This page contains Dave's reviews beginning with those of July 21, 2008 (bottom of the page)

“Frost/Nixon”: It was August 1974. Ron Howard was playing Richie Cunningham in the 50s nostalgia sitcom, “Happy Days,” and our country’s 37th President, Richard Milhous Nixon, facing impeachment for his alleged role in the Watergate scandal, had just tendered his resignation. Nearly 35 years later, Howard directs a movie about the aftermath of that resignation, specifically the infamous interview Nixon granted British television journalist David Frost. “Frost/Nixon” stars Frank Langella (“Starting Out in the Evening”) as Nixon, a man, who despite his disgraceful exit, is arrogant and unwilling to admit any wrongdoing for Watergate, which involved the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters a few months before the 1972 Presidential election. Never quite knowing the extent of their leader’s involvement, the nation’s wounds never quite healed, and a small-time (well, in America) television host by the name of David Frost (Michael Sheen) saw that as an opportunity to advance his career. He, along with his producer, John Birt (Matthew Macfadyen) knock on several network doors trying to convince them to fund a two-hour television special where Frost would interview Nixon on a variety of topics, including the Vietnam War and of course, Watergate. The project is agreed upon after Frost agrees to pay Nixon $600,000 (including a non-refundable deposit of $200K). Frost’s team (played by Oliver Platt and Sam Rockwell) are bent on giving Nixon the trial he never received, while Frost just seems more interested in conducting a successful interview. Meanwhile, Nixon and his people (led by an idol-worshipping assistant played by Kevin Bacon) view the series of interviews like a heavyweight boxing championship. They’re just as determined to use the television special as a way to get the American people back into their corner. They see Frost as an amateur incapable of holding his own against the intellectually-superior Nixon. Frost’s team shares the same concerns. “Frost/Nixon” was written by Peter Morgan (“The Queen”), adapting his stage play of the same name. Ron Howard, who keeps getting better as a filmmaker, turns in his best work with this film. It’s a daunting task, filling two hours for what appears to be a tepid premise, but he not only manages it, but keeps his viewers’ attention throughout. He’s aided by his two leads. Frank Langella is utterly riveting as Richard Nixon. In a year rich with outstanding lead actor performances, his is one of the strongest. Michael Sheen doesn’t break any new ground after his solid job as Tony Blair in the aforementioned “The Queen,” but he is very well-balanced as David Frost. “Frost/Nixon” is one of the best films of the year. *** ½ (out of) ****

“Doubt”: is one of those rare films that combine an interesting subject, great (and I mean GREAT) acting, and a very polished script. “Doubt” is based on the award-winning stage play by John Patrick Shanley (who directed and wrote this film) and stars Meryl Streep as Sister Aloysius Beauvier, the very strict principal of a Catholic school (St. Nicholas) in the Bronx. It’s 1964 and the school has just accepted its first black student. The boy, Donald Muller (Joseph Foster), has his difficulties with his fellow classmates, but has a “protector” in the form of Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman), who takes a special interest in Donald. But an incident occurs that suggests something inappropriate has happened, and instead of following the proper channels (in part because it’s a “man’s world”), Sister Aloysius immediately assumes that Father Flynn is guilty of wrongdoing and is determined to bring him down, while the man staunchly defends his innocence and reputation. It doesn’t help that the two don’t share the same vision for the church. Father Flynn envisions a compassionate church that is moving forward with the times, while Sister Aloysius wants to stick with the tough and often-controversial traditions. In between the two parties is young Sister James (Amy Adams), who is also Donald’s teacher. It is her nature to trust, while Sister Aloysius’ is the opposite, apparently. But when the evidence against Father Flynn mounts, Sister James begins to have her doubts. It is impossible to not be drawn to this film’s acting performances. But while Meryl Streep is utterly mesmerizing as Sister Aloysius, it is a credit to Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams and Viola Davis (the latter in a brief role as Donald’s mother), that they are never – not once during the whole film – upstaged in a scene with Streep. That they more than hold their own is a testament to the greatness of the acting in “Doubt.” All four actors deserve Oscar nominations for their performances. Not lost in all this is John Patrick Shanley’s rich and brilliant script (also award-worthy). Despite winning a Tony and Pulitzer for his production, Shanley was still limited by the constraints of the stage when “Doubt” was just a play, but within the medium of film, he had – and used – a lot of freedom to flesh out his ideas, many new from the play and drawn upon from his own experiences as a student in the Catholic church. He also sprinkled some appropriate metaphors to throw his audience a little of the doubt that filled his story. My only complaint about the film is its less-than-satisfying conclusion, but despite that, “Doubt” is still a relentlessly engaging film that will likely provoke some intelligent discussions after your viewing. And that’s something that doesn’t happen often enough from our movie-going experiences. *** ½ (out of) ****

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”: begins the day after World War I ended. Young Benjamin Button is born horribly disfigured, the result of a childbirth gone wrong. His mother died on the spot, and his traumatized father, a successful businessman, leaves the infant at the doorstep of an old folks home, where he is taken in and raised by Queenie (Taraji P. Henson), who helps run the place. It’s apparent from the beginning that Benjamin’s condition is that he was actually born old and will age backwards. He “grows” old and gradually becomes outwardly younger while those close him to age in the usual fashion. It’s a fascinating premise and filmmaker David Fincher comes as close as you can to pulling it off. Why more people aren’t questioning (and exploiting) the transformation is the oddity that is never satisfactorily answered, but we generally go with it. Brad Pitt plays the title character all the way from 80 to 20 (thanks to some fantastic makeup and CGI effects) and inhabits the role quite nicely, though I preferred him as an old man to what we see later in the film (we’re too easily reminded that, well, he’s Brad Pitt). Cate Blanchett plays the eventual love of his life, Daisy, but that relationship starts out as creepy (with Benjamin meeting her when he was roughly 70 and she wasn’t yet 10, yet is still drawn to her), but we’re reminded that his mindset was still that of a child. Eventually, they meet in the “middle,” but I never quite bought the idea of them as a couple. Their characters lack of chemistry was the film’s biggest flaw, in my opinion, and unfortunately that was too important a part of “Benjamin Button.” Having said that, the rest of the film was too impressive to dismiss. Eric Roth’s script (from a 1922 short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald) was very good, even if he seemed to channel “Forrest Gump” (a film he also wrote) more than a few times. But it was director David Fincher’s movie. The talented auteur behind “Seven,” “Fight Club” and “Zodiac,” went to town with the film’s premise. The effects and cinematography (the latter by Claudio Miranda) are a sight to behold. They beautifully capture Benjamin and his life during Prohibition; through World War II (including some great ocean battle scenes) -- all the way up to modern times. As previously mentioned, Brad Pitt was better while inhabiting a character outside his age range, but the same critique applies to Cate Blanchett, who is viewed as an old woman for much of the film, as her daughter (played by Julia Ormond) reads her mother’s diary about Benjamin. But Blanchett’s usual persona, like Pitt’s, was too distracting, and also hampered by her (at that time) unsympathetic character. Taraji P. Henson (memorable as Shug in “Hustle & Flow”) was a standout as Benjamin’s surrogate mother. “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” isn’t a perfect film, but its flaws never exceeded its fascinating premise and mostly successful execution. It’s a nice ride in your theater seat. *** ½ (out of) ****

“Milk”: Sean Penn could act the phone book and I would still pay to see the performance. Yes, that’s an overused cliché, but Penn is really that good of an actor. I’ve been following his career for some 25 years and he’s rarely disappointed. He’s played surfer dudes, hardened murderers, cops, soldiers, politicians, street punks; the list goes on. When I heard he was cast to play Harvey Milk, our country’s first openly-gay elected official, I knew he’d pull that off too. Penn, who has been nominated for an acting Oscar four times (winning once for “Mystic River”), may have just completed his greatest performance as the tragic hero, who was brutally murdered by a co-worker. Milk’s story begins in New York in 1970, where Harvey has just met the love of his life, Scott Smith (played by James Franco). In 1972, Milk, wanting to make more of a difference, moved with Scott to San Francisco (the City) -- a place that better fits his newly laid-back personality. Before long, however, Milk’s former uptight persona re-emerges, after realizing his adopted city had work to do in a lot of areas. Milk, using his new business, Castro Camera, as a meeting place, starts using his voice – loudly – to try to advance his ideas. He runs twice, unsuccessfully, for a job as city supervisor, but after realizing he was losing because of districting issues, a change was made to allow a supervisor to come from different neighborhoods of the City, and, representing his Castro district, Milk finally won election in 1977. His area evolved quite a bit in the five years since Milk arrived, and so did Harvey. He shed his hippie look for a suit and tie, and the people in the community became much more accepting of his “alternative ways,” well, except for one of his fellow supervisors, Dan White. White (played by Josh Brolin) claimed he had no problem with Milk’s different views, but White’s very conservative ways became very apparent after Harvey wouldn’t support one of White’s pet projects. Friction turned into unfortunate action and Harvey Milk and San Francisco’s mayor, George Moscone, were murdered by White on November 28, 1978. “Milk” was directed by Gus Van Sant from a script by Dustin Lance Black (“Big Love”). Van Sant did an excellent job of re-creating the atmosphere that surrounded the City during that era. His movie flowed beautifully; skillfully showing the impact that Harvey Milk had not only on his adopted city, but around the country. “Milk” is highlighted by a jaw-dropping turn from Penn, who becomes Harvey Milk. Gone is Penn’s infamous scowl, replaced by Milk’s smile. Penn also slips in a subtle Long Island accent (Milk grew up in that area). It’s a tremendous performance. Also outstanding were Penn’s cast-mates, Emile Hirsch (as a young gay man who inspired Milk to become a voice for the community); Josh Brolin (who could also act the phone book), James Franco, Diego Luna and Denis O’Hare (the latter as California politician, John Briggs, who, along with singer Anita O’Bryant, tried to use their voices to discredit the gay lifestyle). No matter what your persuasion, this film makes you feel like you’re alongside Milk, helping him to fight the good fight. “Milk” is a powerful film that should not be missed. **** (out of) ****

“Tropic Thunder”: The movie-within-a- movie has been done a thousand times, but not with this kind of talent. Ben Stiller, Jack Black and Robert Downey Jr. head a terrific cast that also includes Jay Baruchel (“Knocked Up”), Danny McBride (“Pineapple Express”), Bill Hader (“Superbad”) and Steve Coogan (“Hamlet 2”). Did I mention that Nick Nolte is in this film, too? The film is “Tropic Thunder” and involves an eclectic film crew who, in the course of trying to make an authentic Vietnam War film, wind up trying to defend themselves against a group of native druglords who think the group is there to apprehend them. The premise of this film is pretty silly, and its execution awkward, but it’s the characters that kept my attention. Downey Jr. plays a sophisticated actor trying to pull off a “pigmentation augmentation” (figure it out) for his role as a black man. Stiller is a macho-type, while Black plays a coked-out actor trying to make a serious film. Throw in Brandon Jackson as a rapper-type trying to extend his “brand,” and Matthew McConaughey as Stiller’s agent, and there are plenty of laughs to sustain “Tropic Thunder.” But when it was over, it was over. Mild recommendation because of the stellar cast. ** ½ (out of) **** (On DVD)

“Slumdog Millionaire”: The Indian city of Mumbai has been in the news a lot lately, though before the big news of the attacks broke, I had a chance to watch “Slumdog Millionaire,” a film that is partly set in the largely populated city. Dev Patel plays Jamal Malik, a young man who’s had quite a few interesting experiences in his 18 years of life. Those experiences bring him to India’s version of the game show, “Who Wants to be a Millionaire,” where he’s beaten the odds and gone all the way to the show’s final question. But how did a simple orphan who was educated in the rough slums of Mumbai manage to know all the answers? That’s truly the big question. The answer is laid out in a series of flashback stories told to a very suspicious police inspector, who thinks Jamal has somehow cheated his way to the top. At its heart, “Slumdog Millionaire” is about two brothers who take very different paths in their lives, but, of course, the story all boils down to the love of a girl and the lengths the boy (Jamal) will go to get the girl. “Slumdog Millionaire” was directed by Danny Boyle, whose career has covered a wide variety of films, including “Trainspotting,” “Millions” and “28 Days Later.” To prepare for making a film in India, he enlisted the aid of local casting specialist Loveleen Tandan, who ended up receiving a co-director credit because of her value to the production. To show the different stages of their lives, the film employed three sets of actors for Jamal; his brother, Salim, and Latika -- Jamal’s love interest. The story (adapted by Simon Beaufoy, from the novel “Q&A”), with its elements of “Oliver Twist,” is mostly far-fetched, but the film still manages to suck you in. Boyle, with excellent contributions from his young cast (especially the three actors playing Jamal), fills his film with winks to Hollywood action flicks and Bollywood (the latter, in one very memorable sequence that initially felt out of place, but was too much fun to truly question). In the end, it was just a sweet little tale about a boy and a girl. “Slumdog Millionaire,” recently honored as the National Board of Review’s top film of 2008, isn’t quite that great, in my opinion, but it’s still a very good film. *** ½ (out of) **** (Mostly English, but with some Hindi with English subtitles)

“Quantum of Solace”: A new James Bond movie is always an event and given the success and promise of the last one (“Casino Royale”), it wasn't unreasonable to expect great things from the latest, “Quantum of Solace.” The new film picks up where the last left off, with James Bond (Daniel Craig) thirsting for revenge for the death of his lover, Vesper Lynd in the previous film (she was played by Eva Green). Comingled in all that is the secret organization, Quantum (a sort of modern SMERSH), who have operatives all around the world, including in Bonds' MI6, where M's (Dame Judi Dench) bodyguard is revealed to be a member. One of their chief agents is Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), under the guise of the head of the environmental company, Greene Planet. What he's really trying to do is secure a patch of desert in Bolivia that has a “hidden treasure” that will give him power and money. To get what he wants, he contracts with General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio), a nasty man who's also responsible for the death of the family of one of Greene's employees/part-time lover, Camille Montes (Olga Kurylenko). Camille wants Medrano dead and Bond wants to untangle Quantum to get his revenge, so, together, they chase bad guys in boats, cars, motorcycles and planes, oh, and on foot high across rooftops - all to the disappointment of M, who is worried her top agent is going rogue. But this is where the Bond film clichés grind to a halt. Credit goes to director Marc Forster (“Monster's Ball) for trying to put a little more intrigue in his main character. Most of the previous films had the same M.O. You expect to see poisonous creatures in hotel rooms or Bond climbing in bed with every female character (only one this time), but aside from the wild chases, the other stuff was really toned down. I'm a big, big fan of the old Ian Fleming novels (I read them before I saw my first Bond film, which happened when I was 13) and of course, of the Sean Connery Bond movies. Daniel Craig is the closest thing we've had to the “real” James Bond, and for that, the producers should be applauded. However, “Quantum of Solace” doesn't quite live up to the immense promise of “Casino Royale.” It's still quite good, however, and features some terrific action sequences (except for the disappointing opening credits) and some very solid performances, but it still left me wanting just a little bit more. I guess I'll have to wait a few more years for the next Bond film. *** (out of) ****

“City of Men”: is a companion piece of sorts to the 2002 award-winning film, “City of God,” but compared to that film (which is in my personal top-five), this is amateurish stuff. The film was directed by Paulo Morelli and written by Elena Soarez (“House of Sand”) and features four supporting members from the first film in different roles. For this film, which was culled from a Brazilian TV series by the same name, the focus is turning 18; rising above the roughness of the streets, and discovering that family is what matters most. There's still a war over turf and plenty of gunplay, but the drug angle is pushed to the background in favor of the two storylines: Ace (Douglas Silva) becoming the father he never had, and his best friend, Wallace's (Darlan Cunha), also an orphan, obsession with finding his father. It's a rather pedestrian tale, with the setting of the rough streets of Rio de Janeiro as its primary uniqueness. Think of it as “Boyz in the Hood” Lifetime-style. In other words, skip it. (In Portuguese with English subtitles) On DVD. ** (out of) ****

“Let the Right One In”: It almost doesn't seem fair to describe this film, as the less you know, the better, but only filling my review with superlatives isn't going to cut it, so here I go. On its surface, “Let the Right One In” is a Swedish vampire film. Yup - that's what I said. And yes, it's worthy of all the hype it's been getting, and I haven't been able to shut up about it since I watched it. 12 year-old loner, Oskar (Kare Hedebrandt), is struggling with three bullies at his school. As the only child of a broken marriage, the sweet little boy is a little socially-stunted and not particular confident. That begins to change when a mysterious young girl named Eli (Lina Leandersson) moves into the apartment next door. She's also 12 years-old (well, more or less, as she describes it) and makes it pretty clear that their as-yet-undiscovered differences can never result in a friendship, but it's not long before the two are doing the BFF thing. They exchange Morse code techniques, a Rubik's cube and advice, including how to deal with unwanted torment. But all around them in their quiet little Swedish hamlet, strange things are going on, and Eli emerges as the chief suspect. But make no mistake about it: ”Let the Right One In” isn't just about vampires, their history, or even revenge. Its underlying message is about unconditional friendship and how we all need companionship in our lives. It's also an awkward love story. The bond between Oskar and Eli is pretty special, as are the performances from the two young actors. The film was written by John Ajvide Lindqvist, adapting his own novel, and directed by Tomas Alfredson, who filled his film with magnificent and often wildly-inventive sequences and imagery (the latter, courtesy of Hoyte Van Hoytema's brilliant cinematography), plus a very appropriate and memorable score by Johan Soderqvist that recalls tense moments from a classic Hitchcock film. It all sets the tone for a movie that will have you in awe of its physical beauty and its touching story, yet on edge due to its sometimes shocking violence and twisted sensibilities. It's the full package and probably unlike anything you've ever watched before (and also worthy of a personal “wow” after its memorable conclusion). I should also note that I'm not even a fan of vampire films, yet this didn't feel like one. “Let the Right One In” is that special. (In Swedish with English subtitles) **** (out of) ****

“I've Loved You So Long”: Juliette (Kristen Scott Thomas) has been away for the past fifteen years, having served time for an unspeakable crime. Newly-released, she reunites with her younger sister, Lea (Elsa Zylberstein), who once idolized her, but now has to defend her to others, including her skeptical husband, Luc (Serge Hazanavicius) who reluctantly allows Juliette to stay with them at their home in France until she gets on her feet. Slowly, but surely, the wary Juliette's cold exterior melts as important men enter her life, but at the same time, we, the audience who are embracing her character, learn the specifics of why she was sent away so long ago, and like those around her, subconsciously judge her. “I've Loved You So Long” was directed and written by acclaimed French novelist, Philippe Claudel (“Grey Souls”), who, while he's new to the directing game, uses well-placed literary devices to tell his story of reconciliation and lost souls coming together. Kristen Scott Thomas, continuing to split her professional life between French and English roles, is mesmerizing as the emotionally-drained Juliette. It is one of the strongest performances of the year, yet she is very nearly matched by Elsa Zylberstein, who is a revelation as Juliette's loyal sister, Lea. The film's tone is reminiscent of American director Todd Field's work in “In the Bedroom” and “Little Children,” two more films with fragile characters and a delicate subject matter. “I've Loved You So Long” takes a little while to unfold, but it's ultimately very satisfying. (In French with English subtitles) ***1/2 (out of) ****

“The Boy in the Striped Pajamas”: is the story of an eight year-old boy named Bruno (Asa Butterfield). Bruno is living a comfortable childhood with his close buddies; behaving as a typical child. Bruno's life changes forever the day his Nazi officer father is re-assigned to supervise a “work” camp. The impressionable boy becomes lonely and withdrawn -- and worse -- has to watch his 12 year-old sister, Gretel (Amber Gretel) get sucked into the Nazi way of thinking. He's ordered to stay around the family home, but can't resist wandering out in the woods. He's especially curious about that fenced-in yard that houses workers wearing “pajamas.” He strikes up an awkward friendship with eight year-old Shmuel (Jack Scanlon), who, while he isn't as well-educated as Bruno, is infinitely more aware of his place in the world. “Boy” was directed and written (adapting John Boyne's novel) by Mark Herman (“Little Voice”) and is generally well-put together with nice performances from its two young male leads, but for people watching, chances are you will either buy into the heaviness of its story or you'll leave angry by its blatant attempt to emotionally manipulate its audience. I decided to judge it on its positive merits, but scold it for its intellectual manipulation. But one thing is very certain: you will not leave this film with a smile on your face. Consider yourself very forewarned. ** 1/2 (out of) ****

“Humboldt County”: Peter Hadley (Jeremy Strong) has hit a bump in his life. The UCLA medical student has just been failed by his professor father (played by Peter Bogdanovich). Disillusioned, Peter hooks up with a musician and part-time student guinea pig (Fairuza Balk) who brings him home (600 miles north) to her eclectic clan in laid-back Humboldt County, an area infamously known for its marijuana “plantations.” Balk quickly disappears from the film and Peter is left alone with this…this bunch of potheads. It’s quite a jarring experience for the tightly-wound college student, who by now just wants to find the next bus back to L.A. He’s forced to commune with aging hippies Jack (a terrific Brad Dourif) and Rosie (Frances Conroy, “Six Feet Under”), who are pot farmers trying to live under the fed’s radar. Chris Messina plays one of their relatives, Max, who is greedily breaking away from Jack’s tenet of no more than ten plants. Max’s relationship with the polar-opposite Peter and how he helps him realize there’s a lot more to life than trying to please your father, forms the rest of “Humboldt County.” The film, which was co-written and directed by Darren Grodsky and Danny Jacobs, tries to coax its audience into having a sober spiritual awakening from a pot movie. It does nicely highlight the forest-laden area of its namesake (“the place that brings people back to life!”) and effectively hammers home that we are our own generation, but who we are is defined by the previous generation, but it’s not a message that stays with you after you leave the movie theater. Like the underlying weed in the film’s theme, “Humboldt County” is an experience that ultimately leaves you feeling emptier and less enlightened. ** (out of) ****

“Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist”: Michael Cera is having quite a career playing a nerd just on the outside of the cool crowd. We first spotted him in “Arrested Development,” then in the teen slacker films, “Superbad” and “Juno,” and now he’s treating us to his presence in “Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist,” which (not so ironically) is a cross of those two films. Cera plays Nick, a high school student by day and musician by night. Nick is still heavily-infatuated his ex-girlfriend, Tris (Alexis Dziena, “Broken Flowers”), enough to the point where his discarded mix discs (meant as private gifts to Tris) are legendary around the school and are collected by Tris’ acquaintance/rival Norah (Kat Dennings) who doesn’t know the discs’ origins. Long story, short, Nick pretends to be Norah’s boyfriend and winds up falling for her. Not giving too much away here. The gist of the plot is a group of New Jersey schoolkids running around the Manhattan nightlife trying to find a secret concert (think “After Hours” for slackers). Splash in some witty repartee, courtesy of first-time screenwriter, Lorene Scafaria (doing her best Diablo Cody from “Juno” impersonation), and a killer soundtrack and you have an entertaining formula. In fact, “Nick and Norah’s winning recipe makes it very hard to dislike it, making it pretty darn critic-proof. I happen to like this genre and am a fan of a lot of the music in the film, but “Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist” didn’t leave me feeling the way I did after some of the other films (like the aforementioned movies in Michael Cera’s resume), but that’s just because that some heady stuff to top. Ultimately, I did like Peter Sollett’s film (he’s also the director of the excellent “Raising Victor Vargas”) enough to recommend it to audiences looking for a sweet, likeable film with good performances (especially from the leads, Cera and Dennings), and let’s face it: that’s what most of us want from our movie-going experience, at least with this type of film. *** (out of) ****

“Rendition”: came out last fall along with a spate of “war” films seemingly aimed at embarrassing the Bush Administration. I watched a couple of the films and caught a documentary or two, but until I read Roy’s positive review, I avoided this particular film because, well, it’s not the sort of healthy experience I seek. “Rendition” stars Reese Witherspoon as Isabella Fields El-Ibrahimi, a Chicago homemaker and wife to Anwar (Omar Metwally), an Egyptian-born chemical engineer. All is well in their lives until the day Anwar fails to return from a business trip. Aided by her connected friend, Alan (Peter Sarsgaard), Isabella discovers the CIA is holding her husband at a secret detention center and that they suspect him of aiding a known terrorist. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Douglas Freeman, a CIA employee assigned to observe Anwar’s interrogation (which involves some infamous torture techniques), and Meryl Streep is the very scary Corrine Whitman, the right-wing head of U.S. Intelligence who refuses to acknowledge Anwar’s existence, much less his rights as a human being. “Rendition” is a political thriller at heart, but it’s just so heavy and so full of serious accusations, that one cannot come away from it feeling good about what is going on around us. But very importantly, it reaffirms the need for a positive change in our world, one that’s hopefully coming very soon. The film, well-directed by “Tsotsi” helmer, Gavin Hood, is filled with sharp performances from its all-star cast, including Alan Arkin, and the aforementioned Witherspoon, Gyllenhaal, Sarsgaard and Streep. Omar Metwally is especially effective as the suspected terrorist, Anwar El-Ibrahimi. It’s highly doubtful this film will change anything, but one can hope it has created a sense of awareness and the optimism that our reputation will someday be positive in the eyes of the world. *** (out of) **** (On DVD).

“W.”: There’s been much ado about director Oliver Stone’s film biography of current sitting President, George W. Bush. How will our leader be portrayed and will Stone’s personal politics treat our President fairly? Could what we see on the screen possibly influence how we vote? It’s doubtful. Conservatives won’t care to see this film and liberals have already made up their minds and probably won’t learn anything new from this film. Stone, along with his screenwriter, Stanley Weiser (“Wall Street”) mine some of the vast territory of George W. Bush’s life, starting with his Skull and Bones days at Yale University; the hard-partying days that followed (including his various episodes with the bottle), to his struggles to maintain a positive view in the eyes of his father (George Herbert Walker Bush, played by James Cromwell) and his career in politics. Josh Brolin plays “W” and is the single-best thing about this film. True, he doesn’t facially resemble his subject, but vocally, he’s dead on. He’s also got his mannerisms down pat. It’s an award-inspiring performance. Stone’s casting is generally pretty good in this film (I especially liked Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney), but he blew it with Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice. Newton’s portrayal was at the level of a “Saturday Night Live” episode and was distracting to every one of her scenes. Elizabeth Banks was very good as Laura Bush, showing a depth of character not seen in the public eye. Overall, Stone didn’t seem to go out of his way to embarrass Bush (he left out a ton of stuff), but certainly didn’t do him any favors by highlighting some of Bush’s lesser moments. Still, he generally kept his gun in its holster. Despite some flaws, “W.” is an interesting depiction of a very colorful character in our nation’s storied history. *** (out of) ****

“Happy-Go-Lucky”: A short while ago, I mentioned how I think the Coen Brothers have three tiers of films. I tend to measure acclaimed English director Mike Leigh in the same way. He has his masterpieces like “Topsy-Turvy,” “Secret and Lies” and “Vera Drake,” and other excellent, but not-quite-great films like “All or Nothing” and “Life is Sweet.” And then there’s his latest film, “Happy-Go-Lucky.” It’s a nice film, but a fairly large departure from his previous work, and unfortunately, it makes me long for more of his previous work. “Happy-Go-Lucky” stars Sally Hawkins as Poppy, a 30 year-old school-teacher from London. Poppy is one of those rare people who can find a silver lining in every dark cloud. It’s a rare moment when she isn’t laughing or smiling. One of those moments is when her bicycle is stolen. That was her mode of transportation for work. But it forces her to finally learn to drive. Her teacher is the polar opposite of Poppy, a curmudgeon of a man named Scott (Eddie Marsan). Scott has it out for the world and it probably isn’t a good idea that he’s trying to teach. Poppy, on the other hand, gives her students hope and sunshine and in return they give her love and respect. Hmm. Leigh, working with a different cast than usual (no Timothy Spall), with only Hawkins and Marsan (from “Vera Drake”) as repeat players, takes his rough story (he never works from a script) and carves out a nice little film, even if it fell short of my high expectations. Curiously, “Happy-Go-Lucky” sports a plot and lead character not much different than the film “Pee-wee’s Big Adventure.” On that level, this film wasn’t as entertaining, but it certainly went deeper into the human psyche. However, as a standalone film – as this should be judged – “Happy-Go-Lucky” is a pleasant little diversion. But it’s far from Mike Leigh’s best work and it still makes me long for his older work. *** (out of) ****

“Blindness”: runs in the same circles as “Children of Men,” only instead of protecting the new hope for a dying society, Julianne Moore is (apparently) the last person on the planet who can see. Inexplicably, and one by one, people start going blind. First it’s Yusuke Iseya, who stops traffic when everything suddenly goes white. He’s “rescued” by a man (played by the film’s writer, Don McKellar) who turns out to have different intentions. Iseya (billed only as “First Blind Man”) visits a local eye doctor (played by Mark Ruffalo, whose character is also unnamed), who, after seeing his newest patient, also develops the strange “white blindness.” His wife (Moore), who’s convinced the affliction can’t be caught, feigns blindness so she can join her husband, his patient, and several other struck people when the local government decides to quarantine them at what appears to be an abandoned prison. The facility is divided into three sections and is controlled at a safe distance by guards who fear their “prisoners” may be contagious. The guards are more than willing to shoot anyone who comes remotely near them, even if they have a sympathetic need (such as a urgent medical condition). The facility’s food is doled out by its self-proclaimed (and white-blind) monarch (Gael Garcia Bernal), who declares himself king of ward three. His assistant is a blind man from birth (Maury Chaykin). Instead of showing compassion and teamwork, the men demand valuables and “favors” in exchange for the food. “Blindness” is based on the acclaimed 1995 novel by Jose Saramago, and was directed by Fernando Meirielles, whose first two films, “City of God” and “The Constant Gardener,” showed off his considerable talents. That ability is very much on display in this film, which is also aided by McKellar’s sincere adaptation; Marco Antonio Guimaraes’ memorable score, and Meirelle’s personal cinematographer, Cesar Charlone’s beautiful camerawork. The film’s leads, Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo’s solid performances are nicely supported by Gael Garcia Bernal and a host of strong character actors. It’s helpful to understand this film is slow, somewhat disturbing, and fairly far-fetched, but when taken in context (hello, National Federation of the Blind), it’s actually a fascinating study of human behavior. From a technical and subject standpoint, there’s much to admire about “Blindness.” But considered yourself forewarned that as a viewing experience, it’s a real squirmer. *** (out of) ****

“Control”: is the film study of the brief life of Ian Curtis, lead singer of the very influential late-70s band, Joy Division, whose sound inspired a generation of goth and alternative music groups. First-time film director, Anton Corbijn, along with his screenwriter, Matt Greenhalgh, begin Curtis’ story in 1973, not long before Ian (Sam Riley) met and married his girlfriend Debbie (Samantha Morton). Shortly thereafter, Ian met musicians Benard Sumner (James Anthony Pearson) and Peter Hook (Joe Anderson) at a Sex Pistols show. The trio formed the band Warsaw, and after catching the eye of local record mogul Tony Wilson (Craig Parkinson), changed their name to Joy Division. The band signed with Wilson’s newly-formed label, Factory Records and recorded just two albums before Curtis committed suicide in 1980 at the age of 23. Corbijn, who spent time with Ian Curtis and Joy Division and gained fame back in the 80s as a rock photographer and music video director, filmed “Control” in color, but developed it in black-and-white, giving his film a unique and appropriate look. And not surprisingly, given his eye, he did an excellent job capturing his actors little nuances, giving “Control” an extra air of quality. Samantha Morton is terrific as the devoted, but tortured wife, but this film belongs to Sam Riley, whose performance (and striking resemblance) as the brooding Ian Curtis, is outstanding. Matt Greenhalgh’s script, which is based on material from Debbie Curtis’ book, “Touching from a Distance,” focuses on Ian, the couple’s marriage, and Ian’s fling with Annik Honore (Alexandra Maria Lara), an affair that crippled his marriage and aided his deep depression and eventual suicide. It also highlights Ian’s erratic behavior, much of it the result of the medications he depended upon to control his epileptic episodes. “Control” is not a happy film, but it is an interesting study of one of rock music’s lesser-known characters. It’s also a treat for fans (I count myself as one) of the music of the era. *** (out of) **** (On DVD).

“Rachel Getting Married”: Anne Hathaway in a wedding film? Uh-oh. Ah, but that would be the wrong approach. It’s actually Anne Hathaway playing a junkie on weekend furlough from a local rehab facility. Kym Buchman (Hathaway) is temporarily released so she can attend her sister Rachel’s wedding. The two were somewhat close once upon a time, but that was before a horrible tragedy that claimed the life of the sisters’ toddler brother. Rachel (played by Rosemarie DeWitt) blames Kym and well, once you learn the whole story, you’ll blame her too. The guilt from the accident, which occurred when Kym was a teenager, caused her to lean on drugs, alcohol and other unpleasant things. It also led to a string of hospitals. In short, Kym is a mess and she’ll be on full display for her sister’s big day. But what sounds like a very depressing film is actually a celebration of life. First-time screenwriter, Jenny Lumet (director Sidney Lumet’s daughter) takes Kym’s story and sticks it in the forefront for the audience, but in the background (well, mostly) for the family’s wedding guests. So we see the behind-the-scenes dysfunctional stuff, but we’re also treated to one of the best weddings we’ve ever (sort of) attended. The music is great, the personalities are terrific and the vibe is positive (it’s also set in beautiful Connecticut, near the home of Roy Dodger). Lumet’s screenplay is extremely smart and witty and shows a terrific sense for developing characters. She also respects her audience’s intelligence and societal progress (you’ll understand what that means when you watch the film). Kym is clearly her mother’s daughter (mom is played by the excellent Debra Winger), while her father, who is now on his second wife, has found a life companion who reflects his mellowed spirit, unlike his ex – Kym’s mother, whose actions likely led to their daughter’s issues. That the father is constantly rescuing his youngest daughter and making excuses for her behavior, provides jealousy for Rachel and adds to the tension in the siblings’ relationship. Ultimately, it’s the thoroughly self-absorbed and very-damaged Kym who provides the richest source for Lumet’s brilliant script. And it helps the film immensely that Anne Hathaway is able to put down her tiara and give the best performance of her career. She’s completely riveting as the messed-up (but trying to get it together) Kym. Debra Winger shines in her brief role, and Rosemarie DeWitt and Mather Zickel (the latter as Kym’s AA buddy and the groom’s best man) are both excellent. At the helm for this well-balanced film is Jonathan Demme, who channels Robert Altman’s ensemble style to help create one of this year’s best films. “Rachel Getting Married” is a painful, yet beautiful movie that celebrates compassion and family. *** ½ (out of) ****

“Religulous”: If you’ve ever watched comedian and talk show host Bill Maher on one of his shows, you know how he feels about organized religion. The fact the title of his latest film, “Religulous” rhymes with ‘ridiculous’ should confirm it. Writer Maher and director Larry Charles (“Borat”) travel the globe to talk with various religious figures and representatives of organizations, all while trying to prove their point: that groups of people gather to celebrate a person is, well, ridiculous. It can be a slippery slope and a difficult viewing experience, especially for those of us somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, but Maher does ask some good questions and raise some good points, and while some of his segments border on humiliation, he’s generally respectful to his subjects, well, to their faces. My wife, who is a regular churchgoer, wasn’t offended by the documentary film, but I can see the religious right walking out of a screening. If questioning the validity of celebrating religion appeals to you, by all means – see “Religulous.” If not, don’t. It’s that simple. Personally, I found it to be pretty insightful and respectfully entertaining, even if I didn’t entirely agree with everything Maher had to say. *** (out of) ****

“Burn After Reading”: I have this personal opinion that there are three tiers of Coen brothers films. You have your great tier: “No Country for Old Men” and “Fargo;” a second tier, containing most of their other films. These films are mostly excellent, but not in the masterpiece category of the first tier. And then you have the third tier. It’s occupied by the “Man Who Wasn’t There,” and films like “The Ladykillers” and “Intolerable Cruelty.” I didn’t like “Man” at all, but I did enjoy moments of the latter two films, but wouldn’t call them *good.* The Coen brothers (Ethan and Joel) latest film, “Burn After Reading” probably comes closest to “Intolerable Cruelty” in mood and results. That’s not a bad thing, but it’s not necessarily good, either. “Burn After Reading” stars Frances McDormand as Linda, a mousy fitness instructor. She’s also a serial dater who meets her male counterpart in Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), who’ll go out with just about anyone female, including the married, but unhappy Katie (Tilda Swinton). In a Coen brothers twist, Katie’s alcoholic husband, Osborne (John Malkovich) has just been fired by the CIA. He leaves behind a computer disc, which may or may not contain classified secrets. Linda and a clumsy co-worker (played by a very effective Brad Pitt) stumble upon the disc and try to peddle it to the Russians (Linda needs the money to nip and tuck a few out-of-place body parts). Oh, and hilarity ensues. It has a good premise, plus some good lead and supporting actors to pull it off, but it, well, just didn’t feel like it worked. It felt overcooked and wasn’t particularly tasty. Wait for it to come out on DVD. ** ½ (out of) ****

“My Blueberry Nights”: stars Jude Law as Jeremy, an owner of a diner that never seems to have any customers, but has the best blueberry pie in town. Over the years, Jeremy has collected keys in a jar with each key telling a story. On one particular night, a good customer named Elizabeth (Norah Jones) leaves her newly ex-boyfriend’s keys with Jeremy, with instructions to give them to him when he comes in. Jeremy is intrigued and waits, but the ex-boyfriend doesn’t come in. Neither does Elizabeth, who has decided to travel the country by bus, picking up odd jobs until she’s saved enough money for a car. Along the way, she encounters a host of characters that touch her life, including a police officer (played by David Strathairn) who can’t stand that his wife, Sue Lynne (Rachel Weisz), is with another man, and Leslie (Natalie Portman) as a gambling addict. “My Blueberry Nights” was co-written (with Lawrence Block) and directed by Wong Kar-wai (“In the Mood for Love”), who’s had better films, but doesn’t exactly strike out with this one. “My Blueberry Nights” has a structure and feel that’s reminiscent of some late night cable vignette, but without the soft-core sex. But that’s not a bad thing. It’s just a little limited. The performances are about what you’d expect from the talent level. Natalie Portman is striking as always and shows she does sassy well. Singer Norah Jones (I really like her musical work) is competent in her film debut. Her character, like her acting skills is somewhat limited, but I suspect that was the idea. David Strathairn is the standout, but that should come as no surprise to admiring followers of his career. In summary, “My Blueberry Nights” is a simple little film that works well for a night in. ** ½ (out of) **** (On DVD)

“I.O.U.S.A”: It's that time of the year. The squirrels in my neighborhood are making a minor racket while attempting to harvest their stash for the winter. Smart little creatures they are. Instinctively, they put away a little so there will be something there for the tough times. It's a shame more humans couldn't pick up that good habit. If, for example, we simply spent less than what we make, our financial world would be a better place. In fact, it's a shame our leaders haven't set a better example. Our national debt has exploded from about one trillion dollars 30 years ago to just under $9.7 trillion dollars today. And just over the past eight years, the current administration's policies have contributed nearly four trillion dollars to that figure. Most of us have no clue how this all works, and worse, no idea who it affects or how it will be pared down. The policies of the previous administration realized a period of surpluses to the annual budgets (a period never enjoyed in our proud country's history) that allowed us to actually pay down the debt, and even temporarily turned off the infamous National Debt Clock (it wasn't programmed to run backwards), but thanks to the fiscally-irresponsible tax cuts, the Iraq war and other wayward actions of our present leaders, the clock will soon need to be modified to add an extra digit. The too-smart-for-its-own-good documentary, “I.O.U.S.A” highlights all this and more, using animated charts and experts (including Warren Buffet, Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin) to show its viewers just how desperate is our country's situation. What it doesn't offer, however, are easy solutions. Thanks to our country's fiscal mess, there are none. As individuals, we know we should save more and spend less, but that's usually easier said than done, and how does that help our government's revenue stream needed to pay down the debt? The documentary also discusses the United States' potentially dangerous situation with China, our chief lender. Since they hold the proverbial purse-strings (and with it, the ability to cripple us financially), we are basically forced to look the other way. Not exactly the best way to run a country. In a ranking of nations, the United States is dead last (by plenty) for largest merchandise trade deficit, with China number one. Add in future Social Security and Medicare obligations, and it looks pretty grim. “I.O.U.S.A.” was directed by Patrick Creadon (“Wordplay”) and “stars” Robert Bixby of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan citizen's group devoted to reducing our nation's debt, and the unheralded David Walker, who until recently was our long-running Comptroller General, also heading the General Accounting Office (GAO). Their expertise helps ease the intimidating nature of this film, but there's never a moment during this fascinating documentary when you'll want to look away. It also keeps the politics to a minimum (the film was funded by billionaire Peter G. Peterson, a fiscal conservative and former commerce secretary under Richard Nixon), but clearly doesn't show the current folks in a favorable light.

As I was leaving the theater, a fellow patron noted the film was rated “PG” due to some material not suitable for children. They couldn't understand why. I opined that what we just watched wasn't suitable for children or grandchild, the people who'll be stuck with the bill our leaders have run up. “I.O.U.S.A.” may be the scariest film you'll ever watch, but don't let that, like its daunting theme, stop you from seeing it. ***1/2 (out of) ****

“Vicky Cristina Barcelona”: stars Rebecca Hall as Vicky and Scarlett Johansson as Cristina, two friends with very different personalities, who both fall for the same man - an artist named Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem). They meet Juan Antonio while staying with Vicky's relatives (played by Patricia Clarkson and Kevin Dunn) and playing tourist in Barcelona. Vicky is the responsible one. She's engaged to a nice guy (played by Chris Messina), while the free-spirited Cristina says she's morally-grounded, but has problems resisting Juan Antonio's allure. Eventually, so does Vicky. Throw in Juan Antonio's spitfire ex-wife (Penelope Cruz) and you'll want the management to check the theater's air-conditioning system. “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” is writer-director Woody Allen's 2008 offering (he's good for one film a year), and while it isn't his smartest or funniest effort, it's pretty entertaining, and thanks to its talented and attractive cast, held this viewer's attention. *** (out of) ****

“Cassandra's Dream”: Writer-director Woody Allen's European tour continues in England with “Cassandra's Dream,” a lower-level attempt to mine the success of his 2005 effort, “Match Point.” Like that film, Woody tries to thrill his audience with shocking crime and twists, except with “Cassandra,” the “twist” is in how the characters cope with the decisions they make, which is very Woody-like, even if this film leaves you longing for a little more “Match Point” suspense. “Cassandra's Dream” stars Colin Farrell and Ewan McGregor as two very different brothers. Ian (McGregor) is the dreamer. He works in his father's restaurant, but is always chasing the get-rich scheme. To fund some of his ideas, he liberally “borrows” from the restaurant's safe, always promising to pay it back. Terry (Farrell) is a grease-monkey with a taste for drink, smoke and ponies, not necessarily in that order. Terry hits it big one day and the windfall allows the brothers to realize a dream with the purchase of their first boat (the film's namesake), but like most serious gamblers, sudden winning streaks usually lead to bad losing streaks, and Terry's run of bad luck has the potential for broken limbs. Enter the brother's rich uncle Howard (Tom Wilkinson), who could help the boys out of their situation if they help him out. But (of course), not all is what it seems. “Cassandra's Dream” isn't a bad film by any stretch of the imagination, but I guess we're all a little spoiled by Woody Allen. We expect more and when we get less, we can't help but feel a little disappointed. That sums up “Cassandra's Dream” for me. **1/2 (out of) **** (On DVD)

“Kung Fu Panda”: I had the good fortune to see this film in the best possible way – among a bunch of small children at a special showing at the beautifully-restored Fox Theater in downtown Atlanta. I imagine this is the way this film would’ve been viewed 60 years ago, well, its type of film. Heck, it was even preceded by a newly-produced “Roger Rabbit” cartoon. “Kung Fu Panda” is a cute story of a panda named Po (voiced by Jack Black) who dreams of leaving his family noodle business (set in the Valley of Peace somewhere in China) to become the Dragon Warrior. The problem is he’s fat and lazy and well, a panda. The title is likelier to go to one of the “Furious Five” (led by a monkey, tigress, praying mantis, viper and crane). The five are led and trained by Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman), who also trained Tai Lung (Ian McShane), a snow leopard, who unfortunately went bad, but was now very closely guarded in a maximum security prison. Naturally, he escapes and wants revenge. And naturally only the Dragon Warrior can stop him. Did I mention that Po, the panda is actually awarded the title of Dragon Warrior by some old turtle who’s trusting his personal vision? It was put together by DreamWorks Animation and directed by animation veterans Mark Osborne and John Stevenson. Yeah, it’s silly and predictable, but it’s also well-made, full of laughs and is generally harmless. Recommended. *** (out of) ****

“Sicko”: is documentary filmmaker, Michael Moore’s latest attempt at upsetting the conservative faction of our country. While I tend to agree with his viewpoint, I have to admit I don’t like his one-sidedness. True, it’s a lot easier to make your point when you don’t bother to state the other side of the story, but including the latter would make a more honest film, which “Sicko” is not. Call me silly, but I like to hear both sides and then decide. “Sicko” spends most of its time talking to examples of the horrors of the flawed U.S. healthcare plan and then contrasts it to the utopian systems (comparatively speaking) that exist in Canada, Great Britain and France, where you can get free healthcare and not get turned away -- unlike here (in the U.S.). But what he fails to mention is the drawbacks (higher taxes, long wait-times) and the destructiveness of the favorable policies (France’s system is in disrepair, which leads to greater problems that affect the whole populace). The U.S. system is broken in large part due to the greed of the insurance and drug companies, as well as the government’s short-sighted policies. Having said all that, what Moore has to say is interesting and quite upsetting (especially if you’ve been a victim), but “fair and balanced,” it is not, and again, that’s what I want when I watch this type of film. ** (out of) **** (On DVD)

“Pineapple Express”: Judd Apatow and company strike again! This time they take on illegal drug use (oh wait, they’ve eluded to that before) and bad 80s action films. Okay, the last part is new stuff. “Pineapple Express” stars Seth Rogen as Dale Denton, a process server/pothead, who spends his spare time, um, smoking marijuana, which he, um, “obtains” from his, um, “pharmaceutical distribution manager,” Saul (James Franco). Saul has a particularly potent strain of pot known as “pineapple express.” He also sold some to a bad guy named Ted Jones (Gary Cole), who coincidentally is on Dale’s to-be-served list. Long story short, Dale witnesses a murder and leaves beyond a roach of evidence that quickly identifies him as a person of interest to the bad guys, who spend the rest of the movie chasing Dale and Saul. “Pineapple Express” was written by Rogen and his writing partner, Evan Goldberg (the team behind “Superbad”) and directed by David Gordon Green (“Snow Angels”), who after making a series of extremely promising serious films, succumbs to the charms of producer Judd Apatow. Green would seem like a very odd choice, but his filmmaking prowess and obvious love for bad action films (his film sends up quite a few) turn this otherwise sophomoric “dumb comedy” into a well-polished good time at the movies. “Pineapple Express” is filled with its share of irresponsible moments (mostly involving high-school kids), but it has laughs to spare. It also sports spot-on performances from its leads, Seth Rogen and James Franco, as well as a strong supporting cast including the hysterical Danny McBride; the aforementioned Gary Cole, as well as Ed Begley Jr., Rosie Perez and Apatow regulars Bill Hader and Craig Robinson. “Pineapple Express” certainly isn’t for everybody and would seem to appeal to a “certain” audience, but there’s too much good stuff in this movie for any hardcore film-lover to ignore. *** (out of) ****

“Definitely, Maybe”: Guys are supposed to live by a certain code. One of those things is no “chick-flicks.” For example, while going to movies last week, I bought a ticket for “Pineapple Express” while my wife checked out “Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2.” No “self-respecting dude” would be caught dead watching the latter film (ditto for any film featuring Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey). But when I kept hearing good things about “Definitely, Maybe,” the loud “dude!” voices in my head were suppressed by the “but it’s supposed to be good” noises. Since this is a review for “Definitely, Maybe,” you can guess which voice was the loudest. “Definitely, Maybe” stars Ryan Reynolds as Will Hayes. He’s a good guy, but he’s made his fair share of bad choices, and unfortunately, his wife has just served him with divorce papers. Fortunately, one of his wise choices is his ten year-old daughter, Maya (Abigail Breslin), a sweet, young girl with a very inquisitive mind. She wants to know more about her father’s relationships (including with her mother) leading up to her birth. So, through a series of flashbacks (told in bedtime story-style) we learn about the college sweetheart, Emily (Elizabeth Banks); a fleeting romance with a spoken-for older woman (Summer, played by Rachel Weisz), and April (Isla Fisher), a woman Will met while the pair were working on the first Bill Clinton presidential campaign. It’s all told in a very interesting way, giving us, the viewers, an idea of what Maya must be thinking as she listens to her father tell the stories. “Definitely, Maybe” was written and directed by Adam Brooks, who has clearly improved upon his previous work (including the Bridget Jones sequel and the insipid “Wimbledon”). Ryan Reynolds is excellent and very well-cast as Will Hayes. Reynolds has a nice chemistry with each of the woman (all sharply-contrasted against each other), adding to the credibility of the story. Not surprisingly, Abigail Breslin is irresistibly charming as Maya. Providing she doesn’t become yet another tabloid statistic, I suspect Ms. Breslin is going to survive her childhood and have a good chance to thrive as an adult actress, something that’s too rare these days. Elizabeth Banks, Rachel Weisz and Isla Fisher are all good as Will’s love interests. I have a clear favorite, but since that’s also part of the film, I don’t want to give anything away. In short, “Definitely, Maybe” made its way under my skin, but I hope that doesn’t mean I have to surrender my guy card. *** ½ (out of) **** (On DVD)

“Charlie Wilson’s War”: This is one of those films that got lost (at least for me) among the many high quality holiday films that came out this past December and January. But that’s the beauty of Netflix, a service I have recently embraced. Tom Hanks stars as Charlie Wilson, a congressman from the great state of Texas. Wilson, whose nickname is “Good Time Charlie,” certainly knows how to have one. He’s a womanizer who counts socialite Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) among his “friends.” She’s a well-connected and smart, and uses Charlie’s obvious government influence to help her with her little pet cause: stopping communist Russia from taking over Afghanistan. With her persuasion, Charlie, who happens to sit on the Defense committee, is able to steadily increase the defense budget and slyly allocate funds (through the backdoor, of course) to supply the Afghan Freedom Fighters with the right weapons to defeat Russia and help end the Cold War. It’s a fascinating (and reportedly true) story that was very well-written by Aaron Sorkin (“The West Wing”) and directed by Mike Nichols (“Primary Colors”). Both men are clearly no strangers to political material and it shows with this juicy production. The whole cast is wonderful, including the Oscar-nominated (for this performance) Philip Seymour Hoffman, as a lone-wolf CIA agent. Hanks, whose image has been continuously white-washed over the years, is terrific as the hard-partying congressman, while Julia Roberts is smart and sexy as the socialite who knows more than she should about politics. “Charlie Wilson’s War” is terrific entertainment. *** ½ (out of) **** (On DVD)

“The Dark Knight”: The chief task of a film is to entertain, not offend. A filmgoer should also have the proper perspective. They should understand it’s just a film, and, unless viewing a documentary, they’re only watching a work of fiction. With that in mind, plus the knowledge I am a grown adult somewhat desensitized to movie violence, I sat down to watch “The Dark Knight,” the latest Batman film, and second from writer-director Christopher Nolan, following up his 2005 effort, “Batman Begins.” Christian Bale returns as billionaire Bruce Wayne, who, of course, is also “the Batman,” as he’s referred to by the media and law enforcement, neither of whom know quite how to treat the “hero” who seems to have his own idea of justice, even if it happens to break a few laws. Returning are Michael Caine (as Bruce’s assistant, Alfred), Gary Oldman (Commissioner Gordon) and Morgan Freeman (as Bruce’s “Q” and Wayne Industries CEO, Lucius Fox), along with Maggie Gyllenhaal, who steps into the role of Bruce’s old friend, Rachel Dawes. Playing her boyfriend, Harvey Dent, is Aaron Eckhart. Dent is also Gotham City’s District Attorney and true hero, as he relentlessly pursues and incarcerates several key mob figures, winning him many admirers, including Bruce Wayne. The mob figures, led by Salvatore Maroni (Eric Roberts) are reeling from a daring robbery by a mysterious hideously disfigured man referred to as The Joker (played by the late Heath Ledger). The Joker, along with his henchman (to whom he’s not particularly loyal), rob a bank that was literally the holding facility for Gotham City’s underworld. Daring, indeed. We’re not quite sure what to make of this man except he’s brash and deeply, deeply troubled. He’s also extremely self-righteous and bent on destroying Batman, who quite naturally takes an interest in capturing this maverick criminal. The Joker orchestrates a series of elaborate statements against Gotham City’s key public figures as well as its populace, seemingly designed to exposes the basic fears and flaws of man. It’s actually a deep message, albeit folded inside an orgy of violence. It’s this violence that unsettled me as a viewer and redirected me to that proper perspective. I wouldn’t want my nine year-old nephew, Jack, to view this film, even though he has an interest in the comic book hero. This isn’t the Batman I grew up watching on television or read about in the 30 cent copies of the DC comics. No, it’s a graphic illustration of the darker, serious Batman, the one who seems to rise above the traditional silliness of a comic book hero. It’s also the version I’ve been waiting to see for years. Christopher Nolan and his brother and longtime writing partner, Jonathan (probably best known for their collaboration on “Memento”), took a series of ideas from the special comics (they credit the 13-issue run of “Batman: The Long Halloween” as the inspiration for this film) and ran with it. We see the transformation of Harvey Dent; the manifestation of the Joker and the vigilante side of Batman. The action is nearly non-stop and almost always spectacular, yet Christopher Nolan resists showing off any unnecessary technical flair, even though he clearly possesses the chops. And in keeping up with the darkness theme, I applaud “The Dark Knight” for avoiding the silly clichés and one-liners that plague other films of its type and distract viewers from the story’s aim.

Before I discuss the performances, I’d like to note the film’s fantastic score, which seemed to improve upon everything I disliked about the music in the recent film, “There Will Be Blood.” Two different films, sure, but composers Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard seemed to take elements from that film’s score and soften it to the point where it hauntingly blended into its scene. It’s extremely effective and quite memorable. Much has been made of Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker, and I can’t say any of it was overhyped. He truly deserves all the accolades and certainly a supporting actor Oscar nomination. And the rest of the main cast did nothing to disparage their considerable reputations. Hey, you can’t go wrong with any film featuring Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman, not to mention Christian Bale (surprisingly holding his own in scenes with Ledger) and Maggie Gyllenhaal, as well as the extremely underrated Aaron Eckhart and a remarkably subdued Gary Oldman – all turning in strong performances. The violence in this film is often implied (probably the reason why it somehow managed a PG-13 rating), but it’s still plentiful, yet doesn’t make you forget you’re watching greatness -- probably the best Hollywood film of its kind I’ve watched in years. And as much as I enjoyed “Iron Man,” “The Dark Knight” blows this out of the water. It’s a completely first-rate film and becomes the new standard to follow for its genre. Simply brilliant. **** (out of) ****

“Mamma Mia!”: What forms the basis for a good film? Should it be entertaining and well-performed? If that's all, then “Mamma Mia!” is a great success. The film is based on the hugely successful stage musical by director Phyllida Lloyd and writer Catherine Johnson, who repeat their roles for the movie adaptation. The inspiration for “Mamma Mia” came from the music of the famous Swedish 70s pop band, Abba, and from the 1968 Gina Lollobrigida film, “Buona Sera, Mrs. Campbell.” Single mother Donna (Meryl Streep) runs a resort on an exotic Greek island, along with her 20 year-old daughter, Sophie (Amanda Seyfried), who is preparing for her wedding to Sky (Dominic Cooper). Years earlier, Donna broke up with her boyfriend, Sam, and then subsequently had flings with two young men. The dalliances resulted in Sophie, who has spent her entire life wondering about her father. Somewhat impetuously and unknown to her mother, Sophie mailed a wedding invitation to the three possible candidates (played by Pierce Bronson, Colin Firth and Stellan Skarsgård), with the hopes of revealing her true father, who would then give her away at the wedding. The men, each keen on the idea of getting reacquainted with Donna, not to mention the fun vacation, accept the invites, beginning the fun. Also arriving for the wedding are Donna's best friends Tanya (Christine Baranski) and Rosie (Julie Walters), who both remember how to have a good time. In fact, the whole film is a good time, even if it has a preposterous premise and a completely silly ending. It did have some great performances, especially from the utterly charming Amanda Seyfried (“Big Love”) as Sophie, and lo those Abba songs, each dutifully performed by the mostly amateur (to singing and dancing) cast. To their credit (with a few male exceptions), they pulled it off. Personally, I went for the cheese factor promised by the old Abba songs, and darn if I'm still not humming “Take a Chance on Me” and “Dancing Queen.” For this movie snob, “Mamma Mia!” is a guilty pleasure. *** (out of) ****

“In Bruges”: I confess I was one of the many turned off by this film's original ad campaign, which played “In Bruges” as a silly travelogue starring a very, very annoying Colin Farrell. A lot of positive word-of-mouth and several months later, I finally gave in and watched the film on DVD. While I still have reservations with Colin Farrell's character, the film as a whole won me over. Farrell is Ray, a bumbling hit-man who botched his last job and has been sent along with his work partner, Ken (Brendan Gleeson) to the Belgium city of Bruges, a bit of an unusual vacation spot, but just low-key enough to ready the pair for their next assignment. The older, more seasoned Ken soaks up the beauty of Bruges, but Ray is mostly bored and unimpressed by the old, but charming city. He comes out of his shell a little when he meets Chloe, a local prostitute and drug dealer played by Clemence Poesy. Mix in Ralph Fiennes as Ray and Ken's mysterious boss (doing his best Dennis Farina impersonation), and a winning screenplay by writer-director, Martin McDonagh, and “In Bruges” turns out to be a very smart and entertaining black comedy with excellent performances by its fine cast. *** (out of) **** (On DVD)

“Lust, Caution”: is a strange little film from director Ang Lee (“Brokeback Mountain”) that fails to succeed as either a spy or erotic thriller, the two genres it attempts. Tang Wei stars as “Mrs. Mak,” a woman of means with the good sense to be Mah-Jongg partners with the wife of Mr. Yee (Tony Leung Chiu Wai), a notorious torturer in Shanghai, circa 1942. Mrs. Mak is really Wong Chia Chi, a young, unmarried woman who is recruited by the Resistance to get close to Yee, in the hopes he can be assassinated. She infiltrates his lair through the wife (played by Joan Chen) and eventually catches the eye of the overly cautious Yee, who proves to be a tough mission. For all its moodiness and near two and half hour running time, “Lust, Caution” is neither thrilling nor erotic. It's also lacking in chemistry between the characters. Skip it. (In a variety of Chinese dialects and Japanese with English subtitles) * 1/2 (out of) **** (On DVD)