Away We Go

www.filminfocus.com/focusfeatures/film/away_we_go

Judd: Every once in a while Tom and I get treated to an indie-flick that the studios think may be a crossover hit. These are my favorite films, and I love to drag Tom along with me because it gives him a taste of what I have to go through 20 times a year with mainstream pieces of shit like “The Proposal”. This summer’s potential crossover is called Away We Go and it’s about a pregnant couple (SNL’s Maya Rudolph and The Office’s John Krasinski) who are trying to find a place to settle down and raise a family.

Swanner: Treated? This was no treat and I can’t believe you have the nerve to slap down The Proposal over 97 minutes of quirky indie crap. I’m glad that Sam Mendes is making more movies but he’s not putting the same effort into this one that he has in the past. When you’re making a road movie don’t tell us at the beginning where they are going ‘cause I was counting down the cities every time it got boring…which it did a lot. The actors are really good but the script, as good as it is, is poorly constructed. The movie starts off hilarious and by the end I was considering suicide.

Judd: That’s how I feel about every romcom – except there’s nothing hilarious about them and I’m considering suicide by the end of the opening credits. Now I will grant you that Away We Go was a little maudlin by the end, and the movie would have done better to disperse the depressing stuff throughout the story. I will also agree that there were some scenes that were pointlessly “quirky” for quirkiness’ sake. Pointlessly quirky is kind of like the gratuitous pillow fights in those chick flicks you like so much. It’s something we both have to stomach as best as we can.

Swanner: I just kept envying all those people walking out of the movie last night. How did you like the “indie” title cards they kept slapping up on screen to tell you where there next location was. I’m sure they got some 5 years olds with sharpie’s to make them. I don’t want to totally dog the movie. As I said the cast was good. I thought Catherine O’Hara, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Allison Janney were outstanding in supporting roles and the two leads do a fine job. My big problem still seems to be the positioning of the script and the pacing that are my stumbling blocks.

Judd: I didn’t mind the indie title cards. They were very Wes Anderson, though they weren’t done in the Futura typeface that he likes to use. The movie is basically a set of vignettes as Rudolph and Krasinski try to find a place to settle and each family they visit has their quirks. Gyllenhaal and her husband are a horrible hippie couple. I thought they were hysterical because I dated (yes, I’ve had relationships) someone just like her and he was an equally pretentious hippie. But Janney was by far the best character in the film. What a hysterically awful mother!

Swanner: Let’s not forget I sat in front of Darth Vader. At first I thought he was asleep…that I could understand but then the person he was with asked him a question I realized that it was the sound of him breathing. The theatre was like a Cambodian sweat shop, and I hate the chairs ‘cause they’re like some child’s ride as they wiggle from side to side. All this added up to a night in hell. I’d rather be dragged behind a car than sit through that again.

Judd: Aww, you poor thing. I have to suffer through walks on the beach, shopping sequences, pillow fights, women falling off their shoes, bridesmaids fighting, the “hysterical” results of miscommunication, Stanley Tucci being a eunuch, Diane Keaton being “goofy”, Kate Hudson being Kate Hudson, and full grown women lip-syncing with hairbrushes to 70s pop songs in their underwear and then falling down laughing and exhausted. And I suffer through this crap at a rate of twice a month. Twice a month! Women don’t even get their periods that often! So fuck you! The next romcom we go to I’ll gladly drag you behind a car.

Swanner: 2 Stars (for the performances)
Judd: 4 Stars

The Proposal

touchstone.movies.go.com

Swanner: A pushy boss (Sandra Bullock) forces her hot young assistant (Ryan Reynolds) to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada. Did you notice I added hot to Ryan’s description? Wasn’t he dreamy in the movie? I had such a good time, I don’t want to hear you spread your hate about this wonderful film

Judd: Look, people know that I can’t stand romantic comedies. They’re all the same, recycled insipid stories, banal jokes, and saccharine romance. The Proposal is insipid, banal and saccharine, and while I won’t go so far as to say it was tolerable, it wasn’t as nauseating as I expected.

Swanner: That’s like a four start review from Brian for a Romcom. I knew you’d love it. Wasn’t the supporting cast good? Betty White and Craig T Nelson were so good. I love the way they used Alaska as the back drop. It was so beautiful. Ryan Reynolds, all the clean clear air and Betty White…I think I need a cigarette. Did you notice I was giggling through the whole movie? It’s always a good barometer if I giggle during romantic comedies.

Judd: The scenery was beautiful. White and Nelson were very good as father and grandmother, but the movie still falls back on a lot of routine romcom shenanigans and too many scenes were set up just to showcase Bullock’s “Isn’t she quirky?” comedy style. I will say that I enjoyed the first hour, the last 40 minutes is when it got to be intolerably “cute”.

Swanner: Is that why you kept checking your watch? So you could check when the movie goes too cute? That was scene one for me. It was adorable. Did I mention the chemistry of the two leads? You could cut the sexual tension with a knife. How about the naked scenes? It was very sexy…even when Bullock is naked it was sexy. I’ll admit there were a few “isn’t she quirky” scenes but the film is so loveable that it’s forgivable and the audience really loved “those” scenes.

Judd: Yes, the first time I looked at my watch it was to mark the time of death. Seeing Ryan Reynolds almost fully naked was a nice treat. Watching a naked Sandra Bullock being cornered by a “cute” Pekinese puppy, or whatever the hell it is, wasn’t so cute. I recognized absolutely no chemistry between the leads. I related mostly with Craig T Nelson’s character at the end of the film. When all the women were telling him that Bullock really loved Reynolds, his reaction was “She does? Who can tell?”

Swanner: You don’t get romantic comedies the way I do. The is definitely 27 Dresses for me…which I loved as well. I thought the script was good and as I mentioned, the supporting actors were as good as the leads. It’s nice when two of my favorites work well together on screen. It was a big win/win for me. Having a Barry Manilow song hovering in the background is the only thing that might have made this movie better. I hope this comes out on Blu-ray soon or I might have to travel back to the theatres to see it. I loved it.

Judd: It didn’t make me ill or angry. Does that count?

Swanner: 4 Stars
Judd: 2 ½ Stars

The Hangover

hangovermovie.warnerbros.com

Judd: I have a love/hate relationship with Summertime releases. Summer is when all the big action fluff that I usually hate comes out. It’s also the time that a slew of forgettable PG-13 comedies are released. But it’s also the time when one or two R rated, adult oriented comedies come out and that what gets me excited. The Hangover is the first of this summer’s Rated R contenders, and while it’s not a grand slam, it’s a pretty good opener for the season.

Swanner: I agree with you completely on this R rated comedy issue. It’s even gotten to the point where some big actors are catering to even younger audiences. Eddie Murphy, William H Macy and Adam Sandler are now making movie that are really geared but young kids and I think it’s kind of dangerous. I don’t want to see theatrical movies catering to a preteen crowd. I don’t want to see those movies. I want to see movies I can relate to that are funny and original. I really liked The Hangover. I liked the humor and I thought the script was new and fresh considering we’ve seen this storyline before.

Judd: The story is as old as the hills. A bunch of guys go to Vegas for a buddy’s last fling as a bachelor. They wake up in the morning and there’s a tiger in the bathroom, a baby in the closet, the groom-to-be is missing, and no one can remember what happened the night before. I was a little worried during the first 20 minutes because the movie gets off to a slow start, but after the characters are introduced and we get to the meat of the story, the movie moves at a fairly decent pace.

Swanner: It’s also very smart and I think that goes to the fact that they are appealing to adults. There is no dumbing down the story. These guys are in Vegas so there are strippers, drugs, gangsters, gambling and yes…even Mike Tyson. The story becomes a comedy mystery where they spend most of the movie trying to remember what happen to the Groom and where is he? They go from one insane situation to another and as crazy as it gets I never felt like the film looses it’s focus. Two years ago it was Knocked Up and last year it was Pineapple Express. All are adult comedies with strong scripts and acting.

Judd: I used to work with someone that didn’t understand why studios made rated R films. He said that R films relied on potty humor and foul language. I think that the situation is actually reversed. It’s the PG-13 films that rely on cheap fart jokes and their single allowed F-bomb. R rated movies speak to adults because they intended for adults. I loved all the insults slung at chubby bearded actor Zach Galifianakis. It’s funny because he’s fat.

Swanner: The movie does have a really good cast. They didn’t rely on big stars and I think that helped the movie. Since there really wasn’t a star, the focus was on the story…that’s smart. The cast does includes the very cute Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms (who actually had a tooth removed for the movie), Justin Bartha and the before mentioned fat guy Galifianakis. There is also a really good supporting cast as well. As Brian mentioned, it is rated R and that’s because it is a movie meant for adults. I think the movie will appeal mostly to guys but I think the women who get dragged along will have a good time cause it’s really a funny film.

Judd: I disagree that it’s a guy film. I know plenty of chicks that are looking forward to seeing The Hangover. They can’t stand the Massengill scented crap the studios try to target women with. They want to see real comedies with honestly funny scenes and great writing and no one falling down in glee/exhaustion after a pillow fight.

Swanner: Hey, I always fall back in glee and exhaustion after a big event has happened…how do you know about the pillow fight?

Judd: I haven’t said it in awhile, but you are a big fat girl. Anyway, I don’t think this a movie that girls will have to be “dragged to” and even if they are they’re going to enjoy it. The ability to take a familiar story and turn it into something fresh and new is quite a talent. And while Scott Moore and Jon Lucas also wrote Tom’s favorite, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, I won’t hold that against them and say that they are a writing duo to keep your eye on.

Swanner: That’s what I said. Girls will like this movie…it might not have an immediate appeal to women but they will come Ray … they will come.

Swanner: 3 1/2 Stars
Judd: 4 Stars

Land of The Lost

www.landofthelost.net

Swanner: I’m thinking the title refers to where your money goes when you see this film. Land of the Lost is the latest movie from star Will Ferrell and if there is a god then it should be his last. Ferrell plays Dr. Rick Marshall, a scientist who has found a way to travel to other dimensions. I can’t believe that someone green lighted this rumored $100 million dollar mess.

Judd: I liked it! No, I didn’t. I will say it was better than I expected. Of course, I expected to want to throw circular saw blades at the screen or gouge my own eyes out with a grapefruit spoon. I didn’t want to do either, so I was delightfully surprised.

Swanner: Delightfully surprised? You disgust me. If Will Ferrell hadn’t mentioned a Mama’s Family marathon you would have hated the movie. $100 million dollars for that thing? Really? You’re okay with that? Mediocre special effects and a horrible script with Will Ferrell doing anything he wants to and for as long as he wants .

Judd: I said it was better than expected. Like the difference between expecting to die tomorrow from nut cancer and being told I’m going to live, but they’re going to have to replace them with marbles. In that case, a person would be delightfully surprised to have glass balls. I would ask the have them replaced with shooter marbles, or better yet paper weights. Big ol’ clackers.

Swanner: That is your argument?? What I didn’t like about the movie was that it was much more adult then the original series. What about the children who think it’s like the series? It was a horrible script and the director or the editor let Ferrell ramble…not being funny. The storyline was dumb and the acting was surprisingly not good. I did like that when Ferrell gets bitten by the mosquito, his face starts to go gray as the blood is drained from his body. That was good and the scenes with Matt Lauer so I liked about 5 minutes of the film.

Judd: Since you’re forcing me to talk about the movie, I didn’t think it was good. I was actually surprised at how adult oriented the humor was. The original show was a Saturday morning show for kids, and this version included sex jokes, drug jokes, and the language was about as course as a PG-13 movie can be. I wouldn’t recommend anyone to go to the theatre to see this movie – however, I can think of select few that I would recommend to give the movie a rent, to watch at home and under the influence.

Swanner: Well hip hip hooray. I thought you had lost your mind. I’m not saying that the movie is unwatchable, there is an audience for this film. I think stoners are the target audience for the film not children. I still can’t figure how they spent $100 million dollars filming a movie in the desert. One good thing about all this is I have another movie to add to my worst picture list…so there is a silver lining.

Judd: I’m totally indifferent about the movie. I didn’t think it was good, but I’ve seen worse movies that have affected me more. A colleague of our left the theatre fuming mad she had to sit through such a steaming pile. I’m blasé about it. I don’t think it even comes close to the crap we’re going to see in August and September.

Swanner: 1 ½ Stars (for Matt Lauer)
Judd: 1 ¾ Stars

Up!

Official Site: disney.go.com/disneypictures/up

Swanner: 78-year-old balloon salesman Carl Fredricksen finally fulfills his lifelong dream of a great adventure when he ties thousands of balloons to his house and flies away to the wilds of South American — but discovers too late that he has a stowaway, an overly optimistic 8-year-old Wilderness Explorer named Russell. That is the storyline to Pixar’s new film Up. What still amazes me is how they can take a 78 year old balloon salesman and an 8 year old wilderness explorer and make it as exciting as Indiana Jones.

Judd: That shouldn’t be a surprise. You see the name Pixar and you know you’re going to get an excellent story told through beautiful animation. They slip up every once in awhile, but their overall canon is exceptional. I went in expecting a masterpiece and that’s what I got. Up is not only an excellent adventure movie, but it’s extremely heartfelt and emotional as well.

Swanner: If you think about it, it is like Indiana Jones. An old adventurer and a young boy travel to South America searching for a place lost in time. Okay, it’s a stretch but surprisingly the action was intense (maybe too much for me) and they sure did have a lot of comedy. I love the people at Pixar because they can construct a film that satisfies all demographics. I’m still amazed at how quiet the theatre was last night…maybe it’s the 3d glasses. They might mesmerize the children to stay quiet and in their seats.

Judd: I don’t think it was the 3D, Up is a genuinely fantastic film. In fact I was a little upset that Pixar didn’t introduce the movie with a short, but the move introduces itself with a very emotional and moving start. It wasn’t necessary for Pixar to come up with something separate. I really can’t think of one bad thing to say about the movie. The villain is a total asshole. He’s on par with the best of Disney’s villains. The sidekicks are a hysterical and endearing without being cloying. If I had to come up with one thing that I can complain about it was the 3D. I didn’t think it was necessary. In fact, I would say that it was gilding the lily.

Swanner: The 3D certainly doesn’t add to the betterment of the movie. It enhances the beauty of the film but doesn’t move the story. They also don’t use cheap tricks to make the 3D interactive. This movie will be just as good in 2D as 3D. I think on a Blu-ray disc on a High def 1080p TV it might even look better. I can’t wait. I love seeing wonderful movies that make me excited for the home video release. I felt the same way for Wall-e and Ratatouille. I still can’t believe they made a movie about an old grumpy man as the main character and make it work for kids. The opening of the film was beautifully done without much dialog and the characters are as rich and deep with personality as any Pixar before.

Judd: Absolutely. The whole audience sat and watched the credits which featured stills out of a scrap book. They were mesmerized. The only reason we didn’t stay for the credits is because we both knew we would eventually be watching from home on our own copies. I think Up should finally be the animated feature that crosses over into the Best Film category for the Academy Awards. It was really that good. I would recommend this film to anyone.

Swanner: I hate to get all agreeable with you but you are right. I can’t wait to watch it at home and yes, it is that good. If it’s not nominated for best picture than they might as well change the best animated picture award to “whatever Pixar released this year” award. They just set the bar so high I don’t see anyone touching them or they’re artistry

Swanner: 5 Stars
Judd: 5 Stars

Terminator Salvation

terminatorsalvation.warnerbros.com

Swanner: In this fourth installment of the Terminator series, Christian Bale plays John Connor a man who has been fated to lead the human resistance against the machines. On he learns that his father has been captured by Skynet (the machines) and is set to be terminated. So John and a mysterious stranger Marcus Wright venture to Skynet’s operations to save his father and stop the machines. I could go on but I’m sure I’ve already lost Brian.

Judd: Lost me? I’ve seen commercials for breakfast cereal with loftier plot lines. I know that this is supposed to be a summer movie with lots of action and explosions, but that’s all it served up. I bet you the script is five pages long, including the title page, list of characters and scene breakdown. What’s worse is that it felt like the scenes were written explicitly to set up the next action sequence. You seriously gave an in-depth summary in one sentence.

Swanner: Well there is the fact that John Connor’s father is younger than him and that he must save him because his father has to be sent in the past where he meets John mother Sara. If the machines kill his father…will he no longer exist??? How is that for storyline? What about the fact that this mysterious stranger turns out to be part human and part machine? How’s that for a twist? I will admit it was really loud. I’m not talking too loud for Grandpa I’m talking too loud for everyone. If one more thing blew up I don’t know what I’ll do…and it did.

Judd: Oh wow, you just gave me the plot of Back to the Future with a dash of Star Trek Next Gen. Anyone with half a brain will know the mysterious stranger is a cyborg right off the bat; it’s hardly a twist. I’m sorry but the whole thing – acting included – felt like a sub-par B-Movie with an A-Movie budget. Christian Bale once again trots out his growly Batman voice – if he does anymore action flicks he’s going to damage his reputation as a serious actor, not to mention his vocal chords.

Swanner: I’ve never been a big Christian Bale fan so beat him down all you want. It’s the two newcomers that I was watching. Anton Yelchin as Kyle Reese and Sam Worthington really are the ones to watch here. Yelchin is having a great year so far, he plays Chekov in Star Trek and was amazing in last years Charlie Bartlett and here he enters into another franchise as John Connor’s father. Worthington plays Marcus Wright, our human terminator, and he is delicious…can I say that? The Aussie born actor with very little experience has made a big impression on me.

Judd: The only reason Yelchin was cast is because he’s scrawny and makes the perfect underdog. It had nothing to do with his acting chops, which he definitely has. Sam Worthington is hot, I’ll give you that, but we’ll see what he’s capable of later, because this movie wasn’t exactly an actor’s showcase. Now before you call me elitist I know that action movies aren’t supposed to have Oscar worthy performances, but this hit a new low. Common’s acting skills makes Ben Affleck look like Lawrence Olivier.

Swanner: You really need to let that one go. I love how Oscar nominee Jane Alexander has two lines in the movie but was in many different scenes … I think she plays a bigger role later down the line. She plays Virginia but I bet her real name is Sara. I feel like a really nerd here but I liked the movie. It’s a popcorn movie. I had a good time…it was too loud but it’s a war movie so they tend to be loud. Did I mention how hot Sam Worthington is? He’s playing Perseus in the new Clash of the Titans which means he won’t be wearing much. hehehehehehe

Judd: The movie sucked. The plot was stupid, it was too loud and the acting was horrible. I know that this kind of summertime fluff isn’t my thing, but when it’s properly executed I love a good popcorn movie. Live Free or Die Hard is a perfect example of a dumb, loud, outlandish yet excellent action film. Terminator was a waste of time.

Swanner: 2 1/2 Stars
Judd: 1 Star

Night At The Museum 2

NightAtTheMuseumMovie.com

Swanner: This weekend I got to see the sequel to the very popular Night at the Museum which this time has Ben Stiller at the Smithsonian. What has happened is the Museum of Natural History from the first film is being transformed into an interactive museum so most of the exhibits have been moved to the Smithsonian and now they are being threatened by exhibits at this new museum. I’m serious…that’s what it’s about. Brian’s been bitching about thin storylines I wonder what he’ll think of this one?

Judd: Unlike you, I knew better than to waste my Saturday morning seeing a crappy Ben Stiller movie. I still can’t figure out why you went.

Swanner: It is a major summer release. I’m a movie reviewer. So I felt it’s my duty to see all shows…not just the ones I want to see. Don’t forget, we do have readers that have kids and would like to know our thoughts on kids movies too. I thought the movie was fine. I mean it was made well and the special effects are really top notch. The main problem I had with the movie was that it felt too much like a kids movie.

Judd: Fuck the kids and fuck people with kids! How about that! If they’re so concerned about what little Johnny or Suzy are going to see, let them pick up a parenting magazine, not a gay “alternative press” magazine! I sure as hell am not going to waste sleeping in on a Saturday morning to put myself through hell for some fags and dykes with gaybies. Which, by the way, I don’t believe in and will not condone by lending my opinion from a parent’s perspective!

Swanner: I’m sure you wanted to remind me that the movie is a kids film so of course it felt too kidsy. You’re right it is a film for the “family” but as an adult that likes kids movies… this felt too kidsy to me. This movie just wasn’t doing it for me. For example is how we felt when we watched Cars, it felt like they were appealing to a much younger audience…same here. I liked the first Museum much better than this one. I should mention that I still don’t really like Ben Stiller that much.

Judd: Fuck Ben Stiller! Goddamn, gays and their kids. Taking them to movies that I have to review. I’m not going to do it, I tell you! I’ve had it! Where’s my peanut brittle?

Swanner: It sounds like someone missed their meds this morning. All in all, the movie is good and I’m sure that their targeted audience will love it. I just found myself yawning and that’s not usually a good sign for a movie that’s moving fast enough to keep the life spoilers…I mean to keep the children occupied. I’m hoping that this is the end of this franchise, I just don’t see where it will go from here and frankly I don’t care.

Swanner: 1 1/2 (for adults) 3 (for kids)
Judd: Where am I?

Star Trek XI

www.startrekmovie.com

Swanner: I knew I was going to love the new Star Trek movie when Captain Pike called for three to head to the planet. Kirk, Sulu and Chief Engineer Olson. To anyone who ever watched any of the series knows that if your name is called and you’re not a main character…you’re going to die. They didn’t let me down.

Judd: Did you notice that he was wearing a red shirt? That’s another tip of the hat to the original series. I wasn’t sure what to expect from this movie. I like Star Trek, but I’m not a fan. Director/Producer J.J Abrams has a ton of hits and misses under his belt. I truly went to this movie with an open mind, and I was pleasantly surprised. I thought the story was just complicated enough to keep me thinking and the action sequences were grand without being frantic.

Swanner: Don’t forget that the cast is really cute. They sure did get a nice mix of good-looking people. I was a big fan of the original series so I was hoping for the best when I walked in the theatre. I think when you play around with classic material you have to make it your own…sure, but you have to please the fans so it doesn’t feel like your changing their heroes. I think Abrams balanced that nicely here. The storyline starts on the day of James T Kirk’s birth and we follow his life (quickly) to the time he graduates from Star Fleet. Once aboard the Enterprise, Kirk and crew battles a group of rogue Romulans with a very big ship.

Judd: I thought the plot device Abraham’s used to make it his own was really smart – he set this new franchise in an alternate time. Nero, an evil Romulan from the future, comes back and changes the course of history. It’s so simple that it’s brilliant. Abram’s has completely reopened the franchise back to the original crew and whatever spins off from there.

Swanner: Exactly, He’s basically changed everything that has been made with the time traveling plot. So anything that happens from here is fresh and heaven forbid they might do something that every Trekkie would know…they blame it of the Nero and move on. You’re right, brilliant. I really liked how all the characters get introduced, and the relationships that the characters have early on. I didn’t expect to have as much fun as I did. I know I would have liked the movie even better if the bratty kid was talking behind us the whole movie.

Judd: I also liked that the characters weren’t all introduced at once. We got Uhura, Spock, Bones, and Kirk right off the bat, but the rest of the crew we met one by one as the movie progressed. I know it kept me anxious to see when we were going to meet a new yet familiar friend. And you had to mention that child… Ugh, what the fuck is up with parents that feel the need to bring a three year old to a two hour movie? If a parent is that intent on seeing a movie and can’t get a sitter, lock the bastard in the closet with some cheerios and a portable DVD player – maybe one of those water dispensers for hamsters. I should not be subject to someone’s god awful children because they really wanted to see a movie. You know what? You should have thought of that before you decided not to pull out!

Swanner: Please…it was a cool rainy day. That’s what the trunk is for. People should only be allowed to bring children under five to a movie that have animals that talk. It all goes back to people thinking they can do whatever they do at home in the theatre. My motto is “Shut up and watch the movie”. Back to the movie review. I thought the film moved great, the action and special effects were top notch. I think what you said earlier is the really star of this film, the franchise has been completely revived. After 40 years I would have thought it was over but this proves me wrong and I’m happy to be wrong…this time.

Judd: I think as long as Abrams doesn’t get too carried away and make the characters do something that is way out of line with their personalities, I think they can churn at least three more movies out of this reboot and keep the Original Trekkies happy.

Swanner: 4 Stars
Judd: 4 Stars

Angels & Demons

http://www.angelsanddemons.com/

Swanner: You can always count on plenty of remakes and sequels come summertime. The first two big movies of the summer have been both been prequels but today I’m talking sequel. Angels and Demons is the sequel to The Da Vinci Code. When the DVC came out it made a lot of money but that was three years ago and still the popularity of the Dan Brown novels hasn’t waned. This time around Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is actually asked by the Vatican for his help after four cardinals are kidnapped by the Illuminati, a group of religious scientists, whose ultimate plot is to take down the Catholic church by blowing up the Vatican.

Judd: So these Illuminati’s are the good guys?

Swanner: No…well not in this movie. We’re suppose to side with the church, even though i’m going to hell. You kind of have to loose yourself in the story and there is a lot of story. I didn’t even mention that the Pope has died and they are in the process of choosing a new one. There is also some stolen antimatter that will level the Vatican in seconds and a few others but what’s important here is the direction and the script.

Judd: So the Pope is dead and someone wants to destroy the catholic church by blowing up the Vatican. You’re just getting my hopes up cause i know this is going to end happy. I hate happy. Is there anything “Brian happy” here?

Swanner: Brian happy? Well the kidnapper is going to kill one cardinal every hour on the hour for four hours and the fifth hour they are blowing everyone up. During all of this the Robert Langdon and crew must decipher clues before the cardinals are killed. That reminds me…the movie does get a bit gory with some sick killings. I hope i didn’t give anything away.

Judd: You better not be teasing me to get me to go see the movie. If you’re leading me on and i actually spend movie on this I’ll hunt down your fat old ass and make you watch that awful Diane Keaton direct to DVD movie.

Swanner: I’m not kidding…really. People are killed. It will make you happy. Ron Howard directs this film and it’s a real nail bitter. The first film sort of trotted along. Here’s a clue and there’s a symbol but this movie just flies. They have five hours to save the church.

Judd: Tick tick tick

Swanner: David Koepp and Akiva Goldsman have produce an incredibly exciting script that Howard just runs with and a very big cast which includes Ewan McGregor, Stellan Skarsgard and Hanks as well as every capable supporting actor working today who looks like he could be a priest. The comparison i’ve been using is Alien vs Aliens. Alien was paced slower and was really trying to set a mood where Aliens was non-stop action. Thats exactly what this movie was…none stop nail biting action that had me on the edge of my seat right from the start.

Judd: Edge of your seat??? Your big ass would take up all of the seat. edge of your seat…please.

Swanner: It’s a figure of speech you asshole.

Swanner ***1/2

Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past

www.ghostsofgirlfriendspastmovie.com

Swanner: Before I let you know how much i hated this movie…let me tell you what it’s about. Matthew McConaughey plays Connor Mead, a womanizer photographer who is spending the weekend at his brothers wedding. While there, he tries to talk his brother out of getting married, hits on the mother of the bride, has slept with most of the bride maids and finally destroys the wedding cake. He’s a bad guy…we get it. While in the bathroom he runs into his uncle Wayne, who’s been dead for years, who is warning him that he’ll be visited by three ghosts. (imagine Charles Dickens spinning in his grave)

Judd: Wait, are you speaking badly about a romantic comedy? I must take pause here to really take this in.

Swanner: And so we meet the first ghost, A 16 year old girl that was his first lay. (why she’s a dead 16 year old they never explain) who takes him on a journey on why he’s such a douche bag. There is a storyline that follows Jennifer Garner as the girl that got away but he’s such an asshole in the movie you pray they never get together. Once we get to the ghost of girlfriends present i was just hoping the movie would end soon but i knew we still had the future to look forward to seeing. After my failed attempted suicide the movie continued to piss me off by having him douche bag his way through every scene.

Judd: So the whole movie is based on A Christmas Carol? Did he take off his shirt a lot? I’m pretty sure it’s in his contract that he does.

Swanner: The whole point to the Scrooge/Connor Mead character is that we see why he turned into an asshole. We understand how it can happen and when he finally sees the light we rejoice in his enlightenment. I never believed he was changing but then again he’s not much of an actor. He can flash that smile and ham it up for the camera but he never make you wish for the character to change…you just wish he’d go away and stop destroying every ones life around him.

Judd: I know you’re not a fan of McConaughey but it sounds like “you” have nothing good to say about the movie. It’s a romantic comedy. It’s about a wedding. There is nothing redeeming?

Swanner: Well the script pretty much sucked. We’re suppose to dislike the character not hope for his death in the first ten minutes. The supporting cast was good but the script had just about every female character either a whore or a bitch and all the men were throw away for the most part with the exception of Uncle Wayne (Michael Douglas) who was his womanizing role model. They even have terrible scene were Robert Forster rambling on about nothing that just felt embarressing for an actor of his caliber. I wish i could find some reason for people to watch this movie but i honestly can’t. What really bothered me was that the film treats the female characters as badly as the McConaughey’s character does. This is an ugly movie and it needs to be ignored.

Swanner: no stars