Alejandro González Iñárritu Trilogy (Amores Perros 2000, 21 Grams 2003, Babel 2006)

Unlike Toy Story, I can’t say this is a “perfect trilogy”. These movies do have their flaws. The thing that make’s these movies so good is that the flaws are few and far between. This is not your ordinary trilogy. It is not on a line like the Lord of the Rings or Star Wars. They don’t have similar characters in different settings like Indiana Jones or any comic book trilogy. What makes this a trilogy is the way they are directed and written. Every film centers itself around 3 characters’ that represent a different view on a human concept. The other similarity is that each film as one small aspect that connects all three characters directly. Don’t get me wrong; this is not the same film over and over again. They are all presented in a different way; and although they all have the same “out of chronological” directing style, they all feel very different and apart and at the same time, one relates to each of the 9 characters the exact same way.

Amores Perros is a film about love. 3 characters that represent love in a different way that are all met together by a car crash. In the first story, the main character (Gael Garcia Bernel) falls in love with his brothers’ wife because his brother is abusing her and he wants to do anything he can to give her the life she deserves. In an attempt to make enough money to flee town, he enters in dog fighting competition. He ends up wrapping his head so far around the crime he forgets himself and he ends up forgetting the real meaning of his love. The second story revolves around a man that give’s up his family for the love of his girlfriend. His girlfriend is a model, whom is very beautiful, popular, and famous. His girlfriend is then involved in a car crash (Crash movie that connects the 3 characters) and loses her looks and becomes a totally different person. This shows the sacrifices you live with when you turn on love for selfish love. The third story is about a homeless man who gave up a life with his daughter to become a Guerrilla. He then uses his life to take care of homeless dogs and puts his love in all the things he can since he turned his back on the reality. This shows that you have a responsibility to the things you love no matter what decisions you made in your past. This film is excting, engaging, and the film gets the message across in a very impactful way. This is easily the best of the series. The directing is perfect and the story will bring you to your knees. However, the second story does get a little confusing as to what the resolve is going to be and is a little more vague than the other two. There also isn’t the jaw dropping acting that the other two films use to draw you in. However, that being said, this film is not to be missed.

9.3/10

21 Grams is a film about death. This film is different than Amores Perros in the way that the characters are personally connected. One story is about man (Sean Penn) who has a condition with his heart and needs a transplant. The second story is about a man (Benecio Del Toro) who has been in and out of trouble all his life and has now found Jesus and is trying to make his life with the law and his family right. The third story is about a woman (Naomi Watts) who has a wonderful family of 4 ( Her, her husband, and 2 daughters) whose family dies in a tragic accident that involves Benecio Del Toro. After the death of her husband, she opts to give up his heart for a donation. Penn’s character receives the heart and lives. He then gets too involved with Watt’s life and makes some rash decisions that lead to his painful demise. Watt’s character represents the outcome of a tradgic death, Del Toro represents the giver of death, and Penn’s character represents death itself. If it seems as if I’ve given too much away, trust me, I haven’t. This movie is filled with twists and turns that will really blow you away. The message is just a strong as Amores Perros however, it didn’t seem to come off as strong because the characters all become a part of each other lives instead of staying separate like the other 2 films. This film is probably the best directed. This is seen by the way it can jump from the past to the future over and over again with 3 different stories without losing you. The acting is superb as Benicio Del Toro blew me away once again. The only real flaw is that the message is not a gripping. Even though it is about death, we don’t seem to be as floored as we were for love. Also, it goes from being 3 stories to 1 story and has to rely on a final monologue by Sean Penn to explain exactly what went on. This element makes the film a little Hollywood and drive’s it to be the least of the 3 other films. Other than that this is a great film, though I would suggest you watch it 3rd instead of 2nd.

7.9/10

Babel is a film about communication. The title of this film has the most significance to the story than the other one’s. The title is taken from the tower of Babel or the confusion of languages. The first story is about a two American tourists (Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett) taking a trip in the Middle East on a tour bus full of people from other nationalities and races. So, when he is trying to find medical help for this wife after she is shot, he finds himself unable to communicate with the locals and the people on the bus. The second story is about two Middle Eastern boys that shoot at the bus carrying the other two characters and accidentally injure Cate Blanchett. Unlike the other 2 films where our main characters all live in the same area; the third story in this film is about an Asian girl from China. This girl is just trying to live a normal life after the tragic death of her mother. The communication aspect comes not from the connection between her and the characters in the Middle East. Her communication aspect of the film comes from the fact that she is deaf and mute. The only connection she has to the other 4 characters is that her father gave the Middle Eastern boys’ father the gun they used to shoot at the bus. This movie also seems to have a side story. The nanny of Brad Pitt’s children defies his wishes and takes the children across the border for her son’s wedding. This happens to be the most intense of the 4 stories because it shows that no matter how good of a person you are, if you make one wrong decision in your communication, it could ruin you forever. This film is easily the second best of the trilogy. The acting incredible, the story is gripping, and the message is portrayed beautifully. However, the Nanny story really doesn’t seem to have as much to do with communication as the other 3. This may lose some people as to what is the full outright meaning of the film. The only other flaw is that the Asian girl has absolutely nothing to do with the other characters, and the way she is connected seems a little weak. Likewise, her story can confuse the viewer as to where the film is going. However, if you are like me and after you think about it and piece it together (and perhaps give it a second viewing), you will love this film as you will the others. This rounds out the trilogy in a perfect and satisfactory way. Now Inarritu can move on to greater things and inspire us with new concepts.

8.4/10

-Zack Tinsley

Valentines Day (2010)

Valentines Day is a movie not unlike many other recent chick flick’s that involve multiple characters in one setting all sharing the same day and struggles together. It’s cute, somewhat funny, very colorful, and has all the likeable and unlikeable characters. The largest problem that faces this movie is that it lacks any trace of an intelligent story. Unlike a film like Love, Actually that also revolves around many characters facing similar ups and downs; Valentines Day just seems to be a series of shorts that are either extremely dull or extremely pointless. Every story is predictable from beginning to end with its repetitive nature. Every story is either about the lovesick character that loves Valentines Day and they fall out of love and back in love by the end or about the single character that hates Valentines day and by the end of the movie finds the beauty in the day. Garry Marshall presents this film like this holiday deserves as much credit as Christmas or Thanksgiving. Every character give’s his or her regular ole’ generic character. Brad Cooper, Julia Roberts, Jamie Foxx, Topher Grace, Ashton Kutcher, and Jessica Alba all play themselves while Jennifer Garner, Patrick Dempsy, Jessica Beil, George Lopez, and Anne Hathaway give the usual less than stellar performance at trying to be funny, loveable or hated. Throw Taylor Launter, Taylor Swift and another stupid story about high school and you sum up the worth of this movie. Shirly Maclaine and Hector Elizondo are really the only standouts when it comes to acting and they have the shortest amount of screen time. This movie does provide a few laughs and can be a good date movie if you are really bored. Overall, there are many other less than perfect chick flicks out there that you dust off (any 90s Meg Ryan movie) if you are trying to avoid this movie.

3.4/10

-Zack Tinsley

Toy Story (A Perfect Trilogy)

With Lee Unkrich at the helm, I must say that I was initially a little nervous for the completion of the trilogy, as it was his first solo direction project. But I must say, he delivered on all counts. With the triumphant return of Woody and Buzz to the big screen, the question everyone has been asking themselves is; where does this rank in the trilogy?

Well, let's start into this one, and be totally honest, there have been very few antagonists as villainous as Sid. I would rank him as the second or third most dastardly animated villain ever (Ursula and Jafar certainly come to mind). So, we can write this off immediately. "Toy Story," is the greatest animated film of all-time IMO. I'd say most can agree on the point that it is the greatest of the trilogy. The depth we see through the eyes of the toys is brilliant, and the love and importance of these toys to a child is very impacting as well. We need to help people when they are in danger, even if they don't respect us or want us to be there for them. Buzz shows us this with perfection! But the real question we want to know is this, where does the third installment in this series rank with respect to "Toy Story 2?"

Having now seen the film twice, I changed my mind from one viewing, to the next. The villains in the two films are very similar, at least on the surface. But, the Prospector and Lotso are both evil toys! How many different agendas could they have? Well, I'll tell you; two. The prospector wants to be admired, not played with, as is the case with Lotso. Which villain comes off better? It is hard to decide. I'd give the edge to Lotso because he ruins hundreds of toys lives, as appose to just a few. He is the equivalent of a Hitler, or Mussolini. He is a true dictator. So, "Toy Story 3" is better. Right? Wrong. After much contemplation, I must say, "Toy Story 2" takes it. But with a better villain and deeper story, and meaning, how could this be? The reason is this; we mustn’t forget, the Prospector isn't the only villain in "Toy Story 2!!!" Remember Big Al? He was the worst villain of the three of them. In our eyes he directly hurt our beloved Andy! He stole Woody (luckily Buzz saves the day)!!! As a real person, he holds onto that feeling of disgust we had towards Sid. Big Al is subtle, but without him, we have no story!! It's essentially all his fault!! For this reason, I would bump "Toy Story 2," just barely ahead of "Toy Story 3."

Having said all of this, "Toy Story 3" is perhaps the deepest of the three films. It was designed for all of us who grew up on T1 and T2. It was the more adult end to things, and because of this, it was deeper. We see the recurring theme of helping people. But we also see the idea, that people forget why they made decisions sometimes. Jessie went with Woody because she realized Emily had grown up, and knew that Andy would be a good new owner. She seems to forget this when she utters something to the effect of, "he threw us out, just like Emily." Another theme we see is that not one thing has to ruin your life. The subtle cameo of Sid (the garbage man) having seemingly grown up to be a normal guy adds to that as well. Most (myself included) didn't even notice it, but that was the point, he was just a normal guy now. His life wasn't ruined. Loyalty is another important tribute we see through Woody's eyes. Also, and perhaps the most important theme we see in the film is that there are some people's lives that we will touch, and make a huge impact, but this doesn't mean we will be in their lives forever. There is always someone new we can help! Towards the end of the film I think we'd be remiss if we didn't acknowledge that it almost brought us to tears. "Toy Story 3" was the complete package, and deserves the Oscar it is going to win next March. Oh and did I mention it's hilarious? Its comedic volume was great, maybe a little behind the likes of 1 & 2, but not by much! The "Cool Hand Luke" reference was perhaps the greatest comedic element of the film. Unfortunately, the world has lost a respect for old films, so this went unnoticed to most. "Toy Story 3" wrapped up an absolutely beautiful trilogy, and is what I would say is a top 5 trilogy of All-time. The biggest reason for this is, it's over now, and I don't think it could have ended better. Thank you Pixar!

Toy Story 10/10
Toy Story 2 9/10
Toy Story 3 9/10

-Travis Stauffer

Kramer vs. Kramer (1979)

I'm going to start this one off by saying this; KvK is not a better "film" than Apocalypse Now, but it did earn and deserve it's "Best Picture" win at the Academy Awards. It's not very often i say that. Normally to me the best is THE BEST. Now on to bigger and better things. First off (and i may take some crap for this), this is Dustin Hoffman's greatest role. Hoffman is one of the more outstanding actor's in film history. With roles like Ratso in Midnight Cowboy and Raymond Babbitt in Rain Man one may ask how the movie where he plays an everyday father trumps those. I'll tell you. By his acting alone, he will bring you to tears. There is this scene in the first ten minutes of the movie in which Hoffman's character is acting very nervously and he is raising his voice, yet, it is when his charctor calms down and mutters the words, "mhmm, how much courage does it take to walk out on your kid" that not only sends chills up your spine but sends the message that this is not ordinary role. This movie is superb for many reasons. Not only is Hoffman's acting incredible but as always Meryl Streep (greatest actress of all time) will send you in to tears with her stellar under 20 min performance. Even with her limited screen time, the audience can feel the presence of Joanne the entire running time just from that opening scene. It is about a Woman (Streep) who decides to leave her son and her husband (Hoffman) to go find herself. We are introduced to Hoffman's charcter as a work-a-holic who seems to have very little involvement in his son's life. A few scene and a bunch of tears later Hoffman is a changed man and everything ends up the way you would think it would. Or did it? I love this film because it portrays a very real scenerio of a (non-adulterous) divorce. This movie will make you sad, but not because it shoved sadness down your throat like some movies (any Will Smith drama), or because the character you fell in love with died, or because it is this love story the and dumb couple broke up. It is sad because it is real people, in real life, making real decisions and it is nothing more and nothing less. That is why this film is so beautiful. I know i make it sound super sad, but it has it's humorous parts and it's fun parts between the father and son. The only true downfall i would see in this movie is that it is very hard to watch and it is not what we call "fast-paced entertainment". Although humorous in parts do not get me wrong, it is sad and it is a slow paced film, so you kind of have to been in that particular mood. If you are, i guarantee you will be blown away.

9.1/10

-Zack Tinsley

The Blind Side (2009)

Well, we can finally do it. I never thought it would ever happen but it did. We can finally say that Sandra Bullock has impressed us. Sure she was funny in Miss Congeniality and The Proposal. But, she has no definitive roles as an actress (some of them have been down right awful). However, with this film, she really convinces us that she is, in fact, another person. Now that I'm done with that.. The Blind Side. This film is a great family movie. It's happy, sad, funny, inspiring... and cheesy. But the cheese, is ok for the type of "christian" attitude the film is trying to portray. This film is about a boy, a very large boy, Michel Oher, who comes from the slums of Memphis and is "adopted" by a rich family. This decision changes not only his, but every one's life. This movie has a good set up, and middle, and then the ending turn gets a little sloppy. At first we see this down and out kid who is poor, not very bright (supposedly), and shy. We him struggling in school, then the teachers showing interest in him, then him homeless, then the Tuohy's giving him a home. The director then shows us his new life and how it contrasts with the conflict of his past life. Then the third act comes and it goes from being a cheesy family movie that everybody is happy with to the super serious. There is a certain scene that i think is totally out of place with movie and the overall feel but.. ehh.. o well John Lee Hancock's just getting started. As much as this movie is about Mike, in my mind it was more about the development of Mrs. Tuohy (Bullock) and how she changes as a person through the hardship of this boy's life. This is a perfect family movie. Its heartwarming and it's directed very well. However, it is very predictable, cheesy, and well, Quinton Aaron gets my vote for worst acting of the year followed by his co-star Tim McGraw. But, like i said, we got the Bullock role we have been waiting for; and for me, that trumps the rest.

7.0/10

-Zack Tinsley

Splice (2010)

Here it is, my first "9" of the year. This film is technically 2009, but for all intensive purposes is a 2010 release. The first thing you need to realize before viewing, is this; it is NOT a horror. I don't know who decided to market it as such, but please, do not go into it with these expectations. This film is a thriller at best, and quite honestly, it's more of a drama than anything. Director and Writer, Vincenzo Natali, executes this modern day Frankenstein tale to near perfection. It has several nods to Frankenstein, and delivered on point. Not only was this film written and directed well, but Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley did an excellent job of portraying their characters in a way that we feel the things that are happening, through them. This film presented what some will remember as, some of the most disturbing scenes they have seen in a piece if cinema. However, much more than that, it gives a lot of depth. Underneath it's sci-fi premise, I think this film, has a lot to say in the way of the dangers, and "do's and don't's" of science. It challenges our thoughts. Through the lives and actions of it's characters, we question and tip-toe the boundaries of ethics and morality. I viewed the film as a metaphorical timeline for how we sometimes handle things as people, and to me, it seemed accurate. Natali gave me want I wanted and more. Sci-fi has very much made a comeback. 9/10

-Travis Stauffer

The Game (1997)

Throw two Oscar winners in a pot, mix in one of the greatest directors of the last 15 years, and poof, brilliance. "Fight Club," "Seven," and "Benjamin Button." Just a few of the works that director, David Fincher, can claim as his own. "The Game" comes as close to a masterpiece as you can get, without quite being there. Few actors can carry a film as well as Michael Douglas has shown he can throughout his career. In this thriller, we get a taste of life, and value. Throughout film we follow, Nicholas Van Orton (Douglas), around for a few days. He is Wall Street millionaire, who seemingly has it all. But as the film develops, we see that he is lacking the things in life that really provide happiness. Nicholas is payed a visit on his 48th birthday by his younger brother, Conrad (Sean Penn). Conrad informs and encourages Nicholas to call a recreational service, CRS. Nicholas eventually does, and finds out that he is to participate in some type of "game." What exactly it is? He doesn't know; and neither do we. Peculiar things start to happen to Nicholas, and as things unfold, they get stranger and stranger. It get to a point, where Nicholas can seemingly no longer trust anyone. Is this even a game anymore? or is it a scam? I'd like to write more, but I would rather you just indulge yourself in the film, and figure things out for yourself. Fincher toys with our minds yet again, in this fantastic film. We are intrigued, but we (like Nicholas) just want to know, what in the world is going on? Fincher makes us feel like we are a part of what is happening, by confusing us, just as much as CRS confuses Nicholas. All in all, the film gives us great depth, and makes us ask the question, am I really happy with my life? I believe Mr. Fincher hit the nail on the head with this one. Great work sir. This is why we keep coming back to you, for more and more! 9/10

-Travis Stauffer

Watchmen (2009)

The first thing i want to do before i get to critical of this film i would like to note that, yes, i did read the graphic novel and yes, it was not only the greatest graphic novel I've ever read, but one of the greatest books I've ever taken the time to finish. In most cases, one would say they didn't like the movie nearly as much because the book was so much better. However, for Watchmen, this is not the case. In fact, i would suggest reading the book first in order to truly understand the overall point the movie is trying to make. Watchmen, the novel written by Alan Moore (V for Vendetta, From Hell), is a beautifully painted story about masked vigilantes and how their decisions affected the rest of their lives and the lives of other over a span of 4 decades. This includes a back story for almost every character. It shows why they did what they did, who they are, and if they regret or miss doing it. It shows comic book hero's in a very real and human way. We learn to sympathize for them, and we fight with ourselves wondering if we should respect their decision to stay retired from crime fighting or if the world really would be better if we had those people. This is where the movie misses the mark. If you haven't read the novel, then the movie will be 3 hours of not really being able to understand why Silk Specter hated doing it all these years. Why night owl is so repressed. Veidt continues to sell his fame. We don't really care for the feelings and emotions of the characters and why, when you get to the end of the movie, the twist is such a big deal to the overall meaning of the story. The movie seems more like a superhero bio-pic of something that cannot happen. However, Rorschach and Dr Manhattan's stories are told almost spot on like the book. The problem is, it takes so long for you to relate with those two characters that the viewer could end up missing the point entirely. That is where the book comes in. If you have read the novel, you can automatically feel for the characters. You already know the point the movie is trying to make and you will really appreciate what was presented. For example; the first 15 minutes of the film contains a opening credit montage that shows us the ENTIRE back story of the original "watchmen" and the formation of the character's you will be following. If you have read the book, you understand this and can appreciate how Snyder was trying to stay as loyal as possible; if you have not read the book, you may get lost and bored and lose interest all together. Don't get me wrong the movie was directed very well. Zack Snyder has shown us with his small resume (that consists of a great remake of a horror masterpiece and a very good Frank Miller adaptation) that he has the potential to be one of the next great directors. So, it's not surprising to see (if you have read the book) how loyal this film is to the art (casting is perfect) and story line (about 90% of the dialogue comes directly from the novel). My overall review is this; if you haven't read the book, i wouldn't recommend watching it without knowing the general idea of the film before hand because you may find yourself bored or uninterested. To the readers, you will enjoy it if not just to see your favorite scene's and beautiful soundtrack in action (you might also like the ending in the film slightly better. I know i did).

7.3/10

-Zack Tinsley

Requiem for a Dream (2001)

Darren Aronofsky directed the most disturbing, gut wrenching film ever made (the last time i watched it I puked). Basing things, purely on the way it was shot, this is the greatest film ever made. It pulled me in and made me feel for the characters. It's ending instills something in you that just makes you not want to speak. It has pulled more emotion from me than any film I have ever seen ("Kramer vs Kramer" and "Revolutionary Road" are kind of close). The actors really made me believe this was their lives. Jared Leto carries us through the film as Harry Goldfarb, a junkie who see's a meaningful legitimate future. However, the means by which he intends to go about it is very unorthodox. Leto is also so great in that, he is the link between the two stories. Ellen Burstyn delivers the most impactful and powerful female performance I have ever seen in a film (albeit Angie in "Changeling" was great as well). Jennifer Connelly is incredibly convincing as Harry's junkie addict girlfriend Even Marlon Wayans gives us a performance to remember. This film should be shown in every high school in the country. It would reduce drug use without a doubt in my mind. It was also Aronofsky's first big film, and led to bigger things like, The Fountain and The Wrestler. A powerful film that wouldn't only make my top films of the decade, but would be in my top five list of all-time, with no contention. Brilliant piece of cinema. 10/10

-Travis Stauffer

Ironman 2 (2010)

Ironman 2 is a very unique film if you have followed the past Marvel films. Unlike X-Men, Spiderman, Fantastic 4, etc. Ironman follows more of the Batman route and becomes a drama rather than an action packed adventure. The action sequences are good, however, they are few and far between. So if you are going in to this film thinking you are just seeing "another comic book movie", you will be disappointed. Most sequels provide you with one of two things; it either has the character's greatest villain to fend off or it skips a couple years and show's you a character that has developed between films to make a path for a third installment. Ironman 2 has neither of these. The film starts off almost immediately after the first one leaves off and there really is not "major" villain. In fact, the primary "villain" in this film is his rival in the arms race Justin Hammer (whom is played by the brilliant Sam Rockwell). There is a lot of good to say about this film as a sequel. First, it show's a greater development of Tony Stark than we had in the first. Second, his relationships are are much better portrayed. Finally, it has some crazy incredible easter eggs (briefcase suit, captain america shield, hammer of Thor, mentions of the Hulk and the Fantastic 4) for comic nerds like myself. The movie starts off great. It show's Tony and his cocky attitude we all love, it introduces us to a villain, whom is used not unlike the way Scarecrow was in Batman Begins, and then we get an introduction to War Machine (which includes and excellent fight between best friends). Then enter Nick fury. After this, if you don't understand the "Avengers", the next half an hour can lose you. The action scenes are now completely over until the very end, there are some unnecessary scenes with unnecessary dialogue, and one may even forgot that Whiplash and Hammer are still the bad guys. However, the film does end with a incredible action sequence that show's the consequences of not only Tony's decision to be Ironman; it is also caused by Hammer's obsession with "besting" Stark. I thought this film was great. I loved how it showed a more human side to Tony. I loved how it didn't bog us down with needless villains (i.e. Spiderman 3, X-Men 3), and i also loved the way it presented the Avengers/War Machine. However, i did think this Favreau needs to tone it down on the Avengers thing because we lose Ironman a little bit. 7.7/10

-Zack Tinsley

Robin Hood (2010)

Ridley is masterful, and when he works with Crowe, good things happen. It was no “Gladiator” but then again, there are only a handful of films in film history that are that good. The story was great, and it helped reinvent the legend in a way we had never seen before. Held my attention for sure. I saw it twice. Sequel? Not likely. Scott rarely engages in them, and with two Alien prequels on the horizon, and Crowe’s age, this looks to be the end of the road for the duo, as far as Robin Longstride is concerned. Don’t sleep on them though. I’m sure they’ll pop something else out in the near future. 8/10

-Travis Stauffer

A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010)

Please stop ruining horror classics with garbage remakes. First Chainsaw, then Halloween and now this? STOP! This film lacked almost all originality. The kill scenes were almost all identical to the original. And the one’s that weren’t, well, weren’t very good. When it starts, you think you’re gonna see something original, but tough luck. You don’t. The films spends half and hour of it’s screen time building up to tell us the Fred Krueger is a pedophile. That’s great and all, but we already knew that before we watched it! Don’t waste our time, and toy with originality, and pretend things will be different in the trailers. This was seriously a joke, and if it weren't for me having nothing to do and seeing "Macgruber," this would be easily be the worst film of 2010. About 1 jump scene I didn't call before it happened, maybe. Other than that, very poor film. 3/10

-Travis Stauffer

Shutter island (2010)

It’s very possible this would have been my first film above an “8” for 2010. However, I might always remember this as, the marketing disaster that was. The initial trailer released back in June with, "Taking of Pelham 1, 2, 3," ruined things for me. I knew the twist, and it was hard to get passed. Having said that, upon two viewings, this was very well written, the story was interesting, and the characters were complex. DiCaprio was great, and played what is arguably the second best role of his career. Marty almost always delivers, and he did again with Shutter Island. I'd like to see his next Leo collaboration be "The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt," but it seems to have been put on the back burner for now. No worries though. Whatever these two decide to get themselves into next, shouldn't disappoint. If I could ever say one thing slightly critical to Martin Scorsese, it would be this; take control of marketing next time. Shutter Island might end up being the greatest film released in 2010, and I didn't get the full experience. It was put together great. Just make sure you oversee things a little better next time, please. 8/10

-Travis Stauffer

Martin Scorsese, is without a doubt, one of the greatest directors of all time. We know that from his 4 decades of creating some of the greatest stories ever told on film. So, why wouldn't he start the new decade with his best thriller to date? Cape Fear is a good thriller that seems to get drowned out amongst his two gangster movies made in the 90s. Not only is this film directed by one of the greats; it is also written by the man who brought us Mystic River and Gone Baby Gone. This is another area that Cape Fear was lacking, a great writer to provide us a excellent remake of an already fine thriller. Add Leonardo DiCaprio (who very well could be considered the actor of the decade in the 00s) and you and you have the making of a potential masterpiece. The film also stars Mark Ruffalo, Ben Kinglsey and Max Von Sydow to round out the rest of the stellar cast. Shutter Island is about a detective named Ted Daniels, who had been sent to the Mental Asylum for the criminally insane on Shutter Island. At first he thinks this is a simple search and find, maybe question some people and move on. He then gets way more than he bargained for and actually becomes part of the chase himself. This film has 3 great acts. The set up shows you a nervous cop and his partner who want to solve the riddle of a missing rachel solondo. The second act shows our main character battling with reality and his own mind and ends the third act showing us the breaking of the main character and the one line of dialogue that sum's up the entire movie brilliantly and leaves everyone guessing what is real. One thing i loved about this film, is that every time you think it would get to be that predictable conventional asylum thriller; the movie takes a turn you don't expect. You then try to figure out what is happening during the duration of the film but you end up becoming just as lost as the characters, only to be revealed the pieces of the puzzle as if you were a character in the film yourself. This film just misses masterpiece thriller by a hair, there is 30 min in the film where can can lose you if you feel you already have it figured out and are just waiting for it to end. It also doesn't have the most incredible performance by leo (if you have seen everything else he has done with Marty). Other than that the only REAL flaw i can find in this movie is the marketing. This film was marketed as a "horror" when it is more of a Drama/Thriller. Also, if you are obsessed with Scoresese like me, you would have seen the original trailer which revealed half of the ending. The only other thing i can think that would make someone like this movie is the ending. The "twist" is more of the style of Rear Window where the twist is really no twist at all. In reality, the ending is exactly what you thought it would be.... or is it?

Shutter Island 8.6/10

-Zack Tinsley

Get Him to the Greek (2010)

No “Sarah Marshall.” This one was almost great (as far as comedies go). However, it took a fatal turn, one very similar to “Step Brothers.” The last 20-25 minutes of the film seemed to drag on a bit. To the writers, I assure you, I didn't see this film, so that I could find a deeper message hidden within the crude humor. Your ending tore things up a little bit. Up until that point I was thoroughly satisfied. However, that time just really brought it down a notch. Fun movie, and is definitely good for some laughs. Aldous Snow is a great character, but I think that he, like “Shrek” needs to move on. Jonah Hill was fun, and the brief connection we see to “Forgetting Sarah Marshall,” was a good add in. The hour or so in the middle was hilarious, but as it moved towards the end, it just became fatal. I think I want to see Russell Brand more, but I’m trying to decide in what capacity. Because I don’t think I ever want to see him as a lead character again. But I guess time will tell. A little Russell goes a long way, and that may have been the problem towards the end of this one. 6/10

-Travis Stauffer