Myffubs

Though its previews give Sinister the appearance of a by-the-numbers fright flick, or perhaps some crummy J-horror ripoff, the end results are different, and decidedly better. Ethan Hawke stars as Ellison Oswalt, a true-crime novelist who moves his family into a home which doubles as the site of several ghastly murders. Tellingly he plans to write about them without telling his wife (Rylance) or children (D'Addario, Foley). Ellison uncovers reels documenting the crime along with footage of other killings. Upon viewing the murders, he sees a common thread, which then begins to weave itself into his family's life. Rounding out the cast are a disapproving local sheriff (Thompson), his eager-to-please deputy (Ransone), and a college professor (D'Onofrio) only present via webcam. Sinister works on a small scale, but uses this to its advantage; its few characters and fewer locations provide a more claustrophobic feel to draw the audience in and aid the story's horror. Writer/director Scott Derrickson and fellow writer C. Robert Cargill occasionally allow the film and plot to resemble other genre standards (namely The Exorcist, Poltergeist, The Ring, and The Shining) but refrain from hackneying or reproducing the works that inspired them. Though some moments dip into silliness and others into stupidity, Sinister reveals itself as a surprisingly satisfying experience. Its scares do scare and its horror does horrify. Those hoping for a gore fest are advised to sit this one out. Those who want to be frightened while being entertained would do well to see Sinister.

It shouldn't come as much of a surprise that Shark Night 3D is awful. Its theatrical release is due entirely to the success of Piranha 3D, but it lacks Piranha's bite; sure, that movie was a nasty, semi-soft-core misogynist piece of trash, but at least it delivered on its promise of decidedly R-rated nudity and gore. Shark Night offers neither, instead throwing in an even more preposterous plot, even blander actors playing duller characters, and teases where Piranha came through. There's also overuse of MTV-style editing to let viewers know the characters are having fun, because anyone watching certainly won't be enjoying themselves. Put David R. Ellis at the helm and what you've got is a recipe for disaster. The ineptitude is clear from the opening sequence, which rips off of the opening sequence in Jaws. The attack is unclear and fairly unconvincing; where the effect of pulling someone through the water to simulate a shark attack was new in '75, here it feels obviously dated and, well, boring. The subsequent attacks are similarly handled, with characters simply being dragged underwater and no clear details, though some sequences feature horrible special effects and laughably unrealistic shark behavior. The plot comes second to the shark attacks, yet takes up most of the film's running time. College students venture to a lake house for Spring Break, only to find the waters fairly shark-infested. Might this have anything to do with the creepy, foreboding locals? Too much time is spent getting from one place to another, especially when a thinking audience can figure that most escape attempts won't play in favor of the college-aged shark bait. The 3D is hardly used, and when it is, the effect is hampered by the inability to properly frame the action. In the end, Shark Night 3D is a waste of your time and money. If you're really in the mood for a shark flick, you're much better off waiting for SyFy to have a Terror-in-the-Water weekend.

The Bourne Legacy proves itself as little more than a half-hearted attempt to restart the franchise. Jeremy Renner stars as Aaron Cross, another government-trained assassin from an operation parallel to Treadstone and Blackbriar. Presumably his abilities surpass Bourne's, though this isn't really put to the test. Following the fallout of Ultimatum's potential media leak, officials decide to shut down a number of programs, ranging from field operatives to researchers. Cross decides to rescue Dr. Rachel Weisz in hope of receiving his medication, and the two then flee to Manila. Too much of Legacy just feels like a watered-down retread of the other Bourne pictures with different actors. It knows the words but not the music. Edward Norton channels Chris Cooper, Joan Allen, and David Strathairn of series' entries past without really bringing anything new to the role. Renner does solid work in the lead role. Weisz is mainly kept around as multi-purpose window dressing. The action sequences are only mildly interesting while other scenes fatally lack momentum. It's as if the director and writers thought they could coast on the audience's familiarity with the series and interest in seeing impressive stuntwork and professional ass-kickings. No new grounds are really covered, save some uninteresting scientific developments. The movie can be praised for its efficiency and technological aspects, but that praise would mean more if these aspects were put to use in a better movie. All in all The Bourne Legacy has no real reason to exist other than to regurgitate the series' now tired formula, and to open the door for yet another sequel.

Premium Rush delivers on the promise of its title. Joseph Gordon-Levitt stars as a daring NYC bike messenger. Apparently there is no end to the risks bike messengers take. Some of the film's best sequences elaborate on various possibilities that could end in disaster. Michael Shannon plays a hapless cop whose gambling habits have gotten him into trouble with the wrong people. His performance is another of the movie's numerous highlights. Gordon-Levitt receives an envelope, the contents of which could help Shannon. Premium Rush moves back and forward in time and all across NYC, following different characters and providing the audience with the central scenario before fleshing out the details. This approach works decidedly better than more straightforward storytelling. Writer/director David Koepp capably maintains tension, while his and John Kamps's script successfully injects humor into various situations. The characters are well defined and have plausible motivations. Ultimately Premium Rush is fairly simple, but it offers enough innovation and personality to rise above standard genre fare. Those looking for a good time would do well to see it.

Stuck is a fascinating character study by way of thoroughly entertaining B-Horror. It weaves a fictional narrative with basis on the true story of a woman from Fort Worth (to absolutely no one's surprise) and the man stuck in her windshield. Mena Suvari stars as Brandi, a nursing home assistant whose life could possibly be better if she could only get that promotion. Stephen Rea co-stars as Tom, who has recently lost his job and been evicted from his apartment. After partying a little too heavily, Brandi decides to drive home. She soon hits Tom, providing the film with its central predicament. She does not stop, and somehow manages to make her way home without attracting much attention. From there she calls her part-time boyfriend, full-time drug dealer Rashid (Russell Hornsby) and the two attempt to plot a way out. Director Stuart Gordon has shown time and again that he can find humor in unlikely places, and his work here proves no exception. Stuck is often darkly hilarious in its depiction of Brandi, cornrows and all, whose sickening attempts at self-preservation (she really does want her promotion) are generally botched by her short-sightedness and stupidity. Suvari is unflinching in her performance, diving head-first into questionable material and coming out on top. The scenes involving Tom's attempts at escape manage to disgust, dishearten, and entertain equally. Rea is an excellent character actor, and his ability to evoke sympathy does not get in the way of the admittedly gallows humor. Though improbable in its climax, Stuck never falters and delivers an extremely satisfying conclusion. This film is clearly not for everyone, and will likely turn off many a viewer. However if you enjoy a mix of black comedy and gritty horror with a splash of biting social commentary, you will likely find Stuck right up your alley.

The Best and the Brightest certainly isn't deserving of its title. It lacks anything resembling goodness or intelligence. Its particularly foul sense of humor is at odds with the maturity level of anyone who might be drawn in by the promise of an interesting set-up. It's about a couple attempting to get their five-year-old into an excellent preschool, yet the humor suggests the movie is for people who really wouldn't put much emphasis on their child's education. The cultural elite is shown as stupid and morally bankrupt, but then, so are the protagonists. The actors don't seem to be acting, as the characters never feel like real people. If nothing else, they're almost always aware they're in front of a camera, either acting bizarrely inhuman or offering half-baked quips in order to amuse a theoretic audience. The Best and the Brightest is essentially sitcom-lite fluff that uses its nonrating to indulge in perversity. I call it perversity because some of the humor simply is dirty without the good grace of being funny. In fact, none of the humor is remotely funny. This is the sort of movie where the aforementioned five-year-old, the reason for the conflict at the center of the story, is reduced to "cute" reaction shots. That, and faux-intellectuals are wowed by sexually explicit instant-messenger logs. So at least viewers are offered the message that smart people are actually really stupid, too. What comfort for those who enjoy this movie.

Roman Polanski's Carnage is a well-made film adaptation of a stage play. The story involves two couples who agree to meet following a violent interaction between their children. Before long both couples devolve into bickering monsters who are arguably worse than the kids. Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly star as Penelope and Michael Longstreet, and Kate Winslet and Christopher Waltz fill the roles of Nancy and Alan Cowan. In short the Cowan child hit the Longstreet child with a stick and broke two of his teeth, though the general consensus is that either couple could be in the other's position. Penelope is introduced as a do-gooder type, while Michael seems ill-fit for the formality of the occasion; Nancy wants to end the matters quickly, and Alan is content to condescend when not being interrupted by his cell. The film proceeds as a comedy of manners and lack thereof, and its success is dependent on the performances. Both Foster and Reilly are adequate, but Winslet and Waltz steal the show. There is nothing in Carnage to suggest that it has been altered or improved for cinematic treatment; indeed it could be a filmed play, which may turn off many a viewer. That said it was rather enjoyable for its documentation of seemingly decent people indulging in indecency. It provides its capable cast with some great scenes. Its humor is brittle and caustic, and its characters are recognizably human. Chances are experienced moviegoers will know whether or not they want to see Carnage; those who want to see it will likely enjoy it.

Drive is a very well made thriller. It features an excellent cast, great cinematography, and some of the most compelling scenes of recent memory. Ryan Gosling stars as the Driver, who does not seem to have a name. Tellingly he drives. He works as a Hollywood stuntman during the day, moonlighting as a getaway driver for various criminals. Gosling's performance is anchored in the Driver's harsh reality; he deals with life and death situations on a routine basis with no real identity. He slowly opens up when he is getting to know his neighbor (Mulligan) and her son (Leos); he does not talk much, but is genuinely kind. Mulligan's husband (Isaac) returns home from prison and is soon threatened for owed protection money. The Driver decides to offer his help, which is when the film shifts from a slow-building character study to a pulse-pounding thriller. Also involved in the proceedings are Bryan Cranston as the Driver's mentor of sorts, and Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman as two mob bosses. Each actor breathes a unique life into his or her respective character. Most are given surprising amounts of depth. Nicolas Winding Refn's direction deserves praise as well; the film captivates in just about each and every scene. Though the meandering first half clashes with the abrupt ending, Drive ultimately manages to be a satisfying and thrilling experience.

Juno is the sort of film that is hampered by aspects of its approach, yet surprisingly winning in its outcome. Ellen Page stars as the titular Juno MacGuff, who becomes pregnant after, well, having sex. She could be termed quirky and is a bit of a wiseass -- especially for someone who forgets basic biology -- but the performance makes her disarmingly likable. Juno of course decides to have the baby and to then give it up for adoption, and the film follows her through the remaining course of her pregnancy. Director Jason Reitman's previous Thank You for Smoking was justly praised, and here he has created an equally enjoyable experience. Diablo Cody's script is perhaps a little too self conscious -- would anyone ever use the phrase "honest to blog"? -- but she shows a knack for creating memorable characters with occasionally humorous dialogue. The proceedings are definitely aided by a talented cast. Michael Cera shines here with his unique meek charm as the, um, baby-daddy. J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney have excellent bit parts as Juno's father and stepmother. However the majority of the acting credit must go to both Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner as the potential adoptive parents, and who provide valid dramatic counterpoints to the otherwise sweet comedy in the foreground. Though the self-congratulatory wittiness may grate some and the twee-filled soundtrack may prove taxing to others -- plenty may fall into both categories -- Juno ends up coming together nicely on just about every level.

Over the course of his career, director Wes Anderson has developed a loyal cult following. His films explore adult matters with a refreshing sense of childlike innocence and wonder. Moonrise Kingdom offers little variation on this approach, but utilizes it to perhaps its best effect. The plot centers around young Sam and Suzy (Gilman and Hayward) who exist as misfits in their small island society, which itself consists of various outcasts. These include affable if daft Scout Master Ward (Norton), Sam's khaki troop leader; lawyer couple Laura and Walt Bishop (McDormand and Murray), whose idea of sweet nothings consist of legal jargon; mild-mannered police captain Sharp (Willis); and various khaki scouts and Bishop children. Sam and Suzy decide to take flight in search of something more meaningful, possibly love. Soon just about everyone else is searching for them. Though the premise seems simple, Anderson and company excel at delivering unexpected and rewarding payoffs. Each actor finds the right note to play his or her character. In particular, the younger actors are astonishing, capturing in their performances the heightened emotions of one's preteen years. The production is highlighted by beautiful locations and excellent cinematography. This is not to say the film is without its (admittedly minor) problems; the early flashback sequences interrupt the overall flow, and Tilda Swinton is woefully underused as Social Services. Still Moonrise Kingdom fits in with the best of Anderson's work. Fans and newcomers should find plenty to enjoy.

Rock Star follows a familiar story line to its logical conclusion without stopping for too many detours along the way. Mark Wahlberg stars as the singer of a heavy metal cover band who gets the chance of a lifetime when the group he idolizes needs a new front man. Suddenly he finds himself catapulted to the kind of life he's always fantasized about. Of course, as is usually the case, it comes with a price. Rock Star echoes another of Wahlberg's films, Boogie Nights, in the way that his character gets swept up into a decadent lifestyle that eventually overwhelms him. There are also shades of Cameron Crowe's Almost Famous and, perhaps unintentionally, Rob Reiner's This is Spinal Tap. Rock Star, however, lacks those films' ambition, depth, and originality. Still the movie is fairly enjoyable, and is certainly never boring. It boasts an admirable cast, highlighted by Dominic West, Timothies Olyphant and Spall, and a very funny though rarely seen Beth Grant. Steel Dragon, the fictional band, is perhaps less engaging than the sight of Wahlberg fronting a glam rock group; their songs are largely uninteresting, and they seem like the sort of band that might tour with Spinal Tap. The movie's tone comes off as slightly schizophrenic, switching between earnest drama and fevered camp. Whether the laughs are intentional or not, things progress with an undeniable charm, driven by the logic of male preteen fantasies. Rock Star is indeed worth checking out; viewers may be swept up along with Wahlberg or may find themselves laughing at his ridiculous exploits, but either way, they will likely end up having a good time.

I like independent movies and music. I like them not because they're independent, but because they break away from the mainstream to offer something different. Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist is the sort of movie that celebrates indie for indie's sake while attempting to appeal to the masses. It's a calculated, soulless trod through a calculated, soulless evening with calculated, soulless characters. There's not a bit of humanity in the thing. Sure, it can be seen as a celebration of the city at night, of underground music, of young love, etc. But if there's going to be a movie celebrating those things, shouldn't it be at least a little bit fun? The dull proceedings begin and end as just another Michael Cera vehicle. I have nothing against Cera, but filmmakers and producers seem to think just putting him in movies will work. Not so. He makes for a dull, meek protagonist who has what the movie thinks is excellent taste in music. Kat Dennings makes for a similarly dull, meek love interest; imagine a manic pixie dream girl as realized by a twentysomething Andie MacDowell. It's no surprise when sparks fail to fly. The movie is fairly typical for its ilk, relying heavily on cutesy moments and lame attempts at understated humor. None of it is cute or funny, making for one of the most boring trips through NYC with some of its least interesting inhabitants, a night on the town for those whose bedtimes lie between 9:30 and 10:00. Nothing of importance or interest is ever at stake, and it constantly shows; when Nick and Norah seem pretty apathetic about what they're up to, why should an audience care? And the word "Infinite" definitely fits in the title; though the movie doesn't quite reach ninety minutes, it feels like twice that. Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist attempts to blend indie and mainstream sensibilities the way successful independent breakthroughs have, namely Juno and Little Miss Sunshine. With those movies, it worked. Here, it forms a toxic combination, devoid of anything resembling life or soul.

Upon seeing the trailer for The Blind Side, I had a good idea how I would react. Upon viewing the final product, my suspicions were validated. Its heart is entirely in the wrong place. The movie ought to be about Michael Oher and how he achieved success, but this is not the case. The Blind Side centers around the kind Southern white woman who takes in an underprivileged black youth. Her kindness, not his struggle, is what the movie is about. To the actors' credit, everyone does a good job. The leads are mostly great, especially Quinton Aaron, but the direction and writing undercuts the performances. The Blind Side is all uplift and no substance. When the movie isn't trying to win your heart with its blatant emotional pandering, it's trying to warm it with sentiment-heavy and sitcom-lite humor, a rather nauseating combination. Also problematic is the unflattering portrait of African Americans. In the movie's eyes, if black people aren't waiting for kind white folk to lend a helping hand, they are either unable to support their families or are manipulative bullies. I suppose there is one business-professional African American woman, but it's telling that she is introduced as a villain. There are moments in The Blind Side where a better movie shines through, one with both the appropriate seriousness and sweetness for the situation, but this better movie is largely overshadowed by the mediocre one in the foreground. It is sadly telling about the state of film when movies like this are nominated for Best Picture.

The Cabin in the Woods will undoubtedly find its way into the hearts of horror fans everywhere. The plot follows five friends who decide to venture to the titular cabin. These characters fall into stereotypical categories: the bimbo (Hutchinson), the stoner (Kranz), the jock (Hemsworth), the smart guy (Williams) and the virgin (Connolly). Of course, these are not the only cliches exploited. Upon arriving at a seemingly abandoned gas station, the group manages to insult the creepy, Confederate flag-waving owner. Meanwhile the cabin itself is as foreboding as any, but nobody (save the pothead) really minds or even notices. When the basement trap door suddenly swings open, the group decides to see what might be down there. Etc, etc. Meanwhile, a team of scientists in an underground laboratory closely watches every move the characters make. To go on further might ruin some of the surprises that await. The Cabin in the Woods takes several twists and turns over the course of its ninety-plus minutes. The film provides a few scares, but excels mainly in delivering laughs while skewering conventions. Writers Goddard (who also directed) and Whedon know their way around the genre and exactly how to send it up. Credit must also go to their superb cast, who fit their characters perfectly and find plenty of grounds from which to mine humor. The cherry on top comes in the form of an intelligent and well-observed metaphor. All in all most horror fans should be pleased more than pleased with The Cabin in the Woods. Some may be thrown by the approach, particularly those who enjoy more straightforward fare. Audiences who stick through to the end will likely find themselves having a good time.

Jeff, who Lives at Home is a low-key comedy that often pays off in unexpected ways. Jason Segel stars as the titular, Signs-obsessed pothead who ventures out into the world with a trivial purpose before taking several detours along the way. The film dutifully follows. Jeff actively looks for messages, perhaps from a higher power, to derive some meaning from his existence. Early on he gets a call from a stranger asking for Kevin, then decides to follow a youth with the name Kevin on his jersey. Etc, etc. Meanwhile Jeff's presumably more responsible but less fun-loving brother Pat (Helms) and his girlfriend Linda (Greer) are unable to communicate. Linda thinks their relationship needs work, while Pat thinks it needs a Porsche. Their mother (Sarandon) wants Jeff to run an errand and ponders a secret admirer at work. Jeff occasionally runs into Pat and helps him follow Linda, who may or may not be carrying on an affair. This is basically what happens, which is to say, not very much. Still the movie manages to entertain, and provides its narrative threads with relatively satisfying conclusions. Save, of course, the too-convenient climax. The performances range from good to great. Segel is amiable, charming in a role that could quickly become agitating. Helms proves similarly memorable, while both Greer and Sarandon turn in oddly touching performances. The film excels at subtly humorous moments stemming from the loosely defined but recognizably human characters. Its directors and writers, the brothers Duplass, are admirable in their unwillingness to adhere to standard comedic and dramatic conventions. They utilize their signature lo-to-no-fi approach with grace; the shaky handheld camera and unnecessary zooms prove a small price to pay. Those who are curious should indeed see this film. Though neither the best of the year nor significantly groundbreaking, it is both enjoyable and genuine, exceedingly rare traits among modern releases.

The Innkeepers occasionally rises to the occasion and manages to be a worthwhile horror film. It could have been a great one were it not for one unfortunate problem: its lead. When the role is as central as this one, it requires a good actress. Sara Paxton could be best termed serviceable, but does not hold interest for long and has some regrettable scenes. In many other ways The Innkeepers is quite good; it features a slow build up to some startling sequences and a thrilling climax. Paxton stars as Claire, an employee at a closing hotel. She and her co-worker Luke (Pat Healy) ponder the story of Madeline O'Malley, whose ghost supposedly wanders the building's hallways. The two are attempting to document her existence with audio (not video) recording devices. For the most part, not much happens. Claire and Luke converse and are generally likable, and every so often one of the few guests appears. These scenes may seem slow, but director Ti West uses them to lay the groundwork for genuine scares and suspense. If the set up sounds similar to Paranormal Activity, the results are different and decidedly better. Dingy surveillance footage is replaced with good cinematography (and a plot), the characters come off as fleshed out individuals instead of pawns for a jump scenes, and the conclusion ultimately satisfies. If only the lead had been more capable. Still The Innkeepers is mostly enjoyable, and hearkens back to the times when horror films were actually scary.

Jack Black deserves an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Bernie Tiede, a small town funeral director who murdered his close elderly friend Marjorie Nugent. The film observes the odd relationship that builds between the two. Bernie is a well-liked and respected figure in Carthage, Texas. He's cheerful and kind, and seems to brighten everyone's day. As a part of his job he comforts widows in their times of grief and keeps in touch with them over the following months. This is how he meets Marjorie (Shirley McLaine), recent widow and local curmudgeon. She shows distaste for just about everyone, whose feelings are perhaps mutual. Bernie however wins her favor with genuine sweetness. The two grow close, much to others' befuddlement. The film utilizes a mockumentary approach surrounding this central narrative; the locals (who may or may not be actual Carthage residents) offer gossip and opinions on what occurred between Bernie and Marjorie. This approach works well, providing audiences with numerous authentic slices of life. Director Richard Linklater keeps the humor gentle, even when ranging into darker territory, while the dramatic counterpoints prove oddly touching. Though the performances highlight the film, the underlying tenderness is what drives it home. Unlike most recent comedies, this one contains a beating heart.

The film adaptation of Battleship proves to be about as poor as one might imagine. The movie rips off a number of recent flicks -- namely of the alien-invasion-leads-to-mass-destruction variety -- most of which are derivative enough as it is. Thusly viewers get a simultaneously bloated and watered down translation of the popular Hasbro game. One sequence comes close to dramatic line readings of "B3!"/"Hit!" with related visuals, but most of Battleship comes off as an excuse to, say, blow stuff up real good. Of course the movie can barely do this well; the action scenes are so poorly edited that one can barely make sense of the confusion. Bright lights and loud noises bombard the senses. The rest of the movie involves several pasted together subplots featuring a parade of cliches -- such as a rebellious Navy lieutenant seeking the approval of his girlfriend's father while also learning to take command of his men; the aforementioned girlfriend's work with a wounded veteran, who learns how to accept the loss of his legs and respect himself again; the scientist whose work brought on the alien invasion, and his reluctant stabs at bravery. This would all be well and good if these matters were given the thought and time they deserve, but instead, the filmmakers decide to throw aliens at everyone, and their attributes become decorations. Not that one should expect more from a movie based on a board game, but the characters are too poorly defined to care about. Again much of the alien invasion is not well done. The effects are decent but more often than not indiscernible, and some of the designs are simply lazy. A mildly rousing conclusion featuring a historical battleship and WWII vets comes off as too little, too late to save this hulking train wreck. There is a cultural problem with movies like these, ones eager to depict mass destruction without pausing to consider the presumed loss of life. Typically they earn a PG-13 rating, allowing audiences too young for R-rated flicks to bear witness. But how exactly is the younger generation supposed to feel when buildings in Hong Kong are destroyed, especially when the movie flaunts its big explosions and toppling buildings? Those eagerly awaiting the next Transformers sequel or some similarly brain-dead nonevent will likely enjoy this movie. Others should simply steer clear. Battleship is one of those movies no one will really remember in a few years, let alone in a few months.

Young Adult is a darkly humorous look into the life of Mavis Gary, the author of a once-bestselling series of YA novels. Upon learning that her high school sweetheart is happily married, she determinedly sets out to steal him back. Having enjoyed popularity in high school and fleeting fame in the subsequent years, Mavis has become self-centered and spoiled. The diction of her current novel, which doubles as the film's narration, offers an often hilarious glimpse at how she views herself, her past, and her current situation. This is a deeply disturbed character, but an endlessly fascinating one as well. Directed by Jason Reitman from a script by Diablo Cody, Young Adult is expertly handled. Reitman's heroes all have an abundance of confidence with films to match, and perhaps here, he has found the best combination. Cody's dialogue is concise and well written, lacking the all-too-knowing-ness of her previous work. Though occasionally the typical teen vernacular works its way into the movie, Cody makes good use of it. Charlize Theron is excellent as Mavis, in a simultaneously hilarious and horrifying role. Patrick Wilson does well as the high school sweetheart, who is indeed happily married but reluctant to be cruel. Patton Oswalt proves a surprisingly good choice to play Matt, a logical and sane counterpoint to Mavis's delusions. The film's success is dependent upon the performances; with less capable leads, it would sink under some of the weightier material. As things are Young Adult is an excellent character study with some wonderfully poignant moments. It may be too bleak for some and too caustic for others, but if you enjoy scathing humor and subtle wit, Young Adult is your kind of movie.

The Raid: Redemption provides its audience with numerous exciting action scenes, but very little else. The movie focuses on an Indonesian special ops team's raid -- and presumed redemption -- of a crime lord's building. Countless criminals live in the rooms and roam the halls. Some pack knives, others carry guns, and one enjoys using his fists and feet. Who says you can't stay fit? Needless to say they're none too happy when spec ops invades, prompting one of the various shoot outs. These sequences are very well done from a technological standpoint, boasting simply stunning stunt work. However, not a single character comes to life as a human being. In this movie people exist primarily to be beaten, shot, and/or stabbed. In fact, many rush forward to do so. One fight scene features around twenty criminals rushing the protagonist, who easily disables or kills each and every one of them. This -- other than his pregnant wife -- is how you can tell he is the protagonist. At no point do any of the criminals look around and say, "Hey, guys, this isn't working like we planned. Do you think maybe we should try something else?" What little plot there is seems to have been lifted from bits and scenes of better action flicks with less impressive action sequences. Still the stunts and technology deserve praise. The Raid: Redemption will appeal to a good number genre fans, but those expecting more than dazzling fights and shoot outs may find themselves oddly disappointed.

Chernobyl Diaries continues in the vein of many recent horror flicks, relying on an overabundance of jump scenes -- replete with the often-favored loud noises -- to suggest that the audience should be scared. Uh, huh. The movie opens as three American friends meet a fourth in Kiev. Paul and Chris are brothers, Natalie is Chris's girlfriend, and Amanda is their single friend. Mostly these traits define the characters, who are otherwise easily startled. Paul decides to take the others to see the Chernobyl reactors and nearby town. The four are led by local tour guide Uri and joined by two other tourists. When the military denies the group access, they should take it as a warning sign. As in most horror movies, they don't. Uri utilizes a little-known entryway, and soon the group has found its way into the eerie, deserted town of Prypiat. These scenes are certainly among the best in the movie, providing what's certainly the most haunting imagery. Of course the horror aspects wait just around the corner to negate some of the goodwill earned here. After an odd encounter with some wildlife, the group returns to the van to find various engine parts missing. Eventually someone wanders off, and then someone else, and so on. Though plausible character motivation is not a hallmark of the horror genre, it would be nice if there were, say, some. This is the sort of movie where audiences will want to shout at the screen while characters make the wrong decisions. The handheld camerawork does the action no favors, and a number of scenes are just too dark to see. Some thrills do pay off -- namely a well-advertized jump sequence -- but most are negated by the fact that the characters are too often too stupid to care about. The movie does not fare well in the wake of the excellent genre commentary The Cabin in the Woods. In addition to this, the use of an actual tragedy to masquerade as a horror plot comes off as crass and shameless. In comparison to Paranormal Activity -- a connection incessantly boasted in the ads -- Chernobyl Diaries is perhaps less dull though no more remarkable. Undiscerning horror fans and those looking for a few jumps may well enjoy the movie, but anyone hoping for something more will only be in for a disappointment.

Knight and Day is a fairly decent action/comedy/romance flick. It nails the action and comedy genres, but it doesn't put heart into its romance, and it suffers for it. It starts out well, breathing life into its characters in what would be termed as a "meet cute" if it weren't for the violent action sequences that permeate it. The film continues on a lively enough pace and sets up some very excellently choreographed chases and fights, but loses momentum about halfway through. This could be due to any number of causes: poorly-established characters, a plot that functions only to drive one action sequence to the next, or the increasingly implausible attraction between its leads. Well, being that the leads are Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz, it's plausible that they would be attracted to each other, but mostly on a superficial level. The actors are surprisingly good, but have little chemistry in their scenes together. There's a funny-in-its-implausibility scene in which a pouty Diaz wants Cruise, attempting to take cover from gunfire, to, I don't know, kiss her or something. Noticing this, he calmly walks towards her and does. We get the feeling that if either character were a terribly deep thinker, they might say to the other, "I'm sorry. I don't think this is working out." They're simply going through the [e]motions of a typical romance film. Regardless, Knight and Day is rousing in most of its kinetic action scenes, and it's often fairly funny and perfectly pitched, a task that most films of this sort don't quite manage. If only the romance had been handled as capably. As it stands, KaD is an enjoyable but ultimately forgettable popcorn flick.

The Signal is perhaps one of the best horror films to be released in recent years. It's highlighted by both its experimental nature and its frightening message, that the media will slowly drive us crazy. Well, not slowly, not in this movie. While watching television, making phone calls, and/or listening to the radio, the citizens of Terminus are susceptible to becoming violent raving lunatics thanks to a mysterious signal. It's reminiscent of body snatcher and zombie films, but there is an eerie sort of twist: those affected by the signal have no idea that anything is wrong with them. Instead, they view others as threats to their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. As one of the Affected states, "It's telling me what I should do, what I should want. I want my wife, and I want my home, and I want all you people to stop bothering us." Of course, this is first and foremost a horror film, and The Signal never gets too heavy-handed in the delivery of its message. It's actually quite scary and funny, and often at the same time. The film follows several characters through three loosely-connected chapters (called transmissions, each created by a different director) that vary wildly in delivery. The first transmission is arguably the best, crafting horror around uncertainty and building suspense with a surreal atmosphere. The second takes pitch black humor to the next level, yet also manages to include the film's single most disturbing scene. The third transmission turns the film into a psychological thriller about losing one's mind. Despite this, the film works; it feels like a whole (much more so, in fact, than many other films with just one director). Sure, there are shortcomings; two of the actors are not exactly good enough to carry the dialogue-heavy climax, which will lose some audience members, and the film's budget is apparent in several scenes. Of course, these are minor complaints when looking at the film as a whole. It's an excellent horror film that takes a jarring look at the messages of fear we receive from media sources almost every day: the outside world is a dangerous place, those whose views differ from ours are inherently an enemy of sorts, and we must do what we can to protect the ones we love. With this fear semi-constantly drilled into our minds, how long will it take for people to finally snap?

Final Destination 5 is quite a bit of a mixed bag. There are elements present that suggest that it should be a better movie than it actually is, but looking at each of the series' sequels, it's quite an accomplishment that this one manages to be as good as it is. The opening premonition (a bridge collapsing, if, for some reason, you don't already know) is easily the best sequence of any of the five Final Destinations. It's an amazing technological accomplishment that manages to create a palpable sense of dread; though you know the it's-only-a-premonition gotcha! is right around the corner, tension yields to pure fear as the bridge crumbles away in three dimensions. If you're an adrenaline junkie, this scene alone is well worth the admittedly bloated price of admission. The rest of the film doesn't live up to this sequence, but there are moments when the filmmakers know how to get under your skin, such as the well-advertised trapped-in-a-Lasik-chair and screw-on-a-balance-beam scenes. It's unlikely that you'll be able to guess the outcomes of the over-elaborate but still bizarrely jarring deathtraps the characters find themselves in. Much has been said about this entry's use of characterization, which, following every sequel, is understandable. Let's simply say that there *is* characterization. The characters are somewhat bland, but occasionally funny. The actors are all right, but wooden lines of dialogue (the ones that have been heard in each Final Destination film) still sound stilted. If nothing else, they convey full ranges of fear and terror, two emotions that likely won't serve them outside of the horror genre. The film includes some plot twists, but does little of interest with them; if you have seen the trailer, you know of one, and if you pay attention, the second one is frustratingly easy to guess. In the end, there's fun to be had here, but as a good number of the critic's reviews will tell you, you probably know whether you want to see Final Destination 5 or not. (A little forewarning to those who, like me, pick up on certain details: when the bridge collapses "for real," it collapses differently than in the premonition, which would, theoretically, change the order the characters "should" have died. The filmmakers don't make any use of this, so don't expect any curveballs of that sort. You can probably just regard it as what looks like a very expensive continuity error.)