Jumper

2 Stars

Ah, the sturdy piece of wood that is Hayden Christensen. Sure, a sturdy piece of wood is good for building a boat. Or a treehouse. But for acting? Not so much. I’m not saying it would have been a better film without him. But it’s a start.

Jumper is the story of a young man, David, who discovers he has the super-human ability to teleport from one location to another. But instead of using it to save the world, a la Spider-Man, he decides to go for personal gain, teleporting into banks and what not, just so he can get some money. There’s even a scene where he’s watching the news, and there are people stranded in a flood, who he could totally save with his ability, but doesn’t. Damn. What a self serving jackass, as the script wants us to believe. Then we get to the action. There’s an ancient brotherhood led by a silver coiffed Samuel L. Jackson who is trying his hardest to both keep the jumpers at bay, and go 2 minutes without saying “motherfucker.” And David is just trying to woo an old schoolmate, who by the way, has been under the impression that David’s been dead for the past 8 years, along with anyone else who ever knew him. The film quickly devolves into an exercise in flashy special effects and even flashier location shooting. Which I will give to director Doug Liman as being pretty cool.

I always kick it off with the acting, so here goes. Samuel L. Jackson is good, as usual. When is he not. I have a theory, that he is the black Christopher Walken. The movie could be absolute shit, but he’ll still be “OK” in it. As is mostly the case with this one. He seems to walk through the role as if it’s just a paycheck to him, which is entirely likely. Diane Lane has become less hit and more miss recently, and this is no exception. And of course the two leads. Christensen. And Rachel Bilson. The only person I can think of with the exact same lack of charisma as Christensen. Put the two together and you get… well.. Jumper.

What happened to David Goyer? He did Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, all of the Blade movies, and coming up he’s got The Flash and Magneto. So promising was his writing career. Then he turns out this P.O.S. that is an hour and a half of plot holes and missed opportunities. And that could be due to Liman not able to work the sci-fi angle. But come on. There could have been great fight scenes. Don’t get me wrong, the ones they had were fantastic. But… there could have been more.

There could have been more exploration into the “Jumpers” vs. “Paladins” (shadowy Sam Jackson organization) struggle. Especially considering how HUGE of a plot point it really is. There could have been more exploration into the whole David being dead thing. I mean… they watch him fall through the ice at the age of 14-ish, he teleports out, never to be seen again. He comes back 8 years later and people treat him as if he just got home from college. What the hell? It makes little to no sense.

The whole thing should have been longer. Should have been more in depth. Should have been better.

Though I will give them credit for doing some fantastic special effects work. The teleporting was magnificent, and they kept the practical science behind it pretty accurate. The replacement of the displaced matter when a Jumper leaves an area was accurate. The comparable velocity law was accurate. Basically it was as scientifically accurate as you would expect a sci-fi flick about young adults who can create tiny black holes at will and travel anywhere in the world through them, to be.

And as Liman demonstrated in The Bourne Identity, he has a knack for doing impressive location shooting. He gets some damn fine shots of Rome, Giza, London, Tokyo and Prague. But I could watch the Travel Channel, and get the same thing. Only no Hayden Christensen. So it’s better.

2 Stars go to this, but only because I’m feeling generous on President’s day, and I enjoyed the special effects. If we get a competent filmmaker behind the wheel, who knows what those effects can do.

Later Brodie Fanns!

-Brodie Mann

Brodie Fanns!

New review for your reading pleasure. I don’t know what’s in store for the blog-o-dome this week. But, you’ll know it when I post it.

Strange Wilderness

2.5 stars

Could we really expect the latest offering from the guys who brought us Grandma’s Boy to be a masterpiece? No. But was it funny as hell? Yes. And no.

Faced with struggling ratings and competition from a hipper, more knowledgeable show, the cast and crew of the long running Strange Wilderness, a wee hours of the morning nature documentary show, make one last ditch effort to save their beloved TV program, started by star Peter Gaulke’s father. They embark on an international road trip to hunt Bigfoot, who has been found in Ecuador of all places.

The cast is anchored by Steve Zahn, and he slips perfectly into a role he probably would have done about 10 years ago, but at this point he seems out of place in this stoner/slacker flick. Happy Madison Production regulars Peter Dante and Alan Covert are right at home playing character-types that have brought them a huge cult fan base throughout the years in just about every Adam Sandler flick ever made. While comedic child prodigies Justin Long and Jonah Hill seem to be wasting their talents on a film that is far beneath their talents they have previously demonstrated in Accepted and Super Bad respectively.

I don’t think it’s really fair to fault the cast for the film being unfunny. Because in all actuality, the scenes in the film are not unfunny. But this is where the age old maxim about a film’s director comes into play. The saying goes that a film really has three directors: the writer, the director and the editor. And if you want to get really technical, you could add the cinematographer into the mix, but we’ll just stick with these three. Writer Peter Gaulke (yes, he named the main character after himself) has had moderate success with some of the most mediocre to awful comedies of the past 10 years (Me, Myself and Irene, Say It Isn’t So), while director Fred Wolf (former head writer/cast member of SNL) is marking his feature film debut. But I think the problems of this film lie with the third director. The editor, Tom Costain.

Like I said, it wasn’t an unfunny film. The scenes individually were hilarious. It’s a very quotable film. And the actors did some damn funny work, including the intentionally unintentionally funny Robert Patrick (T2: Judgement Day) and the always good for a laugh Joe Don Baker (Mitchell). Yet while the cast is a weird amalgamation of the Happy Madison, Judd Apatow and Broken Lizard (Kevin Heffernan) camps, which should lead to great comedy, it falls apart in the editing.

It feels like term paper written over a Red Bull and Hot Pocket fueled all-nighter. It’s convoluted, hastily put together, rushed and sometimes makes little sense. It’s like Wolf filmed a very funny movie, then Costain put it on his shelf, sat down with his bong for about a month, then realized it had to be shipped to theatres in week, and spent all night cutting the thing from memory. There were times when I was left wondering if it was a joke they were playing on us. Like they had cut the real movie, then decided to make a second version of the same movie, only using all the deleted scenes and blooper reels.

And it’s sad, because Grandma’s Boy was such a great cult classic. Luckily, most of the negative backlash will be going to Happy Madison, while Apatow’s crew and Broken Lizard should escape relatively unscathed.

Brodie Fanns!

I’m excited to see you. I had a long weekend, but it is time to get back into the movie dealy.

Let’s jump right in.

I only have a mini-review for you. Why? Well… quite frankly… Rambo just doesn’t warrant a full review.

Rambo

3 Stars

I went into this movie with very low expectations. While most recharges of long forgotten 80’s franchises have actually done quite well (Freddy vs. Jason, Rocky, Live Free or Die Hard) and impressed the heck out of me, Rambo was one franchise I felt didn’t really need a revamp, and wasn’t particularly excited to see.

So when my expectations are that low, I wasn’t at all surprised when they were met. I was, however, surprised when the flick exceeded them. As a child of the golden age of action, where gratuitous violence and gore reigned supreme, I was pleased that this is a return to form for the now distinctly divided genre. On one end is the dopey, outlandish plot, star driven flick (anything with Vin Diesel), on the other, high brow, character driven, concept action (The Bourne series).

But Rambo is not so much an homage, as it is a memorial to the quality action flicks of the 80’s. The villain is that of unimaginable evil (East-Asian warlord). The hero is as mythic as he is brutally compassionate (it’s an oxymoron, I know, but it makes sense). The female lead/quasi-love interest is the traditional damsel in distress. And the supporting cast is made up of a rogue’s gallery of caricatures and archetypes.

The action, once it starts, is non-stop, with some goofy blood effects, but lots of them. It really could have gone the political route, as it is set during a civil war, but it leaves the politics out, and just goes for the jugular. Literally. John Rambo rips a guy’s jugular out of his throat.

At this point, I’m just waiting for the next logical film from Sylvester Stallone: either Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot: Part II or Rocky vs. Rambo.

This ends the review portion of our broadcast.

Now, as an entertainment reporter, and admitted cinephile (it doesn’t mean what you think it means you perv), who also happens to have high-speed internet access, I stay pretty up to date with films in production. Sure the occasional one slips through the cracks, but usually I’m pretty up to date on this shit. I’ve been following the casting of Star Trek since it was announced, and there were rumours of Matt Damon or Nathan Fillion in the role of James T. Kirk (Fillion would have been awesome, but too reminiscent of Cpt. Reynolds).

I’ve followed movies from production all the way to much delayed release.

But I keep update through various websites. I pretty much live on Apple Trailers, Yahoo! Movies and of course, my homepage, the IMDb. I peruse the myspace from time to time to see what they’ve got going on over there, hit up studio sites for their in production calenders, and I use other sites.

But this is all to keep me updated on films coming out. I generally have a running list of what’s coming this year (I even have a short list of the major 2009 releases I want to see), just so I know what I want to see, and to keep track of production and release dates.

To help pass the savings on to you, every few months I’ll post the ones I’ve got dog-earred. Obviously January has past, but here’s a short list for February, March and April.

February:

• In Bruges Starring: Colin Farrel, Brenden Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes; Written and Directed by Martin McDonagh. View Trailer Here. February 8th
• Charlie Bartlett Starring: Anton Yelchin, Robert Downey, Jr. and Hope Davis; Written by Gustin Nash; Directed by Jon Poll. View Trailer Here.February 22nd

March

• The Bank Job Starring: Jason Statham and Saffron Burrows; Written by Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais; Directed by Roger Donaldson. View Trailer Here. March 7th
• 21 Starring: Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth, Laurence Fishburne and Jim Sturgess; Written by Peter Steinfeld and Allan Loeb; Directed by Robert Luketic. View Trailer Here. March 28th

April

• Forgetting Sarah Marshall Starring: Jason Segel, Kristen Bell, Bill Hader and Jonah Hill; Written by Jason Segel; Directed by Nicholas Stoller. View Trailer Here. April 18th

That’s a brief look into what’s coming up this spring.

Check ya later!

-Brodie Mann

Aloha Brodie Fanns!

New review.

But before I start, you led a good life, Heath. It took me while to warm up to you, and I’m going to miss what you could have given us in the future. You had an immense and dynamic talent that was just starting to show. But your swan song looks phenomenal. To you, Joker/Skip/Ennis/Casanova/Patrick/Heath Ledger, I raise my glass.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

3.5 Stars

Sweeney Todd is a conundrum of a movie. And sad as it is to say, I have to use a Simon Cowell quote on this one: “Yeah it was good, but so what?” Tim Burton, you’re a one trick pony whose trick is getting very old.

Benjamin Barker (Johnny Depp) was a happily married man with a beautiful baby daughter and a nice little barber shop. Until the jealous Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman) decides he should have Barker’s wife for himself, and forces Barker into exile. Sixteen years later, Barker, now calling himself Sweeney Todd, returns from Australia, only to learn that his wife is dead and his daughter now the charge of Turpin. Todd and his meat pie shop running land-lady Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) hatch a plan to lure Turpin to the new barber shop on the second floor of the pie shop, where they will kill and cook him for her pies. Subplot being that the sailor Todd sailed with from Australia, a young man named Anthony Hope (Jamie Campbell Bower) has fallen instantly and madly in love with Johanna (Jayne Weisner), who just so happens to be Turpin’s charge, a.k.a. Barker’s daughter. What a small world we live in. Even smaller by 18^th century standards. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, it’s a bloody musical. Literally, bloody. One of the goriest musicals I’ve ever seen.

Here’s the thing. Tim Burton (Edward Scissorhands) has always been a master of the visually beautiful, yet mostly macabre comedies. Sweeny Todd is definitely the perfect fit for Tim. But there in lies the problem. That’s pretty much all he can do. The man has no range. While one could argue, that he’s found his voice, there are plenty of directors out there who have found their voice. And their voice isn’t as mono-tonal as the love child of Steven Wright and Ben Stein. Spielberg is one. While there are certain thematic elements that remain constant in his films, his “trademarks” if you will, I ask you, would you guess that E.T. and Saving Private Ryan were made by the same person?

That’s because he has range. He can explore his own boundaries as a film maker. Burton pretty much refuses to move outside his comfort zone. So while he is a decent and competent director, he isn’t that dynamic. It brings me back to my first point… It was good, but so what? It’s the same thing we’ve been seeing from him for the past twenty years.

Johnny Depp (Pirates of the Caribbean), on the other hand, continues to explore his bounds as an actor. It was his first singing role and he nailed it with perfection. I had my doubts, not that I didn’t think Depp could do it, it’s just, he’s never struck me as a singer. There were times when his vocal characterization of Todd was very reminiscent of Cpt. Jack Sparrow. Though I suppose when you play characters of the same era and similar geographic backgrounds, that’s bound to happen.

Where would this film be without the outstanding supporting cast? I don’t know, but probably with less stars in this review and even less awards. Bonham Carter (Fight Club) was fantastic as the daft Mrs. Lovett, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the absolutely fantastic performance of young newcomer Ed Sanders (literally nothing, this was his first film) as the orphan Toby, who was a hawker for Sacha Baron Cohen’s (Borat) Adolfo Pirelli wonderful hair growth elixir, and became a worker in the meat pie shop. He was fantastic, holding his on against both Cohen and Depp, two of the finest actors in today’s market.

While this film was entertaining, and gloriously gory, I fail to find the true ingenuity in seeing the same thing over and over. My plea to Tim Burton: there’s this thing called the box, and there’s a big wide world of filmmaking outside of it… check it out sometime.

Brodie Fanns!

New review, and since it’s Cloverfield, and since J.J. Abrams gave us the teaser at the start of the movie, I AM posting the teaser for Star Trek at the end. So here it is!

Cloverfield

5 Stars

The first film of the year worth seeing, and goddamn is it worth seeing. Featuring a cast of young actors of no particular importance, and directed by Matt Reeves, who’s been making a name for himself directing TV shows for the past 14 years, this J.J. Abrams produced monster movie is the stuff horror junkies and film nerds salivate over. Luckily for you, I’m somewhat both.

Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) just took a high level corporate position in Japan, so his brother Jason (Mike Vogel), best friend Hud (T.J. Miller) and Jason’s girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas) throw him a going away party, with Hud filming it all for posterity. Through both the on camera interviews Hud performs, and cut-aways to what was previously on the tape, we find out that there is complicated history between Rob and Beth (Odette Yustman). Then the power starts to flicker and the building quakes. The party guests head up to the roof to check things out, and notice explosions off in the New York City skylline. They head down to the street, and that’s when they figure out what’s going on. A monster is attacking New York City. What ensues is a panic enduced thrill ride that is as entertaining as it is gripping.

A cast of mostly unknowns was the best route to go for Abrams (Lost, Mission: Impossible III) and crew to go, as anybody registering any amount of star power would have seriously detracted from the film. I mean, the most recognizable face for the mainstream movie-going public is Lizzy Caplan as Marlena, and she was was Janis Ian in Mean Girls. As previously stated, the lack of highly recognizable faces made for a more engrossing film experience. We were able to believe that these were actual people in this actual situation. Granted as believable as a monster who lay dormant in the northern Atlantic for 1000’s of years waking up and attacking a major metropolitan city can be. But they put me there.

The biggest asset this film had going for it was the handheld camera direction. It obviously is drawing comparison to 1999’s The Blair Witch Project, but the comparisons end at character P.O.V. direction. Where Blair Witch Project was presented as a documentary, viewing the action from a third person perspective, in Cloverfield, we’re given the first person perspective. Hud is filming the party which leads us to the attack. We’re given the obvious yet necessary explanitory exchange where Rob asks if he’s still filming, to which Hud responds, “Yeah, people are gonna want to know, how it all went down.” It’s a blatent deus ex machina, but without it we’re left wondering why these 20-somethings are still filming.

But that device of presenting in first person is precisely what makes this such an effective thriller. We’re experiencing exactly what the characters are, and subsequently can sympathize. We’re given fleeting hints at the monster throughout the film, sort of a Jaws-ian move to not reveal the monster till the third act, which heightens the suspense throughout the film, and adds to the shock, awe and horror of the revelation towards the end.

And the end. The end is one of the more satisfying endings I’ve ever seen. I promise not to reveal the end, but rest assured, it does not disappoint. It is precisely how they should have ended it.

Abrams and crew created the perfect monster/horror flick to kick off 2008, and if this is any indication of what he can do, I can wait till he closes out the year with Star Trek.

Here’s the teaser:

Before I get to that, if you’re wondering about the cast:

Kirk- Chris Pine (Smokin’ Aces)
Spock- Zachary Quinto (Heroes)
Scotty- Simon Pegg (Shaun of the Dead)
Sulu- John Cho (Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle)
Uhura- Zoe Saldana (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl)
McCoy- Karl Urban (The Lord of the Rings)
Chekov- Anton Yelchin (Alpha Dog)
Pike- Bruce Greenwood (National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets)
Eric Bana, Winona Ryder, Leonard Nimoy and Jennifer Morrison also star.

Hey Brodie Fanns!

Here’s Juno. Charlie Wilson’s War to follow soon enough.

Juno

4.5 Stars

Drawing some warranted comparisons to June’s Knocked Up in it’s addressing of an unwanted pregnancy, Juno differs in its more delicate handling of the subject matter, and by looking at it through the scope of the woman’s eyes. It’s just as whip-smart funny, but holds off on the vulgar, to create a touching, poignant and often times hilarious take on teenage pregnancy.

After a random tryst with her maybe boyfriend (the official status of their relationship isn’t made entirely clear from the get go), 16-year-old Juno (Ellen Page) keeps turning up positive on the three pregnancy tests she commandeers from a local mini-mart. As one can imagine, it’s not exactly the most welcome news for her, her parents (J.K. Simmons and Allison Janney) or Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera), the aforementioned boyfriend. In fact, the only people who seem to get a kick out of it are her best friend Leah (Olivia Thilby) and the couple who has their hopes set on adopting Juno’s baby, Mark and Vanessa Loring (Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner). Juno just wants to get the thing over with so she can go on with her life. But the bonds she forms with both her parents and the Lorings make the ordeal into something more than she can probably handle.

As Juno, 20-year-old Ellen Page (X-Men: The Last Stand), is able to step away from playing the stereotypical pregnant woman in distress and bring a fascinating third dimension to, and I say this with all due respect Katherine Heigl, as she was very good in her film, a character type who is generally relegated to stereotypes, that of a single, pregnant female. Some of the more die hard of film buffs took notice of young Ellen two years ago in Hard Candy, but with the critical attention she’s getting with this film, and her growing fan base, she should have no trouble making the transition from indie darling to big time leading lady. I would love to see that happen, as she’s a very talented young woman who has a knack for picking good scripts.

To help her bring this script alive, she has an amazing supporting cast, and this film would be lost without them. Cera (Arrested Development, Superbad) plays the unsure, nervous boyfriend to perfection and his own “aw shucks” sweetly, naïve personality lends itself to the character just magnificently. Simmons (Spider-Man 1-3, The Closer) finally finds THE role. He’ll always be remembered for his work in the Spider-Man franchise, but this is the role he was meant to play. The only way it would have been a more perfect fit for him is if the film was based on a true story, and he was the actual guy the story was based on.

Director Jason Reitman (son of Ivan Reitman) made an impact with his 2005 feature film debut Thank You for Smoking and continues his impressive declaration that he is his own talent, as opposed to making it big by name dropping his dad. He’s got immeasurable chops and I can’t wait to see his future works, of which there aren’t any currently in the works.

But let’s give credit where credit is due: rookie screenwriter Diablo Cody. She crafted an engrossing tale of teenage angst, minus all the mindless trappings and clichés that accompany your typical 21^st century teen angst film. She threw in some fascinating layers to each of the characters, hinting at them through out the script, but never making the mistake of delving too far into them. After all, the movie is called Juno for a reason, it’s about Juno. It’s not about Mike and Vanessa, or Paulie and Leah, or Mac and Bren (Juno’s parents). It’s about Juno, and that’s the thrust, but each character is given a rich and interesting backstory we only get glimpses of. And I want to commend her for exploring the issue of abortion in a very tactful and non-political way. Had she handled the issue wrong, it could have set the wrong tone for the film, but she handled it in a very mature manner.

The only real drawback is the sometimes overtly and overly trite and contrived “hipster” jargon. The dialog approaches near Dawson’s Creek-ian levels of pretentiousness and unbelievability for high school students. Is she hinting that they are smarter than we give them credit for? And if so, why does Leah provide us with one of the more cringe-worthy pieces of dialog in recent cinematic history with “Swear to blog?” Get it? Swear to blog? Blog in place of god. I don’t get it either. I’m five years removed from high school. Is this how they talk now a days? OH! And what the hell is with these indie movies trying to out do each other with finding the most obscure indie artists for the characters to be huge fans of? Fuck you, I know I ended that on a preposition. But let’s face it. Kamya Dawson… sucks.

Aside from those minor annoyances, I couldn’t help but fall in love with this film and its characters.

Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story

4 Stars

The makers of the *insert genre name here* Movie franchise need to take a cue from Judd Apatow and crew on how to make a good parody. When making a parody, you don’t make exaggerated versions of pre-existing characters and exaggerate the situations to sophomoric proportions. You create your own characters, which are exaggerated companions to who they are parodying. And that’s why Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story works.

Dewey Cox (John C. Reilly) is the biggest country/rock star to come out of the 50’s, and Walk Hard documents his rise and fall, and then phoenix like re-emergence from the ashes. Cox battles the hazards of fame, drug addiction and multiple wives to become a music legend.

Walk Hard primarily satirizes Johnny Cash’s Walk the Line and Ray Charles’ Ray, but pulls material from all sorts of films to create a larger than life music star who suffers all the cliché trappings of rock superstardom. It serves as a throw back to the Mel Brooks films of the 60’s and 70’s, and the Zucker/Abrams flicks of the 80’s, where it serves as a knowing parody, but never gives a wink and a nod to the audience. The film is presented as a goofy account of a fictional man’s real life. Think Forrest Gump, only written by, well, Judd Apatow (The 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up), the man who’s name is practically required on all comedies if it wants to do well at the box office.

The production would be nothing without Reilly’s (Chicago, Talladega Nights) chops as an actor, singer and as an all around performer. He’s able to play a simple man who makes it big and lives his life in almost ignorant bliss. There’s a sweet charm to his portrayal, and of anyone else in the Apatow cast of characters, I don’t think anyone could have captured the character quite as well as Reilly.

Reilly also has an amazing supporting cast to boost the films comic credentials. Justin Long, Jack Black, Paul Rudd and Jason Schwartzman come together to play The Beatles (George, Paul, John and Ringo, respectively) providing for one of the more hilarious scenes in the movie as Cox is going on a journey of self discovery. Jenna Fischer (The Office) as longtime love interest Darleen Madison provides some good laughs and a good break from the male dominated comedy.

There were times when it felt like they were reaching for jokes, providing us with some groan worthy moments. And certain spots make it feel like an over-blown Saturday Night Live skit, but it then it circles back around and gets funny again.

I’m looking forward to the next Apatow project, and whatever he and his entourage have in store for us.

I Am Legend

3.5 Stars

Name two good movies that you never thought would be combined together to form another good movie. How about Cast Away and 28 Days Later? Sounds like a weird amalgamation, right? Well, it is… but thanks to a great story by Richard Matheson and the charismatic action of Will Smith, it works in the new Francis Lawrence flick, I Am Legend.

When a deadly virus wipes out over 90% of the world’s population, sole survivor Robert Neville (Will Smith) lives in the desolate New York trying to find a cure to help the few who survived the virus, but became souless zombies. He lives his life by a strict routine, outside by daybreak, indoors by nightfall, as the zombies have an aversion to UV rays. At mid-day, in accordance with a looped broadcast he sends out over the radio waves, he waits in New York Harbor for any other survivors there may be.

This movie works the same way Cast Away worked. If you’ve got a leading man with enough talent and charisma, he can literally carry a movie. And Will Smith (Independence Day, Ali) has enough charisma and talent to carry two movies. Much of the movie is him interracting with his dog, and the “friends” he’s made up using store mannequins.

I think that Will Smith made this film. There are very few other actors who are fascinating enough to warrant watching just them for two hours. It’s a true credit to his talent that he can carry the film, and I think he did a magnificent job.

Francis Lawrence actually accomplishes what few former music video directors are able to. He’s grown as a film maker since is feature debut with Constantine. And while it’s a step up, there’s still something left to be desired in his sophomore effort. It seemed a bit empty. The special effects were nice to look at, and it’s amazing how they were able to empty out New York City for some of the scenes. But all of Smith’s charisma and wonderous special effects weren’t enough to save it from being an average end of the world disaster flick. It seemed to be in step with 2004’s The Day After Tomorrow instead of 28 Days Later… like it should have been.

It’s definitely warrants a viewing, but for a more insightful look at a post-apocalyptic world, there are better films out there.