Warner Bros. Pictures “The Hangover” is directed by Todd Phillips, “Old School”, which got me a little excited to seeing this movie, but unfortunately Phillips failed to hit his mark. This was no classic by any means and fell flat when I noticed this had all been done before.

I was worried the first time I saw the trailer as there are many movies that follow this formula, and in fact, there was a direct-to-video movie in 2006, “Bachelor Party Vegas”, that dealt with a group of friends celebrating a bachelor party while getting into trouble along the way.  Hmm… okay well the plot was the same making me figure the moral of the story will most likely follow.  Fortunately “The Hangover” does not end the same.

The idea of the movie is simple.  Four buddies drive to Las Vegas for friend Doug (Justin Bartha) bachelors’ party.  What was meant to be a one fun night in Vegas turns into a full blown out adventure when none of them remember what happened the night before.  After waking up in their suite, which was a mess, they realized they have lost Doug who is supposed to be getting married the next day.

After what seemed like a long portion of the movie, the audience finally finds out that the three buddies left, will be spending the rest of the movie looking for Doug. At that moment is when it is apparent that this movie is nothing new. There is nothing original about it, but three crazy friends added with a crazy surrounding like Las Vegas made it easy to create wild and hilarious escapades.

The gang of friends is not the greatest cast of actors. There is of course the outspoken, loud, and free spirited friend played by Bradley Cooper (He’s Just Not That Into You”, “Nip / Tuck”). His other good friend is played by Ed Helmes most known for his role on “The Office”. Helmes character bares no difference to his dorky and awkward role on the NBC sitcom. The third buddy is Doug’s future brother-in-law played by comedian Zach Galifianakis (“What Happens in Vegas”).

This cast of characters did a fine job with what they were given, however I am sure there was plenty of improvisation that played a key role that wasn’t delivered like it was in many past films in the same category.  It’s quite obvious that the filmmakers were trying to capture some of the success that films like “Old School”, “The 40-Year-Old Virgin”, “Superbad”, “Blades of Glory”, “Pineapple Express”, and other similar films have had.

“The Hangover” is just another one of these ridiculous, outlandish, raunchy comedies. This is not necessarily a bad thing.  I actually love these types of movies if done right.  This film never quite got where I was hoping it would go though. I could go on for days with movies that have done this in the past, but all you need to do is take one actor from one of these films and follow their film credits.  Most share at least one film together that feels just like the other. This one is no different.  For example, the hilarious Ken Jeong plays a role in “The Hangover” and is known for having roles in many of the same type of the films with the same actors.

I definitely cracked up at some parts and was grossed out by many. With that alone, the movie was successful. Although, I found myself thinking that I just wanted them to find their friend already and get the movie over with.  It just wasn’t anything new and exciting. I am positive there will be plenty of people in the right demographic that will absolutely love this film. In my head I can just imagine a bunch of guys sitting around the tv watching “The Hangover” while drinking some beers and laughing hysterically. This film will do fine in the right setting.

There is plenty of mindless physical comedy with exciting action accompanying it that keeps this one entertaining. I never seemed to mind if Doug got home in time to get married, but I stayed entertained. Some of the comedic timing seemed off and maybe a little awkward toward the beginning. Luckily it started to flow a little better after the friends began their adventure. I don’t know why there is so much frontal nudity these days, but I guess it keeps the audience laughing.  I however, am over it. Let’s try to find a new approach to make us laugh.

At first I thought this was terrible timing for this movie to come out with Will Ferrell’s “Land of the Lost” and Jack Black’s “Year One” coming out soon, but I failed to notice the PG-13 ratings on those. I predict “The Hangover” to do well, but not be as memorable. These other movies have a chance to make a lot more in the box office as they have a broader audience and more can see it.  The R rating at least has a chance to pull another crowd in even though it leaves it more restricted. Time will tell.

Has Pixar gone 10 for 10?  Disney / Pixar’s UP is the studios 10th and first 3D film.  There has been plenty of hype for this new film, and I myself was one that got into that hype. I have watched most of the online featurette’s, “UPisodes” and clips. Fortunately, I did not watch all of them to save some of the surprises the movie may have.  I’m very happy to say that the hype lived up to my expectations.

Disney / Pixar’s UP is about a grouchy old man, Carl Fredricksen (Ed Asner), who has made a promise to his late wife that they would go on an adventure to visit South America. It was a promise he held since childhood.  After Carl loses his wife Ellie, he realizes it’s now or never to fulfill his promise.

Carl’s house, which once sat in the middle of a typical middle-class American street, now is in the middle of a hustle and bustle construction site with sky scrapers and new developments on all sides.  The old man’s house is on the verge of being bought out by a developer so he can demolish it for his plans of the area.  Fredricksen realizes that he must save his house and take it with him on his adventure. His plan seems to take off without a hitch until he finds out that a local boy scout is trapped aboard his flying house.  Russell (Jordan Nagai) is an 8-year-old Junior Wilderness Explorer that only wants to earn his last badge of assiting an elder.  This is where all the comical antics derive from when Carl must now take on this adventure with one more than expected.

The audience will soon notice some of the heavy subject matters within this film. The main reason why Russell wants to earn his last badge is so that he can be honored the Sr. Wilderness Explorer badge by his father that is not around much.  This subject matter may hold a little too close to some of the children in the audience. There are many other subject matters toward the start of the movie like a baby complication and death that may need some explanation.  Much of the movie holds a dark undertone because of the side plots, but makes up for it in humor. No doubt these characters deliver a great amount of comical relief, but the sad parts may outweigh them. I do appreciate the more complex story and underlining the film has than say Cars did, but am just a little worried the effect it may have on children. You’ve been warned.

This being Pixar’s 10th film makes it a perfect time to debut their first 3D film even though they are a little behind the times.  By being a little late Pixar really got a chance to perfect this newer trend.  The scenes have tons of depth and are just gorgeous, which is displayed in Disney Digital 3D.  “We look at 3D as another crayon in our crayon box.” Director/Writer of Up Peter Docter stated. This is one aspect I truly love about Pixar. The studio has always been big on creating films strong on story with the technology used playing just as the medium to display that story unless it could help contribute.  Therefore Pixar never wants to have the technology distract from the movie.  In UP, Docter used 3D technology to help the movie showcase different moods the audience should feel between different scenes. “For example, at the beginning of the film, Carl is stuck in his ways and he’s living in this little house,” Docter explained. “We wanted it to feel claustrophobic so we flattened everything – we made it purposely less deep. Contrast that later when he gets to South America. We wanted this expansiveness – we wanted you to feel the wind in your face, so we really pushed depth there.” The use of 3D changes the mood for many of the scenes and helps show some of the beautiful locations within the film. Instead of using the effect as a gimmick, it is used as another visual cue.

Another aspect of this Disney / Pixar film is uniqueness in look and style.  I have noticed that all of Pixar films differ in style from the backgrounds to the characters in the movie. “We wanted UP to have a distinct look all its own and to be a departure from other Pixar films,” Producer Jonas Rivera stated. “We were trying to reach back and connect to the great Disney films that we grew up with, like ‘Peter Pan’ and ‘Cinderella’, and the great sense of style and caricature that they had.”

One sense of style the audience may notice is the more ‘animated’ the characters look compared to the realism of the wild scenery they are set. For instance, there are scenes toward the beginning of the film where characters are animated like our favorite slap-stick 2D animated counterparts. Ricky Nierva, Production Designer, stated that he coined the term ‘simplexity’ for the style he wanted. Basically they wanted to remove some of the detail without making the CGI look cheap. The reason behind this was to caricature the humans while still keeping them relatable. This sense of style adds to the suspension of disbelief one must have to believe what’s happening in the film.  One thing about the film that I was having a hard time swallowing was the unbelievable situations. Okay, I bought the fact that a house flies to an exotic destination in South America via helium balloons tied to the fireplace, but I am not too sure I could believe some of the crazy action sequences.  I especially had an issue in the scenes with the dogs in airplanes later in the film.  I’ll hold off in order to not spoil anything, but there were quite a few stretches even in the world the film created.

UP is definitely the best family movie I have seen in awhile. I noticed myself laughing out loud a lot and even feeling like a kid again. It brought back quite a few memories of childhood and made me miss those good times had. More importantly, it showed me that I should always keep some adventure in my life no matter how old I am. After all, an elderly man is our action hero of the film.

If you are looking for a movie emotion invoking with humor, sadness, action, and adventure, then this is the film you should look at. It definitely has those adult themes family movies have been containing within the past decade and I actually took something away from it. That’s what we are all after anyway, right?

Partly Cloudy (Pixar Short):
Quick and to the point, Disney / Pixar’s newest short had some of the best comical moments compared to all of their past shorts. It is very touching and a perfect opening to UP. This is probably my favorite short from Pixar and really leaves you with an “awe” moment. However, this is another one that might need some parental guidance. Do your kids know where babies come from?

While the first Night at the Museum was an enjoyable enough piece of escapism, I never felt the need for a sequel.  I loved the setup, and yet by film’s end was pretty  much ready to move on.  Everybody had learned a valuable lesson, as per tradition in these type of films, and I didnít really think there was a lot left to do with the premise.  Because of this, I went into Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian with a decided lack of excitement.  And yet I came out having loved it. 

Both films revolve around Ben Stiller’s character of Larry Daley, and what happens to him over the course of a single evening in a museum where the exhibits come to life.  The first film took place at the Museum of Natural History, and as indicated in the title, the sequel takes place in the Smithsonian.  In typical sequel fashion, this means that everything is  bigger, better, and their is a lot more of it. 

But instead of just throwing more stuff at us and seeing what sticks, the filmmakers actually manage to utilize the expanded world.  Part of what makes this work so well is the interaction between the exhibits which would serve no logical purpose being together.  By placing the action in the Smithsonian there is a great deal of variety between the exhibits, and seeing them come together in such a way is a great deal of fun.

Being able to actually enter the paintings and interact with the sculptures brings a whole new level to this museum.  And when Daley takes a chase sequence into a classic WWII photograph, everything about this movie begins to click.  The creativity on display is way beyond anything in the first film.  Helping fuel this creativity is an amazing cast of new actors including Hank Azaria, Jonah Hill, Bill Hader, and on and on. 

Everybody from the first film returns as well, but the absolute highlight is one of the new additions.  Amy Adams is brilliant in the role of Amelia Earhart (or at least a wax replica of her).  Playing a caricatured version of Earhart, Adams fast-talks her way through every scene leaving Stiller’s character desperate to keep up.  When he tells her that one of her exclamations sounds made up even for her, she replies “it’s how I speak.”  She then gives a normal line of dialogue as comparison and questions “where’s the fun in that?”

That brief exchange encapsulates everything that works about this film.  Everybody seems to be having fun.  There is not one weak link in the cast and everybody gets a moment to shine.  On top of this, the special effects are a blast to watch.  There is nothing revolutionary about them, but they are perfect for this type of film.  By manipulating real art and exhibits we are all familiar with and putting them in the context of this story, the effects begin to actually feel special.

Even though I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, I again don’t see the need for another sequel.  I just don’t know what they can continue to do with this premise.   However, unlike after the first film, I will keep an open mind.  When they announce the inevitable Part III, I might find myself actually looking forward to seeing the further adventures of Larry Daley and his magical friends.  Especially if Amelia Earhart is going with him.

Even with the franchise’s signature star confined to public office, The Terminator series doesn’t lie when it says, “I’ll be back,” albeit with a new spin. Up till now, the Terminator films have focused on Terminators from the future sent to the past with the goal of killing humans who would be influential in the war between Skynet (machines) and the Resistance (humans).  Terminator Salvation, the fourth theatrical incarnation, sees the story take a new direction by focusing on the actual war itself for the first time. 

The film focuses on John Connor played by Christian Bale as the messianic, but mistrusted leader of the Resistance and Marcus Wright played by Sam Worthington who is part man, part machine and unclear of his origin. In the previous films, especially T2 John is portrayed as the ultimate savior of the future, but here we see him become even more Jesus-like with many opposing his leadership. It’s also interesting to note that the original ending had him dieing for his father (sound familiar?), but because of leaks this was changed. Despite, some vaguely religious allegories the movie is very much an action thriller, in fact, that’s about all it is.

The movie’s plot consists of a series of events with the sole purpose of propelling the action from scene to scene. We see Wright deal with what makes a man a man and a machine a machine, but that is about as deep as it gets. Being a Terminator movie, the plot is a little convoluted, but this movie is built on the action. With the Charlie’s Angels director, McG, at the helm it goes without saying that the action sequences come at you full throttle. All kidding aside, the film never lets up with intricate action sequences that never go over the top, even though ratio of explosions to plot points seems a little excessive. So if you’re like most Terminator fans and are looking for some post-apocalyptic warfare or you just want to get a glimpse of a young CGI Schwarzenegger, you can’t go wrong with Salvation.