The Abyss (1989)

As my cinematic odyssey continues I am slowly working on seeing all those movies many of us have already seen. I apologize for my late arrival to the party. But perhaps being more well versed in the language of cinema, seeing movies, like "The Abyss," now as opposed to when I was 8 isn't such a bad thing.

Director James Cameron's tale of deep sea adventure isn't your typical wham-bang popcorn muncher; it's slow and methodical. This lends itself nicely to creating intense situations in an environment (underwater) where high speed shenanigans would seem grossly out of place. And even at two and a half hours "The Abyss" is rarely a snoozer.

It does suffer from an awkward and slower beginning, where plot exposition hits you over the head so hard you'll cry. But soon enough it sheds it setup to focus on the story at hand, which is executed with simple dignity by lead man Ed Harris and the lady that played Maid Marian in "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves." Aside from Michael Biehn's character descending into madness with all the subtlety of turning on a light switch, there's very little to complain about with this thoughtful, well made sci-fi picture.

Well, the very end kind of sucks, but once you see the movie you'll realize it's really inconsequential.

Grade = B

Magnolia (1999)

My friend Dan, also a film buff, was really excited that I was finally getting around to seeing "Magnolia," and now I understand why. Since the film has been around for a while some of you may have lost your appreciation for it that I am fresh from developing for myself, so excuse me while I gush about this movie for a few paragraphs.

"Magnolia" is one of the rare modern movies that really takes advantage of the medium of film. What I mean by this is it takes a scenario that could in no way be conveyed in any other form. It's something you don't see very often now days. For someone, like myself, that has really become jaded with a slew of the same thing over and over recently, it reignites that love for movies that drives us to watch them in the first place.

It doesn't try to conform to typical Hollywood conventions, yet it isn't so out there that an open minded person can't really appreciate what it attempts and accomplishes with flying colors. The editing is tight and never leaves you dwelling for too long on a particular character in, what is essentially, and ensemble cast movie. The narrative instantly sucks you in and doesn't let go until the credits start to roll. This is not an easy feat considering it's imposing length (170 minutes) and the fact it isn't an action film but rather a melodrama.

There are those that won't like it, but that's to be expected from every movie. But this unique and perfectly executed film is a breath of fresh air, even 7 years after its release, and will surely please any competent movie-goer on some cinematic level. I can see why this is often ranked among the top films from the last decade.

Grade = A

It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Reviewer

Widely regarded as the ensemble screwball comedy, "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World" has had many parodies and imitations over the years. You're probably already familiar with it's premise; a group of people, driven by greed, try to beat each other to a hidden sum of money buried somewhere in southern California. Hilarity, or what is supposed to be hilarity, ensues on their adventure and it all culminates with... well, I'm not going to ruin it. Not completely, anyways.

Having finally sat down and watched the source material for so many other shows and movies I've seen over the years I couldn't help but feel underwhelmed. Perhaps it's because the idea wasn't as fresh as it was back then or that I've seen the gags so many times before. But more than anything, I think it's just because the film is too darn long. The film would have had a lot more charm and impact if the editing choices were a little tighter. For example, a semi-funny brawl occurs at a gas station between two mechanics trying to restrain one of the protagonists whom they assume is insane. Not bad, except the scene is about 7 minutes long; 5 minutes longer than it should have been. The entire movie suffers from episodes like this.

At the end of the day, which may be when you finish the movie after taking breaks to pursue more interesting activities, you'll realize all isn't bad, but enough of it is to wonder why you invested so much time in such a mediocre film.

Grade = C

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)

Effeminate pirate Johnny Depp? Check. Hot as heck Keira Knightley? Check. Legolas? Check. Super saturated atmosphere and more pirate slang, myths, and cliches thrown at you in the span of 30 seconds than every pirate movie ever made? Check. Smells like a Pirates of theCaribbeann movie. Disney brings back 2003's summer blockbuster based on their aging theme park ride for another go around in Pirates of theCaribbeann: Dead Man's Chest; the first of two sequels filmed back to back.

If you didn't see the first one, don't fret, any pertinent back story is taken care of quickly enough in the first few minutes, while simultaneously setting up the plot for the rest of the movie. After that it's another roller coaster ride of action set pieces, slap stick humor, over the top special effects, and scene stealing Depp.

Technically, there's not a whole lot wrong with this new Pirates movie. It's by far the most entertaining movie of the summer, thus far. The filmmakers took great care to preserve the feeling and fun from the first movie while also raising the bar. It's as a summer blockbuster should be.

But perhaps the filmmakers took a little too much care preserving the first movie's feel. A lot of the plot mechanics return. Once again we have a crew of the damned, a cursed ship, relationship problems, and an overly long final cut. It's as if they copy and pasted different names and locations into the original script and said go. There's a sense of deja vu in practically everything that happens. And the parts that are different aren't as good as the parts that are repeated. There's also an emphasis on non-Depp (read: non-interesting) characters and their own sub-plots. Let's be honest; Captain Jack Sparrow is the glue that held the first movie, this movie, and, presumably, its sequel together. Everything else is filler. And at 150 minutes, that's a lot of filler.

Negatives aside, this is still a fun, highly entertaining film, and fans of the first one will probably like this one just as much. If you didn't like the first don't expect to have your mind changed this time.

Grade = B-

New Super Mario Bros. (2006)

After a very, very long hiatus, Mario returns to his 2D roots with the appropriately titled New Super Mario Bros. on the Nintendo DS. Lifelong fans of the little Italian stereotype will be pleased to see Mario in his natural element and not whoring himself off shamelessly in childish rip-offs of other types of games. Mario jumps, shoots fireballs, ducks, dodges, and slides down flagpoles with all the majesty of his golden NES days. The graphics pop and the color pallete makes this the prettiest 2D Mario ever.

All is not good in the Mushroom Kingdom, however. There are some nagging issues gamers from any generation will be confronted with. First off, the game is short, even for a handheld. Front to back, without taking time to collect everything and explore every path, Princess Toadstool can be rescued in a scant 3 to 4 hours, making this a little too similar to the original SMB lengthwise. I'm sure we can all agree that the original game is a great game, but it's from a different time. There's a different standard for today's games, and New SMB doesn't quite make the cut lengthwise.

There are also a total lack of interesting power-ups for Mario. There's the standard fire flower and red mushroom (yawn). There's also a giant mushroom which inflates the little plumber to screen filling porportions, and a tiny mushroom that shrinks him down to a few pixels in width; think Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap. These two abilities rarely, if ever, affect the flow of a level aside from having to use them to nab hidden or harder to reach coins. Aside from that, there's only a blue shell that Mario can where on his back and slide into enemies with. Sound exciting? It isn't. You'll loath receiving it as a power-up as opposed to even a fire flower. After we've seen capes, feathers, boots, etc. these standard or semi-standard power-ups are the epitamy of boring.

And for being a DS game New SMB doesn't take advantage of any of the hardware's unique abilities. Sure, you can select a stored power-up by touching the bottom screen, but we've seen this mechanic before and executed in a more user friendly manner.

I don't mean to nitpick the negatives. We all know what to expect from any traditional Mario game. And if this were an NES game it may have barely edged SMB3 in terms of enjoyment. The bar was set with Mario's first SNES adventure, Super Mario World, and New SMB doesn't quite clear it. This is clearly a bare bones Mario; no thrills or chills. The problem is that super simplified play mechanic isn't very exciting.

New SMB hovers somewhere between NES era Mario and SNES era Mario. Is it worth the $35? Barely. Perhaps after reaquanting themselves with traditional side-scrolling/jumping goodness the fine folks over at Nintendo can churn out what we all had really hoped New SMB was going to be. And perhaps they won't take their sweet time about either.

Grade = C+

Wedding Crashers (2005)

I'd be lying if I said I went into this with a lot of optimism. Even to the untrained eye this appears to be nothing more than another film cashing in on the Frat Pack's popularity at the moment. It seems the fine folks in Hollywood are squeezing the Vaughn/Wilson/Wilson/Stiller/Ferrell (especially Ferrell) fruit for every last molecule of juice they can get. I, for one, am getting a little tired of these guys. But my bias aside, they don't make horrible movies. OK, sometimes they do, but for the most part these things are fairly entertaining, light hearted romps that probably won't have much staying power down the road, but are good distractions for a chill night in.

Anyways, personal bias aside, "Wedding Crashers" is just as I said. There's nothing particularly wrong with it, but it isn't fall on the floor funny or terribly original either. Two best friends (Vaughn and O. Wilson) are avid wedding crashers. Why? Free food, a great party, and the knowledge and charisma to score ridiculously good looking women at weddings via a montage sequence set to... I forget the song at the moment, but you get it. After "the season" ends, one more potentially juicy score rears its head and the pair can't resist. True to standard screen writing conventions, something goes wrong when Wilson falls in love, which is against the rules, apparently.

This story arc is what drives the movie, but the relationship between Wilson and Rachel McAdams is neither funny nor intriguing. That gap is filled admirably by the supporting arc between Vaughn and the crazy Gloria Cleary, played by Isla Fisher. Wait, not admirably - barely. That's it; barely by Vaughn and Fisher. Off shoots or marginally funny moments with the rest of the Clearly clan add some giggles to the film, but even Christopher Walken can't save the picture when everything falls apart in the third act, both literally and figuratively. Throw in an obligatory Will Ferrell cameo and there you have it. It's another movie fresh of the assembly line. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but this group of guys have done better and it just seems that they're running on fumes right now. So let's appreciate it for what it is and move on.

Grade = C