Day 48 -- Camp

Released: July 25th, 2003

Starring: Anna Kendrick, Don Dixon, Daniel Letterle, Joanna Chilcoat, Robin De Jesus

Writer/Director: Todd Graff

Description: After a series of Broadway flops, songwriter Bert Hanley goes to work at a musical camp for young performers. Inspired by the kids, he finds an opportunity to regain success by staging an altogether new production.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Before "High School Musical" and "Glee", the quintessential movie and TV show about a group of talented teens was "Fame".  The 1980 film, which later moved to TV and was remade in 2009, is one of those movies every performer watched and then decided that they wanted to do what those kids did. It's to performing arts, what "All the President’s Men" is to journalism.

"Camp" tried to follow in "Fame's" footsteps, but failed miserably. Even the move from a school in NYC to a camp in upstate New York was an ill advised one. There is no real direction in this movie, and it appears to be a collection of scenes with the thinnest of threads connecting them. Only two characters are even remotely developed, straight kid Vlad (Letterle) and cross dressing, gay Michael (De Jesus). From what I can tell, the plot of the movie was the kids inspiring a drunk, failed musical theater producer, who has become all doom and gloom. But when the kids start singing his new songs, he begins to enjoy it again.

Every aspect of the film is under-produced, except for the musical numbers, which were well done. The progression of Vlad from kissing the starlet of the camp to "dating" the unappreciated girl was quick (two scenes), jarring, and frankly, undermined any other relationships in the movie. The only pair that had any chemistry and intrigue was Vlad and Michael. The writer was going for a bond between them where the slowly began to understand each other, but I think they missed an opportunity by not making this duo more of a focus (platonic or romantic).

There appeared to be no over-arcing story between the teens, and the story felt like a bunch of scenes edited together. The action would jump from one story to the next without any transition or build-up. Also, they would bury any conflict in the plot and resurfaces it intermittently, but by that point, all of the drama was gone. The suck up getting revenge on the bossy starlet was a story arc that they completely abandoned and only used in two scenes. This movie was a prime example of really bad editing ruining a film.

The performances weren't all that good. Outside of the signing, which again, was top notch, everything else was pretty poor. The only actor with any semblance of talent was Oscar nominee, Anna Kendrick. Despite her part being small, she still had the most interesting scenes in the film, and as I mentioned before, her storyline should have been expanded. All three leads made it too obvious that they were reading line because most of the "emotional" scenes were very wooden. It felt more like an end of summer camp movie, than a film to be released in theaters.

"Camp" was bad in just about every aspect. The fact that Disney's "Camp Rock" was light years better is kind of sad. The only chance the story had was if it was a TV series, and the writer got a chance to explore all of the storylines that were introduced. It was probably a great learning experience for the actors, but definitely something that shouldn't have been released.

Rating: 3.5/10 -- The singing is the only thing that saves this movie. There's really no reason to watch this movie, unless you were in it.

Day 47 -- Interview with the Vampire

Released: November 11th, 1994

Starring: Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, Kirsten Dunst, Antonio Banderas, Christian Slater

Writer/Director: Anne Rice/Neil Jordan

Description: A vampire tells his epic life story: love, betrayal, loneliness, and hunger.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Vampire movies have seen resurgence in recent years, and the genre has bred a whole new group of fans that do not understand the mythology. There are certain rules that apply to vampires that I feel have been forgotten in these new incarnations. And if these movies hang their hats on anything it would be the audience expecting certain things to be true.

"Interview with the Vampire" was a nice throwback to me to way I enjoy vampires to be portrayed. There is a class and sophistication with Lestat (Cruise) and Louis (Pitt) that is missing from the Cullens. An immortal should have a posh about them that makes them appear better than the mortals. While the brooding, self loathing vampire has its place, it also needs to be counter-balanced by the blood-thirsty abominations that they are. This contradiction can inhabit the same body, like Angel from "Buffy", or can be two vampires living together as it is in "Interview".

Lestat is you typical hunter type of vamp. He enjoys the kill and the power that he feels over those he deems inferior to himself. Cruise plays him with the perfect mix of evil and likeability. I wouldn't be surprised if Boreanez based Angelus after seeing this film. Cruise was also in his prime during this time period, and it was a nice reminder of how great of an actor he was when he was sane. He was at his best in the scenes with Claudia (Dunst), as he showed concern and vindictiveness each time he tried to teach her things.

Louis was more of your newfangled vampire. He's self aware, and doesn't enjoy the kill as much as Lestat, which leads him to be depressed the entire movie. This is Pitt's first real showcase of his acting talent; he does a terrific job of allowing each of Louis emotions to emanate from the screen. His character only becomes happy after he and Claudia arrive in Paris, and as the old story telling adage goes: once your character stars felling happy, you torture him some more. His introduction to Armand (Banderas) is the beginning of the end of his ignorant existence.

The review wouldn't be complete without mentioning the great performance by a 12-year-old, Kirsten Dunst. It's quite astounding that she can play innocent and devilish within the same scene. The moment where she "kills" Lestat comes to mind, she begins it by being cute with him by the piano, then turns diabolical as she slashes his throat, and finish it by being creepy as she says a prayer over him. It was a hell of a first role for Dunst, and you could even make the argument that she peaked with Claudia.

"Interview with the Vampire" was my first introduction to Anne Rice's version of the vampire, which are much closer to my idea of these fictional characters. They are dangerous, yet sophisticated; it's a great mix that certainly influenced Joss Whedon when he created the Angel character. If you enjoy the genre, it is definitely one to check out, and I even excuse it for not make a bigger deal about needing to be invited in, which is one of my favorite rules. Also, real vampires don't sparkle.

Rating: 8/10 -- If you dislike "Twilight", I'd give this film a chance before writing off the entire genre. The trio of Cruise, Pitt and Dunst makes the movie compelling, like a vampire version of "My Two Dads". Another entry in the "they-don't-make-em-like-they-used-to" list.

Day 46 -- The Perfect Score

Released: January 30th, 2004

Starring: Scarlett Johansson, Chris Evans, Brian Greenberg, Erika Christensen, Darius Miles, Matthew Lillard

Writer/Director: Mark Schwahn, Mark Hyman and Jon Zack/ Brian Robbins

Description: Six high school seniors decide to break into the Princeton Testing Center so they can steal the answers to their upcoming SAT tests and all get perfect scores.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Whenever a high school movie picks a particular moment in high school, they tend to blow it out of proportion. There's sports, prom, cheerleading, or graduation, and each have end of the world implications. The writers tend to over-dramatize the situations, so that the teen audience continues to believe their lives are more important than they are normally.

"The Perfect Score" takes on a subject that may actually be important to their lives: the S.A.T. Test. It's plot is definitely something we all thought about during this stressful time, and something that a lot of us dismissed immediately . Stealing the answers to the test is ridiculous and something that only should be in movies. It's a great idea on the surface, a heist movie with high school kids, but something went wrong with the execution.

Everyone's motivation was as stereotypical as you would imagine, but there didn't even seem to be a hint of subtext to their reasons. Desmond (Miles) needed them to play college basketball, Anna (Christensen) wanted to fulfil her parents wishes, Kyle (Evans) wanted to pursue his dreams, Matty (Greenberg) want to reunited with his girlfriend, and Francesca (Johansson) and Roy (Leonardo Nam) didn't disclose their need for the answers. Those descriptions were as deep as they went with it, and the coming of age ending where they all decide that the test didn't hold power over them, was really contrived. By having them do the right thing and not use the answer was the one right thing the writers did with the script.

There's always a reason why a film has three people credited as writing the screenplay. Usually it means the original draft was not up to par, or that someone came up with the story but wasn't a good enough writer to turn in a shootable draft.

Of the three writers, I'm only familiar with Mark Schwahn, who is the creator of "One Tree Hill" and writer of "Coach Carter". There are times in the film where I see some of the comedy that is prevalent in his previous work, but there are also moments and characters that are the complete opposite, that I have to believe he was the late comer to the draft, or that he was rewritten by the other two who had created the story.  I don't see how Roy's character was nothing more than we need a funny Asian kid because you know Asians are good with computers, but we'll give him the added wrinkle that he smoke weed.

The performances were nothing to write home about either, Johansson and Greenberg steal the movie among the six leads, while Darius Miles couldn't even play himself well. Evans was flat as usual, which is something that seemed to plague him early on in his career. He didn't really start coming into his own until he became more of a dramadey/action actor. Lillard's in four scenes and he steals them all, which is nothing new for him. You could tell that a lot of the actors we still learning the craft (except for Miles), and were very inconsistent. It was also refreshing to see Johansson play a character that shows off her acting rather than her sex appeal.

"The Perfect Score" is one of those movie that tried to cash in with the teen demographic, which wasn't all that unusual for films produced by MTV. Although, they tended to be a little more "edgy" than their Disney counterpart, they still were too squeaky clean to have any relevance in the genre. There's a reason short lived shows like "My So-Called Life" and "Freaks and Geeks", and the John Hughes movies from the 80s, still resonate today: they didn't sanitize their plots because they thought the audience couldn't handle it. It's a shame that more filmmaker don't trust the intelligence level of teenagers.

Rating: 5/10 -- It's a watchable movie with some famous faces in it, but I'd recommend checking out their better films first. Especially, Erika Christensen in "Swim Fan", it's a much better guilty pleasure. If you're a fan of the genre, you'll enjoy it, but if you think it's an updated "Breakfast Club", well, please watch "The Breakfast Club" again.

Day 45 -- These Girls

Released: May 23rd, 2006

Starring: David Boreanez, Caroline Dhaverna, Holly Lewis, Amanda Walsh

Writer/Director: John Hazlett

Description: During their summer between high school and college, three girls blackmail a slightly older hunk into having sex with them.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

While watching 365 movies, there will surely be a few that have absolutely no impact. They are fine movies and nothing is wrong with them, but they are missing something to keep you interested. Not every movie is a winner or a loser, and when viewing a large amount of films there will be those that don't really deserve a review.

"These Girls" is one of those that made me say, 'meh', at every twist in the movie. When your movie is about three teenage girl, with each girl being dumber than the one before, blackmailing an older man into having a tryst with each of them, you really don't have much foundation to write from. Keira (Dhaverna), who may be the "smartest"of the three, devises a plan for the trio to have sex with Keith Clark (Boreanez), after he stops talking to Glory (Walsh). The three pose as "babysitters", and share the older man. Gloria, who is in love with Clark after having an affair for months, is against the plan, but goes along with it so that she can see him.

None of the four main characters have any redeeming qualities. The interactions and conflicts between them are neither interesting or all that dramatic. There was no one to root for, and the action at the end of the movie was ridiculous and stupid. Even the twist at the end -- Glory being pregnant -- didn't bring out any emotion in me. It was an inconsequential plot.

The performances are a little dry, and once again, Boreanez shows that he's a much better TV actor than he is a movie actor. He seems to lack the ability to create a character in a short period of time. I couldn't tell if his character was bored, or a jerk. The female characters didn't help because they were as 2D as you could get. Each was a stereotype of of a teenager: schemer, ignorant and stage 5 virgin clinger.

The direction and cinematography did this movie no favors either. Every scene was bland and they did little to nothing to show us the atmosphere of the small town. The closest was during Kiera's introductory voice over. The writing was generic and there was no tension at all.

"These Girls" doesn't deserve much attention aside from the families of the filmmaker. It's not interesting, but it isn't terrible, either. It's the definition of mediocre. There's no need to go out and watch it, but if you do, you'll barely remember it. Probably not the first movie these actors point out on their resumes.

Rating: 5/10 - Mediocre. It's biggest accomplishment is that it was made. Since it was adapted from a play, I'm assume it was someone's pet project. Boreanez should stick to TV.

Day 44 -- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Released: February 27th, 2009

Starring: Noomi Rapace, Michael Nyqvist

Writer/Director: Nikolaj Arcel and Rasmus Heisterberg/Niels Arden Oplev

Description: A journalist is aided in his search for a woman who has been missing -- or dead -- for forty years by a young female hacker.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

For some reason, subtitles are off putting for some movie goers, which always confuses me. The excuse I always get is, 'if I wanted to read, I'd open a book'.  This is completely short-sighted, and completely shuts you out from some great movie experiences. 

"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Swedish version)" is one of those films. Adapted from the Stieg Larsson classic trilogy, the movie follows investigative journalist, Mikael Blomkvist (Nyqvist), as he digs into a 40-year-old missing person case. With the help of hacker extraordinaire, Lisbeth Salander (Rapice), Bloomkvist begins to unravel a deep, dark secret of a wealthy Swedish family.

I usually don't mind spoiling films during this project because they are mostly terrible movies, but this one, I feel the need to keep it a little more vague. The mystery is one of the best I've seen in years, and deserved to be enjoyed. It's one of the few that I didn't guess from the beginning, and delighted me more than anything. I enjoyed the fact that I was figuring out the murders at the same time as Mikael and Lisbeth.

But what the movie should be more remembered for is the introduction of the most powerful female characters in the last decade. Lisbeth's ability to not need or rely on her male counterpart is a change from most films we see in America. This is not a feminist point, but she is Blomkvist's equal through out the film, and at times she takes the lead. And it's not just in her scenes with Blomkvist, it's also when we are first introduced to her in the movie's first act, and she is shown getting revenge on a sadistic guardian. It was refreshing to see this type of character on the screen.

Along with the way they wrote Lisbeth, the writers also tapped into the one thing that excites me: slow storytelling. The running length of 152 minutes would lead many filmmakers to improperly pace the movie, but Oplev does a nice job of blending the introductions of our main characters together. By mixing the two stories, the film doesn't stay too long on one character, and that keeps you from getting bored. Even during the longer second act, the reveals in the mystery are perfectly placed so that they immediately reset your losing interest gauge.

"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" is on the same level as "Letters from Iwo Jima" for me. They both convey a beautifully crafted story without using English as it's main language, and relying heavily on subtitles. If you still have your doubts about watching a subtitled movie, I highly recommend renting these two films, and if they don't change your mind, then you are hopeless, and can go back to watching "Twilight".

Rating: 8/10 -- If you enjoyed David Fincher's remake, then I highly recommend checking out the original. One of the best movies in the last five years, and should be enjoyed whether or not you like subtitles. Rapice's Lisbeth should be hailed as on of the greatest female character in film over the last 25 years.

Day 43 -- Disney's Prom

Released: April 29th, 2011

Starring: Aimee Teegarden, Thomas McDonell, DeVaugh Nixon, Danielle Campbell, Nolan A. Sotillo

Writer/Director: Katie Wech/Joe Nussbaum

Description: A group of teenagers get ready for their high school prom.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

There's usually a bit of embarrassment I feel whenever I watch a TV show or movie from the teen/high school genre.  I can usually defend it because for everyone melodramtic moment there a equal and opposite realistic moment.  But Disney's take is a little too much, even for me.

"Prom" takes everything that could be realistic and cool about a movie featuring high school kids, and turns it into a film that causes eye rolling for the entire running length. It follows the story of a group students from Brookside High School in a WASP-y suburb where lacrosse is king.

If the movie was turned off in the first five minutes, the average movie watcher should be able to predict the rest of the movie. It's textbook high school drama: smart girl ends up with other side of the tracks guy, arragont jock sees his entire world crumble, and shy nice guy gets the beautiful girl he loves after a heartfelt plea. These themes can be written with some heart and realism, but Disney made it so sugar-sweet that my teeth hurt while watching it. For Christ-sake, the prom's theme was Starry Night. Ow (grabs mouth).

I realize what I'm getting when I watch this genre, but at some point, you have to stop completely lying to the audience. Sure, there's a chance of some kind of fairytale ending, but not every good character will have one. The best example from "Prom" is that the shy kid, Lucas (Sotillo), didn't need to end up with the girl. An ending of just him and his best friend enjoying the concert would have been good enough. The genre is unrealistic as it is, with some many pretty people in one high school, but please stop giving teen girls unattainable dreams for their proms; it's hard enough as a high school boy.

Aimee Teegarden leads the cast of mostly unknown young actors, as Disney tried to recreate the same magic they got from the "High School Musical". Teegarden is way over-qualified for the role, and for those that have seen the TV version of "Friday Night Lights", we know how good of an actress she can and will be. There were points in the movie, especially the peppy moments, where you could tell she was trying not to read her lines sarcastically. But she added a sense of credibility during her dramatic scenes that was absent from every other moment in the movie.

The only other possible future star in this film is Danielle Campbell, who played Simone. Besides Teegarden, she was the only other actor who didn't over exaggerate her emotions, her choices felt natural. She's one to look out for in this genre. Also, it doesn't hurt that she has stunning natural beauty.

"Prom" is a fairy tale version of a fairy tale movie. Disney went out of their way to make it family friendly, and that is what makes today's youth feel so entitled. It also gives the genre a bad name, even "High School Musical", as absurd as it is, gives a better representation of the genre. I will defend teen dramas when they are done well as is the case with "One Tree Hill", "O.C.", "Freaks and Geeks" and "Dawson's Creek", but when the entire movie is fluff, I can't stand behind it, no matter how gorgeous Aimee Teegarden is.

Rating: 4.5/10 -- Probably shouldn't be viewed by anyone under the age of 14, or male. Teegarden tries her best to carry the movie, but she's just not experienced enough yet. For comparison purposes, the Disney Channel movie, "Lemon Mouth", is more well done than this movie, and that didn't cost $8 million dollars to make.

Day 42 -- Loser

Released: July 21st, 2000

Starring: Jason Biggs, Mena Suvari, Greg Kinnear

Writer/Director: Amy Heckerling

Description: A college student, branded a loser by his roommates and booted from the dorm, falls in love with a coed who has eyes for their professor.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Remember that time when Jason Biggs was a comedy star? No. Are you under 18? Yes. Well, that explains it. Believe it or not, Biggs made five comedies in a row between 1999 and 2001, and was one of the most visible actor under 25. But as quickly as his fame rose, it fell even faster. Luckily, he found a nice niche out of the spotlight, and has become a respectable comedic actor.

"Loser" is the one movie from this time period that got lost in the shuffle. The plot is your basic late 90s young adult romantic comedy. A lot of sexual humor, along with drug and alcohol use. The "unique" element of this is Biggs plays Paul, a "loser" who is not ready for life in the big city, and falls in love with the emotionally unstable girl, but unfortunately for him, she's dating their professor. You know, that old story.

After being screwed over by his slacker roommates and watching Nora (Suvari) run back to the predator professor, Paul contemplates leaving, but apparently ends up staying and getting a hair cut instead. As you probably guessed, Paul ends the film with Nora because these movies need a happy ending, and it was made by Amy Heckerling, so this was only natural. It even had that cheesy montage before the end credits where it tells you what happened to each character in a "humorous" way. Note to filmmakers, these are not necessary, let your story stand on it's own, and also, they are never funny; even Mallrats' were unnecessary.

There are many reasons that "Loser" is never brought up when people discuss comedies of this time period. It is very bland and the story is even more predictable than normal. I can only imagine Heckerling was able to make this film due to her reputation from "Clueless" because the two couldn't be further apart in terms of quality. Every discovery made by the characters are telegraphed so far in advance that the audience know what they will do 10 to 15 scenes before they occur. It's lazy and appalling.

The only thing that kept me intrigued was that the movie was a flashback to a time in my life that I remember vividly. I'm quite sure I even took a girlfriend to see this movie. I know, I know, but I was only 14, so cut me a break. Everything in the movie from the music, to the clothes, to the video store full of VHS (What's that?) tapes, bring me back to the beginning of high school. While the quality of the film isn't the same, I imagine it's the same feeling that people who grew up in the 80s have when they what a John Hughes film. "Loser" along with "American Pie", "She's All That", and "Varsity Blues" recall a time before student loans; ah, I miss those times.

To their credit, Biggs and Suvari have a lot of chemistry on screen and rise above the rest of the slop that surrounds them. Suvari is one of those actresses that I have always considered pretty and talented, and wondered why she didn't get more mainstream work. Biggs is Biggs, and he's good being the naive nerd, but he needs a superior script to not seem bland. The rest of the cast sit on a scale ranging from awful (Jimmi Simpson) to meh (Greg Kinnear), and really don't add anything to the movie.

"Loser" was a YA rom-com that was forced through to capitalize on the "American Pie" audience before it matured. The producers even tried to double down by enlisting Heckerling to write and direct the feature, which turned out to be a terrible mistake. Sometimes even with all of the right ingredients in place, the meal still comes out tasting like crap.

Rating: 5/10 -- Nostalgia factor is really the only reason I would tune into this, and that is even fleeting. Suvari in her prime was nice as well, and the scenes between her and Biggs are the films highlights. Should only be watch as a comparison to convince someone how good of a film "American Pie" was in its time.

Day 41 -- S. Darko

Released: August 9th, 2009

Starring: Daveigh Chase, Briana Evigan, Ed Westwick, James Lafferty, Matthew Davis

Writer/Director: Nathan Atkins/Chris Fisher

Description: The story picks up seven years after the first film when little sister Samantha Darko and her best friend Corey are now 18 and on a roadtrip to Los Angeles when they are plagued by bizarre visions.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Some movies should never be made. They are usually sequels to movies that really didn't require a sequel, such as "Speed 2", "American Pyscho 2", and "Caddyshack 2", to name a few. At least with the movies I named, there was most likely a mainstream audience out there that would pay money to see it. But others are made for reasons that I haven't quite figured out yet, maybe the producers like to lose money?

"S. Darko" makes "Southland Tales" look like an actual movie. From what I can tell there no semblance of a plot, and every consequence is immediately erased by time travel or alternate realities. At least "Tales" had some sort of a structure, despite how messed up it was. Even "Donnie Darko" was a presentable movie, and that film enjoys a love-hate relationship from me.

What I can gather from the story is that Samantha Darko (Chase), who's apparently is in "Donnie Darko", is traveling to LA with her friend, Corey (Evigan), to get away from her life in Virginia. Along the way they break down, and are rescued by Chuck Bass...err, I mean Randy (Westwick) who offers to fix their car. Once they settle into the middle of nowhere town, crazy stuff starts happening.

First, a meteor hits a windmill, and crazy local, Iraq Jack (Lafferty), escapes with his life, but this moment sparks the twist and turns of a time travel movie. For the next half hour, the plot moves along smoothly as the girl assimilate themselves to the town, and eventually come to odds when Sam wants to leave, but Corey does not. After an argument, Sam is killed in a two car accident. This is when things go off the wagon in terms of plot, and I got completely lost.

It's okay to have some twist, and alternate realities are alright, but they are a writing crutch because there are no real consequences to any decisions you make with the characters. One minute they could be dead, next their alive, and then someone else died, but then they're not dead either, like I said it protects you from making a tough choice in writing. The biggest screw you from the writers is that the movie reverts to the meteor attack, and we find out that Iraq Jack died. I assume they tried to go for the "Donnie Darko" ending where he was dead the whole time, but it fell incredibly short.

The strangest thing about this film is that the supporting cast is a who's who of teen girl entertainment. Beside Gossip Girls' Westwick, the roles are filled by One Tree Hill's James Lafferty, Vampire Diaries' Matthew Davis, and Twilight's Jackson Rathborne. None of them seem to be giving a lot of effort, except maybe Rathborne, who turns in an okay performance as geeky Jeremy. 

But the award for worst acting, and probably deserving of a Razzie (on second thought, this film is too bad for the Razzies), goes to Briana Evigan. The "star" of Step Up 2: The Streets" is trying entirely too hard to sound like a bad-ass bitch, and part of the blame goes to the writer as well. She stresses the curse words too much, and make them sound more unnatural than a girl with her personality should. 

The writer was attempting to be vulgar for vulgar's sake, especially the scene where Corey talks about sex with the Pastor (Davis). For some reason when I hear the term "blue balls" spoken on screen, I cringe, not because of what it means, but that I think if your going to write about that, there are much more cleaver was than using that term.

"S. Darko" holds the distinction of being the messiest movie that I've watched so far. The writer and director tried so hard to emulate the previous film that they forgot to create a compelling story. There is nothing remotely redeemable about this film, the two female leads don't provide enough eye candy to make it watchable for the most immature reason. I should know, I've watched plenty of films for that exact reason.

Rating: 1.5/10 -- Made me long for "Gamer", and I hate that movie with a passion. I've already wasted enough words on the piece of crap disguised as a film.

Day 40 -- Guarding Tess

Released: March 11th, 1994

Starring: Nicholas Cage, Shirley MacLaine

Writer/Director: Hugh Wilson and Peter Torokvei/Hugh Wilson

Description: A former First Lady of the US wants a particular Secret Service agent to head her bodyguard detail, even though he can't stand her.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]
 

***

First off, thanks to everyone who voted in our first poll. There will be more in the future, so stay tuned.

Some movies are only remembered because certain actors star in them. There's not really much that stands out story-wise, or even performance-wise, but they still stick in the mind of audiences even years after their release. It's usually quite the achievement to make a movie, no matter what the quality, and have it find an audience. Albeit, a niche audience, but no matter what you're assured it will not be forgotten.

"Guarding Tess" at it's core is a comedy version of "Driving Miss Daisy", but it's enduring success is because of the work of Nick Cage. He plays ambitious Secret Service Agent Doug Chesnic, who despises the role of guarding former first lady Tess Carlisle, and dreams of a more glamorous assignment within the agency. But after his final day, his is notified that Mrs. Carlisle ask him to be kept on for another tour of duty. Doug refuses, but relents when the president asks him to do it as a personal favor.

From this point forward, the relationship between Doug and Tess dominates most of the movie, as Tess attempts to loosen him up, and he tries to stick to protocol. After a diner alone, the pair gain the trust of each other and begin to blossom into a mother-son relationship. This is where McLaine's old school acting shines through, as she doesn't attempt to show the change through anything dramatic, but rather, she keeps it subtle by using her mannerisms and tone of voice to convey her love for Doug.

The most important thing that many screenwriters should learn from this movie is that if you set a moral code and personality for a character, make them stand by it, unless something legitimate causes it to change. The device used in "Guarding Tess" is the final act when she gets kidnapped, which makes Doug change his thoughts on protocol because he has grown to care for Tess. So his shooting of the driver who turned on her, is much more justified because it was shown why he changed and why it was significant.

Outside of that solid piece of writing, the plot and story isn't all the special. The conflict between Doug and Tess is outstanding but the kidnapping was poorly thought out and executed. Unless I missed it, there was no indication as to why her driver would execute a plan to use her for ransom. A more believable storyline would have been her son doing it so that he could get the money for his retirement home project, whether that be through her life insurance or the ransom. But the driver was just an excuse to use the car lighter clue that made Doug seem competent in the CIA's mind.

"Guarding Tess" was truly a time when the actor's performances were much better than the material they were given. It was a rare movie where Cage allowed his character to slowly develop, and not gave him a unique quality, such as the Pokey voice in "Peggy Sue Got Married". The movie didn't affect me one way or the other, it's a fine move to watch, but it's not something I'd probably pay money to see. In the end, I cared more about the terrible drama in the final half-hour, then I did about how the story would turn out, and that is not what a filmmaker should be striving for in their movie.

Rating: 6/10 -- Average movie, with some good performances. Feels like a movie that could only be made in its time period. When you watch it you can tell it's from the early 90s, and is too slow for today's ADD movie going public.

 

  

Day 39 -- TiMER

Released: May 14, 2010

Starring: Emma Caufield, John Patrick Amedori, Michelle Borth, Desmond Harrington

Writer/Director: Jac Schaeffer

Description: If a clock could count down to the moment you meet your soul mate, would you want to know?

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

There's always an interest light bulb that goes on in my mind when I see a new twist on a genre. Romantic comedies all usually come from the same place, usually a women is either unlucky in love or she's currently in a love triangle. Most astute movie watchers can sniff out where the story is going early on, especially in terms of the triangle because there's always one obvious choice.

"TiMER" takes the first premise and adds a twist on it. The TiMER is a scientific device that can determine the exact moment when you will meet your soul mate. It's truly meant to take the guess work out of relationships because your timer begins when you and your soul mate both buy the device.

Unfortunately, for Ooma (Caulfield) her TiMER hasn't started counting down, yet. Ooma (repeated her so you realize they named a character, Ooma) has become very pragmatic about her love life, and as she approaches 30, which includes 16 years of living with a blank TiMER, she becomes desperate to find her soul mate. But after meeting a younger guy, with whom there's no pressure because his doesn't run out for four months, she begins to forget about her pragmatic ways. Eventually, her TiMER begins to countdown, and it turns out to be the guy her sister is "dating". 

That's the only real twist, and it caught me slightly off guard. I'll admit when Dan (Harrington) was introduced, I thought he was the soul mate, but as the movie went along I thought he was more meant for Steph (Borth) because he wasn't seen much after the bar scene. But I guess my instincts were rusty because it was a quite obvious slight of hand, per se. I'm actually glad they didn't fall into the trap of having the young guy change his morals (not getting a TiMER) just to fulfill the audience expectation. The emotional response it drew from me when they said their final goodbyes in his apartment were appropriate, not melodramatic.

Caulfield did what she does best, be a neurotic, funny, quirky woman that can make you laugh and cry in the same role. Those of us that remember her as Ayna, the vengeance demon on "Buffy", already know the range she has as an actress. It's not all-time great range, but it's enough that the comedy, nor the drama looks forced.  Ooma is not one of her top performances, but it is another example of how she harness both sides of acting without over-acting.

The writing was pretty generic, and had a few decent callbacks at the end, but the stellar parts of the script were few and far between. Only a few scenes stand out in my mind: When they find out Mikey (Amedori) has a fake TiMER, when Jesse finds his soul mate, and the break-up scene in Mikey's apartment. The banter parts of the script work, especially most of Steph's scenes, but they suspend belief a little too much and have us believe that she hasn't been fired from her jobs, yet. 

It's a mediocre script from a pretty interesting idea, which brings up the question: If you could know, would you want to? This can be applied to love and death, and it's interesting to see the smart way they approached it in "TiMER", as opposed to "In Time", which had a bigger budget and more known leads. It's an interesting tale that if an idea's intriguing enough, good writing trumps a big budget and marketing.

Rating: 6.5/10 -- A romantic comedy with a twist, and a smart one for what it's worth. Caulfield is adorable, and Borth is pretty good as the smart aleck sister. If you like rom-coms, it worth checking out, but if you loathe them, then you can pass. I enjoyed it because I like new twist on old ideas.

Day 38 -- The Boondock Saints

Released: January 21st, 2000

Starring: Sean Patrick Flanery, Norman Reedus, William Defoe

Writer/Director: Troy Duffy

Description: Fraternal twins set out to rid Boston of the evil men operating there while being tracked down by an FBI agent.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Movies are enjoyed for all sorts of reasons, and become popular in many different ways. The least of which is the quality of the film. You could like the actor, director, writer, and hell, even the cinematographer, or it could be made from a terrible novel (*cough* Twilight *cough*), or sometimes the lack of quality is the reason (The Room). While shooting a movie, there really is no way to know whether you will find your audience because the film is good or some other unpredictable element.

"Boondock Saints" owes it popularity in my circle of friends to the tremendous drinking game involved with it, and honestly, I've only seen this film twice without a drink in my hand. There are many different games depending on how drunk you want to get, but the most popular one is to drink whenever someone swears. This can get dicey during the one action scene about midway through the film.

Despite the fact that the game is sometimes the only reason someone will see the movie, there's an actual film with a plot and everything. Connor (Flanery) and Murphy (Reedus) McManus are on a mission to wipe out organized crime in the city of Boston. With their loose cannon partner, Rocco (David Della Rocco), the brothers kill about a dozen of Beantown most notorious criminals. The action is your standard fare for the time period, lots of slow motion and creative ways for people to die, including shooting a guy while he's masturbating at a peep show, which surprisingly is Ron Jeremy.

As the movie moves along there are several twist, such as the hitman hired to kill "the Saints" turns out to be their father, and FBI Agent Smecker (Dafoe) decision to join the brother on their quest to eradicate evil. If you take the writing (more the dialogue) for what it is, a typical high-energy, action movie with some comedic moments, then you do not get bogged down by some of the poor exchanges. But if you consider Duffy's work as mediocre then you are complete missing the point of the script.

 None of the encounters involve thought provoking dialogue or insightful soliloquies, but the overall issue of the film is where his genius lies. The Saints are rampaging through Boston on a murder spree, but their victims aren't random people, they are the low-life scum of the criminal underground. 

So are they justified in what they do or are they simply killers?

It is a deep and difficult question to answer, and Duffy tries to show that with the end credits consisting of testimonials from citizens of Boston. It definitely goes back to the idea that one man's vigilante is another man's terrorist. The men they kill, while evil in many respects, come from families and are not seen as bad men by their wives and children. 

And if vigilantes were allowed to kill those that they saw as evil, where would the line end. Criminals are easy targets, but what about the people that believe women who get abortions are evil, or to the even more extreme, those that participate in pre-marital sex. There's a reason why there's a justice system and it is not like the old west, and it is my belief that while the McManus brothers are bad ass, they are also criminals because they committed a crime that wasn't in self defense.

Even though I probably went a little deeper with this movie then I need to, I still enjoyed it. It's a fun action film that is great to watch with a few buddies, and possible enjoy an adult beverage in hand. It's not a classic by any stretch, but it does more things good than bad, so it passes my action film litmus test.

Rating: 6/10 -- Good popcorn flick, and definitely one that can be enjoyed with friends before or after a night out. But don't sleep on the thought provoking idea presented in the film. Defoe is outstandingly creepy like he should be.

Day 37 -- Striking Distance

Released: September 17th, 1993

Starring: Bruce Willis, Sarah Jessica Parker, Dennis Farina, Tom Siezmore, Robert Pastorelli

Writer/Director: Rowdy Herrington and Marty Kaplan/Rowdy Herrington

Description: Coming from a police family, Tom Hardy ends up fighting his uncle after the murder of his father. Tom believes the killer is another cop, and goes on the record with his allegations. Demoted then to river duty, the killer taunts Tom.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Ah, when Bruce Willis was a legitimate action star. For those too young to remember, Mr. Willis at one time was hired to play these roles, not be an over-acting parody of them. Most notably starring in the two greatest Christmas films of our generation, Die Hard and Die Hard 2.

"Striking Distance" is a forgotten "gem" from the early 90s that had one of the most ridiculous twist at the end. Willis stars as Det. Tom Hardy, who is investigating the Polish Hill Strangler murders, while also being the key witness in his partner and cousin's (Really?) police brutality trail. Prior to the policeman's ball and after the conviction of his cousin, Jimmy Detillo (Pastorelli), Hardy's father is killed following a high speed chase with the Strangler. Hardy's insistence that the killer was a cop and not the man they arrested for the crime, coupled with the suicide of Jimmy, earns him a demotion to "river duty". 

For most people, that explanation of the early plot doesn't ring a bell, but mention it's the movie where Willis plays a boat cop, and every one suddenly remembers. To be honest, that's all that should be remembered about this film. Just like "Twisted" before it, this movie -- despite being older -- follows the same cliches as every other film of the genre. Lone wolf detective tries to investigate a crime that every one else believes was committed by someone else, and when they discover the truth, it is a twist that they never saw coming. In "Striking Distance's" case, the twist was that the cousin wasn't dead, but he was indeed, the Strangler himself. Oh, no, they couldn't stop themselves there, Jimmy's father, Nick Detillo (Farina) killed Hardy's father to cover up his son's crime.

The writers not only had one twist ending, but two (three if you count Parker's IAB double agent/Hardy's lover storyline) that are ridiculous and never explained. But what can you expect from a writing team named Rowdy and Marty, I mean seriously, the only person who should call themselves "Rowdy" is Roddy Piper. And no surprise that "Rowdy" also directed "Road House", which is just as ridiculous as this film. I'm sure I'll find a lot of these, but once again it looks like the writers just went by a template and filled in blanks for character name, location and dialogue. Every action piece and investigation scene was straight out of every law enforcement movie ever made. 

Willis didn't help matters either as he played a sadder version of John McClane, and casting Parker as his love interest didn't do the film any favors. The acting overall was average, and very much monotone, except for the freak out by Danny Detillo (Sizemore) at the police party. It was a border paycheck performance for most of the actors involved.

"Striking Distance" will be remembered for one thing and one thing only: It's the movie about boat cops. No matter how small a part the actual river duty played in the movie, that will always be the lasting memory of the film. And one final plea, stop casting Parker as a romantic lead, no one finds her remotely sexy -- even Matthew Broderick.

Rating: 5/10 -- Should only be sought out if you have an obsession to watch every Bruce Willis film ever made, or you were doing some crazy project where you were watching a movie a day, but who would do that? Nothing really off putting about it, but it would be a last resort on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

Day 36 -- Serenity

Released: September 30th, 2005

Starring: Nathan Fillion, Summer Glau, Gina Torres, Alan Tudyk, Adam Baldwin

Writer/Director: Joss Whedon

Description: The crew of the ship Serenity tries to evade an assassin sent to recapture one of their number who is telepathic.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

When a cult favorite TV show gets taken off the air too soon, the fans of said show always clamor for a movie to be made. They pay no mind to how exactly their favorite show could actually translate to the big screen, and really only want to see the characters once more. For short lived shows, the chance are worse, but sometimes producers take a chance.

"Serenity" would be the prime example of a movie that was closely tied to the show from which it was born, but was still able to be enjoyed by those that never seen a second of "Firefly". I originally saw this movie from that perspective, as I rented it based solely on how impressed I was with Nathan Fillion's guest starring role on "Buffy". I never felt lost or even realized it was a TV show, but once I found "Firefly", I watched the entire series in one sitting. 

For those unaware, and honestly, why are you reading this if you're not,"Serenity" picks up about six-months after the final episode of "Firefly", and we are reintroduced to Mal (Fillion) and his merry bunch of space pirates, but this time they are on the run from an assassin, who wants to reclaim River (Glau) after she escapes from an Alliance facility. But as they scamper across the galaxy the discover a sinister experiment that created the universe's most feared monsters, the Reavers.

The series was made to be a movie. I've seen it called a space western, and it a very accurate assessment. It goes to show that the core of a great western can be translated to any locale, or time period, and it takes a good writer to make it plausible.

Enter Joss Whedon.

As usual, he does a great job of mixing action, comedy and drama and makes each character likeable. Captain Mal is one of more three-dimensional leads that I've seen in a long time. You know exactly what his motivation is at every moment, and never leans on one aspect of his personality. It is definitely one of those rare moments where a writer and an actor are completely in sync when it comes to a character.

While it was a given that Whedon would provide a great script, it was his direction that drew some concern, but he looked like a seasoned pro. It was most likely because of his familiarity with the world and character that he knew how to create the correct tone. The most beautiful shot of the movie is when they first arrive on Miranda. The whites in that setting are so sterile, yet extremely creepy.

"Serenity" is highly recommended for anyone that enjoys a clever action movie. Fans of Indiana Jones and Star Wars should equally enjoy this film. The final fight with the Reavers is well shot and paced perfectly, and I couldn't go without saying that Summer Glau kicks some serious ass in that scene and in the movie. This should be the standard for transitioning a TV show from small screen to the big screen.

Rating: 8/10 -- One of my favorite sci-fi movies of all-time. Clever writing and terrific acting combine to create one of the most enjoyable movie watching experiences in my life. If they didn't kill off a vital crew member, a sequel would have been quite easy to make story wise, but he most likely knew going in that it was a one-shot deal. Must see.

Day 35 -- Ned Kelly

Released: March 26th, 2004

Starring: Heath Ledger, Orlando Bloom, Naomi Watts, Geoffrey Rush

Writer/Director: John Michael McDonagh/Gregor Jordan

Description: You can kill a man but not a legend.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

 It is always interesting to watch a biopic based on a historical figure that I never heard of before. You begin to understand how people outside of America feel when they watch a Revolutionary War film or a Civil War feature. All movies surrounding a historical figure during the 18th and 19th century have the same issue, the man may be a hero in one country and a terrorist in another. The prime example for America is how the Founding Fathers, especially George Washington, are viewed in the States as compared to England.

"Ned Kelly" tells the story of a man born to an immigrant Irish family in Australia. His father, like many Irish in Australia at the time, was shipped to the faraway island to serve a jail sentence, and therefore his family is labeled criminals from that point forward. After Ned is arrested for stealing a horse, and serves three years, he is released and tries to live a normal life. But after a police officer, who wanted Ned's sister as a lover, fabricated events that occurred at the Kelly house, and blames Ned. Thus, setting off the vigilante motives of the Kelly Gang.

There are moments in this movie that are very sleepy. While the action is great, the love story is completely impractical and apparently, completely fabricated for the American audience. And it makes up the majority of uninteresting moments. Not to say Naomi Watts and Heath Ledger had no chemistry, as they very much did, it's was more that there really no reason for Ned to have a lover while on his mission. It felt as added on in the movie as it was in the script.

The odd part of the film, and something I never considered until after the film, was that the action was very U.S. western-esque. This shouldn't surprise anyone since the story takes place around the same time as most westerns. I wonder if the old west we grew up with as Americans was common everywhere, or that's just what all directors want to shoot when there are horses and pistols involved. Either way, the action is well shot, and the ending is quite compelling.

The film's performances are actually better than the story that was told. Heath Ledger was amazing as usual, but I guess it's still to soon for me. I still get sad each time I watch his films, only because of the wasted talent. It's unfair that he cannot make movies, yet Katherine Heigl continues to work. But the standout performance was from Orlando Bloom, who showed for the first time that he could portray an actual character, and not someone from a fantasy world.

"Ned Kelly" is a movie that would probably play better for me if I were an Aussie, just like "The Patriot" wouldn't play the same outside of America. There's nothing inherently wrong with the film, but it didn't reel me in like an emotional movie should. It felt like just another western, except the character had Australian accents.

Rating: 6/10 -- Fans of Ledger and Bloom should see this film, as it is definitely one of their better performances, respectfully. The story of the film is not any different than anything John Wayne made, but I'm sure if Ned Kelly was an American folk-hero, I'd feel differently.

Day 34 -- I'm Reed Fish

Released: June 1st, 2007

Starring: Jay Baruchel, Alexis Bledel, Schuyler Fisk, DJ Qualls, A.J. Cook, Sherri Appleby , Katie Sagal

Writer/Director: Reed Fish/Zackary Adler

Description: Reed Fish's life turns into chaos when a high school crush returns to Mud Meadows on the eve of his marriage to the small town's sweetheart.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

Happy Valentine's Day, everyone! This is usually a holiday I try to forget since I don't have anyone to share it with, but as the day grew closer, I realized that I needed to find a romantic movie to watch for this project. As I scrolled through my queue, I realized that there were plenty of choices but only one that both intrigued me and I hadn't seen before. The coming-of-age story, "I'm Reed Fish".

The movie first stood out because Alexis Bledel was one of my high school fantasy women, so I stopped on the movie as soon as I saw the cover. But I was pleased to find quite a few actors and actress that I enjoyed in the film. This only heighten my excitement prior to viewing, but that all dissipated somewhere between the quarter-mark and the half-way point of the movie.

This is the moment where they reveled that it was a film within a film, and also where it lost me. It was an interesting way to tell the story, but also left feeling completely uninterested the story of the "film". As I sat through the rest of what we already knew was not the actual story, I kept hoping that it would pay off in the end. But, alas, it didn't.

The ending of the "film" didn't help my opinion of the film. It actually an awful movie that the character Reed Fish (Baruchel) made. If only because it didn't really end, and it felt like the middle. After the "credits" roll, we are lead to believe that Reed ends up with Jill even though there is no explanation of how they reconciled or that they are even together. You don't know about them until the final few frames of the movie. It appeared that the writer Reed Fish was too interested in delivering the twist ending, right down to "real" Jill (Appleby) looking like "fake" Kate (Bledel). 

Despite the problem with the storytelling and ending(s?), the movie was well acted. Baruchel showed a knack of playing a leading man in a romantic comedy, and made Fish's wave of emotions over the last half of the film believable. Fisk is hit or miss as the wedge that comes between the town's fairytale relationship, but she does light up the screen in her two singing showcases. The movie would have been lost without the supporting performances by Katie Sagal and DJ Qualls to help create the environment of a quirky small town.

"I'm Reed Fish" has some major plot holes in it that get absolutely no explanation at all. In the "fake" movie, we are to believe that Fish has completely severed ties with both Kate and Jill, but after the movie premieres everyone seems cool. I don't know if the part of the film that explains this change of attitude was left on the cutting room floor, or if it was completely omitted in the script. Whether it was the writer, producer, or editor who made this mistake, all that matters is there a huge gap in the story that was never fulfilled for me. If Fish making a movie healed everything, then that's really narcissistic and I don't buy it.

Rating: 4.5/10 -- The half-point is because despite it problems, this film is better than "Killers". There is nothing that makes me dislike a movie more than incomplete writing. Hell, I'd take a throwaway line that explains a plot hole, but to have a couple look like there's no hope and then have them lay on a roof holding hands with no explanation of how they reconciled, is inexcusable. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think so.

Day 33 -- Happythankyoumoreplease

Released: March 4th, 2011

Starring: Josh Radnor, Malin Akerman, Kate Mara, Zoe Kazan, Pablo Schreiber


Writer/Director: Josh Radnor

Description: Captures a generational moment - young people on the cusp of truly growing up, tiring of their reflexive cynicism, each in their own ways struggling to connect and define what it means to love and be loved.

[Review may contain spoilers. Please watch movie before reading, unless you don't care. Most of these films have already been released for a while, so they should be readily available.]

***

It's always a wonder to me how some movies slip through the cracks and never really get the push they deserve. After watching "Killers", I am even more saddened. I understand that marketing is a big part of the reason why these independent movies never get more popular than word of mouth, and that's a shame, especially when most of the films that get attention are crap.

"Happythankyoumoreplease" (yes, it's all one word) is not an earth-shattering indie film, but it's one that deserved a lot more attention than it received. Writer/director/star Josh Radnor's coming of age story in New York is one of the more honest that I've seen in a while. 

A film doesn't need to be raw and "edgy" to be a realistic interpretation of life. There are plenty of people out there who don't become addicted to drugs, or run in shady circles, or are trying to find themselves after a troubled past; these people are usually called boring. But boring doesn't have to equal uninteresting. I believe that the majority of movie goers would relate to the issues and people in this film than would from something "grittier".

Each character has their own way of trying to find happiness in that weird stage of mid-to-late 20s, where you're too old to act like a college student, yet you don't feel old enough to be a full-time adult. Maybe it's because I'm currently navigating this time period that I enjoyed this film more than most. It's like those teen dramas when your in high school or college, which you understand more than most because you in the same place. 

Each story is compelling, especially Annie's (Akerman). She currently dealing with Alopecia, and has attempted to fight the disorder by using humor. Despite her happiness on the outside, she is a much more wounded person than her friends know. Until she finds out that her co-worker finds her beautiful the way she is, and he looks past what she perceives as a disability. 

Akerman turns in a terrific performance, and honestly, it was quite unexpected. She's a lot better actress than I gave her credit for before the film. Maybe subconsciously I critiqued her differently because she didn't look like she normally does, but I hope for my sake that it's more like she finally found a good role to play.

Radnor basically played Ted from "How I Met Your Mother", and he plays it so well that it's not a huge negative. The only change in the persona is that he has slightly more confidence than his TV alter ego. But I was more impressed with his writing and directing. In my experience, it's rare that an actor usually does all three facets well in the same movie. There's usually a weakness, but I really couldn't find one. Not to say he was outstanding or Oscar worthy, but it was a very well done film.

The casting in this move was fantastic, too. Kate Mara is one of the most beautiful and talented young actresses out there, but it hasn't added up to any mainstream leading roles. Whether this is by choice, or a lack of breaks, I hope it happens one day. She could be on the Amy Adams path, where she doesn't get her big break until her early-30s. I'd be remissed if I didn't point out the wonderful dynamic between Zoe Kazan and Pablo Schreiber as a couple at the tipping point in their relationship (to marry or not to marry).

"Happythankyoumoreplease" is a fun movie that will draw every emotion out of you. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you may even scream at the TV when Rasheen get taken away even though you know what Sam did was wrong, but you won't be able to turn it off. The writing is clever, New York looks great, and the characters are well portrayed. It was one of the pleasant surprises that I thank my friend, Anthony, for recommending.

Rating: 7/10 -- Good writing always entertains me, probably more than good direction. Kate Mara melts my heart in every scene, and Malin Akerman makes me want to reach out and hug her character. The theme of the movie really got me, so it may rank lower on your list, but it's one you must watch. This is exactly the type of movie I was hoping to find in this project.