SPEED RACER sputters to the Finish

Every once and awhile a director takes a chance and dabbles outside the conventional practices of movie making. They re-invented the action genre and use of CGI in THE MATRIX, and cartoons mixed with live action genre in WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT? They pushed the limits of creativity and every movie thereafter evolved into something new and fresh.

SPEED RACER has this kind of feel. Meshing 3D animation, CGI, and live action in a seamless montage that is way ahead of it's time. The movie felt like a video game from green light to checkered flag. And that's exactly it's flaw.

SPEED RACER has a passable plot sugar-coated with so much action and bright flashing lights and explosions that you don't really mind. There's just enough plot to get you to the next race.
The race scenes are best viewed on the Big Screen or IMAX as I fear they won't translate as well on DVD or Blue Ray unless you have a system that is worthy of the spectacular colourful racing world of the future.

Based on the Japanime series of the same name that opened up mainstream North America to Robotech, Akira, and, eventually, Pokemon, SPEED RACER may be a pre-cursor to the future of high octane action flicks.

One guarantee is that there's no other movie quite like it and feels like watching the birth of something special and grand on the horizon in the movie making world. Too bad the story wasn't better.

9 Mach Five's out of 10 (for action)
5 Matt Fox sitings out of 10 (for plot)
7 karate-chopping monkeys out of 10 (overall)

INDIANA JONES 4 and the Mystery of the Miscast Script

Upon walking out of INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULLS, I had a odd taste in my mouth. Not a horrible taste. An out of place taste. One of those tastes where you take a sip out of a pop container thinking it's Coke but find out it's root beer. Expecting one thing but getting something else entirely that I can't classify as bad...just unexpected.

Indy was his usual Indy self cracking his whip (albeit done in such a way that it seemed like Spielberg put the movie together and realized "Aw crap! I forgot to have Indy use his whip! Let's just have him snap it a couple times and swing from something."). There were the usual creepy caves, snakes, insects, and half-decayed corpses. There were sequences of Indy going back for his hat when he should've just gotten the heck out of there. And there were the narrow escapes before he gets thrown off a cliff, killed by collapsing walls, giant red ants, and disappearing stairwells. All that is great and tasted perfectly well of Indiana Jones. And you know, as old as Harrison Ford is, he made Dr. Jones feel young again despite looking a little past his prime on the opening shot.

It's the Crystal Skulls part that ruined what could've been a great movie.

Steven Spielberg and George Lucas have said since the closing credits of THE LAST CRUSADE that they'd never do another Indiana Jones movie without the script being perfect. I should've realized then that with each of their track records (Spielberg with ET, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, AI, JURASSIC PARK; Lucas with STAR WARS) a perfect script usually meant sci-fi.

Liberties have been taken before in Indiana Jones. The 2000 year old sentry guarding the Holy Grail in THE LAST CRUSADE for example. But all of them fit (more or less) into the Indiana Jones mythology. THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULLS does not.

The characters were fun. The action was great (with one glaring monkey swinging exception). And the cinematography was top notch. It was the script that was miscast.

It was a story better suited for the likes of Mulder and Scully (X-FILES 2 coming in August!) than it was for Indiana Jones. Not a bad story just not what you'd expect.

I went in expecting Coke and I got a mouth full of Root Beer. Now that you know it's Root Beer, it may not leave a funny taste in your mouth after you leave the theatre.

8 Crystal Skulls out of 10

The Man Behind the IRONMAN

He was rude, obnoxious, and inconsiderate. He was one of those people who you love to hate but secretly admire because he was so quick-witted and cool. You wish you were him because of his success and hate yourself for it. This man is Tony Stark. Tony Stark is Ironman.

Unlike every other superhero persona, Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) wants the world to know he's Ironman. To him, this is another cool feather in his cool cap. And like Batman, Tony Stark wasn't bitten by a radioactive spider or from another planet. He relies on technology to invent Ironman: a yellow and red chrome hero that couldn't have existed in any other time frame than now.

IRONMAN as a movie is the first truly "Summer" blockbuster. The kind you can sit back, strap in, and be taken away on a high-octane, explosive, CGI-laced ride that leaves you breathless at the end. This isn't a movie where the science has to be taken apart because, quite frankly, the science doesn't make a whole lot of sense. (I.E. Stark goes "A-Team" on us and builds the Ironman suit while being captive in a cave in Afghanistan.) But, quite frankly, if I can believe that a man came climb walls like a spider, if I can believe that robots can transform into cars, this plot isn't that bad. And that's one of the reasons why IRONMAN is so much fun.

IRONMAN has all the same playfulness and action of the first SPIDERMAN and the original Chris Reeves's SUPERMAN. Most of the movie involves the comedic failures and successes of creating and perfecting Ironman's suit. There's no true super-villain for him to battle as his mission is to destroy the high-tech weapons that he (as Tony Stark) created and sold (A high-tech weaponized suit of armour destroying high-tech weapons: Can I rename this flick IRONYMAN?). But a super-villain isn't necessary here and would've cramped up the story.

As the first blockbuster of the Summer season, spend some well deserved time with the cocky yet endearing Tony Stark. I look forward to the sequel when he can face off against someone truly worthy of Ironman.

8.5 mixed drinks out of 10

HAROLD AND KUMAR 2 barely escapes with an OK

Too often comedy sequels pale in the glow of originality of the first. There are few exceptions to this rule such as NAKED GUN 2 1/2, AUSTIN POWERS: THE SPY WHO SHAGGED ME, and SHREK 2.

HAROLD AND KUMAR ESCAPES FROM GUANTANAMO BAY follows the same path as WAYNE'S WORLD 2. Same set of standby jokes told slightly different with a little more edge but essentially nothing new. This is the danger of writing a poor script with one dimensional characters. In Sequel Writing 101, the most important lesson is to write something the viewer hasn't known before about the characters. This never happens.

Where the original (HAROLD AND KUMAR GOES TO WHITE CASTLE) was a pure buddy movie cut from the same mold as the Cheech and Chong flicks or Dave Chappelle's HALF BAKED, HAROLD AND KUMAR 2 trades in it's simplicity of two guys getting the munchies for political agendas. Do I want to watch Harold and Kumar teach me about the injustices of the terrorist concentration camps or about the misjudging of races if you make general racial statements? No! That's what Michael Moore is for. I want Harold and Kumar to chase after that elusive bag of the best sticky-icky that'll give them the best high while surviving increasingly drug-induced silliness. I don't think this movie has killed the franchise...there'll probably be one last sequel. But I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't.

Still, Harold (John Cho) and Kumar (Kal Penn) emerse themselves into their characters and their play of each other makes for an entertaining movie. The sad part is that the boys were given a boring plot to make it work. And Neil Patrick Harris continues his bid of being the William Shatner of the future generation of actors as the one who re-invents himself past expiry date to make fun of himself. A bold move that has extended Shatner's career that very well could work for Harris.

For the most part, save your bucks and wait for HAROLD AND KUMAR ESCAPE FROM GUANTANAMO BAY to hit DVD or for it to show up on Spike or TNT where they'll replay it every two hours for a few weeks straight.

6 Doogie's riding a Unicorn out of 10

88 MINUTES of my life wasted

Predictable. Mundane. Pacing is wonky. Characters have the depth of the paper the story was written on. And ultimately the plot was WAY over thought and forced.

I have a feeling that the writers of 88 MINUTES were thinking more about plot twists as opposed to worrying about having an actual working plot to base to twists on.

The main premise of this story is as follows: A forensic psychiatrist (Al Pacino) is told he's got 88 minutes to live because of an alleged false testimony he gave YEARS ago putting a criminal who raped and killed his little sister on death row. Pacino now has only 88 minutes to find out who's on the outside trying to kill him...meanwhile, there's a serial killer on the loose who's calling card is hanging his victims upsidedown by one leg and slitting there throats (see what I mean by writer's forcing it to be original).

There literally is no saving grace in this movie. Pacino tries his best to make a bad script work as he always does but no one, short of God Himself, could save this movie.

A much better smarter and excellent real-time based movie would be 1995's NICK OF TIME starring Johnny Depp. So I recommend renting that movie before advising anyone to pay money to see 88 MINUTES.

2.5 out of 10 (I'm not even going to waste my time thinking of a clever way to rank this.)