Despicable Me

Starring the voices of Steve Carrell, Jason Segel, Russell Brand, Julie Andrews, Will Arnett, and Kristen Wiig.

Okay, when I went to see this, I only knew that Steve Carrell was the main guy. When I came home and saw that line-up, I was like DEAR JESUS no wonder this was such a great movie! With a cast like that, you know it has to be funny.

This was another movie that I wasn't sure about. I saw a strange little teaser several months ago, which raised my interest, but I actually had no idea whatsoever what it was about. Then I saw another trailer that gave me more of an idea, and I decided that I would probably like it but it wouldn't be the end of the world if I didn't go. But like Knight and Day, I was pleasantly surprised when I went! I'm so glad I went to see it!

It opened with a scene of a bus full of American tourists bursting onto the scene of the Gaza pyramids. This scene is just rife with satirical commentary on Americans and tourists and everything. I mean, it's all very subtle so that a child wouldn't know the difference, but it's soo hilarious to an adult! Want a taste of the humor of this movie? Watch the preview. Why do I say this? Because as soon as I saw the fat tourist dad get out of the bus, followed by his fat child tugging on the leash that pulled his hippy (as in, hips) mother out of the bus, I had a huge burst of deja vu. At first I thought I had stumbled into the wrong movie, or they had blatantly stolen this scene from another movie that had already come out. I was soooo confused. About halfway through the scene, which I remembered line by line, I realized the preview that I had seen for this movie was actually just the first scene of the movie. So as I said, if you want a taste of the humor of this movie, and its satire, watch the preview and you will see what I mean. It's great!

What struck me most about this movie was just how much subtle satirical commentary was strewn throughout. Well, I can't really say it was all that subtle since I noticed it. But it's not flat-out, people aren't generally saying these things in dialogue. But there are so many layers to what's going on. Like when Gru (the main Evil Villain) enters the Bank of Evil ("formerly known as Lehman Bros"). I was like *JAW DROP* WHA??? lol Kids don't get that, but those sorts of things make a movie like this wildly entertaining for an adult.

And there was so much social commentary tucked into the bank's refusal to loan Gru money based on his age (lots of reference to age) and lack of potential (financial crisis, anyone?). It was just beyond crazy. I enjoyed the movie so much because it was so intelligent. More so than your average kids movie.

And yet so heartfelt! It also tugged all the right mommy heartstrings for me. Everyone knows I want kids, and badly. We're only waiting because of the Navy. So seeing this man's heart softened by 3 adorable little girls was just perfect for me. It was so sweet!!

His professor friend was also funny, and another target for age jokes. I kept trying to place his voice the whole time, but I NEVER suspected Russell Brand. My jaw dropped to the floor when I saw that. And I never tried to place Vector's voice, but again, I would NEVER have suspected Jason Segel. And if I hadn't known Steve Carrell was Gru, I never would have suspected that either! And Gru's mother was Julie Andrews! I just didn't know!! That's talent right there, when you can have a kids movie stuffed full of famous voices and no one knows who any of them are. Impressive.

Vector was hilarious! He was also a commentary on nepotism and geekiness. I'll be honest, when I first saw him, I actually thought they had put Bill Gates into the movie as a joke. And then he wasn't Bill Gates but another villain, and I wondered if it was a purposeful reference to his looks or if the geeky look just happens to resemble Bill Gates. But Vector was funny too.

Everybody was just great in this movie. It was so intelligent, and so funny, and so heartwarming. I really really enjoyed it.

And then there were Gru's minions! Sooo cute! They're just these little yellow guys with hardly any features but tons of personality. They were such a joy. I wished at the end that I'd gone to see it in 3D because you could really tell they were playing with the medium during the credits. I figured this was just another movie to hop on the 3D bandwagon, but it really would have been fun to watch in 3D. For me, it's generally only really worth it if you get to see some awesome flying sequences. I loved Avatar in 3D, and How to Train Your Dragon was so fun in 3D because of all the flying scenes. But I don't really remember much about the rest of the movie in 3D. Like Toy Story 3--I figured that would be a waste of money to see in 3D, and I think I was right (I wouldn't know, I didn't see it in 3D). But this had several great flying scenes and I have a feeling all the little minions would have made for some fun 3D antics. Aww, plus storytime would have probably been really fun too!! Aww. So I guess, if you go see it, you should consider seeing it in 3D to enhance your experience. But it's still great in 2D too!

Overall, this was a great film. I saw it within 3 days of Knight and Day (I finally got back in the mood for movies) and I just couldn't believe that I saw two amazing films in one weekend. I would highly recommend both of them. If it were a choice between the two, I would base it on your mood. If you want a fast-paced, extremely fun and engrossing action romance, go see Knight and Day. If you're in the mood for a fun, heartwarming and very funny animated movie, go see Despicable Me. If you're not sure, go see them both! They're both highly worth watching! I give this my full recommendation, 5 unicorns!

RATING (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 5 unicorns
CONCLUSION: warm fuzzy happy ending

Knight and Day

Starring Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz.

BEST. MOVIE. OF THE SUMMER!!!

Okay, now that I've got that out of my system, I can move on with a rational review. :)

Part of the reason I only saw 2 movies in June is that a whole spate of movies came out that I was mediocre about. This was one of them. When I finally saw a useful preview a few weeks before it came out, it looked a lot more interesting than before, but I was still under the impression it was just another spy movie like Killers, which was admittedly amusing, but still not the most wonderful movie on the planet. So I thought about going to see this movie every day for more than a week before I finally got out of the house and went. Man was I mad I had waited!! This was such a wonderful surprise!!!!

I went into this thinking, ah, just another spy movie. NOT SO. This movie was everything I could want in a movie and more! I was swept off my feet from the very beginning and never even stopped to think until the credits rolled.

Tom Cruise is meant for these types of roles, honestly he is. He is perfect for them.

But let me ruin the praise for a moment with a bit of backstory (I'm nothing if not thorough..). I'm too young to remember Tom Cruise in his glory days. By the time I started paying attention to celebrities and watching movies, Tom Cruise was that vaguely strange but unbelievably famous guy who jumped on Oprah's couch and liked Scientology. (I know, weep for my empty youth) I didn't see Top Gun for the first time until several years after he joined the Church of Scientology and married Katie Holmes. I've still never seen Jerry Maguire, his other huge movie. I know I've seen all 3 Mission Impossibles and I really liked them, but I can barely remember them except that I liked them.

So I've spent the majority of my adult life thinking that Tom Cruise was the guy that everyone used to like but thought was kind of strange now. They whispered behind his back and he had lost all of his charm. But I am beginning to change that impression now! I am letting go of all of my perceptions (where did I get them from anyway?) and basing my opinion on the man himself. And what I see impresses me.

He was very good in Valkyrie. I never actually saw Tropic Thunder, but his small role in that movie garnered him a beloved mention in the NY Times review of the movie to the point that it was almost the only reason I wanted to see it. I discovered later that it was the character Les Grossman, who made an appearance at this year's MTV Movie Awards. He was AMAZING as that character! It's no wonder everyone was talking about it! If I hadn't known it was him, I would never, ever have guessed. And I watched an interview with Taylor Lautner (of course lol) talking about the ad he did with Les/Tom, and he said it was amazing to work with him. As soon as he put that makeup on, he was Les Grossman. He was talking all tough and being a puffed up jerk and everything. So in character. And then I was impressed even more. And his performance at the Awards! So great!! And my opinion of Tom continued to inch higher and higher.

I watched an interview with Cameron Diaz when I was trying to decide one day if it was worth going to see Knight and Day that night (I do all sorts of weird things to see if I'm in the mood for a particular movie when I'm undecided on whether or not I should go). She commented that Tom has a great eye for stunts and action in movies like Knight and Day. He would apparently always be looking around and say "We should try this!" and then come up with this crazy stunt that they would do. She laughed that people would do anything for Tom. Probably because he knows what he's talking about! SERIOUSLY. I cannot even express to you how entertained I was at this film.

As I was saying before, I adored Tom Cruise in this role. He's what, twice my age? It wasn't a schoolgirl crush, but genuine admiration. He was charming, and capable, and fit (um Taylor Lautner's not the only one who's been working out some nice abs), and wonderfully spastic and just perfect for this role. He's one of those actors that should seriously distract me, but he's so good at what he does that you don't even notice it's him. Watching the film, he was Roy Miller the spy who would do anything to protect June for some unexplained reason. And it was wonderful! I was so enthralled!

I loved his constant repetition of her name. "June, June, now June, you've got to listen to me, June.." lol She was so perfectly spastic in her own way too. Cameron Diaz was equally perfect for her role, and their chemistry was spot-on. Their perfect match was part of what made it so enjoyable to watch. She was innocent and inexperienced and terrified and he was always cool, always in control, always with something up his sleeve to save them in some spectacular way.

In fact, about halfway through I began to marvel at how brave the filmmakers were to make such a sexist film. I mean, it wasn't in a bad way--I love the idea of some big strong man constantly saving my life, because god knows I would be the crazy fritzy girly girl that would be screaming and covering my ears in those situations. But I just thought it was brave of them to make a modern movie with such a helpless heroine.

Well let's just say it didn't stay that way. The ending was perfect. I know I keep using that word, but that's how it felt. It brought perfect closure, and humor, and a happy ending, and it just brought a smile to my face. So great.

I didn't really notice the score when I was watching the movie, but as soon as I stood up from my seat I knew I wanted to own it. I wanted to return to that glorious mindset, of train-hopping across Europe, of high speed car chases and rooftop escapades. I needed that back without having to go see the movie again every day. I was soooo disappointed that it didn't come out for another week! For some reason the score was released almost 3 weeks after the movie was. Very strange. But I bought it literally the morning it came out (I kept up the screen on my computer so I wouldn't forget to buy it the moment it was released). I have listened to it pretty much exclusively since it came out almost a week ago. It's so great! If you want a taste for the flair of this movie, go to Amazon.com and listen to the previews for the songs. They're awesome.

A side note on the soundtrack: When I discovered I couldn't buy the score, I tried to think of something that reminded me of it. I immediately thought of the Mr and Mrs Smith soundtrack, which is appropriate since it is also a fun, romantic spy movie. When I went on to see if I wanted to buy it as a substitute, it just so happened to be by the same composer, John Powell! I about fell off my chair laughing when I saw that. When you listen to enough movie scores, you start to unconsciously notice similarities in a composer's work. Like the fact that I chose the one score in the universe that is almost exactly like Knight and Day, by the same composer. :) But still, Knight and Day is even better than Mr and Mrs Smith, so this soundtrack is better too. I get to watch the movie in my head all day every day, and man is that fun!

Another little aside, a sort of revelation I had the other day: I think I like movie scores for the same reason other people like audiobooks. I mean, sure I listen to Harry Potter on audiobook every time I get in the car and have been pretty much since I discovered them a year and a half ago, but I don't usually bring them into the house anymore. So when I'm doing chores or just sitting on my computer, I have to have music playing. But when I have a mix of movie scores playing, every new song that comes on is like watching that movie for 3 minutes. So I get to watch all of my favorite movies in parts every day. It's so cool! I think that's why it's so hard for me to turn back to any other kind of music. I miss getting reminded of my favorite stories every time I turn on my music, so it's hard to listen to anything else.

Anyway, long story short, this was an AMAZING movie. GO SEE IT NOW!!!! I don't know when it will leave theaters, but it came out June 26th so it's probably coming close to the end of its run. Summer is a hard time to release because there are always newer, more exciting movies coming out to push the older ones out of theaters. But in the case of Knight and Day, you will be hard pressed to find a better movie this summer! I give this 17 rainbows and ponies! Go see it now!! :-D

RATING (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 17 rainbows and ponies!!
CONCLUSION: a perfect happy ending

Toy Story 3

Starring the voices of Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, and many others.

I have to put a disclaimer at the beginning of this one: I was surprised to learn that this was one of the most anticipated new releases for this summer. I remember seeing and generally liking the two first Toy Story movies, but I've never been a huge fan. The first one was very clever and cute, but I only saw the 2nd one once and I could barely even remember the story line. Something about an evil fat cowboy and Woody's lover the red-haired cowgirl... So that's how I went into this movie. Just so you know where I started.

This was a tolerably good movie. I wasn't even sure if I was going to see it, but 3 things swayed me. First, my facebook news feed was filled with good reviews the weekend after if opened. Second, I read a review that started with something like "This movie made a 30 year old single man cry." I thought, well now that's a winner! lol Third, and perhaps most important, I saw a clip of Ken and Barbie when I was trying to decide whether or not to go, and I was thrilled! Silly pretty people in their pretty house were exactly what I wanted to see! (literally, I'm not being sarcastic there, sadly)

So I hopped in my car and saw it. It had all the charm and wit of the first two, but I still just couldn't really get into it. It was good overall, but by the end I felt like the action was very contrived. They were manipulating things to drag out the suspense as long as possible, even though I figured they could have escaped about 3 problems ago. So it wore on a bit for me. It was very cute at the end, which I suspect is what made the grown man cry, but I let out a single tear and was done with it. I was hoping for all out bawling! So needless to say I was disappointed.

The one thing I remember very clearly is when I looked at the house as they panned up from the yard to the treetops in that last scene is that I recognized the architecture and landscaping and they were surely in the pacific northwest! I have no idea if that was the intent, but knowing that it had been set in Seattle the whole time made it a whole lot more interesting to me. lol

One problem I had with this movie is that I'm now familiar enough with movies and actors to be distracted by certain actors. For example, I didn't actually realize Tom Hanks voiced Woody. I'm sure I saw it somewhere along the way and my jaw dropped to the floor when I found out and then I got over it. But as soon as he opened his mouth in this movie, I was like, "That's Tom Hanks!" And then Buzz sauntered over and I was like, "Ah yes, Tim Allen, I'd forgotten about him. He hasn't done many movies lately. I wonder what he's been up to..." *huge distraction*

But while we're on the subject of Buzz sauntering... I had forgotten my favorite part of the whole movie because it was sadly overshadowed by the glowing fire of a furnace... you'd get it if you'd seen the movie. Anyway, I don't want to ruin it, but all I can say is Antonio Banderas (aka Javier Fernandez Pena in this movie lol). Ole!

Because I wasn't a big Toy Story fan to begin with, it's not really fair for me to review this movie. Still, I saw it, and I have an opinion, so here it is. There are better movies out. If you like Toy Story, you'll like this one. If you're just looking for a good family film, go see something like Despicable Me, which is much more intelligent and hearfelt. I'll give this movie 2 My Little Ponies.

RATING (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 2 My Little Ponies
CONCLUSION: happy ending

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, among many others.

I'm sorry in advance...this one got kind of long. *blushes*

As a Twilight fan, I was looking forward to this movie a great deal. I read the books in 6 days after I saw the first film, and I was totally blown away. It was safe to say that I was firmly Team Edward (I got breathless when Bella got breathless, and I'll admit there was some small and ignored part of me that was head over heels for him when I first read the books). But when I went to watch the film again after reading the books, I found that Robert's Edward was much moodier and angrier than the Edward I had seen in the books, and I didn't like him as much. I still haven't decided if I read a happy Edward because that's what I want to see or if the books really are less depressing than Rob's portrayal of Edward. At any rate, it took me a while to reconcile the two.

I immediately jumped headfirst into internet fandom, and discovered that I could check a Twilight website, http://www.lionandlamblove.org/, daily along with my Harry Potter website, http://www.mugglenet.com/ (and you can bet I'm excited for that movie to come out too!). And so it became a habit. I'd been checking Mugglenet daily for years; now I check them both once every day or two. When there's a lot going on, or when I'm particularly in the mood, I will check them both daily and watch and read almost every post. When I get out of it for a few days, as I did before Eclipse came out, I found it almost impossible to catch up. At one point I had about 15 tabs open of stories I wanted to read (mostly interviews I wanted to watch) at some time or other. It took me a week or two to finally catch up, but I made it.

I bring this up because that greatly affects my experience in watching the movies. I started watching interviews when the biggest thing out there was the 2008 Comic Con panel. Now there are probably 4 billion interviews with each Twilight actor and it's a little bit more daunting. I like checking them every few days so I can keep up with what's going on and not miss something important. For example, I take a deep interest in who writes the score for the movies. When it was announced that Alexandre Desplat was scoring the next Harry Potter, for example, I was disappointed because I didn't much care for his New Moon score. However, my biggest problem with the New Moon score is that it feels too magical, so he may be perfect for Harry Potter. But if I didn't check the website daily, that tidbit would pass me by. It's the same with Twilight. So when I heard Howard Shore was scoring Eclipse, I was thrilled. His Lord of the Rings scores are some of my all-time favorites, and he didn't disappoint. Listening to the Eclipse score (when it finally came out the day of the movie!) gave me a lot of deja vu as I heard traces of the LotR score in there, but as he's such an excellent composer, you forgive him the similarities in sound. I got Desplat's score for New Moon and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button within a couple weeks of each other and I can no longer distinguish between them. When I hear a song on my shuffle that is clearly by Desplat, I try to guess which soundtrack I think it's from and half the time I'm wrong. (which in my opinion shows that the New Moon score was inappropriate, as it was nothing like Benjamin Button, which was delightfully magical in its own way)

But I digress. It is perhaps a little known fact that I am obsessed with movie soundtracks. My Zune playlist is probably 75% movie soundtracks because I just love them. I love hearing a song and being able to watch a movie or a scene in my head. No other type of music can so clearly evoke an image and an emotion just by listening to it. As such, a good score can make or break a movie for me.

Still, I digress. I have a lot of movies to get through tonight so I can't afford to spend it all in a lengthy discussion of movie soundtracks (as much as I'd love to!).

The whole point of all of this is that I did not enter Eclipse as an innocent bystander. Far from it. I was armed with nearly every interview the cast has ever given, plus articles, pictures, ads, and all sorts of things the average moviegoer would not have seen prior to watching the movie. I admit most of the people who went to see it at midnight like me probably had read the books, but even that is not a given.

A moment to return to the books vs movies discussion: I barely remembered Eclipse before I saw the movie. To be frank, I've never actually made it through all four Twilight books a second time. I read all 4 in 6 days the first time. Then I tried to reread them and only got part of the way through New Moon before I put them down. (my husband came home 3 weeks after I read them, what can I say?). A few months later I tried again, and again stopped partway through New Moon. Then last fall I tried again, and I very nearly made it! I finally made it through New Moon and Eclipse another time, but I only got a few chapters into Breaking Dawn before my attention involuntarily shifted again. I used to be better at rereads than I am now, but I can't seem to sit down and reread anything anymore. It makes me sad. Anyway, I tried yet again this summer. I got 3/4 of the way through Twilight before I gave up. James showed up and it was no longer about Bella and Edward. How boring, right? lol I happened to watch Twilight and then New Moon in preparation for the release of Eclipse around that time, so I had the brilliant idea to simply skip ahead to Eclipse and see if I could finish from there. Well, I got one chapter in before I yet again gave up, so that's where I was when the movie came out.

As such, I remembered very little from Eclipse. Even after I first read it, all I remembered was that there was some huge epic battle, and Bella betrayed Edward for Jacob. I couldn't STAND Jacob when I first read the books. He was a huge, ugly, brutish bully that always acted like an asshole around her. Edward was the dream standard of a man, always patient and loving and kind and gorgeous, whereas Jacob was just a jerk. That's probably why I didn't remember much from Eclipse. I was so pissed that Bella kept thinking about Jacob when I wished she would just forget about him and move on with Edward. I have more appreciation for her plight now after watching New Moon. I went into New Moon convinced that I would hate Jacob. Then Taylor Lautner in all of his muscley hunkiness walked on screen and didn't look intimidating or mean at all and I kind of saw where the Team Jacob fans were coming from... I was sort of in between the two. Funny how all it took was a new interpretation of Jacob for me to see that.

But it also relates to how Rob plays Edward. In the book, it is a clear win of Edward over Jacob. Edward is endlessly patient and loving and mature and for god's sake he's so gorgeous it's hard to breathe around him. Jacob is young and reckless and can be mean-spirited when in a bad mood. At least, that's how I saw them. Perhaps it was my bias skewing my reading? lol Or perhaps I'm right. Hard to say--I'm always trapped in my own brain. But Rob plays Edward with such brooding intensity. He hardly ever laughs, and he delivers all his lines with deep anguish and a furrowed brow. I'd say one of my favorite scenes from Twilight the movie was when Edward spiritedly dropped out of the sky to jump on Bella's truck, and he skips down in a very giggly mood and is utterly playful with no hint of brooding. That scene makes me so happy every time, because that's how Edward should be. There are unfortunately none of those scenes in New Moon. I read soon after watching New Moon that Rob saw how stiff he was in that movie and tried to lighten up for Eclipse. That gave me a lot of hope, because I was tired of watching him ruin everything I loved about the character. I mean, he fits in some ways, but he sees Edward differently. To him, he's had 90 years to be lonely and hate himself. Then suddenly Bella comes in and he doesn't know how to feel. I actually watched him say after Twilight that he believes that Edward is actually anguished that Bella makes him happy, because he's upset about how to be happy. I was like WTF NO! That explains a lot. He's not just a bad actor. He's just a bad judge of character. All of his brooding is entirely on purpose and portrays the character as he sees him. To the rest of us, he just looks grumpy all the time for no particular reason. Why's he upset about being happy, again? I respected his acting a bit more when I understood where he was coming from, but that doesn't change the fact that I believe Edward is a fundamentally different character from the actor who plays him. It leads to differences in our expectations, and as such, I am frequently disappointed in Rob's performance when I watch him play Edward.

Because I've had so much trouble rereading the series and maintaining my own characters independent of the actors (when you watch 2 interviews a day and have read the whole series once, it's hard to keep them separated), Edward in my head is now some approximation of the joy of the book and the brooding of the movie. It's the same with Jacob and Bella. I saw Bella as completely helpless and reliant on Edward, and Kristen's perception of the character is one of strength and courage. Perhaps because I am so helpless and reliant on my husband (or at least I was before this monster of an underway!), I see her differently. So now Bella is somewhere between my vision and Kristen's.

For Jacob, I'm not so sure Taylor and I have different interpretations but just that he doesn't really fit the role. I mean, don't get me wrong, I like him as Jacob most of the time, but if you're following a strict reading of the novels, he's nothing like Jacob. Jacob was supposed to grow about a foot and a half between Twilight and Eclipse...and Taylor's leveled off at about what, 5'7 or so? Don't quote me on that, by the way--I may know a lot about them but I'm just making that up. He's a whole hell of a lot shorter than Rob, but I don't want to sell him too short by saying he's 5'4, so 5'7 seems like a nice compromise. At any rate, he's supposed to be 6'7, so he's just not physically the right body type to play the character. Losing that foot of height makes a huge difference. He no longer towers over Bella, looking indestructible. Instead, he stands at almost exactly her height (they're literally like the same height in real life) and is just extra muscly. Taylor did a fantastic job of bulking up for the role, but he did only what he could control. He can't control how big he is, only how much muscle he adds to his frame. So he looks a lot smaller. And his voice is softer and more velvety than the husky roughness described in the novel, so Taylor presents an entirely softer, sweeter, more loveable Jacob than the book. I mean, even when he's yelling and trying to look tough and angry, he just looks adorable. Like the alpaca. :-D

ANYWAY. I still haven't even gotten to the movie. See, this is why it's so hard for me to sit down and do this in a quick sitting...

I came out of New Moon crying that it was definitely better than Twilight! So much better acted! So much better directed! My oh my how wonderful! Then a week went by and I went to see it again, and I realized that it was exactly like Twilight. Same poor line delivery, same brooding faces. Only with a bad score. And I didn't really like the Volturi (I'm sorry, Dakota Fanning is no evil vampire). And it was just...not that great. I listened to the score for days on end, and realized that while I liked the score itself, I hated it in the movie. What I had at first taken to be wonderful sweeping themes, were really just inappropriately scored and overly magical orchestrations thrown up behind what could have been a much better movie with the right music. Twilight's score by Carter Burwell was edgy and therefore firmly grounded in reality. I personally think that's what draws people to Twilight--the idea that in a normal life, vampires and werewolves are running all over the place and you would never know. So when strings and harps started floating around behind Bella's desolation scene, I was like Huh?? Listening to the score didn't make me think of Twilight at all. It was just pretty to listen to. I realized it most when a Twilight song came on after I'd been listening to New Moon for so long and all of a sudden I was there, transported back. I was watching the first film, I was obsessed with Edward, I was in love with the whole series... and then a New Moon song came on and it was just there. That's when I knew it wasn't right. And ever since that moment, I've disliked New Moon as a part of the series.

You think I've given enough backstory yet? lol

Long story short, I went into Eclipse with mixed expectations. I loved the books as a whole, but my enjoyment seemed to be waning exponentially the more time passed from that initial reading, thanks largely in part to watching the movies. Plus I couldn't remember much from the specific Eclipse plotline to make me particularly excited about this film. What I loved about the books was how much I saw myself in Bella and my husband in Edward. Okay so maybe he's not quite as perfect as Edward (no man is--Edward is clearly a character written by a woman for a woman), but it's uncanny how similar we are to their relationship. So of course their love story is the focus for me, all throughout the books. Despite the distractions of him leaving, of Jacob trying to make his moves, of various vampires trying to kill Bella, through everything--the only important thing is Bella and Edward being in love.

But I find that when I'm looking towards one of the movies, I dread those intimate scenes that I love so much in the book. Rob's just going to be brooding, and frowning when he tells Bella he loves her, and it's just going to be stupid. So when I started seeing previews and interviews about the fighting scenes in Eclipse, I was thrilled! At least if the acting sucked, the plot was mostly action anyway! We were saved! lol With David Slade in the director's chair and Howard Shore conducting the orchestra, we were sure to have a winner.

I was not mistaken. I have only seen it once, the night it opened. I'll admit I don't remember much. I figured I'd go see it again, but as my only plan was a vague idea that I would see it with my husband when he came home, I never did make it back. (I figure I'll be going sometime in the near future :)!!) So this will be a bit vague, I apologize.

I walked out with the impression that it might, in fact, be the best movie of the three. But I cannot say that with any certainty because it wasn't until my second viewing of New Moon that I realized just how much I disliked about it. So I reserve judgment on that. No silly fangirl squees from me about how it's the best movie ever. It's probably not. And I'm okay with that.

HOWEVER. It was amazing!! Rob was soooo much better. He was smiley and cheerful and actually acted a bit. I saw several interviews afterward where he said that he felt like the farther along we go, the more Edward goes from being this distant 100yo vampire to being a 17yo. And the closer he gets to being a normal 17yo, the more emotion Rob had to play with. Because that makes sense?? Whatever. The point that should be taken from such an exchange is that Rob should get better with every movie, because he'll inexplicably feel like he can actually show Edward's emotion more with each film. Finally! So Eclipse is much easier to watch thanks to Rob's newfound freedom to actually express himself on screen. Yay.

I found that Eclipse confirmed my thoughts on Jacob. I hated him, hated him when I first read Eclipse. I couldn't stand that he was even in the story, and then when Bella kissed him! (oh hush, I know you know the plot by now) I was sooooo mad. I just couldn't believe she'd done that, that she had betrayed Edward by doing that. Stepping back and viewing it in light of the movie makes it easier for me to understand, because when I'm not completely obsessed with Edward (Rob makes it surprisingly easy to be detached lol), I can see that she's really only doing it get Jacob to stay and not fight. So fine, whatever, I get that, but I still hated that part. But like I said, Taylor's Jacob is much easier for me to relate to, and the more I think about it, the more I think I should probably be Team Jacob. Not because of Taylor's abs, thank you very much, but because Jacob also represents my husband. Edward represents the amazing pedastal I put him on, but Jacob represents his personality. At least, how it's described and not how it's shown. He's supposed to be always happy, the warm one that always brings a smile to her face. That's my honey! So why do I prefer Edward's grumpy brooding to Jacob's jocular warmth? Probably because I like to see a man show his emotions, at least in theory. As I like Taylor's Jacob more than I like the Jacob in the book and I like Rob's Edward less than I like Edward in the book, they're more or less equal when the movie's over. I think it's strange that I went from thinking about Edward in casual thoughts ("ooh, it's cloudy, I'm glad, now Edward can go to school!") to being neither Team Edward or Team Jacob after watching the movies.

But my goodness this is not a review of the series! Move on to specifics!!

David Slade was AWESOME!! I loved his use of close-ups, coupled with wide shots. And he shot the action sequences so well, like a dance but still showing the grit of the moment. He was perfect for this film. 2 huge thumbs up for him!!

As I said, I enjoyed Howard Shore's score. The thing that surprised me the most was that I walked out not having noticed it at all. It's such a quiet, unobtrusive score compared to the last two. Both of them had at least one moment when a big orchestral theme took center stage in an almost theatrical way, to the point that you noticed it as its own entity in the film (Bella's Theme in Twilight and all the parts where the New Moon theme played in New Moon, or the weird magical part during Bella's desolation scene, or just...etc lol). I had been listening to the soundtrack for a couple of weeks before I watched the movie, and I bought the score album a few hours before the movie came out. I listened to a few peeps and was surprised to hear that it was mostly piano and soft strings. A change from previous movies. There are a few tracks that contain the beautiful Jacob's Theme, but it's not by any means a running theme in the film. Other than that, there isn't really a running theme. And even having listened to it for 2 weeks, I didn't come out with any sense of a main theme. I suppose that is the purpose of a good score--to support the plot and action in an unobtrusive way, so that you leave thinking about the movie and not the music. I'll have to watch it again to see how I feel about it, but I believe it was a good addition to the saga. At least Howard Shore listened to the previous scores--Alexandre Desplat admitted to not even watching or listening to the Twilight score before he wrote for New Moon because he wanted it to be original. No wonder it sucked so much!

I also felt the actors did a better job overall in this one. I was quite swept up in things rather than getting bogged down in thinking about how they were acting a scene, which is certainly an improvement over New Moon.

I also liked the vampire contacts this time. They had this wonderful glow to them that really made them pop. And while we're talking about vampire effects!! The shattering effect was AMAZING!!!!!! It wasn't in any of the previews, and for good reason! I was so thrilled when I saw that! I'm finally about 2/3 of the way through Eclipse now (as of the last couple of days, so there's hardly any hope for me finishing it), so I don't remember how it's described in the book. I don't even care. It was amazing! If you go for one reason at all, go to see the way vampires get crushed and torn into pieces! I'm totally in love with that effect!

I just remembered that, as you can tell... I'd forgotten just how great that was.

Also, I was unsure how Bryce Dallas Howard would be as Victoria, but she was great. She has the perfect beauty to play a vampire. I think she's more appropriate for the role than Rachelle Lefevre was, if just by looks. And Rachelle played her so wild, which was a little weird (though I'm sure a lot of that was Catherine Hardwick too). Bryce was perfect. So dainty and yet so feral. Very good. Xavier Samuel as Riley also had an excellent face to pull off a vampire. They were great.

Which reminds me, did I mention how much action there was in this one? It was great. It starts off with this very gritty scene with Riley, which sets the tone in an excellent way. Just excellent in every way. *nods slowly as the memories come back*

A comment about the entrance of Jacob: lol. It makes me really happy when I can see how a scene has been contrived to please its audience. I noticed the same thing with Edward's entrance in New Moon (and Twilight was pretty obvious too). In Eclipse, Jacob's first scene is with him leaning up against his bike looking like a total badass. Well, as much of a badass as Taylor can. :P The badass rock song swells up as the camera pans up his attitude-filled stance, and you can just tell the scene's been engineered to please its audience. The titters that skittered across the audience were proof of that. Edward had a similarly "badass" entrance in New Moon, although his was less geared toward being a genuine badass and more toward just making a big entrance. It amused me, but in a good way. I like it when they're comfortable with being that obvious about it.

So I've remembered a lot more as I've sat here and thought about it. I'd say it's clear that there were a lot of things I liked about the movie. I came out of it extremely happy but trying to be reasonable, so I can't say what my conclusion would be after a few more showings. I know this is the worst thing ever to put on a review, but I'm going to have to reserve judgment until I see it again. As I think I've made clear, there are a lot of things tangled up in this. Book expectations, expectations from the two previous films, knowledge of the cast and crew... because it's been almost 3 weeks since I saw it and I've seen 3 movies since then, it's hard for me to keep the movie itself separate from all of that. Let's just say, I really enjoyed it at the time. I came out thinking it was probably the best of the 3 but I was going to reserve judgment until I was off the high of seeing such an enjoyable film. Because I enjoyed it so much, and because I plan to shell out another $8 or $9 to go see it again (not to mention popcorn! hehe), it's obviously worth a high recommendation. So I'll give it my full blessing, 5 wereponies!

RATING (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 5 wereponies!
CONCLUSION: very happy ending

Killers

Starring Ashton Kutcher and Katherine Heigl. Also with Tom Selleck and Katherine O'Hara.

So I'll admit, it's been a while... I have five movies that I've seen since my last post, so we'll see how this goes. I think the amount of effort I've been putting into each post has deterred me from writing in a while, so these will be much pared down from what they were before. If you want links, you can google them yourself! :P

I saw this movie over a month ago, so forgive me if it isn't clear. My perception going in was that it was a romantic comedy where she found out he was a spy and that was a sort of side note to the romance. Not so much. I was amazed at how much action there really was in this film. Ashton Kutcher is charming as ever, and he was great for this role. I also love Katherine Heigl so I enjoyed the film just for these two, beyond the rest.

Like I said, the movie was almost entirely action, and the romance plot played a definitely side role. I think this movie appealed to me because it had everything I dream of. The lived in this fabulous suburban neighborhood with their perfect everything, they have a perfect relationship (he has a perfect business as a home builder), and they're getting ready to have their perfect baby. All of those little asides amused me.

But they were nothing more than asides. Basically, this was a shoot-em-up movie hidden under the guise of romantic comedy. There was a lot of action, a lot of stunts, and it appropriately kept you guessing the entire movie as to who the villains were. I was as surprised as any by the ending. It was a playful and engrossing thrill ride all the way through to the end.

I would recommend this movie. When I first saw the previews for Killers and Knight and Day around the same time, I believed they were nearly the same premise. Not even close. If it were a choice between the two, Knight and Day would be the clear winner. Still, if you're looking for an action-packed romantic comedy--or perhaps more appropriately, a romantic action thriller--then you would definitely enjoy this movie. I give it 3 ponies.

RATING (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 3 ponies
CONCLUSION: happy ending

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemma Arterton, Ben Kingsley, and Alfred Molina. Directed by Mike Newell. Produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. Music by Harry Gregson-Williams.

This movie is touted as the follow-up to Jerry Bruckheimer's last epic Disney romp, Pirates of the Caribbean. While it didn't have the same perfect mix of cast, characters, and script, this movie has a lot of the same swashbuckling feeling in it--Bruckheimer's stamp is all over it. But before I get too far into that, marvel with me over the cast and how much I recognize them.

Jake Gyllenhaal. Um, duh. I first started recognizing him with The Day After Tomorrow (let's agree not to link any more movie titles or I'll be here until tomorrow), then with Jarhead and Brokeback Mountain. I also saw that he was in Brothers with Tobey Maguire, and he was in Zodiac. Basically, he's made a name for himself over the last decade. I also happened to read an article by Joseph Hooper in this month's copy of Elle magazine, which reminded me of the fact that he plays Billy Crystal's son in City Slickers (what?? Oh yeah, I remember that!! lol). Plus he's gorgeous, so he's a face you remember easily. He has this really sweet look to him, so he leaves an impression. When I saw that he was slated to star as the swashbuckling hero in this movie, I was floored. He didn't seem the type, and at first, it took me a while to get used to him as the dashing prince hero. But he really fits it by the end of the movie. In fact, one of the best quotes from the article comes from Jake himself: This role is "surprisingly more me than any role I've played before. In that sense, I'm probably more of a prince than I might let on." The article ends, "The ballsiness of this proclamation takes him by surprise, and he has the good manners to blush." (p. 103 of the June 2010 issue of Elle, if you're interested) I was just really amused by this quote. It's most revealing because instead of playing introverted, dramatic roles, he apparently prefers the epic hero. Which I think is great! To be able to admit that you like playing that part, that's great. As I said, he hasn't really been that actor up until now (unlike, say, someone like Orlando Bloom, who has played almost exclusively heroic characters). But it's kind of fun to go on the ride with him, because you can tell how much he's enjoying himself. He was just fun to watch, plus like I said, he's enormously handsome and MAN does he have some muscles in this movie. :)

Gemma Arterton. I mentioned her in the post where I mentioned my interest in this film, but I'll recap here. I first saw her (or noticed her) in the wonderful parody/tribute Lost in Austen, where she plays a thoroughly modern Elizabeth Bennett. Apparently she was also the Bond girl in the latest Bond movie, Quantum of Solace. Who knew? A pale but sassy Elizabeth Bennett is a far cry from the tanned, anguished Bond girl in the 2008 film. I also have a BBC DVD set where she plays Tess of the D'Urbervilles, but I haven't watched it yet. She fits period roles because of her classic beauty and pretty accent. Her latest screen presence was in Clash of the Titans, where, similar to this movie, she played a priestess destined for great things and hopelessly in love with the hero. I felt this role was enormously similar to that one, but as she's such a pretty lady, it's very easy to see her in that role. She is equal parts beauty and passionate wit, so it works. I felt slight disappointment that Tamina felt so similar to Io, but at least the love story was a bit more believable in this one. I like her, at any rate, so no worries.

Ben Kingsley. Apparently he has been in about a million movies that I've heard of but never seen. To name a few: Shutter Island, The Love Guru (actually I did see that one, now that I think about it), Lucky Number Slevin, Tuck Everlasting, AI, Rules of Engagement, Schindler's List, and a whole slew of classical roles. His resume stretches all the way back to 1966. Wow has he seen some changes over the years! I recognize him despite having seen almost none of his movies, and I suspect the makeup and facial hair make him look a bit different anyway. I expected to have seen more of his movies when I got home to check, but I guess not. Still, he was great--as you would expect from such a resume.

Alfred Molina as Sheik Amar, or the small business entrepreneur (lol you'll get it if you see the movie). Okay, let me start off by saying I had NO idea this was him! Talk about the surprise of the movie when I saw who played his character!! He was in one of the previews before this movie, and I remember placing him in my memory and knowing exactly who he was. He's the villain in the upcoming Sorcerer's Apprentice movie with Nicolas Cage and Jay Baruchel. I saw his face and went, "Aha! I recognize him! But from where??" After some thought, I realized he was the Doc Ock villain from Spiderman 2. And that was it. I watched my movie, enjoying his character almost more than any other in the whole film, and came home to discover that it was the very same actor. I was shocked! And then I went through the rest of his resume and was like Jeez, I recognize him from more than I thought! He was in The Da Vinci Code, Pink Panther 2, Chocolat, and many others. But still, hands down the most amazing part was the fact that he was so well disguised in this movie that I didn't even recognize him! Even though he was in the preview right before the movie! Just amazing. If you go see this movie, prepare to be utterly charmed by his character. I loved him so much.

I will take a moment to mention that Richard Coyle and Toby Kebbell, who played the 2 brothers of Jake Gylenhaal, looked enormously familiar, but I don't recognize any of their work or their names. Guess they just look like other people. But Richard Coyle's character was pulled straight out of a Tolkien novel, with his royal bearings and struggles to be the king he was meant to be. He could have been in Lord of the Rings and he would have fit. In fact, I thought he might have been in them, but apparently not. He played his part well. And did I mention Toby Kebbell is also in the upcoming Sorcerer's Apprentice? Kind of crazy how well Disney spins their webs...

I recognized Mike Newell's name when it came on at the end, but at first I couldn't place him. When I checked at home, I realized he directed the 4th Harry Potter movie, Goblet of Fire. Turns out he's also done a few others I recognize: Love in the Time of Cholera, Mona Lisa Smile, Four Weddings and a Funeral, all the way back to 1964. Another experienced player. There were a couple of shots that jarred my experience of the movie (an artsy shot of shadows jumping across rooftops instead of the actors themselves, for example), but for the most part the fighting was impeccably filmed and it was appropriately epic in scale. He did well with this.

And then of course there's the producer, Jerry Bruckheimer. Do I even need to list his credentials? I'll go back as far as 2000 but then I'm stopping! Yet again, we've got the upcoming Sorcerer's Apprentice on his resume (you know really, I'm surprised Jake isn't starring that one as well :P), CSI, Confessions of a Shopaholic, both National Treasure movies, all 3 Pirates of the Caribbean movies, Deja Vu, Glory Road, King Arthur, Black Hawk Down, Pearl Harbor, Remember the Titans, Coyote Ugly, Gone in Sixty Seconds...etc. This guy knows how to make a movie. And he's done it again with this one--Prince of Persia is jam packed with action and epic shots and flowing music and all the good stuff. It wasn't one of his best movies, which I'll discuss in a moment, but it certainly had that Jerry Bruckheimer joyride feel. Definitely fun. Oh and did I mention there's apparently another Pirates movie scheduled??? I heard it was just going to be about Jack Sparrow, but I didn't realize it was already moving forward. Crazy.

Now I know I don't traditionally mention the soundtrack on movies, but I pay attention to every one. I'll admit, my favorite type of music to listen to is movie soundtracks because I like to be able to picture the movie while I'm listening to the music. I can literally watch a movie in my head by listening to a soundtrack, and I find that so much more satisfying than just listening to music on its own. As such, I recognize the name of several different composers because I often own several of their soundtracks. As soon as I saw Harry Gregson-Williams, I immediately knew why it was such a good soundtrack. I know him most for Shrek and Chronicles of Narnia, both great soundtracks. The Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe is a fantastic soundtrack. He also scored X-Men Origins: Wolverine, another great soundtrack, plus Deja Vu, Kingdom of Heaven, Bridget Jones 2, and others. You can see from his resume that he's good at epic soundtracks. His name doesn't have quite the weight of John Williams, James Horner, or Hans Zimmer, but he's definitely proving his mettle. This was such a good soundtrack that I'll admit another little secret: I've already downloaded it from Amazon and am listening to it as I write this. Only $7.99!! :)

Now finally to the actual review! lol This was an enjoyable movie. It took a while to get there, but I enjoyed it overall. I feel that this was very similar to Pirates of the Caribbean--right down to an interesting similarity in Jake Gyllenhaal's outfit compared to Jack Sparrow (think loose, light tops with flowy pants and head scarves). There's a lot of hand-to-hand combat and impressive fighting moves. It has a love story between two lovely people, both with a bit of sass. And it's decidedly epic, with a sweeping score, wide shots and a far-reaching good vs. evil plot. It's even based on a former Disney idea--Pirates was created from the ride, and Prince of Persia was pulled from a video game.

The difference here? Prince doesn't have near the plot or wit of Pirates. I spent a lot of time wondering what was really going on, and why all of the plot points needed to be converging at once. I mean, it made sense in the end, but did it really need to be quite so complicated? Why did he need to be an adopted orphan prince who gets blamed for killing his king/father and then runs off with the fiery priestess and has the dagger and is constantly running around getting in trouble? It's like I said, all the plot points came together beautifully in the end, which justified the winding path it took to get there, but from time to time, I felt like it was a bit contrived.

The fighting was amazing but it felt very very choreographed. There's a lot of jumping and swirling and flipping and dashing and all kinds of crazy things. Jake shows his fitness in this movie as he practically flies around, kicking the crap out of his enemies. He's fun to watch, but it feels a little less believable and charming than Pirates. I suspect this has something to do with it being based on a video game. This movie, since it delves into the supernatural as the basis for its plotline, doesn't work as hard to be historically credible as Pirates. I figure the fighting style is taken from the game, which would be sooo much fun to play like that. You would feel like the biggest badass of all time. Jake (or I suppose I should start calling him Dastan) really looks like the biggest badass of all time. But you jump in to him being awesome, so you lose some of the charm of watching him get that way. Why is he so much better than everyone else? You just have to accept that he's a badass and then sit back to enjoy the ride.

It took me about 10 minutes to adjust to Jake speaking with an accent. I kept looking at him going, Nope, nope I just can't see him with an accent. I'm so used to him in his quiet, firmly American roles. But I got over it. Once you get swept up in everything, you just get used to it. Plus he's so easy on the eyes that a Britsh accent sure can't hurt... ;)

I mentioned that Alfred Molina's character was one of my favorites. He was wonderful, and he captured in his character alone all the fun and joy of Pirates. He was fickle, silly, foolish, and with enough power to make all his flaws even more obvious through his actions. You could tell that Molina really let loose with this character. I suppose there's something freeing about wearing a long dress and head towel--you can really get into character when you don't even look like yourself anymore. He was a true joy to watch, complete with hilarious conservative commentaries on the Persian government. It was hysterical!

The biggest flaw in this movie was the script. It was a little too jumbled and lacked the abundance of witty humor that made Pirates so great. Still, it had an attractive, well-acted cast, sweeping imagery, cool effects, and a great score. It may not be the greatest movie of all time, but it's still enjoyable. I give it 2 rainbows and a pony.

Rating (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 2 rainbows and a pony
Conclusion: HAPPY ENDING

-PrincessM

Shrek Forever After

Starring Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas, and Walt Dohrn. Directed by Mike Mitchell.

This was a great movie. I wasn't sure how it was going to be when I saw the preview, but I found it very amusing.

I've always enjoyed the Shrek movies but I tend to forget about them after they leave the theater. We don't own any of the Shrek movies even though I saw the last one 3 times in theaters--I remember it very clearly, because I saw it once when it came out in May, again because I enjoyed it so much, and then one more time when I was in Spain that summer because I wanted an enjoyable movie experience without the headache of trying to understand what was going on. My Shrek-in-Spanish experience was one of the highlights of the trip because it gave me so much genuine happiness for those few hours.

So I was shocked when I realized that the last time I saw a Shrek movie was 3 years ago, in 2007. I hadn't ever really considered that they would make another one, partly because it's been so long and so much has happened to me since then (I got married, moved to a new state, endured 2 and a half deployments, got a puppy, ETC). I found that when I tried to remember what happened in the last 2 movies, I couldn't even remember the plotlines. So I watched the Shrek 2 and 3 trailers (I would highly recommend it if you can't remember them clearly, although a thorough memory of the last 2 sequels isn't strictly necessary to enjoy this one). This movie actually harks back more to the original movie than the 2 sequels, which was a surprise, but in a good way.

A refresher: in the first movie, Shrek has to save Fiona from her imprisonment in a dragon-guarded tower so Prince Farqaad will leave Shrek's swamp in peace. In the process they fall in love and true love's kiss turns them both into ogres. Donkey falls in the love with the dragon and they have little dragon/donkey babies. In the second one, they have to go to Far Far Away to meet Fiona's parents and break the news that they're both ogres instead of people pretty people. Prince Charming tries to steal her away, but in the end everyone lives happily. In the last one, everyone's gotten used to the idea that Shrek is an ogre and the King, who also happens to be a frog, dies, leaving the kingdom in Shrek's hands. In order to escape this responsibility, he sets off to find a new king, the young an hilariously accurate teenage prince, Arthur. Charming tries to stir up the evil characters of Far Far Away, and even works to turn Arty against Shrek. We also find out that Fiona is pregnant and Shrek deals with the terror that comes along with that. Again, it ends with a happy ending, with Arty becoming king and Shrek and Fiona returning home to the swamp to raise their newborn triplets.

In this latest sequel, Shrek finds himself fatigued by family life. At his triplets' first birthday party, he finds the tedium of parenthood, husbandhood, and gentle friendly ogrehood to be too much. He says some hurtful things to Fiona and wishes he'd never rescued her in the first place. Enter Rumplestiltskin, that master of devious magical contracts. Fealing betrayed that Shrek had stolen his opportunity to rule Far Far Away when he rescued Fiona and thus prevented her parents from selling the kingdom to him to secure their daughter's future (whew, deep breath), Rumple jumps on Shrek's despair and offers him the opportunity to be an Ogre for a Day. Shrek wants to be feared, to be able to take mudbaths when he likes and do whatever he wants. He believes that Rumple's offer is the perfect way to recharge.

Not a stickler for the details, Shrek agrees to any day Rumple wants to take from his life. Rumple takes the day he was born, and so Shrek enters a world in which he never actually existed. Rumple is king (since Shrek didn't save Fiona, her parents signed over the kingdom to Rumple and promptly disappeared). Fiona is an ogre warlord fighting against an oppressive regime. Shrek discovers that he has entered a world where his family not only does not but cannot exist, and he realizes he left behind everything he could ever want without the ability to return to that life.

Adventures ensue, including re-meeting Donkey, a plump Puss in Boots, a gladiator Gingerbread Man, and a battle-hardened Fiona. Of course there's a happy ending, which I won't spoil, but what surprised me the most was my emotion in getting there.

I can relate to this plot because I spend at least 30% of every day thinking about babies. I read baby books, I look at baby bedding, clothing, diapers, bags, strollers, etcetera online, I watch pregnancy and baby shows on TV, I consider how I would like to decorate my nursery, I think about where we're going to move so I can think about what kind of climate I'll have to walk with the stroller in....etc. I recognize that it could be a good 2 or 3 years before we even get pregnant, but I just can't help it. I'm struggling with the desire to start several baby crafting projects, including several designs for baby blankets that I don't need yet. I don't even know what sex my baby will be and I'm already trying to make blankets for it... lol I also spend a lot of time thinking about what it will be like when they get older, when they're terrorizing my house and I can't get a moment of peace. I know it will be crazy and I will probably long for this life of solitude, quiet and endless sleep. But I can't wait. I. Can't. Wait.

So it's very appropriate for me to watch a movie about someone who has everything I want but feels overwhelmed by it. I get that. I have a feeling I will feel like that a lot when I have kids. And yet I want to have kids more than anything else in the world. So this movie captured exactly what I'm feeling right now. He has this perfect life, with a wonderful, loving wife and 3 bouncing babies, but life seems to lose its interest after days upon days of the same routine. I can understand how he would wish to return to his old, quiet life. And so he does, only to discover that he would do anything to go back.

I'll be honest, I had to work really hard to keep from crying in this movie. When he realizes that he may never see his family again--that's heart-wrenching. I can't even imagine. In a moment of rash behavior, he gave up his entire life and may never get it back. In the alternate reality, his family doesn't even exist. His kids don't even exist anymore. And his wife doesn't love him because she's never met him. I felt this hurt very deep in my heart. I tend to react very strongly to pain involving kids, and this was no exception. The idea that he would never see his kids again is even making me almost cry sitting here thinking about it. I just can't handle that kind of awful pain.

Side note: I seem to be extraordinarily emotional tonight, and I don't know why. I almost cried when I saw a commercial saying that we would remember forever the men and women who have given their lives to fight for our country. I almost cried while watching a show about a paralyzed woman who gave birth to twins. Just looking at those little babies made me tear up for some reason. Now I'm watching the History channel show America: The Story of Us (I would highly recommend it, by the way!), and the bombing of Pearl Harbor is making me want to cry. I suppose the link here is that 1) my husband is under the ocean and I haven't heard from him in almost a week, probably won't hear from him for many more to come, and 2) I want a baby so bad I'm already planning my nursery decorations three years in advance. So Shrek Forever After hit me very hard tonight: a man suddenly loses his entire family, his wife and kids, without saying goodbye or getting a chance to ever see them again. That hit me right in the core of my heart.

But as I said, this movie does have a happy ending (of course, it's Shrek!). One of the things I love about the Shrek franchise is their ability to capture certain facets of our culture and of human behavior. Puss has gained a ton of weight in this one, which inevitably brings to mind the growing trend of obese cats in our culture. Makes you wonder, does obesity in our pets say just as much about our culture of overindulgence as obesity in humans? Just a thought. I also feel that Shrek's fatherhood crisis very well captures how many parents feel at one time or other. It's an excellent kids movie, because kids will enjoy the jokes and animation, and parents can relate to the plotline.

I sat in front of a child when I watched it, and it was adorable to hear their comments. Of course I don't remember any of them now, but they made me smile as I sat there. I would highly recommend going to a showing with kids because it's adorable to hear their take on it.

One of the best parts about this movie? It was a mere hour and a half long. Lots of entertainment in such a short amount of time! Hurrah!

I stayed for the animated part of the credits because I was curious to see what they held. They started with bits of scenes from the first movie and continued on through the first 2 sequels. My feeling from this is that the animators chose their favorite scenes from the franchise and put them in the credits of this movie as a way to wrap things up once and for all. I don't expect any more sequels from this franchise, but this was a nice way to bring it to a close.

I would highly recommend this movie. It far exceeded my expectations. It pulled my heartstrings but ultimately left me with a smile. 5 rainbows and donkeys!

Rating (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 5 rainbows and donkeys
Conclusion: HAPPY ENDING

When Harry Met Sally (1989)

Starring Meg Ryan, Billy Crystal, Carrie Fisher, and Bruno Kirby. Directed by Rob Reiner and written by Nora Ephron.

Tagline: Can two friends sleep together and still love each other in the morning?

You know, it's funny, that tagline just about sums up the whole movie, in a way that I've never seen a tagline do before. Well done, tagline writer.

This review will be a little distorted because of the trouble I've had actually watching this film. I know, it's sad that this movie has been around for more than 20 years and I'd never seen it. That's why I was trying so hard to watch it, to see what all the fuss was about. Plus I adore Meg Ryan, so I knew it had to be good.

I checked the DVD out from the library, which might have been a mistake. The disc started skipping right around the time Harry announces his divorce, so I had to stop watching at that point. Not to be deterred, I asked our media people to clean the disc and put it back on hold. I apparently got the exact same copy back, because it made it through the scene at the game where Harry tells Jess his wife's leaving him, only to have it start skipping at the scene where Sally meets Harry in the bookstore. I took it back again and put our only other copy on hold, hoping to God it would play all the way through.

Well this was a few weeks ago. It just finally came in for me, and since I didn't start watching it until after midnight last night (I know, stupid thing to do), I figured I'd just skip the first third. I mean, I've watched the first third of the movie twice but I'd never seen the end. That might have been a mistake too. Because it's been 2 or 3 weeks since I watched the first part, I'll have to see what I can remember from that. There is some disconnect on the plot because of that, but I was up to 2am watching it as it was. I don't regret starting in the middle, only that it might have affected my opinion of the movie. Or maybe not.

A little note: this is one of those movies that  my mom said I couldn't watch as a kid because I wouldn't understand it. As such, I've gone my entire life without seeing it or even knowing what it was about, other than that a young girl or teenager was too young to understand it. Really, after watching it, my mom was quite right. But still, when you spend your entire life thinking there must be something terrible in the movie, it's hard to realize it's just a romantic comedy. With a lot of talk about sex in it. lol

My first impression when I turned on the film the first time was: "Oh my gosh, I didn't think I could ever find Billy Crystal attractive, yet there he is! Look at him!!" When they are dressed to look younger, back in the 70s, they blew my socks off. I mean, Meg Ryan still looks about like she did in this movie (God that woman is gorgeous) but Billy Crystal has changed a lot. And it's not even the fact that he was older in this film--he's actually younger in this one that my other memories. But the two movies I know him best for are City Slickers and The Princess Bride. Miracle Max is not exactly your romantic lead. I was kind of afraid when I saw the actors in this movie that I wouldn't be able to believe the love story, but Billy Crystal is really perfect for the role. He's no Hugh Jackman (Kate and Leopold is one of my all-time favorite movies), but he's got that twitchy little cynical energy that perfectly fits this character. He's funny without being the macho, manly type.

I enjoyed watching the 2 characters age. It's obvious now how dated everything is, but I have to wonder if they realized it then. There was a lot of attention to detail, because I could see an obvious difference from their dress in 1983 compared to their dress in 1989. I'll be honest, I don't even really remember what people were wearing 6 years ago. I don't remember it being all the different from what people wear now. I'm sure it was, but to be able to date the clothing by half-decades--that's quite impressive.

Meg and Billy worked really well together. Meg Ryan is one of my favorite actresses ever. She's so adorable and quirky and funny and so loving. She brings such life to all of her characters and I love her for it. In fact, she's one of the main reasons I went to see The Women, a movie that came out recently containing a sort of reunion of former lead actresses. Her quirky humor combined with Billy Crystal's quick wit was a joy to watch. He doesn't sweep her off her feet like some of her other romantic leads do, but you can see how the two of them are perfectly matched. At least in the movie. :)

One of the things I didn't like about this movie was how slowly it went about resolving the romance between them. Carrie Fisher and Bruno Kirby were wonderfully amusing and well-matched as the sidekick romantic storyline. But when their storyling started and ended in a matter of minutes, I was left disappointed that Harry and Sally were still pretending not to love each other. Then they finally slept together and I was happy. Except that Harry displayed all the tell-tale signs of being uncomfortable and wanting to bolt, and I knew things wouldn't work out the way I wanted. Sally was highly affronted--which she had every right to be--but Harry tried to put it in the past and pretend it never happened. I could see when she told him it was a mistake over dinner that he was genuinely happy to put it behind them. But she was more hurt by his willingness to ignore it so easily than she was by his speedy escape that morning. He quite sealed his doom in that moment.

And then he was trying to be sweet and loving and she was ignoring him. I can understand how you wouldn't want to be hurt by someone like that, but considering how quickly they hugged and made up after an argument earlier in the movie, you'd think she would see sense and at least let him say his piece. Especially if she's mad that he doesn't love her and yet he keeps leaving her funny messages where he sings karaoke to her (adorable!). I suppose she was right to give him his space because he seemed to need that time to think to realize that he really did want her forever.

Which plays out as he dashes across town (literally) to meet her and she tries desperately to leave a party that she can't stand to be at alone. He sees her, tells her he loves her, and she pushes him away. Then he spouts this wonderful line explaining just how much he really loves her and ends with, "When you realize you want to spend the rest of your life with someone, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible." Soooo sweet! But she just brushes it off, saying some nonsense about not being able to hate him when he says stuff like that. I was hoping for more of something like, "I love you too Harry! I've loved you for ages and I was just mad that you didn't love me and now we can be happy together!" I mean sure they kissed and made up, but it wasn't the glorious ending I was hoping for after all this time of knowing they were meant to be together.

I also found the ending a little abrupt. It was cute and a good way to tie in all the documentary couples that were sprinkled throughout the movie, but I actually watched about 3 minutes of the credits, waiting for extra scenes to be stuck in there. You know how some movies will have a sort of epilogue play during the credits? Well I felt I needed one of those to give me closure. Unfortunately I didn't get one, so I ended up feeling like something was still wanting from the film.

I realize that I am giving a less-than-stellar review to a film that many have claimed to be their favorite movie of all time. I apologize. I love the happy endings to be perfect and clear-cut, and I don't like to have to sludge through a lot of nonsense to get there. Not that there was a great deal of nonsense in the movie; I just felt that they could have gotten together after they slept together, or even way before that, and I would have been satisfied. Of course, then you lose the whole point of the movie, which was captured so perfectly by that tagline: "Can two friends sleep together and still love each other in the morning?"

One of the reasons the movie was hard for me to watch was their time of separation at the end. It was Christmastime and they were alone and both suffering for it, but Sally wouldn't talk to him. I really related to Harry at this point. I spent October through the beginning of January by myself last year because my husband was out to sea. It was horrible. You can't even imagine what it's like to spend the entire holiday season--Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, your wedding anniversary, and New Year's--by yourself until you've actually been through it. That was after my husband came home 3 days before Christmas the year before. We haven't spent the holiday season together since 2005. It's really hard. At least in '08 I had his homecoming to look forward to. Last year, I was just miserable. Why should I put up a tree if there's no one else here to enjoy it? Why should I put out Christmas decorations if I'll just have to put them away later? Why should I have to get people presents if I'm not even going to celebrate Christmas with anyone? and on and on. I ended up having an excellent Christmas day celebration with some friends, but the time leading up to that (and even afterwards) was a really trial for me. Our wedding anniversary is December 29th (not to mention that the anniversary of when we started dating is November 29th), so having to spend that alone on top of everything else was pure torture.

As I said, I felt Harry's pain at the end of the movie. Hearing the Christmas songs, seeing the snow and the trees and seeing him sitting alone, feeling the agony of loneliness... I know how that feels. Sure, the reasons were different, but it doesn't hurt any less. When Sally jumped into his arms on New Year's, I was actually slightly bitter and jealous. I said to the screen, "Do you know how much I wish I could have done that? That my husband would have just appeared out of nowhere to make it all better? You'd better feel happy!" I guess that may have tainted my experience. I almost felt like crying when I saw Harry walking along the streets by himself because that's such a horrible experience, spending Christmas alone when you wish with your whole heart that you could be spending it with the one you love. I couldn't fully appreciate what Sally was going through because I was feeling so upset for Harry. Again, it just felt like everyone would have been saved a whole lot of grief if they had just been able to admit that they loved each other at first. Oh well, it's not my movie.

I enjoyed the film overall. Meg and Billy were perfectly humorous and quirky together, and I felt there was some great humor in there. As a romantic film, I probably wouldn't rank it among my top 10. I won't be pulling it out whenever I need a pick-me-up because I do feel that the happy, romantic part is too long in coming. Still, for the joy it gave me while I watched it, I give it 4 rainbows.

Rating (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 4 rainbows
Conclusion: HAPPY ENDING

Robin Hood (2010)

Starring Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, William Hurt, Mark Strong, Oscar Isaac, Matthew Macfadyen, and Kevin Durand. Directed by Ridley Scott.

A small disclaimer: I went to see this movie within an hour after finding out I was going to have to pay $1200 to have a bladder stone removed from my dog's abdomen. I might have been a little distracted.

I went into this movie without any real expectations. Robin Hood is cool, and Russell Crowe as the suppressed but badass hero in Gladiator was cool, so it had a lot of potential. Plus Cate Blanchett is wonderful, Mark Strong is becoming one of my favorite actors, and Matthew Macfadyen played Mr. Darcy! Of course, I went in simply with the knowledge that Russell Crowe was Robin Hood and Cate Blanchett was some random woman, so I can't really say I went to see it for all those actors. Those were just treats waiting to be discovered. But I also heard right before I went that it had received some bad reviews, so I went in as a completely blank slate: it could be totally kick-ass, or it could totally suck. Or it could be simply mediocre.

On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most kickass and 1 being the worst movie ever made, I would give this movie a 6 or a 7. I enjoyed my experience overall, but there were certain parts that threw me a little bit and brought my experience of the film down. I'll try to follow my thoughts chronologically, but of course, that's rarely successful. Still, it's worth a try.

I started the film knowing only that this was meant to be a prequel to the tale of Robin Hood. I suppose I should therefore clarify my understanding of the legend of Robin Hood going in. I'll admit that my only real experience with Robin Hood is the 1973 Disney animated movie where they're all portrayed as animals, with a little bit of Robin Hood: Men in Tights thrown in there. Here's what I know about Robin Hood: he steals from the rich to give to the poor because the evil Prince John and the evil sheriff of Nottingham are overtaxing the poor to fill their coffers. He has his "merry men" and his best buddies Little John and Friar Tuck. He falls in love with the beautiful Maid Marian, who in the Disney movie seemed to be somewhat like royalty, at least in my perception as a child. Robin is the best archer in the land and gleefully uses his talents to make fools of the authorities so he can help the poor maintain their lowly but happy lifestyles. In the end, King Richard the Lion-hearted comes back to save the day and Prince John is left sucking his thumb and calling for his mama. End of story.

The following names sound familiar to me even if I can't tell you why: King Richard, King John, Loxley, Robin Hood, Little John, Friar Tuck, Maid Marian, Will, and Eleanor of Aquitaine. Obviously some of these were mentioned above, but the others sound familiar from something other than my Disney Robin Hood experience. Loxley and Eleanor of Aquitaine are particularly troubling because I don't remember how they fit in.

This movie, being a prequel, should presumably follow a line that ends with all of these characters ready to fill their roles in the great legend of Robin Hood. That was not quite the case with all the characters. King Richard died early, as did Sir Robert Loxley. These were both necessary plot points for this movie, but they left me confused. If King Richard dies, how is he supposed to save the day when Prince John ruins his country? I still can't figure out why the name Loxley is familiar (perhaps it's from Men in Tights?), but if he's so familiar to me, how is it possible that he died before the famous tale began? Unless there is some alternative way that the story goes (and believe me, I'm not so naive as to think the Disney version is the definitive version), I don't understand how these characters can have passed on so early. So that left me wondering throughout the movie what I was missing.

Another problem early on: a strange desire to turn off the television. Do you ever get that feeling, when you're just sitting in front of the TV and watching some mindless movie, that you have something better you could be doing? I tend to sit down in front of the TV and become so entranced that hours will pass before I feel strong enough to turn it off. So when I am hit by a sudden urge to turn off the TV and do something more productive, I feel strangely free from its bonds and figure I'd better take advantage of the feeling and turn it off straight away. Well, I had that feeling toward the beginning of Robin Hood. I am highly entertained by noble stories of battles, but sometimes they just don't hold my attention. This movie started with King Richard fighting battles on his way back from the Crusades (already?), and since I wasn't entirely sure what was going on, I found my attention wandering. Of course I didn't leave, but it was very strange for me to have that urge. I suspect it may have had something to do with the fact that I felt so terrible about my little doggie's bladder stone, but I don't remember thinking about it specifically when I had the desire to stop watching. I just figured I could find something more interesting to do.

The movie did get more interesting. I particularly liked their attention to historical detail. They portrayed these characters as they really would have been, dirty and with grimy clothes and slogging through the mud. I liked that. I sometimes feel that we romanticize the middle ages, but this did not have pretty ladies in sparkly dresses scampering around their palace. Instead, there were men (and women) slogging it out in the fields, trying to plant and push their wagons and live life like it must have been in 1199. I was very impressed by that.

I also find that I appreciate stories like this more as I get older because I actually understand something about history. When I saw that it was set it 1199, I immediately put it into the historical context of the Norman invasion of 1066, this being less than 150 years after that (the movie introduces you to the tension between England and France right off the bat, so considering their history is important to understanding what has brought them to this point). I also have studied the Tudor reign, particularly during the time of Henry VIII, quite a bit. Seeing how fitfully arrogant King Henry was has opened my eyes to the way royalty really acted back then. There was no gentle king with his lovely princess who wed her to the handsome prince. Sure, Sleeping Beauty makes for a nice story, but the monarchy was much messier than that. In the court, there was intrigue and the king's hogwash about "god's divine power" and someone always trying to get ahead by playing to the king's favor and stepping on someone else. Below that, there seemed to be very little attention paid to what the actual commonpeople were dealing with. Kings felt free to overtax the people to fund their own exorbitant and expensive lifestyles, as well as the wars they waged to win themselves glory. [see the French monarchy just before the French Revolution in 1789 as a great example]

It is vital to understand this aspect of history to appreciate this version of Robin Hood. Prince John eagerly awaits the day he will become king, and within moments of hearing that his brother has died, leaving him the crown, he already shows his selfishness by refusing any reward to Robin for traveling the perilous road to bring him the news. Instead, he giggles and remarks that as Robin's father owes back taxes, the king will keep his gift as payment. Not a good omen.

I suppose at this point I should take a step back, as Robin was not actually "Robin" at that point. There was a great deal of intrigue leading up to this point--in sum, an Englishman named Godfrey has allied himself with the French to overthrow the English monarchy and rule all of England himself. He plots to kill King Richard, who dies before he can kill him. But he ends up killing a bunch of the king's knights in the process, including one named Sir Robert Loxley. He's the only one left alive with Robin and his men find them, and he asks Robin to take the crown to England and return his sword to his father in Nottingham. Robin agrees and he and his men take on the cloaks of the knights because knights are much more respected than mere archers.

A side note--that was another part of history that I appreciated about this movie. Because we have all grown to love the story of the good-hearted archer Robin Hood and his men, we tend to assume that archers were on par with knights in the eyes of the people. Not so. Several different times, this movie makes mention of the fact that archers (or "yeomen") are almost a joke in their culture. It's important to understand just how lowly Robin started to be able to appreciate how far he climbed simply on his own merit.

So we have Robin sailing back to England with the crown of England under the name of Loxley, and the king reminds "Loxley" that is father owes him money. Thankfully all of Richard's knights have been away in the Crusades for 10 years, so no one knows he's just an impersonator.

Robin sets out for Nottingham to return Loxley's sword, and he discovers a saying cut into its hilt that seems to remind him of his childhood, which until this point has been very vague, even for him. Half of the movie is spent explaining who Robin's father was and how he is (sort of) important to the plot later on. Long story short, he goes to Nottingham (aha, the stage is set for our legend!), meets Maid Marian, is asked to continue portraying Loxley by Marian's father-in-law (oh yes, Marian was married to Loxley before the wars, before she even met Robin--so does that mean she's not really Maid Marian anymore??), and goes about his business pretending to be a knight returned from war, married to Maid Marian, all so that if Loxley Sr. dies, Marian can keep her land and Robin can learn more about his family.

Now at this point, I recognized a feature of some of my favorite romance novels. I love it when the two characters are forced to be married before they love each other, because it makes anything they do afterward totally legit. They were already married, after all! Of course, I don't know that Marian and Robin hardly even kissed in this movie, but I liked knowing that at any time, if they felt like consummating their "marriage," they could do so. Adds a nice element to the movie. :)

Blah blah blah, I'm terrible at summarizing... I guess the point I'm trying to make is that this movie was much more complicated than I expected. Not in a bad way, but certainly more than I realized going into it. Godrey wanted the English crown, so he teamed up with the French to invade England, all the while stirring up dissent in the north over taxation. Again, some understanding of English history is handy here. Robin is not really Robin but Loxley to half the characters, and he gets married to Marian before he even knows her, and the church is involved in stealing the villagers' grain (which is where Friar Tuck comes in, saying "I've never been much of a churchy friar." hehe PS he's a beekeeper?) I didn't realize Robin's sidekick was Little John until about 3/4 of the way through the movie, which I suppose makes his other two helpers known merry men as well. In addition to all this, the newly crowned King John has married a French princess and fired his chief counselor to put Godfrey in his position and disrespects his mother, who is apparently Eleanor of Aquitaine, and acts like a petulant child who is sent by God to destroy the lives of everyone in England. There's A LOT going on in this movie.

There is very little humor in this movie, but I'll share some of my favorite lines:

Loxley Sr. to Robin: "You will dine with us tonight, but first you will bathe. You stink." lol (a great reference to the fact that medieval times were disgusting!)

Robin and Marian talking about her marriage to Loxley Jr.: "Yes, we were married for a week and then he went off to war. I barely even knew him."
Robin: "A good (k)night."
Marian: "Short but sweet, yes."
Robin: "No, I meant that he was a good man, a good knight..."
Marian: *blushes scarlet* "Oh, of course..."
haha You have to hear that one to appreciate it, but it was hilarious.

One thing I didn't like was how Robin went from just wanting to get out of the Crusades to suddenly fighting on behalf of the people of Nottingham and falling in love with Marian. They hardly talk to each other, so it's hard to see how they would fall in love so quickly. Plus why would Robin care if the grain was taken by the church, and why would he bother to plant it in secret? He's only been there like 2 days and there's no guarantee he'll be staying. I just thought it was a bit contrived.

Other than that, the rest of the plot seemed believable. I could never figure out what King John was going to do, if he was going to cut down his rebels or use them to defeat France, but I suppose that was the point. He is utterly selfish and no matter what he says, you must always assume that he will only do what serves him best. He seemed a bit wishy washy, but as it was all in the name of what he wanted at the moment, I suppose it makes sense.

This movie, while enjoyable overall, does not ever reach the scope or emotional pull of Gladiator, that other most famous product of Ridley Scott's direction and production and Russell Crowe's acting. Russell Crowe was also a producer on this one, which probably comes with his enormous fame as well as his previous experience working with Scott. I suspect the reason this movie was not as good was simply the script. It seemed too rooted in the grandiose to be able to capture the individual agony that was so vital to the story in Gladiator. Sure, there were battles and combat in that one, but I felt that Robin Hood was nearly all battles and combat, without sufficiently leaving time for character development. It's like they wanted us to see what kind of movers and shakers these characters were even before they became known for the legends they are today, without giving us the emotional connection that makes them so popular.

I remember quite enjoying the movie when I walked out of the theater. I wasn't whistling or giggling like I sometimes do after a great movie, but I was glad I had gone to see it. I felt like I got a little glimpse into history, like I understood a little bit more about what life was like back then, even if I couldn't quite match up all the dangling storylines with where they fit in the plot of Robin Hood as we know him, defender of the poor and bane of the rich. I even found myself contemplating the way the king behaved the next day without even remembering where I had gotten such an image--it took a good 30 seconds of contemplation before I was able to place the memory as coming from the movie. I know I shouldn't take my history from Hollywood, but it speaks highly for this movie that I felt it so accurately portrayed politics in the middle ages that I had already committed its scenes into my memory.

Some random observations to end this monstrosity of a review: The absolute strangest moment in the movie was when I looked at the sheriff of Nottingham, really looked at him, and realized he was played by Matthew Macfadyen, beloved actor of Mr. Darcy! To go from having his pleading eyes as Mr Darcy take my breath away to being disgusted by the liberties he took with Marian was quite a shock. He's really a dufus in this movie, meant to be mocked in every way. You would never know it was him if you weren't paying attention. What a shock. From dreamy Austen hunk to despised slimeball sheriff of Nottingham. Who woulda thunk.

I really enjoyed the French in this movie. I feel that when two cultures are represented in a way that reflects what actually happened at the time, you feel like you are seeing a more authentic presentation of history. All French people in this movie spoke French, with Godrey even switching into French when it suited him to address his allies (Mark Strong has an excellent French accent, huge kudos to him!). Even Robin spoke French for a moment when demanding that his French opponents surrender, and I felt this lent a huge dose of credibility to the story. If Robin had shouted "Stop!" the French would have had no idea what he was saying. But when he shouted "Arretez!" you immediately understood that he was addressing the French in a way that they would understand and respond to. I really liked that.

Overall, this was a very pretty movie that brought in historical elements to make the story feel more real. Certain parts of the plot seemed to be stretched to their thinnest point to be able to give this movie its own plot but still maintain the integrity of the original Robin Hood story. At times I was distracted by it but at others, I appreciated their creativity. Because I left the theater with a smile on my face, I will give this movie 3 proud stallions.

Rating (out of 5 rainbows and ponies): 3 proud stallions
Conclusion: HAPPY ENDING

-PrincessM