Iron Man 2

I’ve got to say, my favorite genre of film is horror. I can watch a horror movie any time of the year, whether it’s in the morning or afternoon or, preferably, at night. I long for Halloween because there’s usually a smorgasbord of horror movies on the tube and I usually watch the ones I don’t have on DVD and line up a bunch of them to view continually throughout October.


Once again, I digress.

My second favorite genre of movies is probably, and more accurately, a sub-genre of action movies—comic book movies.

After years of collecting DVDs, my wife grew tired of seeing all the different colors of movie covers in our bookshelf. She suggested that I inter the discs and covers into a DVD binder, doing away with the plastic cases and saving space on our shelf. Not long after doing this, my binder count is up to 25, with each binder holding 20 movies. That means I have around 500 titles in our bookshelf. Of course, maybe 2% of those movies are my wife’s, but the rest are all mine.

Two of those binders are dedicated to my second favorite genre—or first favorite sub-genre—comic book movies. A good portion of one of the binders is growing with the Marvel Studios films that tie into my upcoming Blu-Ray, The Avengers (I already have a spot saved for it).

Before The Avengers came out back in May, I sat at home and watched the films that led up to it, so I can have the characters’ stories fresh in my mind. Seeing that the Blu-Ray is probably coming out in September, I decided to do it again (although it might be a little premature since it’s still more than a month away). But after watching the first Iron Man film and The Incredible Hulk, I ventured into the next Marvel Studios film leading to The Avengers…Iron Man 2.

Sorry for the long-windedness in getting to this point, but let’s move on and get into my thoughts on the film.

To synopsize the film, we open with the ending of Iron Man, or at least the audio of that press conference that ends the first movie. The scene takes place in Russia and it opens with an old man, Anton Vanko, clearly very sick, who is lying in bed and watching said press conference. As he’s about to die, he calls over his son, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) and tells him he’s given him all his knowledge that the Starks have robbed from him. As he passes, we get a terrific performance from Rourke as he believably portrays a grief-stricken son, showing the anguish in his face, as well as obvious anger toward the man on TV—Tony Stark. In the next scene, we’re treated to a montage of Ivan, going over plans and schematics (bearing the Stark Industries name, as well as Anton Vanko), as he proceeds to build a similar arc reactor that Tony Stark built for himself. But at the end of the scene, we see that Ivan Vanko has made some type of electric whip devices before the scene blacks out and the Iron Man 2 title appears.

We then cut to Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), as Iron Man, jumping from a military aircraft with AC/DC’s “Shoot To Thrill” accompanying the scene, as he flies threw fireworks (and getting hit by one) and down into the Stark Expo. Once on stage, he demonstrates how he’s disassembled and goes on to host the opening of the show. As he introduces a 1974 film of his father, he takes a break to go back stage and we see that he’s testing his blood, the reading showing his blood toxicity level is at 17% (if memory serves me correctly). At this point of the story, it isn’t clear why there are toxins in his blood, but we come to find out later that the palladium in his miniature arc reactor is slowly poisoning Tony.

Later, Tony summoned to appear before a senate hearing regarding his Iron Man suit and how he should release it to the government as a weapon. That’s where we meet Justin Hammer, a counterpart (albeit inferior counterpart) to Tony Stark. He’s called in before the senate as a weapons expert. The scene, as most in this film, is very entertaining, showcasing the humoristic zings between Tony Stark and Senator Stern (Garry Shandling).

As the story moves on, we see that Tony’s blood toxicity rises dramatically as he fights it, unaffectedly, with some sort of green liquid that he drinks constantly. Perhaps as a result of this, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) is given control of Stark Industries as Tony has made her CEO, following an introduction to Scarlett Johansson’s character of Natasha Romanoff—the Black Widow from S.H.I.E.L.D.—posing as Natalie Rushman, a new notary assistant to Ms. Potts.

Later, Tony, et al, go to Monaco to attend a Formula One race, as one of the cars is sponsored by Stark Industries. They all get together in a nearby restaurant, where Justin Hammer, coincidentally, is present as well. Not surprisingly, and to get away from Hammer, Tony suits up in racing gear to drive the Stark car himself. This is where Ivan Vanko—Whiplash (although he’s never called this in the movie)—confronts Stark for the very first time.

As the confrontation is seen on television, viewed by everybody in the restaurant, Pepper gets Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and has him drive to the track, making sure they bring a metal case that has the same colors as Iron Man’s armor. They get there in the nick of time and save Stark from Vanko, giving him this case that turns out to be Stark’s mobile Iron Man armor (which is a pretty cool special effects shot). Again, just in time, because Vanko wasn’t out for the count when Happy slams into him twice with the car (one part I clearly didn’t get—how can he survive that?). Iron Man prevails and Vanko goes to jail in France, only to have Hammer help him bust out seeking revenge on Stark.

Without going further into the story, there are a lot of great surprises and performances here. Samuel L. Jackson is back as Nick Fury, with a bigger part, I might add. He’s actually an integral part in helping Stark with the palladium poisoning from the arc reactor. And let’s not forget Don Cheadle taking over the role of Rhodes from Terrance Howard. I thought he gave the character more life and there was a lot better chemistry between him and Downey, especially when they fight side by side as Iron man and War Machine (awesome).

Everything was enjoyable in this film and I don’t have many complaints. If there was anything I can complain about was how quick and simple the ending was and how it was resolved. But there were a few winks here and there us comic book fans can appreciate, like the appearance of Captain America’s shield, or replica thereof.

Yes, I’m looking forward to seeing how far Marvel Studios can go with this universe they’ve created. Hopefully they can introduce more characters to the group and retain other heroes’ rights currently owned by other movie studios. I mean, come on! Spider-Man should be a part of this universe! They’ve already ruined the character by rebooting a successful franchise with a shoddy retelling of a story we saw a mere decade ago (see my July 9th review)!

Well, what’s my final “bit” on Iron Man 2?

Great comedic moments, some dramatic acts, a lot of kick-ass scenes, all made for an awesome film!

By the way, don’t forget to wait for that extra scene!

Thanks for reading!

You can follow me on Twitter: @JustCallMeManny

Iron Man

Still on my Avengers tear (as I was before that superhero ensemble was released), this time writing a few more reviews before the DVD and Blu-Ray is released, I delved, once again, into the one that started it all: Iron Man.

From start to finish, this movie is very entertaining, and even if it wasn’t a comic book movie, I’d still feel that way. I had my reservations way back when, when Robert Downey, Jr. was cast as the lead. I always saw him as the roles he played in the 80s, like one of the douche bag antagonists in Weird Science or the drugged out (both in the movie and in real life) friend in Less Than Zero. Basically, I’ve always thought of him as just a supporting character (Chaplin aside) and not the lead hero of an action movie.

Back in the 90s, when I first heard of Hollywood trying to get the comic book character of Iron Man onto the big screen, the name being mentioned quite a bit in the letters portion of many Marvel Comics books was Tom Cruise. I thought, at the time, that he would’ve done well in the role. I didn’t know much about the character—seeing as how I wasn’t into that particular comic book when I was younger—but I figured Tom Cruise would be a good box office draw. But, after a while, the books stopped citing the upcoming movie and I figured there really wasn’t too much interest in the character by the movie studios.

Well, 2008 came around and Paramount Studios—collaborating with the new Marvel Studios—released the much hyped Iron Man. I bought into it and being a big comic book nerd—regardless if I had read the source material—I paid for my ticket and watched it.

Right from the get-go, Robert Downey, Jr. commands the screen and entertains you. Tony Stark is portrayed as you would think a billionaire would be like. The opening scene is very entertaining and Downey sets up Tony Stark’s character from the start. Thinking back, and after watching the performance of Robert Downey, Jr. in this film, I think Tom Cruise would’ve been too dry and boring in the lead role. But Downey steals the show with his charm and humor, which adds to the character tremendously.

At the start, we see Stark with a few military personnel, riding in a Humvee in some far away country which looks to be in the Middle East. The convoy is ambushed and Stark is nearly killed by the attack. After a quick montage of Stark being operated on, we see a quick shot of something us Americans are all too familiar with, as Tony is held hostage and being filmed with terrorists surrounding him, spouting off something in their native tongue. The movie then goes back 36 hours to how all this came to be. But after arriving back to where we left off, basically we find out the terrorists want Stark to reproduce his deadliest weapon while being held captive in a cave. Stark outsmarts his captors by building, instead, his first armor to help him escape. This turns out to be an awesome scene.

There is, of course, much more to this part than I can put in words, but the buildup to how Stark creates his armor and how he escapes is amazing. When Stark returns back home, he is affected by his recent traumatic experience, not wanting his company to make weapons, but to venture into renewable energy and, more importantly (as well as secretly), to create a better and more advanced suit of armor than what he created in captivity. Of course, besides the trauma he had endured, there is much more to why he chooses his path than just being a hostage of terrorists.

Although the origin portion of this film is a little drawn out, watching Downey as Stark is so entertaining and you have fun following him in his quest to become a hero. The performances are pretty good by all the members of the cast, with the exception of Terrance Howard. He seemed a little stiff and wasn’t very believable (in my opinion) as a captain of the air force. He just seemed a little dry and not very animated when I thought he should’ve been. Overall, however, Robert Downey, Jr. is a one-man show with his performance, making up for any inadequacies—which aren’t many—from the other actors.

Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts is a breath of fresh air as Stark’s assistant-come-love-interest. Both she and Downey have good chemistry together on screen, although I heard Downey had to wear lifts in his shoes since Paltrow is a little taller than him. But she’s not the typical assistant portrayed on the screen, she has a little cynical side to her and you can tell she doesn’t take crap from many people, which shows in the scene where she “takes out the trash.”

Not being familiar with the comic book, I didn’t know who Obadiah Stane was so I couldn’t tell you if Jeff Bridges nailed the part or not. But I thought he did well, especially when he turned on the evil in this one.

The special effects, great when the film was released, is already looking a little dated in some scenes, but that’s to be expected; most special effects become dated within 4 or 5 years. Most of the flight scenes were believable and looked very impressive.

I’m keeping this one short and sweet, because I’m sure most of you have seen this movie. If not, you are woefully behind in the must-see movies that should be watched before viewing The Avengers. But my final “bit” on Iron Man? The movie keeps you rooted in your seat, cheering Tony Stark on as himself or as Iron Man, since this flick is definitely not one of those superhero movies where you’re bored watching the hero when he’s not in his superhero persona. The film is a great addition to your library, if you haven’t purchased it already. If you haven’t, you may want to wait until The Avengers is released on home media, because I’m sure that there is going to be some extravagant edition that features all the movies leading up to it.

Iron Man is awesome!

By the way, a little fun trivia for you: the engineer that Obadiah Stane speaks to about duplicating Tony Stark’s arc reactor is none other than Peter Billingsley—little Ralphie from A Christmas Story—who looks a little ridiculous with his hair shaved to look like he’s bald. Also, look for Captain America’s shield in the scene where Pepper Potts walks in on Stark while he’s being disassembled as Iron man. And, if you haven’t heard or seen it already, there is an extra scene after all the credits have rolled that gives the first wink at the upcoming (at the time) Avengers movie.

Thanks for reading!

You can reach me on Twitter: @JustCallMeManny

The Dark Knight Rises

Back when they first announced the sequel to The Dark Knight was to be titled The Dark Knight Rises, I thought that was just a working title. It just didn’t have pizzazz or that something that was going tell you the next movie was going to kick ass. It was only an extra word added to the 2008 movie’s title. I figured in coming months, they’d announce a new title and say, “ha-ha, we fooled you…we weren’t going to name it The Dark Knight Rises!”

But they didn’t make such an announcement.

My next thought was that this was, in actuality, Batman 3. And it got me thinking: Most part three movies suck! I mean, look at Superman III…and Halloween III (although, I do like that movie)…and Jaws 3…and Godfather III…and most recently, Spider-Man 3. It’s almost a given that all part three films always bite the big one.

To top it off, I started thinking about the trailers I had seen for The Dark Knight Rises. None of them were anything spectacular that made me get up out of my seat and shout, “I can’t wait for this movie!”

So, with all that in mind, I wasn’t in a hurry to see this film.

But I found myself, the other day, in a need to get my pick-up an oil change. My wife actually said, “Why don’t you take it to Sears at the mall and go see a movie while you wait for it?” So that’s when I decided, half-heartedly, to go see The Dark Knight Rises.

Let’s start with the story.

It’s been eight years since the events from The Dark Knight. The Harvey Dent Act was passed to help get criminals off the street and Gotham City is a much better place to live, striving almost perfectly. However, a new villain is coming to terrorize Gotham, named Bane (played by Tom Hardy), who is an unstoppable force and a former member of the League of Shadows. Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has made himself a recluse after giving up being Batman and because of it, his body has deteriorated as he walks around his mansion, in hiding, using a cane. Also on the prowl is a cat burglar, Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), who is only looking to clear her record and start over with a clean slate.

Without giving too much away, and keep the first half of this review spoiler-free, I’ll talk about the performances of the actors.

Christian Bale, at the beginning, seems a little out of sorts with his characterization of Bruce Wayne. But once the movie gets moving along, he seems to fine tune it and get right back into character. As Batman, however, he appears to slip right into character as if he’d never left it.

Michael Caine also returns as Alfred, and he’s amazing as Bruce Wayne’s trusted butler, but he’s only in the movie for a short amount of time.

Gary Oldman is back again as Commissioner Gordon. Oldman’s performance is good, but not as commanding as it was in the first two movies.

Morgan Freeman, back as Lucius Fox, brings back that lightheartedness from the first two movies, which is good to have that levity in such a heavy-handed comic book movie such as in Christopher Nolan’s Batman films.

As I get into this review, I’ll mention some other noteworthy performances by the other actors.

I guess I’ll get into what I liked about this film first, and then talk about what I didn’t like.

The score was awesome. Hans Zimmer kept up the movie’s intensity and amped up the action scenes as well as the dramatic themes perfectly. Although it’s more or less the same cues we’ve heard before, he still didn’t disappoint or veer off with something totally different that didn’t fit the film.

When Batman makes his first appearance, I loved it. Showing up on the Bat Pod to go after all of Bane’s cronies on their motorcycles was an awesome scene, especially the brief comedic scene involving the overzealous rookie cop who shoots at him.

Tom Hardy’s Bane is pretty powerful in this film. He definitely shows it in his performance that his character is Batman’s toughest challenge yet. The only complaint I have, while not Hardy’s fault, is his voice. But that can be discussed later. Without the issue with the voice, Tom Hardy as Bane was a force to be reckoned with. When I first heard Tom Hardy was going to play Bane, I didn’t think it would work. But I was wrong!

Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Officer-turned-Detective Blake was probably the stand-off of this film. He is such a great young actor; it’s hard to believe he’s the kid from TV’s Third Rock From the Sun. Although I didn’t like where his character went at the end of this flick, his performance deserves an award for this movie.

Lastly, the most bad-ass part from the film is…The Bat. The new vehicle featured in The Dark Knight Rises is simply called "The Bat." Once you see this thing unveiled in the movie, it’ll give you goose bumps.

Now, for the things I didn’t like in the movie, I have to give you ample warning…there will be spoilers…so don’t say I didn’t warn you. I’ll even feature a cool spoiler logo here.

Okay, so first and foremost, the one thing that bothered me throughout the whole movie was Bane’s voice. I know…I know…that’s the complaint everybody’s talking about, but I’m sorry…it bothered me and took me out of the movie each and every time he spoke. I just found it a little too amplified, like it was coming out of some electronic device. The thought of Darth Vader kept coming to my head every time he spoke. It was a good, realistic choice to have him needing the mask to feed him anesthesia, rather than having him wear a mask for no reason. Equally an excellent choice to not include the comic book rendition of having tubes feeding steroids into his body to bulk himself up at whim. But, bottom line, that voice threw me for a loop.

I know we couldn’t have Bruce Wayne recuperate too quickly after Bane disposes of him earlier in the film, but when he’s stuck in that remote prison after Gotham’s destroyed, it’s such a long drawn out and boring part of the movie. All we see is Bruce trying to escape and fail, then we see how desolate Gotham became after it was destroyed, then back to Bruce in the prison trying to escape and fail, then back to Gotham…it had me looking at my watch a few times.

As for the first showdown between Batman and Bane…that was colossal! Ending nearly the same way as it did in DC's Batman "Knightfall" comic book series was so cool, but the follow-up or rematch between the two near the end of the movie started off awesome, but ended unsatisfyingly. Though I liked the unexpected twist that Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) was really Talia Al Ghul, daughter of Ras Al Ghul, and how she stopped Batman from subduing Bane, it was very unsatisfying that Batman was essentially saved by Catwoman. Basically, if Catwoman didn’t show up, Bane would’ve probably killed Batman. So we never get the redeeming triumph of Batman over Bane.

Finally, my last complaint would be about Detective Blake and where his character ended up at the end. Since Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan said there would be no Robin featured in these films. So why does Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character set up to be Robin at the end of the film? And if that’s the case, why the name change? The first Robin was named Dick Grayson, not Robin! Yeah, we find out, when Detective Blake goes to pick up some belongings he had, he reveals his real first name—a name he doesn’t go by—is Robin! What???!!!

I know trying to make a better film than the previous one, The Dark Knight, would be impossible, so I can’t fault Christopher Nolan for that, but this film, as a whole, didn’t seem as epic as the aforementioned film. Seems like they tried to make it ambitious and grand, but instead, it seemed choppy and didn’t flow as well.

But don’t get me wrong, this film was very enjoyable and is a good close to Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy; I just think it could’ve been better. If I had to compare it to The Amazing Spider-Man, it’s hands-down a way better film. Compared to most part threes in film history, I’d say this was a good effort. I’ll definitely add this to my Blu-Ray shelf when it’s released later this year—a claim I can’t say about The Amazing Spider-Man (are you seeing a trend here?).

My final “bit” on The Dark Knight Rises?

Overall, this movie is solid, with great performances throughout. If you’re not a Batman comic book fan, you probably won’t see anything wrong with this outing. I’m not that big a fan of the comic book (I’ve always been a Marvel Comics fan over DC), but I know a little bit about the characters portrayed in this film, so that’s why a lot of things bothered me. But I enjoyed and, for the most part, was satisfied with the ending. It left room for more sequels, if Warner Bros. goes that route. But, more than likely, the franchise will be rebooted yet again. I’d say, go to your local movie theater, buy a tub of popcorn and a soda, sit down, turn off your brain, and enjoy a good Batman movie!

You can reach me on Twitter: @Just CallMeManny.

The Amazing Spider-Man

Well, what can I say about The Amazing Spider-Man besides the obvious complaints everyone else has been moaning about?  Am I going to say this reboot/remake was unnecessary?  Of course.  Am I going to compare it to the three films by Sam Raimi?  You can count on it.  Will I give it a fair review?  Without a doubt.

Let’s start by how this film was marketed, shall we?  In many of the teasers shown, whether as a trailer before a feature film or a TV spot, it’s said to be the untold story of Spider-Man.  Well, after viewing the film, in a nutshell, it’s the story of Peter Parker being bitten by a spider and gaining the abilities of said spider, and having to go up against a villain who is transformed into a monster.  What’s untold about that?  Sam Raimi did that in 2002, a short ten years ago!  It’s been told!

Okay, I’ll save the rest of my gripes for the review, so let’s get into the film.

I guess the untold tale would be how this film starts, showing Peter’s parents (Campbell Scott and Embeth Davidtz) and how they had to suddenly leave their son behind with his aunt and uncle (Sally Field and Martin Sheen).  It seems that Peter’s father, Richard Parker, was some intelligent scientist who had some research that other people were very interested in—so much so that they ransacked the Parkers’ home to find it.  From then on, the story continues just as it did in Raimi’s 2002 classic, with Peter (Andrew Garfield) dealing with his life as a nerd in school until he finds his father’s old briefcase in the basement.  He discovers a tie to Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) and the work they had been researching, so Peter goes to the doctor to search for answers.  Meanwhile, Peter’s love interest, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), seems to be stuck in the story for no apparent reason than to make it easy for Peter to meet Dr. Connors and to have a tie with Captain Stacy (Denis Leary).


Now, I don’t want to get into spoiler territory (there isn’t much to spoil anyway), but there is so much in this film that made me angry that it’s hard to put into words.

Let’s start with the suit.  Why did it have to be modified?  The suit in Raimi’s movies was not exactly like the suit in the comic books, but it was close enough to the classic look.  Why change it?  If the filmmakers did their homework, they’d know that many times Marvel worked in a new look every once and a while, only to change it back after fans complained.  What’s with the built-in sneakers?  And the suit, at times, didn’t fit Garfield’s frame right.  The suit in Raimi’s films fit perfectly all the time.

Going from organic web-shooters to mechanical…why?  I guess I know the answer to this.  The comics have Spider-Man using mechanical web-shooters that Peter created and a lot of fans the first time around complained when they went with the webs shooting naturally out of Peter’s wrists.  But that made sense (in a fantasy world kind of way).  If a person is going to have the abilities of a spider, why wouldn’t he gain the capability to shoot webs as well?

Now, as for Peter’s abilities, there doesn’t seem to be a seamless continuity.  At times, he’s not able to control his spider abilities, but sometimes it’s no problem.

During the first part of the film, after he gains his spider powers, Peter makes it his mission to find a wanted man who has a tattoo of a star on his left wrist.  This leads to a ridiculous part of the movie that left me shaking my head.  He finds a guy fitting the description of the wanted man.  Turns out it wasn’t the guy, but he roughs him up a bit until, all of a sudden, a bunch of thugs start showing up.  I don’t know where all these guys were before, but they start coming around dark corners, from another side of a fence that Peter tries to go over to get away, and out through doors of a building a few stories up!  That scene left me saying “what the fuck?”

With all that aside, let’s talk about the powers Peter gained and his web-shooters.  First off, I guess I don’t have too big of a problem with how he had gotten his powers.  In the comic book, he was bitten by a radioactive spider; in this flick, he was bitten by a mutated one.  Whether it was on his neck or hand—it doesn’t matter.  What I have a little problem with is how he developed his web-shooters and the webbing.  He basically steals (!) the webbing from Oscorp, but develops the shooter.

What’s with Spider-Man divulging his identity so easily to everybody?  He’s trying to save a kid and takes off his mask, he just meets Gwen Stacy and shoots his web to move her close to him, Captain Stacy has his gun trained on him and he turns around (already unmasked) instead of jumping away.  It’s even apparent that Aunt May knows what’s going on!  None of this would ever happen in the comics!

Also, “bullet time” has been used to death in nearly every action movie released since The Matrix trilogy, and it’s disappeared in the last five years or so.  But, hey, let’s use it tiredly one last time here in The Amazing Spider-Man.

One last thing: it was a cute thing for filmmakers to add a scene after the movie ended and a few credits rolled, but it usually made sense or gave us a wink.  Bullseye gave us a last shot, showing us he was still alive at the end of Dare Devil.  The same thing happened inWolverine when we saw Deadpool at the end.  And all the movies (Iron Man, Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, Captain America) leading up to The Avengers had a purpose.  But this scene after a few credits at the end of The Amazing Spider-Man was stupid.  There was no clue as to who it could be or what was going on…it was simply a meaningless tag-on to the movie just to copy what all these other comic book movies are doing.

What’s my final “bit” on The Amazing Spider-Man?  The movie is a thorough retread of Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, totally not needed and a waste of time.  Don’t get me wrong, there are some good action scenes and some interesting things along the way…but again, it’s all been-there-done-that material.  Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone and Rhys Ifans all turn in good performances, albeit with the material they have to work with, but that’s not saying much.  I saw it in 3D and, looking back, I don’t know why it was shot in 3D because nothing stood out.  Unless you’re a diehard Spider-Man fan, skip this flick until it’s available for rental, because there’s definitely nothing new here.  In fact, wait until it shows up on cable TV because I wouldn’t even pay three bucks to rent it.  I can’t believe a sequel has been green-lit already, but that’s the way things go.  To me, Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 is the best comic book movie ever made and this flick didn’t even come close.  Skip it.

You can reach me on Twitter: @Just CallMeManny.

Children of the Corn

Once again, a movie has been remade from a film I have regarded as a classic, or somewhat of a classic, within the Stephen King library of films. The film I’m referring to is 1984's Children of the Corn. But now in 2009, it’s back again, albeit with some changes.

During the beginning stages of the film, I had to take multiple breaks and pause it every once and a while to cleanse my pallet of this flick. From the get go, the co-star of the film, Kandyse McClure (who plays Vicki), was getting on my fucking nerves, making me want to turn this off and send it back to the Netflix warehouse by express mail. She was acting like such a bitch to the character of Burt (played by David Anders of "Heroes" fame) that it was bordering on overacting.

In this version of Children of the Corn, Burt and Vicki are not a happy couple, but a couple on the verge of divorce. But you'd think that she'd start being civil to Burt after hitting the kid that runs out into the middle of the country highway...or at least stop acting like a bitch and start being a little concerned. Instead, she accuses Burt of murder, telling him he’s going to jail, and then going off in a tangent about how he’d rather be back in Vietnam doing sweeping patrols and smoking pot. At this point, we’re supposed to get that this is a period piece around the late 1960s or early 1970s. Which brings me to the point that the Burt and Vicki in this film are now an interracial couple. No biggie. But I was just wondering, why the change?

Up until the ending, the film pretty much follows the original, begging the question as to why the filmmakers felt they had to remake this film. Yeah, they put a couple of touches here and there, establishing the children taking over the town already and giving us a shot of the leader. This time around, however, it’s not the man who looks like a child playing Isaac, but an actual child. Usually, that’s a mistake when you put such a young child in a heavy role like this one and seeing how the film was going thus far, I’m sure that was the case there.


On the plus side, when the couple are driving on their way into the town of Gatlin, Vicki lightened up for a while. But then she reverted back to her previous bitchiness when she found the corn crucifix and Burt didn’t want to throw it out.

It makes me angry that original movies are insulted like this. Why does anybody think it can be done better? Children of the Corn of 1984 wasn’t considered a classic by the masses or an award winner in any sense, but it had a cult status among fans of the genre as well as fans of Stephen King adaptations. The stars of the original film didn’t give the performances of their lives, nor did they stand out in the film. What was memorable about 1984’s Children of the Corn was the actors who played Isaac and Malachai, John Franklin and Courtney Gains respectively. Not only did they both stand out, but it was ingenious casting to have Franklin take on the role of Isaac. He was 25 years old when that film was released, yet he was playing the part of a boy in his pre-teens. The actor had GHD (Growth Hormone Deficiency), so he looked and sounded years younger than he actually appeared. Because of this fact, he appeared to be a boy with extraordinary intellect and vocabulary, nailing the part perfectly.

Now, this 2009 version did nothing of the sort. They rounded up a bunch of kids, with one stand-out as a copycat Courtney Gains playing Malachai, and they stuck the kid from Showtime’s "Dexter" in the lead role. He’s okay as the cute little kid in that show, but to have him as the sinister Isaac? Having him standing on top of a roof and doing little meaningless hand signals is not scary at all. He has no antagonistic prowess whatsoever and giving him that oversized black farm hat isn’t going to make him any more sinister. He just looks like a cute little kid.

There’s a part in the film when the children are chasing down our protagonist, Burt, into the rows of corn. Let me tell you, this is a long portion of the film; it seemed as if it was never going to end. However, if I may be so bold as to admire one change they made to the characters, and that’s the fact that Burt is a Vietnam War vet, which makes this portion of the film a little interesting. See, he’s flashing back and he’s seeing this situation as how he and his platoon were chased down in the jungles of Vietnam. If only it didn’t take so much time out of the movie. I mean, they could’ve cut the film time down a bit if they edited this piece a little.

Overall, I guess it wasn’t that bad. But then again, it wasn’t that good either. It’s just another testament that this trend of remaking films has got to stop. Let’s go with fresh ideas, let’s try to come up with ingenious ways to create sequels to the favorite movies of our time. Why do we constantly accept remakes? Even the filmmakers these days are tired of using that nomenclature. Instead of using the already tired term of remake, filmmakers are now injecting the word “reboot” into the mix.


I’m not going to go into this particular movie too much, only just to say it’s another forgettable remake of an original film that had, like, ten sequels, dooming this reboot from the start. Every time I ventured into a Blockbuster or Hollywood Video, I’d see a few of these sequels on the shelves and I just felt pity.

Anyway, what’s my final “bit” on Children of the Corn? Seeing that the film was a cable TV event, that tells you a lot. It wasn’t good enough to make it to theaters and in my opinion, it shouldn’t have made it to DVD as well. It’s just another remake that should be filed away with all the remakes released so far and all the remakes that are on the horizon to be filmed. This one is forgettable and not really worth a watch, but if you do, you’ll neither be disappointed nor impressed. It’s nothing to recommend, but it’s not like someone will hate you for doing so. Skip it…or not.

100 Years of Universal Studios

I love movies from the early black & white monster movies of the 1930s and 1940s, to the sci-fi classics of the 1950s and 1960s, the gritty—and sometimes exploitive—films of the 1970s, the awesome slashers and other horror flicks of the 1980s, the action thrills of the 1990s, and all the way to what we have now in the new century.

Yes, movies have been my life and a way to escape into different fantasies within a theater screen or sitting in my family room in front of my television. I love and cherish all of them, even the lame bombs I’ve found myself suckered into watching, as long as there’s a diamond in the rough every so often.

Not long ago, I had realized that there’s one movie studio in particular that has churned out the best films of our lifetime, a studio that has produced hit after hit, year after year, and is just as magical—if not more so—than Disney itself. The studio I’m referring to is Universal Studios in Hollywood.


When I became aware of the quantity and quality of their canon, was a few years ago while visiting the theme park (as I’m apt to do two to three times a year). A wall adorned with murals of some of their hit movies made me stop and think about how many films throughout the years were awesome and highly successful, both financially and critically. I was with a buddy at the time and I stopped him as well to point out the wall and asked him, “Do you realize the greatness of Universal Studios?” He shrugged and tried to continue on to the escalators to get to the tram ride, but I stopped him again. I said, pointing to the murals, “Don’t you think that Universal has made the most memorable and best movies of all time?” With another shrug from him, I said, “Never mind,” and we continued to the ride.

Although that mural was just a taste of Universal Studio’s catalog of hit films, I’d like to go over and point out Universal’s most memorable and noteworthy films that most people will recognize.

Lon Chaney was known as “The Man of a Thousand Faces” during the early 1900s and part of the reason is because of the films he acted in for Universal Studios. Although I can name quite a few, the two most noteworthy films he was featured in are 1923’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame and 1925’s The Phantom of the Opera. Although I haven’t seen Hunchback, I plan to see it soon. But The Phantom of the Opera is superb, a true artistic view of how films were made during the silent era. Yes, this is a silent film and may take some people out of it by that fact, for it may throw you for a loop. But the tone and gloom of the scenes is pure art and very exciting at times. I highly recommend searching through Universal’s index of silent films because there are quite a few gems there.

One of the first “talkies” of the film era was a very popular title that is still creepy and entertaining: 1931’s Dracula. Starring Bela Lugosi as the vampire that is still recognized today as the definitive characterization of the title character. The same year, another Universal Monster was brought forth in the film, Frankenstein. Often mistaken as the name of the monster, actually the title refers to the mad scientist who created the creature (played by the great Boris Karloff).

The following year, in 1932, Karloff played another prominent monster in The Mummy.

Continuing on with movies to terrify and feature innovative special effects, 1933’s The Invisible Man entertains to this day. Although you don’t see him until the end of the film, Claude Rains plays the titular character.

1934 had some good eerily fun flicks, but 1935 came at us with the sequel to Frankenstein with Bride of Frankenstein. Karloff returns in this film that rivals the original and is very compelling.

The 1940s brought us some more enjoyable flicks, not letting up in the entertainment, especially in the special effects event of 1941 with The Wolf Man starring Lon Chaney, Jr. I hadn’t mentioned it before, but starting with 1931’s Dracula, makeup creations were made by the great Jack Pierce. Continuing his masterpieces thus far, he really had his hands full with not only creating the wolf-like features onto Lon Chaney, Jr.’s face, but to apply it little by little in order for the time lapse to work for the effect of the main character to appear as if he were slowly changing into the title monster.

Along the years, Universal continued with these famous monsters by making sequels featuring the title characters, even parodying them in Abbott & Costello films, and that may have been what ended the era of Universal’s famous monsters. But the 1950s brought in a breath of fresh air with a new era of entertainment: Science Fiction.

Even though Abbott & Costello were still big in the box office with a few more monster parodies and Alfred Hitchcock featured quite a few awesome films, the 1950s was the decade for science fiction. A new famous monster would emerge from this decade, but the most memorable films from the 50s were sci-fi alien invasion movies that were cheesy but fun to watch.

Although not that well known, It Came From Outer Space is significant because it’s the first film from Universal to be featured in 3D—a popular gimmick of the 1950s. The alien monster is kind of ridiculous, but it’s a fun film to watch. Being a regular visitor of Universal Studios, especially the back lot tram ride, I enjoy seeing the familiar Courthouse Square (which I’ll mention quite a bit during this article) throughout the course of the film.

1954 brought us another famous monster, the Gill-Man, with Creature From the Black Lagoon. Again, this film was filmed in 3D and historians who have seen the film theatrically have said the underwater scenes are excellent.

In 1955, Universal released one of my favorite sci-fi films of the 50s: Tarantula. To this day, I love the special effects and think they’re excellent and believable. Seeing that giant spider climbing over the Arizona mountainside is still chilling to see after all these years. Look for a young (and uncredited) Clint Eastwood as the jet squadron commander near the end of the film.

Definitely my favorite film from the 1950s, The Incredible Shrinking Man is superb and I can re-watch this film over and over. I never tire of it, enjoying the special effects with the title character fending off the attacks of his own cat, the scaled world of being shrunken down to inches, and the battle with the tarantula in the basement. A wonderful film that I fully embrace and recommend for all to see.

Although from here on out, beginning in the 1960s, many films were now being filmed in Technicolor, steering away from black & white. But technology has to move forward, right? Well, Universal Studios’ oeuvre of films didn’t falter.

My very favorite from the 1960s—in fact, it was released in 1960—was a film that technically wasn’t a Universal Studios film. It was a Paramount Film made by a director who was quite synonymous with Universal and even used the back lot to film this movie. The main exterior set is still quite a staple of the back lot tour and I always get a kick out of being able to walk near it during the annual “Halloween Horror Nights” event. The film I’m speaking of is Psycho. In actuality, the set I get to walk near is a rebuilt set for the sequels of the 1980s and is in a completely different area of the back lot, but a fanboy can dream, can’t he? Yes, Psycho is one of my all time favorite films from Hitchcock. I love how he chose to film the movie in black & white because it truly captures the mood of the story and gives it the feel of the 1950s. It justly shows how brilliant of a mind Hitchcock had. Psycho is honestly his true masterpiece.

Hitchcock’s follow-up to Psycho is my second favorite from his inventory of films and gave me a fear of the featured animals for many years. 1963’s The Birds was his second masterpiece (can an artist have two masterpieces?) and is a brilliant story within a story. The closing scene is still haunting and luminous as you see how well the special effects worked in this feature.

The 1960s had quite a collection of great films to poor through, but the 1970s had quite a few recognizable features to watch as well.

A film I haven’t seen in years, but it’s in my Netflix queue to revisit, is 1970’s Airport starring Charlton Heston. It’s been so long that I really can’t do this justice, just trust me and rent this.

1973’s American Graffiti is George Lucas’s look at the days of cruising in hot rods during 1962. It stars Ron Howard, Richard Dreyfuss, Cindy Williams, Wolfman Jack and Harrison Ford. It’s a cool movie to check out to see how life was for teenagers during that time.

Earthquake is another disaster film of the 1970s. Again, I shamefully admit, I have not seen this film, but I’ve heard it’s very entertaining and, again, is in my Netflix queue to be watched.

Considered to be the first summer blockbuster, and from a director you’ll see a lot of in Universal’s list of movies, Steven Spielberg’s Jaws is an awesome film that still works to this day. I’m still afraid of swimming in the ocean and, at times, get a little freaked out when I swim in my pool at night. It just works in so many levels, with the characters, the story, the visuals, and the nostalgia of having a good time at the beach during the 70s...still a great film.

A very funny film, 1977’s Smokey and the Bandit brought the Pontiac Trans Am into the limelight, I'm sure making sales of that car go through the roof. The separate chemistry between Burt Reynolds with Sally Field, Jerry Reed, and Jackie Gleason is wonderful and so terrific. The first time I heard Jackie Gleason’s foul mouth in this film had me rolling. It’s a great time.

For every comedic movie about college life, 1978’s National Lampoon’s Animal House deserves credit. John Belushi’s character in this film steals the show. My favorite part is when he breaks the fourth wall as he climbs the ladder to look through the window of the sorority house, showing us he’s enjoying the view.

Also in 1978, an awesome film about a group of friends going to fight in the Vietnam War, The Deer Hunter is amazing. The Russian Roulette scene in the film is amazing. Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken shine in this movie.

I was a big fan of Steve Martin growing up, so to finally see 1979’s The Jerk when it showed up on cable TV (without my parents knowing, of course), was a big treat for me.

The 1980s was a great decade for films and although I wasn’t a big fan of country music, Loretta Lynne was still a household name and being able to catch movies on cable TV, I watched 1980’s Coal Miner’s Daughter quite a few times. Sissy Spacek as Loretta Lynne is so believable, at times, it’s eerie. 1980 also brought The Blues Brothers, The Nude Bomb, The Gong Show Movie, Somewhere in Time, and Flash Gordon.

In 1981, the best werewolf transformation was seen and brought attention to one of the best special effects makeup artists of our time—Rick Baker—and the movie that did it was An American Werewolf in London.

In 1982, the biggest movie was Steven Spielberg’s E.T.: The Extraterrestrial. Although he touched up the movie recently, adding some CGI here and there, the movie is still a sweet story of an alien left behind on Earth by his peers and how he befriends a young boy, forming a connection and almost becoming one of the family. If you don’t shed a tear at the end of this flick, especially with John Williams’ powerful score, then you don’t have a heart. One thing about this “nice, adorable alien film,” it took away from another alien film (albeit, evil alien film) from Universal entitled, The Thing, directed by John Carpenter, which is awesome and became a cult hit when it was released on home media. Also in 1982, the very funny and often imitated, Fast Times at Ridgmont High was released, leaving us the very memorable performance by Sean Penn as Spicoli.

I was going to try and keep sequels off this piece, but 1983’s Psycho II deserves some recognition as a terrific follow-up to one of the greatest films from the master, Alfred Hitchcock. We also were introduced to Brian DePalma’s Cuban gangster flick, and Al Pacino’s most animated performance ever, Scarface.

Director, John Hughes, had a successful decade in the 80s with 1984’s Sixteen Candles, The Breakfast Club and Weird Science in 1985.

Now, my favorite film franchise ever, filmed at and produced by Universal Studios—Back to the Future. The trilogy—released in 1985, 1989 and 1990 respectfully—is a perfect story arc, each directed by Robert Zemeckis, and featuring such a great comedy team with Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd. The story of time travel has always been an interesting concept and most people fantasize about going back in time to fix things gone wrong or to see what happened during a time before they were born. The movies are a beautiful combination of sci-fi, comedy and family fun—with mostly a western when part 3 comes around. A lot of people wished there would’ve been a fourth part to the story, but that time has passed and the trilogy is complete the way it is. Nostalgic of a time during the Reagan era, I love watching each part one right after the other, making me feel like a teenager again.  A big part of this movie was filmed in Universal Studios' Courthouse Square in the back lot.

Universal Studios brought us into the 90s with Tremors in 1990, a pretty entertaining monster movie about creatures that live underground and wreak havoc in a small desert community. In the same year, the year before he returned into his Terminator role, Arnold Schwarzeneggar starred in Kindergarten Cop.

In 1991, Ron Howard—another name you’ll see on this list quite often—paid tribute to fire fighters across the country by filming a very realistic film showing us what these heroes go through, in the movie, Backdraft. The film starred Kurt Russell and William Baldwin and is a very exciting film to watch with outstanding practical special effects. In the same year, Nick Nolte and Robert De Niro starred in the remake of Cape Fear.

1992 brought us American Me, Far and Away, and the interesting Death Becomes Her. The special effects were ground-breaking in this flick, especially the broken-necked Meryl Streep and the hollowed-out Goldie Hawn.

CGI made a big leap forward with 1993’s classic, Jurassic Park, directed by Steven Spielberg. The first time seeing this movie, I went in knowing it was a dinosaur flick, so I was just expecting animatronics, puppetry or claymation…I had no idea I was going to be floored with what I saw. Even though this movie is nearly 20 years old, the special effects look better than some of today’s CGI attempts. The film was followed by two decent sequels and it’s rumored that a third is in the works. And I don’t know how he did it, but in the same year, Steven Spielberg directed another solid film called Schindler’s List. Liam Neeson is superb in the lead role, with moving performances throughout. It won an Oscar for Best Picture.

In 1995, Ron Howard directed Apollo 13, a movie about the ill-fated trip to the moon and how the astronauts were able to make it back home against some incredible odds. In the same year, Waterworld was released and sort of bashed by critics, but I’ve got to admit that I like this film. A month later, the wonderful family film, Babe, was released. It’s a cute story about the life of a little pig that learned to herd cattle. Following in the impressiveness of Goodfellas, Casino, starring Robert De Niro, Sharon Stone and Joe Pesci is nice look of how Vegas was run during the 1970s.

1996 brought us another impressive special effects flick with Twister. The movie stars Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton as a recently separated couple who happen to be tornado chasers. The chance to get a device to measure tornado activity gets them back together for a very exhilarating film. In the same year, Eddie Murphy delighted us in the remake of The Nutty Professor, Michael J. Fox returns with director Robert Zemeckis’ The Frighteners, and Sylvester Stallone saves a bunch of people from a collapsed tunnel in Daylight.

In the 1990s, Jim Carrey had been flying high with hits like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, The Mask, and Dumb & Dumber, so in 1997, he starred in Liar Liar as a lawyer trying to make his way up in the law firm, going as far as lying to his own kid and ex-wife. When he misses his son’s birthday, crushed, the child makes a wish before blowing out the candles, wishing that for one day, his dad couldn’t tell a lie. What follows next is a very funny movie with Jim Carrey’s character in a lot of hilarious situations.

Now, unfortunately, a terrible, yet memorable, film was released in 1998 by Universal Studios. I don’t mind the film and can enjoy it for what it was, but critics really panned this film. The film I’m speaking of is the remake of Alfred Hitchcock’s masterpiece, Psycho. The film starred Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates and Anne Heche as Marion Crane. I see everyone’s points about how it was useless to shoot a remake shot-for-shot with no change in the story or subplots. But I do feel it’s a good way to introduce a classic to the new generation of film-goers or, like Gus Van Sant claims, the film was made so that no one will ever remake Psycho.

Another remake—albeit a successful one—in 1999, was The Mummy starring Brendan Fraser and Arnold Vosloo. The movie is a fun adventure and really fleshes out the 1932 classic. The same year, the very funny and hilarious, American Pie, was released, telling the story of a group of guys who make a pact that they’d all get laid before graduating from high school.

In the 2000s, Universal Studios continued their magic with films like these:

2000: Gladiator, O Brother, Where Art Thou, Erin Brockovich, Meet the Parents, The Family Man, and How the Grinch Stole Christmas.

2001: A Beautiful Mind and The Fast and the Furious.

2002: Big Fat Liar, The Bourne Identity, The Scorpion King, 8 Mile, and Red Dragon.

2003: Bruce Almighty, The Cat in the Hat, Hulk, and Seabiscuit.

2004: Along Came Polly, Dawn of the Dead (remake), Friday Night Lights, Ray, Shaun of the Dead, and Van Helsing.

2005: The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Cinderella Man, Jarhead, Kicking & Screaming, and King Kong.

2006: Slither, Miami Vice, and United 93.

2007: Dead Silence, Evan Almighty, Knocked Up, and American Gangster.

2008: Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Baby Mama, The Strangers, The Incredible Hulk, Wanted, Mamma Mia!: The Movie, Changeling, and Frost/Nixon.

2009: Drag Me to Hell, Land of the Lost, Public Enemies, Inglorious Basterds, The Fourth Kind, and It’s Complicated.

2010: The Wolfman, Kick-Ass, MacGruber, Get Him To the Greek, Despicable Me, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, and Devil.

2011: Paul, Hop, Bridesmaids, Cowboys & Aliens, Dream House, and The Thing.

Finally, we’re here, in 2012, celebrating Universal Studios’ 100TH anniversary and looking forward to another 100 years of entertainment. Quite a few movies are lined up for 2012, 2013 and 2014, like Dr. Suess’ The Lorax, American Reunion, The Bourne Legacy, R.I.P.D., Despicable Me 2, Jurassic Park 4, and so on.

I hope you enjoy my look at some of the movies of Universal Studios. I’ve only scratched the surface of their library, so I highly recommend you look online for their complete library to see what more they may have. A good reference I discovered was www.wikipedia.org and look up “List of Universal Pictures Films.”

My final “bit” on Universal Studios?

It’s positively and absolutely the best in Hollywood! You can’t go wrong with a Universal Studios film.

Happy 100TH Anniversary Universal Studios!

Law Abiding Citizen

By the looks of the trailer and TV spots, when it was running theatrically, I didn’t think Law Abiding Citizen was going to be that good of a flick, so I never bothered to check it out at that time.  Maybe it was the lack of promotion or that the trailers didn’t highlight the heart of this film, but I just wasn’t interested in it at all.

But not too long after this movie was released onto DVD and Blu-Ray, I decided to place it on my Netflix queue, leaving it resting for quite some time before I finally watched it.  It finally reached the top of the list, probably because I had forgotten to reorganize it to put other movies in front of it, and showed up in my mailbox.  Even after that, all I did was place it in front of my television, letting it sit there, while I watched other films I had in my collection or just flipping through the boob tube.  However, the day came when nothing was on TV and I didn’t feel like watching any of my DVD and Blu-Ray collection, so I grabbed the rental and popped it into my PS3.

So, what did I think about it?

I loved it.

With the star power of the two actors who lead this movie, Jamie Foxx and Gerard Butler, and a pretty gripping drama featuring just the right amount of action and acts of vengeance, you get this movie.

The movie starts with Clyde Shelton (Butler) at home with his wife and daughter, tinkering with some electronics and having some light banter with his little girl.  His wife calls to their daughter as someone knocks at the door.  Clyde goes to the door and as soon as he opens it, two guys come in knocking him to the floor and binding him arms behind his back.  The bigger of the two pins Clyde down as he slowly stabs him in the abdomen.  He does the same to the wife and is about to start raping her all in front of Clyde.  Suddenly, the daughter walks in and is horrified to see what’s going on.  The two men are taken a back by her appearance, but the bigger of the two gets up and takes the girl out of the room, killing her off-screen.

Turns out, Clyde survives the ordeal with the two men apprehended and going to trial for the murders.  This is where we meet Nick Rice, a prosecuting attorney working with Clyde to make sure the men pay for their crimes.  But Nick informs Clyde that Clarence Darby (the man who did the killing) is prepared to testify against Rupert Ames (the accomplice) in order to get a lesser sentence, making sure Ames gets the death penalty.

Clyde is not happy with this deal and wants Nick to go all out, to try and prosecute both men accordingly.  But, as Nick informs Clyde, if they go for the prosecution that strongly, they may lose the case and both men walk.  Clyde doesn’t care and is sure that they can win the case with his testimony and thinks that the jury will be in their favor.  Nick, however, points out the sad truth about our judicial system and how defense attorneys use any and all tricks of the trade to eat prosecution witnesses alive.  Before Clyde can argue further, Nick informs him that he’s already made the deal, much to Clyde’s disappointment.

The trial goes forth as Nick had indicated, with Clarence Darby getting off the murder rap by testifying against Rupert Ames.  Outside the courtroom, Nick Rice is stopped by reporters and answers some questions as Darby walks up with his attorney, extending his hand for a handshake.  Nick, reluctantly, shakes Darby’s hand, either because of the reporters witnessing the scene or as a simple reflex, and looks off across the street as he does.  Standing across the street, watching the scene that had just unfolded, is Clyde Shelton, looking mortified and wounded.

Cut to ten years later, Nick Rice has clearly moved up in the world.  He has much better digs, very busy in his career, has a daughter who is a young accomplished cellist…he seems pretty content with his life.

The time has come for Rupert Ames to be executed and Nick goes to the viewing to witness it.  What should have been a peaceful death by lethal injection turns out to be a terrible display of a man being killed in a very torturous and excruciating way.  We find out shortly that this is the first in many vengeful acts committed by Clyde Shelton against the broken judicial system that failed him and his family.

As I watched this flick, clearly the best revenge was acted out against Clarence Darby.  You may have to turn your head away from the screen if you’re a little squeamish because he clearly gets his just desserts in that scene (and make sure to watch the unrated version for that part).  There’s clearly some mystery in this story as you begin to wonder who’s helping Shelton out when he’s incapable of acting out the punishment to the people he believes are responsible.

From the beginning of the film until the end, you’re set into a roller coaster ride of emotions.  Because you may find that you’ll be asking yourself who’s side should you be on.

Anyway, this flick is entertaining the whole way through, keeping you on the edge of your seat, wondering what’s going to happen next.  Some of you may think you’d do the same thing if you were in his shoes, some of you may think he went too far.  It’s definitely a movie to think about long after it’s over.

My final “bit” on Law Abiding Citizen?

I love this movie from start to finish and it definitely has the potential to be re-watched over and over…for me anyway.  All I’ll say, to end this, is that my favorite scene in this film is when Clyde Shelton is in court, acting as his own attorney.  I’m sure many of us would love to say what he said to the judge in that scene.  Priceless!

Give it a look-see…you won’t be disappointed.