Holiday Movie Time...some quick reviews

BLACK SWAN      Full Review | Credits Critics are impressed with Black Swan, the latest psycho-thriller from Darren Aronofsky. The film stars Natalie Portman as Nina, the technically perfect prima ballerina, and Mila Kunis as Lily, the new girl from San Francisco who makes up for any shortcomings in her technique by exuding sexual confidence and passion on stage. Dance company director Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel) chooses to re-imagine Tchaikovsky's ballet Swan Lake, and Nina's perfect technique and naive innocence make her an obvious choice for the lead as the virginal White Swan. However, Leroy doubts that Nina has the emotional depth, darkness and sexual expression to inhabit the Black Swan. By challenging Nina to free herself sexually and get in touch with a darkness she didn't know she possessed, Leroy plants the seeds of a psychological crisis in her mind. Many critics were impressed with the way Aronofsky pulled the audience into his powerful examination of the human psyche, but more so, everyone seems to agree that Natalie Portman's performance is exceptional. She trained extremely hard to prepare for this role, including 10 months of daily 5 hour ballet sessions, and the results of her dedication clearly translate to the big screen. David Edelstein of New York Magazine commented that, "Portman gives the kind of performance that wins awards, largely because you're so aware of her sacrifices to play the part." Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, who gave the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, also expressed praise for Portman, he states, "Black Swan centers on a performance by Natalie Portman that is nothing short of heroic, and mirrors the conflict of good and evil in Tchaikovsky's ballet Swan Lake. It is one thing to lose yourself in your art. Portman's ballerina loses her mind." Several critics are confident that Portman's commitment to her craft will earn her awards and many have singled her out as a definite Oscar contender. There are some critics, however, who were not impressed with Black Swan, regardless of the impressive acting. David Denby of theNew Yorker criticized Aronofsky's obsession with exploring self-mutilation and denounced the film claiming, "Black Swan is a pompous, self-glorifying, and generally unpleasant interpretation of an artist's task." Other critics sided with Denby as well. Rex Reed of the New York Observer called the film, "overrated, overwrought and overhyped" and "an exercise in hysteria so over the top that you don't know whether to scream ****or**** laugh." Overall, critics had a strong reaction to the intensity of the film. Christy Lemire of the Associated Press sums up the impact the film has on audiences, asserting "Black Swan is at once gorgeous and gloriously nutso, a trippy, twisted fantasy that delights and disturbs in equal measure...Black Swan will leave you feeling stunned as you leave the theater."

BURLESQUE      Full Review | Credits Reviews are mixed for Burlesque, the cabaret-inspired musical from first time director Steven Antin. The film stars Cher as Tess, the veteran performer turned club owner and Christina Aguilera in her big screen debut as Ali, a small town Midwestern girl who risks it all to follow her dreams in Los Angeles. After getting off of the bus in Hollywood, the former waitress from Iowa wanders into the Burlesque Lounge and, with stars in her eyes, begs Tess to give her a chance to shine on stage. She eventually works her way up from cocktail waitress to main stage performer and earns everyone�s respect with her huge voice. Tess is behind on her mortgage for the club and she quickly realizes that Ali is exactly the type of fresh young talent she needs to save the lounge. The premise of the story is one of the oldest in Hollywood and many critics attack the plot for being unoriginal, predictable and thin. Peter Debruge ofVariety felt the film lacked substance and he states that, "whatBurlesque needs is texture -- not the red-velvet-and-rhinestones look that dominates the production design, but any sense that these are real people with real dreams facing real obstacles." Wesley Morris of The Boston Globe echoed this complaint about the plot and he asserts, "it's entertaining enough, like watching a celebrity workout film with a plot. But never once is it believable." Several critics felt that the talented cast was one of the only positive aspects of the film. Carrie Rickey of the Philadelphia Inquirer maintains that, "Burlesque is a preposterous and intermittently entertaining lesson in how to make a movie musical with a little brains and a lot of talent." By all accounts, Aguilera holds her own in her first lead role, however since most of her screen time consists of singing, dancing and performing, it doesn't seem like this role was much of a stretch for her. Mick LaSalle of theSan Francisco Chronicle was impressed with Aguilera's overall performance and he proclaims that, "Aguilera is jaw-droppingly good in several numbers. Moreover, she makes us believe in this aspiring performer's talent, in her consuming need to succeed, and in her essential worth as a person." Kirk Honeycutt of The Hollywood Reporter was also a fan, and he commended the pairing of Cher and Aguilera, stating, "It was a risky bet by this first-time feature director to cast songstress Christina Aguilera, a singer who had never acted in a film. The stroke of genius here is to pair her with pop-music icon Cher. They balance each other out." Overall however, most of the criticism was negative and it was predicted that audiences would be left wanting more from the film. Stephen Whitty of the Newark Star-Ledger was unable to find any redeeming qualities in the film. He criticized that, "the numbers are no more memorable than the tired script, or cardboard characters. You�ve heard of movies that are so bad they�re good? Well this is so bad, it's...bad." Burlesque did manage to come in fourth at the box office this past weekend, proving that its appeal was about as strong as the reviews.

LOVE AND OTHER DRUGS      Full Review | Credits Critics are reluctant to give positive reviews for 20th Century Fox's latest romantic comedy Love and Other Drugs. The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Jamie, the womanizing pharmaceutical salesman who is attractive and charming despite his commitment phobia. During one of his drug-pushing crusades, he impersonates a medical student intern and meets Maggie (Anne Hathaway), a woman with her own commitment issues. Hathaway and Gyllenhaal have great chemistry, and many critics site their performances as the only saving point of the film. Rex Reed of The New York Observer was not a fan, but he consented that, "What makes this preposterous yawn (113 minutes of nudity with seizures) bearable is the considerable charm of its two attractive, sexy stars." The major criticism revolves around the film's lack of cohesiveness. David Edelstein of the New York Times states, "Love & Other Drugs is crazily uneven, jumping back and forth between jerk-off jokes and Parkinson's sufferers sharing their stories of hope. It's the sort of movie in which half the audience will be drying their eyes and the other half rolling them," and Kirk Honeycutt of The Hollywood Reporter adds, "This movie's got ADD like you wouldn't believe." The tone jumps around continuously, which contributes to the film's instability and disconnectedness. Adding to the carefree, highly sexual nature of the first half of the film, Jamie switches from selling Zoloft to selling Vlagra, which prompts an endless array of erection and penis jokes. All of this witty sexual entertainment comes to a halt once the two characters actually fall for each other, and when that happens, they are force to take a serious look at all of the issues and insecurities they have been burying their entire adult lives. It seems that this jarring transition is what prevents audiences from really connecting with the film. Bill Goodykoontz of the Arizona Republic complains that, "the movie jumps back and forth so much between an adult romantic comedy (think, lots of sex and nudity) and Serious Illness Issues (melodrama for the most part) that perhaps audiences are lucky not to be charged for two movies." Despite the complaints about inconsistency, Love and Other Drugs has all of the qualifications of an entertaining romantic comedy and it is likely to be a hit with female audiences, which should provide the film with a healthy box office return.

TANGLED      Full Review | Credits Disney's latest animated film Tangled is receiving favorable reviews across the board from critics. The studio's much talked about 50th animated feature puts a modern day spin on the Brothers Grimm fairy tale Rapunzel, and it features Mandy Moore as the voice of the latest in a long line of Disney princesses. In this adaptation, the princess is taken at birth by a devious woman named Mother Gothel who raised Rapunzel as her own and keeps her locked up in a tower because her long golden locks have the power to keep anyone eternally young, so long as the hair is never cut. Despite her mother's desire to keep her locked up, the young heroine longs to escape the tower and see the world and her opportunity arrives when a young thief named Flynn is blackmailed into taking Rapunzel out to see the world. This film comes from Disney�s department of in house animators instead of the company's Pixar division, and several critics noted that this film is the first competetive non-Pixar movie the studio has released. Ann Hornaday of The Washington Post commented that Tangled is an, "uncommonly pretty visual experience." Critics are also in agreement that this film makes a valiant effort to include a little something for everyone. Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times states, "Whether you like stirring adventure or sentimental romance, traditional fairy tales or stories of modern families, musicals or comedies, even blonds or brunets, Tangled has something for you." Colin Covert of the Star Tribune seemed to share this opinion stating, " Tangled, opening Wednesday, finds the just-right balance between sentiment and satire, action and romance. Plus it's pretty." Other critics were less pleased with the movies attempt to blend so many different facets of the story into one cohesive performance. For Justin Chang of Variety, the film was only, "a passably entertaining hodgepodge of old and new animation techniques, mixed sensibilities and hedged commercial calculations." Although the storyline may take a while to find its footing, the positive features of the movie seem to be enough to compensate for some minor downfalls. Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel concedes that, "the emotional moments pay off and this version of Rapunzel lets down its hair just enough to deserve a place of honor with all the other glorious Disney 'princess' tales."

NEXT THREE DAYS, THE      Full Review | Credits Critics are not impressed with The Next Three Days, the latest film from writer and director Paul Haggis ( Crash, In the Valley of Elah). This suspenseful prison-break thriller stars Russell Crowe as John Brennan, a mild-mannered English professor, and Elizabeth Banks as Lara, his supposedly falsely accused wife who is sentenced to 20 years in prison for allegedly murdering her boss. After Lara's appeal is denied and all of their legal options are exhausted, John's desperation leads him to concoct an elaborate scheme to break his wife out of jail. Critics seem to agree that there are several glaring flaws that prevent this movie from being a success. Believability was a major downfall for most audience members, and Peter Travers ofRolling Stone stated, "It's damn hard to enjoy a thriller when you don't, won't, can't believe a word of it." Others echoed this sentiment, and Tom Maurstad of Dallas Morning News proclaimed that, "The Next Three Days is too long and full of the kind of ludicrous coincidences and preposterous moments that will have you laughing when you're supposed to be tearing up *or* gasping in shock. It wants to be intense, but more often is just intensely stupid." Another consistent complaint had to do with the casting, specifically that Russell Crowe was not the best choice for the lead role. Ty Burr of the Philadelphia Inquirer felt that Haggis made a mistake casting Crowe because, "the role calls for someone average, nearly anonymous - someone like you *or* me - and at this point in his career Crowe is built to tangle with giants" and Christy Lemire of the Associated Press added that, "the main dynamic you have to accept in The Next Three Days - the one that the entire story, all the drama, all the risk hinge upon - is that Russell Crowe and Elizabeth Banks actually belong together. Always strong individually, they make no sense as a couple. And that's a problem, since it undermines our ability to become emotionally immersed in the danger in which they find themselves." The fact that Crowe and Banks are respected big-name actors is what made this performance even more disappointing. Scott Bowles of USA Today laments that, "Despite a veteran cast and a couple of Academy Award heavyweights,The Next Three Days manages to remain less than the sum of its parts." Roger Ebert of theChicago Sun-Times gave the movie 2.5 out of 5 stars, and he sums up his frustration stating, "The Next Three Days is not a bad movie. It's sort of slow, because it spells out a lot of details, but it kept me involved. It's just that, after it was over, I felt it was a waste of the talent involved." The film is scheduled to open on the same night as the highly anticipated Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1. while Lionsgate execs feel that it will draw a more mature audience that will not be swayed into seeing the latest Harry Potter, The Next Three Days may not have the positive buzz it needs in order to see considerable box office success.

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 1      Full Review | Credits Anticipation is high for Part 1 of the final installment of the Harry Potter epic, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. This movie marks the beginning of the end for one of the most successful film series in recent years and fans and critics alike are eager to find out if this movie will live up to high expectations. The first half of the grand finale opens with the beginning of their biggest adventure yet -the quest to destroy He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named by finding Horocruxes (objects that contain part of Lord Voldermort's soul), destroying the Dark Lord and ultimately restoring peace to the wizarding world. Gone are the carefree days at Hogwarts, and critics concede that this is the least characteristic of all of the Harry Potter films because of the change in scenery and dark nature of the text itself. David Kois of The Village Voice stated that the film is, "no longer really a children's story at all, Deathly Hallows plucks its young heroes from the comfy four-posters of Hogwarts and makes them refugees, fleeing and, eventually, waging war." The film is a combination of several high-stakes reconissance/escape missions interspersed with slower periods where our three young heroes are travelling around the countryside as they try to solve all of the unanswered questions that constantly plauge their mission. Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel summarizes the plot stating "The first third is brisk and witty, the middle third gloomy and the finale of Part 1 not so much a cliffhanger as a grim, inspiring tease, a masterly build-up to put 'I can't wait for part 2' on every Muggles' lips." While most critics are giving favorable reviews, one of the grievance that has been voiced by many is that the film does nothing to refresh our memories *or* explain any of the back story that is so vitally important to this film's plot. David Edelstein of the New York Times registered his frustration when he complained, "I've read all the damn books and seen all the movies, and I still need the occasional refresher." Other critics weren't bothered by their confusion over certain details, and some even praised the film for not trying to cater to audiences that are new to the Harry Potterscene. Roger Ebert, who gave the movie 3 out of 5 stars, was quoted in his review for theChicago Sun-Times saying, "My cluelessness didn't bother me, because the film depends more on mood and character than many of the others, and key actions seem to be alarmingly taking place off-screen." Justin Chang of Variety went so far as to say that "the filmmakers should be applauded for not pandering to the few Potter virgins who may be in the audience, and for pushing the series ahead into unapologetically darker realms." Roger Moore came down somewhere in the middle of this debate resolving that, "at this point in Harry's anguished saga, the saga doesn't care much about the needs of the newcomer. Director David Yates's film, his third in the string of Potter adventures, will not be for everyone." Also, Elizabeth Weitzman of New York Daily News commended both the director as well as screenwriter Steve Kloves, asserting that they "know how to trim J.K. Rowling's books without betraying the themes and tone of her work." The film is expected to open to record-breaking success at the box office and overall, critics are in agreement that the latest Harry Potter film has enough substance and magical wonderment to give audiences a satisfying two and a half hour performance of the first half of the famed seventh book.

UNSTOPPABLE REVIEW      Full Review | Credits Reviews are favorable for Tony Scott's latest film Unstoppable. The movie revolves around a runaway train that is barreling down the tracks at 80 mph towards Scranton, Pennsylvania and no one is on board to stop it. As if the stakes weren't high enough, it also happens to be carrying toxic, highly flammable chemicals and it is on a collision course with a train full of school children, so the potential for a catastrophic disaster is high. The plot is simple, yet Scott and writer Mark Bomback manage to build upon the natural suspense of this thriller by adding depth to the characters and the circumstances that surround their lives. Peter Debruge of Variety notes that, "given the linear, one-track nature of the plot, Scott and Bomback prove surprisingly effective at delivering a well-rounded experience, going out of their way to fill in the personalities of their two leads." Denzel Washington plays Frank Barnes, the veteran engineer and Chris Pine is Will Colson, the fresh-from-training newcomer. The two men join together and accept the suicide mission risking life and limb to try and stop the speeding train while the audience is eagerly glued to the screen waiting for the outcome. Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun Times gives an appropriate description of the film stating, "the movie is as relentless as the train, slowly gathering momentum before a relentless final hour of continuous suspense. In terms of sheer craftsmanship, this is a superb film." He gave Unstoppable three and a half stars and fellow critic Toddy McCarthy of The Hollywood Reporter seems to agree, stating that it is "the best blue collar action movie in who knows how long" and pinpoints the "lean and pure simplicity" as a key factor in its appeal. For some however, the simplicity does not provide enough depth to make this a satisfying film. Keith Staskiewicz of Entertainment Weekly admits that "the exchange of substance for speed may not appeal to all, but if you're on board you'll find it hard to disembark."

MORNING GLORY REVIEW      Full Review | Credits Critics are offering mediocre reviews for the romantic comedyMorning Glory. Although the film features several big-name actors including Harrison Ford, Diane Keaton and Rachel McAdams, it fails to bring anything new and exciting to audiences except a few laughable one liners. Rachel McAdams plays Becky Fuller, a talented young TV producer who finds herself unemployed after being fired from a TV network in New Jersey. She aggressively searches for a job at one of the major networks and lands a position as the executive producer of one of the lowest rated morning news shows on the air. Faced with the looming prospect that the show will be cancelled if ratings do not improve, she ferociously throws herself into her career in order to try and salvage the show. Diane Keaton and Harrison Ford play the dueling co-anchors who can barely stand to be on set together, let alone co-host a news show. Predictably, McAdams plays the plucky heroine who devotes herself to her career, triumphs in the face of failure and still has time for romance. Unfortunately, most critics agree with J.R. Jones of the Chicago Reader when he states that, �McAdams is typically effervescent here, but she can't rescue this weak comedy.� Overall, critics are hesitant to praise the film. David Edelstein of New York Magazine admits, "Morning Glory isn�t terrible. It has a lot of craft, a lot of star power, and a fair number of laughs. What irks me is that the filmmakers settle for so little." This complaint is echoed throughout other reviews, and Manohla Dargis of the New York Times agrees that, "Morning Gloryhas a talented cast and a subject ripe for examination, parody, satire, something. You just won't find much of that here." The negative reviews mainly site predictability and lack of true comedic substance as its major downfalls; however there are others who found it charming. Rex Reed of The New York Observer states that it, "is the smartest, sharpest, funniest and most consistently entertaining comedy since The Devil Wears Prada" which is not that much of a stretch considering they were both written by the same woman� Aline Brosh McKenna. Although Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly gave the film a B-, he also predicts that, "Morning Glory will find an audience, if only because as mediocre as the picture often is, it features the sort of tasty, ham-on-cheese movie-star overacting that's undeniable lowbrow fun."

DUE DATE REVIEW      Full Review | Credits Reviews have been mixed for Hangover director Todd Phillips' latest movie, Due Date, starring Robert Downey, Jr. and Zach Galifianakis. The road trip movie has the pair making the journey from Atlanta to Los Angeles, all the while with Downey's character becoming increasingly frustrated with his car mate's bizarre and annoying behavior. Many are quick to point out the similarities between this film and John Hughes' classic Planes, Trains and Automobiles, with critics favoring the latter. As the L.A. Times' Besty Sharkey remarks, "I say that because it is nearly impossible to watch Due Date, the new comedy from The Hangover filmmaking phenom Todd Phillips and not be hit by a wave of nostalgia for the far better Planes, Trains and Automobiles." What did work, for many critics, was the acting. States Claudia Puig of USA Today, "It's Downey's signature sarcasm and distinctive slow burn that make the movie."Peter Travers of Rolling Stone comments "a raucous ride built out of used parts and bizarre shifts in tone but driven by two comic virtuosos who know that the best laugh riffs rise from a baseline of character." For some critics including Manohla Dargis of the New York Times, though, this is not enough to carry the film, "Regurgitation and a self-pleasuring dog define the limits of the new film's ambitions." However, Though reviews have been less than stellar for Todd Phillips' Due Date, as of Monday the film was able to pull in a cumulative $35 million in the four days since it opened on Friday, suggesting critical praise is not tied to box office success for this movie.

HEREAFTER REVIEW      Full Review | Credits Though somewhat uneven, reviews have still been highly positive for Clint Eastwood's latest film Hereafter staring Matt Damon and Belgian actress Cecile de France. Hereafter deals with the intersecting stories of a psychic, a boy who has lost his brother, and a Tsunami victim who are all dealing with tragedy and loss in a film that also features Bryce Dallas Howard and twins Frankie and George McLaren. As many have noted, this is not Clint Eastwood's normal fare. The New York Observer's Rex Reed explains, "It's a change of pace, but it exemplifies every carefully honed aspect of the treasured director's craft." As Reed goes on to explain, the story may also be a departure for screenwriter Peter Morgan, calling the screenplay, "worlds away from his political, character-driven biopics like The Queen and Frost/Nixon." Ty Burr of the Boston Globe calls this story "a multi-character melodrama about the supernatural that's affecting both in spite of and because of its flaws." The film does not have the full support of critics, however, with Michael Phillips of The Chicago Tribune lamenting, "Sometimes a major screenwriter's missteps become exacerbated by a major director's dogged, determined house style." However, most critics seem to lean closer to Washington Post critic Michael O'Sullivan calling Hereafter a "mostly mesmerizing but finally flawed film."