The American

Summary: An American hitman named Jack (George Clooney) hides out in a small Italian town after an attempt on his life in Sweden. While in Italy he takes a side job crafting a rifle for a hit woman, which a colleague puts him in contact with. During his time there, Jack also develops a relationship with a prostitute however due to his dangerous profession he can’t share his secrets or his inner pain. Although he wants out of this hellish lifestyle it seems impossible for him to escape it and enjoy the simple pleasures of life since death and danger continuously follow him.

Plot (B-): The majority of spy/assassin movies have an intricate plot where you may or may not fully know the protagonists motives. The American does not fall into that category since the story is very straightforward. I could sum up the essence of the film with a few words rather than sentences and it would give you a good understanding of the story such as: survival, guilt, emotional pain, detachment, and love. This is a pretty good movie but it was lacking in one certain area, which will be explained in the Acting & Dialogue section.

Action (B-): This is not like one of the Bourne films where Jason Bourne is fucking guys up left and right in a variety of ways. Other than a few gun shots the majority of the film rests in hands of the actors interactions with one another.

Acting & Dialogue (B-): This is probably George Clooney’s darkest character of his career. He typical picks roles where the characters have life to them which when combined with his own acting talents and charm everything is brought to life. But this is a different character all in all. Clooney plays Jack as a serious man who seems to be tortured by not only the events of the opening scene but his life in general. He only continues to be an assassin because it’s what he’s good at. My biggest compliant with the film was the lack of dialogue. Clooney maybe had 18 lines throughout the whole film and never spoke for more than a few seconds at a time. I feel that if he spoke more the film would have had a bit more life to it. But that’s not the direction the writer and director went for. They wanted a serious and dangerous man who rarely interacts with people and whose emotional pain is visible through his demeanor. To more analytical, his secluded lifestyle is a metaphor for why he keeps people at a distance. This is done out of choice but more importantly out of necessity. The only other actor who shares a fair amount of screen time with Clooney is the voluptuous Italian actress Violante Placido. Placido plays Clara, a prostitute who Jack ends up falling for during his time away. She did a very good job and her chemistry with Clooney was believable especially during the sexual scenes.

Sex Appeal (10): Speaking of sexual scenes there is not only a good amount titties in this film but there’s also some bush. Placido got naked several times, at length, and acted completely natural about it.

Director (C+): Anton Crobijn is still fairly new to directing movies. His resume consists of a few films but is mostly dominated by music videos of bands such as Metallica, U2, and Depeche Mode. Therefore, you can state that he’s still an amateur director when it comes to filming movies. Crobijn did a decent job but I think working with such a good actor such as Clooney was more beneficial to him. It seemed that Clooney took the reins of this film and just went with it. If Crobijn worked with a less talented actor in this film I think he would have run into some troubles. However, I did like the way he filmed the movie. Everything was up close and personal with the actors. The cinematography was great and the setting of Castel del Monte in Abruzzo, Italy was breathtaking.

Overall: B-

Actor of the Month: James Franco

Why: James Franco is not Hollywood’s go-to actor. Nor he is not the highest paid actor in his profession. But I’ll tell you one thing…he is a damn good actor and you can always count on him delivering. Moreover, Franco is smart about the roles he chooses. Rather than picking some film for decent size paycheck Franco chooses films, which will help define his career and also help him define the movie. I will not argue that Franco has done some less than stellar films, but who hasn’t? It’s his individual performances that truly count. Franco’s first film was Never Been Kissed (1999) where he worked alongside Drew Barrymore, John C. Reilly, and David Arquette. However, he didn’t truly burst onto the scene until he starred in the short-lived cult TV show Freaks and Geeks. Franco was so good in that series that one must see his performances in order to truly appreciate it. In 2001 he starred in the TV movie James Dean playing the title character. Now, I’ve never seen it but IMDB gave it a 7.2/10 stars, which is good. Even without seeing it I feel very confidant that Franco did a good job. He looks somewhat similar to the 50’s icon and definitely knows how to play the cool factor. The following year Franco got his biggest break in Spider-Man (which he starred in all three) as Harry Osborn, son of the Norman Osborn aka the Green Goblin. His representation of a son who isn’t appreciated by his father but desperately willing to seek his approval was accurate to the comic book character. In 2007, Franco had a very small role in a good but highly depressing military film entitled In Valley of Ellah starring Tommy Lee Jones and Charlize Theron. Why he didn’t have a bigger part in this film is beyond me, but it was still a good movie and performance nonetheless. In 2008, he starred in the stoner hit-comedy Pineapple Express with Seth Rogen. Franco was great in this film because he showed audiences how funny he can be. I thought he was perfect for the role of Sol the pot dealer because the guy constantly looks stoned much like Jim Breuer. To further show his versatility, Franco starred in Milk that same year. He played Sean Penn’s gay lover. While I don’t know much about the story of Harvey Milk, other than what was portrayed, their chemistry was authentic and added to the validity of the film.

Franco does not pigeon hole himself into a certain genre. He feels the necessity to explore all options, which is why he played a whacky re-occurring character on the daytime soap opera General Hospital from 2009-2010. If you were to Google any episode you may think it’s a joke because his character is called Franco and he’s so strange to say the least. I guess he did that just to mix things up and keep his career fresh.

James Franco is more than just an actor and I don’t think he would define himself as just that. Many do not know this but he is enrolled at Columbia Universities Graduate Program for Fictional Writing and the Graduate Film Program at NYU. Talk about a man who is dedicated to the arts. Therefore, for reasons such as this I name James Franco September’s Actor of the Month!

Why I Don't Care For the Emmy's

Last night were the Emmy’s and even though I watch as much T.V. as I possibly can and consider it one my oldest friends I cannot bring myself to care about the Emmy’s. It’s not that I don’t want to see my favorite shows do well or be rewarded. My main complaint with the Emmy’s is the habitual nominations and wins of the same people and shows. There is so little variety from year to year that it’s not interesting. I mean how many times can Alec Baldwin, Steve Carell, or Tony fuckin Shalhoub be nominated for Best Actor in a Comedy and win? I’m not saying I don’t appreciate those guys in their respected shows I just feel that there is so more out there for people to choose from.

Another thing I don’t like about the Emmy’s is how they ignore the underrated talent. One of my favorite shows, “The King of Queens”, was on air for a decade and it never won a single award. That show, and Kevin James especially, was hysterical. Instead, in 2006 the award for Best Lead Actor in a Comedy went to Shalhoub who had already won the Emmy three times. Furthermore, he has been nominated every year since 2003. Or how about “Lost”? Here’s a show that everyone jerked off to for years saying its so amazing. However, it quickly lost its momentum in the recent years, then had subpar series finale, and was nominated for Best Drama Series, which it thankfully didn’t win.

The Emmy’s need to give other people and shows time to shine. For example, “How I Met Your Mother” is a great show with a funny cast but somehow there’s a need to give another nomination to "30 Rock" or The Office (I love "The Office" by the way I’m just using it as an example). Year after year it’s the same bullshit with the Emmy’s and it’s just not interesting to me. I can appreciate, however, the Miniseries categories, which is always different and unique. This year Steven Spielberg and Tom Hank’s The Pacific won and it rightfully should have. Their recreation of the Marines in the South Pacific in World War II was stellar, accurate, and breathtaking. Another well-deserved win was Al Pacino for Best Lead Actor in a Miniseries or Movie for playing Dr. Jack Kevorkian on HBO’s You Don’t Know Jack, which was sad, dark, and emotional, but highly moving.

While I’m happy Pacino and The Pacific won I’m still frustrated by the generic nominations of the Emmy’s. In my opinion the Oscars has been and will always be superior.

The Expendables

Summary: A group of mercenaries is hired to take out a corrupt ex-CIA agent who financially backs a military dictator on a small Spanish island

Plot (B): The plot of this film is extremely straight-forward. There are no hidden agendas or meanings. What I liked about the film and its plot was that it didn't pretend to be something it wasn't. This was a action flick to the core. Was it Stallone's best film in terms of writing? No. But it was entertaining and that's what's important. All in all it’s a good action flick.

Action (A): Obviously, this is where the heart of film laid. From start to finish there was a variety of action. Typically, most action films tend to stick with one type fighting style whether it’s gun shoot-outs, hand to hand combat, or sword fighting. In The Expendables you get a strong balance of it all such as: awesome hand to hand/ martial arts fight, amazing kills with blades, and various deaths using guns. The deaths scenes were creative and in some cases explosive. I really appreciated the variety of action in this film because it kept me interested and on my toes.

Acting & Dialogue (B-): For me this was the weakest part of the film but I’m not saying it was horrible. The acting was good but I did feel that some of dialogue was a bit cheesy at moments. However, it’s clearly evident that this film is not meant to be about the dialogue but more about the events taking place. The Expendables practically hosts every action star from the 80’s to today, which was a real treat especially if you grew up in the 80’s. Stallone’s character was not all brawn and no brains. There was a combination of both which added depth to him. Even though Stallone played one of the main characters he did make sure to not dominate the film. He allowed everyone to have time to shine. I really liked Jason Statham in this movie. He played his character with a sense of calmness and coolness, which worked well when teamed up with Stallone’s. I also really enjoyed Dolph Lundgren’s character even though his screen time was minimal. His character represented the civil disunity that can occur among mercenaries even if they are all close friends. I believe that aspect may have spoken some truth about real mercenaries and that you can never fully trust each other. On a complete side note, it should be known that Lundgren is an utter genius. He has a Master’s in chemical engineering from the University of Sydney and speaks seven languages. Nice job Drago! The films antagonist was played by Eric Roberts, the ex-CIA agent. What Roberts’ lacks in physical presence he makes up with attitude and charisma. His character was smart, deceitful, greedy, and just plain bad. Roberts illustrated those traits well much like he did in The Dark Knight.

Sex Appeal: N/A

Director (B): Say what you want about Sylvester Stallone but that guy is talented and I don’t think enough people give him credit. His scripts are well written and structured. His directing abilities are strong enough that he can balance giving suggestions and commands to others while focusing on other aspects of the film. Most of all he’s vision orientated and smart. He knows what he wants and understands how to achieve it in a manner, which audiences will like. Towards the end of them film I made connection and while its unofficial it makes sense. I think Stallone named The Expendables from Rambo: First Blood Part II. During that film there’s a part where Rambo’s Vietnamese contact asked him why they picked him for the mission. He simply responded that he was expendable and his life didn’t really matter. As I said, this isn’t his best work but it was good enough for me and kept me entertained.

Overall: B

George Lucas Reveals Never Before Seen Opening to "Return of the Jedi"

For a Star Wars nerd such as myself this is as good as porn!!! While it's not a whole lot it's very cool and explains when Luke gave R2-D2 his new lightsaber. Enjoy! Also, CinemaBlend.com as reported that all six Star Wars movies will be going on sale as a package in the Fall of 2011 on Blu-Ray. I think I just went from 6 to midnight!

The Other Guys

Summary: Detectives Allen Gamble (Will Farrell) and Terry Hoitz (Mark Wahlberg) are two mismatched partners serving in the NYPD. Both men seize the opportunity to become a pair of New York’s Finest by solving a case no one else seems to care about.

Plot (B+): In this world of the NYPD there are many different types of cops. There are the go-getters (played by Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) who chase down criminals at whatever cost and are idolized by everyone. They never do any paper work and leave behind millions of dollars of destruction. There are the suck ups and wannabe’s who desperately ache to be like their heroes but fall a bit short. Then there are the other guys who everyone makes fun of and pushes their paper on. Obviously, I’m talking about Farrell and Wahlberg’s characters. The Other Guys is a funny movie with creative and diverse comedic scenes, which properly lives up to previous Farrell/Adam McKay movies. What I liked about the film was how far fetched certain things were. It was clear that The Other Guys was making fun of other cop movies but this was done with such creativity and humor that it worked. The plot itself is pretty easy to follow but it didn’t grab me completely. What I really liked was each character’s past, especially Farrell’s because it was pretty outrageous. It is clear that Hoitz and Gamble are partners who have not been together for years. It seems that they’ve been working together for weeks or a few months so there is a lot of tension particularly stemming from Wahlberg’s Hoitz. It is this aspect that sets the tone for their rocky relationship.

While I’ll definitely say the film was funny I was expecting to laugh harder and/or more. Don’t get me wrong I laughed throughout the entire film and so was the rest of the audience but I guess I was expecting something closer to Step-Brothers where I would have lost my breath at one point. However, I think this film may suffer from the Tropic Thunder Syndrome, meaning it was SO MUCH funnier the second and third time than the first. What definitely hurt the film was its rating. The film was rated PG-13 and I think it would have been a lot better if was rated R. Even though the characters were saying “shit” all the time there wasn’t one F-bomb. Now dropping fuck bombs doesn't mean a movie will be better or funnier but I feel that they could have crossed the line a few times and it would have been golden. But all in all a good film.

Action (B): There was nothing overly fancy about action in the movie. Although I appreciated what was delivered it was relatively standard. Like I said above, certain things were far fetched but worked well for the type of movie it was.

Acting & Dialogue (B/B+): At first people may think that Will Farrell and Mark Wahlberg would not work well together as a comedic team. Well, let me be the first to tell you that’s certainly not true. I really liked their chemistry since it was so fresh. Wahlberg is an underrated comedic actor who really knows what he’s doing. He played Hoitz as the traditional tough ass New York cop who was on his way to becoming one of the best the city has to offer until he committed the most unthinkable act against a man who’s so revered and so loved in the Big Apple. As for Farrell, well he’s Farrell. He was great as usual and played Gamble as the most plain and straight-laced detective due to some past experiences in his life. Gamble would rather clean his desk and organize his filing cabinet instead of chasing the bad guys. What will perplex you, as much as it does Hoitz, is that Gamble is the biggest chick magnet ever. Super hot women just flock to him and he’s is completely unaware of his mystical powers, which makes his marriage to Eva Mendes’ character so funny. Their relationship is normal but not normal at the same time. It was this element, which made Farrell’s character so unique. There are also other pairs of comedic team who were funny and entertaining such as Rob Riggle (Step-Brothers, The Hangover), Damon Wayans Jr. (who is a spitting image of his father), and Jackson and Johnson. However, in my opinion, the unofficial shinning star of this film was not Farrell or Wahlberg. It was Michael Keaton. Keaton played Captain Gene Mauch and if you watch his scenes closely you'll laugh pretty hard. He speaks his mind on just about everything and somehow unknowingly relates it to a specific 90’s female R & B group. Keaton has become extremely selective over the past few years with the movies he stars in so I felt it was a real treat to see him in a comedy again. I’ve always believed he has done a fantastic job with comedies and I was happy to see that he still has it.

Sex Appeal (6): Having Eva Mendes reference and grab her breasts deserves at least a 6 in my book.

Director (B/B+): Six years ago Adam McKay graced audiences with Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy and since that movie we’ve been getting dynamite films from him. His relationship with Will Farrell is something very special. The reason why they continue to work together is that they understand each other and share the same vision when it comes to comedy. While I can’t say this is the best movie of the Farrell/McKay team it was very good and certainly lived up to expectations. Although, McKay doesn’t really dabble in special effects there’s one particular scene that I felt was extraordinary and was labeled by Entertainment Weekly as the Summer Movie Moment. It centers on a night of debauchery between the two main stars. It’s not so much what they are doing but rather how the scene was shot. It was extremely creative and original. Instead of trying to explain it myself I will quote writer Keith Staskiewicz of EW since he wrote it so clearly, “So he (McKay) decided on a single tracking shot that, using a special camera to minimize changes from take to take, depicted the characters’ increasingly drunken revelry in a series of frozen scenes. To film the sequence, the actors had to hold their compromising positions for long periods of time.” This may not make sense to you now but when you see the movie it will and you’ll appreciate it.

Overall: B/B+…Like I said in the Plot section this film may suffer from the Tropic Thunder Syndrome and probably is funnier after repeated viewing so therefore the grade could rise. If you’ve seen it more than once let me know.

Actor of the Month: Joseph Gordon-Levitt

Why: Typically, actors that start their careers as children hardly ever last. Somewhere through the craziness of their teenage years and young adult life they tend to get caught up and lost in the Hollywood lifestyle. Growing up famous leads to an early introduction to sex, drugs, and alcohol thus interfering with their career. Some are lucky enough to avoid that dark path completely or have the ability to work through it i.e. Drew Barrymore. While Joseph Gordon-Levitt has been smoking weed since his high schools and calls himself a “pothead” its clear that he never had real problem with drugs (Levitt admitted this in this months issue of Details Magazine), growing up in the limelight, and is nowhere near the likes of Danny Bonaduce, the walking train wreck. (Danny if you ever read this I'm sorry don't hunt me down.)

One of Levitt’s earliest roles was in Robert Redford’s A River Runs Through It (1991). Under the direction of Redford he played the role of the elder brother growing up in early 20th century America with style, grace, and simplicity. Levitt then came to have one of the lead roles in Angels in the Outfield (1994). For any young child actor that is a major accomplishment no matter how well the movie does. As he entered his teenage years he landed a part on the hit TV sitcom 3rd Rock From The Sun (1996-2001) co-starring John Lithgow. Working for five straight years along with such an accomplished actor definitely helped Levitt polish his skills. Perhaps it was his time on 3rd Rock, which prevented him from trailing down that tempestuous path that swallows so many. In 1996, he starred in the crime thriller The Juror with Alec Baldwin and Demi Moore. Even though he wasn't the main star his performance always left an impression on me. In 1999, he starred in the cult high school classic 10 Things I Hate About You along side with the late great Heath Ledger as well as Julia Styles. This is definitely my favorite film of his from his youth. The innocence in his face and his willingness to go above and beyond for the girl of his dream all clearly represent a teenage boy in love.

During the majority of the 2000’s Levitt worked somewhat consistently but didn’t star in anything the average movie-goer would have seen. However, in 2009 he re-emerged. Levitt starred in the hit indie flick (500) Days of Summer co-starring Zoe Deschanel, which is a wonderful movie about the love and pain of a relationship. The emotions and obsession he displayed clearly hit home for any guy. Also during that year he starred in the action film G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra. The film itself was mediocre but his performance was pretty good as the villain known as Commander. This summer, Levitt starred in the blockbuster sci-fi thriller Inception where he gave audiences another powerful and crisp performance. Working with Leonardo DiCaprio and under the genius mind of writer/director Christopher Nolan solidified him as a quality actor in Hollywood.

Currently, Levitt is being considered for the role of The Riddler in Nolan's Batman 3. His ability to relate to a character and bring the correct emotions and attitude is unbelievable. Levitt is extremely versatile and likes to take on different projects, which help define his career. Hopefully he'll get the part because I know he’ll do a great job. For reasons such as this I name Augusts’ Actor of the Month to Joseph Gordon-Levitt.