"Unicorn City"

This is a tricky one to gauge. A portion of this film was shot right up the street (at one point a stone's throw from my bedroom window) from where I was living at the time; I saw the giant green screen and troll costume and heard the singing of the Bardladin. I also went to a free screening in which the filmmakers were present, introduced the film, and held a Q&A afterwards. This kind of screening is much like a midnight showing in that you have people who are enthusiastic about the film. This creates an energetic atmosphere that seems to heighten all of the emotions meant to be induced by the film. Jokes are funnier, successes are more triumphant, failures are sadder. With that said, I laughed a lot during this movie. Jon Gries (most will probably know him as Uncle Rico from "Napoleon Dynamite") was fantastic as the over-controlling, over-the-top Shadow Hawk. The hero Voss was equally pathetic as sympathetic. Most everyone was believable in that I would totally buy that they game like this. There were tender moments, there were epic moments, and there were hilarious moments. These moments are all made possible if you can just accept that this is an absolute ridiculous premise told in a ridiculous manner which will result in ridiculous fun.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1734589/

The Good, the Bad, the Weird"

Well, that was a fun movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0901487/

"Rise of the Planet of the Apes"

When I first saw this movie in theaters, I loved it. It was a very pleasant surprise to me who had little to no expectations. James Franco wasn't as boring an actor as he normally is, John Lithgow was great as the father suffering from Alzheimer's, and the computer generated Caesar was amazing. Having just watched it for the second time, it was not as good as I remember it being, but still an enjoyable movie. The first half in which we see the growth and development of Caesar and just how smart he is is pretty good. The second half when Caesar is in captivity with other apes and earns the position as their leader is fantastic. And everything, both the good and the bad, are worth the journey to the final scene in the forest between Caesar and James Franco's character.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1318514/

"Inglorious Basterds"

I really wanted to like this movie. I like Quentin Tarantino movies. I like Brad Pitt. I like Nazis getting killed. I like the trailer for it. I like what I was hearing from others who had seen it. However, I thought this movie was just okay. My first problem with this movie was the misleading promotion. Bloody baseball bats, gun-toting Jewish soldiers, and piles of dead Nazis littered the movie posters and previews. Did this movie have those things? Absolutely. Was this movie about those things? No, not really. While screen time is split with the Basterds, I felt the majority of the film was dedicated to Shosanna, a Jewish French woman who has her own strategy for killing Nazis, yet who's plan doesn't come to fruition until the end, in which, yes, dead, bloody Nazis are in abundance. The fusing of these two stories comes in the form of Colonel Hans Landa, the Jew Hunter, and his cutting through both the Basterds' and Shosanna's story lines, culminating in the gathering of all of them at the cinema. Christoph Waltz as Colonel Hans Landa was by far the highlight of this film and for those looking for the signature Tarantino dialogue and blood, you will find it. Another concern I had with this movie was it's length. With a running time of 153 minutes, it was just too short. Yes, short. You have all these great characters, their own stories, and how they all come together, yet it seemed to cut them short in order to give everyone equal screen time. Perhaps this movie need the "Kill Bill" treatment, being split into two movies. This brings me to another problem. So many things in this movie seemed like a rip off of "Kill Bill." You may ask, how can one rip off his own movies in his own movie? Is that not just his filmmaking style? Yes, it could be, and Tarantino certainly has his own style. But for someone as talented as Tarantino thinks he is, he can do unique without being repetitious. He can present and expand his style and I just feel there was little expanding. One thing I do love about Tarantino is that because he is Tarantino, he can get away with a lot of things other less known or less reputable directors can. The opening scene is an example in which we get a look at the brilliance of Tarantino, Cristoph Waltz, and what I thought this movie would embody completely. What normally would be a 45 second scene to introduce the Jew Hunter's apropos name was more like a 10 minute scene that was filled with great dialogue and tension building. It was classic Tarantino, demonstrated Cristoph Watlz's deserving Academy Award, and was filmmaking at it's finest. The remainder of the movie showed this same brilliance in flashes and some rather cliche and menial instances. Upon my initial viewing I was overall disappointed but know that upon further viewings I think I would grow to love this movie, that it would get better with each viewing. It had so much brilliance in it, some I caught, and I'm sure a lot that I missed. And as disappointed as I may have been, I certainly look forward to watching it again.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/