Short version: Like Twilight, New Moon is strictly for fans of the book – for the rest of us, it’s actually worse than the first film.

Screen Rant reviews The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Well, maybe the third time will be the charm.

In an earlier article we speculated whether New Moon might turn out to be a good movie not just for fans but for general audiences (maybe even guys!). With the replacement of Twilight director Catherine Hardwicke with Chris Weitz on New Moon, many people were hoping for a more exciting film this time around. Unfortunately, if anything what we’ve gotten is a film that is even slower than the first one.

Short Version: If you’re looking for some wicked-cool visuals and destruction on a scale that even Emmerich has never put on screen before, then 2012 is for you. Plot and character development? Move along, nothing to see here.

Screen Rant reviews 2012

That picture right there? That’s why you go see 2012. Heck, lately that’s why you go see any Roland Emmerich film – destruction on a massive scale. The man has taken what Irwin Allen used to do and multiplied it by 100.

2012 actually starts in 2009 – well first it starts out in space, showing us a few different shots of our solar system and the planets lining up all in a row, with the sun at the end of that line. When we get to good old Earth, we’re in India where geologist Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor, the assassin from Serenity) is meeting a fellow scientist at the Institute of Astrophysics. They go 11,000 feet down into a copper mine where it seems they figure they may as well do some scientific research as long as they’re down there.

Short Version: Do yourself a favor and find the original 30 minute Twilight Zone episode of The Box and watch that instead.

Screen Rant reviews The Box

Well this is going to be a short review because I don’t want to spend any more time on this movie than I have to. The Box is based on Button, Button – a very short story written by Richard Matheson that was used for an old episode of the classic TV series The Twilight Zone. It was written and directed by Richard Kelly, the man behind the cult classic Donnie Darko and the poorly received Southland Tales.

BTW, personally I think it’s obvious, but this review does tell you whether or not they push the button.

Short Version: While the animation is excellent, Astro Boy is too intense for younger kids, too corny for teens and annoyingly political overall.

Screen Rant reviews Astro Boy

I went into Astro Boy with high hopes and nostalgia. I’m actually old enough to remember watching the original cartoon back when I was a kid, and being a sci-fi kind of geek even as a wee child, remember enjoying the futuristic show about a robot boy who could fly and had all kinds of cool weapons. Trailers and clips looked good so although I expected a kids’ film, I was looking forward to this and brought along my 13 year old daughter and a friend of hers.

All three of us were of the same opinion: It was a waste of an hour and a half.

Short Version: While not as smart as it could be, Surrogates is thought provoking and mildly entertaining.

Screen Rant reviews Surrogates

Bruce Willis’ latest (semi-)action movie is Surrogates, a thought provoking look at the idea of taking our virtual/avatar online selves to a whole other level. In the film, it has been 14 years since Lionel Canter (James Cromwell) developed the first generation of a technology that allowed robots to be controlled completely via thought. We are briefly shown the stages of the development and integration of the technology over ensuing years, leading to present day (some time in the near future in the film).

Short Version: Never quite reaching the “Good” mark and hovering just below “OK,” Gamer opens the 2009 Fall movie season with plenty of shooting, death, blood and confusion.

Screen Rant’s Paul Young reviews Gamer

I’ve written this review for Gamer three times now and with each iteration I just can’t seem to find that slightly mocking tone I like to use so much – not to mention each one has been over 2000 words long and there is no way this movie deserves that much effort.  But I thought, “Am I’m trying too hard to be a ‘professional’ movie critic? No one really listens to them very much; people would rather listen to what their friends think of the movie. I wonder if we have any more Twinkies and Cheez-Wiz?” I’m just telling you what I thought; I never said I would edit those thoughts.

Short version: Just like super-sizing a McDonalds meal doesn’t make it taste any better, neither does giving us more of what was in the first film improve Transformers 2.

Screen Rant reviews Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Regular readers here at Screen Rant are familiar with my disdain for the first Tranformers movie. While many agree with me and others disagree vehemently – both sides have been expecting me to skewer Michael Bay’s Tranformers 2. I didn’t go in expecting much, and that may have actually caused me to not judge it quite as harshly as a lot of other reviewers are doing.

Short version: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian is a mildly funny and harmless family film about on par with the first movie.

Screen Rant reviews Night at the Museum 2

What’s there to say about the the sequel to the first Night at the Museum? It’s a bit of fluff, something to take the kids to where you might be mildly entertained without having to worry about anything offensive where your kids are involved.

Short version: Push has an interesting premise, but it just doesn’t manage to translate it into a great movie.

Screen Rant reviews Push

I really thought I was going to enjoy Push more than I did. But much like the God-awful Jumper, Push has an interesting premise that it just can’t translate into a great movie.

Just like Jumper, Push has an extensive backstory… While the former film established it via an in-depth document sent out to movie sites cataloging the history of the good guys and the bad guys, this film did it with a comic book mini-series. Having read four of the issues (which I found pretty intriguing) I had hoped that I would find the film more meaningful through understanding the deep background of “Division.”

Sadly, that didn’t turn out to be the case.

Short version: If your idea of a PG family movie includes sexual references, an annoying dog and bad language, by all means go see Marley & Me.

Screen Rant reviews Marley & Me

Let’s just get right to it, shall we? I don’t know… maybe I’m getting grumpy in my old age, but I just didn’t see the appeal of Marley & Me. I went into the theater wanting to like this movie, I really did. While I’m a huge sci-fi and superhero movie fan, I’m always happy to see a movie out there that parents can bring their kids to – so it bugs me when I can’t give that sort of film an endorsement.

Let me say that while I realize this film is based on a book, I know nothing about the source material other than it’s an autobiographical book by John Grogan about a dog he really owned.

Short version: Whether you enjoy Punisher: War Zone or not will depend completely on what you’re looking to get out of it.

Screen Rant reviews Punisher: War Zone

So… there are two approaches I take to reviewing movies here at Screen Rant. Sometimes I review movies from a more “overall” perspective – generally speaking, and compared to most other movies out there, is it a good movie or a bad one overall?

Then I have what I call a “context review.” This is where I decide whether to basically adjust the bell curve and review a movie from more of a niche perspective. In other words, does it accomplish what it sets out to do within the context of its genre?

Short version: Max Payne starts out promising but eventually begins to unravel, only to end in an awful mess.

Screen Rant reviews Max Payne

Mark Wahlberg plays Max Payne, a cop who’s wife and child were murdered and who subsequently becomes an obsessed outcast in the police department. Eventually he teams up with Mona Sax (played by Mila Kunis) in a quest to track down the killer.

Short version: Were it not for the Dakota Fanning rape scene controversy, no one would be talking about this boring film.

So you’ve heard all the talk, accusations and screaming about the film Hounddog (or as many spelling-impaired people are writing it: Houndog) screening at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival starring Dakota Fanning but haven’t seen the film. The big question on people’s mind is “Just how outrageous or explicit was that rape scene?”

So you can gauge my answer, keep in mind that although this is a movie & TV website, for the most part I’ve come at stories from the point of view of a parent when it’s appropriate. I do not want every movie release to be Rated G, but on the other hand it drives me insane when bloodless yet intense violence or overt sexuality is aimed at kids.

Short version: Bangkok Dangerous, isn’t.

Screen Rant reviews Bangkok Dangerous

If Nicolas Cage doesn’t get a hit movie soon, he’s going to be doomed to doing only National Treasure sequels for the rest of his life. I knew I was in trouble when the showing I attended (11AM on a Saturday) consisted of me, and two other guys who walked in right before the movie started.

That’s it – 3 people.

In Bangkok Dangerous, Nicolas Cage plays an assassin who is the poster boy for the word “loner.” He travels the world and does his job with painstaking precision, but he’s just about had enough and is ready to do one last job and quit.

Short version: The Clone Wars is visually interesting, but in the end pointless – and worse: annoying.

Screen Rant reviews The Clone Wars

Holy cow there’s a lot of… angst? anger? annoyance? surrounding the latest addition to the Star Wars saga: The Clone Wars. Me, I’m indifferent. I’m not a huge Star Wars fan (although I was when the first three movies were released for the first time) and I think that George Lucas has run the franchise into the ground and it’s all about:

1. Visual Effects

2. Merchandising

3. Money (see #2)

Short version: Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D is a great film to take the kids to, or if you’re a fan of 3D – otherwise don’t bother.

Screen Rant reviews Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D

I was trying to come up with a metaphor for Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D, and the perfect one came to mind:

Journey 3D is like vanilla pudding.

It was OK, not really awful or anything – but not something you would go out of your way to watch if there was something better available.

Short version: Wanted tries oh so hard to be the next Matrix, but despite insane amounts of action, falls short.

Screen Rant’s Wanted review

No doubt I’ll be taking a lot of heat for this since it seems that across the board, Wanted reviews are glowing and effusive in praise. I’ve seen many comments to the effect of “it was trash, but I loved it anyway.” While I certainly wouldn’t call it trash, it also failed to win me over.

Now don’t get me wrong… Pardon the pun, but going in I really wanted to love this movie. I didn’t go in with any thoughts that it would be high art or deep drama – just a cool popcorn flick. But even in popcorn action movies I can only suspend my disbelief so much.

There are minor spoilers related to the very first scene in the film below.

By Brian Rentschler

Short version: This movie starts out with some potential, but by the end, it’s over-the-top yet mediocre at the same time. It has its good spots, but overall its flaws are too distracting and frustrating for it to be truly enjoyable.

Didn’t I already see this movie a few years ago, and wasn’t it called Training Day? That might be because this movie was directed by the guy who wrote Training Day, David Ayer. However, I feel quite confident in saying that, unlike Training Day, this movie isn’t in danger of winning any Oscars, at least for acting or directing. It’s not terrible, but it’s far from great.

As usual, Keanu Reeves substitutes with likability what he lacks in acting ability. Throughout the entire movie, the believability factor of Reeves playing a cop is about the same as when Kevin Costner played Robin Hood. Somehow, it doesn’t matter, though. Far more detrimental to the movie are plot holes and logic gaps in the story that could accommodate a big rig. With the exception of Hugh Laurie, who plays Dr. House Captain Biggs, nearly every actor in this movie hams it up, even the Oscar-winning Forest Whitaker. With a better script and better direction, this movie had the potential to be something more and have something poignant to say. As it exists now, if I were a cop, I would probably feel insulted by this movie.

Short version: While there’s an attempt to make this a personal story, it’s really about what we thought it would be: Incredible vistas populated with a combination of ancient temples, pyramids, woolly mammoths and a cast of (CGI) thousands.

Two weeks ago I posted my thoughts about 10,000 B.C. based on what I’d seen so far and at the panel for the film at WonderCon, and one of the words that came to mind regarding what director Roland Emmerich had in mind for this film was “spectacle.”

Oh, and it tries oh so very hard to live up to that word.

The best I can say about 10,000 BC is that it wasn’t as bad as I was expecting it to be.

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: How can such an interesting concept end up as such a boring movie? One reason: Hayden Christensen.

I must be feeling generous with this Jumper review – despite the fact I’m giving it only 2.5 stars, that’s a rave compared to other movie reviews of this film.

I had really hoped this would be one of those little movies that turned out to be great, especially since I knew it was from Doug Limon, the director of The Bourne Identity and Mr & Mrs Smith. Those two films would look great on any director’s resume.

And then we had the screenplay, written by Jim Uhls, who wrote the script for the amazing film Fight Club and David S. Goyer whose written great stuff like Batman Begins and Dark City.

You’d think that this movie couldn’t miss with all that talent behind the camera… but unfortunately you’d be wrong.

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: A self-promoting, off-beat quasi-documentary that people in the lower ranks of the Hollywood movie machine will appreciate more than most of us.

I thought that with all the press surrounding Michael Moore and his latest film Sicko, it might be fun to review a (semi-)documentary about Michael Moore. Well, at least partially about him.

First off, you need to know that despite the promotional material and the title, Michael & Me is not really about Michael Moore, bashing or otherwise – so for both Moore haters and defenders there’s not really much to get bent out of shape over with this flick.

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: A schizophrenic and mind numbing movie. Who knew that so much action could be so boring?

I’m not going to spend too much time writing this review because I’m quite sure that it’s irrelevant. Based on the reaction of the audience at the screening I attended, most folks will not agree with this review, will go watch Transformers and leave the theater in a state of bliss.

Me? I just don’t get it.

Over the weekend I actually started to get excited about this movie based on the early reviews that had been coming out. I just checked Rottentomatoes.com and although in the overall category it’s just barely slipped into “Rotten” territory, the “Cream of the Crop” reviewer consensus is still well into “Ripe” (meaning good). Over at IMDB.com the user rating stands at 8.3 out of 10 at the time of this writing.

I can only conclude that all these people are on crack.

By M Holtreman

Short version: Not completely awful, unless you’re a big fan of Nancy Drew from the books and video games.

For this film, I present the inaugural review of my daughter. She saw the film and she is the target audience for Nancy Drew, so I thought it would be appropriate to have her write the review.

At the start of the film we find Nancy Drew (played by Emma Roberts) solving a burglary in her hometown of River Heights. She solves the case and the police catch the burglars.

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: Unfortunately Ghost Rider lives up to its pre-release buzz: Boring and bordering on cheesy.

As I had written earlier here at Screen Rant, I went in to Ghost Rider without any preconceived notions about the character since I had never read the comic book. I was also mildly optimistic (based on one of the trailers) that it might turn out to be at least good, if not great.

Oh well…

For those of you unfamiliar with the character, Ghost Rider is actually Johnny Blaze (seriously) who here is played by Nicolas Cage. I like watching Cage onscreen, although there’s a “sameness” to his performances from film to film that’s starting to wear a little thin on me. Nothing personal against the guy, but he has such a distinctively quirky delivery that it’s starting to overshadow the characters he plays.

By Brian Rentschler

Short version: This is another superfluous, mediocre addition to the Hannibal Lecter franchise. Has this dead horse been beaten enough?

I think the Boy Scouts should add another merit badge to the list: Mediocre Movie Franchise Survival. I would certainly qualify for it; after all, this is the fifth movie I’ve seen that features Hannibal Lecter. One was excellent (The Silence of the Lambs), one was very good (Manhunter), one was terrible (Hannibal) and two were mediocre (Red Dragon and Hannibal Rising). This latest installment in the franchise left me with a feeling of ambivalence. I suspect most of the critics will end up complaining about how the teenage Hannibal is, in many aspects, blatantly different from the adult Hannibal. That is indeed a valid complaint, and I’ll touch on that a little during this review, but the questions going through my mind were quite different. Why do we need to know more about Hannibal’s younger years? Why do we need to understand his motivations and tribulations? The short answer is, we don’t. It is better for some things to remain enigmatic, and the character of Hannibal Lecter falls squarely into that category.

There are quite a few things in life that are more exciting because there’s an element of mystery to them. Hannibal Lecter didn’t have the lion’s share of screen time in Manhunter or The Silence of the Lambs, but that didn’t stop him from having a major impact on the storyline. Indeed, much of the allure of his character stemmed from the fact that we didn’t really know all that much about him. Whether it intends to or not, Hannibal Rising tries to throw most of that mystery out the window. It deigns to offer us an explanation for Hannibal’s eventual metamorphosis into a psychopathic serial killer, as if such a thing could ever be explained from a logical and rational standpoint. It even expects us to empathize with him, but it never comes close to giving us a good reason to do that.

By Brian Rentschler

Short version: This short film deserves some credit for being original and mildly entertaining, but it’s pretty lame overall.

For those of you who think the Jewish community is underrepresented in Hollyweird, Landau Motion Pictures has the answer for you. They made a short film (about nine minutes long) back in 2003 called A.P.U.: Art, Pot and Underwear that has quite an eclectic group of characters, including a Jewish action star. Long story short, the film is about as weird as the title implies.

Kiko Rosenberg (played by Seth Landau) is an action star whose marriage to his co-star, Adrienne Lennon (played by Jen Richey), is on the rocks. Adrienne hires two movers — Scooter (played by Scott Schwoch) and K.W. (played by Kenneth Bristow). However, Scooter thinks Adrienne is totally hot, and he wants to steal a pair of her underwear. During this epic quest, we meet an accountant who appears to be a cocaine addict, as well as a guy who looks like a girl from the back.

By Brian Rentschler

Short version: Overall, this movie was silly and formulaic. The threadbare plot and insipid dialogue made it almost unwatchable at times, but the movie partially redeemed itself by including a few action sequences that pandered to me.

Given the fact that this movie was directed by Michael Bay, I wasn’t expecting Citizen Kane when I sat down to watch it, but I have to admit that despite a few interesting action sequences, I was really surprised by how bad it was. After the movie was over, I watched a “Making Of” documentary about the movie, which I thought was far more interesting than the movie itself. The first shot in that documentary is Michael Bay being interviewed on camera. He’s talking about how he told the writers not to go into details about the action sequences. He only wanted them to put the word “action” in the script where they wanted an action sequence, and he would come up with the specific details himself at a later time. At first glance, such an approach doesn’t seem unreasonable, but trust me, that’s his way of saying that he puts far more value on action scenes than storyline or character development.

The Island is a very unique film for Michael Bay in a couple of different ways. It’s the first feature film Bay has directed that wasn’t produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, and it was a box office failure, earning only about $36 million in the U.S. According to IMDB, Bay’s next project is the Transformers movie. That doesn’t sound like every director’s dream to me, but Steven Spielberg is listed as an executive producer, so what do I know?

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: Shyamalan seems to be off his meds with this very odd and sometime extremely technically botched cross-themed film.

If I were to come up with a single word to describe what I felt while watching Lady In The Water it would be: confusion.

By Brian Rentschler

Short version: This movie is funny and daring at times, but it mostly falls flat. I’m still trying to figure out exactly what point it’s trying to make. If you want to see a funny and effective religious satire, rent Dogma instead.

Saved! is one of those movies that seems difficult to review. After all, how are you supposed to effectively review a religious satire without a common frame of reference? Or, as others might argue, isn’t it better to have no common frame of reference at all so you can see how effectively the movie engrosses the viewer in its subject matter? Ultimately, though, I don’t think it matters. I think it boils down to how entertaining the movie is, and how effectively it makes its point. Saved! is funny and daring in spots, but for the most part, it’s not all that entertaining. Even worse, the movie doesn’t really seem to know what it wants to say. I watched Dogma right before I watched Saved!, and I found Dogma to be a much better movie in every aspect.

Co-produced by Michael Stipe (otherwise known as the lead singer of REM), Saved! first gained attention when it won the Audience Choice award at the Nashville Film Festival. Ebert and Roeper gave it two thumbs up, so what’s not to like? The problem is that everyone who liked the movie appeared to single out the religious satire aspect, while overlooking the fact that most of the movie is not truly satirical. The movie alternates between messages that are misleading, confusing and (ironically enough) preachy.

By Vic Holtreman

Short version: Do yourself a favor and rent the orginal version.

Based on how Poseidon, the remake of the 1972 disaster-film classic The Poseidon Adventure is doing at the box office, I’d say that most people are going to agree with my review. I’ll only touch briefly on the nausea that the creation of yet another movie remake brings to me, and here, once again with good reason.

For those of you young ‘uns, The Poseidon Adventure was released way back in 1972, and it was one in a string of very successful disaster-themed movies produced by Irwin Allen. It starred Gene Hackman in his prime and a handful of other actors who were popular at the time, including Ernest Borgnine, Stella Stevens and Shelley Winters. The plot was simple: Rogue wave flips ocean liner and a small group of folks try to survive by making their way to the bottom (now top) of the ship, hoping to be rescued.