Revitalizing The Classics - Bell, Book And Candle

The old Hollywood is undeniably dead. The stars of today have become classless, cheap imitations. Bad movies are pumped out more often than good ones. It has just come to the point where the very soul of it all has just vanished. So why not return to a bygone era where the stars were glimmering gods and goddesses? Why not bask in the glory of the movies that didn't rely on vampire/human sex to drive sales? Yes, that was a direct jab at Breaking Dawn. While we're on that subject, I'll bring up the first movie in the Revatilizing The Classics series... Bell, Book And Candle.

Novak casting her spell

Bell Book And Candle is an unconventional love story set around an unsuspecting human named Shepard 'Shep' Henderson (James Stewart) and a crafty, seductive modern witch named Gillian 'Gil' Holryod (Kim Novak). This pairing may seem familiar to some who have seen Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece Vertigo. If it doesn't seem familiar, don't worry. I'll cover Vertigo somewhere down the line.

The story is set into motion on Christmas Eve when Shepard's phone is bewitched by Gillian's Aunt Queenie Holryod (Elsa Lanchester). This causes Shepard to retreat to Gillean's apartment downstairs (also a functioning Voodoo shop) to report that his phone is malfunctioning. It is a chance meeting at first, but it quickly turns into a game of cat-catches-mouse (not cat-and-mouse) when Gillean discovers that Shepard's current fiancé is her old roommate that caused her trouble during college. In order to get back at her old roommate, Gillean plans to take Shepard away from her. Thus, a spiteful love spell is set into motion. What ensues is a lightweight romantic comedy as Gillean tries to hide her true identity, her true intentions behind the love spell, and her true feelings from herself and her warlock brother Ricky Holryod (Jack Lemmon).

Bell, Book And Candle didn't really break any new ground, but it is certainly a movie that shouldn't be missed. The story is fun, Novak sets the screen on fire, and this was ultimatly the last romantic lead role for James Stewart. He himself admitted that he had been miscast as lovesick Shepard (due to his age), and I regretably agree with him. However, that does not mean that his performance was marred. It was still as good as ever.

Memorable Quote:
Shepherd 'Shep' Henderson: That girl you know, Gillian Holroyd, she's one.
Merle Kittridge: A witch?
Shepherd 'Shep' Henderson: Yes!
Merle Kittridge: Shep, you just never learned to spell.

I give Bell, Book And Candle 3.0 Osborne's* out of 5.
*Robert Osborne is the Turner Classic Movies primary host.



Photos courtesy of Harvard Film Archive and Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Paranormal Activity 3

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

The third installment in the Paranormal Activity series delightfully proves that this series has some serious legs. Whoa! That's a pretty bold statement about a movie that is like watching home movies from hell. Sounds boring, but that's the beauty of it.

Following along the same close lines as its predecessors, PA3 goes back in the past to explain why Katie from the first PA slowly went evil. So, what does that mean? That means we're still voyeurs on a demonic Where's Waldo hunt while watching a typical family descend first into curiosity, denial, and then terror. You'd figure that it would get old by now, but it doesn't.

Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman (the mad-men behind a possibly-true movie called Catfish) have injected their own brand of mayhem into the mix. The scares are much longer, more frequent, and bigger than any other PA movie. There is no single segment dedicated to just a door moving anymore. The directors know we've already seen that and crave something more. That's what they give us... more substantial visual scares. For example, a camera isn't positioned in a fixed position anymore. As it pans across the living room and into the kitchen, you know that something is going on just out of sight. The demon also gets a visual overhaul. He gets a name (Toby), the demon gets a bed sheet, the demon gets a dark shadow, and the demon gets dirty.

Now on to the issues:

>Yes, it's true that 75 percent of the footage shown in the official trailer is not featured in the movie. It's called the "editing process." It's not false advertising. It's just something that happens. I'm sure it will all show up on the DVD as an extended cut.

>Yes, this movie takes place in 1988, but is shot in HD. We already know it's not real, so why is that important? Do you really want to watch a movie in a crappy format? You'd complain about that!

>Yes, the last 15 minutes of PA3 is a complete game changer. It gives the viewer some answers, and it provides even more questions. It gives the answers the viewer wants or the answers that the viewer doesn't want. I personally liked it, but there are some who are ripping it to shreds. Oh well... it's just a movie.

3.5 Popcorn Kernels out of 5 (same as the first two, more visual scares, some answers provided, and a tense ending)



Photo courtesy of Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

I know it's a little late to write a Harry Potter review, but I've been on vacation. So, I'm writing one now... better late than never.

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

The eighth and last installment of the Harry Potter series was nothing short of spectacular. However, amidst all the magic and destruction, the story was lost. Don't get me wrong! The movie was an amazing piece of cinema, but the plot liberally differed from that of the book. It can actually be viewed as a blessing and a curse. Moments that dragged in the book where sped up to out-of-sight speeds suitable enough to be consider passable, and moments that shined in the book were only insignificant specks.

Despite my complaints about plot, I applaud the filmmakers for paying close attention to Snape's character arc. It was the most heartbreaking thing for me to watch but still very satisfying. If I was part of the Academy Awards, Alan Rickman would be getting an Oscar for sure. That's how powerful his performance was.

As far as visuals go, this movie was a visual feast of light and dark (and pale skin). The pacing was tense and unrelenting while danger lurked around every corner. Musically, Desplate did have a few memorable tunes this time around, but it was nice to hear the old John Williams theme from the Sorcerer's Stone during the credits.

Overall, I have to say that Harry Potter is definitely one of the must-see movies of the year.

4.5 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (magical visuals, epic conclusion, satisfying action, and Snape is just awesome)

Popcorn Worthy? - Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

If you like mermaids like Ariel, then maybe this movie isn't for you. These mermaids (which don't make an appearancece until later in the movie) are beautiful and very, VERY deadly. I'll just say that they are a cannibalistic and make the zombies in the movie look like harmless fairies. Believe me, this isn't kid stuff. I needed to start off with that because the mermaids are the most amazing thing about this movie. Another thing that needs to be said is that even if you haven't seen the second or third movie, then you won't be completely lost. To be honest, this is the direction in which the series should have gone in the first place. It doesn't have a deep plot and is clearly not supposed to be taken seriously (pretty much everything in this movie is impossible to do).

Acting wise, Johnny Depp just plays his usual Sparrow gig (and makes fun of it), Geoffrey Rush doesn't have a sense of sinister left in him as Barbossa, Penelope Cruz is sultry (maybe a little too sultry for children), and Ian McShane plays a tiresome and somewhat menacing Blackbeard (with magical powers?). I was more than relieved this Pirates installment was sans Keira Knightley's and Orlando Bloom's boring story arc and infused with a small and more interesting love story between a mermaid and a missionary. Yeah, sounds dull...but missionary's need love too and can provide gratuitous shirtless scenes for the ladies with a butt-naked mermaid for the men.

Anyways, the music is provided once more by Hans Zimmer and is infused with former Pirate's excellence on top of new musical excellence. My favorite tune is played during the mermaid scene and is fittingly called "Mermaids" on iTunes (very original).

Overall, this movie is fun, silly, and chocked full of action throughout as the characters try to beat each other to the Fountain of Youth. Like I said before, it can't be taken seriously...just like all the James Bond movies that starred Roger Moore.

3.5 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (deadly mermaids, filthy pirates, a timid bad guy, good music, plenty of action, fun, and excitement)



Photo courtesy of Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

Ever since Harry Potter movies started to hit the silver screen, my sister Kimberly and I have had the long running tradition to go see them all together. We even had the tradition to go the midnight book releases as well. Along the way, my brother-in-law Brandon and niece Halie have been added to the tradition of going to see the movies.

Well tonight, we all reflected as the credits rolled how hopeless, dark, touching and magical the penultimate Harry Potter installment is. I am not going to lie, this movie does not offer a single shred of hope. Part 1 is purely a transitional film filled with dread, gloom and pure evil. One can't help but be depressed and deeply touched when the movie is over.

Following as close to the novel as any movie could, Part 1 still veered off from the original text. Hedwig was more heroic, Dobby appeared where he wasn't supposed to (but I'm not complaining about that), and a character was even spared his impending death! I'm curious to see what direction they will be taking that character now. There were other minor details changed...so no big deal.

Director David Yates has only improved since his Harry Potter debut on Order of the Phoenix, and I'm glad that the best has been saved for last. Character development is a critical issue in this installment, and it is played out well by all of the actors...old and new. I can't describe this development, but there were just these little moments shared between characters that were deeply touching. However, David Yates should really learn how to film a scene concentrating on two characters in movement. I could have sworn I was watching Cloverfield when the camera was severely shaky.

The musical score for Part 1 wasn't bad, but it wasn't phenomenal. The spirit John Williams and Nicholas Hooper pumped into the music was not be felt. Don't get me wrong, I still think Alexandre Desplat did a good job. However, I really liked the Fever Ray song in the Red Riding Hood trailer before the movie started much more than anything in the actual movie.

Three more points of interest for people with young ones. Firstly, the snake scenes are scary for small children. Secondly, Harry and Hermoine have a practically nude make out scene. Necessary? Nope... Lastly, the ending was AMAZING! The movie couldn't have ended any better. It fit the prevailing mood completely.

4.7 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (gloomy, sad, touching, character development, lacking powerful music, I could have sat through Part 2)



Photo courtesy of Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Paranormal Activity 2

READER BEWARE: Opinions are Expressed Below

Paranormal Activity 2 has been the movie that I have eagerly been anticipating the very second I heard about it. I know that I've already gushed about how I loved the first Paranormal Activity (which is truly an acquired taste). So now, what did I think about this bigger budget sequel? The first one had a $15,000 budget...this one had a $3 million budget. That still pales in comparison to other movie budgets. My reactions to this movie are complex...

I can't believe I'm saying this, but PA 2 bored me, thrilled me, terrified me and amazed me.

Boring you say? That's just awful! Well let me explain what I mean by the statement above. The movie starts off in the happy household of a family (and their dog) who has a newborn son (Hunter) in 2006. They are documenting Hunter growing up and developing...so the reason why the camera is always running is perfectly clear. Well, within the first 10 minutes of the movie...Katie Featherston makes her appearance. She's just as happy and as normal as she can be. This unsettles me...unnerves me. Why is she at this family's house and holding their baby? Don't they know she is a crazed, possessed killer? No, they don't because she hasn't done anything yet.

Yep, you heard me correctly...PA 2 is a prequel. However, the last frighting moments are truly part of a sequel. It's a hybrid more or less.

Micah Sloat is still alive, and Katie Featherston is still innocent. That still doesn't explain how she is involved with this happy family. FYI: Hunter's mother (Kristi) is Katie's sister. Gasp!

After this fact is established, someone breaks into the happy family's home and trashes it (without stealing anything but a "special" necklace). They are all upset by this (I can't imagine why...sarcasm there), and the father decides to install security cameras all over the house. No more are we, the audience, bedroom voyeurs! We are able to spy all over a huge house! Don't get too excited though...the only spooky thing going on in this household for the first thirty minutes is a crying baby, a superstitious Hispanic nanny (or cook...or whatever) that I can't understand and a pool cleaner that just won't stay in the pool. This is where the movie is boring. However, it's realistic. I give the movie props for that.

The movie really picks up when the parents leave their teenage daughter (Ali) to babysit Hunter. The nanny (cook...whatever) has already been fired at this point for crazy ranting about demons. Some things happen (not going to tell you), and the rest of the movie is tense and frightening in ways that will make your hair stand on end. Hunter is put in danger, the dog's life hangs in the balance, and Katie's inevitable crossover to the dark side is closely looming. That's what I love about PA 2. It is closely linked to the first PA. FYI: If you haven't seen the first PA, then you will be completely lost.

I'm going to straight up admit that there were three parts to this movie that literally terrified me. I'm not saying that I just jolted out of my seat...I'm talking the cold sweat, hands shaking, heart pounding and fingernail biting type of terror.

A lot of elements from the first PA have been transferred to this one. Doors open by themselves, footsteps can be heard on the staircase, someone gets dragged down the hallway...but these happenings have been injected with steroids and are scarier than ever. However, PA 2 has some new tricks up its sleeves. It even provides a reason why all of this is happening in the first place, but it just makes the mystery deepen.

All in all, PA 2 managed to do what Blair Witch 2 couldn't. There is a legitimately great franchise here that is ready to be harvested, and everyone involved knows it. I'll just say that a PA 3 was more than hinted at when the final 10-15 minutes of the movie played out.

4.5 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (scary, tense, dog didn't die...that I know of, a cliffhanger ending, but a slow start)




Photo courtesy of Google

Popcorn Worthy? - RED

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

With DC Comics churning out movies like its main competitor Marvel, they can either have a hit or a miss. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are mega hits while Jonah Hex is a messy miss. So, going into seeing RED...I was a mix of emotions. Was it going to be good, or was it going to suck? I simply did not know. But with a cast of Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Helen Mirren and John Malkovich on board...something had to be cooking.

RED (Retired Extremely Dangerous) starts off slow with the humdrum life of Bruce Willis who gets his kicks by ripping up pension checks. In turn, he is able to call and complain about not getting his money. This enables him to have an excuse to flirt with the girl of his dreams (Mary-Louise Parker) that he has never physically met. After about 15 minutes of their awkward blossoming romance, the action starts to pick up. Amazingly cool action to be more precise.

It takes awhile for Bruce Willis to "get the group together," but once the retired quartet does reunite...the hardcore laughs start to emerge. Morgan Freeman is smooth as ever. Helen Mirren is just plain sexy with a gun. That's all I can say about that... The pinnacle of laughs come from John Malkovich who is crazy (and amazing) as ever. All I can say is, watch out for "The Pig!"

As far as the plot goes...it was pretty predictable in parts and not so predictable in other parts. This certainly isn't Hitchcock, and this certainly isn't an Academy Award winner. However, it's a really good movie, and I wouldn't mind seeing it again.

4.0 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (great action sequences, truly funny moments, John Malkovich)



Photo courtesy of Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Toy Story 3

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

OK, I know that this review is coming in WAY late...but better late than never. I just got to see the movie, so get off my back! The question is now, why waste my breath on reviewing a Pixar movie? What do I mean by that? Well, unless you have been living under a rock...you should know that anything that has Pixar attached to it is absolutely amazing. I can't believe it all started in 1995 with the first Toy Story. I was only 5 at that time...I feel so old now. Since then we have been blessed to see A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc., Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Cars, Toy Story 2, Wall-E and Up. Each Pixar movie has proved over and over again to have a great plot, amazing graphics and witty humor.

So what is there to say about Toy Story 3? Well, Pixar knew its main audience for this movie would be my generation. Let's face it...we practically grew up alongside Andy and the gang of toys. So the issues brought up in Toy Story 3 were very sensitive to me. Be advised, this movie is not a "feel-good" movie. I spent most of the movie fighting back tears to spare my dignity. However, there were a few laughs along the way, but they couldn't erase the harsh, bitter and brutal reality of what was happening to Woody and those few toys still left. It's so heart wrenching, and some parts were a little too dark and mature for a child's understanding. That's as far as I'm going into it... However, as I have said to some others...one of the writers must have gone through a brutal divorce when developing this movie.

The graphics were stunning (as always), and the voice talents were at their absolute best. The usual voice talents are there with the addition of Ned Beatty as Lotso (a hugging dictator), Michael Keaton as Ken (who is NOT a girl's toy...yeah right), Timothy Dalton as Mr. Pricklepants, Bonnie Hunt as Dolly, Whoopi Goldberg as Stretch and Blake Clark as Slinky Dog who was originally voiced by the late Jim Varney. Clark was Varney's close friend in life, and he did an excellent job of keeping Slinky's voice the same.

As for the music, Randy Newman (who I'm not too crazy about in general) stayed true to the original Toy Story music. So no foul there. It was great to hear "You've Got a Friend in Me" one last time.

There's no point in gushing over it anymore. It was amazing! Oh and here's a little factoid for you. Sid (the bad kid from the first Toy Story) is the guy picking up trash. Pixar is genius.

5.0 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (a deep plot, heart wrenching, strong connection to my generation and a great end to a great series)



Photo provided by Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Devil

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

I am officially announcing the decree of changing M. Night Shyamalan's last name to SHAMEalan. I shall also decree that anyone will be shot on site if they say that The Village, Lady in the Water or The Happening are great movies. Is it sad that the pinnacle of SHAMEalan's career was The Sixth Sense? It is very sad, but I will not waste a tear on this man whose mind should be put to better use elsewhere.

I'm going to make this as brief as possible to spare you the pain. The movie is narrated by the Hispanic security guard whose mother told him stories of the Devil coming to earth to collect souls once someone commits suicide (such a wonderful bedtime story). It seems her stories are true as five strangers (three jacks and two queens...as the security man calls them) get trapped in an elevator. Tensions rise in the enclosed space as the lights continue to flicker and some mundane elevator music plays in the background. I'm guessing SHAMEalan was trying to go for a claustrophobic approach...but it just didn't happen. I mean it kind of happened for the characters, but for the audience member...there was no tension or distress. The only distress was trying to figure out who the killer was inside the elevator. I used the "don't trust a ginger" method.

As far as having a deep meaning throughout...there really wasn't one. I have no clue why the Devil chose an elevator in some high rise building to collect souls. I also have no idea why he chose that specific day to kill those specific people. Sure, they were all sinners...but we're all sinners...right? The only meaningful thing was mentioned at the very, VERY end. It had to deal with forgiveness, and if you believe the Devil is real then God must be real too. Wait a minute, that sounds A LOT like The Last Exorcism (but reversed).

The acting was just OK, but I did not connect with any of the characters as they attempted to be scared. Sure they sweated profusely, screamed and went through the general cabin fever hysteria...but I just didn't feel anything. As for the music in this movie, there might have been some other than the elevator music, but I don't remember any. So that you should tell you something right there.

1.0 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (zero suspense, unclear motivations and elevator music)



Photo provided by Google

Popcorn Worthy? - The Last Exorcism

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

I'll admit it...I'm a sucker for movies that have the home recorded effect. I'm talking about the nauseating, shaky camera movies like The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, Quarantine and Paranormal Activity. It's kind of a sick pleasure to watch the alleged real footage of inevitably doomed (and stupid) people. The Last Exorcism follows this same formula.

"If you believe in God, you must believe in the Devil"

The central character is Cotton Marcus from Baton Rouge. When Marcus was a little boy, he rose to fame in the religious community as the leading expert in performing exorcisms. He soon followed in his father's footsteps (who had 150 exorcisms underneath his old belt) and became a charismatic evangelical minister. All was going well for Marcus until a young boy from Harrisburg, Texas was suffocated to death in order to cast his demon out. This is the point when Mr. Miracle reveals his true colors. You see, all of the exorcisms Marcus performed were money grubbing scams. So with guilty conscious and doubted faith in hand, Marcus sets off to set things right. Marcus takes a documentary crew behind the scenes to show them how "un-real" his (and others) exorcisms are by performing one last time on camera.

Through random selection, Marcus chooses his last exorcism and answers the pleas of Louis Sweetzer who claims his daughter Nell is possessed by the devil himself. With camera crew in tow, Marcus sets off to the Sweetzer Ranch located in the deep backwoods where demonic superstition runs rampant. Here in hillbilly paradise, Marcus does not heed warnings to return back home and meets the highly dysfunctional Sweetzer family. The father is a religious tyrant, the brother is sitting on the thin line of insanity and Nell is as sweet as pumpkin pie...suspiciously sweet. Well as luck would have it, Marcus stumbles upon a bonafide case of possession. Throughout the movie, he has a hard time admitting this despite all the foreshadowing and not so subtle clues.

As far as scares go, this film is riddled with nail biting moments (as well as some pretty good humor). I'm talking about cold sweat, hair standing on end and edge of your seat fear that makes the girl 10 rows behind you scream to the top of her lungs (as well as a few curse words from several other people). You never really know what is coming up next or what you will see. It's one shock after another I can assure you. That's the excitement behind it all...there's an actual air of mystery to the plot. I'll just say that actress Ashley Bell, who brilliantly plays possessed Nell, provided most of the scares through her glaring stares and contortionist abilities (yes she really can bend into all of those positions...look it up).

The only drawback to this film is its ending. It starts off spooky with screaming in the woods and demonic chanting, but it pays off being pretty much absurd and frustrating. There was a definite ending this movie could have had, and it would have been absolutely wonderful...but they had to take it one more step further. It was a step that pretty much left everyone grumbling.

Two more things of importance...never trust a ginger, and there is no climbing on the ceiling as the trailer implies (consider me disappointed on that point).

3.5 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (great suspense, excellent performance from Ashley Bell, weak ending)



Photo provided by Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Salt

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

I recently discovered that I have the amazing power to predict the future. No, not really...it's just that Salt, starring luscious lips Angelina Jolie, was just too predictable for my taste.

Let me start off by saying that this movie was intended for fun mindless action. Nothing else. It seemed like someone took the script, shot it up with an AK-47 and then decided to go with that. In other words, the plot and dialogue was flimsy. However, there was a great concept behind it all. Russian sleeper agents that are raised from birth are living in America...sound familiar? I even loved the Lee Harvey Oswald reference. Was he really a sleeper agent that successfully sent a Russian "screw you" message by killing John F. Kennedy? Other than those two concepts, the rest of the plot fell flat and I became bored.

As far as the action, it was the same old stuff. I wasn't on the edge of my seat at all, and a rush of adrenaline did not surge through my body even for a split second. Most of it could not be humanly possible to do without dying in the process. Sure it's a movie, and Jolie is a CIA agent (possible Russian spy), but she's also human. I guess they were going for a James Bond approach. Another flaw was the love factor. Jolie's character was married to a German (relatively unknown actor August Diehl), and the love was there...but not really. He had a weak screen presence (barely any presence at all) and no character development. The movie tried to convince me that they loved each other by showing three second flashbacks of them falling for each other. I just didn't feel it.

The only thing that this movie has going for it is Jolie herself. Otherwise I could have slept through this movie and not cared. I think everyone involved in this movie knew that too...that's why they ditched Tom Cruise and made the main role female. Jolie is a one of a kind lead action star and just what this movie needed to bring in an audience. And for the sidekick, best friend role, please cast someone else other than Liev Schreiber. He's a good actor, but he wasn't right for this movie because he ruined the ending. I won't say why...

And now for the music. It was nothing to write home about. If you want a good action movie, you've got to have some good music to back it up. It was lacking both.

The saddest part of all is that a sequel was set up. To be honest...I'm not going to see it. Who is Salt? I know who she is, and I've seen enough.

2.5 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (for being boring and having gaping plot holes)

Photo provided by Google

Popcorn Worthy? - Inception

READER BEWARE: Opinions Are Expressed Below

In the un-inspired and un-creative doldrums of modern cinema where talking animated dogs, hamsters and blue cat people are hitting the market like wildfire and movies that shouldn't be re-made are being re-made...imagine my surprise when I stumbled upon the most thought provoking, mind bending (and mild headache inducing) movie I have seen since...well...since ever! Inception has restored my faith in Hollywood.

But don't consider me too surprised. Christopher Nolan, the man at the helm of this movie, has already brought us the mind-boggler Memento, The Prestige and has managed to rejuvenate the crumbling Batman franchise with a eagerly anticipated third installment on the way. So I already considered Inception a must see. But the question was...a must see what? The trailers, synopsis provided by the studio and the cast was certainly revealing nothing in depth. I found out why. There is NO WAY to merely describe this movie in words. It must be seen. Everything that I had guessed this movie was about was completely wrong, and there was no single point in the movie where it became predictable. It always manages to keep you guessing...even the awe inspiring (and emotional) end that will keep you on the edge of your seat and breathless as the credits begin to roll. I'm not a spoiler...so you will just have to go see it to find out!

As far as acting goes, Leonardo DiCaprio does his usual troubled, tough guy acting job and chooses another script that involves a dead wife who messes with his mind (not literally as in Shutter Island). Ellen Page is still brooding from Juno, Joseph Gordon-Levitt proves that he can act and do the most intense fight scene since The Matrix (BETTER than The Matrix...actually), Michael Caine pops in for a bit, Tom Berenger is looking old, Cillian Murphy should just stay evil (although he was still good as a good guy), and Tom Hardy became a name to look out for.

However, none of these actors could hold a candle to the lovely, haunting performance of Marion Cotillard (Leo's vengeful dead wife). When Cotillard came on the screen, the theater always fell dead silent (after everyone took in a sharp intake of breath) and those pesky teenagers even looked up from their glaring cell phones to watch her jaw dropping performance. And her eyes, that woman could kill anyone she wanted to with those gorgeous eyes. It was those eyes that drove a grown man to scream out (not me) in horror as she seemingly looked straight at us. It is safe to say that Cotillard commanded the screen and should get an Oscar. Will she? Now that is another story. The Oscars are soooo disappointing. One flaw of this movie is that they could have used Cotillard as a more central and diabolical villain than having no key villain at all.

And all I have to say for the movie's music is...Hans Zimmer. When you put Nolan and Zimmer together...it is a perfect marriage in the cinema world. The music perfectly portrays this deep, haunting and powerful movie.

It's all just a dream within a dream, within a dream, within a dream, within a dream. Confused yet? That is the second flaw with this movie. It is hard to follow at times, and the dream setting is no help at all. I will not lie about that. Hence the headache I mention above. This is not a shove some popcorn into your mouth and drool while watching action sequence after action sequence movie. There is a level of involvement and you must listen and watch.

So all in all, Inception is Popcorn Worthy and possibly the greatest (and most inventive) movie of this decade. Inception is certainly going into the annals of classic-dom.

4.8 Popcorn Kernels Out Of 5 (because I wanted more of Cotillard and for some confusion throughout)



Photo provided by Google