The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn- Part 1: Movie Review

Directed by Bill Condon
Screenplay by Melissa Rosenberg, based on the novel by Stephanie Meyer.
Running Time: 117 minutes (1h, 57 mins.)
Rated PG-13 (for disturbing images, violence, sexuality/partial nudity and some thematic elements).
Distributor: Summit Entertainment

Here we go again. We get another one of these films. You know, the one with the sparkling vampire and the girl who falls madly in love with him. When you really think about it, you gotta wonder why anyone, especially a mother of three, write this? That question won't really matter to anyone anymore since it's a worldwide success and it's making teen heartthrobs out of almost every young cast member involved. So now we come to the first part of the final film in the series, which means Summit Entertainment used the Harry Potter trick in order to make more money. Does it work? Not to sound like every other film critic but keep reading to find out...

If you're a fan of the series, then you already know the story. If not, then here's this brief description. Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), along with everyone close to them, must deal with a chain of tragic consequences brought on by their marriage and their unexpected pregnancy, which will lead to a childbirth that could kill her. If anything, just watch the trailer and the countless television spots. They help. Now, I want to make clear that I am not a fan of the Twilight saga. Even though I don't exactly mind seeing the movies, I think we all know that they're the franchise that made vampires lame. The countless Twilight wannabes don't help either, especially The Vampire Diaries. Worst. One. Yet.  True Blood is more of a better show. At least some of the vampires on that show are badass. But we're not talking about those two, so let's get back to Twilight.

As you know, this is the first part of the film, which I felt was weird because it seemed like everything big in this part happened. Yeah, I know Harry Potter did it, but they had enough material to split it into a two-parter. This however, doesn't. As I mentioned before, the two-parter trick was obviously done by the studio to make more money off this franchise, but it probably could have worked better had it been one long movie. Then again, with the exception of the fans, why would anyone want to sit through two-and-a-half to three hours of this? The performances are more of the same. Kristen Stewart is a notable example, at least in some scenes. I never liked her character and this film didn't change that at all.

In the first film, she was a little crazy. In New Moon, which is the worst film in the series, she went beyond crazy and acted like a total bitch. In Eclipse, she's still a bitch, always pitting the vampire and the werewolf against each other. In this one, she proves herself as needy, an example being a montage of scenes set during the aftermath of their time...you know...under the covers. After their first night of doing it, Bella wants it again and Edward refuses, only to give in later. Taylor Lautner starts okay, but gets progressively worse as the movie goes on. Most of his dialogue doesn't work and his character still constantly has hissy fits, especially in an unintentionally hilarious scene involving him in his wolf form and the rest of his wolf pack. When it comes to the three of them, Robert Pattinson was probably the better performer. Supporting is the same, not that it's a bad thing to these guys: Ashley Greene, Elizabeth Reaser, Peter Facinelli, Anna Kendrick, Billy Burke, Sarah Clarke and Kellan Lutz. As for Michael Sheen, I wondered why he was credited because he isn't even in the entire film. The only time you ever get to see him is right after the credits, which you should probably stay for if you want to get an actual hint of what will happen in part two.

The director this time around is Bill Condon. You might know him as the director of Gods and Monsters, Kinsey and Dreamgirls. Like the second film, it's looks like anyone could have directed this. At least in the first film, Catherine Hardwicke put some of her own visual style into the mix. Same with David Slade in the third. I think they should get someone like Zack Snyder to direct one of these films. I know it's too late now, but come on, think about it. Melissa Rosenberg returns as screenwriter and the script this time isn't that bad. Yes, despite some unintentionally funny scenes, there are also scenes that do contain some of the emotional, character-driven depth that was missing from the others. I do have to say the action scenes aren't shot that well. They're set in places so dark, I almost thought I was watching the film in 3D.

I didn't expect too much from this film, seeing as it's a Twilight movie. They were scenes that worked and they were scenes that didn't work. There are moments of interesting intensity (especially the scenes with Bella and the growing demon baby) and moments of unintentional laughter. I found myself in a mixed bag with this fourth entry, so I think the least I can give it is **1/2 (Two stars and a half).

The Descendants- Movie Review

Directed by Alexander Payne

Screenplay by Payne, Jim Rash and Nat Foxon, based on the novel by Kaui Hart Hemmings.

Running Time: 115 minutes (1h, 55 mins.)

Rated R (for language including some sexual references).

Distributor: Fox Searchlight Pictures

(Note: This is a slightly edited version of the original Toronto International Film Festival review that was posted 2 months ago).

In a career that spans almost twenty years, The Descendants is Alexander Payne's fifth film. After the critical, commercial and Oscar-winning success of Sideways in 2004, I was starting to wonder how come it was taking so long for him to make another film. I guess he was just taking a break and a long one at that. I know that he was working on a draft of I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry with his writing partner Jim Taylor, but then Adam Sandler came in and started, in Payne's words, "sandlerizing" the script and along with Taylor, he produced this year's Cedar Rapids. But now we come to this film, which happened to premiere at one of the most popular film festivals in the world. Mr. Payne, it's good to have you back.

The film stars George Clooney as Matt King, a land baron and the head of an Hawaiian family with many descendants, which of course is where the film's title is taken from. His wife, Elizabeth, is suffering a coma due to a boating accident and the doctors tell him that there's no way that she'll come back from it. This is a way for him to re-connect with his two daughters: 10-year-old Scottie (Amara Miller), who first meet when she's picked up from school and 17-year-old Alexandra (Shailene Woodley), who returns home from boarding school. When Matt tells Alexandra the bad news about her mother, she doesn't seem to care, due to her and Elizabeth arguing over Christmas. Matt didn't know what the argument was about, until now. Alexandra tells him that they were arguing due to the fact that Elizabeth was having an affair with another man. Now, Matt is trying to find the man she was sleeping with while at the same time trying to figure out what to do with their last piece of land.

Like I said before, it's good to have Alexander Payne back in the game and it's clear that his talent hasn't slowed down at all, even after a seven-year hiatus. He brings us a movie that explores the relationships between the family and makes it hilarious and heartbreaking at the same time. Payne takes the setting of the film and clearly states in the script that Hawaii isn't paradise. While I'm on the subject of the script, I also want to make a quick mention that one of the writers of the film, Jim Rash, is known best as Dean on Community. That's a surprise. George Clooney's character says, "Paradise can go f%$k itself", one of the lines that stayed with me throughout the screening. Speaking of Clooney, his performance is great and I would rank it one of his best. Payne stated at the TIFF Q&A that Clooney was the actor he had in mind when the script was being written. Clooney could get an Oscar nomination for this.

Some of his shine, though, is stolen by the young actors in the film. Many of the great scenes come from Shailene Woodley, Amara Miller and Nick Krause. Woodley has obviously played a teenager before, all thanks to that crappy pregnancy show, The Secret Life of The American Teenager, but unlike that show, she truly embodies the actions of a teenage person. Basically her performance is surprisingly excellent. She has the chance of getting an Oscar nom. Then we have Miller, who makes her screen debut. She's good here too. But the one who really has a breakout role is Krause, who plays Sid, Alexandra's friend. His lines range from "Sup, bro" to "I didn't know old people hit like that" to even talking about his mentally challenged brother.

Sid is kinda stupid, but he shows a smart side as well. I think Krause is one of the best things to come out of this entire film. Oscar, pay attention to him too. There are also some fine performances that come from Judy Greer, Matthew Lillard and Beau Bridges. Phedon Papamichael is the cinematographer behind this film and he renders the Hawaiian landscapes and mountains wonderfully. Papamichael last collaborated with Payne on Sideways and he did a great job there. Its Hawaiian-like score also stayed with me, long after I left the theatre.

The Descendants is definitely one of my favourite films this year. It's an intelligent portrait of a man and his not-so-perfect family that's often funny and often sad. It's very clear that Alexander Payne, Fox Searchlight, the cast and the rest of the crew truly have an Oscar contender on their hands. I give the film a very enthusiastic **** (4 stars).

A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas- Movie Review

Directed by Todd Strauss-Schulson
Written by Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg
Running Time: 90 minutes (1h, 30 mins.)
Rated R (for strong crude and sexual content, graphic nudity, pervasive language, drug use and some violence).
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures (New Line Cinema)

The darkness of Halloween is out of the way, so now it's time to get right into the joy and bright lights of Christmas. The jolly songs on the radio, the stores filled with big toys and games, the various amounts of drugs spread onto a toddler...you probably wonder why I mentioned that last part, aren't you? Because of these guys. The Cheech & Chong of our generation are back and this time, they're holding nothing back, especially in 3D.

Set six years after their zany escape from Guantamano Bay, Harold Lee (John Cho) and Kumar Patel (Kal Penn) have been estranged from one another, replacing each other with different friends and living completely different lives. While Harold has a great job in Wall Street, a big house and is now married to Maria (Paula Garces), Kumar is living a nasty apartment and spending all his days getting high. Things change on Christmas Eve when a mysterious package brings the two guys together and when a joint burns down Harold's father-in-law's (Danny Trejo) Christmas tree, they travel across New York City to find the perfect one. Through their mission, trouble ensues at every single turn.

If you've seen the first two films, then you know what to expect. If you're new to this franchise, prepare to get shocked, because this time around they're really pushing the envelope, one notable example being a baby getting exposed to marijuana, cocaine and ecstasy. Expect parent groups to be all against that. Another example is the 3D. It may be unusual that a film like this would be filmed in the format, but it does work really well. While it makes fun of the technology, it also embraces it, having many things fly at us like weed smoke and splattering eggs.

John Cho and Kal Penn still have the chemistry that drove the first two films and of course, back from the dead is Neil Patrick Harris. Harris plays himself once again: the drug snorting, very heterosexual version of himself. Here in this, he makes fun of his real-life public image, pretending to be gay. NPH pushes that further when he sexually assults a Rockette. Danny Trejo is perfectly used as Harold's menacing father-in-law. We don't see too much of Paula Garces as Maria, just like the first two films and Danneel Ackles returns as Vanessa, Kumar's on-off girlfriend.

Directing this time around is Todd Strauss-Schulson. This is good direction, especially when this is his feature-film debut. The writing is funny, filthy and inventive. Writers Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg send up many references to Christmas classics like A Christmas Story and even going into a claymation sequence, which lasted a bit shorter than I expected it too. I liked it, but Community did it better. Just saying.

I liked this film. Sure, it doesn't live up to the first, but it's slightly better than the second. While many people might be offended by what happens in the film, there are many people who know how to take a joke and have a good time. I am one of those people. I give the film *** (3 stars).