Title: Conan the Barbarian

Starring: Arnold Schwarzenegger
Director: John Milius

Plot: Conan was still a child when he saw his parents murdered and his village burned by a horde of savages, lead by the semi-god Thulsa Doom. They took him to the north, where he grew up working like an animal, and was later sold as a slave. His master trained him to be a warrior, and made a fortune by using him in fights. But there comes one day, when he gives Conan his freedom, and the chance to take his revenge after so many years.

Review: Today I will be reviewing the movie which gave Arnold Schwarzenegger, our current governor, his break through role into the world of movies. To begin I would like to say that I was surprised by the plot of this movie which was pretty decent as far as “epic tales” go. The beginning does as it should and establishes some pity and understanding of Conan’s feeling and motivations however I thought that the segue from his youth to maturity was, while explanatory, overall sloppy and I think that it could have been handled better. This “sloppiness” was unexpected from Oliver Stone (World Trade Center, Any Given Sunday, and JFK), who helped write.

After this though, the story progressed fairly smoothly and as expected for this style of film, the only other bump, I would say, was the unusually awkward sex scene, that did not really add anything to the film.

The actors were interesting, in this film. Aside from the obvious *cough* govenator *cough* James Earl Jones played a strange villain, he portrayed it well but I think that there was not much there, character wise, for Vader, I mean Jones, to work with. The supporting cast I think did a good job adding some comedy, particularly Gerry Lopez as the jovial, wise cracking, sidekick, and Mako as the wizard. If I must I will say that Arnold did well in the role but as with most of the other characters Conan was pretty one dimensioned and probably didn’t require that much talent.

So should you see it or not? Weeeelllll… it is pretty funny… and it does feature a current governor… You won’t completely regret your time spent watching it and it is a “classic movie”, however unless you are a hardcore fan of Schwarzenegger or fantasy-action-adventures, you probably won’t herald this as a vision to be beheld by all.

* * * * * * _ _ _ _ (6 out of ten)

Popularity: 10% [?]

Title: Minotaur
Starring: Tom Hardy, Michelle Van Der Water, Tony Todd
Director: Jonathan English

Plot: Long ago in the Iron Age a shadow loomed over a lonely village of Thens. For over five years, eight village youths are stolen from their families to the capital of the Minos Empire and placed in the underground labyrinth to be a sacrifice the Minotaur - the Minoan god. Theo, haunted by the loss of his love, Fion, in an earlier sacrifice, is convinced that the beast isn’t a deity and that his girl still lives within the labyrinth. His father Cyrnan, the village leader, tries to reason with Theo not to go but Theo is driven by blind rage and made his way in with six other youths to be sacrifical lambs. However, Theo intends to kill the Minotaur.

Review: When I first heard about this I though it might be a pleasant visit to a familiar story. Produced by the Sci Fi channel I didn’t think it could be that bad, and it wasn’t like they were making up a story, this myth has persisted since ancient Greece. But this movie does not follow the myth and I think here it loses much of its appeal. However judging it upon its own merit I think that it was filmed very well and that the story was good, just a departure from the story we all know and love. One of the major differences was the Minotaur itself, instead of being the feared by all man, beast it is in mythology, this movie regards it as a god which the inhabitants of Minos keep concealed as they worship it. Also rather than the popular image of a muscle bound half man half bull, the Minotaur is depicted as a large, boney, wrinkled, and hideous bull creature with no real human features, as if a normal bull had been transmogrified into this permanently enraged creature.

As I said, these changes were not really bad, just different, and if one looks past these I think that this movie can be relatively enjoyable. Something I was happy about with this was that it didn’t seem really cheaply made, like a lot of these movies do. The effort was put into it just did not come together in the end, and while I wish that was enough, I review movies, not effort. When it comes down to it this was a good movie but it just felt as if there was something lack that I can’t pinpoint. If I had to guess I would say most will breeze through this with little memory of what they just saw and for that I think this movie is a pass. Not bad, but nothing special.

* * * * * _ _ _ _ _ (5 out of ten)

This movie had some nostalgia points for the actor from 90’s NOTLD and was decently entertaining but in general fell short of expectations

Popularity: 10% [?]

Title: Clerks 2

Starring: Brian O’Halloran, Jeff Anderson, Trevor Fehrman, Rosario Dawson

Director: Kevin Smith

Plot: In a long awaited sequel to director Kevin Smith’s movie, Clerks, we revisit the characters of Dante and Randal 10 years after we first met them. After an accident left the Quick Stop in ruins a year ago Dante and Randal are working at a Mooby’s fast food joint. As Dante is getting ready to finally move on with his life Randal questions his own goals in life.

Review: For those of you not familiar with works of Kevin Smith allow me to try and explain the duality I felt when I first heard this movie was coming out. I love his movies and a new one could be amazing, but a sequel risks falling far short when compared to the original. I am elated to state that my fears were completely irrational and it is rare that such a movie has satisfied me so completely. In all honesty, the feeling that I had walking out of the theater was one of pure satisfaction, my only regret being the fact that the movie passed as quickly as it did. If it were not for the late hour my friends and I had viewed the movie (the last screening of the night) I would have bought another ticket immediately and seen it again, if not 6 times more.

One of the advertisements for this movie had the statement, “No experience required.” But if a person goes into this movie with out at least a minimum of have seen Clerks (the rest of the movies in the View Askewniverse and the animated show, having ideally been viewed) is doing a serious disservice to not only themselves, but the movie itself. Even though I think it would be enjoyable, there is just enough fan service to create a whole other level to the movie without distracting from the movie itself. On the subject of knowing Kevin smith movies, though Clerks II contains the same raunchy language and discussion of pop culture minutia that Kevin Smith fans have come to know and love, this movie most definitely shows growth. Even if the “feelings” parts seem out of place or forced at times I think that overall it added to the movie making it enjoyable in a way that Chasing Amy had, only Clerks II succeeds with me as it is more relatable to my own life examining friendships and societal norms rather than the problems with falling in love with a lesbian. Even the dance sequence was pulled off with grace.

There isn’t much to say about the characters, because I have got to know and love most of the characters in previous Askewniverse movies. Dante and Randal are both hilarious in this, their return. Randal delivering excellent quips and unquestionably having some of the best lines in the film, and Dante is the perfect compliment to Randal while at the same time providing a believable and sympathetic character to the audience. Jay and Silent Bob’s input, while not always directly related to the plot, is always hilarious and brings a smile to a serious scene.

Three new main-ish characters were added to this sequel Elias, Becky, and Emma. Starting with Elias, he was a funny character, the only thing I might have changed about him was the cautious manner in which he spoke. Even though it makes sense that his character would talk this way I found it a little distracting at times. I was surprised to see Rosario Dawson playing Becky, as the last movie knew she was in was Rent which has considerably more serious subject matter. Even though she is a more “dramatic” actress, she did a terrific job here as the endearing Mooby’s owner. Last is Emma, Dante’s fiancé, who was left undeveloped and never really did become more than “Dante’s Fiancé” and seemed an outsider interacting with the familiar characters, like a guest star on a sitcom.

This movie is absolutely one of the best I have seen in a long time, and while it did have its flaws, there is simply not enough good things that could be said about this movie. I recommend that if you have not seen this, or other Askewniverse movies, GO SEE THEM NOW. You may love them as I do or you may hate them with a burning passion (I don’t see how you could) but to not even give them a chance would be a crime worse than sodomizing Walt Flannigan’s dog.

Before I give my score I have to say that because of the connection to the main characters the “feelings” parts left me especially touched. By the end I was even nearly moved to tears.

* * * * * * * * * * (10 out of ten)

Popularity: 9% [?]

Title: V for Vendetta
Starring: Natalie Portman & Hugo Weaving
Director: James McTeigue

Plot: The film follows V, a freedom fighter who uses what some would call “terrorist tactics” in pursuit of a personal vendetta and, above all, to force sociopolitical change in a dystopian Britain. The film is a loose adaptation of the graphic novel V for Vendetta by Alan Moore and David Lloyd.

Review: First I have to say that I have never read any of the comic books and so my review will disregard any of the supposed variations from the graphic novels (which even if this is true it is not necessarily a bad thing).

This movie works as an action movie; this is derived from the fact that the action is solid and constant throughout. Not only the amount of action but the quality of it probably because it is rare for one man to take on many of the faceless minions of the enemy without garnering some support from the audience, much like Neo, who ironically was the hero against many Agent Smiths, who was played by Weaving (I just realized a second bit of irony in that V, being masked himself, is in fact faceless). Now that we are through that awkwardly structured sentence I can move on to another level on which this movie worked. V for Vendetta, in my opinion anyway, provided excellent commentary on recent political events in the United States. The governmental use of fear in this Orwellian society was extremely reminiscent of the Bush administrations using the terms “terror” and “9/11” to manipulate the public. But that is a separate topic.

The acting here was most definitely on par with the action and plot if not exceeding both. I wise pleasantly surprised by the ability of Weaving to give the character of V depth, despite the fact that his face is covered, depriving us of facial features. Natalie Portman likewise did a great job playing a conflicted person and victim of the controlling government. Here purpose as a character was weighty because of the perspective that it presented to the viewer. As for the rest of the cast, they were mainly British actors with whom I was unfamiliar, so I was glad that they for the most part played convincing roles.

Overall I would definitely recommend this movie as it has a wide appeal and I found it highly enjoyable. Other viewer testimonial comes from our very own Emo who said quote “GOOD, good, best I have seen in a while.” He proceeded to add “mostly because of the cool fighting/blowing up with music.”

* * * * * * * * * _ (9 out of ten)

[Emo edit: I would like to add that people who think Bush is taking away our rights should also watch this film.]

Popularity: 10% [?]

Title: The Terminal
Starring: Tom Hanks
Director: Steven Spielberg

Plot: A visitor from Eastern Europe is stranded in JFK airport when his home country breaks out in a civil war and his passport is invalidated. Knowing little to no English, Viktor is forced to adapt to his new life and hope that he will be able to get home.

Review: There are many factors that I have to consider when review this movie, because it was entertaining, and maybe even touching, while at the same time it seemed to have an air of snootiness to it. Most of the comedy in this movie comes from the interactions of the characters, from the famous Hanks, to the relatively unknown actors playing the supporting roles as the airport staff. It was no surprise to see Hanks pull off this role, as he has demonstrated his wide acting range with roles in movies like Philadelphia to Toy Story. The only flaw there was the inherent problems with the character such as what kind of accent does someone from a made up country have? As for the supporting cast, this surprised me, it is rare to have them actually do a good job from the shy Cafeteria worker, Diego Luna, to the gruff but kind janitor, Kumar Pallana.

The acting in this was in general good, as I have already stated, save for the character of Amelia Warren, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones. While watching I couldn’t help but think that the sub-pot involving here wasn’t necessary to the story. What she represented, as well as the pursuit of her, I loved because it was a classic example of the banding together of the misfits or outcasts to rise against the odds, something I myself identify with very much. However whenever she was onscreen and actually interacting with the cast I was wishing she would go away, just something about the character giving me thoughts of dismissal. Lucky for me her parts were brief and served only as a plot catalyst.

Which brings me to the plot, the themes of this movie were three-fold, there was a comedic, a romantic, and a “sensitive” one which I don’t quite know how to explain. The character based comedy I thought was well done and I enjoyed it because it was constant and helped keep interest in the story. The romance was intertwined throughout the movie and as you can tell by my feelings for the love interest I did not like these parts. This was the main love interest though; there was also a romantic sub-plot between the janitor and a clerk (who turns out to be a Trekkie; bonus points for nerdom), however this episode falls more under the third category, the “feel good” or “awwww” theme in this movie. Whether it was Viktor helping others or them helping him, because of the believability of the characters this theme was particularly strong and managed to bring a tear to my eye. The part when Gupta is on the tarmac really was touching.

In the end this movie, overall, was very good. With its detractors it still earns a good score for its unique combination of the elements and the great performances from most all the characters.

* * * * * * * _ _ _ (7 out of ten)

Popularity: 9% [?]