Les Miserables - Review

Despite some of the early reviews which indicated that the movie was less than spectacular, I went to see it for myself. I admit, I have never seen the staged production and I read the book by Victor Hugo so long ago that I have forgotten the intimate details of the story.

I loved the movie. I loved the music. I enjoyed the cinematography and the acting and the character development.

The movie is real and gritty.  The characters are caked with the reality of life during the early 19th century. I could almost smell the streets of France as the movie progressed.

The movie spans 1815-1832 during periods of rebellion and revolution in France; beginning with the final defeat of Napoleon and ending with the June Rebellion. The story revolves around a man, Jean Valjean, played by Hugh Jackman. He was imprisoned for minor thievery for 19 years and is pursued through the rest of his life for breaking parole by the chief policeman, Javert, played by Russell Crowe. Along the way, Jean adopts the daughter of Fantine, played by Anne Hathaway, who had fallen on very hard times and was striving to provide for her daughter, Cosette, played by Amanda Seyfried.

The music is spectacular and real. The character development is well done and effective. Did I say the music is fabulous?

Isabelle Allen is stunning and effective as the young Cosette. It is her face that forms the poster for the movie.

Th movie is long, listed at 165 minutes, but it is a fast movie. There are few places where it drags and the depth of the acting, the story, and the richness of the sets and characters make it a very engrossing movie.

I found the make-up to age the characters through the years to be especially intriguing. I also know that many of the actors starved themselves to give the realistic appearance of being destitute during the period of the movie.

In my humble opinion, this movie ought to have a lot of Oscar nominations: Best picture, Best actor: Hugh Jackman, Best supporting actress: Anne Hathaway, make-up, costumes, set design, and a few others.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie!  Bring tissues for the ending.

-- Bob Doan, Elkridge, MD

Red Dawn - Review

I was looking forward to a campy, remake of the 1984 cult classic.

I didn't get it.

This remake of Red Dawn lacks imagination. plot, creativity, and the feel good ending that the original movie had.  Mind you, the original wasn't that good, but at least it left you feeling good!

This version is just bad. It has no socially redeeming value and is not even worth the time to watch it when it comes out on Netflix.

The acting is bad. The character development is practically nonexistent. The rest of the movie is trite and superficial. From a technical perspective, the bad guys are using US equipment for their military forces. The plot is poor and unbelievable--another secret weapon, not further specified, has crippled the US military and left the entire country defenseless and open to assault by North Korea. The landing is done by aircraft--how were they refueled in getting from North Korea to the US and without flying over Japan? The geography just doesn't work nor does the apparent logistics to support an army large enough to capture most of the US.

Come on, the US is not South Korea--whom the North Koreans hate more than us.

And that is just the beginning of the movie. The inevitable inclusion of the Russians and the bumbling North Korean officer who is in charge of the occupation are just more bad movie ploys. Given that the movie had a $65 million budget, I wonder why they couldn't have done better?

Another reviewer wrote:

Red Dawn really doesn't offer too much more in the movie department. The fact that a technologically strong country like North Korea doesn't have better armor for their troops is complete fiction and makes the threat of the enemy a little less intimidating. Throw in the fact that the kids can shoot better than the troops, and well you get a classic American cowboy film that further pumps up someone's ego. Aside from American pride, this movie also has a vague ending just like its 80's precursor that sets the stage for both ending and opens up for another movie. Whether or not this sways your vote I can't tell, but I'm just warning you that there is no definite closure to this film. 

I concur with all of the above.

RECOMMENDATION: Must miss!

-- Bob Doan, writing from Tampa, FL

Argo - Review

What a great ride! The movie had everything--suspense, villains, a "you gotta be kidding me" plan, unlikely heroes, and a storybook happy ending. Best of all--much of it was true.

Argo is the dramatization of the 1980 joint CIA-Canadian secret operation to extract six fugitive American diplomatic personnel out of revolutionary Iran. Although I knew and remembered the outcome--the movie had be doubting my history as it went along. It was such a long time ago, 1979, and not much had been written about the operation in the intervening years so it was all new territory for me to appreciate.

The lead character, Tony Mendez, played by Ben Affleck, is a CIA operative who becomes involved in trying to exfiltrate six Americans who escaped from the Tehran Embassy as it was being overthrown by revolutionaries. The film brings in scenes from the 70's and recreates them with amazing detail while also having real news reports playing. I was amazed at the young Tom Brokaw in the background of one scene.

The plan, developed by Mendez is as improbable as anything I can think of. It was just that improbability that caused the plan to succeed. The actors surrounding Affleck did great jobs with their roles and I believe that John Goodman, who plays Academy Award winning make-up artist John Chambers, may be nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar. Alan Arkin gives a memorable performance as movie producer Lester Siegel.

I cannot vouch for the historical accuracy of the details of the movie, as I am only beginning my research; but, the movie is well worth the effort to see. I do know, from some of the articles that I have read, that the movie severely minimizes the role of the Canadians who at the time received all of the credit (or blame, from the Iranians). I believe the truth lies in between and that this operation may have been one of those bilateral success stories that happen only so infrequently. There is an article written by Anthony Mendez in The Daily Beast which does serve to provide some historical context for the movie.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie. This movie is not suitable for the under 13 year old crowd as one obscene word is used fairly frequently.

-- Bob Doan, Elkridge, MD

Trouble with the Curve -- Review

Trouble with the Curve, although touted as a baseball movie, this movie will appeal to those who are not baseball fans. The movie is a story about the relationship between a father (Clint Eastwood) and a daughter (Amy Adams).

The father is baseball scout suffering from failing health and eyesight. The daughter is a high powered lawyer who is one the fast track in her law firm for partner. The baseball team is confronted with technology advocates and the scout refuses to use a computer. He evaluates talent on sight. There are some classic technology battles in this story--can a computer and statistics really tell you everything you need to know about a person or a team. The movie conflicts with the premise of the movie Money Ball, that in fact computers are better than eyes on scouting.

Add in a little love. A lot of past history and a bit of basebll and you have a good solid, yet predictable movie.

I enjoyed the movie and the character development. Clint Eastwood was masterful in the part and amy Adams played the conflicted daughter very well.

Recommendation: Go see this movie.

-- Bob Doan, writing from Denver, CO

Hope Springs - Movie Review

Hope Springs, starring Meryl Streel and Tommy Lee Jones surprised me for its raw honesty and sensitivity. I am not a Steve Carell fan, but even he played a good role in the movie. It was a different role for him and he pulled it off fairly well.

I was surprised because I had low expectations for this movie--a true to life exploration of how marriages become dysfunctional after three decades together. The couple, played by Meryl Streep (Kay) and Tommy Lee Jones (Arnold), had reached a definite low point in their marriage and something had to change. At the insistence of Kay, Arnold is coerced into an intensive week of couples therapy in a small New England town conducted by Dr. Feld (Steve Carell).

I thought the acting was excellent--especially Tommy Lee Jones portrayal of the husband, Arnold, who is more concerned about his career than his marriage. I admit--I found a lot of similarities, too many really, between my own experience and his portrayal.

Meryl Streep, as Kay, was believable as the catalyst for the couple to reconnect through an intensive week of marriage counseling to rekindle their relationship.

I was pleased at the way the subject matter, sometimes sexual in nature, was handled. Professional and definitely not graphic. But this was not a movie about sex between a couple--but more importantly the reconstruction of an interactive relationship.

This movie will not appeal to a wide audience--not should it. But, for couples married for more than about 15 years, it should be mandatory viewing. To retain vibrancy and intimacy requires constant work, and it is the small things that occur in combination which can cause couples to drift apart--and cause the end of a relationship.

I especially enjoyed reflecting upon the breakfast scenes used in the movie to help document the state of the relationship. One strip of bacon and two eggs, perhaps a boring subject but definitely a bell weather of their relationship.

Recommendation: Married couples need to see this movie. Un-married people will not appreciate it. The movie deals with adult subjects and is not suitable for the under 17 crowd--but they shouldn't be there anyway.

The Odd Life of Timothy Green - A Review

This is an OK movie to spend time viewing when there is nothing else happening in life.

The character development is lacking, the acting is OK, and the cinematography is great! Filmed in the Northeast during the Autumn, the colorful leaves and hillsides were filed in their full glory. That, however, is probably the best thing that can be said about the movie.

The story revolves around a childless couple relating their history to a social worker while attempting to adopt a child. The story is about their encounter with their perfect child--Timothy Green. One night, after determining that they can never have children naturally, the couple writes attributes of their ideal child on pieces of paper and then buries these papers in a box in the garden.

From there, the story line is predictable. After fantasizing about their perfect child during the night in the middle of a freak a thunderstorm set in the middle of a drought--he appears. But, he is only with them for a short while. We, the audience know that but the couple seems oblivious to the developing story line--until the very end.

The movie is trite and full of overused lines and situations.

That said--it is a tear jerker at the end, even though everyone knows what is coming.

The moral is clearly, enjoy what you have been given today because you never know when it will be taken away. The couple grow as parents during their all to brief time with Timothy, as all parents grow. And of course, then there is the somewhat sappy ending.

Recommendation--If you need to suffer through a chick flick--find something else. I enjoyed the movie and the story, but I am a sucker for these kinds of stories. The movie was a bit long and seemed drawn out. I would not see it again nor will I rent it when available.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close Movie Review

What an incredibly touching and deep story. A new actor, Thomas Horn, plays Oskar Schell who loses his Dad (Tom Hanks) in the 9/11 Twin Towers attack. Playing opposite Tom Hanks ad Sandra Bullock (Oskar's Mom) is no small feat. But this 14 year old star of the movie pulls it off with panache.


The movie puts different spin on 9/11--even though officially it is not about 9/11 and it isn't. It is not a 9/11 movie, but yet at the same time it uses the events of 9/11 to put a very personal spin on how real people are affected by real incidents. The movie is about growing--accepting loss and overcoming the paralyzing fear of the unknown.

Oskar is a 9 year old, special needs boy who loses his best friend, his father, on 9/11. He sets out on a quest to put the pieces of the story together centered around a key he finds in his father's closet a year later. His devotion to trying to find the lock that the key opens enables him to overcome a myriad of fears and limitations while growing and developing new relationships. Along his journey he meets many people--many who are also hurting, but they all have a story.

This is a must see movie about the victory of love over the forces of hate which would deprive us of fulfilling relationships. Most of all, the movie is about growing and becoming better than we were when we started despite the events that confront us.

Tom Hanks, Max von Sydow (the Renter) and Sandra Bullock give excellent performances. It has been a long time since I have seen von Sydow in a movie and he gives a performance worth of Oscar consideration.As I wrote already, this movie is carried on the shoulders of Thomas Horn, whose portrayal of Oskar is deep, complex, and consistent throughout. I believe his inaugural performance is also Oscar worthy because he truly carries the movie.

I learned a new word--which will always make me smile and help me to remember the movie--oxymoronist.




-- Bob Doan, Elkridge, MD

War Horse -- Movie Review

I was lucky enough to see this movie last evening. I am a huge softie for dog and horse movies, so I definitely wanted to War Horse. 

The movie was much more than I expected.  I had expected a sappy tale about a boy (Albert) and his horse (Joey)--and when the Joey was separated from Albert the subsequent journey for them to be reunited.

What I got was a movie about the hard side of life in England and Europe during the early part of the 20th Century and focused mostly on the WWI time period of 1914-1918.

Life was hard and real. Albert is there from Joey's birth, although his family does not own the horse and they come together on a whim of Albert's father who buys the horse at auction--and really buys the wrong horse for what they need--although in the end, Joey is exactly the right horse for what is asked of him.

The characters in the movie are real--it is easy to hate the hard, business-like, buffoon-seeming landlord and his overly privileged son. Even the weather is used to create the sense of hardship and that nothing can go right for life in the period.

The movie is about relationships centered around the horse--Joey, who by the end of the movie has at least four different names. One of the most touching relationships is between Joey and a rival cavalry horse, a big black stallion, who experiences life with Joey during the war. Through the movie, Joey touches the lives of many different people, and almost all of them are a bit better for their contact.

There are some really hard scenes of war--the trench warfare of WWI France is graphic--although not as gruesome as the movie could have made it, the scenes there are truly memorable and hard. The use and abuse of horses in war during the transition from agrarian based life to our current mechanized lifestyle is evident. It is hard for an animal lover like myself to accept how horses were treated--but one scene stands in my mind as Joey is being marched off to war and Albert is allowed one last good-bye, the battle hardened sergeant cuts the good-bye short by saying something about Joey being a horse, not a dog.

This movie is not for children--and it is a hard movie for adults to enjoy, because the hardest realities of life and war are ever present in the movie. I sat through the movie hoping for a happy ending--which seemed impossible. The struggles, the ever present death and destruction, even the interludes of moderate joy were tempered with the knowledge that these too soon must end--and they did.

I am glad I saw the movie on the big screen of a theater to experience the fullness of the movie. I am sure that it will not be nearly as powerful in a TV. The movie gets long in places--it seems that the trials of the war will never end, but then war is like that.

Recommendation: See this movie, but do not expected to feel good about yourself or the world while in the theater. You may even wonder why you went to see a movie that is so hard and real and that seems to highlight the worst of all of us at every turn. But, like other great war movies that depict war at its worst and hardest--this movie deserves to be seen.

Inception Movie Review

The movie Inception is a movie which while full of action, is not a mindless trip to the theater.

I am not a Leonardo DiCaprio fan, but I found his acting to be stellar in this sci-fi movie which requires the movie goer to stay engaged and understand the movie.

Director Christopher Nolan has engineered a true thinking movie and at 2:28 running time it can get almost exhausting before it is over.

The plot is as follows: Dom Cobb is a skilled thief, the absolute best in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state, when the mind is at its most vulnerable. Cobb's rare ability has made him a coveted player in this treacherous new world of corporate espionage, but it has also made him an international fugitive and cost him everything he has ever loved. Now Cobb is being offered a chance at redemption. One last job could give him his life back but only if he can accomplish the impossible-inception. Instead of the perfect heist, Cobb and his team of specialists have to pull off the reverse: their task is not to steal an idea but to plant one. If they succeed, it could be the perfect crime. But no amount of careful planning or expertise can prepare the team for the dangerous enemy that seems to predict their every move. An enemy that only Cobb could have seen coming. Written by Warner Bros. Pictures

The cast seemed well suited to the task of pulling this complex plot off. DiCaprio gives an excellent performance as Cobb assisted by his close aid Arthur, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Michael Caine stops by to play Cobb's father-in-law and former professor.

The movie really moves along very nicely at time at almost a frantic pace--except for the end which begins to drag some as the pieces of the plot come together. Some of final scenes are just to long--I checked my watch during them as it just seemed to go on and on in a plodding sort of way. It seemed as if they spent a lot of money filming these scenes and decided they couldn't cut them down--but the length of the action and the violence begin to detract from the movie. They were out of character from the rest of the movie which is very crisp and focused.

The ending, no I'm not going to reveal anything, works on multiple levels and fostered spirited discussion among our friends as to the clues which were left in the ending to help the viewer determine what happened.

Be prepared to think and actively watch if you see this movie. The viewer will be lost if they are expecting the usual Hollywood fare of mindless action.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie. There is violence (a lot of it). Probably not suited for the under 13 crowd who will not be able to follow the plot.

Iron Man 2: A Review

I went to see the much anticipated Iron Man 2 on Sunday afternoon.

Here's the short version: good movie, I thought the story line was stronger in the first movie, but the sequel was a thrill to watch.

The Story: Iron Man becomes a household word and the self-appointed protector of the country. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) is synonymous with Iron Man. A particular senator (how true is this) is not happy that Iron Man is on the job and wants to secure the Iron Man "weapon" for the United States. Of course, he wants to militarize it and there is a lot of intrigue associated with this and of course the obligatory Senate Committee is involved. But, there are a couple of evil characters who provide the spice for the movie--when sparks are not flashing between Tony Stark and his assistant/aide/part-time love/future CEO of Stark Industries: Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow).

The movie is a bit long, and the five-year old I went with found some of the non-action scenes a bit boring. But, the story line development was excellent. And needed.

The acting is great. I thought Robert Downey Jr and Gwyneth Paltrow reprised their roles in admirable fashion with strong believable performances. In addition newcomers to the script Scarlette Johansson who played Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff, Sam Rockwell who played Justin Hammer a villan, Mickey Rourke who played Ivan Vanko an especially nasty villan, Don Cheadle who took over the role of LtCol James "Rhodey" Rhodes all did great jobs and were very strong and believable. One of my favorites was Samuel L. Jackson who reprised his role as Nick Fury (from the trailer on the first Iron Man) and was especially fun to watch.

I was saddened that Terrance Howard did not reprise his role as Rhodey from the original Iron Man--but sometimes change is a good thing. Once I got used to Don Cheadle--it all worked for me.

The mix of action and story was good for adults. There are a lot of double entendre jokes and quips which make the movie just a bit more interesting. The interplay between Tony Stark and Pepper continues to be one of the highlights of the movie and provides a unifying theme.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie. It is worth the time and the money. It won't win an academy award, but the thrill is back. And if you saw the first one--you will enjoy this one just as much.

Valentine's Day movie review

On the day after Valentine's Day, Chris persuaded, cajoled, and even asked me to see the movie Valentine's Day with her.

This movie is a must miss! If you are a guy and cannot get out of going to this movie with the one you love, at least extract something significant in exchange--like a new car or a trip around the world. (OK--so I got a new car)

There are lots of stars in this movie and you might be drawn into it because of them--but beware, most of them are short appearances in an uninspiring, predictable, and often boring script.

If you saw the trailer--you saw every highlight from the movie. The best performance was from Bryce Robinson--who plays Edison. And he plays a fifth grader. Everyone else is going through the paces to get a paycheck to cover their mortgages this month.

I really couldn't tell if the movie was a comedy or a tragedy. The true tragedy was that I spent money to see it.

RECOMMENDATION: Avoid this movie. It is not even worth a rental.

Sherlock Holmes - Movie Review

This movie is worth seeing!

The classic story of Sherlock Holmes takes on new life and excitement as Robert Downey Jr (as Sherlock) and Jude Law (as Dr Watson) display an interaction between actors on the screen similar to that seen between Paul Newman and Robert Redford in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

The movie was fun, creative and a joy to watch. The scenes are full of action and depth which draws the viewer more into the movie and the story. Set in London of the 19th century, this is not your tourist view of London. It is the hard working, seeder side of the city and its environs. The action scenes are at the same time thrilling and fun to watch. The movie moves along nicely with few spots where the story drags--although the sotry is a bit complex--as one might suspect of Sherlock Holmes.

Robert Downey Jr is witty and cunning as Holmes. He displays the creative genius of Holmes without being boring or condescending. Jude Law is the perfect straight guy-the supporting cast behind the genius whether it fighting the bad guys or providing support in cleaning up the messes that Holmes gets into.

Visually, the movie is full of life and depth. There is always something deeper in the scenes which is worth seeing and enjoying.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie. There is action, a bit of violence, but mostly a solid and entertaining story line.

2009 Movies of the Year

Movies 2009--the good and the not so good

Best Movies of 2009

1. Star Trek - the best movie of the year by far
2. Transformers 2 - almost the best movie (Megan Fox is hot!)
3. Avatar - Strong movie, creative--not as good as the other two
4. Defiance - difficult material to see on screen
5. Taken - best thriller of the year
6. Up - best animated movie of the year
7. Angels and Demons - much better ending than the book
8. Race to Witch Mountain - I like corny movies, OK?
9. The Proposal - the best chick flick of the year and funny
10. Knowing - even though the ending was terrible

Worst Movie of 2009

Mall Cop

Movies intentionally not on the list:

Twilight 2 New Moon (I'm neither a tween nor a cougar!)
Night at the Museum 2 (been done)
Ice Age 3 - yeah, yawn
Fired Up (cute and a funny rental)

Movies I still want to see:

Year One
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Inglorious Bastards
It's Complicated
The Blind Side
Invictus
Sherlock Holmes

Avatar - Movie Review

It has been a while since I reviewed a movie--but I saw Avatar and felt it needed a review.

I saw the movie in 3D XD at the local theater and was really impressed with the way the 3D was incorporated into the movie--it was one of the most impressive and natural 3D experiences that i have had. Technology gets a great grade.

The story is compelling and intriguing. The movie is long--almost three-hours, but the character development is necessary to understanding and appreciating the movie. The story moves though and the three hours passes very quickly. Much has been written about the opening sequences as being slow--but without the character de velopment acocmplished there, the movie would lack depth. The story is a lot like Dances with Wolves meets Fern Gully. The movie is set on a planet called Pandora with native peoples who are different form humans, but as you might suspect also superior in many ways to humans. This sets up the conflict between the races which forms the basis for the plot.

That written---the movie provides solid entertainment with a distinct social engineering thrust in two arenas--one--the suppression of indigenous peoples is wrong, and two, we need to be more in tune with our environment. Of course the quest for money (the love of money is the root of all evil) and the desire to possess the mineral riches of the planet are critical parts of the movie and directly relate to the environmental and ecological themes presented. There is also a strong religious (earth mother) undertone to the movie as well.

RECOMMENDATION: See this movie. It is not the best movie of all time, but the technical effects are amazing, the story compelling, and the acting is strong. Everyone is talking aobut this movie and there is no way you can appreciate it without seeing it. See it in the 3d and exepcially the XD 3D is you can. There is some violence and sensuality in the movie--so not good for the pre-teen crowd.

New Moon - Twilight Movie Review

Opening day--there I was standing in line to see this movie because I'm married to a Twilight series lover.

I looked around the theater as we sat down--as a male, I was in a definite minority. There was a definite lack of testosterone in the theater. I was in a den of women (some are calling the older ones cougars) to see a movie about vampires. I wondered if I was safe.

Let's talk about the movie.

It is a love story of epic proportions. And a love triangle. There are some action scenes, but it is mostly dialogue. There are personal interactions. This movie has almost no character development--that was all assumed form the first movie or the books. So, if you do not know the back story--you must read the books or see the first movie to enjoy this stiry. There are many references which assume full understanding of what has happened before.

So--first timers (probably guys) are going to hate this movie because they do not understand it.

Series followers are going to love it because it is generally faithful to the books.


New Moon is the second installment in the Twilight series and I found the movie plodding, punctuated by moments of action. It is a depressing story where no one seems to be happy and there is little joy. The action is short and always goes back to more depressing dialogue. As you might expect from a movie about vampires--it is a dark movie. The skies are always overcast, or it is raining. The dialogue is cumbersome and ofter gets in the way of the story.

Recommendation: Unless you are a Twilight series addict, you will probably not like the movie. The only reason to see the movie is to understand what all the fuss is about. No sex, no foul language, but there are some violent scenes.

The Proposal: A Review

So I was dragged off Sunday afternoon after driving for over six hours to see a "chick flick" pretty much against my will. Gag me--how could I possibly want to see a movie like this after seeing the summer's biggest action flick so far?

But, I was surprised. This "its been done before" movie starring Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds was entertaining. I say, "its been done before" because the plot is about two people who can't stand each other and are getting married to help one of them remain in the country. And yes--by the end of the movie they fall in love. Its been done! Nothing new here except that the acting is really very good and the humor is fresh.

The new part is the wilderness setting of Sitka, Alaska and some really good acting by Betty White who plays the part of an off-beat grandmother. She is really very funny and works extremely well with both Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds.

I actually thought the white puppy almost stole the whole movie--but then I do have a soft spot in my heart for dogs.

The plot is predictable and the acting is good but not great. The situations range from the believable to the wacky--especially one where Betty White is dancing around a fire in the woods. But like an enjoyable meal that you've had before, it all seems to come together for a surprisingly funny, touching, and well paced movie. It was a good way to spend a couple of hours.

RECOMMENDATION: Guys, if you haven't punched your chick flick ticket lately--choose this one. You will laugh and probably enjoy yourself. Be cautious however--your date may actually think you like chick flicks if you show too much enthusiasm. Overall--the movie was good entertainment and probably worth two hours, especially when wrapped around dinner. (But please, don't let my wife know!)

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Review

You haven't seen it yet? Why?

This movie is a lot of fun and it is fast paced. The plot is thin--but who cares. It is a summertime movie designed to entertain--and entertain it does.

The acting is not great, but the action is nearly non-stop.

The critics hate it and the public loves it. Why? Because the movie does not take itself too seriously. It is a fun, summer, action movie. End of story. It has drama, action, enough of a plot to hang the action around and is a great recruiting movie for the U.S. military.

The movie stars Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox. A college freshman and his girl friend, drawing upon the relationships established during the first Transformers movie with the Autobots, are called on to save the human race and the solar system from certain destruction by the Decepticons. There is an interesting piece with ancient Egypt which allows the storyline to develop. Even though it is an action movie--all of the pieces fit together. Although the movie is a bit long, I do not know what I would cut out to shorten it. Perhaps some of the scenes at college near the beginning were a bit gratuitous. But there is good humor and interplay between the characters.

The movie had a bit for everyone. I saw the movie with a four-year old and he loved the Transformers every time they were on screen. The older boys enjoyed the easy looks of Megan Fox when she was on the screen. There is humor--some of it too sexually oriented for many of the younger crowd which will want to see the movie. But the movie is perfect for the pre-teen crowd and those of us who never grew up.

RECOMMENDATION: See the movie. Enjoy it for what it is. It will not win any academy awards, but it is a blockbuster and if you are in the mood for fun and action--see the movie. Be advised--there are some sexually suggestive jokes and scenes which may not be appropriate for the very young crowd. The action can be intense, again, not good for the very young crowd.

Star Trek - Movie Review

Where to start? One word--FANTASTIC!

The movie is a great ride, has a tight plot and successfully restarts (some call it reboots) Star Trek in a manner which essentially provides the writers of any future sequels with a blank canvass. You will have to see the movie to understand how this movie, although set in a time before the other movies and the series, is not a prequel but rather a brand new start with familiar characters. And it works.

I am a Trekkie at heart. I have been part of the Star Trek empire since the series was running on TV originally (OK--so I'm old!).

The film opens with the Federation starship USS Kelvin investigating a "lightning storm" in space. It turns out to be a black hole, and the Narada, a Romulan mining vessel, emerges from it and attacks. The Kelvin's captain, Richard Robau (Faran Tahir) is captured and killed by the Romulan captain Nero (Eric Bana). First officer George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth) takes command and sacrifices himself and the Kelvin by ramming it into the Romulan ship in order to allow the rest of the crew to escape. During the escape, George's wife Winona (Jennifer Morrison) gives birth to a son: James Tiberius Kirk.

And then it begins and it doesn't stop until James T. Kirk is promoted to Captain of the venerable USS Enterprise, NCC-1701.

The plot is the complex, futuristic plot complete with twists and turns that Trekkies have come to expect. It is a tight plot and all the loose ends are wrapped up. Yet, this is a new start--a "do-over" for the Trek empire compliments of the plot.

The possibilities are again endless not bounded by everything which has happened before.

So while NASA sems to be having trouble exploring the final frontier, movie makers have fighured out how to keep us interested and transfixed.

RECOMMENDATION: A must see! Good for kids--although there is one gratuitious (and somewhat disturbing) sexually oriented scene.

Knowing: Movie Review

Took some of our precious Spring Break time to see the movie Knowing. We had thought it looked intriguing and wanted to see at least one current movie during Spring Break.

The movie is directed by Alex Proyas and stars Nicolas Cage and Chandler Canterbury.

The movie has a lot of promise as it begins. The plot is well developed and quickly pulls the viewer into it. A time capsule is opened 50 years after it is buried at an elementary school and there are troubling signs in the numbers on the sheet given to one boy that ultimately predict the end of the earth.

OK--it is a great start and a good story. The acting is good--not great but good. The story compelling as all of the pierces come together including the daughter and grand daughter of the girl who wrote the numbers on the paper 50 years ago. The interaction of the actors and characters is very good and the movement along the plot if compelling.

But let me tell you this--the ending is poor. Beautiful, Hollywood grand style, but a cheap movie trick. Yes it is set up at the beginning of the movie--but any movie that ends this way (and there are a lot lately) just is not a good movie. here are so many other ways to end movies other than resorting to this type of ending.

RECOMMENDATION: MUST MISS. There is no reason to see this movie unless you have absolutely nothing else to do. The ending is just bad. And I was left wondering if the movie producers believe I have any intelligence at all.

Sunday at the Zoo

What a beautiful day it was yesterday, August 17th. I made my first ever trek to the Baltimore (Maryland) Zoo accompanied by the grandsons (a/k/a the dynamic duo of E and Jax), their mother and Chris.

I got to push Jax in the stroller--which really is an RV in disguise. Jax and I had some quality time wandering around looking for the next shade tree--that is until I bored him so much he went to sleep.

I enjoyed the zoo. The shade of the trees made the walk very pleasant. Of course the drive through Baltimore's not so nice side was also interesting, but the zoo is nicely landscaped and the exhibits are well maintained. E and I had fun finding the animals in the enclosures. Seems the zebra had a desire for anonymity and went and hid once we identified him.

The polar bear was very active swimming around her enclosure. She was fun to watch. Finding the arctic fox was fun--he looked liky our cat Louis--a white ball of fluff sleeping in his enclosure.

The African Bird Watering Hole is a unique exhibit and was very enjoyable--although I think E really enjoyed running arounod the outside ofthe enclosure with me chasing him--he even stopped to wait for me when he got "too" far ahead of me,  just to be sure I was still part of the action.

Recommendation: The zoo is a must visit spot while in Baltimore. The walking is easy and although the sun was hot, there are shade trees everywhere. The crowd was light even though it was a Sunday. I'm sorry it took me 13 years to get to the zoo--because as the song says--"it's all happening at the zoo."