“Airheads” (1994) [PG-13]

     This movie is one of many that some people call a “hidden treasure.” It’s not an extremely well-known movie, but it deserves more credit than it receives. The actors did very commendable jobs, the movie personifies most musicians of that time, and this is simply put the best comedy of its kind since “Wayne’s World” (1992). The only drawback to this movie is that the story is barely believable even for a comedy.

     Actors for “Airheads” gave commendable performances through the whole movie. The main cast members were both funny and convincing; they didn’t stop the greatness of their characters even once. Even the secondary cast, who played the less important characters, gave noteworthy performances. Viewers can find themselves liking the less important characters just as much as they like the lead roles.

     In addition to the actors’ performances, the movie itself easily personifies most musicians of that time and musical genre. The performances and script shows character traits and dialects that are true to that time and style. The story epitomizes the rebellious scene of the eighties and nineties Californian musicians’ life, and heavily coats it with wacky comedy.

     As far as the comedy of this film goes, it is amazingly entertaining. This is definitely the best “goofy buddy” comedy since “Wayne’s World.” It’s full of wacky, hilarious moments and almost slapstick humor. However many good things there are to this movie, there is one very bad factor. The story is barely believable even for a comedy; there is no way that most of the stuff in the movie could actually happen in real life.

          My overall rating: 3.5 out of 5

“The Mummy” (1999) [PG-13]

     “The Mummy” is certainly one of the more intriguing movies of the past fifteen years. It draws viewers in with an interesting screenplay, many connections to Egyptian mythology, and attention-getting visuals. Considering the date and the underdeveloped computer effects that were available when this movie was made, there aren’t any bad things to find in this movie except that it doesn’t stand up to the original “Mummy” of 1932.

     One of the most important things to look for in a film is its screenplay and this movie has an interesting one. The screenplay shows an amazing combination of drama, action, horror, and even romance. Few movies combine so many different genres and styles, and the creators of the screenplay have succeeded in doing exactly that. Its screenplay isn’t the only noteworthy factor of this film, either.

     The creators of “The Mummy” threw in many connections to actual Egyptian mythology. They used several real locations of Egypt including ones with great mythological ties in their history. Dialogue also includes more than a few mentions to Ancient Egyptian mythological names. The references made in this film shows that its creators studied up some on the myths of Ancient Egypt.

     Another thing the creators of this movie used to further enhance the viewers’ experience is their use of computer effects and visuals. This means even more than what it sounds like because of the more restricted and underdeveloped computer effects of the time. As many commendable things in this movie as there are, the one underlying truth is that it simply does not stand up to the original 1932 version. The original “Mummy” will always be the better one, although the newer version isn’t all that bad.

          My overall rating: 3.5 out of 5

“G.I. Joe” (2009) [PG-13]

     The 2009 “G.I. Joe” live-action remake has its high points and its low points. Much like original “G.I. Joe” cartoons, it is full of overly dramatic plotting villains and incredibly futuristic gadgets. However, those are the only thing it has in common with the cartoons. The movie itself is great for a summer movie, especially if the viewer doesn’t know much about the original cartoon. The lower points to this film is that it doesn’t follow close to any of the original stories and Channing Tatum who played Duke seemed too much like a boy-band singer to play the normally heroic character.

     There are only two things the movie shares with the cartoon version. One is the portrayal of the plotting villains known as “Cobra.” In the cartoons they are terrorists seeking global domination. The movie does a good job on portraying Cobra in that very same way. The other similarity between the two is the factor of futuristic gadgets. However, none of the technologies in the movie are anything like the ones in the cartoon. These are the only connections between the cartoon and the live-action remake.

     If viewers are looking for a good summer action film, they will find one in this movie. It’s enjoyable for a summer flick and is meant to be pure action, nothing else. It does a great job of entertaining simply with nonstop action. Because it has nearly nothing in common with the cartoons viewers are better off with this movie if they don’t know much about the cartoon. This live action reboot makes an exciting movie if the viewer is looking for something filled with action.

     For what few good things there are in this movie, there are bad things that go with them. First of all, most big fans of the original cartoon usually won’t enjoy this movie too much. It strays too far from the original cartoon and barely does justice for it. In addition, Channing Tatum, who played Duke, was the worst possible choice the makers of this movie could have picked. He was too much like the “pretty-boy” type to play the courageous hero Duke. There’s not much enjoyment to be found in this movie for true die-hard “G.I. Joe” fans.

          My overall rating: 2 out of 5

“Pandorum” (2009) [R]

     “Pandorum” is certainly the best sci-fi/action/thriller I’ve seen this far. It takes an already known story and turns it on end. This film is packed with action and horror—both physical and psychological—will change the way any viewer watches sci-fi movies. Filmed with an amazing futuristic cinematography style, the only bad thing about this movie is that it can get old after several viewings.

     The story for this film takes a basic principle is that of being lost in space in a broken ship with no contact to the outside. The familiar story is turned on its head by giving the characters amnesia at the beginning, from which they slowly recover throughout the movie and little by little discover the truth to the reasons for their journey. This action sci-fi turns the genre itself over by making it a psychological thriller.

     Full of incredible action, this movie doesn’t miss a beat. Dennis Quaid did such a good job on this film, he proves once again that he can play any character and make it believable. The action never stops; fast and heart-pumping, it pulls viewers into the world of the movie. In combination with the Dennis Quaid’s incredible performance and psychological horrors of this movie, the action gets the viewers as close to the fright the characters experience as possible. Not a minute of this movie isn’t scary-good.

     In addition to the story and the action, the visual effects are so great, not a scene goes by without some interesting visual special effect. Even the cinematography itself seems to be one big effect. The way it was filmed simply adds to the futuristic impression given through the whole movie. The single thing wrong with this movie is that the viewers will know what happens after the first couple viewings and the story can get old after several viewings.

          My overall rating: 4 out of 5

"Gamer" (2009) [R]

     For viewers who enjoy “surrogate” and “fight-the-system” movies, “Gamer” is the one to watch. It keeps viewers’ attention by changing the style at nearly every turn. .The film, along with Gerard Butler’s performance, gives an incredible depiction of video games made real. The overall story was good, but has been done many times before. It is, however a grabbing restatement of “fight-the-system” stories.

     This movie has style changes around every corner. One minute the viewer thinks it’s a serious sci-fi action movie, and the next minute it seems full of comedy. It’s as though it was made to keep the viewer guessing. The near-constant changes to the style grab hold of viewers’ attention before the first ten minutes of the movie are up, and it doesn’t let go until the credits scroll.

     Butler’s job on this film and the cinematography both work together to show amazing depictions of live action video games. Gerard Butler did some of his best work in this movie and once again proves to be a very talented actor. The cinematography on scenes of the live video game is noteworthy as well. They depict action sequences and computer effects that are similar to video games of today.

     The story itself was a good one, although it has been done countless times before. The basic idea of the story is too similar to “The Running Man.” One of the few differences between the two is that instead if the contest being put into a television show, it is put into a video game. In fact, the main good thing about it is that it shows that “surrogate/fight-the-system” stories still haven’t gotten old. Overall, the movie is an enjoyable retelling of a story done many times before.

          My overall rating: 3 out of 5

"Reign of Fire" (2002) [PG-13]

     "Reign of Fire" is an incredible twist on the fantasy genre. For a long time a lot of people have pushed the sci-fi genre in with the fantasy genre, however not many stories actually incorporate both at the same time. This movie was one of the first times I have seen the combination of sci-fi and fantasy. The writing in this movie was amazing. Also there were many times when I felt like I was watching a war movie instead of one about dragons. There was only one flaw in the movie and that was because the writers left out a few major faults that dragons of myth are rumored to have.
     When I watched "Reign of Fire" something happened that does not usually happen with me when I watch movies. I began to feel sympathy with the characters. The actors' performances were truely believable, but more importantly the writing was great. Gregg Chabot, Kevin Peterka, and Matt Greenberg all did a phenomenal job on the story and screenplay. The story itself is a break from the normal dragon fantasy tale. However it still recalled similarities with other dragon stories.
     Several scenes in the movie evoked similar feelings as war movies. To fight the dragons the people used warlike strategies, and the castle where Quinn and his people lived looked much like a refugee camp. Also scenes of a destroyed and dragon-guarded London provokes thoughts of a world war and armageddon. Grey landscapes and smoldering London buildings helped this film to become even better.
     Many people probably know dragons in myth have a lot in common with reptiles. Although the writers did an excellent job on the script and the story, they did leave out the flaws dragons are rumored to share with present day reptiles. These flaws are ones like slow movement in cold weather and the inability to see something if it isn't moving. If viewers overlook these neglected faults then they can enjoy a great fantasy and sci-fi movie.
          My overall rating: 3 out of 5

"The Machinist" (2004) [R]

     "The Machinist"(2004) is an interesting take on dramatic revelation style movies such as "Memento" (2000) and "The Sixth Sense" (1999). The best way to enjoy this movie is to strip it of its commonalities with other revelation movies and focus on other qualities. Such as the cinematography. The storyline itself, when taken to its basic form, is not at all complex or new. However, when filmed in the way it was and set in the sequence that it was, it becomes a stimulating movie of self-discovery.
     In addition to the cinematography, the movie contains some interesting "connectives." These are unspoken of signs that hark back to other scenes in the film, and they're never given much attention; it is always assumed the audience will catch on. Among others, one of these signs is in the form of a sticky note containing words uttered earlier in the movie. If I write about the other connectives they will give away the meaning of the movie. Viewers will have to see the movie on their own to understand the other signs.
     Now that I've written on things done behind the screen, I must comment on Christian Bale's performance. His job on the part was nothing short of amazing. He knew when to keep his cool and when to lose his mind. I was convinced that he was the role, and not just playing the part; there was not a second in the movie when I could see through his performance. The most shocking factor of his acting in this film was how skinny he became for the role. Everytime I saw Bale in a scene that showed his upper body I was afraid he would collapse out of his inability to hold himself up.
     Although I have said many good things about this film, I must show both sides of the coin, so to speak. The cinematography, the signs, and Bale's performance were all good, however the story itself was nothing special. If this movie was in book form I would not have been thrilled at all. It was too much like other revelation movies made in the past fifteen years or so. I do not recommend it for its story, but I do for its cinematography and for Bale's performance.
          My overall rating: 2.5 out of 5

This Month's Reviews and Connections!

1. The Machinist (2004) [R] (connected by Christian Bale to...)
2. Reign of Fire (2002) [PG-13] (connected by Gerard Butler to...)
3. Gamer (2009) [R] (connected by Sci-fi Thriller genre to...)
4. Pandorum (2009) [R] (connected by Dennis Quaid to...)
5. G. I. Joe (2009) [PG-13] (connected by Director Stephen Sommers to...)
6. The Mummy (1999) [PG-13] (connected by Brendan Fraser to...)
7. Airheads (1994) [PG-13] (connected by Steve Buscemi to next month's reviews)