Once more into the fray... Into the last good fight I'll ever know... Live or die on this day... Live or die on this day...

 Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

A howling wind can be heard in the background as a simple title card with two words pops up: "The Grey." Whether that's a testament to the men involved in this picture or the arctic tundra itself is up to the viewer. A man named Ottway, played by the always fantastic Liam Neeson, then starts narrating about life, work and the futility of everything now that his wife is gone. He does this in the form of a letter to his wife which he knows he'll never actually send. Very quickly this film lets you know that this isn't going to be a happy picture. It's dreary, depressing and leaves a pit in your stomach, and that's before the story even really gets going. The defeat in Ottway's voice is enough to show you that things can only go down from here.

This is the start to The Grey, the newest film from Smokin Aces director Joe Carnahan (who also co-wrote the film). Marketed as "Taken with Wolves" this film promised to be an action packed, wolf-punching-with-broken-bottles experience that we'd never forgot. Well that is not the case, or at least the former part of this sentence. The film is less an action film, more than a survival horror with a surprisingly deep philosophical element as man faces nature in a battle to the death. Think The Edge, but replace the bear with wolves. That latter part of the sentence is true though as I doubt I'll forget this film any time soon. 

 The film follows Ottway and a small group of survivors after their plane goes down in the middle of the arctic tundra. They are low on food and supplies, dead bodies are everywhere and worst of all, there are really pissed off wolves who want them dead. Not because they don't like humans, but because they are protecting their turf, and these humans are intruders. Now they must find a way out, or at least a way back to safety without getting eaten by the wolves.

The story is a simple survival/long trek story but is littered with brilliance throughout. While most of the dialogue is Joe Carnahan's saltiness at it's best (they throw around the F word like it's nothing) there are a lot of really deep and thoughtful conversations that come off like real people talking about their humanity instead of actors playing a role. Neeson gets a ton of great lines throughout the film and is always moving the story along at a really great pace. Pacing is one thing Neeson has in spades. Part of what made Taken, and to a lesser extent Unknown, such good films is that Neeson can make a situation as tense and fast paced or as slow and methodical as it need be. If he wants you to listen, you listen and if he wants you to panic, your heart will be racing.

The other actors are actually quite good as well, even if none of them hold a candle to Neeson. Frank Grillo plays the foul mouthed tough guy Diaz in a way that makes you hate him one minute and sympathize with him the next. Although he acts like a tool most of the movie, you see genuine concern in his eyes and an actual caring for the people around him. Dallas Roberts and Dermot Mulroney also put in some great performances, making you genuinely care about most of the people involved. In fact at both screenings I saw, I had the person I went with lean over and tell me "Oh I like so-and-so, I hope they make it." If a film has done that, then it has succeeded in it's writing and acting.

My complaints against the film are really quite minor in the big picture but definitely hold the film back from being perfect. The wolves definitely border on Twilight levels of CGI badness and there are some scenes that could have been shorter and had been just as good. Also, and this may have just been me, it was pretty obvious who was going to get the boot minutes before they got the boot. I realize that there is a structure to how your supposed to do those kinds of scenes, but predictability can make an otherwise tense scene seem boring. And while I didn't have a problem with it, there were a lot of people at both screenings who hated the ending. Me, I thought it was well done, but just letting you know ahead of time that you may be disappointed. Also be sure to stay through the credits as there is a scene at the end that gives you a little more of answer to what happens.

Overall though The Grey is a fantastic wilderness survival horror that is well acted, well shot, well written and worth the price of admission. If you like Liam Neeson, The Edge, or films about man vs. nature then this is the film for you.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT (4 out of 5) 

How many of us ever know what it is to become the perfect version of ourselves?

 Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Looking back, I should have picked up on Bradley Cooper's potential as a star way back when I first saw him in Wet Hot American Summer. Rugged good looks, a great sense of humor, the twinkle in the eye that you see in all leading men, and most importantly the ability to be versatile in any role you are given. And despite being stuck in comedies for most of his career (save for a few films) Cooper has certainly gotten nothing but better in the last 10 years.

Limitless, the latest from Illusionist director Neil Burger, is picture proof of how good Cooper has gotten. Limitless lives or dies by Cooper's performance both on screen as well as in the numerous voice overs and inner monologues he delivers throughout the entire movie. If he didn't deliver on both, this film would have been dead on arrival. Acting's certainly not easy but being able to be convincing and entertaining while basically reading your lines out loud is certainly a challenge most actors can't live up to. But luckily Cooper's charm and charisma cut through any doubt and no matter what other problems may arise from this film, you always are entertained thanks to Cooper.

 The story of Limitless is based on the 2001 novel The Dark Fields by Alan Glynn. Eddie Mora (Cooper) is a struggling writer whose life can't seem to catch a break. His book is overdue, his girlfriend dumped him, his money situation is in the toilet and said book only has one word written on it. One day, while roaming the streets of New York, Eddie runs into his ex brother-in-law (Eddie also has a failed marriage under his belt) who offers him a drug called NZT which will stimulate his mind, increase his intelligence and make him more focused then he has ever been in his life. It also makes things more colorful (I don't know why). When the effects wear off he decides he needs more and, after discovering the ex brother-in-law dead, finds his secret stash and takes it as his own.

With his newfound powers Eddie becomes the perfect him. He's in shape, dresses well, looks clean, learns languages, martial arts and other talents and even manages to finish his book. But like every red blooded American he wants more. So he ups the dosage and decides to take on Wall Street. But when side effects start occurring and people start following him, maybe being the best him isn't the best decision after all.

 The story is well done but suffers in a few key ways. First it relies on NZT as a crutch whenever they write themselves in a hole. Need to fight? NZT. Need to run? NZT? Need to accomplish a goal? NZT. Need to fill a plot hole in seconds? NZT. It goes on and after a while gets a little frustrating. I understand the point is that it's a miracle drug but it can't make you God of all sudden (which this movie may lead you to believe). Second, besides Eddie, all the other characters are painfully underdeveloped. DeNiro is basically a caricature of Michael Douglas' Gordon Gekko, Abbie Cornish is just there to be the girlfriend and nothing more, and all the other supporting cast members either don't get a name or aren't developed past stereotypes 101. Seedy lawyer? Businessman? Russian Mobster? All there. Finally, some side plots are basically just dropped mid film for no reason other than they must have run out of time. The best example? One character's motivations change in two seconds flat with no explanation. It baffled me.

The acting is a mixed bag but with more good then bad. I've already raved about Cooper enough but he is fantastic and a treat to watch the whole time. DeNiro, despite not having much depth, is good as well and does a good job with what he's given. He mixes intimidation, evil and kind quite well. It's kind of a throwback to his older roles. But that's where the praise ends. Everyone else either phones it in or gets swamped by Cooper/DeNiro. It's sad really when you think about it, but luckily you don't notice the bad that much unless you really go looking for it.

The only other thing worth noting is they do a tunnel effect multiple times during the movie (the longest being the opening credit sequence) and while cool at first, it gets annoyingly disorienting and I almost got nauseous. Just fair warning you might want to look away.

Overall Limitless is one of those movies that should be a great vehicle for Bradley Cooper. It shows he can do drama and action well and that if you give him a script he can deliver. The story suffers from a few issues but overall is entertaining and doesn't overstay it's welcome. The acting sans Cooper leaves a lot to be desired but an interesting role, albeit shallow, from Robert DeNiro is at least somewhat fun to watch. If you're a Cooper fan or like kinda trippy thrillers then give this a whirl.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

Before you do anything you have to ask yourself if you can do it. If you can't do it, don't start...you'll just get someone killed

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

French films seem to be getting remade a lot these days. And if not remade then there are certainly plenty of movies lately that base their premise on a French film. The Next Three Days is one of those films. Based on the French thriller "Pour Elle," (which is fantastic if you ever get a chance to watch it) The Next Three Days is the newest film from famed screenwriter and short lived show mastermind Paul Haggis. Best known for his work on Crash, the past two Bond films and The Black Donnelly's, Paul Haggis returns to the director's chair for a fourth time to deliver us a tense thriller that relies heavily on convenience rather then reality.

Russell Crowe plays John Brennan, an English Professor at the local Community College, whose wife Lara was arrested and convicted of murder. John believes it was a case of wrong place, wrong time but all of the evidence points to Lara and so most of his appeals get shot down immediately. John, between appeals work, is also tasked with taking care of their young son Luke who seems to have taken Lara's departure the hardest. He is quiet, anti-social, and practically ignores his mom at the jail, which is something that worries both John and Lara. John keeps to himself mostly but during all this meets Nicole (Olivia Wilde), a young mother whose daughter has taken a liking to Luke. She is apparently the only person outside of the justice system that he has told about Lara's incarnation.

After spending three years in prison, Lara attempts suicide and that causes John to shift his focus from getting her out legally to getting her out in any way possible. He consults Damon Pennington (Liam Neeson), a man who has escaped prison multiple times, and he gives John all the information necessary for him to break his wife out of prison. The problem is if he can't do it successfully, Luke is going to grow up without both of his parents, and that keeps John hesitant throughout the first half of the film.

The second half picks up the in the action department and it's also where the films flaws rear their ugly head and the biggest problem is believability. Now I realize that movies are meant to be fiction (unless said otherwise and even then) and in films if you want to move the plot along you have to have things happen at convenient times so that the hero can accomplish his goal. Well in this movie conveniences happen to everyone and that really throws off the reality of it all. 

I can understand John handling and using a weapon. If people were shooting at me I could turn into Rambo pretty quick. What I DON'T understand is a detective looking at a Prius key and knowing it's automatically John. Or a detective seeing John puke after a visit to the prison and thinking "He's going to break his wife out of prison next week." Actually most of these stretches are courtesy of the police, who are apparently gods and can make no mistakes. Even when they do make a mistake, they rally in no time and are right on them. I know police officers and I have never seen an entire city's police force centralized on two people, on foot mind you, and be able to respond to whatever direction the detectives tell him in 10 seconds. I call bulls**t. I know it may seem minor to some people but when it's used in succession as much as it is in the second half it gets eye rollingly obvious that they were running out of script.

Besides that though the only other problem is throwaway characters. I mention Olivia Wilde and Liam Neeson in the synopsis but really they are in the movie together a combined 15-16 minutes (and that's mostly Wilde). I understand cameos but when you base almost your entire marketing campaign on one man's 5 minute speech, it can be disappointing to realize that that speech was it. As for Wilde's character she is never really fleshed out enough and her character is left with a giant "Well what did she do?" moment that never gets answered. I have a feeling it's on a cutting room floor somewhere.

The film is actually pretty well done though on the acting and the technical side. It's paced nicely, the camera work is great, the soundtrack is intense and all of the actors, especially Crowe and Banks, give it their all as their characters. Despite being built like a construction worker in the summer, you could believe Crowe was a mild mannered teacher. And Banks, whose mostly known for comedy roles, gives a great dramatic performance of a woman wrongly accused. Neeson and Wilde are good in their small parts but only Neeson really stands out. His speech is epic and extremely well delivered. If I take anything away from the film it will be his speech.

The Next Three Days is one of those hard ones to rate. It's a good film but it suffers from throwaway characters, plot holes and conveniences that not even Sherlock Holmes could figure out on his own. But I do believe it IS worth seeing if you're willing to turn a blind eye to realism and hopefully you enjoy the ride.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

"Who do you suspect?" "Nobody...and everybody. That's where you come into play."

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

I was a little late to the party when Stieg Larsson's Millennium trilogy first came out. Then again, I always am. Why? Well after reading and obsessing over Harry Potter when it first came out I learned that there will always be bigger fans of things than me. And when the inevitable movie, television show ect comes out, I will be grouped with these fans who make me seem like a total noob. So whenever I'd go to a release of one of the films or one of the books I would always feel out of place since they were all decked out in wizard gear and they had memorized all the spells. I mean I liked the books a lot but I don't obsess. I'm a geek, not a nerd (there IS a difference).

So as time went on more series I read became popular (Darkly Dreaming Dexter, Dead Until Dark, Twilight, and a myriad comic books/graphic novels) I started getting that same Harry Potter feeling I had before and stepped back away from following the masses. So when the time was right I dug into the Millennium trilogy and I have to say that they are fantastic books. I could say a lot about them in detail but Wikipedia will pretty much tell you everything that I could and probably better (I suck at explaining).

What's the most resilient parasite? An Idea...

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

In Stephen King's 2009 sci-fi novel "Under the Dome" he starts one chapter by saying that the worst kind of virus is an idea. He explains that it grows in people's minds until it can no longer be contained and the idea either evaporates or explodes out of the person. The first lines out of Leonardo DiCaprio's mouth in the film Inception is about the virus known as an idea. An idea is truly a scary thing to have because you don't sometimes know the weight of the consequences it may have on somebody. That is both shown and explained in this film.

Ideas are a major driving force of Inception but the biggest force would have to be dreams. This entire film is based around dreams, stealing in dreams, planting ideas in dreams, waking up from dreams, establishing what is and isn't a dream and creating a dream. Christopher Nolan, who seems to now be the "OMG" director of the 21st century with films like The Prestige and the two recent Batman films, has had a lot of time to create his dreamsterpiece.

In 2000 Nolan had started writing a script about dream stealing. Nolan has always been fascinated with the mind and it's shown in his previous films, especially the now famous Memento. He had always thought about dreams and how we hold onto dreams and how we create dreams and the idea of sharing and exploiting dreams. 80 pages later he had a rough draft of a script. He presented it in 2001 to Warner Bros. but decided against making the film. Why?

Like James Cameron he needed time. Time to truly create a masterpiece, time for great actors and actresses to reveal themselves, time to let technology reach the levels he needed and time to gain experience and fame as a writer and director. And after directing the Batman films and The Prestige he finally decided it was time to make the film. He added and tweaked around the script a little, changing it from a horror film to a heist film and then into a thriller/surreal/sci-fi/heist film, and started putting together a team of actors and actresses to play in what he thought might be his masterpiece.

The first person he signed was Leonardo DiCaprio. An actor who I think personally desperately needs an Oscar and who has shown amazing growth and depth as an actor, it was no surprise Nolan wanted him. And with Shutter Island earlier this year, it only added more momentum to this film with his involvement. After that, and with Nolan being a big name in Hollywood now, he cast the rest of the film. They got Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon Levitt, Tom Hardy, Marion Cotillard, Tom Berenger, Tileep Rao and Nolan regulars Michael Caine, Cillian Murphy, and Ken Watanabe.

From there they started shooting, traveling all over the world. From Japan, to L.A, to Paris and even Tangier, this film got around. With the help of regular cinematographer Wally Pfister, editor Lee Smith and composer Hans Zimmer they were able to create a film that looked and sounded amazing.

With the film finished they started the ad campaigns. Starting off subtle, the anticipation and hype grew to a fever pitch. And with reviews from Rolling Stones calling it one of the best of the year and a lot of my blogging buddies saying exactly the same thing, it was a little hard not to have high hopes for this film. Nolan had set a standard for quality and I couldn't except anything less than awesome from him. Well is it awesome? Yes...yes it is.

I usually try to keep my plot summaries short unless I'm spoiling the plot of the film. Well I'm not going to spoil the film but instead give the short plot overview followed by an explanation of some of the ideas this film presents, trying to stay relatively spoiler free.

The film follows Dom Cobb (DiCaprio and little note Nolan's first film featured a character named Cobb) an extractor who specializes in security but also steals ideas and thoughts from other people, particularly his clients. A businessman named Saito offers them a job, a job which could prove to help Cobb get his life back of track, but like every good movie it's not easy. The job is an inception and Cobb can't do it alone. So with Saito, Cobb hires Point Man and partner Arthur (Gordon-Levitt), architect Ariadne (Page), forger Eames (Hardy) and chemist Yusuf (Rao). Their mark is the son of a prominent business man (Murphy) and they are planting the idea that he should dismantle his father's empire.

First I'll explain the jobs:
Extractor-takes the ideas
Point Man- researches targets
Architect- constructs the world of the dream
Forger- becomes another person within the dream world to get information out of the target
Chemist- formulates the sedative that helps them sleep and dream within dreams

Now an Inception-
An inception is when you plant an idea in somebodies head without them realizing it so that the idea will appear to be their own. This allows the idea to grow within the person and become the person's idea and his idea only...as if they were never there.

But how do they wake up?
To wake up from the dream they must experience a "kick." That means you feel something that causes your body to involuntarily react. This could be water to the face, tipping in a chair, or hitting something really hard.

It sounds complicated and twisted but it really isn't. To some that's a negative but I actually see it as a positive. This movie could have taken a more complicated approach but I think that would have made the film really hard to follow and could have left the general audience scratching their heads. Inception makes you think, and you will think (and probably talk about this film for days on end) but not too much. Does that make it a fault also? Yes. Part of me wishes he would have gone further with the ideas and his creation of this world. But for what he has I love it. The writing is awesome, the dialogue is awesome and I just loved every word on that script.

As for the effects I really don't have a lot of words except that they are awesome. The three parts that really show that well are the diner scene, the hotel hallway scene and the kick segments. The diner scene has the world around DiCaprio and Page exploding and popping while everything else is still. This is early in the film and it grabbed me automatically. The hotel hallway scene is just brilliance of picture and will probably be in my top scenes of the year. It's not the longest scene in the world but the way the camera moves and works, as well as the suspense and action of the fight scene as well as the dramatic conclusion make it all amazing to watch. It plays with slow motion in a way I haven't seen since The Matrix. And The kick segments are brilliant, especially towards the end.

In those segments it was always shifted into slow motion. The first time it's just kind of "Oh that's neat" but as the movie progresses it becomes an amazing effect and even creates a lot of tension towards the end. I noted the film as having layers of slow motion I haven't seen before. "Slowest motion," "Really Slow Motion," "Slower Motion" and "Slow Motion." All of it is great and adds a lot to the film. A lot of work was put into those effects.

Now a film can be pretty and well written but without good acting it is nothing. So does the acting deliver? I think so. DiCaprio continues to prove he NEEDS an Oscar by giving a great performance as Dom. He is a tortured character and DiCaprio delivers on all cylinders. Gordon-Levitt is awesome as the "straight man" of the group although he does get a few laughs out of me. Cotillard is surprisingly good as Mal being both beautiful and haunting. Murphy is typical Murphy and Wantabe is typical Wantabe. Page delivers her typical straight faced, somewhat sarcastic but lovable performance but I actually thought she did quite well.

The big surprise for me was Tom Hardy. I've always liked Hardy but never really noticed him. He was just "that suave British actor with a pouty lip and a sharp wit." In this film he is electric and totally engaging to watch. His chemistry with all the characters (especially Gordon-Levitt) is great and his little quips are fun to listen to. He's also a total badass. Overall though the acting is extremely solid and well done.

As for faults this film has a few. There are some plot inconsistencies, the film could have been shorter, the idea could have been taken farther (as mentioned before), the film turns into a pure action film halfway through (not a big problem for me but still) and the ending is great but it pisses me off as well. I'm not going to spoil it but I certainly went "GAH!!" Overall though these faults are minimal since I had an awesome time watching this film.


So is Inception the best movie ever? No. Is it one of, if not the best film so far of 2010? Yes. Should you see it? Most definitely. Don't miss this summer blockbuster masterpiece.

MY VERDICT: TOP FILM

It's always lightest...before the dark

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Films based on older books tend to be hit or miss for me sometimes. Unless you can be faithfully updated to today's times then sometimes you have to work with what you have and hope for the best. The Killer Inside Me is very much the 1950s and a lot of the films essence comes from it being a period piece. The original novel was such a great example of a much simpler time and that horrible things still happened then as they do now. It also was one of the best first person narratives involving a serial killer I have ever read. I would be willing to bet Dexter, The Shining and all of those books/films/shows took some influence from that novel.

The book also had a level of brutality that you don't see in other novels. A nihilistic, evil brutality that is as uncomfortable to read as it ends up being to watch. It's not Saw extravagant or Seed/Hostel methodical, it's just simple human brutality. And if you want to adapt the book correctly into a film then it becomes a hard film to sell. Many studios and many directors have tried to create this film but each having to drop out for different reasons.

Eventually though Michael Winterbottom was given the task of writing and directing the film along with John Curran. They had many actors in mind to play the different parts but eventually they settled on Casey Affleck as the lead and Kate Hudson and Jessica Alba as the love interests. And boy was the movie better for that. But I'll get to that shortly, first what is the film about?

The film is about Lou Ford, a small town sheriff who to everybody else seems like a great stand up guy whose a complete gentlemen to everybody he meets. He says yes sir and no sir and if you asked anybody they would say he is one of the greatest friends you could ever have. Lou is also stands up for what is right and values laws and rules. He doesn't tolerate cheaters and hates fake people. But Lou also has a sickness that eats away at him...he loves to beat and rape women. Why? Nobody knows and nobody will ever know. But sometimes if he is pushed hard enough or it becomes convenient to his own needs he will snap and start hitting.

Lou is currently working on a case involving a hooker who has been sleeping with the town, most notably the big bossman's son. The bossman, the cops, the union leader and practically everybody want Lou to handle the situation. But when Lou falls for the hooker and 10,000 dollars comes into play it becomes more "What does Lou want" and less "What does everybody else want?"

The acting is superb in this film, especially from lead Casey Affleck. He still looks and sounds 14 but he is a joy to watch. He embodies a killer and that dual personality that comes with it. You see remorse, no remorse and total apathy all within a matter of minutes. What makes Affleck great though is the way he works with the small. He is a very reserved character and he can get over all of his emotion with just a twitch of the lip, a blink of an eye or a stare off in the corner. He BECOMES Lou Ford and it is both brilliant and disturbing to see. All the other actors are good as well but are overshadowed by Affleck, which I think was the point. But they all do their job well and are all quite believable in their roles.

The writing, cinematography and costume/make-up design is also brilliant as well. The film feels like a half an hour when it's really an hour and 40. Some people may not like the slow pacing but it's written in such a way where slow works and really adds to the tension and the oncoming brutality. I have nothing bad to say about this movie.

It is a controversial film that will be hated by a lot of people. But the great writing and Affleck make this a film that I won't forget for a long time. A true contender for best film of the year.

MY VERDICT: TOP FILM

Come on Sullivan...we gonna PLAY!!

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Welcome to the first edition of Uwe Boll week where I review all of his films, two at a time, for six days leading up to our big Uwe Boll themed episode of The Demented Encyclopedia on Saturday. Nick will be doing a week of Boll as well so be sure to check that out. I decided to go in order starting with his first film...or should I say his first AMERICAN film. Before coming to America, Uwe Boll had made 4 movies in Germany and one English speaking TV film (whilst in Germany). But when he got here he was handed a script by Robert Dean Klein, made some adjustments to it and set off to direct his first film, a low budget horror film called Blackwoods.

Blackwoods is the story of Matt Sullivan. Matt is a writer who specializes in promotional films and he just met a girl named Dawn. They decide to go out and after they've been dating for a while, Matt decides to go on vacation with her to Blackwoods. Things SEEM okay until Matt gets stopped by the sheriff. First Dawn acts weird around the sheriff almost as if she's hiding from him. Then they get weird looks from the town people at the local diner. And then finally they meet a really weird motel clerk who gives them a room...that plays nonstop porn. Basically it's like small town Deliverance. Trying to make the best of things, Matt and Dawn have sex. After sex Dawn goes for a walk. While on her walk, Matt gets attacked by a man with an ax. He escapes and goes looking for Dawn. Needless to say things don't go too well.

Up until the halfway point this film feels like your run of the mill horror film. The setting, the characters, even the dialogue seems run of the mill. But after the ax guy this film takes a turn for the better turning into an intense psychological thriller that's like a mix between House of 1000 Corpses, Deliverance and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The action is intense, it messes with your head, the twists are good and overall I was left satisfied. The acting is good overall and Matt especially does a good job.

It IS a low budget film and it definitely shows, and it hasn't aged well the past 8 years but for what it is, Blackwoods is a good thriller with good writing and good acting. A good start to the American career of Uwe Boll. If you can find it, check it out...it's worth a watch.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT

We're so precious aren't we? Everyone's gotta live, everyone's gotta be happy. It's a joke...an absolute joke.

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

I'm shocked...absolutely shocked. Uwe Boll made a really good and extremely memorable film. I mean I love his films on a guilty pleasure level and he is a really cool guy to talk to (just see my interview with him) but he really hasn't made a film that is actually good on it's own merits. Or at least that's what I thought until Rampage. It's like he looked in the mirror, gave himself a pep talk and made a huge 180 degree flip as a director. If Rampage is any indication of where he's heading as a director, I could see him clearing his name of any blemishes.

Rampage follows the story of Bill Williamson. He is your average 20 something high school graduate who refused to go to college and lives at home with his parents. He has a steady job as a mechanic and for all intents and purposes he seems like your average guy albeit a bit of a reserved slacker. That's on the outside. On the inside is a totally ape s**t, delusional sociopath with a total nihilistic attitude towards life and the human race. Throughout the first half an hour of the film you see Bill turn from a methodical madman who wishes someday to act out his fantasies while living a happy, normal life to a full blown rage filled monster. The barista messed up his coffee, his boss didn't give him a raise, his friend is a jerk and he got food spilled on him. It was these things mixed with the ticking time bomb inside his head that caused him to snap.

Around the 33 minute mark and until about 70 minutes into it he pretty much goes around the entire town he lives in and slaughters everyone. Men, women, children, cops anything in front of him he shoots. He makes a few exceptions which I'll mention later but he pretty much annihilates the town. At the 70 minute mark the film switches gears and becomes a "perfect crime" story that leaves you dumbfounded as how brilliantly insane Bill really is. But when the whole 84 minute film was over I was left speechless...it was amazing.

Uwe Boll has never been much for good writing in his films and I think he realizes this in Rampage. Besides the general outline and the characters, the rest was improved. He pretty much let Brendan Fletcher and co go to work and say whatever came to their mind. And to be honest, 90% of it is pretty legitimate and feels like good, well written dialogue. It's only accentuated by the brilliant performance of Fletcher as Bill. Fletcher is a Uwe Boll regular having parts in Alone in the Dark and Bloodrayne 2 but he really shines in this film. He exudes a Nicholson/Slater persona without ever seeming copycat and he really plays crazy well. He chooses his words carefully for the most part and you really are in awe watching him. Even in his moments when he totally cracks (he pulls the cheep cheep scene from the Room)

he is as scary as he is brilliant. Even in the way he gestures it is amazing.

The scenes I mentioned are scenes in which he does not kill anyone or doesn't at first. One is at a bingo parlor full of old people. He looks around, bewildered at the fact that a man in full body Kevlar with SMG's is not causing a reaction out of them. Without saying it he deems them "dead already" and walks off. It shows he isn't just doing this for s**t's and giggles but for a reason.

Rampage is a hard film to watch. It's nihilistic, brutally violent, deranged and downright evil. But it is a great social commentary, a well written and acted film and probably the crowning achievement of Uwe's career. Or at least a great step in the right direction.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

Call me Scorpion...

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

As a rule of thumb I don't usually review short films or what could possibly be an overly long trailer. But there are exceptions to everything and I think this is one of them...the Mortal Kombat reboot.

Now I realize that they have made two live action Mortal Kombat movies already and to be quite honest, both of them suck pretty badly, even compared to other video game films. And due to low ratings, bombing at the box office, and nobody wanting to touch this franchise, the chances for a Mortal Kombat 3 became slimmer and slimmer. Honestly, that's a good thing. Or at least I thought it was a good thing until I saw this pop up on the internet the other day.

Being dubbed under many titles including Mortal Kombat, Mortal Kombat 3 and Mortal Kombat Rebirth, the story follows Captain Jackson (Jax) Briggs as he talks to an ex convict whose help he needs. He tells this man first about two assassins. The first one has a skin condition that turns his skin scaly and his eyes red. Usually this kills babies early but this guy is 30 years old. He also kills people for a living and eats there heads for food. He is nicknamed "Reptile." The second guy is a plastic surgeon who went crazy and filed his teeth down to spikes and attached blades to his arms. His nickname is "Baraka." They get this information from washed up action star Johnny Cage, who caught up with Baraka only to be murdered. It was only after he was murdered did they find out that both Reptile and Baraka are working for an evil crime boss named Shang Tsung. Shang Tsung happens to be holding a tournament for fighters and if the man wins then they will get a good shot at taking down Shang Tsung. The man agrees on the condition he is given a new nickname..."Scorpion." Honestly this short film was enough to put me over. Now I'm learning that it was indeed test footage that was sent to Warner Bros. for a new film and if so then I am excited.

The main complaint people will have with this short film is that they are missing the "point" of the series by making it really hyper realistic and gritty. Well I tell them to go watch the original films and then come back here. Both of those films attempted to make themselves as accurate to the games as possible, even down to the costumes and the monsters. The problem however is that the story of Mortal Kombat on it's own is quite weak. It's a fighting game for Pete's sake! So I think this new direction is actually good because it's a refreshing and honestly quite interesting reboot of a great franchise.

But this wasn't the perfect short film either. The cinematography, choreography, special effects, lighting, atmosphere, and direction were all brilliant but the acting suffers slightly. That's not to say they were terrible but especially Jax and Sonya really needed to up their energy. Sonya seemed monotone and Jax got better in voiceovers but when the camera was on him he seemed a bit shaky in my opinion. But really I can't diss too much because it's an 8 minute short film and with what they got it's pretty good, although more talking from Scorpion or any talking from Baraka would be good. I know Reptile doesn't speak but does anybody remember Baraka's gold ending?

Baraka's got a badass voice and I would just hate to see him treated like nothing more than an animal in the new movie if and when it's made.

Either way this looks like it'll be great if it's made and the short film alone is quite enjoyable.

I guess if I had to rate the short film I'd say OWN IT (aka 4 stars) but this film has potential to be a 5 star film if it's done right. Here's hoping!

What was that?" "A...mistake..."

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

I'm going to be honest right out of the bat: I wasn't expecting anything from this film. Honestly I was expecting a 100 minute jump scare fest rip off of Species. I mean Vincenzo Natali is a pretty good director and has directed some seriously good films (a la the original Cube) and Sarah Polley is a VERY VERY good actress, especially when it comes to horror films, but the cheap looking trailer, Adrian Brody's presence (I just hate the sound of his voice), and it's total seemingly lack of originality (on top of it looking like Species, the first poster looked straight out of Aliens), I was really not expecting much.

But what I got surprised the hell outta me. I got a well written, well acted, completely mesmerizing and superb thriller that doesn't use ANY jump scares, has fantastic acting across the board and, above all, is a film I'll remember for a while.

The story of Splice follows two scientists named Clive and Elsa. They are top ranked scientists who are famous for their work with gene splicing and combining DNA tissue to create beings that can be used for protein harvesting. They do presentations, they are on the cover of magazines and their two specimens Ginger and Fred have exceeded their expectations. Clive and Elsa also soon hope that, with the help of Ginger and Fred and using human DNA tissue, they can solve all of the world's diseases. But because it's taboo and frowned upon they deny them this request and ask they focus on this protein they've been working on.

Well Elsa and Clive aren't happy with this and create a human/animal hybrid. Clive is content because he thinks it will do wonders for the scientific world and Elsa...well Elsa wants to see if the thing will live. So without Clive's consent she plants an embryo into the processing chamber and before they know it a creature is born.

Age 50 (as it is called before it gets a name) is a half human-half animal female hybrid that has a venomous tail, bird like legs and is rapidly growing in her body and in her mind. Soon Dren, as Elsa lovingly names it, becomes a full fledged woman esque creature and they need to whisk her off somewhere safe.

That's where the movie splits up into two parts which make up the bulk of this film (bout 40 minutes or so).

On one side you got Clive and Elsa trying to take care of this child and raise her while keeping her a secret and working on the new protein, and on the other you got Dren learning and growing and trying to find an identity and figure out her purpose. It's these scenes with Dren that are truly fascinating. Dren doesn't talk but exudes emotion through her eyes and her movement. The way she holds things, the way she smiles, the way she laughs, it's all growth and it's truly breathtaking to watch.

It's almost a coming of age story in a sense but also a deep thriller because of all the secrecy and because of the last 20 minutes which are some of the most terrifying things I've seen. Needless to say there is one scene in the film I will never unsee as long as I live...it's on par with The Human Centipede.

Splice's great plot and amazing writing (done by Natali as well) is also helped by the amazing acting. Polley is great as always and proves she is a very underrated actress. Brody is actually good although he hits his stride about halfway through the film and kind of drags his feet a bit through the first half. The biggest surprise however comes from model and DJ Delphine Chaneac who plays the teen/adult/grown Dren. She never talks...well one line but still...she never talks. Because of that she has to get all of her emotion and feelings through other means. On top of that she also has to be half animal and half person so she can't be too human but she can't also be full on animal. She is a treat to watch and I hope to see her in more.

All in all Splice was a huge surprise for me and while some people complain it wasn't SCARY or it didn't take it far enough, I really didn't think that's what the film was going for. It was trying to be tense, not scary and I don't want it to be the Human Centipede or a really heavy handed political thriller so I was happy with how it turned out. A great film, give it a look.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

You have to look beautiful for your funeral. This is how they are all going to remember you.

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Films that deal with the idea of death have always intrigued me. Whether it's about the Grim Reaper or a Reaper-esque character, the idea of death, or what happens after death I have always been interested. But one idea of death or near death has always freaked me out: what if you're alive but everyone else thinks you're dead? Stephen King did a great story on it called "Autopsy Room 4" in which a guy had to get a hard on to prove that he was not dead (it's scarier than you think). The Twilight Zone did a great piece on that as well. It's also one of Roger Ebert's biggest fears in life. So the idea is nothing new. But when I heard about a movie called After.Life I got interested again.

The story is of Anna (Christina Ricci). She has a good life, a great boyfriend and everything going for her. But after a small fight with her boyfriend she storms off and drives away. While she is driving she get's in a horrible car accident. She wakes up on a slab in a funeral home, scared and confused. A man named Eliot (Liam Neeson) tells her that she is dead and that he is preparing her body. She thinks that she is still alive and that he is crazy. He says that he can see and communicate with the dead and that it's his job to help guide them to the other side and help them accept death.

But a young boy sees Anna moving around and goes and tells Paul (Justin Long), her boyfriend, that she is still alive. Paul believes the little boy and decides to try to find a way to get to Anna, who is trapped inside the funeral home with Eliot. So it's up to Paul to figure out what to do, Anna to try and cope with the idea that she's dead and Eliot to lead her to the other side.

It's a good story but it suffers from being in the gray zone too much. Is Anna really dead? If so how did the boy see her? Does the boy have powers? How did Eliot get the powers? Is Eliot crazy? There are so many unanswered questions and the movie never really places itself at one end of the spectrum or another. It teases the idea that she is dead but teases almost as much that she is alive. The movie never states whether she is alive or dead. Now I realize that would work for the Sixth Sense and maybe work to create tension but it becomes tedious at times during the movie and makes the overall feel of the movie frustrating. The one good thing it has going for it when it comes to it's writing is it doesn't depend on jump scares. It uses genuine tension and suspense to make the audience jump. A nice surprise compared to the norm.

Where the movie does WELL though is in the acting department. Justin Long is witty and charming as ever finding almost a niche in these thriller films a la Bruce Campbell. Ricci is actually pretty good and believable as Anna. You really do FEEL for her and care about her character's well being. Neeson is great as always. Calm and soothing voice, an eerie feel about him but also a sense of gentleness and a "Why me" attitude. He works great with the film's tone and makes the film actually fun to watch.

After.Life is a decent thriller that suffers from too much gray. The tension and suspense are good and the acting is great but overall it's a pretty forgettable film. Still worth a rent though.

MY VERDICT: RENT IT

Is it better to live as a monster or to die as a good man?

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

To say I was anticipating this movie would be an understatement. In my honest opinion Martin Scorsese is the best living director right now and has created some of the best and most memorable films as all time. Then I hear that Dennis Lehane, an author whom I love dearly and who has created great masterpieces like "Gone Baby Gone" and "Mystic River (both ended up as movies)" was creating a new thriller about Federal Marshall's stuck on an island with an asylum. It was called "Shutter Island." I read the book and was blown away. Not since Catcher in the Rye had I read a book that was truly brilliant. Then I hear Martin Scorsese will direct the movie version. On top of that you got some of the best actors today attached and Steven Knight (of Eastern Promises) and Laeta Kalogridis (of Birds of Prey) are writing it. I nearly squealed with glee when I saw a release date. But it kept getting pushed back...nevertheless my hope never faded and when it finally came out I rushed to see it. The theater was packed but I didn't care, I was happy and seeing the movie I was dying to see. What did I get? I got what I expected: a great thriller from great writers with great direction and great acting that was true almost line for line with the book.

Without giving much away in terms of plot (and it's a doozy of a plot) it's this. Edward "Teddy" Daniels and his partner Chuck Aule are Federal Marshall's that have been assigned to a case at Ashecliffe, a mental institution on Shutter Island. Once there they have to figure out how a patient Rachel Solando disappeared from the island while under watch from the gaurds. But when they start digging they realize that not everything may be as it seems.

From the first shot to the last shot this is a brilliant film. Leonardo DiCaprio continues to impress me at how much he has grown as an actor. Mark Ruffalo is brilliant as well playing the sidekick to Leo and they play off each other quite well. Other great performances come from the brilliant as always Ben Kingsly, Michelle Williams in a surprisingly deep and sinister role and probably most importantly Jackie Earl Haley. His role is no more than about 6 minutes at most in yet it is phenomenal. The look, the voice, the inflection...I actually clapped after he went off screen. Add them all to the great pacing, writing and direction from Scorsese and it's all a brilliant film...

...except for one NAGGING problem: the horrendous editing. Thelma Schoomaker, a multiple Academy Award Winning editor and a great personal friend and collaborator with Scorsese really slacks in this movie. There are noticeable cuts that are quite jarring (not just for effect but like in the first couple minutes) and it doesn't get better. It seems like plot points disappeared and reappeared at random and glasses and scarves disappear and reappear at random as well. One second they are holding a glass and the next frame a cigarette. Usually I don't notice things like this but Thelma really dropped the ball with this one. It wasn't a movie killer but it was consistent enough in the film to make me get a bit peeved.

Overall though Shutter Island is a great and suspenseful thriller that is well told, well acted, well written and well directed and that proves that you don't need jump scares nowadays to really make an audience feel disturbed without being disgusted. A great film.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

You'd let both of us die just to keep your secret?

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

You've heard about this movie, we've all heard about this movie...but have you seen it? I'm willing to bet not a whole lot of you did and for good reason. This multi Razzie award winner is one of the crowning achievements in suckitude in the past decade. This film further cements the fact that Lindsay Lohan is a terrible actress and unless her role is to be slutty, sleep with anything and anyone, smoke like a chimney or go on a drug binge that she is pretty much useless as an actress. It's too bad because when she was younger she had a lot of potential. But like Tom Sizemore she is just a slippery slope that is falling to oblivion.

The plot of I Know Who Killed Me is convoluted, more confusing then Lost and is boring to boot. In a small town there is a serial killer running rampant and kidnapping and torturing women. Aubrey, a writer and piano player is the latest one to go missing. One day a lady finds a girl that looks just like her and brings her to the hospital. Aubrey's parents are there and are happy to have their little girl back only to realize that who they think is Aubrey is really a stripper named Dakota who is a bit down on her luck after suffering some pretty bad wounds. It's now up to her to find Aubrey, this girl who looks just like her, and find out what happened to her.

It could have been an interesting story. The plot when taken out of the context of the movie is actually pretty decent. But the writing and acting completely destroy any hope this film had of being good. Every performance is shallow, hollow, forgettable, boring and uninteresting and all the dialogue is bash your head against the wall stupid and hard to follow. Lohan does nothing for this movie and ultimately this film is a total waste of time.

If you must see it, see it just to witness how horrible a movie truly can be. Otherwise stay away from this one and let it disapear into nothingness.

MY VERDICT: ABOMINATION TO CINEMA

No, he can't see us. But trust me, he can feel us watching.

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

Rear Window was and is one of the best thrillers of all time and probably one of Hitchcock's best films. It's brilliantly written, tense, a modern marvel of movie technology (wikipedia it and you'll see what I mean), extremely well acted (Jimmy Stewart for life) and is one of the best films ever. Disturbia, a remake of Rear Window featuring Shia LaBeouf is nowhere close to that. But it's not a total piece of crap either, just a disappointing thriller with some good scares but overall lacking the punch and the testicular fortitude of the original film it's based off of.

The story of Disturbia is kind of like Rear Window in the way that it's the same idea and same premise but different means to the end. In other words while in Rear Window Jimmy Stewart broke his leg and was doing something to keep busy, in Disturbia Kale is under house arrest for punching out his Spanish teacher after he made a crack about his dead dad and his Xbox live was shut off...same difference right? No not really. Honestly they could have just gone with the original idea (I mean people still break their legs) but NOOO they had to give a "re imagined" look at Rear Window. But basically from there the plot is the same. Kale, in this case, goes in his dead dad's room, finds his binoculars and finds out that his neighbor is a murdering psycho...and he can't prove that.

The story isn't bad but horribly unoriginal, horribly told and all the jokes are juvenile and for about 30-35 minutes the movie is painstakingly boring. It doesn't help that Shia LaBeouf is the best actor in the whole thing. He gives his usual "I'm tough but totally just still a complete nerd with a hard on for anything with a skirt" and everyone else is full frontal lobotomy dumb. Even the villain is boring and dumb. "Look I can steal keys *ghost noises*." Yeah he's pathetic.

Overall though the movie isn't horrible just boring, poorly written and acted and a shameful excuse for a Rear Window remake. Kids just go watch the original.

MY VERDICT: AVOID IT

Now tell me that wasn't some impressive shit!

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

The term guilty pleasure seems to get thrown around a lot but when you think about it what is a guilty pleasure? If you look it up in the dictionary you will see a picture of John Travolta's character Charlie Wax from "From Paris with Love." Directed by Pierre Morel, the famous French director of District 13 and Taken, FPWL shows that even the dumbest most unoriginal plots can be made awesome with a quotable badass character and a lot of over the top action.

The plot is something we have all heard numerous times: Reese (Johnathan Rhys Myers) is a government operative whose job is mostly to plant bugs and switch license plates. He has a wonderful girlfriend Caroline who he lives with and overall a pretty good life. But Reese wants more. After getting engaged to Caroline he gets the assignment he always wanted: a special ops mission. His assignment? To drive around a foul mouthed mentally unstable American hitman named Charlie Wax (John Travolta). Wax is a total loose cannon who doesn't take any prisoners whatsoever while Reese is stuck cleaning up after his mess...and carrying his vase full of cocaine...But when things turn into a potential terrorist attack it's up to Reese and Wax to save the day.

From his first line Travolta owns the screen. Sporting earrings, a shaved head, a dyed goatee, a leather jacket and combat boots Travolta's Wax is a joy to watch. Every line gets funnier and funnier and he never stops. In between kicking ass he tries to "train" Reese to become a better agent and some of his "lessons" are hilarious to listen to. Lines like "When I tell you to shoot the f***er you shoot the f***er!" He even goes so far as to describe what MotherFu**er means! He is rude, crude, obscene and brilliant. Whether you like Travolta or not he is brilliant.

Which is interesting because the rest of the actors suck. Rhys Meyers is totally boring to watch and honestly the first ten minutes are a chore to sit through with one funny moment that I won't spoil. Kasia Smutniak who plays Caroline is monotone and boring and Richard Durden is boring as well. Until Travolta shows up the movie isn't that good. But once Travolta gets things started it's amazing. The action scenes are brilliant and well done and are so over the top that it's hard not to laugh at it's awesomeness.

Overall it's cheesy, over the top, poorly acted (besides Travolta) and predictable but at the end of the day it's a guilty pleasure that is a joy to watch and a great film to relieve stress with because you will be laughing and cheering the whole time. Give this film a shot.

MY VERDICT: OWN IT

You had better decide whether you're hangin' on the cross... or bangin' in the nails.

Hello I am the movie encyclopedia and if no one else will see it, I will.

If I go into a movie with REALLY low expectations then usually there met. If I know a movie is garbage ahead of time I just roll with it, swallow my pride and try to survive the madness. But every now and again a film that I perceive to be total garbage can end up surprising you. Maybe it doesn't change the way you think about films and maybe its as formulaic as a Madden game but it is enjoyable and holds your attention for a hundred minutes. That happened to me the other day with a film called Edge of Darkness.

Edge of Darkness is the newest film from acting legend Mel Gibson. I could sit here and make fun of Mel calling him a drunk who enjoys Sugar Tits and hates the Jews. But don't you think he's been through enough? That was a while ago and he's tried to do everything to make it up. He admitted he has problems with alcohol and got that fixed. I mean if anything else he has laid relatively low. He DID knock up his new girlfriend but otherwise Mel has kept to himself for the most part. The last film he did was 8 years ago! Since then he has directed two movies: Passion and Apocolypto. Both films I have grudges with for different reasons but needless to say I didn't enjoy them. I actually missed Mel on the screen. Was he my first choice? No (that's Edward Norton) but Mel is one of those people that really puts a lot of effort into his movies. And it shows in his newest movie.

The story of Edge of Darkness doesn't pussyfoot around. Detective Thomas Craven is a decorated detective who has worked hard all his life. He is a single parent with one daughter Emma who works as an intern at a scientific research facility. Thomas's wife died when Emma was young so he's had to take care of her for most of her life. One day Thomas goes to pick up Emma from the airport. After some small talk they get home only for Emma to get really sick. Emma insists they go to a doctor but as they walk out the door she gets a hole blown through her with a shotgun and dies almost instantly. Thomas begins to crack but is determined to find out why and who would kill his daughter.

It's nothing we haven't seen before. Corrupt politicians, political conspiracies, nuclear grade uranium, cop with nothing to lose, it's been done before and probably done better. But what makes this movie good is three key things.

1.The acting: Mel Gibson is a good actor whether you want to admit it or not. He gives a powerful and somewhat moving performance as a man who has lost everything in his life. He mixes the anger, the bitterness, the sadness and his slow slip into insanity quite well and is thoroughly enjoyable. The rest of the cast is top notch giving great performances that work well with number 2.

2. The writing: While uninspired and unoriginal the story makes up for it with superb writing, witty dialogue, great back and forth's and they keep all of of the done to death lines (Guy with nothing to lose, fasten your seatbelts) down to one long drawn out line. The story is interesting and I actually wanted to see what would happen next.

3. The directing: Martin Campbell, who is probably most famous for directing the recent Zorro movies and two Bond movies (Casino Royale and Goldeneye), is a great director. What a lot of people DON'T know is that he actually directed the miniseries Edge of Darkness which the film is a remake of. So the source material is in the same hands of he who made it and for us now that means that he knows how to handle the story.

Overall it's not an epic film or a film that will stand the test of time. But it's a History of Violence-esque brutally violent thriller with great writing, great acting and great directing. I know I am just one critic and there are people who will HATE this movie. But I stand by my decision. This is a good movie. Not GREAT but definitely worth seeing in theaters.

MY VERDICT: SEE IT