Reviews

First, Adam Driver is a really great actor whose talents were wasted in the lousy Star Wars sequel trilogy. Not his fault - he took a job, and I hope they paid him well. In this film he was well utilized, and is clearly the best part of the movie. The actress who played Koa was good as well. The main issue I had was with the script. While it did work as a science-fiction thriller, they blew a great opportunity for a surprise twist. Unfortunately, at the 17 minute mark (and in the trailers), it was revealed that this takes place on Earth 65 million years ago. With words on the screen so there was no doubt. This is no way to treat your audience! Why? Why not make it a surprise to the audience that this pilot crash landed on our Earth? Give us hints and clues along the way to build the mystery, then gobsmack us with it at the right time in the narrative, perhaps the third act when we see the Tyrannosaurus. In the hands of a capable writer, this could easily be accomplished. Another thing was that although the writing we see on objects and computer screens is in an alien script, the computer uses the term kilometers as a distance measure, and expresses time in hours. What?? Couldn't you make up words that the audience would understand to act as measures of distance and time? Also, dialogue containing the word "okay" . .. is not okay! Things like that take you right out of the movie. At least he didn't say "you can do this" like they did in the not-so-great Picard season 3. If you're going to design a production with the fine detail of creating symbols for alien script, but then turn around and use colloquial Earth terms (granted that will not be used used for another 65 million years), consistency suffers. Though on balance I did enjoy the movie, with just a little script tweaking and better attention to detail it could perhaps have been one of those movies that is the one to see simply by word-of-mouth.

Oh, where to begin! The first film at least had something of a plot, where the horror crept over the viewer gradually, almost as if they were one of the three unfortunates that would compose the human centipede slowly realizing what was about to happen to them. Visceral, intense and not for the squeamish, to be sure . . .

That established, how could they possibly come up with this steaming pile of garbage? Others can say all they want about it being the chronicle of a madman - it nonetheless fails spectacularly at such a characterization. The sheer concept alone is a sophomoric attempt to simply shock.

How about using the first film as a starting point, and have it so that the doctor was actually part of a group of sick and depraved like minded fellow surgeons who perform similar vivisection experimentation. Imagine the possibilities if the girl who survived the first sequence were taken away by members of such a group before the authorities got there, to be subjected and witness to worse horrors beyond which she has already suffered . . . ? It could still be done, however, as apparently none of it really happened except in the mind of the antagonist all along, if the final scene was any indication.

Bottom line - save your time and avoid this mess.

I'd been looking forward to seeing Untraceable. Its viral marketing was mildly intriguing, whereby accessing the killer's website led to a series of flash puzzles ultimately leading to the film's trailer. The premise, using the Internet as a murder weapon, also held some promise. Unfortunately, these concepts are squandered on a third rate script.

The Pros:

Diane Lane. The concept itself, while reminiscent of SAW, with a technological twist.

The Cons:

The identity of the killer is revealed 40 min into the film. Shameless, absolutely unnecessary plug for the Onstar System 10 minutes into the film. The ending was somewhat rushed, and as such felt anti-climactic. The killer's motivation is simple revenge.

All in all, Untraceable isn't too bad - but it definitely leaves you with disappointed expectations.

I had my doubts about this one, as its limited release precluded the recognition it deserves. Reviewing the premise only made it seem mildly interesting, but I gave it a shot, and was glad for it . . .

The writing is tight, with nary a scene wasted. The performances are excellent, making you care about the fate of the crew, especially in the scenes of self sacrifice. The music evoked the proper mood of such a dire mission.

A strong case may be made that "Sunshine" parallels "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Event Horizon", and the original "Alien." But if such is done in a new way that works and doesn't feel derivative, all the better. The line between homage and derivation can be a fine one, but Sunshine manages to walk it with aplomb.

When any film starts creating buzz and garnering awards, I have to check it out to see what the deal is . . . . I found Juno to be OK, but not as great as its buzz claims – though it could have been with a few conscientious alterations.

There is a great deal to like, certainly – Ellen Page's performance, the treatment of teenage pregnancy in general, and the interplay of the characters. Unfortunately, the picture was marred by several things that either didn't ring true, or make sense within the confines of the narrative. The reaction of Juno's parents to the announcement of her pregnancy was blasé to the extreme! The stepmother's reaction I can almost understand – but the father? Didn't buy it – to him it was as big a deal as someone putting saccharine instead of sugar in his morning coffee!

The character of Juno herself was a bundle of contradiction. On one hand she seems to be wise beyond her years, and in other ways she's helpless. That might seem to make sense in the wake of her pregnancy, thus making the story more poignant, but somehow it just doesn't quite work. Juno's bonding with Mark was a pleasantly unexpected turn, but it went nowhere, and then Mark just disappears from the movie in the third act! When Juno tells her father that she knows someone that makes her feel accepted, I thought she was talking about Mark! I was surprised when she went to Paulie, especially based on his recent behavior in the third act of the movie. As such, her choice didn't ring true enough. If he was the one Juno chose, some voice-over narration throughout the flick indicating her caring for him would have made it make a bit more sense . . .

The music was, in a word, awful. The choice to use it was perhaps to give the movie more of an indie feel, but that still doesn't make it good. Maybe having Ellen Page sing all the songs would have worked, dovetailing into the duet she has with Michael Cera at the end – that would have made sense both actually and metaphorically.

All in all, Juno was a pleasant exercise, full of a potential that could have been realized had the film makers taken the time to step back from the work and see that the forest didn't look quite right for the trees.