Avatar

It is finally here! James Cameron (director of Terminator 2 and Titanic) has been working on this "special project" for around 15 years now, waiting until the technology was just right to make his beloved film. He spent that time creating what his world would look like, making the language that would be used, and making his own "original" story from scratch. Well this is what he claims anyway. The story has actually been done a ton of times before. It goes with the plots of "Dances with Wolves" and "Pocahontas". One more movie that I realized today that this film is basically an incarnation Disney's animated movie "Atlantis" just with a different setting.

Avatar is about Jake, a man in a wheelchair, who gets the chance to be in a Avatar program on Pandora which is moon of an unknown planet. The setting is in the year 2154 and the humans are determined to gain the land of the natives(called Na'vi),which contains valuable minerals. The Avatar program allows Jake to be in the body of one of the 9-feet tall Na'vi and negotiate with the natives. From there, the story of Disney's Atlantis pretty much fills the rest of the story.

The graphics did look pretty good but they still looked unbelievable. When you are not focused on the movie you can really see how ridiculous a giant rhino-type creature looks with an unnecessary 6 legs. You can decide for yourselves whether the land of Pandora looks real or not. You may be asking "What format should I see this movie in?". My response would be to spend a little extra and see this in IMAX if anyone should choose to see it in theaters. James Cameron himself helped contribute to making the 3D technology and specifically for IMAX viewers. Cameron and his team helped out one another in making the film look good, but they did not do a very good job on working on the story.

As with any action movie, there is minor cussing throughout and also suggestive stuff. What I mean by stuff is the fact that the na'vi may be computer generated but still have clothing styles of Indian tribes (or Native Americans). Their necklaces barely cover their chest and their loincloths cover the bottom.

In my own opinion, see this movie if you are the type of person who wants to see movies like "2012" or you just want to see a movie for a fun purpose with no intention of a good plot, then go ahead and welcome yourself to Pandora, the home of the 9-foot tall naked blue alien monkeys who live on floating islands. As for me Avatar gets 3 stars, mostly due to the effects and cast selection of Sam Worthington (Terminator Salvation) as Jake.

2012

Director Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow) seems to have a huge knack for making films in which the world blows up.

That is pretty much all that "2012" is about.


There has been some speculation that the world will end on December 21, 2012 because that is when the Mayan calendar ends. Of course it would not be much fun if it just so happened to be that the Mayan civilization didn't feel like making their calendar go further than 2012, especially considering that they are now extinct. In my head the film is not very realistic but it is entertaining to watch.

The story is all based around what the world would do in the case of global destruction and how one might survive it. It specifically follows the life of Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) throughout the catastrophic events of the movie as he tries to survive along with his kids and ex-wife.

The death and violence in this movie is intense and while you see people crushed by buildings from far away, you never really see the bodies of the dead people up close except once briefly. I am not sure what the purpose of this movie exactly was but it felt larger than life, like a superhero movie but even a little less real than that. The effects are okay, better than they could be, but still not enough.

Religious themes also HAD to be put in this disaster movie, because of prophecies told in the Bible about catastrophic events. In fact, there is even reference to "the people with the cardboard who had it right the whole time". In other spots the Bible is talked about briefly and the President also seems to be a believer and even quotes a verse (Psalm 23) to the entire country. It would seem like it would go with what the Bible says at first, but the ending of the movie makes out to be more of an allegory of Noah's Ark instead of Revelations.

This is not really a kid's movie because of the above descriptions and also there is cussing sprinkled throughout the movie and a few small and quick sex references. By the time you read this review, this film will most likely be in the dollar theater or soon to be on home release. In a smaller format, this may make the movie look even cheaper than I thought it was and also not as fantastic looking (as if it was). In the end, this movie is very overrated and the only thing it really has to offer is the benefit of seeing things blow up, and also the growing theory that the world will end 2012.

The Princess and the Frog

Disney tries it's hand again at making classic stories and fairy tales into cartoons. That is in fact what made Disney where it is today, starting with "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" and moving on to numerous others such as "Winnie the Pooh" and "The Jungle Book". As if Disney could not find another book to make a movie of, they made sequel after sequel of movies such as these, in my opinion most of them having less quality than the last.

Now it seems that Disney is again heading towards the right direction. The original story of the Princess and the Frog that most people know goes something like this. The prince gets put under a spell by a witch, he turns into a frog, the princess kisses him and he is human again as they live hoppily ever after. Like they always do, Disney puts their own twist to this story and actually makes it much better than it could have been.

In this rendition, the prince is put under a spell then turned into a frog. When he does finally does get a kiss from Tiana it does not turn him human again but instead turns Tiana into a frog also. From here the two set off to find a cure to become normal again. There is also no witch in this movie to cast spells. As it is set in New Orleans, the culture of that area is also shown and the villain of the movie is actually voodoo doctor.

Normally Disney would just create a villain with some dark magical power but they have never gone as far as to use voodoo, which is an actual practice today. Along with that, the doctor petitions help (in song of course!)from "his friends on the other side". There are also shadowed ghosts who aid him in his evil devious plot.

Another voodoo doctor plays a big part in this movie but is put as a sort of a fairy Godmother. She is in fact a blind old lady, Mama Odie, who brings some laughter to the screen but still has all of the same "powers" of one who practices voodoo. Little kids might not know what voodoo is so it is probable that the idea may just go straight over their heads and be put as a mysterious magical power.


That is just about all that was wrong with the movie along with the fact of kissing a frog which is just gross. I would consider this a musical and fits well with all of other Disney movies, while still having a catchy style of its own thanks to composer Randy Newman. If you keep your eye out in the film you can also spot a few items from other Disney movies such as the magical flying carpet of "Aladdin".


Although most of the characters in this movie are relatively "unknowns", it does feature a few parts played by famous TV talk show host Oprah Winfrey, the voice actor of Winnie the Pooh and many others Jim Cummings and also the unmistakable voice of John Goodman. It may not be targeted directly towards my demographic but it seemed to do the job of the majority of the rest of the people that were in the theater. Little "princesses" and their mothers all gave the film an applause as the credits rolled. Very seldom do ever hear that sound of approval, and that is what really matters. My little sister was also very pleased and now adds princess "Tiana" to her favorites. She also said that she now wants some Gumbo.....

Everybody's Fine

Everybody's fine.
Really.
But are they happy?

These are some of the main questions that are intertwined throughout this flick starring Robert De Niro, Sam Rockwell, and Drew Barrymore.


In this movie review I will not be able to say too much without ruining it. In my opinion this fact makes a really good movie but it also makes it very hard on me to tell you about it. Most review sites such as Plugged In would tell you what happens and spoil the movie's plot (sometimes with a warning). I am sure that they do this in order to tell you what content is in the movie that you may want to be aware of. I am not going to do this though because I personally do not like it when a review ruins your cinema experience. I will still tell you of suggestive things but not with much detail that it will spoil the fun.

Robert De Niro plays Frank, a lonely father who is also a widow. When he tries to get his kids together(who are adults now), Frank's plans are put to a halt when the children all have various reasons to not being able to visit their father in despair. Since they could not find time to visit his house, he decides to go and visit them. This puts him on a sequence of events that teach him how to be a better father and also shows his understanding of modern life.

I like that this movie had nothing in it that was totally unbelievable. It was not too cheesy of a film and did not add in an action sequence for no reason. It was just a movie that felt like you really were there, as if you could feel the pain that Frank was feeling. That is true acting and gives a good presentation, not some mushy vampire-werewolf story, but like it is really happening in front of you. Although I highly doubt he will, I think De Niro deserves an Academy award for his part in this film.


There is a scene where there is very brief but obvious cussing of various sorts, a prostitute is seen in a short scene, and also a little mention of homosexuality but besides that the movie is clean. If these parts could be edited just a little, I am sure that this movie could earn a PG rating.

This movie may not be the most popular right now but it is certainly not something to overlook. If you don't want to see it now, at least plan on seeing it sometime in the future because it is simply a good movie and I cannot find anything wrong with it besides what I have already said above. If you are a parent I am recommending this to you, it will most likely inspire you. Although it is not a hopeful feel-good movie as the recent "The Blindside", but it is not as much of a depressing movie as "The Pursuit of Happyness" but still good quality and shows modern life on screen in one of the best forms I have seen.

November Poll

The results are in and it turns out that the option of "Other" has won out over the rest of the movies. I am not sure what you would have picked under other but I am guessing that based on the recent box office ratings, it would most likely be "The Blind Side", "Planet 51", "The Fantastic Mr. Fox", "Precious", or maybe a mix of all of them.

Three other movies have also tied for 2rd place. Those movie were "Michael Jackson's This Is It", "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" and also "Sherlock Holmes." Although Sherlock Holmes has not been released yet, I think that the most profitable out of these three will obviously be "New Moon".

I now have another poll set up. This one is now asking what you think the most important attribute of a movie is. I know that I have already made a post about that but I would like to know what everyone else's opinion is on that.