Sylvester Stallone has assembled a myriad of actions stars both past and present for his macho, testosterone laced, action flick throwback to the 80’s The Expendables and largely he has succeeded. The action is sleek and riveting and will excite just about anyone into this sort of mayhem. The problem with the film is some of the scenes that take place between the carnage. It would be easy to blame this on Stallone’s script, but the truth is, the only reason some of the scenes don’t work is due to the acting chops of some of the “actors” onscreen.   Let’s face it, master thespians, most of these guys are not (why am I sounding like Yoda?). No one ever expects Jet Li or Dolph Lundgren to be nominated for an Oscar. 

The Other Guys is a funny movie no doubt about it, it just doesn’t reach the comedic highs of Will Ferrell’s best films. As such I’m reviewing this film as a comparison to his earlier work. There are plenty of ridiculous moments and demented lines in the script written by director and frequent collaborator, Adam McKay (along with Chris Henchy), but the film never reaches the lunacy of Ferrell and McKay’s other films together.

You have to love Steve Carell and Paul Rudd. They are two of the easiest stars to watch on the big screen, each exuding a casual charm and niceness. While Dinner for Schmucks isn’t their best and funniest collaboration, it is a genial, amusing comedy, wrapped around a gooey, moral center. There aren’t too many uproarious laughs to be had, but the film will keep you smiling and giggling the whole way through. 

In the realm of movies inspired by video games such as Streetfighter, Mortal Kombat and Super Mario Bros, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is an amazing movie. When comparing it to other adventure themed movies like Pirates of the Caribbean, The Mummy or any of the Indiana Jones films (yes even Crystal Skull), Persia falls way short of the mark. It’s not terrible in an offensive way, but there is absolutely nothing magical about the film at all. It is merely mediocre at best.

The Hollywood Reporter recently ran a story about the casting of Peter Parker for the Spider-Man reboot. According to them, director Mark Webb (could he have a more appropriate last name for this project?) has narrowed the field down to a handful of young actors, although there have been no screen tests as of yet. 

The finale for Lost has left some fans completely satisfied while others feel ripped off by the conclusion of the show. They feel that the answers given weren’t enough and that the series on a whole was a complete waste of time. Many theories have sprung up about what it all means. Some of those theories are ridiculous (the castaways all died on flight 815 and the island was a construct of Jack’s mind in his last few minutes of life) and some are spot on (the island was real and the flash sideways was a version of purgatory). There are plenty of questions that went seemingly unanswered, but the truth is, every answer you need has been imbedded throughout the entire series. Some answers are hard and fast while others are meant to be interpreted from clues and hints sprinkled throughout episodes. 

Shrek Forever After is an adventure filled and amusing film that the whole family will enjoy. Sure it’s not quite as magical as the first film, but I think it was an improvement over parts 2 and 3. The story was fun and imaginative and gave the audience a chance to meet the familiar characters all over again. As always for me, Eddie Murphy’s Donkey steals the show. The character has the funniest lines in the film and I truly get a kick out of him. As much as I enjoyed the movie and believe other adults will as well, I realize that Shrek is predominantly meant for kids and therefore their opinion is more important. With that in mind, I’ve interviewed both my nine year old daughter and my six year old son to see what they thought of the movie. 

I have to admit, I was pleasantly surprised by Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe’s Robin Hood. I was extremely skeptical of this film for quite a few reasons and sat down to watch it with low expectations at best. From the time I heard about this project I thought that Crowe was woefully miscast as everyone’s favorite arrow slinger. Russell Crowe as Robin Hood!? Ten years ago I would’ve been psyched about that but Mr. Crowe seems a tad too old now to be playing the champion of Sherwood Forest. The trailer didn’t help either. It made the film look like a rehash of Scott and Crowe’s Gladiator set in Sherwood Forest, lacking any of the humor or the warmth the character is so well known for. I was expecting a long, tedious film with endless battle scenes devoid of any emotion but I was wrong. Instead Robin Hood is a well paced, action filled film that is jam packed with political intrigue and anchored by terrific performances from a solid cast. It’s not perfect; there are a few things lacking, but overall I enjoyed the rebooted version of Robin of the Hood very much.

As a film reviewer, I think it is profoundly important to review a film based on its genre and nothing else. It is unfair to compare a comedy like The Hangover to a serious drama like Revolutionary Road. Sure, each genre has to be judged for certain benchmarks such as quality of acting, writing and directing, but these standards need to be judged within the realm of each genre. That being said, when compared to other horror, slasher films, the new reimagining of A Nightmare on Elm Street is a terrific film. It is a classy, well made remake of the popular, schlocky, 80’s film that is anchored by great effects and solid performances all around.

Based on the comic book series from DC/Vertigo, The Losers is a mediocre entry in the cartoon violence action genre. There are some cool action sequences, a decent but familiar revenge themed plot and a couple of good laughs along the way but there are also some big plot holes, overly kinetic direction from Sylvian White and one terrible performance. The first twenty minutes are fairly painful but overall the film improves over its running time. In the first few scenes it’s as if the actors have no chemistry together and haven’t yet figured out how to play off one another. This does improve over the life of The Losers which is why the movie merits a 5 and not a 4.