Basically a scatter of notes for this film, uncovered and ready to spit out.

Straw Dogs:

Pearly white smiles. Cast, right on was appealing. Including The Monkee’s “I’m Going Down” song from my childhood from the brginning. Starts off like every other one does.

“What you done I heard about?” … “Probably nothin”

And the fridge isn’t damn cold enough.

They know their cars, guns, and bars. Which iclude how fast the hunt, what they hunt, and either Jack John or Jose and how fast they throw ‘em back,

Classic story of a man from the city moving into the country to write his novel. Another writer not knowing what he’s got himself into. Not realizing that even his girlfriend likes “attention”, just as any other woman does, but not to this very odd degree. It’s like she was asking for it. 

Just don’t think this writer from New York is about to cut it here to write his book, in any way shape or form. Despite his weak attempts at even trying to work at his old fashioned type writer, I see nothing accomplished, He’s the guy who knows what global warming is, fashion, the library, and a lack of comon sense compared to the common folk of the south.

Doesn’t seem to be that big of a deal,  but somehow in this movie, it becomes a big deal.

Tention builds for the couple as they try to adjust to life there. 

But so much attention that is brought to the women in this film is what destroys it all.

Not just because David sticks out like a sore thumb, he is a nice guy, just different from the back woods construction type that his wife grew up around. When meeting her Ex boyfriend in a local bar in town, David hires “Charlie”, Amy’s Ex to work on the home that used to be her fathers while David works on his book about Stalingrad. After David is further introduced to the local flavors, things take a shocking turn, without making much sense. Wondering the whole time if it would lead to something that made more sense, we have “Of Mice and Men” character “Lenny” made over by Prison Breaks Dominic Purcell.”Of Mice and Men” meaning in here? Not even close enough to compare to the famous “Lenny”. It’s almost hard to see this duplicate, eventhough it’s protrayed by one of my “Prison Break” favorite inmates, Dominic Purcell. Too much?

This casting call needs a swift kick in the ass for this. The option ALONE to cast Purcell in this movie was wrong from the start. Still waiting for something more concrete. This, meaning that he SANK while doing what he was told as an actor much more qualified for a role such as this.

being not so conclusive to constructive conteplation, he stays. 

Maybe he should have just stuck his nose in a book and kept it there.

The agression of the towns people continue.

You almost wish there was something you could do, or something that Charlie should have done sooner. I don’t think it would have taken much of a genious to figure out what may have happened if you didn’t put your priorities in order and protect what was yours in the first place.

This “Man Versus Wild” thing kills me everytime. There is almost always something more important to be doing while these banchees are running out into the woods trying to concur something as if it were a war, or a dramatic version of what today we call a depression.

This “itch” a man needs to control.

(I’d prefer sports that include golf or fishing to achieve that confidence or competitiveness). But I’m sure we’d all agree to see this man do anything, anything at all…

Crime is something we think will never happen to us, but in my mind, if you are the captain of your family you have a daily choice to do what matters most. Vacation and hobby’s aside, Charlie had a feeling as we can see in this film.

Whatever possessed him to go out and become someone he isn’t was just a cover up to maintain what I call a “cover”. Meanwhile, his wife is being raped, more than once. As David’s out hunting down what skills he thinks killing could do, you can see he isn’t proud of this acomplishment. So, what was the point? 

Apparently they only have one cop in the whole town. This is ridiculous. This cop drinks at the local bar and is friends with everyone! Come on! LOL!

It lasted too long. Now couldn’t we just play nice and write a novel? 

“Cover”, is the word I use, but it would and could most commonly be used in the form of a genuine “put on”… Sorry about your luck Davie Jones, you could almost feel something coming, not exactly what, but you would have been much more of a man in my eyes if you did what you would have normally done. Be present, as yourself. Leave the shooting or lack there of to whoever else and be youself, and do what you came here to do. Write.

But this must be the definition of left brain regret.

I can’t function any other excuse. Peer pressure would be the juvinile approached excuse for doing something he didn’t even want to do in the first place.

I’m sturggling as a viewer, wondering if that alone may be the theory behind this movie. Or maybe it’s all muscle to muscle over a woman. Or who can piss the farthest. But, again, I’m not finished. I have hopes this movie means something more than my theories.

Without watching everything prior, just tidbits at a time…I love when David comes home to find his wife in bed and as he’s telling her how he is going to “fire” the redneck’s who left him astray in the woods to hunt all day, I wonder how Amy can simply muster up the words “good for you, Coward.”

Because she’s right.

But why tell him the truth of what happend to her when he was away? It would only make him feel hopeless, and she needs him and every single bit of energy of power he has left in him to protect her in the future. Most women are stronger emotinally, and I’m hoping she keeps this to herself until and only if it can be used to fuel something inside David for his own or her own defense. Telling him would only banish that and give her a sense of helplessness, which without help, will most definatley hurt her for the rest of her life. A burden no woman that is selfless can pondure onto someone they love. But eventually, it should come out.

How? My best guess is yours.

Opinionted: Movie about “prey”, in more ways than one. “The Kill” the hunted for sport (when you are not accustumed to it) and the “prey” as in “Rape” (when you are not a willing participant)…

I think that once Michael learned that Amy didn’t love him back after his rape, he didn’t feel obligated to save her from everything else that followed. Lounging in one (of many) of Amy’s fathers chairs, I think he finally realized he had no control over her at all. Rape is the most common form of control to people that have that sickning power struggle. 

When in Rome? Do as the “Romans do…” 

What happens in Vegas…Stays in Vegas

And apparently, whatever football and construction workers have to do with “Straw Dogs” is still a mystery to me.

Straw Dogs: Def:

In business, something (an idea, or plan, usually) set up to be knocked down. It’s the dangerous philosophy of presenting one mediocre idea, so that the listener will make the choice of the better idea which follows.

To say the least, I wrote enough about it to say that I enjoyed what I saw. Give it a shot yourself and analyze it this far, It’s a dare.

prone to dominance displays and aggressiveness, merely fooling ourselves into thinking we’re not slaves to fleshly impulses

The first editions of this film are one thing. But this new verson pales in comparison. With a much cleaner and collectivley looking cast, the saying you can’t get by on looks alone makes more than perfect sense here. 

Wolf Creek:

Three friends who embark on a 3 week adventure to Australia, in the middle of nowhere to site see abdolutley nothing fun. Well, a meteriod circle that’s there at a national park, but that’s about it. Time’s up. Literally. Their watches stop working, which makes no sense at all after you watch the whole movie, it was never explained. Aliens? UFO’s? And then of course, their car wont start and they are rescued by a crazy looking older man that tows them away to be tortured. Sounds like a few loose ends to this, or else I just missed the boat. Either way, it was what it was, and I usually don’t think of movies in such a simple way, it’s just another “Joy Ride” type of film for me.

This film purifies of repulsion that provides some sense of the experience of death which in my opinion, that is the essence of the horror movie experience. The more gresome, torturus, shocking it may be, we can measure on that how much we think of the film or how little we dont.

The cast, equally involved, meaning there was no main character so to speak, did a wonderful job protraying the British and Austrailian speach, although some what hard for me to understand, I got the just of it. 

Putting me on edge, but not the sickect thing I’ve seen, nor the scariest. I like it because it “could” happen. Beliefs that this was based on a true story is false. It however, was thought up because of a real life back-packer serial killer named Ivan Milat. One of his victims did get away, but that’s about as much as I know about that, and the movie wasn’t so fantastic for me to educate on the subject. Just crazy murders out for what they consider a thrill. Props for actor John Jarrat, who protrayed the villan quite nicely. But I guess I shouldn’t use the word nice, the fictatious “Mick Taylor” was psycho. 

I’d rather not back-pack to tour “down under” anytime, like…ever. With the movie’s beginning statement that says that 30,000 people are reported missing in Australia every year, 90% are found within a month (wondering if that means dead or alive…I’m thinking DEAD), and some are never seen again. But, with this being a fictional movie, who knows what to believe. 

Lauren German (Hostel Part 2)

Hostel Part 1:

54:34 minutes into the movie, I still have no idea what the idea behind this is. If there isn’t a point, reason, definition to this at all, I will be disapponted. Because of the unique flair of it to begin with. Raw and brave to put on a show of this type. Horror porn? But with a good beginning, I felt as though I was watching these guys vacationing and it was more than easy to follow, but not dumb. “Flighty” movies, another term for “air head”, movies that have no barrier, ideas that just bounce off one another into a scramble of a terrible outcome. This, for what I’ve seen in the first 55 minutes, is not “that”. I want to keep watching, so I will. 

I’ll be with you shortly.

Oh, and P.S. (No, I don’t LOVE you, I just think the robbing little kids are hilarious. Best thing I’ve seen yet besides a great beginning story line that follows through as of yet. I have to admit, I have high hopes for the remainder, and NO, it has nothing to do with the nudity, although however real and “revealing” artistically in story mode, here’s to hoping things don’t begin turning BLEAK.)

“You are so Serious, Mr. Serious American Man”…   (Now, really…? Wouldn’t we all after 2 of our friends disappeared? Funny museum, free, but nonetheless…pretty funny business and I woulda walked out of there so fast I’d never have been there in the first forbidden place!) 

Classic: Coulda, Woulda, and Shoulda got away when you had the chance. I’m still waiting for the unlikelihood of a movie like that.

Jay Hernandaz is the best. Credits to Jay. Amazing and as they say, Crazy Beautiful. 

Second part needed surely, but the ending and the event’s after the first hour leading up to the ending were the best. But we couldn’t have anything without the start. I give Terintino props, yet again. No, this wasn’t saw, but close. Close they say, but no cigar. Liked everything leading up to events that happened in more of a storybook theme, rather than just guessing why we were immediatley locked in one room trying to escape. Credits, for sure. Now on to the next part. I coudn’t see myself skipping over it, I’m just hoping (yes, high hopes again what can I say…) that the second part continues as it should and it’s continuiously better and better. So far, I think I’ve already made it clear that I’m all over this. Admittance of a “Like”, but not “Love”, as if there were a button for that.

Henry: Portrait of a serial killer:

Henry Lee Lucas, what a troubled man.

Although “Henry” the film has been loosely based upon his own crimes, it is nevertheless chilling in it’s own nature. Serial killing during this time was not something that people made movies about, especially in the way this was filmed. A type of documentary of sorts, to keep all the watchers in us amused.

There wasn’t a time during the movie that I was bored, or ever thought to escape without pushing pause. But not without feeling weird about it.

Mr. McNaughton, Rooker, and Richard Fire really pulled this one off. A slender base would agree with me, but they are more prone to the up to date style of horror films. A more decorated fashion in the filming industry, it kills me.

Most of the horror films today are based on a scare tactic of torture.

“Henry: Portrait of a serial killer” is based on simple execution style of mass murdering.

Oh, and while he tapes it to watch it later… Grubby and to the point, I think we can all lose sleep over this one, and…isn’t that the point?

How real do we want this? You tell me.

(Either you want a real story or you want fiction.)

An artistic portraitial is better suited for an audience than something so soild and expected. I enjoyed being surprised, I guess you could say.

But all in all, this man in real life truely crossed too many lines and this movie stays with me since it ended. It’s been a week and I still am thinking about it. Maybe it’s because “Henry” had nothing else to do but this. How horrifying his life was, what he did to others, this is simply a movie about what he did and that’s what it’s intent is. To show us. To scare us. As we try to understand why he commited his crimes, we watch this film efficently, waiting for a move to be made. Then we ask ourselves why that move was made, and if it makes sense to us.

You can almost see things though his eyes….at first. Then, of course, he goes too wild and it all becomes insanity in route of curing his cynical boredom. Not all movies (like “Saw” and “Hostel”) are spotlighted with dramatizations. I like this one because it goes without saying. It doesn’t need to explain itself. It just is what it is. And that’s the raw feeling that I like about this film.

Tracy Arnold shines in this movie, playing as the “sister”… something as old as 1986 and as captivating as she was, she really hit a nerve in the right direction. (In the eye with a metal comb…brother), which was the hardest thing to watch. The incest was the most grueling thing to capture. And I really high five a mass murderer here, for saving her. But then, it’s all over evil, so I counter-dict myself.

Of course, we have nothing to worry about, because in the end, Henry picks up the tab on all accounts.

What’s in that suitcase again? LOL… Where is she now?

I’m truly surprised that I have not noticed her in something else. No superstar, but something about it really fit. Hat’s off to Rooker, who protrayed “Henry”, he really made the movie everything that it was. He really made it his “business” to get into character for this role, and I truly believe that he could have fooled us all with his acting abilities. Bravo.

   (What’s with this cover?!?) LOL…

Source Code

Source says that half way through the movie, it gets a little encapsulated.

But Jake Gyllenhaal makes this refreshing, which I think he does in all of his films. Something about his acting ability doesn’t smother me one tiny little bit…

So, its about a soldier who wakes up in something called the “Source Code”. The explanation of what that exactly is, doesn’t really have an exact definition. Well, at least to me anyway. But here it goes…something like this

“The capsule is a manifestation, and where you are is classified. Captain, you cannot deviate from the mission, even to investigate. It cannot be unsettled. Different realities. You are a hand on a clock. We set you and you move forward. We set you back, and you go back. That is the reality of your function. It has been sanctioned by military court to be served. Complete the mission. No more rest periods. Being a part of this program is an honor.”

Yes, the movie has a good plot as far as plots go. The preview alone was fun to watch.

“Manifestation” and “Classified” are two words used a bit too much though. I understand they are strong words, but saying them once would have been adequate enough for me at least.

The movie was an hour and a half long, but it felt like it was only a half hour! Not because it was so wonderful, it was just so simple. I think if I blinked, there it would go.

To top all of this off…I wouldn’t have cared where it went. Where was the effort? Oh, I forgot. There wasn’t any.

Sources also say this movie sucked. I don’t care what “Rotten Tomatoes” movie reviewers say. I like the comment that this is nothing but a strong sci-fi movie idea gone super soft. And these effects? This day in age?

Come on…Low Budget Bernard…

-Giving my personal opinion on classics has to be the hardest thing to do when it comes to movie reviewing. I feel as if I’m disabled, in the mind frame that I feel is most appropriate. To watch something that is a classic and even for a second, pretend that it could have been better if this, or that…just doesn’t feel quite right. So, I leave them with my favorite quotes after watching them. After so long, it seems…was I ever going to get around to watching them at all? Well, I’d hate to think of that. I have so much enjoyed the time I have invested in watching these classic films. Due to shine above the rest with it’s beginning or start of what we know now of movies. Credit galore, as it already was, like a twice sprinkled cupcake after the frosting dried.- Leslie :)

“Out Of Africa”

Meryl Streep & Robert Redford

“I’ve got this little thing that I’ve learned to do lately…when it gets so bad and I can’t go on, I try to make it worse.”

“And when I am certain that I can’t stand it, I go one moment more. And then I know I can bare anything.”

“It’s an odd feeling, farewell… there is some envy in it. Men go off to be tested for courage, and if we are tested at all, it’s for patience and for doing without. Perhaps for how long we can endure lonliness…”

“Somewhere In Time”

Jane Seymour & Christopher Reeve

“Come back to me”

“Is there any way that I can tell you how my life has changed? Any way at all to let you know what sweetness you have given me? There is so much to say. I cannot find the words. Except for I love you and such would I say to him if he were really here.”

“Gone With The Wind”

“Land is the only thing in the world worth working for, worth fighting for, worth dying for, because it’s the only thing that lasts…”

“No, I don’t think I will kiss you, although you need kissing, badly. That’s what’s wrong with you. You should be kissed and often, and by someone who knows how…”

“Wuthering Heights”

“If he loved you with all the power of his soul for a whole lifetime, he couldn’t love you as much as I do in a single day…”

“You’re all of life to me. Let me be a single breath of it for you.”

“I cannot live without my life and I cannot die without my soul…” 

Cell Phone, Zippo, Glow Sticks, Knife, Flashlight….check.

Filled flask and some Xanax, check check. Those are important, LOL.

Thank Goodness Ryan Reynolds has talent along with good looks, without that, I’m not sure what I’d think of this movie.

Come to think of it, I still don’t really know what I think.

It is a knuckle biter though. And I don’t mind seeing the work of anyone who can entertain the audience with just a few props and all alone, (as I’ve mentioned before about Tom Hanks in “Cast Away”)

Does make for a very low budget feel though, because it was.

Paul Conroy is a US contractor sent to Iraq as a supply driver. But here was an Iraqis attack, which leads to this claustrophobic nightmare.

It did make me question a few things while watching, a few details here and there that make you think twice of why they did that and why is he doing that…

“Don’t use your Zippo to see your cell phone, you’ll just run it out quicker!”

“Wasn’t his cell phone right on his chest in the beginning? Wouldn’t that be the first thing you would do…call as many people as possible?”

“Cell phone settings cant be that hard to change!”

“Stand up or try to plow your way out! Don’t just lay there!”

And how far underground can someone really last without air? Wouldn’t he have ran out of air before he had a chance to run a snake off? (Eh, just throw some dust at it…)

(So, yeah, some pretty annoying questions were asked by me and Neil while watching “Buried”, silly questions or not, we just wanted the guy to help himself a little more)

I realize that waking up inside of a coffin is something I’ve never experienced before, so I should stop before I get ahead of myself and just explain how I felt about the movie. That’s what I’m here to do.  

With thatsaid, it was interesting when we hear that he is from Hastings, Michigan. The area code used in the movie was spot on. 269, that’s right. I live in near Hastings, and it’s always fun when a movie has something familiar like that in it. But it certainly makes you wonder if this was or wasn’t a true story, either way, wouldn’t this give terrorists too good of an idea? Strange…but too awful to research and really no point.

Speaking of research, I thought from the start of the movie that it would be neat if we, as the audience, were being tricked. That the whole thing was just a research project for our main character, Paul. That by the end, he would just stand up and pop out of the coffin and he would see that he was in a glassed-in lab with scientists monitoring him.

Better seen on a big screen but decent enough to watch on just about any size screen. There isn’t much to see, but a better effect would be had in a theatre. Making you feel as if you are in the coffin with him. That kind of ”In-boxed” feel.

Loving the “Zippo” effects and the “gnawing” at the rope in the beginning, it truly does make you want to watch the outcome of the film. Great performance by Reynolds, but the creepy voice and terrible approach at a savior named Dan Brenner, (voice by Robert Paterson) could have been cast a little more believeable.

I Always enjoy a different approach to movie filming, so I’d recommend watching this, but it isn’t the best thing I’ve seen lately. Not a total waste of time, but well enough of one if you’re the type that doesn’t see out of the box.

Let’s talk about producers long lunch breaks! Again, a movie that lacks any middle or end story. Huge gaps in filming the new fabulous fad?

Most of the reviews I’ve read about “Blue Valentine” are spot on, but I disagree with it being most or all of Gossling’s fault for the movie’s disarray. He plays his parts well, physically and emotionally. And Willams did the same. They played along with what was asked of them, how little this film had to really show how much these two actors could really shine together. It could have been hot. It could have been really amazing.

This particular movie had poor script. And every other tool in the shed (including the kitchen sink) to have been worth it. Why wasn’t that apparent? Or was it?

Ryan Gossling has something about him that makes the roles he plays so believeable. It’s odd to presume that it would have been better if Williams and Gossling together should have taken their scripts and thrown them in the garbage and just acted together “free-style”. Evenly speaking, it would have been a better idea and made “Blue Valentine” something to remember. He can’t always be the guy from “The Notebook”, I know…I know.

Michelle Williams speaks and Ryan Gossling repeats. That’s fun for about five minutes. We see more of the back of her head than of her beautiful face. Pouty and miserable, terribly unhappy with what it seems like a normal marriage trying to regain some spark. I repeat, it would have been worth it.

Whenether it just be myself not undertanding why the movie mattered, I looked so forward for this movie to come out and play, only to feel injured afterward. Or it may be more than just me, a complete hands down decision that this movie matters a whole lot, pusing people closer to divorce this day in age and having it make sense and desireable to do so.

It’s sad to think that after being married and raising a child, only emptiness remains and all the love is gone. I just don’t agree. You can try with all your might to make things work, but nothing will prevail if the other person in the room doesn’t want to make things work. It’s just sad.

We can hope for them that they find a way to work things out, although we are not shown exactly what is wrong…We can watch as the film brings them together for the first time and watch as it all falls apart after a seven or eight year gap…

Then we can watch as Gossling walks away, defeated by the woman he loves who decides not to do anything at all. Marriage is hard, but why think watching it all fall apart is entertaining? It just isn’t. And yeah, I get the fact that the definition of the movie is meant to be a devastatingly sad story about falling out of love. But WHY???

Sitting here after the long depressing haul, I try to think of how the movie had EVERYTHING it needed to become greatness. It had promise. The “future room” was fun and the rasins were even more so. The camera angles were amazing…(You’d have to see it though, to believe me, and I’m making that kinda hard, my apologies!)

My point for this review is to say that Williams and Gossling playing “along” with their roles that they were suppose to was the biggest let down. They should have took control and made it everything it could have been, with a different approach. Not completely scratch out the whole concept of the film, but tweak it a little…but since it’s over…let’s just pretend it didn’t happen. I’m not an idiot, I realize that actors only do what they are told. I guess.

Wonderfully directed by Tony Goldwyn. Amazing performances by every cast member. Yes, this is going to be one of my good reviews…

Hilary Swank is incredible.

Sam Rockwell is incredible.

Based on the true story of Betty Anne Waters and her brother Kenneth Waters.

When Kenny was convicted of a murder and sentenced to prison, life without parole in 1983, Betty Anne knew he was innocent.

With no resources to prove his innocence, she goes back to school to earn her GED and then applies to law school. The deep breath I took after hearing her plans combined with the phone calls she waits for every Sunday from her brother begin the film’s impression that lasts the whole length of the movie. 

Betty’s entire life is consumed with trying to free Kenny. Raising two children and being married become less important aspects in her life while promising to never give up on her brother. Her life involves risks she is willing to take to seek justice. Patience and time working to free her brother, she will graduate from law school to become his lawyer. More deep breaths, we think this woman is amazingly dedicated.

Supporting actress Minnie Driver and actor Peter Gallagher help with the defense. Talented actors like these give the movie a certain power that I was deeply involved in watching. I would’t lie to you.

Juliette Lewis never goes unnoticed. She never fails to deliever a true representation of whatever character she is assigned. Although her part is fairly small, she deserves notice for this one too. LA Times praises her portrayal as “frighteningly real” and I believe her make-up artist should get a trophy for this!

A movie that is a “must see”, tear jerker, and powerful. Kept me on the edge of my seat through the duration, wondering if Kenny was really innocent, or not so much? I’d hate to say that a story like this gives the movie a ”thrilling” description, however sad and exhausting we find it, it IS a true story. A true story that became a movie that I’d recommend to all.

The real Betty Anne Waters continues to pursue her legal career, helping the wrongfully convicted of their rights to freedom. How cool is that?

Driected by John Curran & Written by Angus MacLachlan.

Awww MAN!

Why Anugus? Get tired or too busy half way through writing this? Reading through what little information was on “Wiki” for this writer, all I can ask is, was this “play” originally sold out or something? Or were there a few empty theater seats after intermission was over?

Robert De Niro & Edward Norton together sounds like, “I cannot WAIT to see this movie!”, It must be good, right? I think that’s what the majority of us thought after watching the powerful theatrical trailer and by simply reading who was cast in a movie called “STONE”…that even sounds cool.

Keeping this simple, all I have to say is that I had a hard time wrapping my mind around why this story didn’t have a suitable middle or even an end at all. It could have been good…and it should have been good. (Sigh…)

It takes so much time to make a movie, even if most of it’s filmed in an office, dining room, and car. But! But! But! This is what they ended up with? This is it?

Disappointing. Very disappointing…

And Milla, beautiful and erotic Milla Jovovich must have walked onto the wrong movie set. Whoops! Not the sexy science fiction or heart pounding action flick! The door labeled “Stone” leading to her make up chair, in particular, just doesn’t fit her face in any way. I don’t blame her, how could I?

Casting director got lucky to use an “all star cast” in this “lump” that took a turn for the worse. I think De Niro and Norton could have entertained the audience keeping the movie between themselves, but only IF the movie would have continued like it had began. The first 15 minutes of “Stone” was intriguing to the point where you continue to watch, hoping for more and for Norton to do his assortment of a “Primal Fear” or “Fight Club” bit and for De Niro to follow up with a “tough cop that doesn’t take anyones shit” bit.

Unfortunatley there were no bits. 

A tidbit of information though. “Stone” was filmed in the Detroit/Ann Arbor area of Michigan. That’s kinda cool because I live in Michigan but for no other reason beyond that.

http://michiganacting.com/acting/acting-news-tips/stone-movie-trailer-michigan-film

Nice try, but the try was disappointing. Don’t even ask about the weird and unnecessary bee’s and sounds in the movie! Apparently they are “supposed” to have some “fuper huper” meaning! Not being so worthy to me personally to figure that out, I stop myself midway just like the movie. The thought is better off not finished. (Kinda like the movie.)

But I would like to add that if someone out there really DID like the film, I think that’s great. The three major talents of De Niro, Norton, & Jovovich wouldn’t have gone to total waste. They got payed, even if we got jipped.

A better script that suits them one day is what we all really want. One with some twists and turns, one with a middle and ending that makes sense. The meaning of a decent movie.