In Relation To While You Were Sleeping

Lucy Moderatz (Sandra Bullock) is all alone. Her father died a year ago, leaving her without family, and her only friends are her co-worker and her boss. But she knows the man she's going to marry. That is, she knows what he looks like. He passes her every day on his way to work. Then, one day, an accident happens and Lucy saves his life. Peter (Peter Gallagher) is in a coma when his family arrives, and in the midst of all the confusion they get the impression that Lucy is engaged to him. Lucy doesn't have the courage to tell them the truth - and soon finds herself knee-deep in the kooky, but kind Callaghan family.

Pros: I absolutely love the Callaghans - particularly the Elsie the grandmother (Glynis Johns), Ox the dad (Peter Boyle), and, of course, Jack the brother (Bill Pullman). The storyline is whacky enough to be funny, but not whacky enough to be unbelievable. I also really like Lucy. Joe Fusco, Jr. (Michael Rispoli) is absolutely hilarious.

Cons: There's one scene where the Callaghans are at Mass and Jack and Ox are talking about business. It's a funny scene, but I'd prefer if the hero paid attention to the Mass.

My Rating: MT (sexual references, language)

Picture from impawards.com

On Murder On the Orient Express

Agatha Christie's Murder On the Orient Express is a Hercule Poirot mystery. The little Belgian detective with the egg-shaped head and fearsome moustache boards a train traveling from Stamboul (Istanbul, Turkey, I presume) across Europe. Among the other passengers on the train there is a rich American gentleman by the name of Ratchett. Poirot, as well as nearly everyone else on the train, takes an instant dislike to Ratchett. However, it still comes as a surprise when Ratchett is found murdered one morning... stabbed twelve times with a knife. Poirot must put his "little grey cells" to work to catch the killer - or is it "killers"?

Pros: This story is another example of how one can have no idea of the solution the first time through, but groan at how obvious it is the second time through. I don't know how she did it, but Christie was definitely the queen of crime.

Cons: There's a fuzzy moral ending, though I'm not sure if it actually is moral or not. It's hard not to sympathize in this case.

My Rating: T (a couple sexual references, one mild, one not. Very annoying.)

Regarding How to Train Your Dragon

Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) is not your typical Viking. He's not tall, and his arms and legs are like toothpicks. He doesn't mind so very much - except that he and his father have nothing in common and rarely talk about anything. Desperately wanting to heal this divide, Hiccup wants to kill one of the dragons that attack the village at regular intervals. But not just any dragon. He wants to kill the Night Fury dragon that no one has ever seen. When he finally lands a hit on the one that has been terrorizing the village, it crashes a distance away. No one else believes he actually hit it. Hiccup goes out to find his dragon and, if need be, finish it off. But he soon discovers a surprising truth that never occurred to him or any of the other Vikings - that dragons might not be so evil after all.

The biggest thing that jumped out at me about this movie is that it's so clean for a Dreamworks production. Based on the animated Dreamworks movies I've seen (Madagascar, Kung Fu Panda, and Over the Hedge) and especially on those I haven't seen (the Shrek trilogy), Dreamworks doesn't really make movies that are tiny-kid friendly. I would never let a five year-old son of mine watch Madagascar. However, How to Train Your Dragon has just one crude part, and on a scale of one to ten, it's not all that crude.

Besides being cleaner than a lot of animated movies I've seen, I also enjoyed how the dragons were portrayed more like dogs than people. Don't get me wrong; I love the mice in Cinderella. But it can get a little tiresome to have animals and people speak to each other - particularly in a world where people are pushing "animal rights." But the dragons are very definitely not able to speak. In fact, Toothless reminds me a lot of a couple different dogs I know.

This dogginess of Toothless helps make the relationship between him and Hiccup pretty real. Toothless's (sometimes) misguided attempts at trying to please Hiccup are so sweet, and Hiccup really throws himself into training and caring for his dragon. They're just a boy and his (really, really cool) pet.

Which brings me to the other relationships in the movie. Hiccup's relationship with his dad Stoick (Gerard Butler) is definitely strained. This can get a little tiresome when it's in too many movies, but it didn't come across as a lecture to parents; just a reason why Hiccup had to do what he had to do on his own. The relationship I really liked was the one between Astrid (America Ferrara) and Hiccup. America is a tough, no-nonsense girl - but Hiccup ends up being superior in the fighting skills department. Finding a balance between "tough girl" and "girl power" is a delicate business, and not too many animated movies have been able to pull it off.

My Rating: AGC

Picture from impawards.com

On Spider-Man 2

Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is having trouble. As Spider-Man, he's an awesome superhero who goes around saving people. But as Peter Parker, he's never on time, neglects his homework, and is far behind on his rent. Into the mess that he calls life comes Dr. Otto Octavius (Alfred Molina), a brilliant scientist who has learned how to harness the power of fusion. Peter instantly makes friends with the personable scientist, but is a little concerned about the stability of the doctor's work. His fears are confirmed when a demonstration goes awry and the artificially intelligent mechanical arms connected to Octavius's spine take over the doctor's mind. Spider-Man must dig deep and find a way to stop the madman before he destroys New York City.

Spider-Man 2 is not as good as the first movie, but it's pretty good as far as sequels go. I'm not exactly a connoisseur of superhero movies, but based on the ones I've seen (and what I've heard about the ones I haven't seen), I would have to say that Spider-Man is my favorite superhero. For one thing, he actually has super powers. This criteria eliminates characters like Batman and Ironman. For another, he has morals that basically match up with my own in every area. This, again, rules out some "heroes" like Superman. Finally, he's such a real kind of character. He's handsome, to be sure, but he can look pretty silly sometimes. He stumbles and falls (a lot), but he gets back up again and keeps going.

Spider-Man isn't the only one who deals with struggles in this movie. His Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) is dealing with the death of her husband and her financial troubles. But the whole message of this movie is that there's always hope, no matter what you're going through. Whether it's sorrow, financial problems, matters of the heart, or a heavy responsibility, there's always a bright light shining to help you through. People are stronger than a lot of movies give them credit for. Instead of giving in to despair or temptation, a lot of people find strength - a superhuman strength, if you will - to get through the dark night. Though Spider-Man 2 makes no mention that God is the source of this strength, the movie certainly elevates humans above the instinctual animals that many secularists think we are.

My Rating: T (terrifying scenes (ugh!), mild language)

Picture from impawards.com

Concerning Inception

Are you living in reality? Or are you in a dream? Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a master of extraction - entering into a shared dream with a corporate giant in order to extract information from the corporate giant's subconscious. When he tries (and fails) to extract information from a man named Saito (Ken Watanabe), Cobb is surprised when Saito turns around and offers him a job. If Cobb can plant an idea in the mind of Saito's rival, then Saito will fix it so Cobb can return home. Unwilling to pass up this chance to see his two children again, Cobb agrees. Even he is completely unprepared for what he and his team will encounter.

The story in this movie is absolutely incredible. It's complicated, but not so much that you feel completely lost during the movie. It's only after the movie when you start thinking about it later that it becomes confusing. Luckily, I had the chance to watch this three times in two days, so I think I have the story straightened out. (Except for the ending - I don't think Christopher Nolan wanted people to understand that.)

The story may be confusing, but it's also a really cool idea. It's completely impossible, of course, but the very ideas of layered dreams and being able to change your dream however you want in the middle of it are just plain cool. Another cool thing is the graphics. The only time they don't look one hundred percent realistic is when your mind is telling you that what's going on is impossible. Your eyes believe everything, but your brain isn't as credulous.

Inception is extremely well done in more ways than just the story and graphics. The acting and characters are superb. At first, I wasn't very impressed. Dom seemed like a boring character, and I wasn't too impressed with Leonardo DiCaprio's acting. But as the movie went on, Dom's character began to have all sorts of little twists and turns, and suddenly I realized that DiCaprio is a very good actor indeed. All the little things about Dom that I took as DiCaprio trying to make a character out of nothing were revealed as being intentional parts of Dom's character. To stay on the acting, everyone else was really good as well; Ellen Page as Ariadne and Cillian Murphy as Robert Fischer in particular.

My Rating: T (violence, language)

Picture from impawards.com

In Relation To National Treasure: Book of Secrets

It's been awhile since Ben Gates (Nicolas Cage) and his friends and family discovered the famous Knights Templar treasure. Things aren't going so well anymore. Riley Poole (Justin Bartha) has the IRS hounding him, and Ben is living with his father after getting kicked out by his now-ex-girlfriend Abigail Chase (Diane Kruger). Then suddenly, a man named Mitch Wilkinson (Ed Harris) comes forward with a piece of paper he claims proves that Ben's great-great-grandfather was a traitor who plotted to kill president Abraham Lincoln. Ben, his father, and their friends know that isn't true. The great-great-grandfather was killed by men plotting to assassinate Lincoln and discover a fabulous city of gold in order to help the Confederate cause. The only way the Gateses can prove their ancestor's innocence is by finding the city themselves using the clues left behind on that damning piece of paper.

This is a light-hearted, lightweight movie that's enjoyable enough with a big bowl of popcorn and a cozy blanket on a winter's night. It's better still with some friends who don't mind talking and laughing about a movie through the whole thing. As far as serious movie-watching goes, National Treasure: Book of Secrets can't stand on its own two feet.

There are significant holes in the plot line, including the idea that Ben and his father can clear their ancestor's name by proving the existence of a city of gold. I see almost no correlation between the two things. That's plot hole number one. There are a whole lot more secondary plot line holes throughout the movie, coupled with completely unbelievable things like Abigail and Ben breaking into Buckingham Palace and stealing something out of a hidden compartment in Queen Elizabeth II's desk. Even if the queen wasn't at Buckingham Palace at the time, the idea that someone could break into the palace that easily is absurd.

But if one can overlook the improbability (and occasional impossibility) of a lot of things, National Treasure: Book of Secrets can be very enjoyable. Ben's estranged mother Emily (Helen Mirren) was a welcome addition to the group, and the humor was simultaneously ramped up and cleaned up from the first movie's standards. Nicolas Cage is not a very good actor, but he's a good comedian, and the best two lines in the movie belong to him. Riley's character isn't quite as weird as he was in the first movie, getting a little smarter and even more likable.

Finally, even though most of the characters were enjoyable, Wilkinson was extremely dull and uninteresting compared to Ian Howe (Sean Bean) from the previous movie. Of course, Sean Bean is an exceptional actor, but I think he enjoyed far more interesting lines than Ed Harris did. Wilkinson simply had virtually no character. He was shallow, with the lamest motivation I have ever heard. Most men who want their names to go down in history are nuts and end up shooting someone or blowing up a building. Though I must say I like Wilkinson's end far more than Howe's.

My Rating: OK (some crude humor, mild violence)

Picture from impawards.com

To Whom It May Concern:

I have decided, after much deliberation, to abandon the formula I have used for my reviews. Instead of a summary, pros, cons, and my rating, I will start writing each review as a cohesive whole, with only my rating remaining as a separate part of the article. My reasons for making this change are simple: Not only are short reviews simply not enough for lengthy British movies, I also want to include more neutral observations instead of confining myself to just pros or cons.