Frozen

If you’re a fan films like 'Deep Water', perhaps the 'Saw' sequels, then you may like ‘Frozen’. Writer/Director Adam Green brings us this “chilling” survival movie set on a small ski mountain in New England. The premise is something that every skier has thought about, what you would do if you got stuck on the chair lift.

When Parker, Joe, and Dan convince the lift operator at their local mountain to allow them one last run before the mountain closes, a misfortunate series of events strand them in the middle of the ride up. As the lights begin to go out their worst fear sets in, they have been forgotten and are now stranded. To make matters worse the small skiing operation is only open on weekend, and since it is Sunday, the trio begins to fear that they will be stuck for the next six days.

If you have ever been skiing, there is a good chance you have been on the lift when it has suddenly stopped. Being stuck permanently is a thought that is hard not to have. Then you begin to think: can I survive jumping from this height? could I slide down the wire to the tower? is help coming? how long would it take to freeze to death? All of these options are explored here; there is not a single original thought in this film. At the three friends vent their frustrations at each other, you start to hope they will make a bad decision to help move the plot along.

The plot is dull and predictable. The acting isn’t bad, but the characters are very un-interesting. ‘Frozen’ dose nothing new, and fall short in comparison to similar movie that have come before it. It’s not that it’s a bad movie, it’s just boring. The only reason I didn’t turn it off was because I intended to write this review. But if you are a college aged skier or snowboarder who really likes "B" movies, then this film is perfect for you. Otherwise, I would say pass on it.

Date Night

In the book “Rant” Chuck Palahniuk talks about liminoid spaces. These spaces are gaps in regularity that occur when the social norm is flip flopped but accepted. These spaces include holidays like Halloween, Madi Gras, road trips, or date nights….

The author states that these events while normally regarded as being against the social norm, are accepted under their circumstances. Circumstances being scheduled breaks like holidays or stress relief like a vacation, even weekends. They are accepted because it is believed that once over the participants will return to normal behavior, re-energized yes, but also more accepting of the mundane pasterns of life that we seem to fall into. And for Phil (Steve Carell) and Clair Foster (Tina Fey) that is exactly what they would love to do.

“Date Night” is a story of two married people who have become jaded by everyday life, and how they come to appreciate their lives together after a night of one crazy encounter after another. When Phil and Clair learn that their friends are getting divorced, they both look to find ways to break the mundane patterns that they have fallen in and led to the separation of their friends. And they do so by crashing the reservation of another couple at a fancy restaurant in New York City. When a pair of thugs, working for a crime boss, believe that they are the couple who had made the reservation it starts a chain reaction that will lead the Fosters into dangerous and marriage saving situations.

Now while the situations that Phil and Clair get themselves into are funny and entertaining… everything between them is rather dull. The story feels like the writers came up with fun things for the characters to do, and then filled in the blanks till they had a beginning middle and end. The plot was dreary and dull, and in case you missed the point of my first two paragraphs I’ll tell you that the character development in this story is nothing more than a liminoid space.

As far as the acting goes, everyone was great in this! With the exception of Steve Carell and Taraji Henson who plays a police detective. Mark Wahlberg has a small part, which may be the most memorable part of this movie. When watching his scenes I realized that I would be enjoying this movie a lot more if he was plying Phil. And it would probably work well because Phil, despite being a office jockey tax preparer, is kind of bad ass. He steps up to protect his wife, he knocks two guys out cold, and he almost shoots a guy… There is no reason Marky Mark couldn’t kill at this roll.

So with your lead actor kind of doing his same old boring shtick, and the plot being a lazy mess, I really can’t recommend this movie to anyone.

Catfish

To hell with "The Socail Network", "Catfish" is the real Facebook movie. If I were to describe it, I would say "It's the dream of every person who has ever walked around with a camera, hoping that a story will unravel for them". "Catfish" is a hell of a ride, with twists both in the plot and the themes. One thing to get out of the way first, this is a documentary in the spirit of "Blare Witch" or anything Michael More makes. So the people in this film are characters, but they do their best to make it feel as raw and real as possible.

When Nev receives a painting from a fan of his photography, he becomes friends with her on Facebook. The painting is signed Abby, an eight year old girl from Michigan. Nev becomes Facebook friends with several of Abby’s family members including her mother and sister. He begins talking on Facebook and the telephone with her mother Angela and sister Megan, and realizes he has feelings for Megan. This is the backstory for a film that Nev's brother Rel and friend Henry decided to make about the discovery of an amazing eight year old painter.

As we begin to learn more about Nev's relationship with Megan, the film begins to focus on his desire to meet her. But while on a work trip the three catch Angela in a lie, as they discover the songs she claims to have recorded are in fact ripped off from youtube. Once one lie is found, holes in everything Nev knows about these people begins to take shape. Both out of curiosity and perhaps Nev's desire to meet Megan, the three film makers decide to take a detour on the trip and drive to Michigan. Twist and turns await them and their hunt for truth.

Obviously as in any "documentary" worth its salt, the editing is key. The editing in this film does a fantastic job creating tension and humor, and well heartfelt moments. Cut-ins from Facebook and other web services that made this story possible are used tastefully and cleverly. My only gripe is that it makes a huge format shift two-thirds of the way through going from a point of view style film to a very formal interview style.

I feel that while yes the scary situations people find them selves in online these days is a device that will draw some into the story, The film is more about the interactions people have with each other. It is about how people act and react in real life versus this new online life many in the world have assumed. It is about how two people react when reality comes crashing in on them. And it is made all the better by the fact that is is a true story. Overall I enjoyed it very much, and can easily recommend it to anyone who has ever had what they consider to be a deep though... If profound thinking isn’t your thing, then maybe you should leave this one alone. But if you enjoy a movie that gets you thinking about your life and your identity and your interactions with other people, go for it.

Clash of The Titans

RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!! They played the ***t out of that line in the TV commercials for this movie.... Of course by the time 'Clash of the Titans' came to this point of the film, it had already lost me. Now I'm always up for a good mindless action flick, but this movie was just stupid.

Fresh off the 'Terminator:Salvation' set, Sam Worthington reprises his role as Jake Sully. Wait... no ya that’s right, He's playing Jake Sully again, this time their calling him Perseus and telling him he's destined to lead man kind against the gods. But good ole Perseus, he just wants to be a normal dude... But when his family is killed by the god Aries, he swears vengeance. So he teams up with the solders who have declared war against the gods, and a spiteful immortal, and some un-human magical mutants, so he can: slay Medusa and use her head to turn the kraken to stone which will weaken Aries allowing him to strike. I'm sorry if I just spoiled the movie for you, but really I didn’t say anything that you didn't know from the trailers and TV adds.

So the plot is a mess, but what makes it worse is the execution of it. Plot device after plot device is used, and the inclusion of several dues-ex-machina just becomes annoying. Although in this case the machine of the gods is quite literal... still an act of lazy story telling if you ask me. Looking back, I can say that the problem may have been the time table. This story would have been great as series of films, if had had time for some character development or a chance to see the journey. Instead we get you’re the hero, you’re the love interest, your mentor, you’re the comic relief, and you’re the Russell Brand/Umpa Lumpa hybrid... For a script I feel like they took a list of the plot points and added some cliché action movie moments and dialogue.... and said ready, set, go....

So how’s the action you ask? Well there was a great fight with some giant scorpions. From what I've looked up I can tell you that a good chuck of that fight was dome with practical effects. Every other action scene was a CGI mess. Now the scenery was nice, and the effects were shiny. And some one out there it was good enough to make a sequel of (set to come out in 2012)…So bottom line, if it’s on cable feels free to kick back and enjoy the pretty backgrounds and flashy lights. But don’t pay money to see this; it’s just not worth it.

Buried

Alright, to tell the truth I was very excited to review ‘Buried’ (aka Ryan Reynolds in a box) because it received mixed reviews from everyone who watched it. So I knew this would be my opportunity to settle the argument once and for all, since my opinion is he only one that matters after all. At first I was worried, because when the movie was over I realized that I had mixed feeling towards it. Then I had a revelation. I figured the people who came away from it saying they liked it fell for a few tricks that this movie uses. So my infallible review of this move is... ‘Buried’ kind of sucks.

When Paul Conroy wakes up in a wooden box, he quickly realizes that he is buried underground and proceeds to spend the next ten minutes having a nervous breakdown. Finally he discovers a cell phone, left in the box for him by his captors, and of course tries to call for help. This is where we begin to learn who he is. Paul Conroy is a truck driver, working in Iraq in 2006. His convoy was ambushed and he has been taken captive by insurgents. With the phone, he attempts to reach help, call home, and eventually hears from his captors. After Paul manages to get in touch with the people who will try to rescue him, but he realizes that the chances of rescue are slim. The story is a race against time, but all the audience gets to see is Paul, wondering if help will come in time or if help even cares about him at all.

Now this is a great set-up for a great movie. And Reynold's does a great job playing the part. However the editing is sloppy, some of the conversations over the phone are improbable, and in several points the movie actually tricks you into liking it. At one point, Paul asks how does someone he hasn’t talked to before know his name... Seconds later the woman on the other end of the phone says someone else gave her his name, and the topic was never brought up again. But for a brief second the audience believes there is more going on, and it the feeling sticks until you realize that this movie is just straight forward. At the end, the audience finds out that in fact one of the characters was being untruthful. This is done in a manner that I think was supposed to be a shock, but to me it was just an aggravating attempt to give the audience something to talk about when it was all over.

I feel if this movie was about a guy kidnapped in America, by Americans then no one would come away from it saying they enjoyed it. It plays on the way people feel about our occupation of Iraq, and the stories that have come out of people being taken. Sure Ryan Reynolds really sold us on being stuck underground, but this movie as a whole is fair at best. If you told me you wanted to watch it, I would say as interesting as a movie that takes place entirely in a box sounds... Its kind of boring. I started caring less and less about whether or not Paul would get out of the box, and more concerned with whether or not this story will gain any depth. And I was sadly disappointed.

The Other Guys

Alright I’ll keep this quick.

‘The Other Guys’, I almost didn’t rent it because it got shitty reviews. I didn’t follow my own rule about giving anything that has potential a chance, until a friend said he really liked it. Of course this same friend was walking out of the store with a ‘Ninja Assassin’ knock off and ‘Death Race 2’. But I remembered I had similar feeling about another Will Ferrell movie, ‘Step Brothers’, and I laughed my ass off for a good chunk of that film. So I picked up ‘The Other Guys’ and found myself laughing even harder and more often.

Will Ferrell and Marky Mark star in this buddy cop film that despite setting it self up to make fun of buddy cops films, fails to make fun of buddy cop films. However, it manages to make fun of every other cop movie in existence. Mark Wahlberg plays a cop itching for a big case, while Ferrell is his partner who would rather sit a file paper work. But when a simple permit violation arrest drops these two in the middle of dangerous position, they both must step to crack the case and stay alive. Its not a great story line, but it serves to set up some very entertaining moments.

Ferrell’s character is very reminiscent of Frank The Tank who he played in ‘Old School’, typically this is something I would bitch about but it works here. It works because Samuel L. Jackson stops by to make fun of Shaft, Dwayne Johnson is playing who I assume is his old WWE personality The Rock, and Wahlberg is playing the same character he’s played in every movie. The humor in the movie works because they are making fun of them selves as much as they are making fun of other cop movies.

Funny man Will Ferrell doesn’t get as many laughs in this movie as he typically would, but he still gets some chuckles in his old outlandish way. Most of the giggles come when Ferrell sets up the jokes and the typically serious Wahlberg knocks them out of the park. Two week points of this movie were the police captain played by Michael Keaton and the shady invester played by Steve Coogan. Its not that they did a bad job, I just don’t feel the director knew what to do with them.

If the plot had been a little stronger this movie could have rivaled ‘Old School’ as one of the best Will Ferrell movies. This movie is made even funnier if you have seen a lot of cop movies, and a lot of Wahlberg movies, or are just very familiar with the tropes used in action flicks. But without knowing much about other movies the laughs are all still there. If you like Will Ferrell’s work you will enjoy this allot, if you don’t then you still have Wahlberg to laugh at. And if you laughed you ass off at the scene in ‘The Departed’ where Alec Baldwin and Wahlberg are ripping on each others mothers, I’ll say that you don’t want to miss this.

After.Life

Sometimes while looking at movies to rent, I will glance at one and think to my self "ya lets give this a try". Typically these are movies that look promising, even though I’ve never heard of them. Honestly a red flag should have gone off when I saw Christina Ricci, Justin Long, and Liam Neeson on the cover of a film I've never heard of. Typically I am easily able to spot the movies that sucked, but the got green lit when the studio figured they could throw a few stars in it there and turn a profit. And that's exactly what 'After.Life' is. However I figured this film had a strong enough premise that it would be worth giving a shot.

'After.Life' plays with one of the most mysterious questions a person can have, that is what happens when we die... When Anna (Ricci) wakes up on a slab in the morgue, she is told that she died in a car wreck. The funeral director Deacon (Neeson) claims to have the gift of being able to talk to the dead. However Both Anna and her boyfriend Paul (Long) are having trouble accepting that she is dead. Anna and Paul both believe that Deacon is lying, but the funeral director continues to claim that Anna is dead and he is simply trying to help. The whole movie is spent trying to figure out, is Anna really dead? Or dose Deacon secretly have malicious intent?

The question of is Deacon lying became the only thing that kept me remotely interested in this movie. It was frustrating just how inactive the characters are. I asked myself, if Deacon has done this so many times, why he wouldn’t have a better way of convincing the dead of their demise. And the relationship between Anna and Paul is very unconvincing. Paul is supposedly a hotshot lawyer, yet can never find the right words to say. He finds himself stumped as to his legal rights to see his dead girlfriend. Over all, Long's acting just failed. Ricci dose a decent job over selling everything. Being on the fence about wanting to love or wanting to live doesn’t make sense towards the end when we discover more about how she thinks. But all the revelations about Anna's past are just a failed attmept to add some depth. Neeson does a great job, doing nothing new. He’s playing the same character he’s done in ‘Taken’ and ‘Batman’ and even the Narnia films, just this time he is a creepy Funeral director.

'After.Life' is listed as a Mystery/Thriller. But really the characters are so inactive, and so borring its hard to get any thrills. As for mystery, the film does do a great job making the audience question whether or not Anna is dead, or if Deacon is bat shit crazy. But if you are interested in finding out for your self, my recommendation is to look up the ending on the internet. Watching this film is just to frustration to sit through.

.45

When Milla Jovovich comes on screen speaking directly to the audience about how she met her boy friend and his large... genetic gift... you begin to ask yourself what the hell kind of movie did I just press play on? Fortunately ‘.45’ picks up after that, as we follow Kat (Jovovich) and Big Al (Angus Macfadyen) in their daily routine selling guns on the street. Despite seeming like simple illegal gun slinging peddlers, the pair are quite sharp. They easily side step a confrontations with the police and appear to have a well establish business selling stolen goods. And despite being an obvious prick, Big Al is fun to watch.

Soon we are introduced to two more characters, Vic and Reilly, and we learn exactly what this movie is about. At first I was under the impression that we would follow Kat and Al on their crazy adventures selling guns and drinking beer, but this movie is much darken then that. This is a tale of obsession, lust, revenge, manipulation, abuse, and addiction. Kat is obsessed with leaving the neighborhood and living on a beach. Al, Vic, and Reilly are all obsessed with Kat.

When we discover Al is dealing with an alcohol addiction and often gets drunk and beats Kat. We learn that a lot of people want to see Al dead, including Vic and Reilly. We learn that Al is a master at manipulating Kat. We learn this is a film about whether or not Vic, Reilly and a social worker named Liz can convince Kat to leave. We also get insight as to what their considering doing to Al if she doesn't, and their less then good intentions for wanting to help.

‘.45’ is an insightful look into the lives of people who are anything but saintly. It is a piercing view of a woman in an abusive relationship and it subtly yet clearly shows us how her mind is processing her situation. One thing that wasn’t so clever about this film were a series of documentary style cut-ins. During these cut-ins it seams as though someone is interviewing the characters, as they break the fourth wal speaking directly to the audience. Although they do help develop the characters, I wish they were left out. I feel the audience would have come to their conclusion with out these cut-ins, which would lead to another layer of depth for the story.

All of the performances were good, but not great. Oddly every actor had two or three scenes where they really shined, but then had scenes that make you wonder if they had forgotten what they had done the day before. Towards the end of the film, I got the impression that the writer was suffering the same problem. I felt as though scrip had a beginning and a middle, then the author forgot what he had written. But I was immersed into the film, and didn’t concern myself with any of the issues until I started writing this review. And that for me is the mark of a good movie. I can easily recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good suspenseful drama.

The Social Network

I picked up a copy of “The Social Network” simply because I wanted to see it, I had no intention of writing a review. I figured, whats the point? The Golden Globes have passed and The Facebook Movie took home best director, best picture, and best score... Everyone I’ve talked to loves it. So why bother writing a review of something that everyone and their mother already has an opinion of?

So I figured I could watch it looking for anything to trash about this movie. Then write about how there’s no way it deserves all the praise. Unfortunately that just wont be the case.

My only gripes with this film are so petty that they’re not worth the flack I may take for bringing them up. The script and acting was sharp and snappy, it was well shot, well paced, every moment of the film helped developed the characters and push the story along.

For those that haven't seen it, “The Social Network” tells the story of the creators of one of the worlds most popular websites. And all of the trials, tribulations, and law suites that went along with it. The story begins with Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg, and his best friend Eduardo Saverin spending a night developing a website and drunken blogging to quell Marks anger at the girl who broke up with him just hours before. The attention he gains from the site earns him the attention of the Winklevoss twins. the twins pitch him an idea for a social network exclusive to Harvard. Mark takes this idea to a much larger scale creating the beginnings of Facebook with Eduardo as his business partner. Their is no clear protagonist as Mark is clearly the main character, but Eduardo seams to be more like the tragic hero. But its clear that the Director wanted viewers to see the Winklevoss twins as the antagonists. Which is fine for the movie, but leaves you wondering what the people these characters represent are like in real life. But the fictional characters are fun to watch as their story is told as a flash-back from two law suits that are occurring, Mark vs. the Winklevoss’ and Mars vs. Eduardo for reasons that are reveled as the story unfolds. The film cleverly intertwines scenes from the dispositions of the law suits and the events that they are discussing.

When I first heard about this movie, I though to myself that there was no way this movie would be anything more then a waste of time. When you think about it, its Jesse Eisenberg (Zuckerberg), Justin Timberlake (Sean Parker, founder of napster and partner of Facebook), and some no name (Spider-man)... (I mean Eduardo), in a movie about Facebook... This sounds like a formula for disaster. So major cudos to writer Aaron Sorkin, and Director David Fincher. I had little to no faith in this film, but damn I was wrong. If you haven't have a chance to see “The Social Network” I would defiantly recommend it to pretty much anyone.

The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans

When I sit down to watch a movie, I prefer to not have an opinion about it before I start. I find that I tend to enjoy movies more when I know nothing about them going in. And of course, I like being able to claim that I am objective in my reviews. But when you see Nick Cage in a movie you can’t help but brace yourself for the worst. With a filmography that includes Knowing, Bangkok Dangerous, Next, The Wicker Man, and that mess of a Ghost Rider movie, all in the past 5 years, you have to be wary of any movie starring Cage. It’s not that he’s a bad actor, its more that he over acts everything. The best description of Nicolas Cage I’ve heard is, he has moved beyond over acting and is now MEGA ACTING.

‘The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans’ is a stage where Cage’s MEGA ACTING actually works. He gets to play a strung out, coke addicted cop and is lots of fun to watch. He plays New Orleans cop Terence McDonagh. During the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, McDonagh rescues an inmate, in the process injuring his back and getting a promotion to lieutenant. To deal with his back pain he starts taking vicodin eventually becoming addicted to them and cocaine. Dealing with that, and a gambling addiction, and his alcoholic parents, and a murder case, and his prostitute girlfriend, just culminates in to a big ball of stress for this bad cop. And when I say bad cop, he is into all the classics. Stealing from the evidence room, lifting drugs from crime scenes, arresting people then just taking their drugs and letting them go, threatening to arrest athletes if they don’t throw games he’s bet on the list goes on and on. Cage’s over the top style works wonders, especially in scenes where he is high as a kite.

This movie is a mess, there are almost too many things going on to keep track of. There are a many side characters, side plots, awkward pauses, all revolving around McDonagh. It’s a perfect combination of chaos to portray McDonagh’s hectic life. I’m not complaining so much about the frantic story-telling, until it gets to wrapping it all up. The half dozen story lines all wrap up in the last two scenes. The majority of those plots ending abruptly an inexplicably. This is either the dumbest ending to a movie I have seen, or the smartest. And after everything is wrapped up, you get a nice book end to answer one lingering question and raise one more. The question I was asking myself when it was all over was this movie something that the audience viewed through the fourth wall, or viewed as the coked up McDonagh saw things… Deep right? Well maybe not, but it explains a lot of the weird editing in the movie and what the deal was with Val Kilmer's character.

Despite all the crazy that this movie brought with it, I would defiantly recommend it. You get some laughs, in between moments that make you shake you head. I thoroughly enjoyed Cage’s performance, it was a movie that I can't imagine any other actor starting in. Now all that’s left to do is wait and see if MEGA ACTING can make “Drive Angry” worth watching.

Leaves of Grass

When the credits roll after you finish watching “Leaves of Grass”, the first name to pop belongs to the writer/director Tim Blake Nelson. While the movie didn’t leave me wanting to go out and immediately start watching everything this guy has ever directed, I figured a little research before writing a review couldn't’ hurt. When his photo popped up on-line, I immediately recognized his face. This guy has been a supporting actor in almost everything. He was even in this movie, again in a supporting roll... Really? This guy doesn't even step up for his own movie....

Well actually I love the fact that he doesn't star in this, because it give us the chance to see a great performance by Edward Norton. Norton plays a Boston area university professor named Bill, and his Oklahoma back woods pot dealing identical twin brother Brady. Both have genius level I.Q.s, but while Bill uses his powers to try to advance his career teaching classic philosophy, Brady’s brain power is burned while he burns. Actually Brady’s knowledge of hydroponics and botany is PHD level, and he is more than able to keep up with his brother’s academic babble. He even critiques Bill’s recent work making a point that he only had to look up one word and he didn’t use “no Merriam and Webster” he used “the f*****g O. E. D.” Needless to say, the conversations between two baked geniuses is very entertaining.

The main characters in “Leaves of Grass” are all connected to words. Bill and Brady both have super sized vocabularies, and their mother as well as Bills love interest are English teachers. They are constantly talking about literature or grammar, or using poetry in their regular conversations. Even the film’s title is taken from the Walt Whitman poetry collection of the same title, which was awkwardly edited into the end.

The story left something to be desired. I was having so much fun just spending time with these characters that I almost forgot that Brady was having a confrontation with a drug dealer, and Bill was dealing with threats to his career. The sub plot of Bill confronting his estranged mother was more interesting then the actual conflict. When they do get around to the actual story arc, it goes by so fast that you almost wish they just left it out. In this mess of a script, I couldn't tell you where the climax was. I really wish they had come up with a better plot Bill and Brady.

The cinematography reeked of indy flick. The shots and editing made me feel like I was watching the nightly news. Some of the scenes cutting back and forth between Brady and Bill took me out of the movie, because it looked more like a jump cut of Edward Norton, rather then a cut back and forth between two twins. Give me an “L” cut or something here guys come on.

If you were to ask me if I recommended “Leaves of Grass”, I would have to ask what kind of mood you’re in. If you wanted to sit alone on in a small group of friends, then yes this is a good pick. If you are in a large group of friends or with your significant other I would pick something else. Why? Because dragging plot line will be a huge turn off for a lot of people so there is a good possibility that will be several people who don’t like this in a large group and why take the chance if you’re doing a movie night with your girlfriend. But if you’re a Norton fan this is a do not miss.

Sunshine

I would be lying if I said “Sunshine” was an entirely original film. The influences of “2001: A Space Odyssey” and horror films such as “Alien” are hard to miss in this thriller set in space. The story centers around seven astronauts on their way to drop a big freaking bomb into the sun, keeping it from dying. So considering I was expecting to see a clone of “The Core” or “Armageddon”, I was pleasantly surprised to see a well executed and genuinely scary film. But director Danny Boyle definitely leaves his mark on this sci-fi horror survival flick. Whispers of his previous films like “28 Days later” and “The Beach” stand out even more then the hints of other director’s films. But hey, if you have never seen any of the films I’ve mentioned or like me enjoying seeing films that are heavily influenced by the director and his inspirations, you may enjoy watching “Sunshine”.

Anyway... with nothing original coming from the film, I look to the actors in hope of them making this film stand out. And here is where I become divided. Immediately I will tell you there is no outstanding performances in “Sunshine”, but I have to question if the acting was even good. All of the actors seemed like emotionless robots, but I ask myself “Is that how people stuck on a claustrophobic spaceship on a mission where they may not survive act”? And the answer I come up with is “maybe...” But even if that was what they were going for... it was good, nothing amazing.

"Sunshine" dose very well giving the audience the sense of dread, paranoia, and claustrophobia, but this is old hat for Boyle. The script has a few attempts to add some depth to the characters and some twists to plot, but it falls short. The story is conventional, you will be making bets with your friends as to which order the characters will get picked off in as soon as the narrator is done setting the premise. And if you have ever watched a horror-survival movie, you will probably win all of those bets.

In all seriousness, this is not a bad film. It’s just not great. Maybe like me you love Danny Boyle’s work and seeing hints of films from the past is a fun throw-back. Or maybe you are an uptight arrogant film snob who bitches and moans whenever a movie is conventional. In which case you can go to the special circle of hell reserved for blowhards and hipsters. My recommendation you may enjoying a cracking beer and watching this with some friends. Just don't go expecting anything extra-ordinary.