
“Sensational, grandly sinister and not for the kids, “The Dark Knight” elevates pulp to a very high level.” – Michael Phillips
Jule's Verne's classic story comes to life on the Big screen – again. This time it's been updated an has comedic-action star Brendan Fraser (The Mummy) as the lead.
{/rw_text} –> OPENS: July 11, 2008 RATING: PG (Cartoon-level violence) GENRE: Science Fantasy
In the glut of summer flicks based on comic books this summer, Journey to the Center of the Earth – even though it is in 3-D – is a throw-back of sorts as it is based upon a novel written in the 1800s.
An unashamed children’s film, it opens on the same weekend as the more adult-themes Hellboy 2 and the slightly raunchier Meet Dave, starring Eddie Murphy.
Directed by Eric Brevig, best known for creating stunning special effects, this film has its sights set on one goal: make a thrilling movie that is fun for families to see together in a theatre. There, according to critics, it succeeds.
But if you are a film snob looking for a great Oscar-worthy work of filmed speculative fiction, you’ll be disappointed.
Journey is all about the thrill ride, special effects and pushing the limits of 3-D technology without breaking them – and for the most part it succeeds, so say the mainstream critics.
Of course, this weekend, audiences will judge for themselves.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Outstanding visual effects
3-D technology perfected
Stunning visuals
Family friendly
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Weak script
Scary scenes may be too scary for children prone to nightmares.
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Christian Science Monitor" value="6"}
"Remake of the Jules Verne classic lacks some of the sense of wonder of earlier version despite its splashy special effects. ” – Peter Rainer
{/for}
{for=”TIME” value=”5″}
“Neither the acting nor the story matters much here; the movie is simply the sum of its 3D effects.” – Richard Corliss
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Sun-TImes” value=”6″}
“This is a fairly bad movie, and yet at the same time maybe about as good as it could be. There may not be an 8-year-old alive who would not love it. If I had seen it when I was 8, I would have remembered it with deep affection for all these years, until I saw it again and realized how little I really knew at that age.” – Roger Ebert
{/for}
{for=”Toronto Star” value=”5″}
“Whatever kinks remain in 3D technology seem to have been worked out, and there are moments, especially involving a blue phosphorescent bird hovering in the air of the theatre, that are quite impressive. Dramatically, however, this movie has not evolved.” – Philip Marchand
{/for}
{for=”San Francisco Chronicle” value=”8″}
“Director Eric Brevig could have leaned on the 3-D and the action sequences – he could have indulged himself and bloated his movie by 20 minutes – and still had something that would have pleased most viewers. Instead, he told the story.” – Mick LaSalle
{/for}
{for=”Washington Post” value=”7″}
“Viewers will delight at amusing visual stunts involving a yo-yo, a beetle’s antenna and at least three spit takes, one from a very sloppy, gloppy dinosaur.” – Ann Hornaday
{/for}
{for=”Kansas City Star” value=”6″}
“Journey provides a diverting if shallow entertainment, not to mention a glimpse of things to come.” – Robert W. Butler
{/for}
{for=”Salon” value=”8″}
“Just as the effects in “Journey to the Center of the Earth” start to become tiresome, the thing is over: Part of its beauty lies in its economy. In real life, it would take you a long time to journey to the center of the earth. Brevig has us in and out in around 90 minutes. Now that’s show business.” – Stephanie Zacharek
{/for}
{for=”Seattle Post-Intelligencer” value=”7″}
“It’s harmless fun, and it makes for an often impressive display of the latest generation of computer-wizardry. But the enterprise is utterly void of substance: instantly forgettable and about as enriching as a rerun of Johnny Quest.” – William Arnold
After his Oscar nomination for best supporting actor in the 2006 Dreamgirls, movie critics expect more out of Eddie Murphy.
But he seems content to make slapstick gross-out comedies aimed at the 10-to-13-year old market (and those who laugh like pre-teens).
His latest movie, Meet Dave (previously called Starship Dave before some P.R.-type decided to de-sci-fi the title), has Murphy returning to comedic science fiction.
His last outing in the genre was 2002′s The Adventures of Pluto Nash which was a box office failure, but has gained a cult following due to its campy nature.
Meet Dave has Murphy teamed with Norbit director Brian Robbins (a former child actor and teen heartthrob in the 1986-1991 series, Head of the Class, who grew up to be an executive producer of Smallville).
Judging from the reviews, most mainstream film critics are not fans of the Murphy-Robbins duo. And if they have to choose a target of their venom – it more often than not is aimed at Robbins.
Positive notes include kudos to Murphy’s mastery of subtle characterization mixed with the broad comedy of physical slapstick humor.
Negative comments include digs at a supposedly tired concept, overacting by everyone except Murphy and humor that may insult the intelligence of anyone past puberty.
WATCH THE TRAILER
<!– {rw_good}
Pre-teen family friendly if you don’t mind slightly naughty potty humor
{/rw_good} –>
<!– {rw_bad}
Overacting by most of the cast
Cited for poor direction
Plot runs thin
{/rw_bad} –>
<!– {rw_score}
{for="Los Angeles Times" value="3"}
"If Murphy seems to have learned something from the scathing reaction to the excessive and generally grotesque "Norbit," Brian Robbins, who directed that movie as well as this one, has not. As if to make up for Murphy's tightly controlled performance, the movie's other actors are pushed past the limits of parody. " – Sam Adams
{/for}
{for=”New York Times” value=”4″}
“The movie plays like a half-hour sitcom episode that has been stretched — principally through Mr. Murphy’s walking and talking — to feature-length running time.” – Manola Dargis
{/for}
{for=”Reuters” value=”4″}
“Like most of Murphy’s recent output, the movie aims low — as in, the targeted pint-sized audience — and its family-friendly results should translate into some solid summer numbers up on its Friday release.” – Michael Rechtshaffen
{/for}
{for=”Boston Herald” value=”2″}
“With toilet humor, such corny-as-Kansas lines as ‘How do you know when you feel love?’ and a too-predictable scenario that never lets Murphy do much more than mug, Meet Dave deserves a ‘no thanks.’” – Stephen Schaefer
{/for}
{for=”Orlando Sentinel” value=”6″}
“It says volumes about the state of Eddie Murphy’s comedy career that Meet Dave, his latest, is his least hateful film in years. For an actor known for making fun of gays, women, fat people, white people, gays, Asians and homosexuals, that’s saying something.” – Roger Moore
{/for}
{for=”San Francisco Chronicle” value=”7″}
“His new comedy, Meet Dave, isn’t likely to win Murphy another Oscar nomination. But at least it allows him to do what he does best – loads of physical comedy – and doesn’t rely principally on special effects for its humor.” – Ruthe Stein
{/for}
{for=”Chicago Tribune” value=”5″}
“Murphy as a brother from another planet inhabited by a team of little men and women supplying his every word and move, is its occasional funniness amid a sea of pablum. If it were completely rank, it’d be less frustrating.” – Michael Phillips
{/for}
{for=”Philadelphia Inquirer” value=”7″}
“In Meet Dave, family-friendly as a Fourth of July picnic, Murphy and Norbit director Brian Robbins redeem themselves with a performance and scenario that might have been developed for Steve Martin.” – Carrie Rickey
OPENS: August 15, 2008
OPENS: July 11, 2008
Opens: July 11, 2008