The Frozen Ground (2013)

You know, when I said in my review of "The Raven" that Nicolas Cage and John Cusack should get together in a serial killer movie, I really didn't think they were actually going to do it. Now granted it's not the same as my idea, which was to have it be a story about a horror author doing battle against his dark half that somehow emerged and started killing people using the methods described in his own works (since that would have been a far more interesting plot than "The Raven"), but it's still nice to know that I clearly seem to have some manner of power over space and time. That's good to know.

Anyway. "The Frozen Ground" is another in the recent line of inexcusably straight-to-DVD Nicolas Cage vehicles that try and inform everyone of what myself and other enlightened individuals already know: That Cage is not worthy of the scorn and mockery that is constantly lumped onto him. I can't stand how often I have to say it, but here I go again. The man is a good actor, people. I know it's easy to write him off because he freaks out often and stars in some really, really bad stuff every once in a while (and who doesn't?), but just because a guy goes over the top doesn't make him a bad actor. The fact that he's always believable as that character he is freaking out as while he's freaking out makes him an incredible actor.

Seriously guys. Pacino does the exact same thing and gets a pass but Cage doesn't? Come on.

That's not to say that we shall be witnessing crazy Cage here in "The Frozen Ground." No, this is one of those movies where he keeps it reeled in, since it wouldn't have made that much sense in all honesty for him to do his patented freak outs here. This is a down-to-earth, gritty look at a serial killer which is based on real events, and of the two leads Cage is playing the one who isn't insane. That's somewhat unfortunate, but hey I'm not complaining about watching Cage in any capacity.

Cusack plays Robert Hansen, a serial killer who is believed to have kidnapped, raped and killed dozens of women in Alaska during the late 70's and early 80's. He flies under everyone's radar and avoids suspicion until a prostitute named Cindy Paulson (Vanessa Hudgens) escapes his clutches and reports him to police. While police initially clear Hansen because of his popularity in the town, trooper Jack Holcombe (Nicolas Cage) is one of the few who believes Cindy, and becomes convinced that Hansen is his man after an FBI profiler essentially describes him to a T in his report of the type of person they should be looking for.

Oh snap! It's the long lost MacKenzie brother!

Working with other policemen and Cindy and diving into the shady underbelly of the seedier side of Alaska, Holcombe does his best to find enough evidence to get a warrant and arrest Hansen and nail him for the murders. But he's got to do it quickly, because as Holcombe believes and we as the audience know for a fact, Hansen will kill again very soon.

This isn't the most original film you'll ever see, true, but as far as true life crime thrillers go it's not that bad. Cage turns in an oddly subdued performance which would normally be disappointing, but honestly it wouldn't seem right to have the expected Cage freak outs during this. I mean, if I want Nick Cage as a cop flipping out I'll just watch "Bad Lieutenant." It's not one of his most memorable roles lately, but it's probably one of his more solid ones.

Trying to pull off those cool shades isn't helped by the flannel and mom-jeans. You need a trench coat and slow motion doves for that.

I'd actually rather have seen Cage as Hansen instead of Cusack. Now it's not that Cusack did a bad job, in fact he's kind of terrifying in this movie, but I think Cage could have really brought something special to the role. Then again, if you look at Robert Hansen's actual mugshot, he looks EXACTLY like Guy Pearce, so maybe they could have cast him instead. I don't know.

The real take away from this is Vanessa Hudgens. As much of a Cage fan as I am I have to admit she stole the show here. This is a scary good performance from her, and it's absolutely heartbreaking to watch the poor girl go through what she goes through as she puts on a tough face as she crumbles inside. It's a fantastic role for her, and should really cement her as someone to pay attention to.

You know, I don't think everyone from "High School Musical" could pull off a scene where they're a stripper ODing from cocaine they just snorted off the back of a toilet while being stalked by a serial killer. (This movie's kind of awesome, actually.)

So I'm glad I saw "The Frozen Ground." It's a well made, moody, kind of sleazy period piece that manages to be both fascinating in terms of real events and disturbing in terms of tone and subject matter. It does what it does well, even if Cage isn't unleashed. Ah well. It's still nice seeing him. Although I'm still not sure why Radha Mitchell was in this as his wife. She's got like five lines and is essentially a pointless character. Between this and doing the same thing in "Olympus Has Fallen," is this just a role that she does now? Has Radha Mitchell been reduced to being a side character or appearing for 30 seconds in a mirror? What's going on here?

Check out the trailer for "The Frozen Ground."

THE BOTTOM LINE - It's not incredibly memorable, but "The Frozen Ground" is worth a look, especially if you're into true crime or just a police thriller. Good performances all around, especially by Hudgens, makes it worth the time. This is particularly true when you factor in that the best we usually get with these kinds of stories is CSI. It's nice to see it done well for a change.

Stolen (2012)

Damn it, Nicolas Cage! Why are you playing me like this, bro? You're my homeslice. My Ace in The Hole. My D-O-G-E. I go to you to be entertained by your madcap antics! I'm not really watching you so you can go all subdued and stuff. I don't go to you to see you do your best Liam Neeson in "Taken" impression. Frankly you're not tough enough for that. But between this and "Seeking Justice," it seems that Nicolas Cage wants to tone it down some. That is, if he currently has any say in what movies he's in, which he might actually not.

Oh Nicolas. Nicolas, Nicolas, Nicolas. Don't do that. Don't let them do that to you. You're the best there is at what you do, but what you do ain't subtle. You are up there with Christopher Walken in terms of actors who are brutally, unapologetically unique and frightfully entertaining because of your uniqueness. But as good of an actor as you are, most of the material you're being given is not worth that serious dramatic talent. You want to be serious? Save that for Werner Hertzog. Save that for a great movie like "Bad Lieutenant." Don't save it for "Stolen." It's just not worth it.

See, "Stolen" isn't bad. In fact I'd dare say that it's pretty decent as far as your standard "You have X amount of time to get Y amount of money or your kid dies" movie goes. But that's the thing. How many of those movies are out there? The answer is "A metric crap-load." This is not a movie that needed to be made. This is not a movie that needed to be written. It's so stock, it's so cliche, and it's so utterly generic that I find it hard to imagine why anybody thought that it was a story that needed to be told, unless there were something really unique about it.

"Listen, I don't know who you are, but please just tell me why I'm yelling into a phone in every movie I'm in!"

Something like Nicolas Cage, perhaps? If the Cagester had been fully unleashed in "Stolen," playing up the zany, wild eyed madness to the hilt, then we would have at least gotten an entertaining performance out of it. But no, he's not unleashed. He's playing it pretty down-to-Earth, which is just sad. It seems as if the film is scared of having any kind of fun goofiness in Nicolas Cage's performance. No, evidently serious movie is serious.

Well, except for the scraggly, one-legged, psychopathic, murderous, gleefully evil villain played by Josh Lucas. Apparently it's okay for Josh Lucas to act like Nicolas Cage would act were he playing a crazy villain, but it's not okay for Nicolas Cage to act the way Nicolas Cage would normally act.

WHY IN THE BLUE HELL WASN'T NICOLAS CAGE THE BAD GUY?!

Honestly, that's the biggest fault with "Stolen." It was cast all wrong. Nicolas Cage should have been allowed to do what Nicolas Cage is wont to do. Because seeing Josh Lucas, an actor who isn't as convincing as an-over-the-top character, play a villain that is almost literally screaming for a Cage/Walken/Travolta/McDowell style performance isn't as fun as it should be.

"Stolen" has Nicolas Cage playing the "World's Greatest Thief," who we find doing the prerequisite "one last job" at beginning of the film. When things go bad and he's left holding both the literal and proverbial bag he winds up doing 8 years in prison. After he is released, his daughter is kidnapped by his former partner (Josh Lucas) in an effort to get the 10 million dollars from the heist that Cage said was destroyed, but he is sure that Cage had hid before getting nabbed.

That one last "one last job" thing rears its head again, as there are few ways of making 10 million dollars in 12 hours besides robbing a bank or something. And I must admit, as sketchy as the methodology was in how Cage gets his hands on the loot, especially in terms of bank security, I must admit that the idea is pretty clever, and was something I hadn't seen before. Take that for what it's worth, but how many movies have you seen that feature bars of gold being smuggled out of a bank via melting? It was pretty cool.

True story: This is the second film Josh Lucas has starred in called "Stolen." I'm not even joking. #needbettermovietitles

So do I regret seeing "Stolen?" Hell no. I got my Nicolas Cage fix. I'm good. Do I wish the roles had been reversed? Hell yes. He needs to play more bad guys, anyway. I swear if he actually is cast in "The Expendables 3," he better be playing the villain. He's got a good head start since Simon West directed both this and "Expendables 2." And I'm serious. I will be so upset if he's not the baddy in "The Expendables 3." Did you even see "Face/Off?" Remember him in the beginning, before Travolta was playing Caster Troy? That kind of corny should be packed and sold in individual bottles to get you through those tough days. It's delicious and nutritious!

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Stolen" wasn't a great movie, but it wasn't that bad, either. It's got an old school vibe to it, which is enhanced by the kickin' jazzy "Cowboy Beebop" style soundtrack. And while I'd rather see Cage be unrestrained, Josh Lucas did make for a passable villain. Although the movie does get docked a few points for not knowing the proper definition of "moose knuckle."

Seeking Justice (2011)

Nicolas Cage time!!! Wooo!!! Once again we join our intrepid over-actor as he has another fun filled, spastic journey which will fill our hearts with joy and glee. So what is on the menu this time, Mr. Cage? A cheesy B-horror flick? An over the top gore fest? Something were you get to play a crazy person?

"Seeking Justice": noun - A 2011 film staring Nicolas Cage, who plays a teacher whose wife is savagely beaten and raped. He makes a deal with a mysterious man who will kill the man responsible, in exchange for a favor to be called in at a future time.

Oh. Well, that doesn't sound whimsical at all. That sounds...grim.
 
In all honesty, I really dug this plot. I like the thought of a exploring what a person will do in their deepest, darkest moments of despair, and I also like the exploration of the grey areas that "justice" can overlap at times. I think if you asked the vast majority of people, husbands or wives or whatever, who were in the hospital a mere hour after their spouse had been beaten and raped whether or not they wanted whoever was responsible to die, a good amount of people would say "Hell yes." Ask them again in a few days or weeks and you might get a different answer, but if you ask them right after they came out of the IC unit, I don't think most of them would be feeling too much compassion for those responsible.

Of course, us being the audience, we know that it's not the best idea to get involved with people advertising free murder (in exchange for...oh I don't know...a "little favor" in the future). We've all seen these movies. But it does make sense in context. I can't really blame the character for doing something stupid like that, or getting involved with really shady people. I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same thing in that situation, honestly. And despite what you're saying, I'll bet you'd think seriously about it too. Not saying it's smart, but there you go. Not everyone thinks clearly during their moments of despair.

"Hello? Listen, my dog just died, can it wait? What? I won a cruise? Well, I suppose I have time to answer a few questions for a cruise..."

So obviously, the favor gets called in, it escalates into something more than Nicolas Cage bargained for, and he tries to get out of it. Guy Pearce plays the mysterious "Simon," the man behind everything, and in a nice change of pace does a job that isn't straight "C average." I mentioned in my "Lockout" review that Guy Pearce is the definition of an "average" actor for me, and I'm seldom impressed with him but in "Seeking Justice" he was pretty good. He's no Nicolas Cage (shut up, he's a good actor) but he does a passable evil jackass.

Here's Guy going undercover as Timothy Olyphant.

The rest of the story really isn't anything overly special. In fact the plot is fairly predictable most of the way through. However that isn't to say that it's bad. "Seeking Justice" is well directed, well acted, and well paced. Despite the fact that it isn't going to blow your mind or reinvent the genre for you, that doesn't stop it from being a passably fun use of an hour and a half of your time.

I think the weakest link is honestly the ending. This isn't because it's necessarily bad, but because it's probably the most stock section of the film. While some sequences of "Seeking Justice" did contain some elements of "twists," with varying degrees of success, the ending is pretty much going down exactly how you figure it's going down. You'll be able to guess how it's all wrapping up and probably be pretty spot on about 20 minutes before the end credits roll is what I'm saying.

"Remember, feet shoulder width apart. Bend slightly forward. Relax. Look down the sights, make sure to line the barrel straight up with the foreshadowing and squeeze the trigger. Very good."

Speaking of "twists," that's another thing that "Seeking Justice" did pretty well...up to a point. The "twists" pretty much boil down to the question "Who is involved in this shady organization that kills bad people?" The answer winds up being "Nearly everyone." Well, that's not true, there are plenty of characters who aren't involved, but there winds up being just a few too many characters who are. Had it been just one other character who winds up in it, that would be one thing, but the movie gets a little slap happy with the idea.

So what about my Nicolas Cage fix? Did I get to see one of my favorite actors going insane? Unfortunately for me, but most likely fortunately for everyone else, not really. Cage plays it pretty straight this time out. There's no high pitched wailing "He's scratching at the DOOOOOOR!!!" or punching ladies while wearing a bear costume in this. Although that is to the film's detriment. If anything I think Cage plays it a little too dialed back. Perhaps he was trying something new. However, as much as I prefer my Cage's to be crazy, this might help sway people into seeing him for the decent actor he is.

For example, the scene where he visits his wife, played by January Jones, at the hospital was kind of weird for me, but at the same time was a really nice moment of acting from Cage. I was expecting a full blown meltdown, but instead, as he's walking down the hallway into the room, he barely has any expression at all. As he's standing next to her, he just kind of looks borderline sad. I was actually getting a tad annoyed and thought "How could they get such a boring performance from him?" But then everyone leaves him alone in the room with his comatose wife, and he starts cracking a bit.

What I liked about it was that it was less of an explosion and more of a barely controlled implosion. I saw a guy who was so overwhelmed that he really didn't know what to do. I guess it makes more sense, because people don't always throw an Al Pacino-esque tirade whenever they're upset. Sometimes you just don't know what to do with yourself, and it's all you can do to just stand there and try to keep your brain from falling out of your head. It's a nice bit of acting from a guy who doesn't get nearly enough credit. Remember, he is a "Best Actor" Oscar winner.

So overall, I'd liked this flick. It was pretty good. It's also nice to see Xander Berkeley in something again. I really don't know why that guy isn't better known. He's a pretty prestigious supporting actor, and not only in little movies, either. Remember "Air Force One?" He was the turncoat Secret Service agent who shoots William H. Macy. He was John Conner's step-dad in "Terminator 2." Has was on "24" back in the first couple seasons when it was good. It was also nice to see Harold Perrineau in something were he wasn't screaming "WAAAAAALT!!!" over and over again. Seriously, screw "Lost" and Michael. And Walt. And Jack. And Locke. And Kate. Oh, especially Kate! That stupid, selfish piece of crap character needed to be thrown off the first sizable cliff they came to. And you know what? Screw Sawyer, too. I liked him until he kept going after Kate. What the crap does he see in her? Is it because she's hot? Because she's a criminal? Because she's a worse sociopath than he is? Why?! OH! And don't get me even STARTED on what they should do to Ben Linus!

What was I talking about again?

Sorry. "Lost" takes me there.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Seeking Justice" is a passable revenge drama with a little bit of action thrown in. It's not the over the top Nicolas Cage that I love, but as always, he's pretty entertaining. It won't blow your mind, but I've seen waaaaaay worse than "Seeking Justice." Recommended.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012)

Oh Nicolas Cage. You put me in such a good mood. Every time I see a movie with your ridiculous toupee of the moment, a little flutter in my soul lifts up to spread a smile on my face. With only a moment's hesitation, I reach out to pick up the case, imagining with glee the wonders that await me in this next magical adventure with the world's foremost authority on "uber-acting." The spasms of his face, the high-pitched, off-kilter delivery of his lines, the sudden explosions of yelling incoherently, his oddly maniac giggle...entertainment awaits us.

I was one of the few people who didn't hate the first "Ghost Rider." It wasn't a fantastic film, but I found it reasonably entertaining. And despite whether or not Nicolas Cage was necessarily right for the role of Johnny Blaze, I found his performance genuine and, let's face it, even-keeled as far as his performances usually get. For anyone rolling their eyes at that statement, just think back to "Face/Off."

Yeah. Now remember that in "Ghost Rider," Nicolas Cage is playing a man whose skull is on fire half the movie. And Caster Troy was the more over-the-top performance. Don't tell me the man only has one setting! He's got at least 4!

He's either acting or attempting to implode a man's skull using only the power of his mind.

For that reason, I was actually looking forward to "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance." In particular I dug the artistic design and vision they were going with, which seemed more realistic and less cartoony than the first one. What I was unaware of was the fact that this film was directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, the same team who did "Crank." And while that may have been an odd choice, had I known that before, I would have made more effort to see it in theaters, which I didn't get an opportunity to do.

Man, is it obvious that this was by Neveldine/Taylor. "Ghost Rider: SoV" contains much of the same kind of frenetic, super charged action that could be found in "Crank," although to a much less, PG-13 level extent. And while a hard-R version of this movie would have been awesome, let's face it, Marvel don't roll that way what with tickets sales and all, even though I'm pretty sure the hit to their pockets would be minimal. It's not like anyone saw this movie to begin with.

Also very present is the same style of fourth-wall obliterating humor that was so prevalent in the "Crank" series. There are several "wink at the camera" moments that, to be honest, are pretty jarring. For example, for those who saw the trailer, the much-maligned exchange of dialogue: "What if you have to pee when you're on fire?" followed by Nicolas Cage's response of "It's awesome. It's like a flamethrower" is actually in the film, complete with a cutaway to the Rider standing in some kind of void where he is floating in blackness, back to the audience as a jet of flame shoots from his groin. He then turns his head and nods in an "Oh yeah" moment. Then *BANG* back to the movie. They also do the exact same extreme close ups as the main character flies down the road on a motorcycle in a state of near maniac rage/rapture that "Crank" did. I guess that will be in every Neveldine/Taylor movie.

 Seth McFarlane wishes he could write a cutaway this awesome.

What it all boils down to really is a matter of personal taste of whether or not it will work for you. Me personally? It didn't really bother me. It seemed to fit the tone of the film, which was essentially a big(ger) budget B-movie. And that's fine. I dig that stuff, especially when Mr. Cage is involved. But I can imagine that if you'd never seen "Crank," or weren't familiar with the kind of movie Neveldine/Taylor make, these kind of scenes might seem horribly distracting. Just know that "Crank" got way, WAY sillier than this one.

The story concerns Johnny Blaze hiding in Europe because he doesn't want to be working as the Devil's errand boy. Now, right from the beginning I found it difficult to discern whether or not this movie was a sequel or a retcon. It seems that events from the first film still...could have happened? They aren't ever mentioned, but I suppose they are possible. The real confusing part is right in the introductory storybook-style flashback of how Johnny Blaze made his deal with the Devil. The story is still the same, but the scene where he signs the contract is presented in a totally different way, with no real reason I can see to change it. That along with no mention of anything from the first film makes me think that "Ghost Rider: SoV" is meant to be its own thing, and the first one might as well have never happened.

 This will make people who hated the first "Ghost Rider" happy, but the real question is "Does the second movie do a better job?" I would have to say "yes" for two reasons. The first concerns art design, and the second concerns how Nicolas Cage portrayed the Rider.

The first "Ghost Rider" had a Rider whose skull was a clean white, with a shiny leather jacket and elaborately boned-themed bike. It worked okay, but when Neveldine/Taylor's version of the Rider is on screen, it's clear that there is a much better way to portray Hell's Collection Boy.

Like this.

In "Ghost Rider: SoV," the Rider's skull is charred black, which gives it an air of desiccation and wear. His bike is a cobbled together husk of blackened pipes and gears, much more utilitarian than flashy, and it looks like it's driven a million miles instead of right off the showroom floor. And finally, in a touch I thought was borderline brilliant, when the Rider is out, and flames are licking all around him, his jacket is in a constant state of melting. During any of the long, slow closeups of the Rider, bubbles can be seen slowly rising to the surface of the leather, popping and running down as they melt. It make total sense, makes him look scary, and it's a really cool effect I dug the hell out of. Between the two movies, I'll take the grungy, scary looking one any day.

Secondly, Nicolas Cage plays Johnny Blaze in a much different way than he did before. In this film he's playing it really really tortured. He's in a constant struggle to keep the Rider inside him because he can't stop it from coming out, especially when evil is near. The problem is that he has no control when he becomes the Rider, and basically everyone around him is going to die, something he'd like to avoid. So it makes total sense why a big part of the movie is Johnny Blaze trying to find a way to exorcize himself and get rid of the curse.

And of course this is all played in a deliciously hammy way by one of my favorite hams. Watching Nicolas Cage deliver in a sweaty, face-twitching, barrage of rising falsetto shrieks such awesomely corny lines as "He's scratching at the door! He's scratching at THE DOOOOR-AH!!!!" is exactly why I watch these movies. Magnifique.

I had the same reaction when they cancelled "Arrested Development."

You know, between this, "Drive Angry" and "Season of The Witch," two movies which I really liked a lot, Cage seems to be drawn to this kind of enjoyable schlock. I say more power to him if the entertainment factor keeps up. Now, I would say "Ghost Rider: SoV" is the weakest of those three films, but it's hardly the worst of his filmography.

THE BOTTOM LINE - I can't say with a straight face that "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" was a good movie. It was a cheesy, dark, zany, over-the-top Nicolas Cage ham-fest with motorcycles, lots of nicely shot action and a Christopher Lambert cameo. If that sounds like a good time to you, bon anniversaire. Cautiously recommended.

Top 10 of 2011

2011 was an admittedly pretty bad year for movies. This was actually a tough list to make, and not for the reasons that usually come up. Usually I'm forced into making hard cuts and quantifying why one of my favorite movies deserves to be on the list and another doesn't. This time I had to struggle to fill up all 10 slots. That's not to say that the movies that made this list are bad! I really liked all of these movies, but it was difficult filtering them through all the crap that 2011 piled upon us.

So without further ado, let's take a look at these diamonds in the rough that make up my personal Top 10 of 2011!





10. Insidious

"Insidious" may just be one of the only PG-13 horror movies that's worth a damn. What's unique about the film is that each act is pretty much a different horror genre. The first act is a classic haunted house movie, the second act turns into a possession movie, and the third act gets a little trippy and is somewhat its own niche with what can only be described as an "astral projection" movie, although it does remind me heavily of "The Others."

Most people who saw it commented on how scary it was, and yeah, there's something to that. It was pretty darn scary, although it is another one of those films that is fueled almost entirely on the "jump scare" tactic, which I hate. I feel they are cheap and are more startling than scary. "Insidious" gets a pass from me in this case, however, because the movie never fakes you out. Every time there's a jump scare, it's because something scary is jumping out at you. There's no kitten jumping out of a closet making a earth-shattering kaboom here. Every scare is legitimately earned, despite the fact that you may be able to see (some of) them coming.

"Insidious" isn't anything groundbreaking in terms of horror films, aside from being PG-13 and being good, but it's well made enough to stand toe to toe with pretty much any horror film to come out in the last 10 years.

9. Drive Angry

I love me some Nicolas Cage, and I apologize for nothing. I know that the hip thing to do is to hate the guy's guts but I honestly don't see how someone couldn't be entertained as hell watching him. Say what you want but the man puts more passion into every performance than nearly anyone else in Hollywood, and you can tell he's just having a blast doing it. And for me, that fun transfers over to my watching of the movie.

"Drive Angry" was exactly what I wanted to see: Nicolas Cage being a bad-ass. This is an exploitation flick, pure and simple. It's the same kind of drive-in B-movie schlock that Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez made with their "Grindhouse" double feature. "Drive Angry" is more "Planet Terror" than "Death Proof," though, for anyone worried about that. While it may not have the same level of gore that "Planet Terror" or even "Machete" had, it's still a fun, bloody romp that doesn't apologize for anything, and just takes the insanity and rolls with it.

If you're ready for this film, and you have to be ready for crazy, it's a hell of a ride. Along with Nicolas Cage being awesome and William Fichtner doing a very cool and unique spin on the Grim Reaper, "Drive Angry" was one of the most fun movies I saw in 2011, and left me with a big smile on my face.

8. Season of The Witch

Oh snap! A Nicolas Cage double header! I was waiting for "Season of The Witch" for a long time, since it got its release date pushed back, and then was only showing for like, a weekend. And of course it was in and out of theaters before I even knew it was released. But when I finally got to see it, I found a really fun action flick with two of my favorite actors, Nicolas Cage and Ron Perlman.Sounds like a good time to me.

Whereas "Drive Angry" was an exploitation flick, "Season of The Witch" is a B-horror movie flick. It's straight out of something that Hammer Films would make. Hell, it even has Christopher Lee in it! That's some serious B-movie royalty right there. I always love films with a great atmosphere and this movie nailed it. From the first scene to the last, it felt like a graphic novel with its very creepy and atmospheric sets. This is a movie you can just smell because it's so vivid in its scenery and style.

For my money, few things are as fun as a movie like this. And to the movie's credit, I didn't call the ending. It did not go where I thought it was going to go, and in fact took the gutsier of the paths it could have gone down. That, too, was a pleasant surprise because normally I can spot endings coming a mile away.

7. Moneyball
Out of all the movies on this list, this is the only one that's award bait. I usually don't like movies that are made to win Oscars but this one was actually pretty good. It embodied the same story of one man rising up against impossible odds to prove to himself and the world that he's worth something that classics like "Rocky" and "Rudy" have, and that's kind of unavoidable in a sports film, but it still strikes home on an emotional level that was very effective. I mean, yeah, that story has been done to death, but there must be something to it, right? 

Not too much more to say about that one. Besides, I already wrote one review about it. I don't need to do another mini-one. It's just a solid flick.

6. Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

Sometimes a movie makes the list purely on the merits of how fun it is. I think the Nicolas Cage double-header proves that. "Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol" was one of the most fun times I had in a theater in a long time, and it's nice to be able to recapture the spirit of the first movie again. This is exactly what the series needed to bring it out of its rut.

I would love to see another "Mission: Impossible." Now we only have to wonder if they're going to start numbering them again. I swear, the titling of sequels needs to be left to people who know what they are doing. In other words, somebody other than Hollywood. Hell, hire me. I can't promise you fancy titles, but there won't be any doubt as to the order in which the sequels go!

5. Everything Must Go

I do not like Will Ferrell the Comedian very much, but I love Will Ferrell the Actor. People look at me cross-eyed when I say this but he is an amazing actor. Just watch "Stranger Than Fiction." Go ahead, I'll wait...

Amazing, right?! That's what I'm saying. "Everything Must Go" reminded me of "Stranger Than Fiction" a bit, despite the fact that it's not really like it very much, but it also felt like "Up In The Air" and "The Beaver," two other films that were also quite good. The thing about "Everything Must Go" is that it's not a comedy at all. If you go in expecting the funny-ha-ha, you'll be bored stiff. If you go in expecting a drama, well, it might choke you up a bit.

Will Ferrell went on record saying that he took this role about an alcoholic selling everything he owns after having the worst day of his life, because he doesn't get offered stuff like that. When a serious role like that came along, he jumped on it. I have more respect for Will Ferrell now for doing that, and I hope he keeps going. In fact, I think he's notably forgotten in this year's Oscar race for this film, because seriously...Best Actor. At least a nomination. Anything to encourage him to keep doing things like this!

4. X-Men: First Class

 Let's be honest with ourselves. The "X-Men" movies have never been very good. Yes, they have their entertaining moments and a fantastic cast, but they've never been objectively good. They're a bit overblown, characters have little identity past their mutant powers, and the stories don't make a lot of sense.

And now we have "X-Men: First Class," and it is the first of the series to not only be a really good comic book movie, but a good movie, period. The characters are (mostly) more fleshed out, which makes sense because there are far fewer of them this time, the story is riveting, and the struggle between Erik and Charles, two friends fated to be driven apart by immovable ideologies, practically sizzles there is so much chemistry going on between the two leads. You know that these two are destined to end up mortal enemies, but even so, the progression building up to that split is so well handled that when it happens, it's still a shot to the gut, and tragic as well as shocking.

Michael Fassbender is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors, and he and James McAvoy absolutely tore it up in "X-Men: First Class." I don't know if another sequel would work, but it's exciting to think of those two in another "X-Men" film.



And now we come to the Top 3! I found it interesting that the criteria for the Top 3 wound up being determined by overall sense of feeling throughout the film. Of all the movies to come out in 2011, these 3 films were the most effective at eliciting an emotional reaction from me, which is something I hold in the utmost importance. Those feelings wound up being disgusted, pumped up, and happy. In that order, here's the best 3 movies I saw last year:


3. Red State

If Kevin Smith keeps making movies, he needs to do more horror. The man has a knack for it, and his first outing into horror with "Red State" is one of the most realistically scary movies I've seen in a long time. It's not a supernatural kind of scary, it's a real kind of scary because this kind of stuff is totally feasible. And it's so easy to see people doing these horrific things in the name of their own obscene, hateful version of religion.

It's not so thinly veiled that the villainous church in "Red State" is supposed to be the Westbro Baptist Church. You know, the "God Hates Fags" idiots. It's so easy to see people following the preacher in this movie, played with Oscar-caliber gusto and passion by Michael Parks (another actor unforgivably snubbed in this award season), because they're already following people spewing this same kind of hate speech that is in the movie. This is scary stuff. And you have to wonder if killings like this are already happening and we just haven't found out about it yet. I hate to say that I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.

"Red State" may not be for everyone, and it will most likely cause a great deal of discomfort among its viewers, and that's the point. It's an ugly thing that this movie is looking at, and it's looking at it with some pretty high-intensity beams. If you're not squirming in your seat or slightly sick to your stomach during "Red State," you don't have a soul. If anything else, this is a movie that will get people talking afterwards. And potentially really mad.


2. Attack The Block

 If an alien invasion happened, would you fight back? Well, I feel sorry for any nasty alien who lands in the ghetto of London looking to cause trouble because they'll be in for a hell of a fight. "Attack The Block" is so much fun that it kind of defies explanation. You just have to experience it for yourselves. It's one of those films that you just kick back and enjoy. If movies were people, "Attack The Block" would be the guy who bought everyone in the bar a round the minute he walked in the door. You just know it's going to be a good time when he's around.

"Attack The Block" is the first movie from Joe Cornish, who has worked with and is friends with Edger Wright, and it shows. It is reminiscent of "Shaun of The Dead" and "Hot Fuzz," but it has it's own identity, despite Wright's obvious influences. I think it's more of a student learning from a master craftsman. Of course at first the work is going to emulate the teachings, but soon he'll carve out his own identity, and I'll be first in line to buy a ticket.

There wasn't another action film in 2011 that I had this much fun with. From beginning to end, this movie about a group of punks in the ghetto fighting back against aliens put a big smile on my face, and I needed someone to high-five.

AND THE BEST MOVIE I SAW IN 2011 WAS...














1. The Muppets

 I think the word I'm looking for is "magic." There's just something magical about the Muppets. I haven't met a single person who didn't like them. The absolutely brilliant marketing campaign for this movie helped psych me up for it more than almost any other movie that year, and when I finally got to see it with some of my best friends, it wound up being the best experience I had in the theater that year.

Watching this movie was like having an hour and a half long childhood flashback. It was an amazing experience that left me feeling good all over, and anybody who has ever liked the Muppets will probably feel the same. Was it because there was nostalgia involved that I liked it? I don't think so, although it does help. Nostalgia can't hold something up on its own, after all. Fortunately "The Muppets" is a very well made, very very funny film that also tugs on the heartstrings. Pretty much like every Muppet movie, for the most part. And that's a good thing.

If I had to complain about something it would be that I felt there was probably a couple too many "why bother" moments where a character (usually Kermit) is ready to throw in the towel, but is brought back around by his friends. It's good stuff, but it happens like 5 times, and it starts getting old. But then Jack Black and Gonzo are doing something ridiculous and you're busting a gut laughing, and the other thing is forgotten about.

There are so many wonderful moments in "The Muppets," from Gonzo blowing up his factory, to Chris Cooper rapping about how evil he is, to the Swedish Chef's first subtitled appearance, to "Travel by Map," to Neil Patrick Harris' cameo wondering why he isn't in the movie, to the wonderfully catchy musical numbers including the immortal "Ma-Na-Ma-Na" (you KNEW it was coming), to every time another one of your old favorites appears on the screen that it seems like every 5 minutes you've stumbled across your new favorite part of the movie. And I guarantee that "The Muppets" will slap a huge smile across the most sour of faces.

After all...life is a filet of fish. Yes, it is.