WALL-E (2008)

Good-looking but obvious "stop messing up the planet -- we'll miss it when it's gone" message movie with robots getting all number five is alive with each other. I mean, I can't think of a single logical design explanation for an EVE (Extraterrestrial Vegetation Evaluator) unit having the ability to put on angry eyes like this:

And why does "she" shoot at every noise? She's been sent to find vegetation (i.e. life), so what's with the zap-a-big-ol-blasty-ray-at-the-slightest-rustle programming??

OK, I'll stop posing questions that no one wants to answer and just say that I enjoyed myself quite a bit more once we got to the doughy humans, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't meant to be the touching part of the story.

Not a bad film by any means, but not the masterpiece of storytelling I was expecting either.

B-

Henry Poole Is Here (2008)

A nondescript dude gets diagnosed with some vague disease and decides to move back to the neighborhood of his youth to die in peace, but there's no peace to be had because Stucco Jesus has taken up residence on the exterior of his house.

It's a really weird movie with warring vibes. There are capital-c Characters for neighbors, an emotionally damaged little girl next-door, and Luke Wilson playing Henry as a cross between Tom Hanks' loser/hero in Joe vs. the Volcano and Nicolas Cage's self-destructive drunk in Leaving Las Vegas -- a very strange combo.

It's not altogether a miss, but darn near enough.

C-

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008)

I liked the first one well enough and this was, basically, more of the same. Well, maybe a little too much more of the same. Although there was some story, the movie seemed to be mostly about special effects. And I admit that everything looked pretty cool, but by two-thirds of the way through the movie, I'd had my fill.

Definitely better than comparable effects-fests (e.g. The Mummy franchise), but still disappointing.

C+

Ghost Town (2008)

I watched this twice in two days -- it's charming as can be.

I'm actually confused as to why this failed to find an audience. Could it be that "dead people have unfinished business" is too familiar a plot device? Did the argument "but we can watch Ghost Whisperer for free" pop up in movie-going debates a few too many times for this to catch on? Whatever the reason, it's a shame that this touching and truly funny film hasn't been seen by more people. Gervais is understated as a loner who's suddenly got way too much company and Leoni is as lovely as always -- I doubt there's a heterosexual guy who wouldn't want her by his side.

Sits up there with Notting Hill as one of my favorite romantic comedies of the modern era.

A

Baghead (2008)

Low-low-low budget movie centering around a group of four non-starters in the entertainment industry spending a weekend at a cabin in the woods with the plan of using their time to write a movie script in which they can star.

Things aren't going so well: there's more curiously boring flirting and jealousy going on than writing. But then "baghead" shows up (yeah, it's just what you're thinking, somebody with a paper bag on their head) and things get weird. Then the group get scared...but I never did.

This movie is nothing more than an idea for a movie tanked by the obvious lack of 1) a full shooting script and 2) improv experience . Seemed like they must've scribbled onto some pages things like "then we joke for five minutes" but no one was very good at it, with the women particularly annoying. Meanders a lot for a less-than 90-minute film.

D

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

Lots happens (as does in any life) and it certainly isn't boring, but it wasn't really fascinating either. It was pretty much an ordinary life -- just backward.

The best sequences were the one Magnolia-like "how Daisy got hurt" scene and then the extended portion in which the two principals were able to meet in the middle for long enough to be truly together and in love. It was during that last section that the movie finally got to me...shame it was three-quarters of the way in.

B-

The Reader (2008)

I'm going to spoil the "secret" so don't read this if you haven't seen it...also, don't read it if you like the movie.

Simply put: this movie's message is ridiculous and every single bit of the story felt as though it missed the mark. I admire the acting, but what's the point when it's in service of such a cruddy story?

I never felt involved with the characters -- never felt even on the brink of any emotion toward them. It wasn't out of distaste/outrage over the the affair, either. That was a rather simple formula after all: attractive middle-aged loner + good-looking but inexperienced teen + opportunity = uh-oh. I didn't hate the first half (the "read-to-me then we'll screw" affair half) of the film, but I kept thinking of it as the set-up, that the real stuff would come later. The filmmakers obviously thought that was the case as well: here's the titillation & now here's the MESSAGE: Ta-Da!!

We jump into the future where the kid is now in law-school and the lover is now on trial for Nazi war crimes. Oh! I get it! She was bossy because she'd been a guard! She was sad because she was ashamed of what she did! And, oh my gosh, she made the prison camp kids read to her just like she made her boy-toy read to her...which means, wait for it....she can't read! Ohmygosh, it's all coming together!

Except it doesn't. Who in their right mind would choose to take sole blame for a tragic decision rather than admit that, due to illiteracy, she couldn't have penned the cover-up? And what about the kid? Why, having sussed out the big secret, does he keep silent? If he thinks she deserves the sentence, doesn't it follow that the other guards involved (the ones who can read) are deserving as well? Or is this simply a personal vendetta: I know she's not the only guilty one, but she hurt me!! This'll teach her!! And why does the final, adult, version of the boy behave so standoffishly with Hanna in prison when he'd been responsible for giving her hope in the first place?

It's all just set-up with no believable payoff. I'd have even settled for an unbelievable but satisfying wrap-up, but instead we get a weak non-resolution that just made me think "so what?"

C-

American Teen (2008)

Went quickly, but it's rather difficult to be convinced of the authenticity of what I saw since I know the kids had cameras on them the whole time.

I mean, did Jake's (the quiet loner) girlfriend really think she would get away with denying her cheating when a camera crew followed her to the swimming pool tryst? Would spoiled princess whatshername have dared to vandalize someone's home with spray paint if she didn't imagine it made her story arc more interesting? I couldn't trust what I was seeing and, even if I believed it all, only about half of it was worthwhile as a picture of how teens interact with each other.

While I was watching a jock's fledgling romance with the quirky drama girl be crushed by his friends, I couldn't keep myself from humming "Stick to the Status Quo" from High School Musical. Who knew Disney was aiming for authenticity?

C+

Man on Wire (2008)

I don't really "get" people like Philippe Petit, star of this documentary. He's excitable and upbeat and I'd probably want to slap him if I spent more than 10 minutes or so in the same room with him. I have the feeling that people like Petit look at people like me as "life wasters" -- as though if we're not constantly searching for the next bit of derring-do that may end our lives we may as well not have one at all.

My dislike for Petit and his Roberto Benigni-level bounciness at awards shows aside, this film is really something. The challenge -- walking a tightrope between the newly-erected World Trade Center towers -- took years of planning, persuasion, and practice. Then they needed tons of luck and help. Petit's enthusiasm is infectious and I can understand how he could cast a spell that would make so many willing to risk arrest in order to be a part of the plan. The story is well-told and truly exciting. I was actually moved by the end.

Also, it should be said, that the reenactments were so amazingly done that I assumed them to be actual footage of Petit practicing in the '70s -- thinking "good thing they owned a camera and thought to shoot this stuff!"

A-

Tell No One (2008)

A tremendous example of taut, yet believable, storytelling. I was tense and confused (without feeling manipulated) up until the very end...well, until almost the very end.

Even the end wasn't bad -- I'm just not a fan of the fact that the "here's what happened" was, basically, a monologue. I'd have much preferred flashblacks to at least accompany the explanation to spice things up and involve us a bit more in what we were hearing. It felt a little like having a donut for dessert after an exotic, meticulously prepared meal. Tasty, but, by that time, I had been conditioned to expect the final act to be as amazing as the rest of it.

Our group contained a grandmother, a teen, and two 40ish moms. All of us praised it highly.

A-

Hamlet 2 (2008)

Looked, from the trailers, as though it might be a giggly, albeit blasphemous, silly time. Instead, it's empty and unfunny with amateurish acting. The high school drama students seemed to have about as much talent as a high school drama department and even Elisabeth Shue seemed uncomfortable in her minimal part as herself.

It kind of comes alive when the play is finally staged, but everything to that point feels like a waste of time.

C-