The Matador is a hilarious spoof. Nevertheless, it manages to convey some thought-provoking emotions.

The Matador introduces us to the lives of a hitman and a salesman, who meet at a bar in Mexico City. Pierce Brosnan throws off his smooth James Bond image, and gives a fantastic performance as Julian, the crude and rough-around-the-edges hitman. Greg Kinnear plays Danny, the average American businessman.

Although Julian and Danny are complete opposites, they end up sharing a bond. Julian is struggling to cope with his chosen career as a “facilitator of fatalities.” Danny is dealing with the pressures of trying to succeed as a businessman. The unlikely duo strike up a friendship, which leads to a bond between them.

So why is the movie called the Matador? One very strong point in the movie is when Julian and a top bullfighter (the Matador) both demonstrate how they must possess clever skills, and devise certain maneuvers to achieve their respective “missions.”

The movie’s other interesting character is Danny’s wife, played by Hope Davis. Davis gives a good performance as the dutiful wife.

The Matador has neither a complex nor a challenging plot (but does have an interesting twist at the end). Despite the lack of complexity, The Matador is worth seeing for the humor and fine performance by Brosnan.

Let me know if you enjoyed this movie as much as I did by adding your comments below.

I happen to like the Harry Potter movies quite a deal. Unlike a lot of other movies geared towards kids, the Harry Potter flicks actually bring a lot of dark intensity to the table, and the CGI (computer-generated imagery) in the films is some of the best Hollywood has come out with since Terminator 2. So I was pretty excited when I heard about Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire, and I was hoping it would be as good as the last three movies. To put it frankly, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire is not only as good as the other movies, it is by far the best in the series yet.

One of the best things about Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire is that everything is much more mature and adult-friendly. The characters bicker and argue in a very genuine manner, and the effects are even more graphic than the last Harry Potter film. The monsters in this film are pretty evil looking, so much so that I’m sure more than a few adults will actually find themselves being a bit spooked. The film is still suitable for kids mind you, but parents should remember that there are some pretty scary parts.

Sure, Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire is not the most intellectually stimulating picture ever made, but not every movie has to be. What it is is an extremely fun, smart, and very entertaining kids movie, and that is good enough for me.

Let me know what you think of this movie by adding your comment below.

The Constant Gardner seems an unlikely title for this movie. The title of the film evokes visions of peaceful afternoons in lush green surroundings, but the series of events are neither calm nor idyllic; they are wrought with turmoil in the midst of the African AIDS crisis.

Don’t be put off by the title, a residual of the book by John Le Carre on which it is based. In fact, while literary tricks are apparent through the visual narrative, the screen adaptation results in a story that unfolds in gripping cinematic fashion.

Fernando Meirelles, the Brazilian director, does a miraculous job of transforming a story for readers into a story for viewers, doing much of the “telling” through choreography, cinematography, and purposefully belated elemental juxtaposition. This may seem like a no-brainer, since this is what directors are supposed to do. But combined with the script and choice of actors, all of the elements come together so seamlessly and realistically, that it is easy to forget that a director was even present to guide them.

Justin Quayle, played by Ralph Fiennes, is a soft-spoken, detached diplomat to Kenya. His wife Tessa (Rachel Weisz) is anything but detached. Her determination to uncover deadly rounds of drug testing on a dependent African community lead to her death . . . and leads Justin to complete the investigation in honor of her dedication to human rights.

It’s about time Ralph Fiennes was given a part worthy of his screen presence. This is the best movie we’ve seen him in since The English Patient. While his character, Justin Quayle, can be at times outwardly sniveling and weak-willed, Fiennes, as diverse an actor as ever there was, pulls it off without a hitch, revealing the character’s psychological strength.

Rachel Weisz as Tessa is a believable free-spirit, admirable in her resolve to see real change in the world. Likewise is their relationship compelling –Justin’s grief over Tessa’s death is as much of a reason for him to abandon the safety of his post as is his growing realization that something gravely unethical is taking place.

As well as Bill Nighy as a corrupt official and Danny Huston as a betraying colleague, it is good to see Pete Postlethwaite on the screen, even though the audience has to wait until the last quarter of the film to encounter his character as a doctor who holds the key to the final question of the drug scandal.

This movie is engrossing from the very beginning, wrenching you in without even a pause for credits. From sweeping, chaotic crowd scenes to extreme close ups of metaphoric detail, the cinematography is beautiful and demands a serious audience.

If that wasn’t enough, a twisting, turning plot paired with convincingly emotional scenes takes The Constant Gardener out of the category of mass-market-paperback movie script and into the realm of realistic drama with a message. The African AIDS plight, the seeming evil disregard of powerful pharmaceutical companies, and the impassioned few who fight against any misconception that life is cheap is almost a call to arms set subtly behind a provocative story, solid characters, and exotic locales.

Add your comments below to let me know what you think of this movie.

Syriana is a very complex picture that points out a lot of the things that go on outside of America, and some of the things that happen inside the country as well. The film has gotten plenty of bad hype among conservatives.

Syriana follows the lives of various different people in the government and international oil businesses. The film is shot in a very choppy piecemeal manner akin to the film Crash, or maybe 21 Grams.

The cinematography in the film is amazing, as is the acting and the dialogue. Everything is very bright and gritty, and you are really attached to everything that happens. Not only does the film give you lots of brainfood, but it also delivers tons of thrill and emotions. You truly care about the characters in this film, which is such a rarity in hollywood these days.

People who lean on the right side of the political spectrum may get their feathers a bit scruffed up while watching this film, but personally I think Syriana is mandatory viewing for everyone. A great film that will make you think.

Steven Spielberg, renowned director of Schindler’s List and the most prominent Jew in the world of film has done it again. Munich is a film of courage for Spielberg. He’s set himself between the Palestinians and the Israelis and covered decades of terrorism in the final product.

The film begins with the reenactment of the terrorism that took place at the 1972 Olympics in Munich. Lynn Cohen, who plays Prime Minister Golda Meir is shown with her cabinet, telling them that there is no chance for peace because of the tragedy. She says, “Forget peace for now.”

Munich is based on a book by author George Jonas, who, in 1956, was a freedom fighter and who now is a conservative political writer who lives in Toronto, Ontario. Spielberg has done and excellent job turning facts written in the book into real emotions and religious beliefs.

Avana, a former bodyguard of Meir is played by Eric Bana. He is the leader of the secret squad that is out to seek revenge on the terrorists. They officially do not exist and have a go-between by the name of Ephraim, who is played by Geoffrey Rush. The fact that they are paid under the table and not known to exist makes the audience wonder why, because Israel is out for revenge and they definitely want that fact known. They make their killings more dramatic by using bombs instead of guns.

Avener’s team consists of himself and four others. They travel under assumed names and carry false passports. One of the team is an expert in forged documents, one if an expert at disarming bombs, one is the trigger man and the other is the person that gets rid of all the evidence after a revenge killing.

The most exciting parts of the film is when there are assassinations taking place. Spielberg has the suspense down pat. It reminds us of Hitchcock’s talent.

The audience holds it breath as Avener and his team wait for a small girl to leave for school before phoning her father. An explosive device has been connected to the telephone. What Avener and his team has failed to notice is that the little girl has returned to the house and she is the one who answers the phone. The team scrambles to prevent the device from exploding. I won’t mention what happens as this will ruin the suspense if you haven’t seen the movie.

Spielberg has timed his movie well, as there is a lot going on between Israel and Palestine at the present time. Everyone seems to be interested in who is right and who is wrong. The director could not have known his movie would be released at the same time that Sharon and Peres were seeking a way to make peace between their factions.

Spielberg has done an excellent job with this movie. It’s a thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat throughout. If you enjoy a good political thriller, you won’t want to miss Munich. It’s haunting, effective and has turned the facts that are inarguable into something that is up for debate. Don’t miss it!

Let me know if you enjoyed this movie as much as I did by adding your comments below.

It’s 2011 and a virus has wiped out almost all of the earth’s population and pretty much all of the movie critics as well. Alright, so this one isn’t really all that bad if you’re a devotee of the animated series that ran on MTV in the 90’s.

The remaining inhabitants are under the auspices of Dr. Goodchild (Marton Csokas) who has found a cure for the virus. They live in the utopian city of Bregna, the last city on earth where, as anyone who lives in any city at any time in this country knows, is a breeding ground for sin and corruption of all manner and type. And of course, rebelling against all this corruption and sin are the holier than anybody else Monicans and their warrior supreme, Aeon Flux. Once our intrepid heroine is ordered to kill Dr. Goodchild, she immerses herself into Bregna and discovers the awesome truth behind the city.

Ok, so half the plots of Star Trek are more complicated and believable than this one. But none of those other movies have Charlize Theron parading around in what looks like 21st Century bondage wear.

I was especially disappointed in the direction of Karyn Kusama who made the wonderfully inventive and heartfelt “Girlfight” in 2000 and I guess it was the lure of the paycheck and the moviemaking on such a level that threw her a curve of monstrous proportions. She literally was in over her head and it remains my firm belief that if the studio had cut her budget in half she would have come up with twice as good a movie. But that could just be me.

I like mindless action adventure fun in my movies and there really doesn’t have to be all that much plot to be satisfying. Take for example “Armageddon”. Really nothing special in the heart and soul and characterization departments but overall it works. And overall this one really doesn’t.

It’s more similar to Vin Diesle’s Chronicles of Riddick than Armageddon – great sets, great costumes, pretty good CGI going on and yet, somehow the whole thing just really doesn’t gel. Charlize is in over her head along with Karyn Kusama but she looks really lovely. Pete Postlethwaite on the other hand looks like an ad for a candy bar rather than a serious actor.

The ultimate error in judgment on the parts of everyone involved with this movie is that they assumed that the audience would be familiar with the story line, the characters and the series in general. This assumption leaves anyone entering the theater who is unfamiliar with the series in a state of wonder trying to figure out what the heck is going on and why people are acting the way that they do. If they wanted to appeal only to the people who had seen the show, they accomplished that. Anyone else will be literally left in the dark.

Please add your comments as to what you thought about the movie. Let me know whether you’ve seen the show.

If you want to see a magnificent movie, be sure to take in King Kong. It is far superior to the previous versions (1933 and 1976,) and takes us into a world where beast and human bond with a passion that will touch your heart.

Director Peter Jackson, of Lord of the Rings fame, wisely follows the example of producers of Jaws. He doesn’t show Kong or any of the other creatures for over an hour into the film. In the meantime, the audience views soup kitchens and bread lines that remind us of the Dirty Thirties era.

The heroine, Ann Darrow, played by Naomi Watts and Jack Driscoll, played by Adrien Brody, find themselves aboard a tramp streamer that’s set a course for the South Seas. Driscoll is a playwright who’s accompanying a director who feels that Skull Island is the perfect setting for a blockbuster movie. Ann and Jack form a close friendship on the steamer, but not so close that it undermines the bond that is later formed between ape and human.

The next portion of the movie takes place on Skull Island and combines two storylines; that of Ann and Kong and another between the humans and other creatures. Amazing special effects draw us into the jungle where prehistoric creatures pursue humans over log bridges and gaping chasms. It is here that Kong snatches Ann and takes her to his lair high in the mountains.

Once there, Kong sets Ann down, roars, bares his teeth and pounds his chest. Instead of cowering in fright, Ann realizes that Kong is acting out the part of an alpha male. Though she doesn’t know how a female gorilla would react, she goes through a series of vaudeville stage routines, which impresses the huge gorilla.

From that moment on, Kong thinks of Ann as his and instinctively knows that it is his job to protect her. A defining moment in the film is when Kong and Ann silently share a magnificent sunset. The viewer instantly realizes that the two have formed a special bond and that Ann trusts Kong explicitly.

Ann’s friend, Jack Driscoll, climbs the mountain to rescue her. When he arrives at Kong’s lair, he finds Ann sitting comfortably in Kong’s giant palm. The movie progresses with Ann and Kong being pursued by giant bats, dinosaurs and other horrifying creatures, as well as the Army Air Corps. Kong is determined to protect Ann at all costs from the creatures and humans alike.

King Kong follows the storyline of both the 1933 and 1976 versions of the movie. However, Peter Jackson has made an adjustment in the relationship between Ann and Kong. The closeness of the two touches the hearts of the audience and gives us a glimpse of the bond that can exist between animal and human.

When Kong climbs the Empire State Building, Ann screams, not out of fear of the ape, but for the fear that her friend will be killed by a society that misunderstands him. King Kong is a magnificent movie with spectacular effects. It’s great entertainment that will remain a classic for years to come. Don’t miss it!

Please share your thoughts on King Kong by adding a comment.

There are times in a suspense flick when we have a hunch as to what is going on, but that is not the case with Flightplan. In fact, you question if the main character, Kyle Pratt (Jodie Foster) is a reliable source and wonder if she isn’t making the whole thing up! The point is you never really know who to believe, which makes for on-the-edge-of-your-seat suspense movie.

When the movie opens we learn that Kyle Pratt’s (Jodie Foster) husband has died, but the purposely choppy flashbacks make it difficult to decipher if he was murdered or committed suicide. Throughout the movie, but especially at the beginning, the scenes shot during cold, cloudy and gray weather adding to the somber mood and depression of Pratt. Pratt and her husband worked as engineers in Berlin, so to transport her husband back to New York, she must take a flight on a state-of-the-art double-decker plan that Pratt and her husband designed. The plane seems to be a painful reminder to Pratt and her six-year old daughter who is equally upset, but also afraid to be outside of their house. To comfort her, Pratt keeps her daughter isolated to create a feeling of protection. Before the flight takes off, they sneak away to empty seats in the back of the plane to take a nap. When Pratt wakes up, her daughter has disappeared.

Where did she go? Did she ever exist?

Pratt’s search of the two floors of the plan is unsuccessful, so she frantically requests that the crew search the plan. Later, the crew learns that things are not what they seem with Pratt. The crew including Captain Rich (Sean Bean) and Air Marshall Carson (Peter Sarsgaard) sympathize with Pratt’s loss and try to be understanding about the difficulty she is dealing with it, but soon things get out of hand.

Where is her daughter? Did she ever exist? Was she kidnapped as Pratt accuses? If so, do you know who could be in on it? Are you sure? Now, are you sure the daughter really existed? This psychological thriller was directed by Robert Schwentke who does a great job of keeping us on our toes until the end. You never really know who to believe or how it will end, but of course when it does it is dramatic and emotional.

Please share your thoughts on the movie Flightplan by adding a comment.