Fragments

Released: 2008

MPAA rating: R

Run time: 1:40

"Fragments" (aka "Winged Creatures" per IMDB) follows the survivors of a random diner shooting and how they each deal with survivors guilt. Despite a powerhouse cast, this ended up being released straight to DVD. I don't know why they changed from the original title, which actually made more sense as there are images of birds and angels throughout the film. "Fragments", as a title, is sort of nonsensical. The movie opens with the incident, but cuts away from it rather quickly, so we are not quite sure what happened and to whom. From there, we follow Carla Davenport (Kate Beckinsale): a waitress, Anne Hagen (Dakota Fanning), Jimmy Jaspersen (Josh Hutcherson), Dr. Bruce Laraby (Guy Pearce) and Charlie Archenault (Forest Whitaker) to see how this incident has affected their lives. We see various reactions, including reckless gambling, born-again Christianity, utter disregard for a child, utter silence and a Munchausen-by-proxy sort of relationship. While the acting was good and the story has potential, each of those individual reactions were very over-the-top. While I do believe any one of those is certainly possible, it seems unrealistic that just about all of the survivors would have reactions that extreme and so quickly after the event. Also, a trauma specialist bounces in and out of the story and no one is interested in speaking with him. While I also understand that reaction (I think it would be mine, to be honest), I don't think they would all react to him that way. The end result is a film that the makers really didn't seem to have confidence in. From the title change (despite peppering the movie with "winged" imagery) to the DVD release, it seems even those involved know that the film missed the mark. If you want to check out a great cast, it may be worth a shot, but it could have been so much more.

Grade: C-

Trailer:

Conspiracy

Released: 2001

MPAA rating: None (made for HBO)

Run time: 1:36

"Conspiracy" chronicles the amazing story of the Wannsee Conference in which 15 members of the German government discussed and launched the "final solution" for the "Jewish problem". The meeting itself lasted just over an hour and the movie takes place mostly in real time. It is surprising to see how a movie that is entirely comprised of men sitting around a table can be so riveting. Kenneth Branagh is impressive as Reinhard Heydrich, the ring leader of the meetings and the man in charge of persuading this group of men to come to the same conclusions he came to. It begins rather stale as the men begin to discuss their problem as mostly an economic matter: More Jews are being captured and detained than they can really afford to take care of. Once that fact is accepted, you watch Heydrich lead the men systematically to the idea of gas chambers and eliminating the Jews entirely. It is horrifying yet fascinating to see these men be so cavalier toward the annihilation of a group of people. There was certainly some resistance to the idea, but Heydrich and his SS cronies squash any questions on the subject swiftly and with no doubt as to what will happen to those that are not part of the solution. The cast of mostly character actors is solid and manage to put together the most impressive "guys in a room" movie since "12 Angry Men" (which started as a play, which this movie feels a lot like). I know this is an old one, but if you haven't seen it, check out the DVD. Great stuff.

Grade: A

The Reader

Released: 2008

MPAA rating: R

Run time: 2:04

"The Reader" was a finalist for Best Picture and netted Kate Winslet a Best Actress win for her role as Hanna Schmitz, a mysterious woman who begins an affair with a high school boy, Michael Berg (David Kross), and ends it just as quickly. Besides being his sexual mentor, she really enjoys him reading to her. That affair comprises the first act of the film (and certainly does not hold back on showing the affair). As the second act unfolds, we find Michael in law school where he is observing Nazi war crime trials and finds the center of attention to be his own Hanna Schmitz, who was a guard at a women's camp during the war and her job included selecting women for execution and she was involved in a fire which killed a large number of women. This part of the movie was riveting and, dare I say, unintentionally hilarious. No, there was nothing funny about the subject matter, but Winslet plays the role perfectly of someone who is completely incredulous that she did anything wrong. ("Are you saying I was not supposed to have a job??") The final act follows an older Michael (Ralph Fiennes), who is still obsessed with her to the point that his marriage has failed and he continues to contact her in prison. The story is very captivating and the acting was top-notch. I had avoided this film for a long time because it looked like it might be an art house bore-fest, but it was not. The story is very well told and has enough plot turns to keep you interested.

Grade: A

Trailer:

Streets of Blood

Released: 2009

MPAA rating: R

Run time: 1:35

You never expect much from a straight-to-DVD film and your expectations are rarely exceeded. Even knowing that, I picked this up anyway because I like Val Kilmer and it "looked cool". "Streets of Blood" is basically a run-of-the-mill dirty cop drama set against the backdrop of New Orleans post-Katrina. Val Kilmer plays Andy Devereaux, who is part Serpico, part Jack Bauer: A clean cop who doesn't mind doing what needs to be done to get the job done. He gets partnered with young cop Stan Johnson (50 Cent), who is idealistic but also struggling at home. The partners find themselves in the midst of a murder investigation that centers around fellow cops and puts them up against the DEA. In this movie, corruption on both the city level and the Federal level is so rampant, it is completely over the top. Every one seems to want their piece of the pie in what has become a lawless New Orleans. What about Sharon Stone, you ask? She plays a police psychologist who is shown interviewing the principals of the story throughout the film, but these scenes really do little to further the story. They are probably meant to be more character development driven, but with such two-dimensional characters trying to be complex, the scenes are really not necessary. I didn't hate the movie. What you see is what you get: A decent straight-t0-video movie, but certainly nothing you need to rush out and rent.

Grade: C-

Trailer:

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Released: 2009

MPAA rating: PG-13

Run time: 2:30

The first "Transformers" was a thrill-ride of action and humor and was very entertaining. "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" brings a lot more of the same...well, except for the entertaining part. You may find it hard to believe that a movie with non-stop action and amazing effects would actually be a borefest, but it is. For one thing, it is just too long. It starts out with heavy action and never lets up. That may sound like a good thing, but for action scenes to deliver any real excitement, there has to be some context. Sure, they try to paste together some sort of a story about the origins of the war between the Autobots and the Decepticons (Do I even have those right?? I was too bored to be sure), but there is so much going on, it ceases to be interesting. You may think I am a movie snob thumbing my nose at a big action franchise, but I actually loved the first one and sort of enjoy mindless popcorn flicks, but this one just missed the mark on so many levels. The big final battle goes on forever and ever (although I think the first one had a similar problem) with explosions and sounds of banging and crunching metal which all amounted to a feeling of "Is this over yet??". I could not have been more disappointed. (To my male readers: No, Megan Fox running around in tight clothing did not make this any better!!)

Grade: D

Trailer:

Orphan

Released: 2009

MPAA raing: R

Run time: 2:03

I didn't expect all that much from this one going in, although I did get some positive feedback from friends. At first glance, it seemed like some sort of "Omen" ripoff. On some basic levels, it was sort of similar, but the story ended up being so much better than I expected. A large part of the credit for that belongs to Isabelle Fuhrman, who is simply amazing as Esther, the orphan of the title. After an opening sequence setting up the story, we see Kate (Vera Farmiga) suffer the birth of a stillborn. After she and her husband, John (Peter Sarsgaard) get through the grief, they decide to add a child to their home (they have two) and end up adopting Esther from an orphanage. Esther is a very talented artist and is perfectly angelic. When she first arrives, she seems like a perfect addition to the family. It does not take long, however, for some weird things to start to happen around her. Kate starts to become very suspicious, while John thinks Kate is over-reacting to coincidences. In fact, John and Esther have a very strange relationship, which borders on creepy, almost pedophilia, at times. As tension starts to mount, Kate digs deeper into Esther's past and realizes she has some secrets that need to be explored. This sets up a very intense battle of wits between Kate and Esther and several very good plot twists along the way. This is a very well-done film with good performances all around. I can not say enough about Isabelle Fuhrman, who shows a wide range of talent moving seamlessly from sweet to absolutely evil. It is hard to believe a child can act so convincingly and carry such a dark film. I will actually go so far as to say this kid deserves an Oscar nomination! The other children are spectacular, also.

Grade: A-

Trailer:

Disney's A Christmas Carol

Released: 2009

MPAA rating: PG

Run time: 1:36

Unless you live in a cave, you are pretty much familiar with "A Christmas Carol", so I'll spare you a plot recap. The question is did Disney get it right?? Well, first, I did see it in IMAX 3D and wow, was that experience amazing. You would not really think this classic tale would lend itself to 3D, but it really enhanced the visuals and I highly recommend the IMAX experience as THE way to see this film. Jim Carrey does an excellent job as not only Ebenezer Scrooge, but as several other characters, along with Gary Oldman, whose main role was Bob Cratchitt. The storyline adhered very closely to the original book, to the point that character narration is interlaced with the actual text as the story opens and closes. In a slight nod to Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities", the opening camera sweep through London takes you through the rich Christmas banquets and the poor children in the streets. If there is to be one criticism of the movie, and it is a fair one, it is that several of the sequences almost look like they are setting up some kind of "Christmas Carol" theme park ride. Also, despite being a timeless Christmas classic, it is important to remember that it is a ghost story and some of the ghost visits are downright scary for younger viewers. The animation was breathtaking and so lifelike that seeing Gary Oldman and Jim Carrey's faces worked into their characters almost made it feel like a live-action movie. This is probably not the best version of this story, but it was definitely a great one. It may give you a peek into my twisted mind that my personal favorite version is Bill Murray's "Scrooged". Kick off your holiday season by taking the family to an IMAX 3D presentation of this film.

Grade: A

Trailer: