Final Destination 3

Posted on February 14, 2006 at 3:22 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for strong horror violence/gore, language and some nudity.
Profanity:	Extremely frequent, strong expletives and graphic name-calling
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	If you have a line in this movie, then the chances are good you are going to die a graphic, bloody death, near constant peril, pigeons killed
Diversity Issues:	Stereotypes
Date Released to Theaters:	2006
Date Released to DVD:	2006
Amazon.com ASIN:	B000FC2HS6

It’s like deja vu, says the main character, only of something I haven’t done yet.

Wow, get out of my head, Wendy! We are barely minutes into “Final Destination 3” and already we, the audience, are sharing her feeling. We have been here before, too. Instead, it was called “Final Destination” and then “Final Destination 2”.

If you have not had the pleasure of the prior “FDs”, there really is no reason to start now.

However, if you have seen either of the first two in the series and are looking for more, then you know exactly what is in store for you. Attractive young things narrowly avert a fatal accident due to someone’s premonition -– thanks, Wendy! — and then they spend the duration of the movie being killed off in graphic, squelchy deaths. This time around, lives are ended with props including nail guns, tanning beds, falling objects, weight-training equipment, and, yes, that initial roller-coaster debacle.

Finally, for the real FD connoisseur, 3 is more in the spirit of the original than 2, as director James Wong has opted to place back the fig-leaf of plot and character development that 2 ignored for the sake of more elaborately drawn-out gore. Is it a worthy trade-off? Most of the audience seemed not to care a whit about the characters despite many scenes of Wendy’s tear-stained cheeks.

Since nobody appears to be putting the “final” in “Final Destination”, maybe the director of FD 4 will skip dialogue all together and use the money saved to stage even lengthier scenes of decapitations and dismemberment. “FD4: Attractive Co-Ed Mimes in Danger”, Wendy, doesn’t that just give you deja vu all over again?

Parents should know that these movies are thin excuses to demonstrate random, cartoon-like violence and extremely gory special effects. There is near constant peril and almost every character with a spoken line ends up brutally killed in a range of creative accidents. The stereotypically shallow girls are burnt to death on malfunctioning tanning beds, a lecherous guy has his head partially pureed by a fan, someone is peppered by nails to the head, and the list goes on. A character shoots pigeons with a nail gun, several people die in an explicit premonition about a roller coaster accident, and there are very few carnage-free scenes. One character is more concerned with being embarrassed in death and refers to particularly graphic form of impalement. Add in the nudity, the near constant expletives, some “friendly” name-calling with graphic profanity, and this movie is rendered inappropriate for sensitive viewers of any age.

Families might want to talk about desensitization and what is shocking about these movies, if anything. They also might want to talk about how different characters react to their impending demise and how laughing at death might help some people feel power over the inevitable. Finally, the repeated references to feeling a loss of control might provoke an interesting discussion about how people often fear what they cannot control.

Families that like this movie might want to see the others in the series, or they might wish to use the time to discuss safety protocols for almost any activity imaginable.

Thanks to guest critic AME.

Firewall

Posted on February 7, 2006 at 3:50 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for some intense sequences of violence, and for some language.
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Some social drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense peril and violence, shooting
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	2006
Date Released to DVD:	2006
Amazon.com ASIN:	B000F8DV1M

What can you do if you want to rob a bank and hotshot Harrison Ford has designed a foolproof security system? Well, firewalls may be unbreakable, but people are not. So, you tell him that if he doesn’t break into his own system, his family is dead.

Ford plays Jack Stanfield, computer security ace and loving husband and father. The bank he’s been protecting for 20 years is about to be merged, and he is suspicious of the new management (Terminator 2’s Robert Patrick) and intrigued by a possible new job offer. This distraction may explain why he’s not too suspicious when a belligerent bill collector shows up at his office, yelling about $95 thousand in gambling debts. But pretty soon some very mean guys are pointing guns at his family and wiring him for sound and pictures so they can track him when he leaves the house.

The thrills in this movie are strictly low-wattage. For a while it is fun to see Ford McGuyver his way around the security system with a fax machine, an iPod, GPS, and a cell phone, but it all disintigrates into a generic shoot-’em-up with nothing distinctive or surprising, except, perhaps, that after all these decades, Ford still knows how to act and do stunts at the same time. Virginia Madsen is wasted in the the “No, Jack, no!”/”Don’t you DARE touch my children!” role. Paul Bettany has a nicely cool vibe but his character, like the others, is underwritten, and the script’s twists won’t surprise anyone who’s ever seen a Harrison Ford movie, most of which are better than this one.

Parents should know that the movie has extreme peril and violence, including shooting, punching, explosions, and general slamming things into characters, some of whom are injured and killed. A child is in peril and nearly dies due to an allergic reaction. There is brief strong language, someone gives the finger, and there is some social drinking.

Families who see this film should talk about how to protect themselves from identify theft. They should talk about the way that some bank robbery movies get the audience on the side of the bank and others get the audience on the side of the thieves.

Families who enjoy this film will also enjoy Air Force One and Witness, also starring Ford. They might also like to watch some other bank robbery movies, including $, the original The Thomas Crown Affair, Bandits, The Desperate Hours and its 1990 remake, and Dog Day Afternoon (mature material).

Related Tags:

Crime Drama Movies -- format Thriller

Eight Below

Posted on February 3, 2006 at 4:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	4th - 6th Grades
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG for some peril and brief mild language.
Profanity:	None
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Brief social drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense peril, characters injured
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	2006
Date Released to DVD:	2006
Amazon.com ASIN:	B000F4PDF8

The dogs rescue the humans, but will the humans rescue the dogs? Can they?

A scientist (Bruce Greenwood) arrives at a National Science Foundation base in Antarctica, in search of a rare meteor. Vehicles are too heavy to take over the thin ice, so Gerry (Paul Walker) takes him on a sled pulled by eight dogs. They are called back early due to major storms, and one of them is injured on the return. The need for immediate medical attention and the severity of the storm means that all of the people on the base have to be evacuated. There is no space for the dogs on the plane. Katy (Moon Bloodgood), the pilot, assures Gerry that she will fly right back to get them. But because of the storm it will be months before they can return. The dogs have been left behind, tightly chained together, with no food or shelter. How can they survive?

The dogs manage to break free, and the best part of the film is seeing them explore the icy environs and learn how to care for themselves and each other. There is a nice counterpoint with the efforts of the humans, also learning and growing and ultimately working as a team to get back to Antartica and the dogs.

The story is exciting and inspiring, the dogs and scenery are breathtakingly gorgeous, and director Frank Marshall expertly balances thrills, laughs, and tender moments that are genuinely moving. Marshall handles the sad and scary material gently and gracefully.

Parents should know that the movie has very intense peril for a PG movie, including a very scary jump-out-at-you surprise, falls, animal fights, injuries to human and animal characters and (spoiler alert) the sad deaths of two of the dogs and of some birds killed by the dogs for food. There are shots of an animal carcass. Characters drink beer and Scotch (and Fresca).

Families who see this movie should talk about how we decide what risks are worth taking. What changed the way Jerry and Katy felt about each other? They might want to learn more about Antarctica, sled dogs, and the beautiful Aurora Australis or “Southern Lights” enjoyed by the dogs in this film.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Balto, an animated film about the heroic dog whose statue is in New York’s Central Park, and March of the Penguins. They will also enjoy this interview with the director.

Imagine Me & You

Posted on January 28, 2006 at 4:02 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for some language and sexual material.
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Social drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Tense emotional scenes
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	2006
Date Released to DVD:	2006
Amazon.com ASIN:	B000F7CEBG

Love at first sight can be thrilling, but it can very very inconvenient when it happens to a bride who is walking down the aisle at the time. Especially if the loved-at-first-sight object of affection is another woman.

Rachel (Piper Perabo) is about to get married to Heck (Matthew Goode). But then she sees Luce (Lena Headey), the florist, and the connection is immediate and irreversible. And so we get the usual do-si-do until everyone lives happily ever after.

Romantic comedies take place between the meet (usually “cute”) and the happily ever after.

In between, the movie’s job is to get us rooting for the couple while it comes up with entertaining ways to keep them apart long enough for us to finish our popcorn and well enough that we feel that they’ve earned that happy ending.

Two traditional rom-com set-ups are immediate conflict (Bringing Up Baby, where a character summarizes the meta-theme of romantic comedies: “The love impulse in men frequently reveals itself in terms of conflict.”) and what I call the “boy who cried wolf” theme, where someone tells a lie and gets deeper and deeper, afraid to tell the truth to the trusting soul he/she now adores.

The first catgory (The African Queen, My Fair Lady, It Happened One Night, Moonstruck, When Harry Met Sally) depicts the sparks and the chemistry while the second (Some Like it Hot, Roman Holiday, Guys and Dolls) is a metaphor for the conflicts we feel as we reach for intimacy and authenticity but resist the vulnerability. Some set-ups, like The Taming of the Shrew combine the two.

In dramas, too, there has to be something keeping the couple apart. We often see the barriers of family (West Side Story, Slpendor in the Grass) or history (Casablanca, The English Patient). But romantic comedies are usually about overcoming initial dislike or becoming more honest.

This film’s trendy twist is that the heroine leaves the man she thought she loved for the female florist who decorated her wedding. But the real departure is not the gender of the loved one — it is the violation of the “almost” rule of comedy. Brides are supposed to run away just before the “I now pronounce.” In this film, she goes through with the wedding, one of several reasons that keep it from achieving the spirit of lightness and possibility that are essential for any romantic comedy, no matter what the gender of the couple. Despite some clever dialogue and the sympathy it creates for its characters, the movie’s essential mis-handling of its tone keeps it from working. The problem is not the same-sex romance; it is the disconnect between the lightness of atmosphere and the seriousness of a heart-breaking betrayal. If the movie is going to be named for a bubble-gummy 1960’s pop song, it had better stay just at the “almost” edge. Once this one goes over, giving us a groom who does not deserve to be treated this way, the movie just can’t recover.

Parents should know that the subject of this movie is a previously heterosexual woman who falls in love with another woman. There are sexual references and non-explicit situations, including same-sex kisses and references to watching porn (with some spicy titles) and to a man who likes sleeping with lots of women and propositions many of them. All of this is played for humor. Characters use some strong and crude language. There are references to depression and some unpleasant family situations. Characters drink alcohol.

Families who watch this movie should talk about what the parents of the characters most wanted for their children.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Four Weddings and a Funeral and Love, Actually.

Related Tags:

Comedy Drama Movies -- format Romance

Annapolis

Posted on January 25, 2006 at 4:16 pm

C+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for some violence, sexual content and language.
Profanity:	Brief strong language, some crude words
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking, scenes in bar
Violence/ Scariness:	Fighting, boxing, attempted suicide
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	2006
Date Released to DVD:	2006
Amazon.com ASIN:	B000F6IOD4

Sincere performances and some star charisma can’t save this movie from its derivative screenplay, a retread of every “callow youth learns what it means to be a man” service drama. This movie samples An Officer and a Gentleman and Top Gun the way Vanilla Ice sampled Bowie.

James Franco plays Jake Huard, a kid who has been putting rivets in battleships as he gazed across the water at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis. His friends and his father think that places like the Naval Academy are not for the likes of them. But at the last minute, despite grades and scores below the Academy’s standards, Jake is accepted. That night, his friends give him a big send off, and tell him the elegant-looking lady at the bar is a paid escort they have reserved for him. He politely tells her he is not interested but offers her a tour of the Academy. If you don’t think she’s going to show up the next day as someone who outranks him, you haven’t seen many movies.

And if you’re surprised that Jake’s future also includes a Benneton-ad range of racially diverse roommates, who also have a neatly assorted range of issues, one of which includes not being able to get over the climb-y thing on the obstacle course, and a tough superior officer who thinks Jakes doesn’t have what it takes, then you probably have never seen a movie of any kind.

But as long as you’re not looking for originality, this film is modestly enjoyable. Franco is nicely broodish, and Tyrese Gibson shows some star power as the superior officer who knows what it takes to be a successful leader. Chi McBride (Roll Bounce, The Terminal), Donnie Wahlberg (The Sixth Sense) and Vicellous Reon Shannon (The Hurricane) provide able support, and the movie’s predicability is offset by boxing scenes that are excitingly staged, with a sense of immediacy, and a slightly old-fashioned feeling — this is a film that takes kissing seriously.

Parents should know that the boxing and other fight scenes are intense and there are some scenes of peril and a suicide attempt. There are some sexual references, including a prank allegation that a woman is a paid escort, and characters use some strong and crude language.

Families who see this movie should talk about why Jake’s father had a hard time believing he could succeed at Annapolis. What made going to Annapolis so important to Jake? Why did he say that seeing where he came from made it possible for him to be there? They might want to find out about the real-life U.S. Naval Academy, as academically rigorous as it is physically demanding.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy An Officer and a Gentleman (for mature audiences).

Related Tags:

Drama Movies -- format Remake Sports