Sometimes the best romantic comedies are the gritty ones. The intricate performances, unpredictable story, and crazy camera push-ins made for an enjoyable viewing experience for me. There were many memorable lines, some reminiscent of As Good As It Gets. And as in that movie these characters make each other "want to be a better man". It has a feel-good vibe, even though it's so soul-crushingly real at times.

Pat: You have poor social skills. You have a problem.
Tiffany: I have a problem? You say more inappropriate things than appropriate things.

4 Stars (out of 5)

I did not enjoy this as much as Inglourious Basterds but it was still a great film by one of my favorite filmmakers. The style and design of the film are extravagant, sometimes over the top, but mostly fun. I only wish the second half of the story was as rich and witty as the first. All is worth it for Christoph Waltz. I should expect to see him in a lead role for all Tarantino's films from now on. He should be what Depp is to Burton, at least for a little while.

3.5 Stars (out of 5)

The best Apatow film since, well, Knocked Up. I really do not understand all the hatred toward Apatow. This was a decent film by an extremely competent and often intimate writer/director. I didn't like Funny People either but I laughed my ass off and thoroughly enjoyed this one. My favorite part of Knocked Up was when Seth Rogan's character is explaining his problems to Paul Rudd's character with great enthusiasm while cursing at him like a crazy person and when he's finally done and runs off camera, Paul Rudd's character proceeds to sing Happy Birthday to his kid while bringing out the cake. I thought: I could watch a whole film about these people. And now boom here it is.

4.0 Stars (out of 5)

It wasn't as bad as I was expecting it to be. Although I would have much rather we got one 95 minute children's film based on the book and not another super-long-winded trilogy of 3-hour bore-fests. This is a story for children, right? So why shove in a boring 10 minute conversation about geo-political details taken from the appendices of a Tolkien book or his lost notes or some nonsense? I just want to see a Hobbit on an adventure. Maybe leave scenes without him on the cutting room floor. Put them in special edition blurays for the fanboys. And why in the world is Gandalf cutting off so many creatures' heads in this movie? Wizards should stand there and look regal. It seems as silly as seeing Yoda do karate.

3.0 Stars (out of 5)

Best Bond film since Brosnan, hands down. I'm a big fan of Sam Mendes and I have not liked the earlier Craig Bond films. This was fantastic. It makes the two previous films look like prequels and this the real deal. The set-pieces were absolutely stunning and the color... so much color! What works for me is that Bond is finally the dapper proud, and sometimes cheesy Bond he's supposed to be. Fixing his cuff after surviving a train chopping in half is exactly the sort of thing I expect from the real 007. Also, great miniature model work in several sequences. Always refreshing to see practical effects in modern blockbusters!

3.5 Stars (out of 5)

The most I've liked a Wachowski film since the first Matrix! Might be the first watchable film since the second Matrix. The strongest portions were the futuristic storylines but the clever editing and story order made up for the other stories weaknesses. The creative decision to use the same actors in each storyline was bold but added to the film's charm. And to anyone that complains that they should have subtitled the strange super-future dialogue, you're wrong. It was easier to understand than pig latin! But why is Tom Hanks seeing a New Orleans style demon anyway? Weird, huh?

3.5 Stars (out of 5)

I enjoyed the performances and direction. It had a similar structure to that of There Will Be Blood. I like a traditional three act structure myself but I can appreciate P. T. Anderson's style. He is a master of storytelling and I always enjoy his work. What I took away from this film is that Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character was in the end jealous of Joaquin Phoenix's character, wishing that he could live a more simple life and not be burdened with the gifts he had convinced himself and his followers that he had. Happiness alludes him, if only he could be free... Free to masturbate into the sea.

3.0 Stars (out of 5)

Love this movie. I love the concept, the execution, I even love the stupid prosthetic pieces they added to Joseph Gordon Levitt's face! I have a soft-spot for science-fiction films that aren't really science-fiction films. It takes place in the future but never tries to explain new technology or why the economies of the world are the way they are but it takes the effort to have it all fleshed out to see nonetheless. I can tell the writer/director knows the back stories behind it all but doesn't spend any time with messy exposition about it. It's just an old-fashioned action tale in a sci-fi backdrop and I love it, especially the time-passing montages and the wires sticking out of most car's old-fashioned gas tanks.

4.5 Stars (out of 5)

Not bad. Was cool that it all took place at one location, although it had a very video game feel to it: Get in, go to the top fighting bad guys along the way, and then battle the boss at the end. The slow-motion sequences with the slo-mo drug were by far the best thing in the movie and I liked that Dredd never took off his mask. I wouldn't mind watching more adventures from the newly imagined Mega City One. It was smart to not over-do it actually leaving us wanting more (unlike the annoying Stallone version).

3.0 Stars (out of 5)

I appreciate when filmmakers break filmmaking rules and this film breaks them all and all at once. Rather than be bored by the intricate minutia of the thin plot, I reveled in its gorgeous unattractiveness. The scenes go too long, the green screen out the car's windows is often terrible, the sound design is dull, the camera work strange and unflattering, and the pacing is a mess... And I love it! It's poetic justice. You're allowed to break the rules if you understand them.

3.5 Stars (out of 5)