I think I can speak for the both of us when I say we love us some Wes Anderson, and this film does not look to disappoint. Just check out the trailer HERE.

Thoughts, opinions, complaints, hate, love?
I think I can speak for the both of us when I say we love us some Wes Anderson, and this film does not look to disappoint. Just check out the trailer HERE.

Thoughts, opinions, complaints, hate, love?

12 Monkeys (1995)
So I forgot it was my turn. That isn’t entirely true. I was holding out until I watched Jacob’s Ladder. In case I deemed it draft-worthy. It was decent, but I wouldn’t watch it again.
Although I haven’t seen his entire filmography, this is the only Gilliam picture I care for. The way it deals with time-travel is the one of the best, aside from perhaps Primer. Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt are great here, but is there a bad film with them?
The latest installment of the storied franchise shakes off the cobwebs of flaws the previous two films have fallen prey to, and delivers in spades. Those who thought Cuaron’s Azkaban was the best and Order of the Phoenix the worst will find much to like about this film. Like Azkaban, changes were made to better suit the film format. The dimwits who haven’t figured out that novels and films are two very different mediums will probably not enjoy this picture. Slight changes were made to enable better pacing and add more drama. The only nitpick I found was foreshadowing of the next two adventures that wasn’t apparent in the book. Since almost everyone watching the movies have read the books, it probably isn’t an unforgivable error.

Much praise should be given for the look and feel of this film: dark. The darkest yet, and that’s a good thing. Lots of bleak scenes, as if the weather was eternally overcast. I hope for more darkness in both theme and picture to come.
4 wands out of 5

About to lay down for the evening after one of the best days I’ve enjoyed in some time, I read this heartbreaking story. My prayers go out to her and her family.
Seems like posting trailers is all we do over here now days. Oh well. Check this contemporary film noir flick out.
I am convinced. I am totally convinced. What am I convinced about? That hope exists for original filmmaking in today’s world of “adapted screenplay” this, or “remake of” that, or the ubiquitous “comic book” film. The Wrestler has convinced me.

This isn’t Rocky with wrestling. It isn’t some inspiring come-back story, though at times it could be. The Wrestler is a film about a guy who twenty years ago was at the top of the business, but is now forced to wrestler in small venues in even smaller towns in Jersey. He doesn’t do it because he has to. He maintains a part-time job on the weekdays. No, Randy “The Ram” wrestles because that’s who he is. He hardly has anything else. His life is lonely, filled with frequent trips to the local strip club, mostly to chat with who seems to be the only one outside his wrestling friends that gives a crap about him (Tomei). He’s even estranged from his daughter who could care less about him. This is a sad man who has nothing else in his life but wrestling, and he gives it his all.
It’s hard to critique a film that has so much heart and feels so true to life. I cannot say a bad thing about it. Rourke’s performance on-screen is amazing. I cringed at the painful stunts that I knew weren’t actually real, but I knew real pro wrestlers endured. Even the emotional torment he suffers resonates with the audience. Very rarely do I get drawn into a movie like I was drawn into The Wrestler. Films can be made to inspire, romanticize, document, narrate, or convey any number of emotions. The Wrestler allows the audience to empathize with “The Ram,” and the sentiment resonates throughout the film.
I won’t mention Aronfosky’s filmography or The Wrestler’s place amongst it. He didn’t write it, so it feels unfair to compare it to his past work. He directs it well. And that is all to be said about that.
Near the end I got the feeling like I was watching an AFI retrospective on film 20 years in the future. Instant classic is a strong title to give a film, but I think it is appropriate here. Easily the best film of 2008. The Wrestler in the future will be placed next to the greats of Hollywood: Casablanca, The Godfather, Rocky, E.T., etc. Snubbing The Wrestler for a Best Picture nomination may be the Academy’s greatest error. Hopefully they do what they can to remedy their error by giving the deserving Rourke his due.
IGN or some guy talked to Frank Miller about Sin City 2.

I guess the question on everyone’s mind is: do people still care about Sin City?
It was cool when it came out almost 4 years ago, but the hype for a new one has died down considerably since then. Isn’t this visual style ‘old hat’ by now? Isn’t Frank Miller old hat? I’m probably in the minority when I say I find Miller’s work uninteresting, overly stylized, and downright boring. His work on Batman was great, I’ll give him that, but nothing compared to what Tim Sale and Jeph Loeb did. Really, I speak for no one when I say Frank Miller should just stop with films already, let alone comics.
He’s already ruined our chances of getting a realistic swords and sandals version of the battle of Thermopylae. Instead we had to sit through that slow motion, 9-foot tall persian, strange orgy, hunchback soldier, oracle nipple filed version of one of the greatest military battles in history. The Spirit!?!? Again, i’m probably the only one not excited at all for this film. Come on Hollywood. Let’s get back to real movies. If I wanted to see a panel-for-panel version of a graphic novel, then I’d go read the darned thing, not pay $8.
How about an adaptation of Sin City into an actual movie? The noir style works great, but the visual style is old and overused. Oh well. How ’bout that Dark Knight coming out next week on my birthday? Now that’s a comic book flick. I remember back in the day when we had a gay Batman, I tell you what…..