Superhero Movie (Extended Edition) (2008)

SUPERHERO MOVIE bombed at the box office, but as a lifelong fan of the genre and movies like AIRPLANE, TOP SECRET, and NAKED GUN, I felt almost compelled to watch it. I doubt there will ever be another breakthrough spoof movie due to the fact that now there are so many of them. During the eighties and nineties, spoof movies came out every other year or so, now they come out every other month (Scary, Date, Epic, Disaster, etc). SUPERHERO MOVIE is not a great movie within the spoof genre, but it provides many good laughs and returns to the roots of what made the movies like Airplane and Naked Gun so great.

The DVD has a feature called "Anatomy of a Spoof" that among other things, gives director Craig Mazin's (a Zucker protégé and fan) philosophy of spoof movies. First, the actors need to play it straight, and second, the movie needs to have characters you care about and create an actual story within the genre you are trying to spoof. It this movie, all the actors play it straight. Drake Bell is Rick Ryker, the Peter Parker clone who gets bit by a Dragonfly and gets superpowers. Sara Paxton plays the love interest. Christopher McDonald is the evil Hourglass. Leslie Neilsen is the wise uncle. The plot follows the basic structure of Spiderman, and throws in Fantastic Four and X-men spoofs as well. The movie avoids trying to create comedy by recreating scenes from famous super hero movies. Director and writer Mazin really tries to make a story the viewers will care about, and many of the jokes are found in the dialogue.

Mazin knew what he was doing. He crafted an entertaining spoof full of witty dialogue. A few things brought the movie down. First, the glut of spoof movies took away any chance for this film to be original. Second, it seemed a limited budget took away from some of the special effects that could have been utilized. Third, Mazin just isn't as talented as the Zucker brothers. Still, this movie had some good stuff, including my favorite, Steven Hawking. This is a must see for fans of the genre. It's not perfect, but SUPERHERO MOVIE is definitely trying to follow in the footsteps of AIRPLANE, and that's more than can be said for all the Date and Epic movie spoofs.

This flick which is a average entry into the spoof genre, one that has direct roots to the classic movie "Airplane". In many ways they are all similiar from "Scary movie" to 'Hot shots" they spoof a current trend or movie. In this one they mainly spoof 'spiderman"; but in spite of the extended gay and fart jokes it's still entertaining. The main villian 'hourglass" is actually a good supervillian that could fit well into any comic book or film based on a comic books. In fact most movies are storyboarded just like a comic book before shooting. So anyone who looks down at comics should forget about movies as well. This isn't a stand out performer in it's genre but it's what you expect and that's some laughs and lots of silliness. Since 'airplane' there has been a alot of these over the top spoofs and they all have their moments and a basic similiar structure based on a outlandish gags. The blu ray print is as good as it gets and this is the only way to watch this movie if possible.

Buy Superhero Movie (Extended Edition) (2008) Now

Is there any good way to start a review for yet another mindless spoof? With the release of "Meet the Spartans" back in January, it did seem as if the parody genre was on the rise again. Since we now have "Superhero Movie" added to the mix, I'm really not sure anymore; it isn't as funny as "Meet the Spartans," but it's certainly a lot better than the droning jokiness of films like "Scary Movie 3," "Scary Movie 4," "Date Movie," and "Epic Movie." Most of these films were nothing more than comedic vignettes, having no real plot other than a back-to-back series of gags. This new film actually does make an attempt at a plot ... and by "plot," I mean that it takes all the best elements from the first "Spider-Man" and forces them to be goofy, at times too much so. "Superhero Movie" is by no means a comedic masterpiece--the sense of humor is juvenile, the jokes are blatantly obvious, and the dialogue is just plain dopey.

But since "Meet the Spartans" was all that and more, how can I be kinder to it than to "Superhero Movie"? Partly, it's because the former parodies "300," a movie with violence so excessive and action so stylized that it was practically begging to be made fun of. But it mainly has to do with the fact that "Meet the Spartans" was unashamedly aware of itself, letting the audience know that it was, in fact, watching a spoof of a great film. I found that level of self-awareness funny. "Superhero Movie" is certainly aware of itself, but not at a satisfying level; the opening credits show close-ups of the hero's suit while a light passes over it; we eventually see that the light emanates from a flashlight the hero is holding. Could nothing more come from this gag than a flashlight? Could no one think of something even funnier than that?

"Superhero Movie" tells the story of a high school kid named Rick Riker (Drake Bell), a story he claims "is not for the faint of heart." While on a field trip to the local laboratory, Riker is bitten by a genetically altered dragonfly; he soon realizes that he's developing super powers, not the least of which is his ability to break-dance vertically on the wall of a building. He also has lightening fast reflexes, as seen when he catches a nail fired from a nail gun. Disguised in a green and black suit and going by the name Dragonfly, Riker uses his abilities to fight crime all over the city, which doesn't seem to be a problem for his aunt and uncle (Marion Ross and Leslie Nielsen). By the way, he lives with them because, nine years ago, his parents were horribly murdered after leaving a movie theater.

His archenemy is Lou Landers, a.k.a. Hourglass (Christopher McDonald), a terminally ill scientist who, through a technological accident, has the ability to suck the life energy out of people. If he can find a specific number of victims, he will be able to live forever, despite his illness. Riker is supposed to save the day, but he lacks confidence since he's a dragonfly that can't actually fly. Whatever. Maybe the girl he's secretly in love with--Jill Johnson (Sara Paxton)--can inspire him towards greatness. At the very least, she can inspire him to attempt a naughty version of the upside down kiss from "Spider-Man."

If this doesn't seem all that funny, that's probably because the plots for parody films are anything but; it's all about the jokes and how many can be crammed into a single film. Indeed, "Superhero Movie" practically bursts at the seams with the mass of its humor. Does all of it work? No, but there are a few select moments I laughed at: there's a moment when Leslie Nielsen's character reads to Riker from a puberty book, only to realize it covers changes in the female body; Riker recalls what his uncle says later in the film, when it seems least appropriate. There are some moments when a parody of Professor Stephen Hawking (Robert Joy) cusses in his distinct computer-generated voice. Some may find this offensive, but keep in mind that the real Stephen Hawking once provided his voice to an episode of "The Simpsons."

But for every funny moment, there are two or three that aren't all that funny. Example: Riker accidentally sprays himself with animal pheromones and attracts everything from dogs to rabbits to skunks (and you don't want to know what happens when a snail shows up). There's a cameo appearance from Pamela Anderson as Invisible Girl; she's been having an affair with the handicapped and bald Professor Xavier (Tracy Morgan), and that puts him at odds with his equally handicapped and bald wife (Regina Hall). There's also a moment when Riker's aunt is asleep on the couch, and she does nothing but pass gas in front of Riker and Jill as they try to share a tender moment with one another. You may not believe this, but that does get old after a while.

While this movie is nowhere near as bad as it could have been, it still isn't good enough to recommend, so those of you upset by my positive review of "Meet the Spartans" can rest easy. "Superhero Movie" is amusing but hardly hilarious, which--believe it or not--is more than I can say for many of our more recent parody films. I'm sure teenagers will love this film, which I guess is fine since there certainly are worse movies. Some people will get a kick out of Brent "Data" Spiner, who plays a scientist that screams like a woman at a certain point. Yes, "Superhero Movie" is juvenile, but it's also harmless, so in the end, it's really no better and no worse than you expect it to be.

Read Best Reviews of Superhero Movie (Extended Edition) (2008) Here

Having `basically' gotten a free copy of this, I decided to go ahead and check it out. I had seriously doubted I would laugh at all in this movie since these movies have been going from good to really bad as quick as a snowball down a snowy hill. I like Scary Movie 1 and 2. But 3 and 4 were bad. Meet the Spartans was bad. I didn't even watch Epic Movie or Date Movie. But Superhero Movie... well... it just might surprise you.

The movie basically spoofs Spidey with tidbits of other movies like Batman and X-Men thrown in. Don't let the box art fool you guys. Everyone on the front of the box is in the movie for maybe 5 30 seconds with the exception of the Dragonfly. Wolverine's whole part was him shaving his legs with his claws while smoking a cigar... lame. Prof X was in the movie for a few scenes, but it really was just thrown in to get laughs in my opinion. Pam Anderson was in there for maybe a good 30 seconds. Ah well. The movie revolves around Rick Riker (or you could say Peter Parker) who becomes bitten by a radioactive dragonfly. And instead of Green Goblin being his arch-nemesis we have Hourglass played really well by Christopher Donald (I always like that guy for some reason). And, in my opinion, Hourglass is a lot cooler, movie wise at least, than the Green Goblin. Hourglass sucks the life force out of people so he can stay alive. The bodies on screen actually look like all the juices and matter were sucked from their insides until there just a prune of what they once were. So basically if you've seen Spidey then you know what's going on here. Good vs. Evil.

The thing about this movie though is they throw in some little twists to the story. Some to make you laugh (or try to) and some just to make the story a little different. The story itself isn't really that bad. If it wasn't for the goofiness and the forced humor, and of course the carbon copy script of Spider Man, then this movie might have been able to stand on its own.

Now for the funny parts. I don't see how the writers can go from one extreme to the other like they do and expect laughs. Some scenes seem like they were written for 8 year olds to laugh at while some scenes would have you dive bombing your child with `ear muffs'. In my opinion, I have a pretty good range of humor. I laugh at Kevin Smith stuff, Will Ferrell stuff, and then even stuff that's in Wes Anderson movies such as Royal Tenabaums and Rushmore. I'm everywhere. So saying that, I did laugh more than I expected in this movie. Leslie Nielson had 2 of the best parts in my opinion that involve a nail gun and then a punch. It was back to back and I just didn't expect it and it made me laugh pretty good. But, like most of the recent stuff these writers and directors have done, most of the comedy is too forced and just incredibly dumb. For instance, they have Johnny Storm freak out cause he's on fire. Seriously? He says, "Watch what I can do" then says "FLAME ON!" Then looks at his body and says, "OH MY GOD I'M ON FIRE! HELP ME!" and stops and drops and probably rolls. I'm not sure since I was rolling my eyes. That's the kind of stuff that took this movie from being decent to `eh'.

In the end I would say, if there is nothing else to rent, give this a try. Or if you're just a big fan of the Superhero movies, like I am, then just say to heck with it and rent it. It almost feels like a big "WHAT IF?" comic. Almost.

Want Superhero Movie (Extended Edition) (2008) Discount?

Rick (Drake Bell) is your baisc high school nerd who was bitten by a genetically enchanced dragonfly and has the abilities and powers of a dragonfly. He becomes an avenging superhero nicknamed Dragonfly and must protects the good citizens of Empire City from criminals, Rick also wants to win the heart of beautiful girl Jill Johnson (Sara Paxton) and must do battle against the evil Hourglass or Lou Landers (Christopher Mcdonald).

Co-starring Leslie Nielsen, Pamela Anderson, Brent Spiner, Jeffery Tambor, Keith David and Tracy Morgan, this is an outrageous and nicely done parody of superhero movies from "Spider-Man 1 & 2", "Superman", "Batman Begins", "Fantastic Four" and "X-Men". This movie is produced by the great parody maker David Zucker who made "Naked Gun" and this movie works better then the Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer duds as it successfully uses some decent laughs, some nifty spoofs on celebrities like Stephen Hawking, and not too much overdosing on Pop culture references like the Friedberg and Seltzer movies. Sara Paxton is simply gorgeous in this movie as the hero's love interest and Tracy Morgan is hilarious as Professor Xevier, it's worth a look for those that were fed up with Friedberg and Seltzer's trash.

This DVD contains never before seen footage that was cut out of the theatrical release and has some good extras like audio commentary, alternate ending, deleted scenes, and two featurettes with trailer.

Save 65% Off

Read More >>

How Do You Know (2010)

My wife and I really enjoyed "How Do You Know." The script itself was slightly on the bland side, as others have noted, but the film itself is redeemed by some great performances and excellent direction and editing. For us, it generated consistent laughs and smiles throughout the film, as well as lots of undercurrents and multileveled themes to ponder after we left the theatre.

What really made the film work for me were the performances of the Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson and Paul Rudd. The Director / Writer (James L. Brooks) spends lots of screen time doing closeups on the faces of these three performers, allowing us to see the interplay of complex emotions on their faces as they wrestle with the dilemmas they are confronting. This would not have worked unless Mr. Brooks was able to coax finely tuned and believable emotions out of these excellent actors; and he is superb at doing so.

The flip side of this is that it takes time to allow these emotions to play out, so the film seems slower paced than films that are more concerned with situational comedy (and perhaps then less concerned with exploring the emotional depths of relationships).

Combined with this are some really hysterical scenes. Owen Wilson has long been known as a great comedic sidekick, and that well-honed character he always seems to play bumbling, shallow, narcissistic and clueless plays well in this film. Yet, even his character plumbs emotional depths I've never seen from him in other films. Paul Rudd, who I am not as familiar with, also did a great job. Yet, what makes the film shine is Reese Witherspoon's performance. You really connect-with her character. The film ends predictably, and was foreshadowed from the very start. I would have preferred another few minutes to give us insight into the outcomes of Reese's choice at the end of the film.

I saw some interesting themes and visual statements popping up again and again throughout the film, such as the way in which the characters would engage in extended dialog with one of them offscreen, before they'd walk into the shot at the end of the conversation. There is also a great scene where Rudd's and Reese's characters play-out their own feelings for each other by helping an acquaintance with her own marriage proposal. Another interesting contrast, which intentionally sums up the relationships each had with her was the gifts the two male leads both offer to Reese's character just before her "Birthday party" how they were presented, what they meant to the givers, and Reese's reactions to them and their presentation.

Ultimately, the film explores the difference and relationship between external and internal love, between self love and love for other, between sacrificial love and self preservation. It does it well, and it does it in unexpected ways. This is definitely a film I will purchase when it comes out on Blu-Ray and watch several times to really "get" all of the more subtle messages and themes being presented. I think the pacing could have been a bit better, and I was a bit let down by the ending as I said, so will rate it four stars really good, but some room for improvement.

Apparently it's a bad thing that "How Do You Know" takes the time to develop characters who have real wants and needs, who aren't afraid to be uncertain about things, let it's plot unfold naturally, let it's scenes linger and take their time; because "How Do You Know" was hated by critics and audiences a like. This baffles me. This wonderful picture from the great James L. Brooks does, for me at least (and apparently I am alone on this one), everything a great film should do. It engaged me emotionally and intellectually, I related to the characters and their problems, I found it to be human and funny and their struggles were timely. Brooks' film is an ode to those who are just off center of making their lives work and I found it next to irresistible. Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, Owen Wilson and Jack Nicholson are all terrific here, delivering witty, honest and well rounded performances. The film is nicely directed, beautifully shot and attentively written. In a year when films have to be all high concept and surreal images trump character and motivation (yes, I'm looking at you "Inception" and "Black Swan"), "How Do You Know" is a lovely breath of fresh air. I just can't fathom how people can dislike such an honest and moving picture, but apparently, it's very easy.

If you are a fan of James L. Brook's pictures or are someone who likes a good, natural, character study, I really recommend you check out "How Do You Know".

Buy How Do You Know (2010) Now

Now I know I'm out of step with current preferences. The average comedy today seems to consistently feature emotionally immature, narcissistic boy-men, and women who are trying to be tough at work but are insecure and confused about how to have any kind of grown-up relationship. The characters are virtually interchangeable from one movie to another. Since I'm an avid movie-lover, I'm not that hard to please, but am too often left cold or indifferent.

Then along comes this supposedly "bad" movie, which I finally Netflixed since I like the director. It has characters I DID care about, and I wanted to give it 41/2 stars in contrast to what's out there. Life thas thrown Lisa and George some curve balls (pun intended), but they are BOTH striving to be caring and self-responsible people (how retro!) and figure out how to move on with their lives. I loved the performances of Reese and Paul (just watching their faces change was delicious), and I agree with another reviewer that Owen found a deeper layer too. Jack was Jack. I was particularly taken with the attention paid to supporting characters and the unique friendship George had with pregnant and emotional Annie. The hospital scene was moving and funny, worth watching the movie to see. But there were many little treats along the way. e.g. 1) Lisa's attempts to rise above her pain with post-it-note slogans,like she did in baseball. 2) the power of silence at the restaurant (what, not even text messaging?) etc.

I am buying this movie, and hope they don't give up making little gems like this. My scales have already tipped to independent and foreign films, so Hollywood is way behind in the battle for my dollar. And just for the record, I see many movies in theaters and have a collection of THOUSANDS. And my friends pay attention to my opinions. There's a bigger market out there than 20-year-old males. Are you listening, Hollywood?

Read Best Reviews of How Do You Know (2010) Here

How Do You Know opened in late 2010 to atrocious reviews, arguably worse reactions from audiences, and went on to become a box-office bomb coming nowhere near recouping its $120 budget. This budget has been oft-discussed, as $50 million went for star salaries alone and you'd be hard-pressed to find the other $70 million onscreen. This is the sixth film to be written and directed by James L. Brooks, who works almost exclusively in romantic-comedy and writes some of the most charming, intelligent dialogue one would be pressed to find in the genre. Is it one of his best films? No. But a bad romantic-comedy by Brooks is far better than the average, mass-produced rom-com that hits the multiplex on what seems like a weekly basis. I have issues with the film like all viewers do, but the amount of criticism it's received is unfathomable to me; being a romantic-comedy, it really is better than 90% of the dreck that's released in this genre.

Reese Witherspoon is Lisa, a 31-year-old softball player who is adored by her teammates but sees her career coming to a halt because of her age. Trying to start a new phase in her life, she begins dating Matty Reynolds (Owen Wilson), a clueless, womanizing pro-baseball player whose insensitivity she finds oddly charming. George Madison (Paul Rudd) is a young executive who discovers that he's the target of a federal investigation and is informed by his father Charles (Jack Nicholson) that he could be facing a possible indictment. As this is a romantic-comedy, you know that George meets Lisa at this unique crossroad in their lives and falls for her, leaving her torn between Matty and George. Kathryn Hahn co-stars as George's pregnant assistant Annie, who is quite the scene-stealer among these big marquee names.

The quality of this film is all about perception, as there's nothing inarguably good about it. Its quality comes completely from how you respond to the material and how well you think the material is performed. If you look at the negative reviews (and there are many) you will see comments like it's "boring," "too long," "has unlikable characters," etc. I did not feel this way at all, which leaves me firmly in the minority. If the film has one big flaw it is probably the characterization. Brooks is a good writer but his creation of the central characters is heavily flawed here, particularly in the relationship between Lisa and Matty. It's hard to see why Lisa would be attracted to Matty let alone why she would continue to actively pursue a relationship with him, as he remains a static character throughout the film. Despite this, their relationship takes up a significant portion of screen-time. Lisa is a strong, fairly intelligent female protagonist but her intelligence becomes questionable due to her taste in men. It takes a while before she warms up to flawed, but extremely loveable George, yet she likes Matty almost immediately. With that said, I didn't find these characters unlikable as they are played by actors charming enough to off-set any un-likability. Even though his character's relationship with Lisa makes little sense, Wilson carries his role very well and is responsible for some of the film's funniest moments. Even with weak characterization, Brooks' characters seem more developed, multi-dimensional, and intelligent than the usual caricatures that populate these types of films.

Witherspoon is a capable actress, adorable as Lisa and Rudd is an actor of intense likability and immense charm. The two have a very cute, believable chemistry together that likely stems from how likable they are separately and their relationship develops in a somewhat unconventional manner. I'd like to see them work together again, as they are the heart and soul of the film. Of course, you can't not discuss the legend that is Jack Nicholson, an actor of such greatness his mere presence in a movie can bring a smile to your face. Reuniting with Brooks for the fourth time, Nicholson is playing a creep but he's still Jack and it's hard to hate him. His first scene, in which he angrily rants at George to the chagrin of Annie, brought me great pleasure and solidified for me why Jack has reached a level of such legend that people know who you're talking about when you say his first name. Many have complained that Nicholson sleepwalks through the role on the basis that he's Jack Nicholson and doesn't need to deliver a performance; but I found Jack to be one of the highlights of the film. He's not in many scenes, but I found his facial expressions and dialogue some of the most grin-inducing moments. Finally, Hahn is a scene-stealer as the really sweet, down-to-earth Annie who brings an earthy quality to the more high-class, problematic proceedings. It's a joy to watch.

At 117 (without end credits), How Do You Know is longer than the typical romantic-comedy but I never felt it was being drawn out or becoming too long. The first time I saw it, I was aware of its length but untroubled by it. The second time, I remained blissfully unaware of the length. While many have failed to recognize it, Brooks still has a knack for writing wonderfully warm, comedic scenes. The hospital scene is a great piece of writing and execution, with Nicholson's entrance being hilarious in a low-key sort of way. Also, Rudd's "Play-Doh" speech is adorable and another wonderful example of Brooks' writing. Essentially, I found this film just like the actors that inhabit it; charming and likable. It may not be "great," but I enjoyed it much more than I expected to and it left a big, goofy smile on my face.

I don't believe that what I've written will change the opinions of those who have already seen it. I can offer nothing to sway those people to agree with me; but hopefully this shows that there are people out there who actually really like this film and are unable to comprehend the vitriol some people have for it. I can't recommend this film to any particular demographic or promise that you'll feel as I do about it...But I hope you do. If you enjoy this movie as much as I do, you're in for quite a treat.

GRADE: B

Want How Do You Know (2010) Discount?

While the critics panned this one, I must say that this movie is well written, the cast is enjoyable and has great chemistry, and it is a kind, warm movie. It came out at the same time as the Tourist, and me and my husband went to see both films. In my opinion, How Do You Know? was much btter than the Tourist in terms of the message it sent across and the after-feel I had when the movie was over. So, if you enjoy romcoms such as Love Actually, Two Weeks Notice, Notting Hill, Penelope, The Family Man, The Proposal, No Strings Attached, etc., you will really enjoy this movie.

Save 48% Off

Read More >>

National Security (2003)

National Security is the perfect movie to see this year. I saw it the day it came out and I want to see it again. It stars one of the best comedians today (Martin Lawrence) and another funny misfit (Steve Zahn from SAVING SILVERMAN). The movie is funny yet has good action. Here is the plot.

Steve Zhan plays Hank. An LA policeman who is bent on revenge to finding the guy who killed his partner in gun battle. Lawrence is Earl. A guy who just got kicked out of the force after turning a practice session into a disaster. Plus Earl always thinks that people have a problem with him because he is blacknot because of his attitude. One day while Earl is trying to have a regular day, he realizes he left his keys in his car and tried to stick his hand in and get it. Hank catches him and interrogates what is going on. While that is happening, a bee comes by and Earl is allergic to bees and so Hank tries to get the bee away but the way they were positioned, it looked like Hank was beating on Earl and a guy who near by got the whole thing on camera. Because of that, a huge commotion started thru out the state about a white cop beating a black civilian. Hank is fired from the police and sent to jail for 6 months and Earl just kicks back and lets the whole thing happen even though he knows it was a bee.

Hank serves his six months and after getting out he tries to do something similar toward police worka job as a security guard. While on the job, Hanks gets called about a robbery and goes to check it out. It seems that the robbers were the guys he had an encounter with in the past and one of the guys was his partner's murderer. Hank goes into action right away and a fellow security guard who worked in the building comes to back up Hank and that person just happens to be Earl!! The two would've had a long argument but realized it wasn't the time and chased the bad guys but they were stopped by the police. Police that Hank kidnapped Earl for revenge but Earl decided not to have anything bad happen to Hank this time although it would have felt real good. Hank goes on to try find these guys who did the robbery because its personal and Earl thinks it is personal too because one them called him a monkeyand he thinks he was called that because he is black. Both Hank and Earl go on the case even though they are not policemen and along the way they go through many arguments that sometimes lead toward zany consequences like fighting over which to go on the streetright or left and they end up jumping the highway into a pile of portable toilets. Hank and Earl must try to put the past aside so they can help each other to try and find these bad guys.

National Security loaded with intense action, thrilling chase scenes, gun battles, fist fights, and many parts that will make you laugh hard. It's definitely as good as blue Steak and you should see it while it is still in theaters.

I wasn't expecting much from the film, "National Security," but what I got wasn't that great either.

This film revolves around a man (Martin Lawrence) who is trying to be a cop. He gets kicked out of the police academy and must resort to being a security guard. One day he comes face to face with a police officer (Steve Zahn) who accidently thinks Lawrence's character is breaking into a car. What happens next looks like a Rodney King beating, but really isn't. Zahn's character is sent to jail and when he gets out can only find a job as a security guard. Zahn's partner was also killed, so once he's out of jail, he's on a quest to find his partner's killer. Lawrence and Zahn then team up, under crazy circumstances, to find the killers and bring them to justice.

There are a few funny moments in the movie, but they are far and few between. Martin Lawrence's previous films, such as "Bad Boys" and "Nothing to Lose" were much better and funnier. I would have to agree with others when they say there were too many racial jokes throughout the film. Just about every sentence that came out of Martin's mouth had some sort of racial slur in it. After awhile it became very annoying.

Those who really enjoy Martin Lawrence's films may enjoy this movie, but I would suggest just leaving this one on the shelf and waiting for "Bad Boys 2" to come out this summer.

Buy National Security (2003) Now

Didn't like the first 10 minutes, but the rest of the movie we liked.

Loved Martin in Police academy, hilarious! Bumble bee incident and the chasing of the semi truck.

Martin ends up woking with Earl to go after the bad guys, but what do you know. The police get in the way of the pursuit. What a surprise.....NOT. Police are never in the right place at the right time, the movies are no different. Crooked cops do exist, not just in the movies.

Very funny... Not a rental but as a purchase..Love this movie.

If you are a cop lover, you won't like this movie.

Martin's comedy rocks! Martin's character and Earl made the movie for us.

Once again the bad guys got caught. See crime doesn't pay! Even if you are on the other side of the law.

Read Best Reviews of National Security (2003) Here

This is about a guy( Martin Lawrence), who accuses a cop( Steve Zahn) of beating him, so he can get on the police force, whn really he was just beating a bee that Martin Lawrences charactar was afraid of. So he goes to prison for 6 months, than they reunite, and have to stick together to take down some criminals. Good Film!

Want National Security (2003) Discount?

I was really amazed with the attitude of the character played by Martin Lawrence. It was absolutely racist to the point that the Lawrence character send an innocent cop to jail and that is supposed to be funny. His obsession about being black is showed during most of the scenes with special stress on his lack-of-brilliant conclusion to the white cop when he tells him that "being innocent in jail + your girlfriend dumped you + an underpaid job after that" means you're a black guy. Basically the simple action plot was just an excuse to portrait was the movie is about: A different version of racism, promoted by the black not-funny main character.

Maybe I am not the target audience of this movie!. At least it was a rental

Save 33% Off

Read More >>

She's Out of My League (2010)

Most comedies out there today are complete and utter garbage. Most romantic comedies could be written by brain-dead zombies and have more originality. After watching hours of that drivel (my wife likes them), She's Out of My League was refreshing. For the first time in far too long, I laughed out loud at a romantic comedy. The movie was genuinely funny, meaningful, and not always predictable.

Despite the scenario (hot girl, deadbeat guy), She's Out of My League doesn't peddle the usual bromides about "love being blind" or "good things happen to good people." Rather, it's about self-esteem. This makes the characters and plot more interesting and subtle. I'm not going to claim that there's Oscar-winning character development in She's Out of My League, but Molly, the hot girl, and Kirk, the not so hot guy, do seem like realistic personalities. Kirk does not "refashion" himself into a stud (although there is one incident with shaving a certain area...). Molly isn't the "perfect" hot girl, but has insecurities of her own and a need to play it safe. They're helped by a decent script with dialogue that doesn't seem too forced or awkward (except for the cursing see below). It is kind of possible to see why they fall in love with each other it makes sense in a way that most romantic comedies don't.

My only problem with the movie is the overload of cursing and sex references. I understand that's standard fare in most comedies nowadays. Frankly, I found most of it funny. Sometimes, however, it just became too much (how many times do you really need to drop the f-bomb? You don't actually need it to express anger in every scene). It got to a point where it seemed like the scriptwriters couldn't think of anything better to fill the space. Fortunately, this doesn't take away from the movie too much, but it might not be a good idea to watch this with anybody who's sensitive about those sorts of things.

She's Out of My League had real potential, and I'd like to see more work from this set of directors, scriptwriters, and actors (well, maybe better scriptwriters). Overall, 4 stars.

Ok, we've all seen this story before. average guy gets the hot chick, an unbelievably hot chick I might add. Its the same storyline in a lot of romantic comedies, but what keeps us from going to watch them when we know they are all alike? They each have there own little twist. The particular twist in League is that the guy is an unattractive Security worker at an airport who meets the hot chick by a series of events that we all wish would happen (dont deny it you guys we all wish life worked like it does in the movies). Anyway, after seeing the previews your either thinking 'Hmmm... this might be a good movie' or 'OH GOD another stupid comedy about a loser and a girl' there is no 'WOW, this looks amazing' crowd. I was in the group that thought it looked good, so I had to check it out for myself. I was downright happy with this movie. It was funny, it was loving, not to mention the disney movie references the fat guy kept making. I dont think I'm the only one who thought Stainer, one of the friends in the movie, had a Napolean Dynamite vibe to him. The way he talked and looked just screamed 'Frickin Idiot'. It was good enough to see twice ad it is good enough to be going in my dvd collection when it comes out. I gave it 4 stars because lets face it, its been done before, and I can't help but to think that its just gonna make all the single unattractive guys out there feel a little down!

Buy She's Out of My League (2010) Now

'She's out of my league' is a movie that works. Rather than relying on tired dirty jokes and cliche's, and despite it's goofy looking promo poster, it is quite insightful into our shallow perceptions of relationships.

Part of it's success is the main character, Kirk, is just very average and humble. He's not self-deprecating in a rediculous way, he's just very straight-forward, with a dose of low self-esteem. Even his more-attractive love affair, Molly, is a pleasant person, rather then some poster-girl stereo-type. Even better is the fat guy (forgotten his name) who's mature outlook helps him to lead a contented life. It's the good characters that make this movie worth watching.

On the whole, everything is good; the dialogue is usually interesting, the jokes are ok, etc. As you can guess, the movie is about a really hot woman who starts falling in love with a man who considers himself unattractive. The man finds it difficult to accept such a hot girl could like him, or that their relationship is justifiable. There is a raft of side-plots and characters that add to the overall entertainment. Overall, the whole movie is very enjoyable. Rating ***1/2

Read Best Reviews of She's Out of My League (2010) Here

When I started to see the previews for the film, I thought it could be a nice mid day typical funny movie. However I was laughing so hard, and when it was over I knew I had to see it again soon. This movie is so funny and because of the somewhat unknown cast, the jokes became funnier.

Want She's Out of My League (2010) Discount?

Emaciated and timid, Kirk (Jay Barachul) is a man who is referred to by his friends as a moodle man poodle. He's the fixer-upper who never gets the girls. When graded by his friend Stainer (TJ Miller), the best Kirk can be is a 6 out of 10, and that's being generous considering his atrocious car. It's Kirk's fortuitous encounter with Molly (Alice Eve), however, that begins to change not only his mind, but the opinions of his unsupportive friends and family.

Filmed in Pittsburgh Primanti Brothers and Mellon Arena are highlighted the movie really comes off as genuine. Sure, the hot chick never goes for the guy who is so skinny his nipples touch, but it was even less believable thanr that execrable disgrace The New Guy; somehow it worked, and it even had a little Serendipity vibe to it. Tal Bachman said it best with their definitive song: "She's so high above me, she's so lovely." She's too good for him, yet realism oozes out of the movie.

Perhaps it's because the actors played who they actually probably are in real life. Alice Eve looks like she has always been the over-achieving cheerleading captain who buckles men's knees, so the role was probably not a stretch. Similarly, there is no doubt in my mind that Jay Barachul has received multiple toilet swirlies in his time. Stealing every scene, however, is TJ Miller. What a cool, socially aware Napoleon Dynamite might be, Miller is hilarious, and looks like the guy who got big laughs since he was a child. For such a young, somewhat inexperienced cast, there are no lulls or weak links.

The one glaring flaw in the screenplay (other than the aforementioned improbable skinny dude and hot chick connection) is an uncomfortable ball shaving scene the most unbelievable scene in movie history. Yes, more unbelievable than Ben Affleck as an oil worker who goes into outerspace as a temp astronaut to land on an asteroid and mine into it to deposit a bomb which will split the asteroid which is the size of Texas into multiple pieces that will narrowly miss the Earth and avoid an extinction level event.

Fun, quick-moving, and worth the time. I recommend it, even if it does toe the line of chick flick.

Jason Elin

Save 32% Off

Read More >>