Looking Forward: The Man of Steel

Directed by Zack Synder (300/Watchmen) and starring Henry Cavill (The Tudors) as Superman, this movie sounds like it could finally restore Kal-EL to the top of the comic book movie world. Not since watching Christopher Reeve don the Superman suit have I been so excited about the prospect of another film staring the Man of Steel. I'm not dismissing Superman Returns, it just didn't really work for me. For starters, Superman should not have a child, but that's only one thing this Superman film needs to make sure of. Here is how I would direct The Man of Steel.
1) Get him in the suit quickly. People have little patience these days. Aside from the destruction of his home planet Krypton, Superman's origin isn't really that exciting. Whilst his origin should definitely not be ignored, it should be dealt with at a quick pace. With Russell Crowe announced as Superman's father Jor-El however, things might move along a bit slower than expected.
2) The movie should go dark, but to a certain extent. They need to draw upon how Superman is an outsider, and will always be a loner because of that. Superman is not Batman. He isn't trying to avenge the death of his parents by installing fear in his enemies. He's just trying to help a world in need. Warner Bros need to remember that. Don't have Superman moping after Lois in a depressing love deprived fashion (Superman Returns). Instead they should have him refrain from a relationship because of the fact that he is incapable of living a normal life. Superman has often been criticised for being un-relatable. The fact that he is an outsider trying to help people is what makes him more relatable than people think. He can't have normal relationships with human beings and Man of Steel needs to showcase this.
3) Superman needs someone to fight. Now Michael Shannon has been cast as General Zod, the film needs to make sure they create some impressive fight scenes. For all their might, comic book movies never seem to pack epic boss fights. General Zod has proven to be an incredible villain on screen and I can't wait to hear the famous line: KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
4) CGI Suit. Yes, I know that risks infuriating fan boys across the globe, but if Man of Steel is going to have any hope of succeeding it needs to move away from the nostalgic classic suit. Plus using CGI may actually give us a suit that looks like something an alien would wear. This also means there would be no more Clark Kent ripping his shirt open to reveal the S logo.
5) A new role for Clark Kent. Surely working as a journalist would allow no time to be Superman? What decent newspaper would allow one of their staff to keep running off in this day and age? If Man of Steel is going to draw from reality, it needs to bring the tough job climate into account. Whist Clark should still work in a newspaper firm in some capacity; he should definitely not be a reporter. I would go the Peter Parker route and have Clark as a free-lance photographer, with his powers enabling him to capture pictures from all over the world quickly.
6) The movie needs a new sound score. Throw out the John Williams score for if this Superman film is to succeed, it needs to establish a new identity and move away from the nostalgia vest that plagued Returns. Much like what Batman Begins did with the score by Hans Zimmer. In fact, a Hans Zimmer score would work perfectly well for this film. It would be dark when necessary but it will add some real gravitas to proceedings.
Finally... The movie needs to set up a sequel. It needs to get people excited at the prospect of seeing Superman again. I think they should set up Lex Luthor for the sequel. Luthor should not be seen however, instead they should just hint at him. (Similar to what was done with the Joker card in Batman Begins). Audiences now want superhero franchises with consistency that delivers every time. Warner Bros are no strangers to creating on going franchises, so Superman should be marketed heavily.
These are just my ideas. If you're reading this and disagree about how The Man of Steel should play out then please feel free to comment.

DLP Vs LCD Televisions

When choosing a high-definition television consumers are often faced with the choice of a DLP vs LCD set. A newcomer to the television market can easily become overwhelmed by this prospect. There are several factors for you to consider during your decision to choose between a DLP vs LCD television including price, performance and overall display quality.
An LCD TV screen, standing for Liquid Crystal Display, operates by illuminating millions of red, green or blue liquid crystals that change turn off and on to produce the proper color on your screen. Why red, green and blue you ask? These are the primary colors of light that make the visible color spectrum as we know it. LCD televisions tend to be very bright, making them ideal for a well lit room in your home as external light will not likely cause many issues with glare.
Most LCD televisions are between 2 and 4 inches in depth, which is ideal for wall mounting your television. Unfortunately, LCD screens are rarely seen in models greater than 50 inches in diameter due to the difficulty in producing large LCD displays in a cost effective manner. One common criticism regarding LCD televisions is that over time, typically 70,000 - 80,000 viewing hours, the green crystals will begin to fade, causing a red-blue tint to the screen. There is currently no option to fix this issue without replacing the television. Many 720i - 1080i LCD televisions below 40 inches in diameter can be purchased in the $300 - $800 price range, which gives the LCD display an initial cost effective advantage in the DLP vs LCD dilemma.
A DLP TV (Digital Light Processing) operates by reflecting light onto a microchip covered in thousands of small mirrors. These mirrors send the reflected light through a color wheel which then projects the correct color onto the screen, similar in fashion to rear projection televisions of the past. This technology is often put to use in digital projection movie theaters to enhance the picture color and clarity.
Although typically more expensive, DLP televisions do not suffer from the green crystal degradation that is common in cheaper LCD televisions. In addition to this, DLP television bulbs are replaceable for approximately $250, a much more reasonable replacement cost than the upper end LCD televisions. While the DLP televisions can produce a much more vivid picture and boasts an extended life span compared to LCD models, some people report a "rainbow effect" if they are too far off from the center of the television. Another issue to consider in the DLP vs LCD debate is the size of the DLP televisions. DLP sets range between 6 and 16 inches, making them more obtrusive and difficult to wall mount than their LCD competitors.
DLP vs LCD Conclusion
When considering your next television purchase keep these pros and cons in mind as a guideline when deciding whether to get a DLP or LCD television. When in doubt about the DLP vs LCD dilemma you can always view both types of TVs in similar lighting conditions in the room you tend to display it in to help you to make a decision.

Mid-Summer TV Line-Up

You gotta love Asylum who makes these "mock busters" of the real movies. They did this before when "Battle: LA" and they did "Battle: Los Angeles". This time they did "Almighty Thor" the day after the summer blockbuster "Thor" flick. People this movie is really bad but the trailer is funny when Thor uses an Uzi to take down Loki! I HAD to watch it just to see that!
The film is about Loki (Richard Grieco) who wants Thor's magic hammer to control Asgard and earth! Grieco didn't go over the top like I expected but it was still terrible performance. Thor (Cory Deal) is a new comer to the movies and he did audition for the theatrical movie. He is a big guy but needs a few more acting lessons. Wrestler Kevin Nash is Ordin and he is killed in the beginning. He does his best raspy Dark Knight impression. Special effects are good to poor! See it for a good laugh and on cable! People who are wondering why Syfy are doing Thor movies all the time is because Norse mythology has no copyright!
HAWAII 5-O--FINALE
I must tell you that the finale of this TV show was awesome. McGarrett (Alex O' Loughlin)is set up for killing the governor Pat Jameson (Jean Smart) Danno (Scott Caan) doesn't go home with his family, Chin Ho (Daniel Dae Kim) is now lieutenant and Kono (Grace Park) is arrested! Wo Fat (Mark Dacascos) makes a fatal guest appurtenance. I can't wait for the 2nd season!
SINBAD AND THE MINATOR
ORIGINAL SYFY MOVIE-MAY 21, 2011
ACTION/ADVENTURE/FANTASY
This movie is the usual low-budget for Syfy but it has a very handsome lead Manu Bennett (30 Days of Night and The Marine)who is very Australian. One day Hollywood will use an Arab-American to play Sinbad for this character is of Middle East decent! The two reasons to watch this is Steven Grives (Beastmaster) as Al-Jibar. He is good at being an over the top bad guy and Pacharo Mzembe is the black man is part of Sinbad's crew who lives through the ENTIRE movie!
SINGLE LADIES
ORIGINAL SERIES ON VH1-MONDAYS AT 9:00PM STARTING MAY 30, 2011
ROMANCE/COMEDY/DRAMA
The show should be on BET or TVOne! It is about two sexy, smart black women Stacey Dash and Lisa Raye McCoy living and loving in Atlanta. It is worth seeming at least the first episode for the one of the creators and producer is Queen Latifah! The other writer and producer is Stacey Littlejohn who is one of the few black female successful producers. She did All of Us, the Wanda Sykes show and Cedric the Entertainer Presents. It is only eight shows and it is the first scripted show on VH1 in history. It is good if you like soap operas with some 'flava.' I hope it stays on for awhile.

Reviewed: Something Borrowed [2011]

Something Borrowed follows Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) as she meets Dex (Colin Egglesfield) at university where they become best friends with feelings clearly developing but neither of them acting on said feelings. So when Rachel's best friend the selfish and obnoxious Darcy (Kate Hudson) shows up and asks Dex out, Rachel gives her blessing, Dex says yes and several years later they are engaged to be married.
This leaves Rachel distraught for letting Dex slip through her fingers and with the cowardly and wimpish Dex (I'm sure just what ladies look for in a man) still conflicted as to what to do next. After Rachel's birthday celebrations though, she and Dex end up sleeping together and supposed hilarity ensues as they try yet again ignore the chemistry between them and just let life run its course.
Thank god for Ethan (John Krasinski) Rachel's friend who gave a voice of reason to proceedings by at least attempting to beat some sense into the main characters who seemed to be oblivious to everything around them. I think my main fault with the movie was the storyline and the way we are supposed to feel for Rachel despite the fact that she didn't make a go of it with Dex, everything that happened to her was self inflicted and she has slept with her best friend's fiancé; and given that Darcy isn't a very nice person to say the least that either of them hung around with her in the first place.
The supporting cast outside the four main characters didn't add to the film in any way shape or form. With some movies you get the token celebrities who show up for 10 seconds, say a line and then leave again and this is how the rest of the cast felt to me for the entire movie. They were just written in for one line and then would disappear never to be seen or heard from again.
Apart from a few witty remarks here and a bit of slapstick, there was not much comedy in the film with the overall feel of it leaning more towards a drama with a bit of comedy rather than the other way around which I feel is the better mix for this genre. There was nothing wrong with the acting with Goodwin and Egglesfield doing their jobs and creating some chemistry but it was merely a minor consolation which can't cover up the rest of the issues highlighted.
As romcom's go this was one of the worse that I've seen so much so that even if your an avid fan of this type of movie you'll have a hard time getting any pleasure out of watching it. Time to forget about this and move onto another one.

Movie Review: True Grit (2011)

The story of True Grit is an excellent source for a movie adaptation and the Coen Brothers retain the storytelling prowess they've always possessed with their vision of this epic tale of retribution. It still feels like a remake though, with every major event (as well as most of the minor ones) from the 1969 film finding its way into the script. Little has changed, save for the cast, and while the characters are handled well by the seasoned crew, it's unlikely their performances will hold up against the adoration of John Wayne and the original film. Even without comparing the leads between the two, this latest Rooster Cogburn is afflicted with such slurred speech and sonorous grumbling that intelligently written banter is lost to humorously unintelligible ramblings - this vocal setback plagues many of the other characters too. Hailee Steinfeld offers an entertaining precociousness and Matt Damon revels in his arrogant Texas Ranger, but it's nearly impossible not to recall the performances of Kim Darby and Glen Campbell. Perhaps the Coen Brothers' True Grit will find favor with those unfamiliar with the original - unfortunately those viewers have already missed out.
When her father is gunned down in cold blood by the treacherous Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) determines to see justice done no matter the cost. Searching out the meanest, orneriest Marshal she can find, Mattie hires Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to hunt down Chaney in the harsh wilderness of Indian territory. Much to the lawman's dismay, Mattie insists on accompanying him, as does cocky Texas Ranger La Boeuf (Matt Damon), seeking out his own unrelated bounty on the man, leading the mismatched trio to begin a dangerous quest for vengeance.
The Coen Brothers' newest film is just begging for comparison to both the original novel by Charles Portis and the 1969 film adaptation. It's incredibly difficult to judge it on its own merits considering just about everything it accomplishes is immensely derivative. While this version follows the book closely, the changes aren't different enough from Henry Hathaway's earlier film, resulting in an attempt that for all intents and purposes, might as well have been a shot-for-shot remake. Many of the scenes are nearly identical, and much of the dialogue is the exact same, including the climactic showdown catchphrase which is cringe-worthy for fans of John Wayne's unforgettable delivery. It can't even top Strother Martin's minor supporting role, this time portrayed by Dakin Matthews.
Jeff Bridges' Rooster Cogburn isn't so much a new interpretation of the marshal from the book, but a variation on John Wayne's performance. This is unfortunate because while Bridges portrays a memorable, likeable character, he hasn't really displayed something creatively fresh for audiences. The language used is perhaps more authentic, but resultantly harder to understand, and the strained lack of spoken contractions doesn't flow well with the contemporary camerawork, lighting and effects. The only real improvements are the costumes and props, which were undoubtedly blessed with larger budgets and extensive attention to details.
True Grit is an exciting story with intriguing characters and therefore exceptional material for a screenplay. But it doesn't mean that it should be redone when it was already successfully adapted 41 years ago with an indelible actor that won an Oscar for his efforts. Especially when the filmmakers have nothing new to bring to the table, outside of an alternate cast and bringing back the bookending of familiar characters with detached, older versions of themselves, for the sake of following the novel - a trick that sadly distances viewers from the roles they're accustomed to.

Movie Review: Unknown (2011)

Last time, they took his daughter - this time they're after his identity. While not an actual sequel to 2008's popular film "Taken," "Unknown" follows a similar pattern of action and suspense centered around a grizzled warrior trying to stay one step ahead of ruthless villains. The tension remains consistent and the spattering of action sequences impresses, yet Unknown can't maintain the same level of thrills as its predecessor due largely in part to a plot that starts to waver with each new reveal. It's certainly not predictable, but the rather tired stolen identity and amnesia angle isn't nearly as satisfying as the rescue and revenge path. Liam Neeson proves once again, however, that watching him kick ass doesn't get old.
Dr. Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) and his wife Elizabeth (January Jones) arrive in Berlin for a biotechnology summit that will feature several high-profile world leaders and scientists. When Dr. Harris realizes he's left his briefcase at the airport and attempts to return for it, his taxi is involved in a car accident that leaves him in a coma. Upon awakening four days later, Martin learns that another man has assumed his identity and that his wife no longer recognizes him. Battling with his fractured memories and the surmounting evidence pointing towards his own insanity, Harris begins an exhaustive search for answers that leads him to the cab driver that saved his life (Diane Kruger), a former German intelligence agent (Bruno Ganz), and those that would attempt to silence him forever.
The film opens with a few bizarrely coincidental similarities to the incredibly obscure 1991 Tom Berenger film "Shattered," but then vaults full swing into a taut, white-knuckle mystery that takes identity theft to whole new levels. The doppelgangers, paranoia, overlooked details, memory loss, general confusion and Hitchcockian switched identity dilemmas culminate in a grand conspiracy theory that is as engrossing as it is improbable. Harris must not only deal with cops, doctors and business associates that don't believe him, but also surviving in a foreign country with a language barrier, no friends, no place to go and general isolation - plus a few assassins. It's a supremely engaging premise for a thriller.
Every character is interesting and nothing is what it seems. Hand-to-hand combat, destructive car chases (unfortunately topped off with CG vehicles) and knife-wielding killers complete the formula for a Liam Neeson actioner, along with the increasingly generic elements of nightclub locales, disbelieving security guards, and an attractive woman who becomes unwittingly involved in death and mayhem but still expresses uncommon bravery. With a few more films like this, Neeson will be a regular action hero.
The setup is so smartly achieved that even scenes comprised of nothing more than two elderly men calmly, casually conversing manages to be nerve-wracking and unpredictable. Sadly, it's a difficult act to follow, so the consistency begins to falter toward the conclusion; explanations, realizations and motives are revealed as contrived, foiling its lasting power. There's simply no good way to end Unknown without being overly neat and tidy - or at least screenwriters Oliver Butcher and Stephen Cornwell couldn't come up with one while adapting the novel "Out of My Head" by Didier van Cauwelaert, a story that desperately wanted to be a movie.

Movie Review: I Am Number Four (2011)

If you've enjoyed a steady diet of Twilight films, superhero movies, and sci-fi television shows, you might like I Am Number Four. But probably not. The film, based on the young-adult novel of the same name, derives almost its entirety from other related materials, leaving individuality a permanently absent entity. The most disconcerting problem is that Twilight does the high-school romances better, the comic-book movies handle the action with more finesse and the television shows contain fewer cardboard characters. If this is number four, I'm just thankful we didn't have to wallow through one, two, and three.
After their homeworld of Lorien is besieged by the Mogadorians, a ruthless race of alien intruders, only nine gifted youngsters escape to Earth and await their destiny. John (Alex Pettyfer) is one such survivor, who, along with his guardian Henri (Timothy Olyphant), must constantly stay on the run to avoid being found by the Mogadorians. After learning of the assassination of another Lorien, John and Henri head to Paradise, Ohio where they hope to lay low and discover a way to make contact with their remaining allies. When John falls in love with Sarah (Dianna Agron), a pretty photographer at his high school, he decides to stay and fight rather than continue running - a decision that will pit him against a relentless team of brutal alien executioners.
Sometimes, (though rarely) mediocre dialogue can be forgiven in the presence of great action. Unfortunately, I Am Number Four has neither. The direction of conversation, if not the actual exchanges, can probably be guessed before anyone has spoken and the revelations often rival those found in an episode of Scooby-Doo. The dialogue drifts into extremely awkward territory on a number of occasions and can't even grasp realism when the conversations are supposed to be maladroit. Friendships, fatherly guidance, antagonistic threats, and confessions of love never felt so lame.
Perhaps even rarer yet, humdrum dialogue can be dismissed when uttered by intriguing characters and inspiring demeanors. Still nothing here. In John's defense, he is supposed to be trying to blend in and become invisible. He succeeds, but that does the audience the disservice. Sarah lends an arguably pretty face, but certainly no more, and Timothy Olyphant's Henri tries ever so hard but can't overcome the tedium of the script. The otherworldly villains are perhaps the most cringe-worthy, spitting broken English over harsh alien speech and committing the cardinal sin of talking too much before killing their victims.
A few interesting shots during combat do make an appearance, though their ingenuity quickly vanishes beneath the shoddy special effects and the behemoth beasts that look to be the lovechild of a flying squirrel and the Cloverfield monster. If inexplicably powerful teenagers, giant sugar glider-creatures, and hokey glowing flashlight hands are your cup of tea, this one's for you.

Movie Review: Take Me Home Tonight (2011)

It's an interesting concept to make an '80s teen sex comedy in 2011 (or a few years earlier since the film's release was delayed) and Take Me Home Tonight manages to touch upon some of the magic of those films while also retaining modernistic comedy elements. The creators have stated that they wanted to make a movie that feels like it was made in the '80s rather than just parodying the decade, but the result shifts back and forth between accomplishing that goal and venturing towards the outlandish antics of present day gross-out teen comedies. The R rating allows for more colorful dialogue, a little nudity and plenty of drug use, but the most satisfyingly humorous moments don't involve sex, drugs, or its '80s setting. Visually (and certainly musically) the best of the '80s is there, but strangely the film would have been as effective set in any era.
Though Matt Franklin (Topher Grace) now works at a Suncoast Video after graduating from MIT and has no prospects on his future career, his greatest regret is never obtaining the phone number of his unrequited high school crush Tori Frederking (Teresa Palmer). When a chance meeting with his dream girl allows him to join her at Kyle Masterson's (Chris Pratt) legendary Labor Day weekend party, Matt, his best friend Barry (Dan Fogler), and his twin sister Wendy (Anna Faris), navigate the rocky revelations of burgeoning adulthood through a night of wild partying, self reflection, and second chances.
Master of the '80s teen comedy, John Hughes, often employed a tactic where a moment of hilarity emerged after reflecting on the more serious revelations of growing up. Take Me Home Tonight uses an antithetical approach - bouts of comedy are capped with the somber musings of regrets and failures. This often leaves a bitter taste to the conclusion of each event no matter how comically it started and forces the viewer to reminisce on the solemnity. As a result the comedy acquires a much darker feel than it actually deserves, which perhaps accurately resonates with the seriousness of cocaine use and lying to women, but detracts from the laugh-out-loud appeal.
A few references to Hughes' work and some paralleling ideas surface in Take Me Home Tonight, but the film can't quite grasp the charm and sincerity of its authentic predecessors. It does, however, still manage to feature a classic tale of a teenager searching for his dream girl and accompanies this with clever bits of comedy and the scene-stealing over-the-top exploits of funnyman Dan Fogler.

Movie Review: Mr. Popper's Penguins (2011)

Adults might have to stretch their patience to accommodate the level of absurdity inherent with the improbability and impracticality of a New York businessman raising six penguins in his apartment, but Mr. Popper's Penguins isn't really meant for the discerning viewer. Children who find bumbling, chubby creatures entertaining won't have any complaints, and the parallel of a familial bond with the unity of a waddle of penguins isn't the worst moral message one could offer young kids. Yet there are those of us who feel that Jim Carrey, while not entirely insufferable as a father of two children and six flightless birds, could be doing grander things.
While Tom Popper (Jim Carrey) pushes for a promotion at his property purchasing partnership, he finds himself further parted from his ex-wife Amanda (Carla Gugino) and his children Billy (Maxwell Perry Cotton) and Janie (Madeline Carroll). When he unexpectedly procures six penguins from his estranged pop's possessions, and Billy mistakes the pesky pets for his birthday present, Popper determines to protect his plumaged companions. As he struggles to balance providing for his new patrons with the pressures of his persistent employers, Popper must also attempt to reconnect with his family while parrying the pernicious plotting of a pushy zoo proprietor (Clark Gregg) intent on poaching the penguins for his own prehensile purposes.
The biggest problem with Mr. Popper's Penguins is the lack of realism. Although it is clearly fantasy, and targeting a youthful audience, the complete disregard for repercussions and consequences is ludicrous, especially given that the police and a dutiful, nemesis zookeeper are included specifically for the purpose of control and reasoning. "We had fun, but it's time to get back to reality," says Popper, when the authorities step in and the penguins are momentarily treated like real animals in need of professional care. The whole movie might have worked more believably if it were animated. It's bad enough that the CG penguins are completely visually distinguishable from their live action trained counterparts.
Jim Carrey is right at home in the role of a nonsensical, overacting, idiosyncratic man desperately struggling to mend his shattered romantic relationship and separation from his kids - the same kind of character he's been playing his entire career, and most likely nothing like the popular source material (the filmmakers probably tried in vain to reel him in). With gags such as a woman who sputters extreme alliteration, the typical soccer ball to the groin, the tuxedo-suited waddlers strolling through the Guggenheim and a crowded New York street unnoticed, and penguin excrement squirted in the face, Mr. Popper's Penguins is unfathomably awkward, bland, unoriginal, uninspired, and largely pointless. The dialogue and situations are pitiful and the supporting characters provide little relief from Carrey's obnoxiousness. If it weren't for a few brief clips from some of Chaplin's films, the entire event would have been agonizing.

Movie Review: Rango (2011)

Rango is basically one giant homage to all the great westerns, from the spaghetti west of Sergio Leone to the comedic parodies of Bob Hope. A multitude of references to a plethora of classics make an appearance throughout the film, and even those that don't recognize these oftentimes clever allusions will find entertainment in the action, sly comedy, and hilariously twisted character designs. Rango may be the typical fish-out-of-water protagonist trying to discover his own identity, but when transplanted into an old west town inhabited by miserly turtles, gun-toting rattlesnakes and hillbilly varmints, all while plagued by intermittent surrealistic visions, profound metaphors, and pessimistic narration from an avian mariachi band, his story seems anything but normal.
The desert town of Dirt finds itself in a crisis of epic proportions. A terrible drought has swept over the land, the bank's water supply is almost dry, and outlaws torment the town's citizens. Luckily for Dirt, the heroic lizard Rango (Johnny Depp) has just arrived to bring about a new order of justice and peace as the latest town sheriff. Unfortunately for both Dirt and Rango, the wily chameleon is actually just an aspiring actor desperate to play the role of a fearless gunslinger. When his theatrical antics find him appointed an official lawman, Rango must gather all his courage and acting savvy to save Miss Bean's (Isla Fisher) ranch, recover the town's precious water supply, and fend off depraved outlaw Rattlesnake Jake (Bill Nighy).
The character designs in Rango range from comically bizarre to truly inspired and end up stealing the show from each creature's individually eccentric personalities. From bug-eyed toads and mangy cats to wheelchair-bound turtles and skeptical possums, the wide variety of animals are brought to life with such vivid visuals that you might find yourself laughing before they even speak. Many of the animals are hideously deformed and disfigured, or their characteristic features so exaggerated that you won't even be able to tell what creature they represent. A bird with an arrow in his eye, a rabbit missing an ear, and an overly hairy mouse mark just a sampling of the curious and intriguing creations that share the screen. The few humans that make an appearance are pure caricatures of their actor counterparts and nearly every design screams of innovation and ingenuity. In addition to the brilliant character designs, the texturing and animation reach a new level of authenticity thanks to the work of Industrial Light and Magic, a company known for their expertise in creating special effects.
With its clever references to classic western films and spattering of dark humor, Rango will almost certainly appeal as much to adults as to children. In fact, aside from the slapstick action sequences and goofy misadventures of the title lizard, the vast majority of jokes, surrealistic dream sequences, and intelligently intricate dialogue seem geared for a more mature audience with a firm appreciation for the genre the film so meticulously spoofs.

Movie Review: Green Lantern (2011)

The filmmakers are under the impression that audiences will accept anything, as long as it's drenched in special effects. Balls of gaseous substances, electrical fields of lightning, pulsing rays of color, billowing smoke, fiery explosions and glowing energy beams all shown rapidly and accompanied by piercing noises - these tricks are sure to impress even the most cynical critics. Unexplainable things happen all of a sudden and viewers are expected to sit back and soak up the visual zaniness without questioning all the cryptic events. This is simply not true. For an origins movie, Green Lantern certainly has a lot more explaining to do.
For centuries, the emerald energy of willpower has been fueling intergalactic peacekeepers known as Green Lanterns. Thousands of specially chosen warriors and guardians police the galaxies, using their unimaginable powers to quell the evil forces of fear. Legendary legionnaire Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison), aglow with purplish, translucent skin and rubbery tendons, discovers that an ancient monstrosity called Parallax has been steadily growing and is responsible for the recent deaths of several highly skilled Green Lanterns. When he encounters the frightful anomaly firsthand, he's mortally wounded and must crash land on Earth.
The viridian energy works in mysterious ways, and purposefully chooses the individuals that harness its powers. When Abin dies, the ring he possesses, recharged by a literal chartreuse lantern, seeks out devil-may-care, foolhardy, hotheaded jet pilot Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds, who hasn't changed drastically from Van Wilder) to be its new caretaker. At first he has no interest in assuming the responsibilities of protecting a massive sector of civilization, but with the help of negativistic ally Sinestro (Mark Strong), bulky alien Kilowog (Michael Clarke Duncan) and bird-beaked mentor Tomar-Re (Geoffrey Rush), Hal will become the most powerful Lantern of them all.
From the very start, solemn narration, intrusive flashbacks and countless tongue-twisting alien worlds, names and devices are utilized, going overboard to stay faithful to the DC Comics characters and entities. With such a swift running time, too much mindboggling content is thrown at the screen rapidly. In the vein of Star Wars or Star Trek, the ideas are completely science-fiction, working on a level closer to Thor than Iron Man. Almost nothing is grounded in reality, and because of this, little is deemed worthy of explanation. An "induction process" allows for communication between the human and his newfound comrades, along with quick acceptance of his lime green muscle suit, comical mask (to protect his identity, despite merely covering his cheekbones), and super powers. "The ring's limits are only what you can imagine," insists Tomar-Re, making further definition pointless.
A subplot with Dr. Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) is unnecessary and wasted, the primary villain Parallax is built up to be invincible but then casually discarded, and Hal's love interest Carol Ferris (Blake Lively, proving she can only play one character) is hopelessly generic. It takes over an hour to devise a plot and forge an antagonist, and just a few minutes to hastily resolve it all. Impressive makeup goes the route of repulsive instead of awe-inspiring, and the costumes and character designs follow suit, appearing absurd rather than impactful.
While trying to stay true to the look of the original comic books, Green Lantern has crafted some incredibly silly stuff. The visuals are entirely too goofy for non-fans to readily digest. There's also a huge focus on responsibility, facing fears, and never giving up, which passes as noticeably bland and uninteresting. Like Iron Man 2, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Hellboy II: The Golden Army, and most of the X-Men sequels, Green Lantern is a mishmash of outdated graphic novel lore, reinvention, redesign, revival, adaptation, stale humor and budget-busting special effects, all of which are an abrasive assault to the senses and dolefully dreary filmmaking.

Movie Review: Red Riding Hood (2011)

If the thought of theatrically adapting the famous fairy tale isn't enough to incite giggles, the recitation of the line "Grandmother, what big teeth you have" will certainly do the job. Little about the film doesn't warrant laughter; the revealing of the red cape, the repetitious jump-scares with the grandmother casting wolf shadows and other bits of details from the source material thrown in for those who forgot what the movie is based on, and the overwhelming feeling that this is a lesser known chapter from the Twilight Saga. All are reasons to dismiss this ridiculous fantasy. Even the dead bodies smirk. Director Catherine Hardwicke, who helmed the first Twilight movie, certainly isn't trying to hide her excessive fascination with werewolves, teenage relationships, love triangles and shirtless hunks.
For twenty years, the tiny, isolated, mountain village of Daggerhorn has kept the peace with a bloodthirsty werewolf by sacrificing the best livestock and the cutest pink piglets. Blonde-haired, red-cloaked Valerie (Amanda Seyfried) hasn't thought too much about it during her childhood, instead concentrating on keeping a secretive relationship with brown-eyed woodcutter Peter (Shiloh Fernandez). Thanks to an arranged marriage with wealthier blacksmith Henry (Max Irons), Valerie is doomed to break away from her true love.
When Valerie's sister is found slashed to death by the werewolf, a party of vengeful villagers goes in search of it. They kill a common gray wolf and believe they've dispatched the menace for good, but legendary monster killer Father Solomon (Gary Oldman) arrives just in time to prove them wrong. His is a deliciously evil role, an unhinged character that Oldman plays often and quite entertainingly, quick to persecute, invade privacy and harm without mercy. It's a Van Helsing of sorts, fused with the maniacal methods of a preacher intent on forcing others to don his beliefs via physical violence, complete with wild-eyed horror stories and a giant metal elephant of torture.
Valerie is eventually confronted by the wolf and realizes that it is someone in the village with a special connection to her. In an effort to keep the viewer guessing, a few gaping plot holes are developed and red herrings thrown in, which creates a mystery unworthy of solving. The greatest accomplishment is for the actors who can deliver their execrable lines without bursting into laughter. Unintentionally, the audience will surely bust up at the climax, everything the grandmother does (Julie Christie must have really needed a paycheck), and the difficulty with which the actors try to take things seriously. Now how long do we have to wait for the live-action feature film of Goldilocks and the Three Bears?

Modeling Agency Vs Modeling Placement Agency

In the world of modeling there are a few choices models have when getting into the business. You have your traditional modeling agency and the model placement agency to choose from. Now before you rush out and make a quick decision let's go over some of the benefits of the two services.
First the Modeling placement agency, there main function is to get the new and aspiring model all of the tools she needs to submit herself to modeling jobs and casting calls. The main focus of the placement agency is on the promotional materials such as website, comp cards, business cards, SEO. Their goal is to give you a media presence and once this is done submit your information to prospective clients. You don't need to already be a model to work with a placement agency either. One of the biggest differences is they have work such as nail models, hair models etc. This differs from the Modeling agency because they focus more on the training.
So now that we have pointed out the benefits of the Modeling placement agency let's talk about the traditional modeling agency. The focus here will be on teaching you runway, posing and modeling walking. This is where you go to train and learn the modeling industry. If you have never modeled before and you're interested in being a runway model then most likely this is the best option for you. You will have professional trainers teach you the ins and outs of the industry. The typical modeling agency will also give you a practice runway with mirrors to perfect your walk and poses. This is a huge benefit if you have never posed before. But be aware with the modeling agency you wont get the media presence or promotional materials in house. This will be outsources as another fee.
As you can see both of these services are beneficial but both are very different. So depending on where you want to go with your career pick your service wisely. If you have some experience then a Traditional Modeling Agency might not be for you. But if you have never trained then you might want to use the Traditional Modeling Agency to learn the basics. If you know the basics and need a media presence and want to submit yourself for work then the Modeling Placement agency is something you should look at and the cost of the promotional materials is normally lower then the Modeling Agency.

I'm Thinking: Are Comic Book Movies Ruined by Actor Face-Time?

It seems a general trend in comic book movies that no matter who the character is, the actor portraying he or she needs a consistent amount of face- time. I began to dwell about this issue recently after watching the Spider-Man trilogy. It seemed Tobey Maguire would lose/remove his mask in almost every fight scene? Was Maguire's constant face time worth ruining the secret identity aspect to Spider-Man's character entirely? Surely someone would recognise Peter Parker in one of those moments from the films. I'm hoping Sony has learnt from this and we won't see Andrew Garfield loose his mask in every action scene. Though, based on his rising fame from his work on The Social Network, we probably will.
It's not just the Spider-Man franchise that has been plagued by actor face-time damaging the aspect of the characters. In 2003 audiences who saw Daredevil would have witnessed what has become a classic comic book movie cliché, where the superhero removes or looses his mask in the final battle. Though In Daredevil's case, Ben Affleck's need for face-time was just one of the many issues wrong with the film.
The X-Men franchise had one of the most popular comic book characters of all time stripped off his mask completely. Yes, I am talking about Wolverine. Sure it would have looked a bit daft to have Hugh Jackman running around in a mask, but on the other hand was the decision for him not to wear one really based on this? Or was it based on studios not wanting to cover one of their high profile actor's face? If done right, (Batman Begins style), Wolverine wearing a mask would have worked on screen. Especially since mutants would surely want to keep their identities a secret. Wearing masks would have portrayed that beautifully.
It doesn't seem like persistent face-time in comic book movies is going to slow down anytime soon. For anyone that has seen the Iron Man films would know Ol Shellhead rarely keeps his mask down in the films, despite the use of clever camera shots of RDJ inside the helmet. For me as soon as you see the hero remove his mask or helmet, the fights over. And in the Iron Man films, the fights were never long.
There's been a bit of fan-boy concern over how Chris Hemsworth is rarely seen wearing his helmet in the Thor movie. For a Norse God\warrior, wearing a helmet would seem like a daily essential. Especially since minor characters (Heimdall, royal guards) etc in the film seem to manage it. Whilst I haven't seen enough of Captain America: The First Avenger to judge, one can only hope Chris Evans doesn't lose his helmet as seeing as it's a World War 2 film, Captain America could easily be shot in the head.
This isn't a huge problem right now, but with the comic book movie industry thriving, it soon could be.
And don't even get me started on Ryan Reynolds and his mask in the Green Lantern.

Movie Review: Season of the Witch (2011)

Season of the Witch doesn't aim very high, which at least allows it to accomplish what it sets out to do. A few cheap scares, some bloodless swordfights, a slightly miscast Nicolas Cage and a perfectly cast Ron Perlman keep the simple plotline moving along, while the bevy of witches, demons, and deformed priests don't hinder the minimal thrills. Perhaps the film never really knows what direction it's ultimately going, but that uncertainty offers a level of unpredictability that keeps the audience guessing - to an extent. Is the girl a real witch or just an innocent child? Are the priests evil torturers or wise saviors? Is there an underlying theme of redemption through sacrifice, or a championing for fair trials? Nah, probably not.
After many years and countless battles, Crusaders Behmen (Nicolas Cage) and Felson (Ron Perlman) realize the devastation they have caused in the name of God. Denouncing the church and casting off on their own, the two knights wander the countryside until they happen upon a village ravaged by plague. Apprehended by soldiers and faced with execution for desertion, Behmen and Felson agree to once again assist the church in a perilous mission - transport a young girl (Claire Foy) accused of witchcraft to a remote monastery where the monks' rituals might at last end the suffering. Enlisting the aid of weary knight Eckhart (Ulrich Thomsen), disgraced merchant Hagamar (Stephen Graham), paranoid priest Debelzaq (Stephen Campbell Moore), and young runaway altar boy Kay (Robert Sheehan), the knights begin a dangerous quest through uncharted territory - where mysterious forces attempt to destroy them from the outside while each man's internal demons threaten to destroy them from within.
It's been some time since a theatrical swords and sorcery movie was released, sticking strictly to the time period of the medieval 14th century, with themes of witchcraft, crusaders, knights, the church and the devil. Although supernatural in nature, Season of the Witch is thankfully devoid of Krakens, Gorgons and other such mythological creatures that disrupt the generally more believable notion of possession. Unfortunately, with generous amounts of computer graphics during the conclusion, the marginally creepy, craftily foreboding opening act is forgotten to the utterly unconvincing animation.
Nicolas Cage, who portrays his average self in a new environment, isn't nearly as authentic as his partner Ron Perlman, who carries himself like an aging warrior knight crossed with Will Ferrell. The language, which cuts in and out of old English and contemporary jesting, also betrays the setting, despite the costumes and gruesome makeup effects that work to complete the illusion. The random flashbacks to scenes witnessed a mere 15 minutes earlier are nothing short of insulting, along with the raspy demon and mutant wolves that appear hideously out-of-place, but a certain atmospheric charm exists over the basic epic quest plot.
While the film only briefly succeeds at creating suspense, the inclusion of swordplay for the sake of swordplay, staring contests, castles, flesh-eating disease aftermath, mass graves, duels, ferocious animals, treacherous bridges, lightless forests, ghostly towns, unsettling fog and boil-covered monks lend to amusing imagery. Sadly, Season of the Witch can't quite recapture the entertainment of '80s sword and sorcery B-movies, despite the wealth of technological advancements.

Movie Review: The Dilemma (2011)

Vince Vaughn and Kevin James seem like a perfect duo for a straightforward comedy heavy on slapstick and crazed antics. It's surprising then that The Dilemma masks much of its laugh-out-loud funniness with dark humor, subtle jests and highly serious drama. Vaughn's fast-paced ramblings and James' general goofiness are still present, but the staid business of infidelity and work-related pressures are rarely laughed at. The cast is certainly capable, but based on your expectations of the leading comedians you'll either be pleasantly surprised by the film's favor of examining realistic relationship tragedies or disappointed by the unfulfilled potential for supreme silliness.
Ronny Valentine (Vince Vaughn) and Nick Brannen (Kevin James) have been best friends since college and now as adults run an electric engine manufacturing company together. They also have idyllic relationships; Nick with wife Geneva (Winona Ryder) and Ronny with soon-to-be fiancée Beth (Jennifer Connelly). When Ronny inadvertently spies Geneva kissing a tattooed mystery man (Channing Tatum), he is faced with a formidable dilemma - does he tell Nick about his wife's unfaithfulness and risk losing a major business deal for their company, or wait and chance losing his best friend altogether? Ronny's predicament only grows worse when he confronts Geneva and she threatens to expose a long kept secret. As he struggles with his increasingly troublesome situation, Ronny begins to cause more problems than he's able to fix and soon finds himself barreling towards a head-on collision with both his friends and the inescapable truth.
Although it's primarily a comedy, The Dilemma delves into the dark infidelities of faulty relationships, which uncovers some serious predicaments. The cheeriest of comic relief interludes can't overcome the solemnity of disloyalty and its destructive nature. But comedians Kevin James and Vince Vaughn certainly try, bringing their trademark playful, flirtatious, speedy, back-and-forth dialogue to the table. Allan Loeb writes the film, but with Vaughn producing, it's likely the scripting was heavily influenced. The sickly-sweet "getting to know the characters" intro is the only segment that doesn't scream of Vaughn's verbal work, with the moral impasse and its resolution appearing to be director Ron Howard's material. It's a return to comedy after a decade of dramatic projects for the filmmaker, but not devoid of tragicomic substance.
The supporting cast of Ryder and Connelly overreaches in the attempt to portray chemistry, which feels like generically perceived romances instead of an authentic union. Channing Tatum and Queen Latifah are more believable as idiosyncratic quacks, but belong in a different movie. Fortunately, awkward confrontations, uncomfortable but funny scenarios, mixed messages, riotous hypothetical situations, and challenged urination make their way into The Dilemma, which is wholly watchable but substantially forgettable.

Movie Review: The Illusionist (2011) - Directed by Sylvain Chomet

The Illusionist perfectly combines the unique, detailed visual style of Oscar-nominated animator/writer/director Sylvain Chomet with the melancholy, simple and poignant storytelling approach of celebrated writer/director/actor Jacques Tati. Although traditionally animated, the film could easily have been a live action work, especially with the lead character so closely mimicking Tati's own Monsieur Hulot (a single clip from Mon Oncle pays appropriate homage), and the use of a dramatic, tragic, romantic plot that never strays from reality. It's occasionally sad, oftentimes humorous, and always touching.
An aging magician (voiced by Jean-Claude Donda) in 1960s Paris somberly realizes that his amusing craft is no longer an exciting art form for the crowds of youngsters that cheer for opening acts like Billy Boy and the Britoons, a stereotypical rock group with springy hair, colorful suits and giddy demeanors. When his venue tumbles from a classy music hall to a crowded park, he journeys to Scotland for work. He's greeted by friendly people and finds small success at a little pub, where he also meets Alice (Eilidh Rankin), a young woman working as a maid and innkeeper.
The elderly man takes a liking to the girl, and treats her to a new pair of shoes. When he gathers together enough money to return to Paris and try his tricks anew, he takes Alice with him; the two share a small apartment (joined by his feisty white rabbit) and are content with their new father/daughter relationship. While their happiness never really dwindles, the poverty surrounding them, and the magician's slow but steady inability to hold a job (let alone a magic-oriented act) in the trying times, weigh heavy on their livelihood.
Chomet's animation and character designs are curiously sightly in the way the characters have too much detail (signified by excessive lines) in odd places, such as the wrinkles in the face or the folds in clothing or the creases in hands. Most of them are quite ugly due to the extreme exaggeration in physical distortions, from plump noses placed high on the head, to thinly stretched lips pulled across large teeth, to the incredibly obese, short and stocky, gangly or off-balance. Facial features are always elongated, misplaced, shrunken, or mutilated in hilariously stylized fashions. With the watercolored backgrounds and equally exaggerated body movements, Chomet's animations are instantly recognizable.
The near nonexistence of dialogue allows the movie to be universally appealing and understandable, with the simplicity of the plot aiding in bringing the character designs to the forefront (so too are the background characters carefully stylized). Some may scoff at the intentional pacing, woeful mood, or the lack of action, but the heartfelt acts of kindness and saddening emotional stresses are beautifully realized. The Illusionist joins The Triplets of Belleville as a stunning masterpiece of illustration, animation, character design and story.

Movie Review: The Green Hornet (2011)

The Green Hornet attempts to represent the very epitome of cool, with fast cars, masked crime-fighters, seductive girls, dastardly villains, enormous explosions, martial arts combat and senseless destruction. The creators must have thought they had every element necessary to build the perfect action flick - but they completely forgot to design a sensible plot and interesting characters. Although the story is based loosely on the 1930's Green Hornet radio series and the TV shows and comics that followed, this 2011 adaptation feels entirely like a Seth Rogen teen comedy.
That's not altogether surprising, considering Rogen and Evan Goldberg (the writer of Superbad and Pineapple Express) not only penned the script but produced the movie as well. This causes the lead character, Britt Reid (Rogen), to assume the role of a giggling, incompetent schmuck, carelessly wasting away his father's vast fortunes (superheroes cannot be poor) from The Daily Sentinel, the last independently owned Los Angeles newspaper. Drunken partying, countless nameless girls (summed up in a hyperspeed scene of love-making, sans actual sex, a la A Clockwork Orange) and pampered luxury fill up his days, not unlike Christopher Nolan's early theatrical interpretations of Bruce Wayne. Reid even has a devoted, coffee-serving valet, Kato (Jay Chou) to wait on him, who secretly specializes in kung fu, words of wisdom, and hi-tech engineering.
When Ried's father (Tom Wilkinson) dies, his spoiled life is suddenly thrown into perspective - he's not consumed with filling shoes, but rather thrill-seeking, especially when he discovers Kato's knack for kicking ass and customizing weapons onto their custom car, Black Beauty, like a human Swiss Army knife. Deciding to become a masked vigilante (leaving all the physical labor and fighting skills to his experienced partner), Reid dons the moniker "Green Hornet" and embarks on a mission to disrupt the crime in the city, conducted chiefly by aging mobster Chudnofsky (Christoph Waltz).
The only mildly amusing aspect of this generic superhero team is the notion that they pose as villains to get closer to the real criminals, while diminishing suspicions about their true motives to law enforcement. The rest is a hodgepodge of failures, from the ceaseless inclusion of juvenile slapstick, to the Academy Award-winning antagonist who embarrassingly switches from realistic to ridiculous while fretting over his intimidation abilities (he predictably participates in the offing of his own henchmen for evil demonstration), to the "drop dead gorgeous" secretary Lenore Case (a noticeably aging Cameron Diaz), who desperately struggles to retain even an ounce of the allure she possessed in The Mask.
Who is the one actor least likely to be on the top of every moviegoer's list to star as an action hero? It would probably be Seth Rogen, who is so far removed from being anything other than a crass, cachinnating, chowderhead that his version of a cloaked vigilante is just short of a court jester. In its defense, The Green Hornet does feature a few thrilling car chases and explosive standoffs, but the typically dependable, macho hand-to-hand combat sequences we expect are tossed aside for highly stylized choreography and graphics that look like an inhuman, computer animated ninja dueling in a video game, with the option to pause and select targets and weaponry. The slow-motion in all the wrong spots and disastrous pacing don't help either.

Movie Review: Battle: Los Angeles (2011)

The creators of Battle: Los Angeles have definitely played their video games and watched their alien invasion films. While derivative, this latest hostile encounter of the third kind still manages to provide solid entertainment with its no-nonsense nature, massive alien creations, and intense wartime operations, including classic rescue, recon, and offensive missions. In fact, these frantic maneuvers result in a rather relentless pacing, one that would be ideal in a video game but perhaps not so much in a movie. The film does have more conspicuous problems, including an obnoxious amount of camaraderie, an abundance of throwaway characters who receive entirely too much screen time, a cameraman suffering from seizures, and a horrendous title. But with the success of Halo, Resistance, Gears of War and more, and this film's similarities to video game structuring, it's likely people will enjoy watching evil alien invaders as much as they delight in controlling the conquering themselves.
After strange meteorites begin landing off the coasts of major populations around the world, it becomes clear that it's more than just a weather anomaly. As otherworldly invaders emerge and begin attacking the cities, retiring Staff Sergeant Michael Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) must head into combat once again. Leading a platoon of marines on a rescue mission through the alien-infested streets of Los Angeles, Nantz must join forces with Tech Sergeant Elena Santos (Michelle Rodriguez) to save civilians and turn the tide of battle against an alien foe of unimaginable power.
Battle: Los Angeles never lets up from the very start, which is both a strength and a weakness. With very little comic relief and no time to catch your breath, it strays from the lighthearted fun of Independence Day or Mars Attacks!, opting instead for a darker, more tragic and action-oriented feel like War of the Worlds or Cloverfield. This leads to a mission of redemption and sacrifice that is fierce and heartfelt, intermittently fused with overwhelmingly silly rallying war cries, gung ho hoorah talks, John Wayne heroics, soapbox speeches, the barking of orders and soldiers verbally losing their cool. Unfortunately, with its PG-13 rating, the combat dialogue is noticeably moderated.
The quick zooms and constant use of shaky cam techniques never gets nauseating, thankfully, but the attention to unnecessary details lean in that direction. A lot of time is spent giving each soldier a name and rank, brief histories, plenty of visual brotherhood, and senses of patriotism, duty, honor and discipline - USMC life. It's a lot of wasted screentime considering so many of the troops are simple fodder, and the focus is frequently on chaotic firefights, piercing bullet strafes, reverberating explosions, and Portuguese man-of-war jellyfish alien dissection. Despite all of the time spent on character development and the initial search and rescue task, the conclusion is rather rushed, shifting into a save-the-world resolve, necessary to avoid ending a full on alien invasion with an epilogue of how the war was won. It might have felt more satisfying if Nantz' mission all along had been to discover the alien weakness and exploit it.

Movie Review: Limitless (2011)

Most viewers will go into Limitless with low expectations, thanks to a mediocre trailer and a cast of second-tier regulars. This works to a great advantage, since the film actually possesses a unique plot, fascinating concepts and genuine thrills. There's also a lot of humor mixed into the graveness, lightening the mood for the more shocking material and creating a sense of fun - it's also difficult to take anything Bradley Cooper does too seriously.
Edward Morra (Bradley Cooper) is a failing writer, struggling to type the first sentence of the book he's already taken an advance to pen, frequently turning to booze for inspiration. When he happens upon the brother of his ex-wife, Vernon (Johnny Whitworth), a well-dressed drug dealer convinced that he's a successful businessman, Eddie is given a clear pill known as NZT that promises to expand the usage of the brain from the standard 20% to a whopping 100%. Upon downing the drug, Eddie is suddenly shot with an unprecedented surge of motivation; he's capable of spouting a sparkling cocktail of useless information (which makes him irresistible to the ladies), recalling everything he's ever seen or heard in a remarkably organized manner, learning languages just by listening to people speak, and finishing his novel in a few days.
He returns to Vernon for more of the miracle drug and is able to secure a large bag. It's a limited supply, but enough to boost his mind into transforming $12,000 into $2 million by playing the stock market. Despite terrifying side effects, which he is eventually forced to control, Eddie is all set to become a very powerful man - if only he can keep a murder charge off the record thanks to gaps in memory, prevent a shady loan shark from killing him, and not run out of NZT while trying to impress the Gordon Gekko of investment bankers, Carl Van Loon (Robert De Niro).
Two things make Limitless a lot more entertaining than typical, mindless thrillers: firstly, Eddie's "super powers" aren't actually superhuman, allowing the premise to be much more believable. The fact that it's caused by a drug also dissuades inquiry because it's generally accepted that drugs do crazy things. It's a purely science-fiction idea without the otherworldly disposition of aliens or time travel. His moments of superior intelligence are demonstrated by green-screen work, CGI, a hazy gray world transforming into a vivid golden one, and hyperactive camera tricks. Secondly, our superhero frequently loses his special abilities and must cope in the real world, dealing with adversaries that also don't possess a super weapon or Kryptonite - along with the accompanying downers of addiction and crashing. He's also simply not a clean cut protagonist.
A necessary narration presides over Limitless, smartly filling in what can't be described by actions. The rest is a combination of adventure, suspense, and creatively hilarious violence. The unexpected conclusion might leave you with questions and concerns, but also a certain undeniable degree of satisfaction. If the bewildering nature of the outcome is too much to wrap your head around, just remember that it's only a Bradley Cooper movie.