The Switch, 2010

The Switch, 2010
Director: Will Speck, Josh Gordon
Cast: Jennifer Anniston, Jason Bateman, Patrick Wilson




Stage: Home Theatre

The Switch in short: Kassie (Jennifer Aniston) and Wally (Jason Bateman) are best friends. Being unlucky in love, Kassie has decided to have a child using artificial insemination. Wally doesn't like this idea, but he isn't capable of admitting to himself, let alone to Kassie, that he's in love with her. At Kassie's artificial insemination party, Wally gets very drunk and spies the sperm donor's sample in the bathroom. Wally was way too drunk to know what he did that night, and Kassie has moved away because she doesn't feel that New York City is a place to raise a child. Now 7 years later, Kassie has moved back with her son Sebastian. While she is looking to get Roland (the sperm donor) more involved in their lives, Wally can't help but notice the many striking similarities that he and Sebastian share.


Preps: hot stuff in the theatres globally, I need to see it. Kind of like Aniston, for her cute act. Normally I need to be in a weird mode to find the comedies she's in, good. But, let's give it a shot.


Reality: What if you are in the best years and want a baby, but don't have a spouse - what will you do? The simplest thing in the world is to get some semen and just have a baby. I come from a single mom with a child process, so I am aware it sounds perfect in theory but can be very hard and depressive along the way. Rewarding, for sure, but very hard in praxis.
Well, this piece demonstrates a strong woman, going for the baby on her own. The usual complication is with her best friend, first trying to help her on the way, but afterwards, thinking about her in romantic sense. Of course, the funny scenes derive from this fact, as well as those before her insemination, trying to replace the lost semen, the "getting inseminated party" scenery and jokes, etc. Do you really throw a party when you get your head into something like this? Or do you really find a decent guy (in this case married), that is ready to give you his sperm - but is also present on this party, along with his wife..

There are several ways you can get pregnant and I am not sure this is the most preminent one. However, it does give a new perspective to the idea of getting a child even if you are not in the relationship period. I believe this is the kind of thing that happens to you, and you shouldn't pursue intentionally. But this is just my opinion, for some women it actually works.

No real surprises here. And no recommendations either. This is just another piece in a long queue of similar ones. Will make you laugh occassionally, though.


Good quotes from the right beginning:
I am ready to do it now. Life is in session. I am in the market for some semen and I need you to help me find some :)



My personal rating: 3,0


The Switch on IMDB

Stone, 2010

Stone, 2010
Director: John Curran
Cast: Robert de Niro, Milla Jovovich, Edward Norton



Stage: home theatre, with a slightly worse sound that it was supposed to be.

Stone in short: Parole officer Jack Mabry (Robert De Niro) has only a few weeks left before retirement and wishes to finish out the cases he's been assigned. One such case is that of Gerald "Stone" Creeson (Edward Norton), a convicted arsonist who is up for parole. Jack is initially reluctant to indulge Stone in the coarse banter he wishes to pursue and feels little sympathy for the prisoner's pleads for an early release. Seeing little hope in convincing Jack himself, Stone arranges for his wife Lucetta (Milla Jovovich) to seduce the officer, but motives and intentions steadily blur amidst the passions and buried secrets of the corrupted players in this deadly game of deception


Preps: hmmm, famous cast makes me believe this could be one of better ones in the genre. Otherwise, this prison playground is lately a bit abused by many directors, many bad movies lately on the topic. Nevertheless, I am confident it will be at least an average one.



Reality: What is the ultimate thing you will do to get your ass out of prison? How much is it worth to you and do you consider involving the ones that are close to you? This I would claim to be the top theme of this piece, very profound put into the hands of Norton (Stone), that is trying to shorten his sentence. To him, all means to do that lay at hand. All the time I am thinking that his beautiful wife is just sitting there, waiting for him to come out. Ups, a mistake. She's not really waiting, not really with all the virtues behind her wait. She's actually messing around with other. In this sense, she holds no true objections to seducing this parole hot shot (De Niro). De Niro again in a role of a strong half-villain, in a citizen duty role, but acting as a bitch towards his last case (Stone).

Doing a proffession like this for your whole life must truly be a pain in the ass. I mean, you get depressed just by watching this misery and all the bad persons sitting behind bars, the role of a parole officers is to listen to excuses about what they've done and how much change they have been undergoing since entering the prison. For some of them this might be the absolute truth, but who is God enough to be diferring good ones from bad ones only judged by their words and a talk every now and then? De Niro has this Godly act here, as he decides whether the convicts are going to be in prison longer or not. What does it take to get his mind elsewhere - well, for sure MIlla Jovovich in her devine suit could contribute to the cause :)

The simple plot turns into a psychological game, that includes a lot of static dialogues, lots of misery and bad charma. I am speaking about lots of talks between the wife and the convict. What do you talk about, when questions like "how are you" are truly trivial and unimportant?

The scenery is impressive, used to be one of the largest walled prisons, located in Michigan. Apart from that scene and some coffee shops and households (home environment) of the main protagonists, you don't see much. The way she seduces him seems profound, but actually it's limited to her big eyes and some sucking up to his profession, wearing tight shirts at the same time.

No big excitement in this movie, but also nothing for you not to be seeing it. A bit of an average piece, lovely to see Jovovich and Norton in action again, quite relieving that De Niro exceeds those stupid comedies (the Fockers) he's been involved into lately.


My personal rating: 5,5 (nothing really special, but a decent shot at the genre).


Stone on IMDB

A Serbian Film, 2010

A Serbian Film, 2010
Director: Srdjan Spasojević
Cast: Srdjan Todorović, Sergej Trifunović, Jelena Gavrilović





Stage: Home theatre

A Serbian Film in short: An aging porn star agrees to participate in an "art film" in order to make a clean break from the business, only to discover that he has been drafted into making a pedophilia and necrophilia themed snuff film.



Preps: heard this is one of the most powerful movies lately, shows the serbian society the way it is nowadays and gives an extra line to all the movies that show something disgustful on screen. Yes, definitely has my attention



Reality:
The first third is inspiring and filled with an outworn philosophy. What do you do, if you are a professional x.y., after you are done with your career (possibly the question that is bothering most of professional sport-dedicated persons, soldiers, etc). In this case, a worn out porno actor. And where did he got stuck with a beautiful wife like this? This actor, that is in no merit a cute one? Well, those ideas just run through my mind, thanking myself, for being more smart and ending up with a professional occupation, that will last forever, if I want it to. Well, not in this piece, here he has to get some ideas to be feeding his family for some time after he's run out of porn money. And the opportunity walks in, like in the shape of Matrix pills - he takes the blue one and submerges his body to the art director and gets rich, or the red one, where he forgets about everything. Of course he takes the blue one. He's not only yearning for money, he needs that thrill again.

I have narrowed down the main messages I get from this movie, into the ones stated below:

1. Nothing comes for free. Or put another way - a big pile of money always costs you. In some sense, when you sign up an agreement for a huge amount of money, of course you need to expect you will need to work hard for this. In this piece, in a philosophical way or psychological way, even though you aren't aware because being drugged, you have paid enormously for this money. And the price may be, like in this case, something you aren't willing to accept and move on.

2. Don't take sex drugs. A quality anticommercial movie for this statement. I am not a fan of them in any way, but this piece shows disastrous consequence, that drugs might have. TO be under influence so deep that you aren't aware of yourself and you wake up three days later to find out monstrous things you have been doing - beyond my imagination.

3. Sexual fantasies or arrowsement factors come beyond any imagination. For majority of people looking at this, was more pain than most stuff already filmed. In this case, you are faced with brutal, up front deed, that surpasses your imagination (up to now we haven't seen this so indirect on screen). Brilliantly shown, how art people are different and have different measurements or need to use different tools to get the effect they want, that will in normal procedures be shown as a deviation and people like this will be put into jail or being judged by normal standards.

The movie rocks a lot of stones deep inside my soul. When you think what kind of deeds he must have done, you don't imagine that. It's simply hurtful and killing to your feelings.
The ending is brilliant - filming the dead family as they were nothing more than a tool. Because they really weren't. And the price of life in this case is.. unimportant. Sort of reminder of all the wars, once driven on the face of the earth. Where the cost of a life is also nothing to be keeping the earth from moving on.

A very unappropriate movie to be shown in local theatres. Some people might get crazy ideas. But very Tarantino-like. Reveals some of the things you might have thought about (like.. how to make a woman not to bite your d... if you want her to give you a blow job -simple, just tear her teeth out). Anyhow, the tempo just accellerates until its brilliant ending. If you stay in the theatre this long, anyway.


My personal rate: 9,0 (extremely good interpretation, horrific findings what you can do in the abused state and abuse of your loved ones beyond your imagination).


A Serbian Film on IMDB

Despicable me, 2010

Despicable me, 2010
Director: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud
Cast (voices): Steve Carrell, Jason Segel, Russel Brand



Stage: Home Theatre


Despicable me in short: In a happy suburban neighborhood surrounded by white picket fences with flowering rose bushes, sits a black house with a dead lawn. Unbeknownst to the neighbors, hidden beneath this home is a vast secret hideout. Surrounded by a small army of minions, we discover Gru, planning the biggest heist in the history of the world. He is going to steal the moon. (Yes, the moon!) Gru delights in all things wicked. Armed with his arsenal of shrink rays, freeze rays, and battle-ready vehicles for land and air, he vanquishes all who stand in his way. Until the day he encounters the immense will of three little orphaned girls who look at him and see something that no one else has ever seen: a potential Dad. The world's greatest villain has just met his greatest challenge: three little girls named Margo, Edith and Agnes.


Preps: wanted to see this for a long time, so now it's about time to dig into this cartoon. Quite famous by slovenian youngsters, anyway. Let me see if I am up to the challenge :)


Reality: Well, sometimes villains do grow into great personalities. Or something deep down inside them sleeps and needs the right button to be pushed in order for good to start spreading around them. As I told you in my review of the Toy Story 3, it's not usual in real world, but in the animated world, it usually is the case. And so it happens here also. To steal the moon seems a good idea and something to play with, however, the three girls are something you cannot expect in advance. Using them as a tool to go to the theft or to perform it correctly, seems merciless, however in the process, the main villain (Gru) grows fond of the girls. In the villain world, that is considered a big mistake, because one power that is really given to the villains is usually emotionless heart, because they don't care about noone but themselves. In this case this changes, as Gru grows love for the three girls and becomes vulnerable in the area.
The side story (a truly sad one) is about orphanes, being put into an institution and waiting for the right potential parent to come by, having afterwards the chance to give the child back (that happens in real world also quite often).. however, we don't see the evolvement in this story up to the level, where it would reach out for your soul.
Gru grows fond of the girls and afterwards, decides to keep them forever. This is somehow expected end in this animated movie and will knock all the soft souls out. And another thing that will drive you nuts - Gru has an army of intelligent small creatures that cannot be more funny than they are shown in this piece. They programm and operate everything, so the only thing you want after this piece, is at least one of those small beings, being there to operate smaller stuff in your life and make up new intelligent ideas :) Although they don't say a word, you can really understand what they are mummbling about. And you need to love them, they bring a softer (not so bright) side of Gru out, just being there to make everything he comes up, in reality. And this is just the case behind every villain - they normally come equipped with a tactic and capable background. Like every president has his wife behind him to back him up or give him the backbone, these small cuties are Gru's backbone, invisible to the public, inevitable to make the grand ideas reality.




My personal rate: 8,5 (loveable and funny. It will make you grow fond for the wannabe fathers. Also, will make you want one of those small intelligent creatures)


Despicable me on IMDB

Toy Story 3

Toy Story 3, 2010
Director: Lee Unkrich
Cast (voices): Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, John Cusack



Stage: Home theatre

Toy Story 3 in short: Woody, Buzz and the whole gang are back. As their owner Andy prepares to depart for college, his loyal toys find themselves in daycare where untamed tots with their sticky little fingers do not play nice. So, it's all for one and one for all as they join Barbie's counterpart Ken, a thespian hedgehog named Mr. Pricklepants and a pink, strawberry-scented teddy bear called Lots-o'-Huggin' Bear to plan their great escape


Preps: haven't seen a good cartoon in a while. Don't remember the former sequels, hence I don't know what to expect. However, cartoons are something different now that at the days of Disney's reign.


Reality: This cartoon has a good point and a good storyline. The script therefore is, as I expect, funny and makes a good statement in the end. The dialogues are funny and I spend half of the time thinking, where does this voice come from (to be exact, who is this voice). Finally, a revelation, one of my favourites, Tom Hanks as the lead voice. Up to this point I am more than impressed. The luvable feeling you have for your old toys and feeling cold-hearted every time you are trying to give them somewhere else than your shelf.. well, I can relate to that. I still have some of the toys that I grew up with.
What truly happens with the toys once you wear them out, is the real question here. As you are a child, the toys do have a soul and you imagine they can talk, jump, do all kind of stuff you want them to. And as a child you make it happen. Now, after this period either they are dumped in a bin or given to someone else. In this piece, the graveyard for the toys seems local kindergarten, where they torture the toys in every way possible. Escaping from that place and returning to the rightful owner seems the plot or the story to begin with.
Also, a negative icon in this mess, the violet Bear, that has taken the Godfather role in the kindergarten, making all of other toys subordinates, however, this is only a field where he expresses his inner depressiveness because being neglected once when he was a toy. As a reflection to a real movie action, usually the villains express something subconscious from the childhood. However, in cartoon world, also the villains are punished / turn into good ones. Not in this one. Toy story feels real here, because also in real life, villains, hardly ever turn into something extremely positive in the end. No exceptions to this rule here. After you think the violet Godfather turned into a good one and will redeem his debt to his so called friends, he turns again and shows his bad nature. Like in real life.
The music is great and vivid, the scenes are well chosen. But my favourite, of course, the scenario. Cartoon or animated movie, nowadays the script is really thoroughly thought through. And shows irony, black humour, surpasses the border of being just well. And this is the one thing you will love about this piece. Of course, battle between good and evil is on the road, as always. And you will think about your childhood pals, what did you do with them and who plays with them now.


My personal rating: 8,0 (an excellent piece in its genre).

Toy Story on IMDB

Transporter 2

Transporter 2, 2005
Director: Louis Letterier
Cast: Jason Statham, Amber Valetta, Kate Nauta



Transporter in short: Frank Martin is the best in the business. The ex-Special Forces operative hires himself out as a mercenary "transporter" who moves goods--human or otherwise. Very simple, he delivers, no questions asked. Frank has relocated from the French Mediterranean to Miami, Florida, where as a favor to a friend, Frank is driving for the wealthy Billings family. There's very little that can surprise The Transporter, but young Jack Billings has done just that; Frank has unexpectedly bonded with Jack, age 6, who he drives to and from school. But when Jack is kidnapped, Frank must use his battle-tested combat skills to retrieve the boy and thwart the kidnappers' master plan to release a virus that will kill anyone with whom it comes in contact.
Stage: Home TV selection of a casual Friday


Preps: None in perticular. Don't even remember the first part. But I am a fan of Statham.



Reality: Is as clear as any well done action movie. It has all that recent movies from Jolie for instance, have. The action, the lady with the guns and shooting all around, the fuss around a chase or two (making an hour long chase and a superfiction of this chase as a multiplier of what we all used to dream of (driving this, getting chased, chasing someone, escaping).. the movie has all the entities of a good action movie and a good result to follow.
The plot is easy to follow and the story is well handled. Like we are used from others, like MI, or Matrix, or some cop drama movies. However, it is not really special in any other department but music. The music reminds me of the daring pieces in the Matrix, really strong and supportive to the action scenes. They will make an impression on you too, regarding the energy, the velocity and the impact they need to keep to keep the pace with the tempo the viewer desires.
But.. nothing more in this movie. We can all stand an hour and a half of watching a decent action. This is a decent action, nothing more. And nothing less.





My personal rating: 5,0 (decent action, but nothing really remarkable)


Transporter 2 on IMDB

Runaway Vacation, 2006

Runaway Vacation, 2006
Director: Barry Sonnenfeld
Cast: Robin Williams, Cheryl Hines



Stage: Home tv selection

Preps: None in perticular

Runaway vacation in short: The executive Bob Munro is stressed, feeling threatened of losing his job and his lifestyle, since his abusive boss Todd Mallory hired the Stanford's geek Laird to work in their soda's company. Bob has promised his wife Jamie Munro, his teenage daughter Cassie Munro and his young son Carl Munro to spend vacations in Hawaii, but Todd demands him to prepare a presentation and attend a business meeting with the owners of a family company in a merging operation scheduled in the same period. Bob hides the truth to his family, rents a recreational vehicle and tries to convince his dysfunctional family that a road trip to the Colorado Rocky Mountains would be good to bring old values back to their family. After many incidents and while in the trailers parking area, the rookie Bob is helped by the bizarre but friendly Gornicke family. They escape from the Gornickes and initiate a journey of difficulties and leaning, retrieving their forgotten family bonds.



Reality: Wow. You really think that actors read a script or give something on their reputation when they sign up for a movie. Well we are all mistaken. They don't. Robin for sure didn't read this shitty scenario when he signed up or he really badly needed the money.
I am dissappointed in all aspects of this piece. It is not interesting nor breath taking from any level. The dialogues are worth puking, the scenery is really cheap, the music.. well, it doesn't exist or I don't notice it. The storyline is lame and unbelievable.. there's absolutely nothing worth seeing in this piece, so I rather decide to skip the last half. Maybe truly not worth my time and I can do something more useful. As I am fond of WIlliams, this was the most I could do with this, for the sake of respect towards the guy. But I cannot go any further from this. Some movies should not be made. This is one of them.



My personal rating: 0 (don't waste your breath, ain't worth it!)

On IMDB (Though I cannot imagine why would you go on this link)

Little Children, 2006

Little Children, 2006
Director: Todd Field
Cast: Jennifer Connely, Kate Winslet, Patrick Wilson


Stage: Home TV Selection

Little Children in short: Echoes of "Madame Bovary" in the American suburbs. Sarah's in a loveless marriage, long days with her young daughter at the park and the pool, wanting more. Brad is a househusband, married to a flinty documentary filmmaker. Ronnie is just out of prison - two years for indecent exposure - living with his mother; Larry is a retired cop, fixated on driving Ronnie away. Sarah and Brad connect, a respite of adult companionship at the pool. Ronnie and Larry have their demons. Brad should be studying for the bar; Larry misses his job; Ronnie's mom thinks he needs a girlfriend. Sarah longs to refuse to be trapped in an unhappy life. Where can these tangled paths lead?


Preps: none in perticular. Getting over the flu and this seems a perfect selection.


Reality: Some of more important life themes seem to pop out in this piece. The flow is constructed of a figure of a good family, being interrupted by an affair. The guy is again, put in the middle of the two women he cannot decide about. Being married to one, screwing another, he just has this figure of a mortuary guy, not being understood by the system. Having his second spring and having an affair with a woman he encountered at the children's playground.. well it brings out a lot of feelings and will go deeper into your soul.

Marrying someone you think it's allright for you but falling for someone that beieves in you (Sarah in this case), this brings out a whole bunch of problems you maybe didn't want to face. What to do next, what is the right thing, you will maybe lose your mind trying to tackle this problem.

Moreover, the movie speaks also about speaking loud about your feelings in your neighbourhood, being mocked and judged by your female neighbours. Furthermore, is being a housewife enough or should you strive for more?


A plus of the movie is definitely the narrator, which is not a typical role in the movies, making sure the viewer understands what director wanted to say. Not really sure if I am thrilled about it or I see it merely as a tool to find the director's minus - he obviously wasn't sure we will get it so he filled this fear with the narrator. Maybe the first feeling overcomes the second and I love this explanatory voice that keeps popping up.


My personal rating: 7,0 (will make you think about your virtues and the way you pursue them in your own life).


Little Children on IMDB

MIllions, 2004

Millions, 2004
Director: Danny Boyle
Cast: Alex Etel, Lewis McGibbon, James Nesbitt




Stage: Home theatre
Millions in short: The UK is about to switch its currency from Pounds to Euros, giving a gang a chance to rob the poorly-secured train loaded with money on its way to incineration. But, during the robbery, one of the big bags falls literally from the sky on Damian's playhouse, a 7-year old given to talking to saints. The boy then starts seeing what the world and the people around him are made of. Ethics, being human and the soul all come to the forefront in this film.

Preps: I don't know the movie and the content. However, the content is well rated.


Reality: What is the difference between good and bad again? This time in a shape of a ton of money dropping out of the sky to a young kid, who thinks it's god sending something to him in order to change the world. And he goes, giving money to persons he thinks that need it and giving all away to charity. Being mocked by an elder brother that tries to spend as much money as he can, the movie beautifully shows the versatility in human nature. The naive one (the younger, not spoilt by the system), wants to give to the poor or ones in need. The elder wants to satisfy his own needs, pay respects with the money and pay the way to the adulthood.

Is it ok to spend the money that has been robbed? This is another part of the story. Do you need to return something that was stolen, even if you help your own miserable life with this or the ones that need help. What would you do with a pile of money? A true dilemma. If you didn't know where it derived from (God wasn't meant to throw us money) or if you knew it was stolen, would you return it? Don't answer right away. It cannot be a simple question. The movie will pop you a dilemma. And a true affection for the younger of the brothers for wanting to change the world.

Finally, the movie reveals several dilemmas. It is hard to spend money all around. YOu get suspicious. It is hard to accept the life after mother's death. Proven.
It is hard to accept another woman in your father's life. I presume the feeling I get with this is genuine. Those are sidestories. But they touch my heart nevertheless.

THe movie is filled with some obscene saints and scenes like they were taken from Monty Phython's wannabe movie. I like it up to some level. After that it just goes beyond what is acceptable and funny. The director should maybe pay more attention to this. Not every obscene story or idea is acceptable.



My personal rating: 6,0 (very watchable and entertaining.)


Millions on IMDB

The Bachelor, 1999

The Bachelor, 1999
Director:Gary Sinyor
Cast: Renee Zellwegger, Chris O'Donnel, Artie Lange



The Bachelor in short:Jimmie is seeing his single friends get married one by one. He isn't too worried until his girlfriend Anne catches the bouquet at his friend Marco's wedding. Suddenly, his wild mustang days are numbered. He finally decides to propose to her, but he sticks his foot in his mouth and botches the proposal. Being insulted by the defeatist proposal, Anne leaves town on an assignment. After she's gone, he finds out that his recently-deceased grandfather's will stipulates that he gets nothing of a multi-million dollar fortune unless he's married by 6:05pm on his 30th birthday: tomorrow! Not being able to find Anne, Jimmie begins backtracking through his past girlfriends to find a wife.

Stage: Home TV selection

Preps: None in perticular, the first five minutes sparkle my interest..

Reality: Well, this is supposed to be an anti-marketing campaign with a theme marriage. Who gets married and why are the "studs" - obviously self called male persons, so fucked up, when they get married? In the movie, it's all about getting the least out of your life when you get married and tons of excuses why not to get married.
For me, the marriage institution is not as important as it may sound from my beginning. However, I despise movies that go so deep into this topic. For heaven's sake, if a guy doesn't want to get married, so what. I mean, you can either to decide to "only live with a girl" and the marriage stays only a paper for what I can see, or you can go and smell the grass on the other side for as long as you want. But making a movie about how depressive life gets when you get married.. well, come on. It's really below the standards and it puts off any desire left in those that really want to get married.

Every now and then, you pop into a movie that turns a serious topic into some sort of comedy wannabe. Well, this piece is a commedy wanna be. So the guys are supposed to be these stereotipes of mustangs, running free, until a dragon lady catches them. Well, give me a break. It really pulled my nerve. You poor creatures, you men. Well, in my opinion, the director made a completely fool out of himself with this piece, as most of these things are not so stereotypical as they might seem in this movie. Life is not really black and white. It's maybe in the US, that a life is measured through 1:0 standard (married : not married), but in my honest opinion, real life doesn't work this way.


My personal rating: 2,0 (for amusement sake, not for the content)
The Bachelor on IMDB

First Knight, 1995

First Knight, 1995
Director: Jerry Zucker
Cast: Sean Connery, Richard Gere, Julia Ormond



First Knight in short: Lancelot lives by the sword. In fact, they're next door neighbours, so teaming up to fight for money comes pretty naturally. Lady Guinevere, on her way to marry King Arthur is ambushed by the evil Sir Malagant. Fortunately Lancelot is lurking nearby and he rescues his future queen. They fall in love, but Guinevere still fancies the idea of wearing a crown, so she honours her promise to Arthur. Can Lady Guinevere remain faithful, or will this Pretty Woman become a lady of the knight?

Stage: home theatre again
Preps: Also a piece I have seen for several times up to now. An adorable one, can't wait to see this energy again

Reality: Lancelot, Guinevere, knights of the round table, history, saving the poor to feed the rich - the content that drives me absolutely crazy. If it were possible, I would make dozens of movies on the topic, because I never get fed up with this. Again, this piece doesn't dissappoint me. Gere in his best years, as Lancelot, the guy all the women want to have. Virtues torn in Guinevere, and loveable king Arthur, wow.. the movie is filled with action, yearning for love towards the country, or to the woman and vice versa. Also with faith and trust of the citizen. Love for the past and ancestors. Redemption. Paying back a debt. Being loyal or being independent.. a nurtured scene with great cast and music. Everything a movie like this could wish for.
Never became one of the greater ones, though. Why is that, if everything I have written so far, is so good? Well, I believe, the key lies in the fact that it just has a great content and not so great execution. The love yearning is real, though. I love the triangle and I cannot dare to judge the lady or freelancer for trying out to have the lady. And the king, overcoming this. Or even not, because he drags out a court, later saved by the bell by the warriors, storming in the holy city and killing everyone, including the king. If the king lived, I suppose the ending wouldn't sound so Hollywoodish. Because in this sense, it just kills the time reality (in that time this wasn't bound to happen). It just grows deeper in the hearts of the viewers for curing their souls with a happy ending. Not likely to happen in the real world.

Nevertheless, a true love story I like to see over and over again.


My personal rating: 8,0 (truly lovable movie that needs to pour into my veins every now and then. Worth seeing Gere with long hair :)).

First Knight on ImDB

Brooklyn's finest, 2009

Brooklyn's finest, 2009
Director: Antoine Fugua
Cast: Richard Gere, Don Cheadle, Ethan Hawke



Brooklyn's finest in short: In Brooklyn, amid drug deals, violence, casual racism, poverty, housing projects, and corrupt cops, we follow three officers: Tango, African-American, working undercover, believing he's earned a promotion to a desk job but told he has to set up the bust of an ex-con who saved his life; Sal, who'll commit murder to get cash to buy a house big enough for his family; and, Eddie, the precinct's oldest beat cop, a week to go before retirement, assigned to mentor an earnest rookie. Can this end well for any of the three?

Stage: Home theatre



Preps: None in perticular, just the one waiting in the line


Reality: Hmmm, didn't know I would see Gere in one of the pieces ever again. Isn't it ages since he made something? Nevertheless, he's still charming and sparkles my interest.
The movie wants to resemble some of the known movies. Training Day, for instance. Gere being a trainer of a rookie, one week before his retirement. And filtration /going undercover, the famous topic good cops, bad cops, cops stealing governmental money, or drug money. The moral dilemma of standing in front of a pile of a money and being able not to steal it. Whether you are a public person or not, this is a good moral discussion for each with his soul every now and then. I think we have to have a strong will to resist an opportunity when it comes on the path. In this movie, the situation of not being able to change anything in your present life because you lack money, and on the other hand, the opportunity to grab it and as a public person, being obliged not to not only for the moral standards, well, in this movie everything revolves around this. And isn't resolved by the end of the movie. What is wrong and what is right, what are the virtues to be pursued or not and what are the consequences... all this is part of this movie. The three cops are followed in their life stories and their pain - or the ways they want to resolve it. In a good sense. However, the piece will make you depressed, as you feel you cannot fight the system as it is set, especially if you are poor and not being able to do much about it.


My personal rating: 7,0 (it will make you depressed because of its core)


Brooklyn's finest on IMDB

Inside man, 2006

Inside man, 2006
Director: Spike Lee
Cast: Denzel Washington, Jodie Foster, Clive Owen, Christopher Plummer



Inside man in short: From a cell, a man tells us he has planned the perfect bank robbery; he invites us to watch. An efficient gang enters a Manhattan bank, locks the doors, and takes hostages. They work deliberately, without haste. Detective Frazier is assigned to negotiate, but half his mind is occupied with the corruption charges he is facing. The bank's president has something to protect in a safe deposit box, so he brings in Madaline, a high-power broker with a hidden agenda. With an army of police surrounding the bank, the thief, the cop, and the plutocrat's fixer enter high-stakes negotiations. Why are the robbers asking for a plane, if they are so competent and they know they won't get one? Why aren't they in more of a hurry? If the job's perfect, why is the thieves' leader in a cell?

Stage: home theatre, TV selection of the evening


Preps: seeing this many times, it is no challenge to see a good piece again and search for even deeper theme.


Reality: The perfect bank job, with a strange line of twitches, where sometimes the robbers run the game, on the other occasions, police. The time in the movie jumps from the time of theft, to the time after, and in between it involves the crimes from WW2 and keeping evidence from that time in the safe deposit boxes. The action, victims, resolving the crime and looking (pursuing) the crime from WW2 that just until the end doesn't get resolved.

The crime is profound, thought up to every last detail, however the villain is not accepted as a villain in the eyes of the viewer. He's too soft to be commiting a crime, however, does a great deal or goes a line extra to show (or to make it look like) he is a true bad person. But the observer of the movie will not take him as that, because Spike Lee does an extra project of making him look decent and human.

THere are some parallell stories, like making a person that is obviously someone from Middle East, a criminal right away and throwing some bad words immediately when he shows up, complaining that he gets a shitty treatment wherever he is just because his origin. Those stories make this piece extraordinary. Spike Lee's efforts with the camera are superb and his excellence shows also in the defilee, where all the main protagonists get their moment on the stage.

My personal rating: 8,0 (one of stronger pieces, in this genre, refreshened by Jodie Foster and Washington in his premium role as the guy that solves the day. A good piece to see once more).


Inside man on IMDB

Taking Chance, 2009

Taking Chance, 2009
Director: Ross Katz
Cast: Kevin Bacon, Tom Aldredge


Taking Chance in short: Based on real-life events, Lt. Col. Michael Strobl, a volunteer military escort officer, accompanies the body of 19-year-old Marine Chance Phelps back to his hometown of Dubois, Wyoming. Stage: Home theatre

Preps: just another one waiting in the line. Taking chance is a promising title..


Reality: Well, the title turns out to market something completely else. Taking a chance as a phrase would be something completely else as Taking mr. Chance home. Which is what movie is all about. Or dare I say the mainstream of the movie. In my opinion (and it changes a bit every now and then, when I think about this, the movie could easily be antimarketing for the war that is happening in Iraq. And the termination / or everlasting question: wtf are the americans doing there? From political perspective, I cannot be the judge. But you have thousands of people, wasting time and governmental money just for some of them to turn out dead. And then be escorted in a fine coffin (the red line of this piece) with a fancy soldier, that is pretending to give a damn and giving the belongings of the deceised to his family.
No true virtues are in this act, being loyal to one's mind is for sure under question here. Is being normal and demanding a family or a happy life without one so bad? THe people feeling really bad for not serving the country in this endless dispute with the Iraquis, this is lame for sure. Noone should feel bad for not wanting to be a part of the war. I am against all wars in all the countries and I feel they just feed the political hunger in some countries or some people, on the other hand they exploit civilians and make them serve. The brave decision makers of course sit in their offices, and are not the ones having their head on the market.

The movie, furthermore, increases the amount of negativism in me towards the drama being pulled off for one person. I am not aware of the number of casualties in this war, but if they really pull off a drama like that and pull out patriotism all the time (all the generations in the family serving, one in Vietnam, the other in Iraq).. well, this is sad, pathetic, depressive.. and expensive. For all the parties involved. So in one sense, the movie shows some kind of weird tribute that I am not sure all the soldiers were treated this nice way. And in the end.. what does a nice coffin bring? nothing. You should instead live a nice life, not a war.


My personal rating: 2,0 (for the contribution to the identification of wars being stupid and male-stupidity- driven. I have several friends that are also in the army. They will personalize with this completely, I am sure. But for me.. a waste of time. Like wars.)


Taking Chance on IMDB

Let the right one in, 2008

Let the right one in / Lat den ratta komma in, 2008
Director: Tomas Alfredson
Cast: Kare Hedebrant, Lina Leandersson, Per Ragnar




Let the right one in in short: Oskar, a bullied 12-year old, dreams of revenge. He falls in love with Eli, a peculiar girl. She can't stand the sun or food and to come into a room she needs to be invited. Eli gives Oskar the strength to hit back but when he realizes that Eli needs to drink other people's blood to live he's faced with a choice. How much can love forgive? Set in the Stockholm suburb of Blackeberg in 1982.


Stage: Theatre Dvor/local cinema


Preps: Haven't seen it on Liffe, the movie festival. So I needed to see this afterwards.


Reality: A great movie, that inspires the soul to think a different path than it would when being a normal mind with a normal perspective. The movie was made before everyone freaked out because of the Twilight saga, connected with vampirism and vampire theme - making the crowd accept vampires and understand the way they were supposed to live and react.
A love story, combined with a story of abandonement (the girl that never ages and sees all the loved ones pass by), never having the chance to let someone near because she yearns for the blood, all of the sudden overcomes this and makes her mind switch off the desire for blood for this perticular young blonde. He on the other side, creates a good story about harrasment in school, unability to get help from his home regarding this and overcoming the adolescential problems with his schoolmates.
The vampire effect goes deeper - as you see the problem with the people being slaughtered simply to bring food to the young vampire, that the audience accepts as a small girl that needs help - in a sense, the killings seem justified.

A good perspective of a world we can only guess about - with good execution and excellent choice of stage. We know so little about the scandinavian countries, that from a south european perspective it seems believable. An excellent movie to see, it won't leave you dry.



My personal rate: 8,0 (a truly good piece on the topic, preceeds the american copy, that was made in 2010 by an amateur for miles).

Let the right one in on IMDB

Let me in, 2010

Let me in, 2010
Director: Matt Reeves
Cast: Kodi Smit McPhee, Chloe Moretz, Richard Jenkins



Stage: home theatre
Let me in in short: A bullied young boy befriends a young female vampire who lives in secrecy with her guardian


Preps: something new in the street, something for me to see. I am curious, though I don't have a clue about this piece.

Reality: Something's fishy right from the beginning. I cannot pull the right nerve to break down the secret. Like a de ja vu, all that is happening I can predict on the screen. Like I have seen something like this somewhere. No, precisely like this somewhere.
I cannot tackle this right up to the third of the movie. Then the ring bells. Of course. I have seen this. This is a bloody copy :) The original is a swedish movie, Lat den ratte komma in (let the right one in). Now, that I have searched through databases, I actually know the title, but what a joke. It's practically the same movie. The director only switched the actors, did a slightly different change and made it american. He didn't even bother to change the title. How lame can you be. What happened to the author rights?
It's probably because vampire movies are a hit nowadays, ever since the Twighlight saga. And the crowd loves vampire movies. But seriously - you just cannot go around and simply copy paste the movie as a total ( I mean virtually nothing is different). OK, I will admit the stage is a bit undecent (unappropriate), the scenario has a few twitches, the boy is brown instead of blonde (and some other minor changes) and it's an american perspective, as oppose to the european. Did the director seriously think noone is going to notice? Very, very poor execution. Like the american copy of the Ring, this one leaves me without any perticular feelings, but rage that someone dares to copy a good piece. The sad thing is..it's so uncreative to copy.. so.. well, it left me with the mouth wide open. A surprise, truly. I don't recommend it. See the original, because it's way better executed.

My personal rate: 0 (a copy that in no sense doesn't preceed the original - Lat den ratta komma in).


Let me in on IMDB

Life Or Something Like It, 2002

Life or Something Like It, 2002
Director:Stephen Herek
Cast: Angelina Jolie, Edward Burns, Tony Shalhoub



Stage: Home TV selection


Life or something like it in short: A reporter, Lanie Kerrigan (Jolie), interviews a psychic homeless man (Shalhoub) for a fluff piece about a football game's score. Instead, he tells her that her life has no meaning, and is going to end in just a few days, which sparks her to action, trying to change the pattern of her life...


Preps: Only the TV commercial, where I sense a drama and of course, Jolie. Despite the dissappointing Tourist, which I saw this weekend, I am eager to experience some more of her.


Reality: This movie is no picnic either, in terms of what it would need to rise up to the standard of a really good movie. Still, it offers a strong consideration to each viewer and leaves the interpretation in clouds. Are you also one of those people, saving the wine for a special occasion, not using the china because it isn't christmas or not enough important people are visiting, not dressing up to just be in the house in the evening with your partner? Well, imagine you had only a few days left. What would you do? Who would you talk to? What would be the places you would choose to visit in those short days?

The short amount of time makes Jolie / Lanie to become who she really is, because it's no use of pretending any more. If she is doomed to live only seven days more, she can go to any place she wants, insult whomever she chooses, scream as loud as she want on air, even if that means she loses her job (ain't going to be around in one week anyway).

Think hard. A fine task, to determine the priorities, and in this lies the secret of why I like the movie. Apart from the philosophical riddle, nothing special. And I hate Jolie wearing this wig. No special dialogues, no special clothes, scenery, anything. But a very thorough consideration what in life is worth having and ditching. All from the perspective of love (Why are we together anyway and what is going to connect us in 10, 20, 30 years).. to burping on the couch, dirty and smelly, eating and not being the perfect housewife. The true herself, as she finds out. Definitely the attic every single one of us should clean up every now and then.



My personal rating: 6,0 (it's actually worth considering once in a while what would you do if you only had one week left. In this sense I recommend seeing this.)


Life or something on IMDB

Megamind, 2010

Megamind, 2010
Director: Tom McGrath
Cast (voices): Will Ferrell, Brad Pitt, Tina Fey



Stage: Home laptop cruise

Megamind in short: After super-villain Megamind (Ferrell) kills his good-guy nemesis, Metro Man (Pitt), he becomes bored since there is no one left to fight. He creates a new foe, Titan (Hill), who, instead of using his powers for good, sets out to destroy the world, positioning Megamind to save the day for the first time in his life.


Preps: Finally, a good quality to be taken from web. I tried to see this a while ago, but no such quality was available. Now, take two of this piece. This time a splendid sound and visio. Apart from that I don't know a lot about the piece. Isn't Brad Pitt one of the voices? It was synchronised in Slovenia anyway, and I don't like synchs if I don't see the original before.



Reality: I see this as the final (animated) remake of Superman, the movie we all watched and adored in sense of wanting to be a guy that saves the day. In this sense, it's a true remake with all the features (found weakness of Metroman, fight good against evil - but more in Tom and Jerry sense than anything else; the lady that is in the middle of everything - the reporter, of course. Doesn't she remind of Helen, the reason to start Troyan war?)

The movie has its ups and downs. Could be a bit shorter. Could also not be so sure in turning a villain into the hero of the day (although this is a positive effect, it also implies that a villain always has his soft side. No, they don't.). Megamind is equipped with excellent music, which also implies what type of music is listened to by villains. I don't mind. I adore AC/DC, Guns n'Roses, Billy Idol. The wrap up with Michael Jackson turns on my smile that just won't quit.

If I wanted to picture the animated version of the beloved hero from my childhood, I would probably go for something like this. The dialogue sometimes gets lost in void, but on other spots it can be compared to best stand up comics. Where you need to pay full attention to get all the jokes and because they are so great you don't want to miss them, you are listening and paying attention really carefully. The positive character turns into negative beyond viewer's belief (Bernard). A geek turning into the main villain without any hope to stop him. This I see as an absolute add-on to the existing firm ground that Superman posed for this cartoon.

No wonder it's a great hit in Slovenia also. A strong recommendation, truly funny piece.



My personal rate: 8,0 (a splendid animated version of Superman, including top humour, superb music and below-the-belt fighting scenes where noone can die)


Megamind on IMDB

The official page of Megamind

Don't look back, 2009

Don't look back, 2009
Director: Marina de Van
Cast: Monica Belucci, Sophie Marceau, Andrea di Stefano


Stage: home theatre


Don't look back in short: Jeanne a writer, married, with two children - starts to see unsettling changes in her home. Her body is beginning to change. No one around her seems to notice. Her family dismisses these fears as the result of the stress of having to finish her next book, but Jeanne realizes that something far deeper, far more disturbing is taking place. A photograph at her mother's house sends her in search of a woman in Italy. Here, transformed into another woman, RosaMaria, she will discover the strange secret of her true identity.

Preps: just another one in the line. And in the first minute I am curious. Never seen Belucci and Marceau cast together.




Reality: A superb psychological piece. Belucci and Marceau are joint persons in one, the first one discovering her true identity, and all the time that passes in between, the viewer will wonder whether she's just making it up, was she abused in her childhood, what are the true reasons behind her visions and the changes of everyday things or the persons she knows (including herself).

It is a traumatic idea, thinking that you could be a victim of such a psychological "truth" seeking, when everything around you changes in minutes. It reminds me of the fear of Alzheimer disease. I believe it must be so for all people suffering from this and all the similar diseases. Nevertheless, this piece intrigues my imagination and triggers some fears that are burried deep down, holds them upfront and makes you suffer with Jeanne as she is on her discoveral journey. The mystery remains unsolved until the end and in my opinion, that is one of the greatest things about this piece. Unexpected outturn and unusual events that happen on the way to seeking the truth.

Nevertheless, the movie lacks true ending. They cannot be all happy and dandy at the end, not at the story revealed. The movie lacks another ten to twenty minutes. Or maybe even better, it is up to the viewer to decide, what happens next. In my experience, movies that leave the endings or interpretations, are much closer to the audience than those that serve everything on a silver platter.

The topic that is spread all around the piece, would definitely be (or one of them) - can actions from one's childhood influence you while you are an adult, even though you have forgotten them up to some extent? WIll the revealing of the secret chamber of your subconscience help you live a better and more prosperous life? Will this lady now be Belucci or Marceau (or is that even important) and will it make the family happier? What's with the mother (or the both mothers) and what happens next? How did this contribute to her existing life (apart from destroying a few weeks and some sane mind in all this time).. The questions just queue up in an endless line.

And while you are watching this, you will endulge the beauty of both, Marceau and Belucci as they are superbly amazing ladies. Both with sparkling energy and just magnificent looks. A true crown to the movie.


My personal rate: 8,0 (piece worth seeing, definitely).

Don't look back on IMDB

Turist, 2010

Turist, 2010
Director: Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Cast: Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, Paul Bettany


Stage: Local theatre


Turist in short: Elise (Angelina Jolie) sits next to an American tourist, Frank (Johnny Depp), on a train going to Venice. She has chosen him as a decoy, making believe that he is her lover who is wanted for police. Not only will they need to evade the police, but also the mobster whose money her lover stole.



Preps: None whatsoever. Just want to see Depp and Jolie again. How bad could it be?


Reality: Well, never say how bad can it be.. this is one of the major no-no's in this year to start with. How low can you go with picking a script, cast and the movie as you are one of the leading stars, as Depp, Jolie and Bethany definitely are? You can not just place wonder kids (cast) on the stage and locate it in Venice. Reality just doesn't work this way. It's definitely one of the worst movies lately and I don't want even to hear about it again. The storyline (plot), the cast itself, lack of energy between Depp and Jolie.. arrrrr. It just goes on and on.

On the first half you will barely see it to its end, I can assure you that. Truly sorry it ever came under my hands. I don't dare to say anything really positive about this piece, as there isn't anything positive to say. Besides the placement and cast. Content is awful, scenes, music, everything lacks. A hut never became a castle just because a king parked outside for a while. Neither did this movie. It remained in its stone age. Total waste of time. And I am sorry for the main cast. A big minus to their respectful line of great movies.


My personal rate: 2,0 (bljak. Do something else. The 2,0 is only because the cast and Venice, which is breathtaking. All the other.. not worth even mentioning).


Turist on IMDB

Official page

King Kong, 2005

King Kong, 2005
Director: Peter Jackson
Cast: Naomi Watts, Jack Black, Adrien Brody


Stage: Home TV selection


King Kong in short: Carl Denham needs to finish his movie and has the perfect location; Skull Island. But he still needs to find a leading lady. This 'soon-to-be-unfortunate' soul is Ann Darrow. No one knows what they will encounter on this island and why it is so mysterious, but once they reach it, they will soon find out. Living on this hidden island is a giant gorilla and this beast now has Ann is its grasps. Carl and Ann's new love, Jack Driscoll must travel through the jungle looking for Kong and Ann, whilst avoiding all sorts of creatures and beasts. But Carl has another plan in mind.


Preps: Just the background of a Saturday evening. Nothing special, as I have seen it before. I wanted to see if I changed my mind about this movie.


Reality: Hm.. the xxxth remake of King Kong and Peter Jackson. Well, the name I want to see again, but not in this role. It's supposed to be a spectacle. And in the movies it was. I remember seeing this in the local theatre. And I cryed. As I always did when seeing the King Kong. I actually despise movies about animal abuse. However, I do agree that in some extent they are necessary to keep us from doing even more such things. And we all love big monkeys, orangutans, gorillas. And we don't want to see them hurt. Which is quite the opposite here. So the movie touches everyone with at least some decent cells within. Or it touches deeply a soul like mine is. In this psychological, animal abuse, sense.

Apart from that, the familiar story, remake as it is expected in the new era of cinemascopy, with all possible effects. To me, a good distinction between real and fiction is really visible here, which makes a minus to this movie. Film it in the studio and then later make the background.. naah, it doesn't pay my bill. Jackson here doesn't exceed LOTR or some of his greatest achievements. The script seems poor, the storyline barely believable. How did they transport the animal in the small boat still remains a secret. The movie could be at least one hour shorter. And the action seems somehow similar to Jurassic park. Ok, it's quite predictable or believable to keep all sorts of weird animals on a deserted island, but somewhere you should pull a line between barely believable and something that's just copied from another movie.

There are some scenes that are a masterpiece, but it's merely a few. And they don't make it up for the looooong suffer you will engage when watching this and waiting for its finish. It will keep you weeping if you see the slaughter of the great animal. In my opinion, it wasn't worth making a remake and making some more money out of emotional-oriented crowd.


My personal rating: 4,0 (merely as a strong warning how cruel people can act towards nature and its wonders. Even if in this case Kong only impersonates the wonders)

King Kong on IMDB

Getting even with dad, 1994

Getting Even With Dad, 1994
Director: Howard Deutch
Cast: Macauley Culkin, Ted Danson



Stage: home theatre, NY selection on local TV - afternoon

Getting even in short: Ray, an ex-con and widower, is planning a coin heist with two accomplices to help him to buy his own bakery. However, he doesn't expect his son Timmy, who was living with Ray's sister, to show up at the house right in the middle of planning. Timmy is ignored and Ray and his buddies pull off the heist. Timmy gets his father's attention by stealing the coins and hiding them. To get them back, his father must take him to a number of different places and treat him like he enjoys his presence. They grow fond of each other but Timmy won't stay with his dad unless he gives up the coins.


Preps: None whatsoever. Since I don't have a better idea for a Sunday afternoon I will look at what the decent TV folks are recommending for the after NY party mood.


Reality: Yuk. Macauley Culkin in another sync of Home Alone. Hmmmmm. Well, I guess he needed to cash in the fame he had in those years. After that they would always connect him with the main character he played in those HA movies. But.. there's also Ted Danson, who shot himself into the star world with this genre. In this case, he plays a foolish dad, that doesn't want to be recognized as dad, and that in any chosen moment in the movie states this aloud without any shame or doubt. And yet, (so Hollywood like), changes his mind in one week and wants to be a father after all. Yes, also the villains and robbers have souls and urge to be daddies. The story is underestimating the viewer, more than obvious exploiting the fame of Culkin (the script is so similar to Home alone funny scenes, it's pretty straightforward what the director is trying to pull off). And most of robbers are really jackasses, but do they need to be so dumb as they show in this piece?

I strongly disrecommend this, as it will give you nothing more than a headache. Predictable flow, predictable ending, horrible script, vague cast.. hm. Don't waste your time. It's not really a family comedy, mere a family copy of Home Alone. I know, even if you see that can turn over those steps for the xxxth time, it still feels funny. But this is only because we kinda grew up with Home Alone. And everything that looks up to that movie and tries to be a better copy, only fails badly.




My personal rate: 2,0 (I wouldn't call et even decent enough to recommend it a bit. However, if you like family comedies of low intel, then it's the right choice)


Getting even with Dad on IMDB

The Ugly Truth

The Ugly Truth, 2009
Director: Robert Luketic
Cast: Katherine Heigl, Gerard Butler, Bree Turner


Stage: Home theatre, a nice pre-ny evening with one of my friends - she insisted on seeing this.

The Ugly Truth in short: A romantically challenged morning show producer is reluctantly embroiled in a series of outrageous tests by her chauvinistic correspondent to prove his theories on relationships and help her find love. His clever ploys, however, lead to an unexpected result.


Preps: I have seen this and enjoyed the irony in the piece one time a year or two ago. After that I have made several refferals to the piece in this blog. And last week one of my best female friends comes and wants to see this, because it's supposed to be great. Heh, I agree on seeing this lesson-full piece again.


Reality: The Ugly Truth tells us that men are on this world not to be understood, but to be teased and flirted with. Don't look for love, look for sex and lust, it's cheaper and easier to find - would be one of the lessons learned in the movie. Gerard Butler casts as the stud, knowing all there is to know about women. Similar role as Mel Gibson played in What women want, only it's the other way around. In the sense, that Gerard is the bad boy all women hate and need still to cope with.
Unfortunately, he falls in love with Katherine (Abby), the producer of the show he's playing in. The irony and black humour, where this piece started (and should end with) turns into some Hollywood cheesy last third of the piece.

Apart from the typical ending, the movie offers a few truly amazing places to laugh and to learn from simple (yet truthful) lessons. It's really hard to judge the ways women respond to this man and yet you try to follow the guidelines. The base would be that you need to pretend to be a sexual goddess and you will be able to get anything in the world. Sadly enough, men like sexual goddesses and unfortunately not women as they are for real. Every now and then the bubble bursts and woman shows herself as she really is and for that she's punished with a break up or sad evenings back at home. But, playing the game for a lifetime ensures you male escort. The question here would be - is it absolutely necessary to have someone, if you have him under these conditions? The truth reveals as she doesn't want to pretend.

Fortunately, the movie is Hollywood-ish, therefore the punishment comes also with a prize, as Butler steps in as the mushy man he once judged online. Nothing more than an average romance in this piece. However, you will love some of the lessons, I was cracking of laughter in some funny scenes.



My personal rating: 6,5 (you will laugh so hard at some scenes that your stomach will ache. Apart from that, a pretty average piece with a typical US ending)


The Ugly Truth on IMDB