Love and Other Drugs

Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway

Directed by Edward Zwick

Rating: 5 stars

This romantic comedy wouldn't have been so good without the two actors cast as the lead roles. Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway are so good at making you feel the emotions they go through. Jamie Randall (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a young pharmaceutical salesman. He'll do anything to make the sale, so he and his mentor Bruce (Oliver Platt) can make it to the big city of Chicago where they will make tons of money. Along the way, Jamie meets Maggie Murdock (Anne Hathaway), a young 26-year-old who has been diagnosed with Parkinsons. They both agree that they're both not looking for a relationship but slowly, they're "friends with benefits" relationship turns into the real thing. Of course, this wouldn't be a real love story without problems and they argue and break up. But in the end, they decided to work things out and Jamie wants to stay, despite her disease.

I would give this movie five stars because it's not your typical romance/love story. Sure, boy is a jerk, boy meets girl, boy likes girl, eventually boy loves girl, and then there's a happy ending. But what's different about this movie is that it shows Jamie and Maggie's relationship isn't perfect. When they both meet, they could care less about committing and use each other for sex. Eventually, they fall for each other but their relationship still isn't perfect. Maggie has Parkinson's disease which she has to deal with as it slowly gets worse. During this hard time, she feels like Jamie won't want to stay and that'll only hurt her later. Breaking up doesn't help, in the end they realize that they don't want anyone else.

What made this a good movie was that it made you laugh, it made you feel sad, and some people out there could probably connect with this story. Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway are a perfect on-screen couple, they compliment eachother so well. You might remember that they played husband and wife in "Brokeback Mountain". Since this movie is rated R (and with good cause), I would recommend this movie to those who don't mind nudity or sex scenes. That was pretty much why the movie was rated R. It was definitely for mature audiences since it contained things adults would understand, though I'm sure there's lots of teenagers who would understand too. So, if you're feeling up to spending $8.50 or however much it costs to go to the movies these days and you're wondering what movie you want to see, I would recommend this one. It's for guys and girls! So don't think it's just another "chick flick". Guys, you'll find things to laugh at at this movie too.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

Mathieu Amalric, Marie-Josée Croze, Emmanuelle Seigner

Directed by: Julian Schnabel

Rating: 5 stars

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is the incredibly true story of the "Elle" magazine editor Jean-Dominque Bauby (played by Mathieu Amalric). On December 8th, 1995, Jean-Dominique, "Jean-Do", suffered a stroke which caused him to lapse into a 20-day coma. Upon waking up his doctors discovered that he suffered from "locked-in" syndrome, which meant that he had no control of his body and only his mind and eyes could function properly. The doctors had to sew Jean-Do's right eye because something was wrong with it. You can imagine the man's frustration that he could think but could not get across what he was trying to say. Every day, therapists worked with him to try and regain usage of his motor skills then ability to fully function. With the help of Henriette Roi (Marie-Josée Croze), Jean-Do was able to communicate what he wanted to say by blinking his left eye. Using a system of letters, Henriette would recite the alphabet in a specific order and Jean-Do would blink when she said right letter. Sometimes she could guess a phrase if she had enough words and even guess the word (if it started something like "je vou.." and she would guess "I want..."). Eventually, Jean-Do decides he wants to write a book to which he actually does.

I would give this movie 5 stars. It's an amazing story about a man who has lost everything in his life by being locked-in his own body. The only way he can express something is by blinking and that must be so hard to have to memorize what you want to say only to be able to fully blink the phrase in a matter of a few minutes. Jean-Dominique's story is so sad. After being stuck in a hospital for months, he's haunted by regrets and memories. What makes this movie depressing is the fact that just as he was starting to improve (though very, very slowly), he got pneumonia and died a few days after his book was released. There was hope but the pneumonia took it away. Doctors couldn't understand why a healthy man like Jean-Dominique had a stroke.

I would recommend this movie to those who don't mind reading subtitles (or are fluent in the French language). If you don't mind a movie with a sad ending, then go watch this film. Though his autobiography is on my list of books to read, I would even recommend reading it if you can read French! You can see why this movie is worth five stars, it was nominated for the Academy Awards and four Oscar nominations. Go see this, you won't regret it.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1

Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint

Directed by David Yates

Rating: 4 stars

In part 1 of the final installment of Harry Potter, this film is darker and more emotional than the others. Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) don't return to Hogwarts this year. They are on a mission to hunt down and destroy Voldemort's (Ralph Fiennes) horcruxes. However, this is not an easy task and frustration is easy to come when you're not so succesful. The horcruxes aren't the only thing on the trio's mind as Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) leaves them another mystery: what is the Deathly Hallows? Harry tries to figure out what Voldemort is up to while their beloved ones are fighting to stay alive. The new Ministry of Magic has been infiltrated by Voldemort's followers, the Death Eaters, and the wizarding world lives under strict precautions while those who aren't "pureblood" are being inspected.

I would give this movie 4 stars. Shocker, right? Personally, I'm a huge Harry Potter fan but that doesn't mean I'm going to automatically give this movie 5 stars. This movie makes you laugh and cry. The actors did a great job at portraying emotions, giving the movie a dark complexion. "These are dark times, there is no denying," says Rufus Scrimgeour (Bill Nighy), the wizarding world's prime minister. Right he is. Just watching the trailers for this movie is enough to make you feel the excitement upon the release.

So why would I give this highly anticipated movie four stars? This movie contains quite a few weaknesses. All I've heard is how great this movie will be and how it is just like the book (source: mugglenet.com). This. Is. A. Lie. Though appropriate, the beginning of the movie was not the same beginning as the book. This was the first disappointment. The beginning that was placed in the movie fit but when you go into a movie with high expectations that it will be just like the book, this is not a good start. Also, I don't understand why David Yates neglected to go into more detail about Dumbledore's past. Dumbledore's back story was not in part one at all. I can only hope to see this in the second part. They should have at least put the correct title of Rita Skeeter's book "The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore".

Kreacher's Tale was also completely neglected. The movie very briefly covered the mystery of who R.A.B was. Kreacher's Tale was very interesting in the book as it pertained to the locket horcrux Dumbledore died for. Harry, Ron, and Hermione's stay at Grimmauld Place was too short as well. That's where they did most of their planning to go in the ministry to take back the locket from Umbridge.

Dobby's voice was annoying too. I know they can't control it if they lose the voice of whoever previously played Dobby in the second Harry Potter movie, but a higher pitched voice bugged me the whole time Dobby spoke. It just wasn't the same Dobby you loved in the second one.

Severus Snape should have gotten more screen time too. Not that he needed a lot. But we should've seen how he was the one responsible for George losing an ear. One of the main questions every reader had was whether Snape was a good guy or not. This was important for the movie to show so we, the viewers, could ask that too. Instead, this is neglected and if you haven't read the book then you won't have the internal mystery of whether Snape is good or evil.

One last thing- Peter Pettigrew. This scene was very vital in the book, when Harry and Ron were taken to the basement of Malfoy Manor by Peter Pettrigrew. It's so important because of Harry and Peter's connection. Since Harry had let Peter go free in the third book/movie, Peter became indebted to Harry. His death would have been important to see. This is something the writers should have included because the readers of the book deserve to have this last movie done right.

The movie did have its strengths though, don't get me wrong. Voldemort's meeting with the Death Eaters was great, it really showed how intimidating he is. You don't really see much of Voldemort in the movies except for some scenes. I really liked this scene because you see the power Voldemort has over these people.

The scene at Godric's Hallow was done really well. It was scary. Bathilda Bagshot was so perfect at portraying how creepy she was. Especially the scene where she turned back into Nagini, Voldemort's snake. I really liked how we got to see Harry's house and how it was destroyed. I was worried that they would skip it.

Dobby's funeral was spot-on perfect. This was exactly how I pictured it in the book. They nailed it. The writers did a great job at portraying the emotion of his death. It was very touching and Daniel Radcliffe showed the emotion of losing a friend so well. Especially when his lines of wanting to bury Dobby properly, without magic.

Overall, I left the movie theater disappointed. The movie did a great job at playing the emotions, though there was some light humor that was nice to be included. These are just my initial reactions to the movie and I know not everyone will agree with me. For example, almost everyone I've talked to that didn't read the book loved it. As well as those who watched the movie with no expectations. That's where I was at fault. I was so excited to see this movie that my expectations were heaven-high. However, this isn't the last time I will see it. I think you'll enjoy it, maybe even think it deserves five stars. So enjoy and don't make the same mistake as me by going to see this with high expectations. Not after you've read this review.

When In Rome

Kristen Bell, Josh Duhamel

Directed by Mark Johnson

Rating: 4 stars

When Beth (Kristen Bell) has to make an impromptu trip to Rome, Italy to go to her younger sister's (Alexis Dziena) wedding, she never expected to find the love she's been waiting for. Feeling hopeless while hanging around the "fountain of love", she takes five coins out of it, not knowing what trouble this would cause her. Nick (Josh Duhamel) happens to be someone Beth feels like she could fall for, after meeting him at the wedding and had a great time. Nick relentlessly tries to get her to agree to going on a date. The trouble is, because she took those five coins from the fountain, five random men believe they are in love with her. They do everything they can to win her approval in hopes for her love back. Beth is afraid that Nick's coin is one of them and doesn't know what to believe herself, despite his refusal that one of the coins is his.

I would give this movie four stars. It was a cute, romantic-comedy. The actors portrayed their characters well, not going over-board to annoy you. However, the choice for Beth's "lovers" could have been better. Sure, they made you laugh and feel a bit creeped out, but they didn't make it feel realistic. Maybe it's because they used people such as Jon Heder, Will Arnett, Dax Shepard, and Danny DeVito. Because they are big names in the comedy world (for example, Jon Heder being famously known for "Napoleon Dynamite), you feel like they "goof up" their characters. Maybe if the writers had toned down their characters so that they were more relatable, the movie would be even better. Sure, they learned a lesson in the end as to why they might have felt like they had fallen in love with Beth but looking back on the movie, they were a bit absurd.

Not to put this movie down, I enjoyed. I think that this is a film most people can enjoy. I'm sure if you liked Bridget Jones's Diary, The Ugly Truth, or Bride Wars, you might enjoy this. When In Rome is a light comedy that you can take your six- or seven-year-olds to. Overall, it provided humor and a satisfying ending.

The Stepfather

Dylan Walsh, Sela Ward, Penn Badgley, Amber Heard

Directed by Nelson McCormick

Rating: 4 stars

Michael Harding (Penn Badgley) comes home for his senior year from military school to find that his recently divorced mother, Susan Harding (Sela Ward), is engaged after a year of knowing her fiance. David Harris (Dylan Walsh) is a murderer, looking to settle down with a new family after killing his last one. Throughout the movie, Michael is suspicious of David and puts together that something is not right. He tells his latest theories to his girlfriend, Kelly Porter (Amber Heard), who tries to get him to stop obsessing over this. Nobody seems to listen to Michael, though we do see that Susan's friend is suspicious as well. David "eliminates" those who are suspicious and as the ending unfolds, we can only wonder what suitable ending is appropriate.

I would rate this movie four stars. This movie has its suspense moments (well put together) and it's a good thriller. It's perfect for those who enjoy the suspense but hate to be scared because it's not a scary/horror movie. I would recommend this to those who like thrillers such as Secret Window or Disturbia. This movie seemed more along the lines of Disturbia such as one of the leading male characters having suspicion over someone and doing what they can to get to the root of the mystery.

There was some things that could be improved to make this movie better. For example, the ending should be re-written. Sure, we can't always have a "happy ending" but it's also cliché for a movie to end with "the killer mysteriously got away" and we see who his next target is. Another example would be that in the beginning of the movie, you see how the police have an open investigation on David Harris but they don't get any more involved.

Overall if you take this movie as it is, then you'll find it pretty enjoyable. However, this is not the ultimate thriller and suspense film as there have been better ones out there. So if you have nothing better to do on a Friday night or want to have a thriller marathon, I would suggest adding this to your list.

Hot Fuzz

Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Jim Broadbent

Directed by Edgar Wright

Rating: 5 stars

"For the greater good."

Sergeant Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an excellent cop. In fact, he's so good at his job that he makes everyone else on his team look bad. Angel gets transferred from the hectic London life where crime happens every day to the quiet country side of Sandford. While everyone in town accepts what is going on (like under-age drinking), Angel makes arrests anyway. His fellow partner, Danny Butterman (Nick Frost) is fascinated by Angel's active past in the police force. When the murder of two actors occurs, Angel becomes suspicious and starts his own task to find the culprit. With the help of Danny, they try and solve the mystery of the multiple murders in Sandford. However, a surprise ending as to who is killing these people bring a funny and satisfying ending.

I would rate this movie five stars. It's clever and hilarious. Simon Pegg does an excellent job in this movie and Nick Frost is hilarious as his partner. I loved this movie the first time I saw it. The ending was funny, finding out that there was more than one killer and that it turned out to be the Neighborhood Association. Edgard Wright drops subtle hints in the movie, such as when Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are in their cop car, people watching and Simon Pegg takes a notice to a man with a long coat on. He notices someone else too and the scene goes a little like this: Simon Pegg: "Ask yourself, why has he got his hat pulled down like that?" Nick Frost answers, "He's .... ugly." Simon Pegg adds, "Or he doesn't want you to see his face." Nick Frost persists, "'Cause he's .... ugly."

Just a warning, there's lots of cursing in this movie. As you tend to find in quite a few British films, the "F-bomb" is used quite a bit. If cursing in a movie doesn't bother you, then I would recommend watching this one. This movie is funny throughout the two hours and keeps you laughing at short jokes and pranks. If you liked this movie, you might enjoy Shaun of the Dead which has Simon Pegg and Nick Frost working side by side as well.

Gentlemen Broncos

Jemaine Clement, Michael Angarano

Directed by Jared Hess

Rating: 2 stars

Gentlemen Broncos is the story of a young science-fiction writer, Benjamin (Michael Angarano), who goes to writer's camp and gets his novel stolen by a famous author (Jemaine Clement). However, the conflict doesn't occur until the end of the movie. Benjamin meets Tabatha and Lonnie on the bus going to writer's camp. Lonnie has his own movie company and produced about 84 movies and trailers. Tabatha reads a little bit of Benjamin's novel, "Yeast Lords" and gets Lonnie to produce the movie. After the first day of filming, Benjamin quits due to Lonnie changing most of the movie into a romance and the movie has its own premier. It's not until the announcement of the movie premier that Chevalier, the famous author who stole Benjamin's story, comes out to the press saying that Lonnie, Tabatha, and Benjamin stole his novel to make into a movie.

Overall, this movie is two star quality. It's corny, cheesy, and has some scenes in it that look bad like a home-made movie. I'll admit, there are some parts of the movie that make you laugh but you're laughing "at it", not "with it". For those who are fans of Napoleon Dynamite or Nacho Libre, then you might like Gentlemen Broncos since the director of this movie also did the other ones mentioned. Personally, I was never a Napoleon Dynamite fan. It was stupid and so was Gentlemen Broncos. I do applaud that Jemaine Clement was cast in this movie because he makes a good bad guy but unfortunately, this movie was a flop.

First of all, "Yeast Lords"?? That is the title of the science-fiction novel Benjamin wrote. Even though his novel is supposed to be an ode to the dad who died when he was young, the scenes we get to see from the story are lame. Cyclops enemies and riding mechanical Bucks that can shoot at you, not that great to watch. Second, this movie is gross. Just look at Lonnie's (Héctor Jiménez) mouth, it's huge and over-exaggerated. Plus, a pooing snake and a hasty kiss after puking his (Benjamin's) guts out with chunks still around his lips- why would you put that in there?

The only good thing about this movie is that it was 90 minutes long.