The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy -- 2005 -- PG

This movie was just funny. It had a decent plot line and some great gags to fill it in. The jokes were just isolated, but completely ingrained into the storyline making them even funnier than they would be otherwise. It had some great costumes from Jim Henson's creature shop, and some clever and amusing twists to the plot as we traveled along.

My only complaints were that the main character, on two occasions, made some decisions that rested more with moving the plot than what his character would do. It would have better served the character for him to have been dragged away at the point where he just ran when the girl was captured. It just felt wrong.

The other was near the end when he chose to enter the final structure where I would have felt better had he been more hesitant and wanted to return to the others. I just felt his willingly going in was like abandoning everyone. Granted all this worked out, but again, it seemed odd.

The only other hiccup was an importance stressed on carrying a towel, but the reasoning behind this was never really explained. It is used a couple of times, but anything could have conceivably been used. The bad guys seemed afraid of a towel for some reason, but it seems a small thing to carry a towel to defend against one race.

Other than that, good show. Got a kick out of the Point of View Gun and the Improbability Drive.

Rings -- 2005

This was a short feature included on the Ring Two Unrated DVD. This short totally measures up the The Ring. It has the same level of creepiness and fear instilled in it, probably since it has the same central plot....but with a big twist.

If you have not watched The Ring or don't know the solution Rachel discovered at the end, then this will spoil it. If you have seen it, don't care to, or don't mind knowing, consider yourself warned and read on.

As a result of having to make a copy and make someone else watch it and so on, these Ring clubs have developed around the country. Well, this kid watches the tape for someone else he know to save their life, but they dare him to last until Day 7. They tell him to video everything he sees and diary everything that happens so they can know too. Well, as he goes through the week, he has someone to show the tape to so he can live.

Watching it all play out and knowing the consequences of his dangerous game makes this short a wild ride to watch. If you haven't seen the Ring, though, it won't make any sense at all. He surfs other internet Ring groups and learns more about what he is in for.

I won't give it away, but this short lead directly into the teaser of The Ring Two, so you can watch this short first and lead it into the Ring Two and it fits perfect. This short is worth the acquiring of the DVD.

Hitch -- 2005 -- PG-13

Through the Queen, I was subjected to this film whose trailers did not paint a promising picture. I was pleasantly surprised, though with a cleverly constructed chick flick with well-rounded characters and individual motivations and stories.

Early on, I was getting lost in the multitude of plots, and I worried they were trying to do too much. However, it all came together as we shot forward and the conflicts reached a satisfying height and resolution. All in all, one of the better romantic comedites I've seen in awhile.

The Ring Two -- 2005 -- PG-13

I watched the Unrated Edition. As a sequel this poor film has to stand up to the sheer creepiness of the original and when compared, it pales. However, when considered as its own film, its actually pretty good. It does what so few sequels do, and that is take the old plot on a new ride. It handles the characters from the original and allows them continued development. It creates a really creepy atmosphere, and has its own share of scares and chills. It has good momentum throughout the movie, good development, and enough intrigue to keep you wondering without being annoyed that you don't know what is going on for most of the film.

It has some weak points, though. One is this elaborate deer attack that once you know what is going on (and watch the making of video that explains it) makes sense, but in the context of the film, really loses you. They explain that the deer react to Samara's presence, and any setup for this (even a barking dog beforehand) would have helped. A similar issue occurred in the Ring with a horse going crazy, so it works, but it never gets a sufficient explanation in this film.

The other problem is what I call Forced Conflict. This usually occurs with characters who like asking lots of questions, like detectives or doctors. This film has a psychiatrist who asked perfectly reasonable questions that the character could have simply answered to avoid all ramifications. Instead, the character clams up and refuses to answer even the simplest question: "Did you hit your son?" Why not answer this with a truthful resounding no? What does she say? "I want you to leave." To make this forced conflict even worse, the psychiatrist locks the character in her office to detain her for a moment while she gets coffee. The psychiatrist returns moments later to find the character escaped out the window. Can anyone say "You just incriminated yourself"?

This aside, it is a passable film when allowed to stand on its own. When placed aside the original, it doesn't measure up and feels like a sequel.

Batman Begins -- 2005 -- PG-13

The revival of the Batman franchise by taking us back to Batman's roots and tweaking them to be exciting. A LOT goes on in this film from Bruce Wayne trying to learn who he is to his return to Gotham to his antics around town before discovering what he needs to "be" Batman. To survive the trek from Bruce to Batman, though, takes some patience as it doesn't happen for the first hour of the movie.

The only disappointment is the attempted inclusion of a Batman villain, Scarecrow. When he was there, he was frightening, but he was way underused and never acheived any measure of being threatening. And his "defeat" was nothing short of shameful (he wasn't beaten by the bat). The real villain was very good, however, and Scarecrow could have been dropped entirely, and we would have lost nothing.

Don't get this film mixed up with the four that have come before. The implications here are that we're gratefully starting the franchise over (and forgetting about that Batman & Robin debacle). Unlike Burton's Batman film from 1988, Mr. and Mrs. Wayne were killed by a rogue hoodlum, just like they were in the comic books. There is an implication of a sequel that may include the Joker.

It was a very good film overall, and one of the best super hero films to come out.

Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children - 2005 - PG-13

I saw a preview for this film, and when I saw the title, I thought they were putting me on and advertising a video game. It looked pretty neat from the trailer, and upon discovering it was a movie, I had to see it.

The best part of this film is the animation. It's CG like Pixar and Dreamworks are famous for, but this animation kicks both of those studios' butts when it comes to the CG work. It is absolutely incredible. Realism is beyond compare for computer animation. It's one of those that you must see to believe.

This medium, of course, allowed for some amazing action sequences. The opening motorcycle chase was just incredible. There was also a one on one melee in a gutted church that was rather good as well. Lots of great shots that were nothing short of picturesque while some high speed this and that went on in front of it. Just a feast for the eyes.

This is, however, where the good part ends.

This thing is based on a video game, and I can only guess it translated well. There was a ton of exposition running non-stop from one end to the other to make sure the audience had a clue as to what was going on. This means that the character development was almost completely sacrificed. They tried to squeeze too much into their running time, so elements of the plot seemed odd or out of place at several moments.

Then, comes the friends of the main character. Who the heck are these guys? We go from ex-soldier guy with skill to these superheroes with no introduction. They come into the story completely out of no where like a deux ex machina finish to a large monster (who also came out of no where) in the middle of the film.

Then, it turns out the main villain is someone who does not exist until certain requirements are fulfilled. It was a neat final battle, but the final resolution escaped me.

I can see fans of the game throughly enjoying and understanding this film, but this is another that for me, who watches the movie and expects to understand, I got lost in the overwhelming plot laid out here.

The Producers -- 2005 -- PG-13

This film is based on the Mel Brooks' Broadway musical which also starred Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick, which was based on the 1968 film of the same name which starred Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.

Probably the easiest part of any musical is characterizing the main characters, and as with any musical, this is done very well. You get a real sense of who the main characters are as well as the supporting cast through their own character songs and moments.

The film had plenty of funny moments to it, and it even had a solid plot. It follows a down-on-his-luck Broadway producer who figures out through his nerdy accountant that with some creative bookkeeping, a producer can make more money with a flop than with a hit. So begins the roller coaster.

The way it all unfolded was just hilarious and the potential for the awful quality was there right from the get-go. The musical ended up being a romp called "Springtime For Hitler." Note this film is set close enough to the end of World War II to make this topic incredibly sensitive, so the potential for this to be a flop was right there. I found myself laughing at a lot of this and the ensuing madness when (surprise) the musical didn't flop.

There were some problems though. One of them is just in the musical to movie translation (and this may have been present in the original film). The first main scene in the office was incredibly long. After the opening scene where our producer is discussed as having another flop, we go to his office where all the principal characters and plot are introduced. This scene runs for over fifteen minutes -- an eternity for a movie. I felt it needed something to break it up a little.

In addition, I didn't quite understand the consequences of the premise. Apparently, if you bring in more money from investors than you spend on the product...you can get into trouble? Why would you get into trouble? Or my main question: if you are caught, why can't you just give the money back? This point was never explained, and I'm guessing they thought the audience would just get it? I didn't. When the musical did not flop, I didn't understand why they couldn't just say they were cooking the books and realized they did not require the funds they'd originally requested and simply return the investors' money. This was the only unexplained point, and it was big enough in my head to make the last third of the movie questionable.

If you can get past that point and just roll with it, it's a fun film though.

Aeon Flux -- 2005 -- PG-13

This is a movie version of an MTV animated series involving a group of people in the distant future -- survivors of an ancient plague that has decimated the entire world's population and relegated everyone to a small patch of one country.

I've never seen the MTV series, so I'm approaching this from a cinematic angle, and I found the movie to be quite good and complete. the story was creative and original with no glaring holes. I thought some of the things that happened we a little forced, but not so over the top that it stuck out real bad.

The characters were decently developed and I felt for them to an extent. I did occasionally find them to be a bit over the top in their actions, but it all worked out fairly well. The only complaint I would have involves the main villain (once he is revealed). The megalomaniac thing works sometimes, but I thought it was kind of silly in the context of the film when the full reasoning came to light. He just felt a little too cold hearted. His reasoning didn't quite make sense.

In addition, I felt that the main character was too powerful in many things she did. She survived some pretty outlandish things.

So in the end, it was a good film, but some contrivances from the filmmakers served to decrease its perfection in my mind. These things might work for superhero type films, but I want to deal with real people in extraordinary situations.

House of Wax -- 2005 -- R

Theoretically, this is a remake of he 1953 film with Vincent Price, but the only similarity between this one and that one is the wax covered corpses, and the deformed man with the wax face. Beyond that, this is an original take on the old idea.

The idea behind this film isn't bad. You have an isolated town with a wax museum made entirely of wax. Some argue that the wax building would melt in the sun, but wax takes some extreme temperatures to melt, and I don't see it as a large error. Anyway, the entire town is essentially dead, so these brothers take it over, filling the shops and building with wax dummies to give the entire town the appearance of being a wax museum. Come to find out that these brothers are killing passers-by and covering their bodies with wax. The deaths are okay, the chases are pretty good, and the ending is kind of neat as well.

Characters are about normal for a horror movie in that you get just enough to know who they are, but not develop them to the point that you care. They also do their typical range of idiotic things such as exploring other people's houses and going places that the script tells them to. I rolled my eyes a lot during this film.

When would I have left if I were them? When I'd made camp and a truck drives up and sits there with its lights shining on the campsite. Knowing there was someone in the area who would do this, I would never go to sleep. We'd be out of there. What do they do? Go to sleep only to have a camera stolen and a car sabotaged. Can't say that I'm that surprised.

In the end, for a horror flick, it was okay, but certainly not the best, or even decent, film to come out last year. If they'd spent some time developing the characters and having them make intelligent decisions, that would have improved this film a lot.

The Island -- 2005 -- PG-13

From the moment I saw the first trailer, I knew this was a remake of a film I saw on TV a long time ago called Parts: The Clonus Horror, and the film followed that plot line perfectly. However, this being a modern movie, it really improved upon some of the cheese that permeated that old plot and made for a better and more satisfying film overall.

We begin in an environment that reminds me of a cross between 1984 and THX-1138 where people are in a mostly sterile environment wearing nothing but white jumpsuits. They all long to go to a place called "The Island" which they believe is the only place to have survived a catastrophic contamination that destroyed much of the earth and forced them into the world they now live in.

While I had an idea of where this was going based on this earlier film, this movie was still satisfying and had its own surprises going along making it not a total waste of over two hours. Some of the chase sequences ran on too long, but they had some great effects here and there.

So in the end, a lot of it is very familiar, but it is tied together in such a way to make it worth watching.

Saw II -- 2005 -- R

The sequel to the thriller Saw has two basic storylines in its structure. One of them is very good with some awesome twists very much carrying on the tradition of the first film. The second storyline is nothing more than a basic slasher complete with a host of characters who will inevitably be killed in a variety of different fashions before really getting to know them making their deaths, while gruesome, mean nothing emotionally.

The primary storyline involves the pathos-injected serial killer, Jigsaw (or John, as he prefers to be called), building an intricate and complex game around and between a cop and his son, who are, of course, estranged due to a parental divorce. This is the primary plot device which propels the film forward in both elements and gives us some buy-in to the story. john makes his simple request and assures the cop that if he complies, he will see his son. Since he is also told everyone in the house where his son is will die within the same time frame of a deadly nerve agent, this creates an understandable amount of agitation for the cop. This conflict is played out in pretty much one location while they can watch the eight people in the house on a series of monitors. This plot climaxes beautifully, has no less than three excellent twists within that climax and really makes the film worth watching.

The second plot of the eight strangers in a house is ok, and serves the primary purpose to give the main plot something to argue over. However, these eight strangers are idiots. They don't listen. They don't cooperate. They are told some specific things, and don't seem to even care. They are told about an antidote in the room they start in, but they don't even try for it since that would involve conversation and character building. Instead, they set themselves to wander aimlessly through this house, insisting (no matter what stands in their way) that they will find a way out. They get themselves into the traps Jigsaw has made, and more often than not, die trying to decipher them...not that the deciphering is that difficult. For the first trap, they somehow know that the antidote is in syringes, but they have yet to see what the antidote looks like yet. How do they know it's not injestible? They woudln't. On another occasion, they actually get an antidote, but no one uses it. Why not? If fact, no one even mentions it even though the syringe clearly had something in it. Deleted scene? Overall, this part of the film just stinks because it is so plain in comparison to the main plot. It takes away from the enjoyment of the main plot due primarily to the amount of eye-rolling that goes on for me.

So the verdict is that this is a good and watchable film as long as you don't expect too much from our house guests, who act very much like they belong on Big Brother complete with their infantile antics. Go for the main plot. It is intelligent and clever and the twists are (as with the first film) definitely worth the wait

Skeleton Key -- 2005 -- PG-13

Dissenters aside, I thought this movie worked pretty well for what it was. Most of it occurred in one house with some pretty decent character development, though the main character could have been rounded out a little better. We got a feel for her outlook, but not much of her past life or future desires.

I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.

Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.

Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.

Red Eye -- 2005 -- PG-13

This was a film that had a really good beginning, and moved perfectly right into the big shocker on the airplane. The tension was really well done...for awhile.

After some time, it became kind of annoying that everything this woman did to escape was discovered every time, and in the most convenient ways possible. The guy was omniscent or something.

The entry into the third act was clever, but matters of convenience got in the way again as this guy managed to keep going somehow. It seemed a bit hard to believe in some ways, but I guess it worked. The subplot of the girl in the hotel was okay, and helped in a way to distract from the main plot, but not enough, so it was very easy to get bored with the single thing going on.

I will have to say that the final scene during the denouement of the whole film was simply golden. I laughed out loud.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 2005 - PG-13

The fourth film adapting the Harry Potter series continues the tradition laid down in the third of allowing Stephen Kloves to adapt the book properly instead of trying to film the book as the first two films did. The result is a film that, like the books, is darker and scarier than the one before it. While it was diappointing that John Williams did not compose the music to this one, it is still a great film and a great addition to the HP series.

This film moves fast. Kloves followed the standard of adaptation very well by retaining the essential plot points of the book while writing a screenplay around them. We thankfully do not include the Dursleys here allowing us to pick up right in the wizarding world with the Quidditch World Cup and all the things that went with it. From there, we jet right over to Hogwart's and get into the point of the movie: the Tri-Wizard Tournament, that underage Harry, of course, has to participate in.

It's been awhile since I read the book, but I remembered much of it as I watched the film meaning it followed the story pretty closely. I'm sure there were some things missed, but given the length of the book, that comes as no surprise. The essence of the story was captured, and we got ourselves a dark, fast film with some solid character moments for the lead trio and those around them.

A moment I am grateful was touched on is the budding love-hate between Hermione and Ron that is back and forth in the books. They were given a solid scene to play out the emotions and they did it very well. Be very cool to see how they continue to blossom this one.

So, overall, if you've liked the movies so far, this one will not disappoint.

The Brothers Grimm -- 2005 -- PG-13

This movie looked intriguing from the trailers I watched, but the final product was actually kind of disappointing. I guess it's still possible to make a good trailer.

The main problem here from the beginning was the pacing. It moved slowly and continued to take its time meandering through the opening plot lines. I had some difficulty following how the brothers ended up in their precarious situation and what the emperor had to do with it as well.

After about an hour, the pace picks up a little bit and it becomes somewhat interesting, but as we continue through it, too much goes on. They are in and out of the forest too much which causes it to lose its nature of being a threat. They are captured, released, and chased over and over again. The final battle throws in nearly every character we've met so far, and it becomes more of an eye roller than anything else.

The outcome to the final battle strikes me as ill-conceived and very hard to believe, even for a fairy tale.

So what began as a good idea just kind of foundered in the making of the film. I think the script has some issues as well that should have been corrected prior to filming. Terry Gilliam, the director and of Monty Python fame, has directed perfectly good films before, but it seems he missed the mark on this one with a film that is too slow and too contrived for its own good.

Must Love Dogs -- 2005 -- PG-13

Guess who got subjected to another chick flick the other night? If you said you did, then clearly we're in the same boat...just like the people in this movie were at one point.

We've reached the age of Internet dating and there's no better way to bring this into the social consciousness than to make it the backbone of a film about a divorcee who is afraid to "get back out there." Her sister places an ad for her, and she meets the love interest because his best friend responded for him...because he is also a divorcee afraid to "get back out there." The two have some good chemistry together and their scenes are really amusing and you want the best for the relationship.

This whole thing gets complicated by the "don't touch that one, he's still married" love interest which she goes after anyway. I know she has a journey to go through, but the film struggles with keeping these two plots remaining interesting as between their introductions and then the parts going, a lot of time passes as a lot of other things happen. For a time, I wondered if the one she shouldn't was out of the picture since the final love interest was in, but then he showed right back up.

Call it a personal preference, but I feel like the girl sleeping with anyone other than the final guy during the film only hurts her character and makes her less appealing. Final guy told his easy-to-bag date "no." Points for him. Must admit that cross-town condom hunt was very funny.

It has its ups and downs, but in the end everything was tied up nice and neat, and it was done as well as it could be done. I think we could have had a cleaner movie without the married (sorry, "separated") guy, but it still worked pretty well. It's no Sleepless in Seattle, though, which I'm sure I'm be watching soon...

Rent -- 2005 -- PG-13

I've been waiting years for this one. I got the cast recording of Rent in 1997, a year after it came out on Broadway. 

This is a heck of a drama on screen. The relationships are engaging when watching them develop from the sweetness of Collins and Angel to the touching uncertainty of Roger and Mimi to the controlling/flirtatious rocky back and forthness of Joanne and Maureen, it seems to cover the basic types of relationship types we encounter or have even been in before. And then you have Mark who is just there giving us the tale from his vantage point, it seems, as he works to film his movie. Through Larson's wonderful music, we feel the trials these characters go through and the heartbreaks as they endure them.

The stage-to-screen translation worked very, very well and it delivers a powerful performance with nearly every main musical number intact. Some of the more recitative numbers from the show were changed into straight dialogue, and two songs were cut; Christmas Bells, which is a favorite from the show and I wish they kept and Contact, which I'm grateful was gone. I guess it was a fair trade-off.

Another bonus here is after listening to the cast recording for so long, most of the main cast in the movie was from the original Broadway cast meaning that the voices singing were exactly the same ones from the 1996 recording. 

Yes, some of the subject matter deals with homosexuality, but that is not something rubbed in the face of the viewer; it's simply an element of the story such as space travel is for Star Trek...simply there and we move on. Will and Grace is 100 times more in your face than this show is about that topic.

So my bottom line is that this is still a wonderful show, and the filmmakers did a great job on the movie of it. The biggest danger is trying to make a movie out of a musical is losing some of the magic of the stage; it wasn't lost here.

Doom -- 2005 -- R

I watched the DVD Unrated version.

I don't know what it was about this movie. It's like a guilty pleasure. We're talking about a film that is mostly cliche sci-fi action.

I don't mind admitting this. Rooms stay dark for some reason, even though the lights get turned on in some rooms. In the dark rooms, no one tries. The guys are pulled off an imminent leave for the mission. Yeah, didn't see that coming... The group is from the Marines. always a sci-fi favorite. Each Marine has his own nickname. One was killed moments after his flashlight conveniently went out. Shots are clearly setup for something to appear in that big open space to the character's right. Kinda takes away the surprise. I asked myself why one sequence was so freakin' long as a guy conveniently dropped his gun clip causing it to skitter across the floor just out of reach. He was in a bathroom and instead of just going for his clip by opening the bathroom stall door and diving for it, he crawls under the door and reaches for it. I'm waiting for him to get pummelled, but as these movies go, that's too easy. It wasn't suspenseful; just annoying.

The character development is remarkably decent. Even though we get a whole slew of characters to likely give us a high body count, the development of these characters was done as well as it could be. Each had his share of a combination of cliches and flaws. My only complain on these was the character who was apparently added at the last minute to fill the need to be a kill. He had no development at all. He stood guard for awhile while everyone else ran around, and then inexplicably, he was used to come in a rare threesome to a particular room where he remained out of sight until the bad creature thing came by and lopped off his head.

However, in the late second / early third act, something happens. The movie actually starts to get interesting. Character development comes to a head as characters get knocked off. With the numbers dropping, characters get more screen time and you learn more about them. It even got exciting. The revelation of the creatures' origin was not much of a twist, nor was an escape by them. The big twist was the leader's solution to the problem. It was completely whacked, but made perfect sense. 

But then we had something big happen. Here's the point where if you allow yourself to be sucked into the film, it becomes the guilty pleasure. A five minute plus continuous shot first person sequence styled right out of the game. The camera zip-pans around finding creatures coming up behind you and on top of you, and the gun is just going nuts as you're being attacked. From a forensical perspective, it's a little silly, but as just an entertaining sequence, it was awesome.

We ended with the obligatory and somewhat silly fistfight / wrestling match (we're dealing with The Rock here). You know, the kind where they put down their guns and duke it out like men (or monsters or whatever). 

So when the credits rolled with its heavy metal rock parental advisory lyrics song at the end, I found myself stunned to discover I liked it. The movie is very entertaining. It had a decent plot, good characters, and some decent directing. It has some weak points, but I am able to overlook them.

But here's the catch: This movie is based on a video game. Personally, I think linking movies to video games is a horrible idea because the video game audience doesn't understand the drama in the film, and the movie audience doesn't understand the video game elements. The filmmakers here wisely made a film loosely based on the game and it's essential plot, but did not duplicate the video game. If you loved the game, you'll hate the movie. If you can detach yourself from the game, or have never played Doom 3 (the game this movie's plot is based on), you just might enjoy it. The title was this movie's doom as it lost over $40 million at the box office according to IMDB. Hope its video sales are better. I admit to buying a copy. I told you it was a guilty pleasure.

The Interpreter -- 2005 -- PG-13

A political thriller following a woman who works for the UN as an interpreter who overhears a plot to assassinate a controversial head of state. The Feds try to protect her, but she shields from them her complex past making their job only that much more difficult.

This is a film with multiple layers and pretty solid characters. The plot centers itself more around this woman as uncovering her past than it does who is following her, and this is pretty much on purpose. The questions linger throughout: did she hear something or not? Is she in on it or not? And the beauty of it all is that we really don't know until it's all over.

I found this to be a well-constructed plot that finally ties itself up fairly well by the final frame, though the denouement is a little shaky. Fortunately, for a political thriller, it doesn't bog us down in the politics. In fact, the movie centers around a fictional country, which while some complain that this is a poor device, works a little better than placing a real one in there since it allows for a statement to be made without centering anyone out.

Overall, good flick.

The Fog -- 2005 -- PG-13

This is a remake of the 1980 John Carpenter film that I have yet to see. We have a little island town with a dark past that finally comes back to haunt them in the form of a fog hiding the supernatural attackers.

Like many teen scream flicks, this one lacks in the character department first and foremost. The main male lead, whose name I don't even remember, has little to no development at all, even though he seems to be the main character. More time is given to the female lead, Elizabeth, but she up and does silly things that no one in their right mind would do (like hearing a noise and walking outside all the way down to the beach in her underwear). There are other characters, but what development they are granted is limited solely to the scenes they are in....if you're lucky.

One question I wanted to know waswhy these spirits chose this moment to return. There seemed to be a bigger backstory here that they never got into. The spirits seem to have a tie-in with the lead female, Elizabeth, but rather than explore this thread, the movie moves onward to another impressive, special effects-laden kill. 

Elizabeth's final actions in the film save the day...but why does she do them? Nothing to this point indicated what needed to be done, and likewise when she did it, it occurred without reasoning or explanation. I thought I had a clue as to what was going on based on what I did know, but it didn't go that way and instead, did something that didn't make a lot of sense.

So while the pacing was decent, the characters were paper thin, and the plot had multiple pitfalls. I wanted to know why this started, or at least someone say there was nothing to trigger it. It might have been triggered by a bag of goodies that was torn open near the beginning, but that really doesn't make a lot of sense...however, it's all we have to go on.