In Nancy Meyer’s new film, It’s Complicated, Meryl Streep stars as Jane, a divorced woman and mother who owns her own bakery in Santa Barbara, California, who has to come to grips with the repercussions of her broken marriage. When her last child leaves for college Jane (Streep) experiences the empty nest syndrome. Even though her divorce occurred ten years earlier she still feels insecure as a woman because her husband Jake (played by Alec Baldwin) left her for a younger woman. To further complicate the situation Jake’s wife (Lake Bell) had a child a few years into the marriage by another man.

The story really begins one night while at Jane’s house her girlfriends are sharing stories about their husbands and lovers. They encourage Jane to go out and meet men after having spent the last ten years raising her children, building her business and dealing with the after effects of her divorce. As a result hilarity ensues.

It was entertaining to see Meryl in a role where she played a down to earth mother rather than a character who dealt with life altering events such as her roles in Silkwood and Sophie’s Choice. Meryl Streep has always been a favorite actress of mine. The first film I saw her in was Kramer vs Kramer. When most actresses find they are not offered more than cameo appearances once they hit fifty Meryl who has entertained audiences for years seems to have proven she is a true enduring talent in the film industry.

Streep presents a very accessible character with whom many women will undoubtedly be able to relate. Jane is in many respects the Every Woman. Like her women throw themselves into the responsibility of caring for others and lose themselves in the process.

As far as the overall plot goes it proved to be unusual which added an unfamiliar and refreshing element to the film. It also raises quite a few questions which serves as good food for thought. On one hand how would any other woman feel if their husband left them for a younger woman and how would they feel to find themselves still attracted to him? Would any other woman have made the same choices as Jane?

On the other hand how does one negotiate relationships with this many issues? Jake seemed as if he found what he was looking for in his marriage to his younger bride but when it became apparent that Jane was starting to get out and date he had to confront his lingering feelings for Jane. Although they end up sharing a string of sexual encounters it still raises the question whether such encounters would be enough to maintain the bond that existed between them.

And finally how does such behavior ultimately affect other people? When the children now young adults found out about the affair they have to cope with residual effects of how their parents’ divorce affected them now that they were out on their own.

In short, I liked this film. I thought Alec Baldwin and Meryl Streep had great chemistry together. The script was well written. And is nice to see Hollywood recognizing the need for films with with mature characters rather than the many films featuring younger adults. There was not a moment when I lost interest. The dialogue was humorous although some scenes are not intended for younger audiences. Nancy Meyers is a talented writer. I look forward to seeing more of her work in the future. There was a time when romantic comedies were only considered chic flicks. But now given the broad appeal of such works as It’s Complicated, it should be no surprise that theaters are now being filled with both women and men alike. If you have the time and the money you could do far worse than going to see this film.

How do you create a blockbuster? Just ask James Cameron. His newest movie, Avatar, is unquestionably one of the biggest successes in movie history. This film brings together a cast of familiar faces such as Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana, Giovanni Ribisi, Michelle Rodriguez and Stephen Lang, who do a great job with the material. However is the movie any good? Is it worth spending over two and a half hours (total run time is 162 minutes) watching a bunch of scantily clad blue people running around in the forest?

The answer is yes.

One of the main draws of this film is its visual feat for the eyes. The state of the art graphics coupled with the 3D effect makes the characters and situations literally pop off the screen. It is hard to not be entranced when watching all the different animals, floral, and events as they seem to hover a few feet in front of you. And given the amount of extensive research that Cameron has done to create a new language and new animal types just to add credibility to the story it is hard not to be swept up into this magical world of Pandora, where all these fantasy beings come to life.

As far as the story goes one will find that it is not terribly original. It feels like too much has been borrowed from Dances With Wolves (1990). But who really cares? The story may not be terribly original but it is unique enough to keep you guessing exactly how it will progress throughout the movie. And that is enough to keep this movie from boring the audience.

In the story we find a young marine, Jake Scully (played by Worthington) who is given an opportunity of a lifetime to join an off world research project on the lush moon of Pandora. Because of an incident that happens with his twin brother he finds himself driving a genetically designed creature modeled after the native habitants of the moon. He has his mission to help the humans but as the story progresses it turns out that there is a greater calling for him to side with the natives.

Sound familiar? Yes, it sounds like a lot of other movies that have come out over the years. But even so Cameron makes a compelling enough drama to keep the user interested in the storyline. We may have seen this story before but we have never seen it quite like this. And that makes all the difference.

Avatar is a feast for the eyes and the imagination. Watching it does not insult one’s intellect. It is over two and a half hours but to tell you the truth the time flies by surprisingly quickly. And by the end of the film you realize that you have witnessed something rather historic: a film that is balanced between spectacle and solid storytelling — a rarity within Hollywood.

Remember that old adage? You know the one that says “If you have nothing to nice to say do not say anything at all?” Unfortunately if we followed that saying there would be no blog entry for this latest incarnation of Sherlock Holmes. And what kind of blog would that be? It may suffice to say this version of Sherlock Holmes (which has been nominated for a Golden Globe Award) was a disappointment to me.  If you are one of those people who wanted to go see a film with an actual story then perhaps you may agree.

Robert Downey Jr. stars as the great detective. Jude Law plays Holme’s assistant Dr. John Watson. Rachel McAdams is Irene Adler, Watson’s fiancee. And Mark Strong plays the part of Lord Blackwood, the main villain in this piece.

The movie’s plot can be summed up in a few words.   Sorcerer and serial killer Lord Blackwood returns from the dead to continue his murdering spree. Detective Sherlock Holmes (played by Robert Downey, Jr) and his assistant Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) team up to catch the killer( Strong) who is threatening all of England. Rachel McAdams (Adler) best known for her role in The Notebook, plays Irene Adler, Watson’s fiancee.

The director’s intention may have been to tell a story about murder, deceit and black magic but in this film the special effects are the real stars and overshadow any attempt at telling an interesting story. Yes, that is right. This film has almost no plot. After the film I was left with a wish that the storyline had been more similar to the classic versions of the forties when the plot was the thing and not the over-use of special effects. What little bit of plot there was left little for character development. For example the director could have explored the relationship between Adler and Watson a bit more in the film and perhaps the story would have had more weight.

But no. That is perhaps asking too much.

Consequently the entire film suffers. It feels more like a vacuumed out period of two hours void of any real soul or depth than an exciting adventure. And given the weakness of the story is it any wonder that the performances also suffered? Unlike his more impressive roles as Stark in Iron Man and Charlie Chaplin, Downey’s portrayal of Holmes was not very convincing to me. Downey, one of the few actors in Hollywood with an impressive acting background (and actual talent). However one might still come away feeling that Downey could have done more with the role. Jude Law’s performance as Watson left much to be desired. There was nothing that he did or said that was really that memorable. The only bright light in the film was Rachel McAdams (Irene Adler). She was the damsel in distress that both Holmes and Watson rescued near the end of the film.

Overall if you like special effects and mindless entertainment then perhaps this film is for you. However if you are looking for something with a bit more weight you may do better to save your ten bucks and consider another film at an art house.

Now here is a walk down memory lane… an oldie but a goodie as far as films go. If you have an hour and a half to kill at some point and the weather is kind of frightful then you can not go wrong by watching this film from the Hollywood Golden Age. Nominated for seven Academy Awards including Best Picture and winner of two, Separate Tables tells the story of several people who live at the Beauregard Hotel. They share one common trait: loneliness.

This movie based on a play by Terence Rattigan and John Gay. It was produced by Harold Hecht and directed by Delbert Mann. Vivien Leigh was to star as Ann Shankland, but bowed out when her husband, Laurence Olivier, decided not to direct the film adaptation.

Deborah Kerr plays Sibyl Railton, a shy neurotic unmarried woman who is unable to cope with daily life. She is finally able to overcome her timid behavior in order to confront her domineering mother. Sibyl (Kerr) strikes up a friendship with Major Pollack ( David Niven)  and is devastated when she learns of the Major’s dark past.

Major Pollack (Niven) is unsure how the people who live at the Beauregard Hotel will react when his secrets are  revealed.

John Malcolm (Burt Lancaster) a disillusioned writer who drowns his disappointment by drinking excessively must face his past when he has a confrontation with Ann Shankland (Rita Hayworth) a  new guest at the hotel. They were once married. Their relationship ended when she sought out the company of other men that lead up to their bitter separation. Malcolm(Lancaster) never forgave Shankland (Hayworth) for her deceitfulness.

There are several other characters living at the hotel. There are an aging spinster, an older gentleman and two women. One woman runs the hotel and the other seems content living among the others. There is a younger couple staying there as well. The young woman wants to remain single while the gentleman is set on getting her to the altar.  Each learns a lesson about forgiveness and acceptance as they get to know one another.

I prefer movies in black and white rather than the newer colorized versions that are available today. I found the characters interesting especially Lancaster and Hayworth. I would have liked the film to have gone deeper into the characters pasts.

THE BLIND SIDE

Director: John Lee Hancock

Based on the book by Michael Lewis.

This heart-warming drama is based on a true story of Michael Oher, a homeless African American boy who overcame his troubled childhood to become an All American football player and First Round draft pick. Nominated for a Golden Globe Award the story focuses on Michael’s journey as he grows in self-confidence and self-awareness and about the loving support he received from his adoptive white family which was so vital for him to grow into the man he was destined to become.

Sandra Bullock plays a central role in this film as Michael’s adoptive parent, Leigh Tuohy, a feisty mother of two who connects with the boy when she discovers he is homeless. Tim McGraw plays Sean Tuohy, the supportive husband who stands behind his wife’s convictions. Kathy Bates puts in a cameo appearance as a tutor who encourages Michael to reach his full potential as a student.

It is a turning point in all of their lives when Leigh Tuohy finds Michael and offers him a room within their home. Once Leigh takes the young boy under her wing her motherly instincts take over and she stops at nothing to protect the newest member of her family. She even searches out Michael’s mother to learn about his past in order to understand the boy she took under her wing.

Adjusting to the new household is a shock to the young Michael but fortunately he bonds with the younger son and feels more comfortable in his role as older brother to his teenage sister. Having spent his childhood years lost in the foster care system we find a young boy who believes he was different from his classmates because he knows so little of his parents.

Feeling like an outcast for most of his life he later comes to term with the prejudice of other people due to his upbringing within a white family. The Tuohy family later acts as legal guardians. Eventually Michael grows into a promising young man and realizes that the old “friends” he once knew as a child have become caught up in a world of violence with which he can no longer identity as he chooses to fulfill his own dreams in life. Eventually Michael thrives as a football player and later becomes All American Offensive left tackle.

This is a touching film. There are no real surprises when you see it. Over all it is thoughtful, warm and engaging. All the actors do a fairly good job at portraying their characters and it is impressive when you stop and think about it that this story is actually real. Not exactly a G-Rated film it is nonetheless a good film which may inspire one to think about the importance that love and compassion play in shaping the lives of children.

Wow. Three words come to mind that I would not have thought possible regarding this film. Three magical words that was a shock to both myself and my boyfriend (who begged me to go for several weeks before I finally relented.) Three words. What were they, you ask?

I liked it.

That’s right. After moaning and groaning about the possibility of sitting through another techno-babble-oriented story with my boyfriend about some strange beings from another planet (or planets), I actually found myself enjoying Star Trek, Paramount Picture’s gamble to reboot Gene Roddenberry’s dying franchise. This is shocking because I for one have never been a “Trekker.”

And even though my grandmother had a thing for William Shatner when the original television show aired back in the sixties I never really took to the franchise. In short, the word “Star Trek,” was not in my vocabulary. Or if it was there was a stigma about it — a negative connotation to it, if you will — and I was one gal who seriously never gave much consideration to men with pointy ears. At least not until now.

You see the new movie, Star Trek, is (I am biting my lips and they are bleeding, can’t you tell?) actually really, really fun. From the first few minutes after the lights dimmed until the closing credits I was hooked. And to tell you the truth there is no small feat let me tell you. The story was engaging. I have to admit Shatner was a bit of a looker back in the original show but this Christopher Pine does a pretty good job on his own. And all of the characters in the story were wonderful. Karl Urban who really made a splash in The Lord of The Rings, does an amazing job as Doctor Leonard McCoy. He just about steals the scene every chance he gets. Zoe Saldana who plays Uhura does a very believable job as the communications officer and Zachary Quinto (who inherits the role of Spock from Leonard Nimoy) makes a compelling argument why franchises can indeed be rebooted with much success.

Eric Bana does a great job as the menacing bad guy, Nero. He has tattoos all over which means he must be evil, right? Well, if that is not enough of an indication his violent tendencies through the film are a dead giveaway. The film was directed by J.J. Abrams of television fame for the hit shows, Alias, Lost, and Fringe, and he does an amazing job giving us a movie that is engaging, enjoyable and exciting. The characters basically keep you in stitches half the time which only makes you want more.

By the end of the film it is easy to feel sad. After all the “friends” you made for the last two hours — all those Roddenberry characters resurrected through the new cast — are now gone. At least for now. Four magic words come to mind as I close this review: go see this film. It is fantastic. It is one of the more satisfying films I have seen in quite some time. Sure, it may not be high art, but it is a good time nonetheless. See this film in the theaters or wait until it comes out on DVD or BLU-RAY. You will not be disappointed.

First I would like to start by saying that I loved the television version of Speed Racer and had unrealistic expectations when I heard they were making a movie. I did not quite envision the Speed Racer the Wachowski Brothers brought to Hollywood but it was an enjoyable experience none the less.

Emile Hirsch is handsome and brought a sensitivity to Speed that made you understand his drive toward success. The seductive lure of Royalton’s offer held little appeal when faced with the truth behind the company’s need to win in racing.

Loyal to his father  (despite how badly Pops handled his older deceased brother Rex’s career and fall from grace) Speed’s honor would not let him desert his family when Royalton vows to ruin them all.

The ending was satisfying although I would have wished for more actual racing rather than the CGI version of glitz and glamour.

I sat next to two eight year old male twins that found themselves a bit distracted during parts of the film where I thought they would have appreciated all the bright lights on screen.

Trixie (Christina Ricci) was well cast. She is quite talented and I feel she is an under rated actress. She has made her mark in independent film and much like Johnny Depp seems to choose films that she likes rather than the salary they command.

Pops Racer (John Goodman) was great as the race car builder who was once a professional wrestler. Susan Sarandon (who looks marvelous) as Mom Racer was the perfect fit. She’s a bit quirky but her eccentricity adds to the character of Mom.

Racer X (Matthew Fox) was one of the highlights of the film for me. Despite the fact that he is wonderful eye candy in black he added a darker element to the movie and of  course raises the question of whether or not he was Racer Rex or another type of racer vigilante who worked to right the wrongs of the racing world.

I liked the film and would give it a strong 4 out of 10 but the flash and CGI racing lost its appeal for me. It was a bit too campy. Although the younger brother Spritle (played by Paulie Litt) was entertaining at times he was a bit too annoying for me. After a while I found myself wanting to watch the chimp more than the kid. And with so many kids in the audience I wonder if the character of Spritle will serve as a bad influence on the younger audience by encouraging them to be brats when they leave the theater.

Oh well.  There are always the original television series on DVD. I only hope that future television adaptations like the anticipated Incredible Hunk will do the characters and story the justice they deserved.