True terror in a scary movie is one of the hardest feelings to successfully create and, ironically, one of the most popular to experience. More often than not, people of all ages would rather be scared witless than laugh at a comedy or cry at a romance. Cloverfield is one of the many films that encourages audiences to feel that horror that never gets old.

Cloverfield takes place in Manhattan, during a going-away party for a young guy named Rob. His best friend Hud is given the job of documenting the night on a video camera and gets more than he bargained for when the ground starts shaking, buildings start exploding, and a strange creature at the heart of it all is captured on his footage.

The entire movie is viewed through the eye of Hud’s (although technically it’s Rob’s) video camera. While at times the jerky movements can make you a little dizzy (people prone to motion sickness might want to avoid the running scenes), I definitely think the filming choice gave a lot of character to the movie. Before watching, I was a little skeptical at how they were going to ensure that the audience saw what they needed to see during certain events. The character holding the camera throughout the entire movie is far from being a filmmaker and is constantly in situations where the choices are to A) get a good view of what’s going on and die or B) forget the video, run away, and live. Surprisingly though, director Matt Reeves did a great job giving the audience what they needed visually while still making Hud a believable character.

And depicting the story visually was extremely important because Cloverfield contains almost no background music (the only exceptions being the music played at Rob’s party and the original score that begins a little over a minute into the ending credits). I personally enjoyed the lack of music because there was no build-up towards a scary event. It just happened. And that made the event even more shocking and scary.

The acting unfortunately wasn’t the best. During my first viewing it wasn’t too noticeable, but the second time through, I felt like the quality of the performances fluctuated a lot. It could’ve been a lot worse, but it also could’ve been better.

Also, as with the majority of creature-attack movies, the monster’s appearance in this film was ultimately not that frightening. It was too obviously CGI-ed, and the noises it made were way overdone. I think I would’ve liked it better if we never got a good or even semi-good view of what the creature really looked like. The human imagination will always be able to create a better monster than any special effects team could anyway.

Something that I also think could’ve been improved is the title. Cloverfield is a cool name, sure, but if the filmmakers would’ve included the word “Cloverfield” in the actual movie at all or switched to a name more significant to the plot, the title would’ve been much cooler.

Basically, it has its moments but also its flaws. If you’re looking for a little fright to spice up a late night with friends, go for it. If you’re a horror junkie searching for the next original terror film, you’ll probably want to pass.

“Winner, winner. Chicken dinner.” This is how the movie 21 starts, and from there the audience is taken on a wild ride from Boston to Las Vegas and back again. I’ve heard a lot of bad things about this movie mostly about how unrealistic it is.  None of the things I heard though stopped me from enjoying this movie.  Yes it is based on a true story (told in the book “Bringing Down the House: The Inside Story of Six M.I.T. Students Who Took Vegas for Millions” by Ben Mezrich), but there’s obviously some Hollywood flair added to this tale.  When I go to the movies, sometimes I look for the realistic elements, but usually it’s the unrealistic elements that make going to the movies enjoyable. 

When the audience first meets Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess, Across the Universe) he is a nerd who has given up everything for studying in hopes of going to Harvard Medical School.  The only way hope he has of going to Harvard though rests on a full ride scholarship, which many students compete for.  In the meantime he is approached by his math professor (Kevin Spacey, American Beauty) who asks him to join a black jack team of fellow students.  This team is special though because they have the ability to count cards, and not get caught.  At first Ben resists the group, but the money and temptation of the girl of his dreams (Kate Bosworth, Superman Returns) also being on the team finally makes him give in.  What follows is a whirlwind ride of Ben transforming from geek to chic.  The team teaches him their system of how to count cards, and putting it into action in a busy Vegas casino.  How could anything possibly go wrong? Enter Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix) as a security guard whose job is being replaced by special face recognition cameras, and he is not too happy about it. 

Directed by Robert Luketic (Legally Blonde) I thought 21 was fast paced and enjoyable (I saw it twice in theaters, which is a rarity for me).  Sturgess was wonderful as Ben, and I thought his accent was pretty accurate.  This movie is just another example that he is definitely an actor to keep your eyes on.  Bosworth struggles a bit in her role, but eventually finds the right footing to keep going.  I really enjoyed the supporting characters who added humor to the movie including Josh Gad and Sam Golzari as Ben’s nerdy friends.  Spacey was pretty engaging as the cool professor, turned enemy. 

Now I never said I didn’t find some of the moments in this movie unbelievable, because I do, and this is one of the downsides to the movie.  For example, how can they use the same hand signals at the same casino every weekend and not get caught sooner?  Also, why is Bosworth’s character the only one to ever really wear a disguise until the end? Why is Ben working in a suit shop that is selling ties for $200 but he’s only making $8/hour as an assistant manager? Well…I guess I can believe that one.

Even with the unbelievable elements, I’d still recommend 21.  It’s a fun movie to watch and I’d give it a B.  It might not deserve a whole chicken dinner, but it would at least get a wing from me.

In the outback of Texas Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) stumbles across a drug exchange that has gone violently wrong. Amongst the dead bodies he comes across a trailer full of heroin and an unclaimed two million dollars. The opportunity to take the money is too compelling. Unfortunately on his trail is psychopathic killer, Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), who relentlessly pursues his quarry and the money. Looking on is Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) who struggles to comprehend the violence that ensues.

I should start out by saying that I’m a huge Coen Brothers fan. I still go around looking for an excuse to quote Tim Robbins’ character in The Hudsucker Proxy “You know, for kids”. Which is quite sad considering that movie came out over a decade ago and I now get the kind of blank looks that Norville Banes used to get.

So, it might come as a bit of surprise that I don’t think No Country for Old Men is the masterpiece that everyone seems to say it is. Now, don’t misunderstand. It’s superbly shot - the use of Texan landscapes is magnificent. The acting is brilliant from start to finish which is incredible considering the amount of dialogue there is in the movie. You would think at some point the actors would start looking sheepish at the having to portray so much without words.

It’s hard not to appreciate the struggle of hair that Javier Bardem overcame to make his character ruthlessly evil and not at all comical. Josh Brolin was excellent as the man pursued. It was also nice to see Kelly Macdonald getting a good Hollywood part. She’s probably still mainly known for Trainspotting but this should lead to some more meaty roles.

I know the whole point of the film is to look at the violence and not the crime itself but I’m not sure it works. I’ve not read the Cormac McCarthy novel but I’ve heard the Coen brothers didn’t stray far with their screenplay. The book may pull it off but I don’t think the film does. The man whose eyes we’re supposed to be looking through is a peripheral character. Although I can appreciate his shock and despair at the sheer violence he sees, it’s hard for his view to have any weight in the film. For me, he didn’t have the onscreen presence to make the incredibly abrupt ending work.

What really happens is the audience invests a lot of time with a psychopathic killer pursuing his prey but don’t get paid off with a climax. When a movie finishes there should be an overall feeling that you’ve been touched by what you’ve seen. No Country for Old Men just sort of glides off the screen and I was left feeling cheated somehow.

Technically and artistically it’s a brilliant movie up to the point where Carson Wells (Woody Harrelson) pops up for a few laughs and then it seems to lose focus. By the time the end came I really didn’t care about any of the characters. Who lived, who died seemed irrelevant and Chigurh’s coin flipping was left meaningless.

It’s definitely worth a watch and I’m sure it will cause all sorts of debate. Unfortunately I just can’t get on the masterpiece bandwagon. Even though I think it’s well done, ultimately I just didn’t find it the story that engaging.

When I first rented Lust, Caution (Se, Jie) all I knew about it was that it was rated NC-17, had subtitles, and was the only movie my boyfriend was interested in watching that night.  So we rented it.  Overall, I really did like the movie, and I think he did too, but it was very drawn out. 

The movie takes place during the second Sino-Japanese War where there is much resistance from students at a local university.  One group of Chinese students form a theater troop to perform plays that will help support the resistance, but soon enough they realize they want to do more than just act.  A plot is formed to assassinate Mr. Yee (Tony Leung Chiu Wai, who has over 80 film credits of which I’ve only seen this one), a higher ranked Chinese man who is working for the Japanese. They make an elaborate plot that boils down to them using one of their females Wong Chia Chi (Wie Tang in her debut film) to seduce him.  Being inexperience is their downfall and things fall apart.  Four years later, they get another chance.  Wong Chia Chi left the group and is going back to school when the group reconnects with her.  They are working for the resistance again and know that Wong Chia Chi is their only hope to get to Mr. Yee, so again she must go undercover and risk everything to bring down Mr. Yee. 

Based on the novel of the same name by Eileen Chang and directed by Ang Lee (Brokeback Moutain) Lust, Caution is a movie filled with tension.  Lee does a wonderful job of keeping the tension going throughout the film.  The audience never knows what to expect next, whether Mr. Yee will finally get caught, or Wong Chia Chi will be found out.  I was always trying to guess what would happen next.  Wai and Tang also did a great job in their roles as well.  Wai played the “bad guy” perfectly.  He was all smiles to his wife and her friends, but when he was away he let his animal side come out.  While Tang had to go from naïve school girl, to a married woman, back to her school girl, and then back to an all out seductress.  She played the part very believably and with a graceful ease.  I also felt that Wai and Tang had a certain chemistry that worked well for their characters, as they have some pretty intense sexual scenes (here’s where the NC-17 rating comes in).  The supporting actors were also very good, especially Lee-Hom Wang as Kuang Yu Min, the director/leader of the troop.  You could really feel his anguish for Wong Chia Chi as she fell deeper into the plot, and see he obviously cared for her a great deal from the time they first met to later in life.   

Like I mentioned earlier, this movie is subtitled.  This didn’t bother me, but sometimes the dialogue was so fast that I didn’t get a chance to read everything which was a bit annoying.  Also, the movie was far too long.  It runs about two and a half hours long, but it felt longer than that.  Not to say it was a bad movie, but for awhile it just dragged on and could have done well with some better editing and shorter scenes.  Speaking of scenes they could have shortened, I have to mention that there are some graphic sex scenes in the movie that may not be enjoyable for some people. I understand why there were in the movie, and appreciate them being there, but they could definitely have been shorter.  But they were essential to show the relationship between Wai and Tang’s characters. 

In the end I’d give Lust, Caution a B.  If you enjoy foreign films you’ll probably like this one too but, if you’re not a fan of them then I probably would not recommend this movie.