"The Karate Kid" (1984)

This movie is incredibly awesome. It's like a two hour montage of 80's music videos with a 21 year old Elizabeth Shue with very nice legs and culminating in the All Valley Karate Championship which is the quintessential 80's movie montage. Like most movies from this era, everything is over-acted, over-simplified, and over-the-top.* But that's what makes this movie so fun and so good, it truly is the best around.**

*Oh! Get it? Over the Top? Like the 80's Sylvester Stallone movie? Another movie like........nevermind.

**Get it? I know you do! *wink*

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087538/

"Waiting for 'Superman'"

The power of this documentary is certainly the picture it paints of a broken and worsening education system in the U.S. It definitely makes me feel blessed to have received an education and almost inspired to do something to fix such a broken system.* The problem with doing something, is that everyone has a different take on what's wrong and on how to fix it. This film shows people who blame the conflicting federal, state, and district policies that create a web of confusion when it comes to regulations, expectations, and requirements. Others address the problem of tenured teachers protected by teacher's unions that don't allow for teachers to be fired for poor performance or rewarded for excellent performance, like any other job would, thus holding on to a majority of uncaring, uninvested teachers who are just there for a paycheck, watering down the handful of good teachers. Again, these are the viewpoints expressed in the film, not necessarily mine, but they certainly do a great job of convincing me that these are not just possible, but legitimate problems, even massive problems. Not that I've given a whole lot of thoughts on unions, but my initial thoughts on unions in general is that they protect the low end, poor worker, never do they inspire the great workers to do better. And when applying this to teachers and teaching, one has to question the use of teacher's unions at all. Now, in displaying these problems, they then go on to show a few select individuals who are "fixing" education on a small scale, but trying to grow it. I say fixing in quotations because I'm not sure if it's fixing it. They show impressive and hopeful stats from their schools which does certainly give one hope, but I'm not nearly educated enough on the situation to know if it's truly fixing it. These viewpoints are expressed through the story of a number of students who, with their families, are trying to get a better education. They do this by getting in to better schools, some charter, some private, some different public schools. Unfortunately, because there is such a large number of applicants to fill a limited amount of spots, federal law requires a public lottery to be held to decide which students fill those spots. The entire movie leads up to each of these students going to these public lotteries to see see if they get in. At this point in the film, I felt nothing but disgust at this lottery. Here we are, kids' futures in the balance, and we're drawing random names and numbers deciding that? Really? This isn't a joke? No, it is a joke. A sick joke with young kids as the punch line. The unfortunate part of this film is that the apparent fixes by those teachers and administrators who care, the two kids out of all that they follow getting in to their school, and the feel good song at the end provide not nearly enough hope or know-how on what to do or how to do it. Sure there's a website to go to, you get to watch another feel good video updating you on a couple of the students (yeah, the two won their respective lottery), and you can look over their "Take Action Checklist." But forgive me for being skeptical that writing my school board, governor, and other elected officials will make a difference. Forgive me for being skeptical that charter schools is the answer. Forgive me for being so pessimistic in thinking that a few people doing these things will help.** But with that said, you should definitely watch this movie. Watch this movie! Every single person who reads this post should watch this movie. Every person who reads this post should visit the website http://www.waitingforsuperman.com/action/ and take a look. I'm not sure this movie is right in what they propose to fix, but they are certainly right in that fixing is a necessity. It may be difficult to see if you're one who, like me, grew up with an adequate educational experience, and maybe I'm falling victim to the films propaganda,*** but this movie is certainly a must see for you to decide for yourself.

*Yes, I did say almost. I'm not that ambitious or proactive.

**That's also why I don't vote.

***That's the point of documentaries, right? To present their personal viewpoints in a way as if it's factual.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1566648/

"Hot Tub Time Machine"

It's too bad that fun and funny actors in a fun and funny setting have to be ruined, like most comedies these days, with crass and gratuitous elements. What's worse is that once you get past the crassness and gratuitous nature, you find yourself listening and watching cliche "gone back in time" humor that lacks originality. There were still some great moments, but not enough to redeem this movie from the modern day crutch it seems all comedies rely on recently.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1231587/

"Kill Bill"

Let me start off by saying that I love both volumes of "Kill Bill." They are among my favorite movies of all time. Let me also say that I believe these movies to be Tarantino's best movies. Yes, I know people love and revere "Pulp Fiction." I do to. Yes, I know so many people are high on "Inglorious Basterds." I'm still not decided on it. But I don't think any of Tarantino's movies are more him, more who he is, than "Kill Bill." It is true, I do not know the man* and I could be very wrong, but in every interview I see with him, every behind the scenes with him, I see this movie as being the best representation of who he is. Now, that alone is not enough to make a movie great, but when you have a filmmaker who is able to pour not just a bit of him or herself into a movie he or she is creating, but a larger portion, maybe even a full portion, I feel you have a greater chance at creating something special. And "Kill Bill" is special. Perhaps one of the most helpful aspects of the two volumes is the use of the chapter format. Each chapter is so unique with a different feel and emotion to it. One chapter you're watching an over-the-top, cheesy, kung-fu movie; the next you're watching dramatic tension build in an intimate setting; soon you're watching an epic, serious, and genuine kung-fu movie; following you're watching an entirely anime sequence; finally you are rewarded with an emotional, satisfying, and incredible finale to an amazing story of revenge. Each unique chapter is an integral part of telling the story of the Bride seeking her revenge on Bill and it is woven together beautifully. It is true that there are deficiencies. Does Uma Thurman portray the best martial arts? No. But when it cuts to black and white and she faces off against the Crazy 88, you forget that completely and can't help but love every minute of it. Does Vivica A. Fox portray a stereotypical black woman of sass and attitude with Uma Thurman? Yes. But it makes her fight with Uma Thurman even better and an even greater contrast when she talks to her daughter. Does this movie have enough Lucy Liu in it? No. But when she is in it, she is an absolute scene thief. Is it sometimes over-the-top to the extreme? Of course! But that's what makes it so incredible! The Bride's acquiring of a Hanzo sword! Her training with Pai Mei! Her seeking of O-Ren and final battle! Her face-off with Elle! Her epic pursuit of Bill! David Carradine as Bill! His Superman speech! I'm seriously freaking out and need to watch these movies again right now! I feel that I could keep going on and on, but I won't except for a few last remarks. One thing I've liked about Tarantino is how great he is at using pre-existing songs in movies perfectly. Even when it's a song you don't think fits, you can't imagine a better song in it's place. I have complained before that Tarantino has a style that is very much his own and that he doesn't seem to expand on that, but luckily his style fits these movies perfectly. These movies are filled with so many memorable moments,** memorable characters,*** and memorable lines**** that fit together and work together perfectly, adding up to a pair of memorable movies.

*Seriously, true story, I do not know Quentin Tarantino personally.

**Esteban.

***Esteban.

****Esteban.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/

"The Wolfman" (2010)

I should first confess a couple things. I love classic horror/monster films and I love Emily Blunt. With that said, this movie already had a lot going for it in my opinion. Now, in watching this movie, I quite enjoyed it. The production design was great, the effects for the transformation into the Wolfman were pretty good considering they were CGI, the effects for the Wolfman fully transformed were great (gotta love practical effects and make-up, right?), and it was filled with strong acting performances. Overall, I would say that this was a good update of a classic movie. Where this movie lost me was in it's overuse of blood and gore. They did so good to build suspense by having the Wolfman concealed or moving quickly and blurred so as to feel the tension of this unknown terror, but then ruin it by splattering you with blood, which just ended up making it hokey at moments. Not that it didn't need some, but it's a sad generation we live in when horror is now synonymous with blood and gore. This movie did not need it, at least not so gratuitously, and was lessened by it. But that still did not take away from the fact that this was a fun movie that is now on my ever-expanding list of movies to watch during the month of October.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780653/

"Mean Girls"

I'm not going to lie; I love this movie. I laugh out loud when I watch it. I laugh out loud when I quote it. I laugh out loud because I don't think that my father, the inventor of Toaster Strudel, would be too pleased if I didn't laugh. And perhaps the single greatest strength of this movie is that it is the supporting cast that makes this movie so great and allows you to tolerate Lindsay Lohan. I repeat again; I love this movie.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377092/

"The Dark Knight Rises"

So, I purposely waited on writing my review of this movie because I needed and wanted to see it at least a second time to solidify my opinion on the movie. After seeing it a second time, I now want to see it a third time to further, further solidify my opinion. But as it goes, I have seen this movie twice now and whilst is may not be a great movie, it is still a really good movie that I really liked. Christopher Nolan really did himself a disservice when he made "The Dark Knight." How, in heaven or on earth, could he live up the the expectations? The answer? He couldn't. It was impossible. Again, that's not to say that "The Dark Knight Rises" isn't a good movie. It is indeed a very good movie. There's just too many great parts for it to not at least be better than good. But to say that it's as good or better than "The Dark Knight" is absolute silliness. In my opinion, I even liked "Batman Begins" more. But just because I liked those movies more, it doesn't mean I didn't like this one. There are few movies that I like more than those two movie. So, first up we should discuss the good, and first up is Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle. I'm listing this first because she was probably the biggest surprise to me. I thought she was great in her adapting personas to fit her given situations, her facade of who she pretended to be as "Catwoman" (which I'm very glad they never actually used the term "Catwoman") and who she really was, and just in general a surprisingly good, solid, and believable performance. Not once did I think to myself that she couldn't win in any fight she was in. Let us next move to the villain Bane. I loved his voice! Once I was able to tune into it, which was pretty quick, it was incredible. He was a big, ferocious, mean man. The fight scenes between him and Batman were incredible, living up to and exceeding all expectations in that category. It was brutally painful to watch as he destroyed Batman and his monologuing (because what villain doesn't monologue?) during that scene was brilliant. A small thing, but one I liked, was how he was just huge. He wasn't cut, with rippling pectorals and an 8-pack abdomen, he was just big, and I'm glad of that. He was a true menace with a plan to carry out and no one his equal to stop him. As for the usual suspects, they were great in reprising their roles.* As far as other aspects, concentration must be given to the story. It was great to see the contrast between the opening scene of the foreboding pain headed toward Gotham and how in Gotham itself we began slow, it was peaceful, and a veritable victory against organized crime. The escalation of tension and trouble that followed was superb as it lead up to the breaking of the Batman. How can one not shout for joy when Batman finally returns? The line delivered by the cop ("Oh boy, you are in for a show tonight, son!") couldn't sum up the feeling that every audience member should have been feeling any better. This was not just a return of the Batman to Gotham, this was a return of the Batman and Gotham to us the audience. It was a spectacular moment in the escalating trouble. That constant build up was almost as captivating as Batman's rise from the prison and the culminating war led by these two larger than life individuals. To see the police finally realizing the symbol that Batman was, the hope he provided, and the lead that they should follow was downright inspiring. It was amazing to see that fulfillment of Batman's hope of inspiring good in people to take back their city. It was equally fantastic seeing Bane versus Batman: Part II as it was watching Part I. Batman was still getting destroyed, but you also saw and realized that Batman hadn't given the people of Gotham everything just yet, and he was well on his way to doing so, and it showed in the fight and in his choices later. Now in repeating all these things I liked about the movie, it's hard to understand why I didn't think it was great, but this movie is far from without problems. Whilst this movie was filled with great parts, it didn't seem to quite fit together as a whole very well. "Disjointed" was the word shared with me by one J. Micah when I was expressing this and I kind of agree. The flow wasn't quite there and part of it I think had to do with the gap between the breaking of Batman and his subsequent rise. That was a longer time period to cover and I feel it may have broken up the flow too much. But it defense of this break, that sequence may cause the viewer to feel as if it's going slow and stir impatience in waiting for what's next, and you have to imagine that's what the people of Gotham were also feeling, but most likely with a little more dread and despair than the audience. Now, despite the emotional investment I had from the simple fact that the prequels caused me to have one and the emotional parts that existed throughout, I didn't feel as emotionally invested as previous installments. The focus on making this movie bigger and better was on the larger scale action and situation. This seemed to take away from the emotional story a bit for me. As much as I enjoyed the addition of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character, he seemed like a contrived character, at least in his purpose of guiding us and Bruce through the emotional journey of Mr. Wayne. I didn't like how he "just knew" that Bruce Wayne was Batman from seeing him when he was a boy and thought he wasn't needed for us to know, understand, or see Bruce's journey, Alfred or Lucius who already knew could have served that purpose. At the same time, it may not have been as important for him to guide Bruce's journey as it was for Bruce to guide his. As far as the ending of this movie and this trilogy goes, I really did like it, and would say love it except for one thing I'm slightly torn by. And whilst torn on the issue, it's also one of the reasons I love the ending. I did find it much more satisfying the second time around, but that could have been just because I now knew what was coming and not relying on my expectations which more often than not sets one up for disappointment. But the sacrifice of the Batman, coming back when he didn't have to, willing to give his life to be the necessary symbol to combat the "necessary" evil, and the end to his journey as the Batman was very satisfying. But in his sacrifice, was he not building the Batman and the symbol of self-sacrifice on a lie? Wasn't that the problem at the beginning of the movie, the lie built upon Harvey Dent? It is different in that Harvey went off the deep end and crazier than usual whilst Batman made the necessary sacrifices to win the day, but being set up as one who gave his all, up to his life, is somewhat diminished by the fact that he didn't give his life whilst Gotham is left believing he did. Conversely, he did give all that was necessary and you couldn't have asked any more of Bruce Wayne as Batman. He was indeed the hero that Gotham needed and ultimately deserved. In "Batman Begins" we are offered a promise of the creation of more than just a man, a symbol that would return to Gotham long enough to inspire the people that their city didn't belong to the criminal and corrupt, a legend. At the end of "The Dark Knight Rises," that promise is delivered. Despite the movie's deficiencies, despite disjointed or lack of emotion at some parts, this was ultimately a satisfying ending to Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.

* I love Gary Oldman!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1345836/