The Godfather -- 1972 -- R

This was a classic that won best picture, and it was a long movie. This length was actually a necessary evil, however, as a lot went on during the course of the film and it's multiple reversals as well as requiring the time to not only introduce a myriad of characters, but fill them out to be real people.

It took about 45 minutes for this film to pick up some steam and start going due to getting everyone introduced, but being a drama based on a book, the direction changed a few times during the course of the film. This slow start is at once alleviated on a second viewing, however, since knowing the characters the second time around, you "get" everything a lot more clearly and the momentum is obvious from the get-go. 

Vito Corleone is the Godfather, not only of the Corleone clan, but of many of the people he has come into contact with over the years, particularly in the Italian community. He creates many give and take relationship with a lot of people, and follows through on them. The first part of the film focuses on Don Corleone and his reign as Don, but he runs into a bit of trouble when someone wants him to get into dealing drugs and he refuses.

This refusal upsets the wrong people and they try to take out the Don, leaving the rest of the family in chaos. Authority passes from one son to another during the Don's absence and a lot of revenge is taken as well on those responsible. His son, Michael, is eventually placed center stage as the main character, and even on a first viewing, this was the point where the film really got into its groove and took off.

It got a little slow while Michael ran off to Sicily, and that all seemed like a big side story we could deal without, but it allowed Sonny's reign to come and go, which was not necessarily a pleasant thing.

The characters, as I said, were numerous and well-rounded, and it's just astounding how well they were drawn throughout the film. Granted, the length of the film allowed this luxury and a shorter film likely would have dropped all those little moments which make these fictional characters seem real, but it worked so well.

It ended up being a solid film and certainly worthy of its Oscar. However, this movie should only be approached if you're in the mood to be thought-provoked. 

The Green Mile -- 1999 -- R

This bizarre tale from the mind of Stephen King was based on his serial novellas, The Green Mile. The title came from a death row prison block with a green floor. Death row is generally called "The Mile," but with their green floor, it became "The Green Mile."

This movie is almost 100% character. There are some shocking moments made more poignant by knowing these characters and their relationships with each other. Since this is death row, we see men sent to the electric chair and how that entire process is carried out. We also get a conflict between a guard and a prisoner. A very shocking (d'oh! pun!) death comes at 90 minutes through the 3 hour flick, and the chords of it strike much, much deeper due to the character development leading up to it. If this had been done after 15 minutes, it would not have meant anything and not have been memorable at all.

On a first watching and taking in everything throughout the film, I found it to be very good. A great exercise is suspense, plot, and development from one end to the other. It also had a solid twist and amusing consequences for one of the nastier characters.

The ending was inevitable and heartbreaking. Through the time we spent getting to know everyone, and then what they had to endure at the end made this movie a very solid viewing and one to stick in the mind if you have the three hours to commit to it. 

And as an added bonus, it even has Sesame Street's "Mr. Noodle's brother, Mr. Noodle" as Mr. Delacroix...not that the kids are watching...he doesn't come to a good end.

Gattaca -- 1997 -- PG-13

This little known film follows a guy named Jerome through his day until we learn his name is Vincent and he is borrowing the life and genes of Jerome in order to achieve his life long dream of going into space. You see, Vincent was a natural child, not genetically engineered as Jerome and most of society are in those days. The doctors told Vincent's parents at his birth how long he was likely to live as well as a 99% chance of dying from a heart condition.

This whole new version of prejudice plays throughout the movie as a murder happens and a small bit of Vincent's DNA is discovered. Since he is not a perfect genetically engineered person, he is automatically the suspect...the trick for the cops is that Vincent is known as Jerome and Vincent is using Jerome's genetic material to hide his true identity.

This seems confusing as I've described it, but the film is rich in characterization and atmosphere. It has a solid ending that feels good, and the little guy triumphing over the system in a big way. Great film.

Genuine: Tale of a Vampire -- 1920

I watched the 43 minute condensed version included on the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari DVD. Apparently the full version can only be viewed in the German film museum in Munich.

This was a really strange story that I really didn't "get." I understood the following: it was about a girl who was captured by a violent tribe, who was kidnapped and sold into slavery when the violent tribe was defeated, and subsequently bought by some rich old guy to live in his house as...whatever. Never understood why he bought her. Anyway, her experiences make her violent, but not a vampire in the sense that we understand today (1920 predates the earliest Dracula film, and the book itself was just over 20 years old by this time).

She entices a nephew to kill his uncle and wants him to kill himself to prove his love. He disappears, but shows up later, so he apparently didn't do it. The next guy she's with freaks out, and I don't understand why.

The intertitles in this film were waaay too long, and delivered too much information for a silent film. To make this point worse, they never gave the right kind of information to get the film to make sense. A lot of the scenes appeared to be dialogue scenes, also completely wrong for a silent film since, well, the dialogue cannot be recorded in 1920. 

Overall, while I was curious enough to watch the movie, the questions the movie was raising in my mind never ended up answered, so when it ended, I was left kind of confused.

The Godfather Part II -- 1974 -- R

This sequel to the 1972 film follows the rise of Vito Corleone and the fall of Michael. THis film was better than the first one. It was paced better, and the two plots intertwined perfectly creating a wonerul film experience. Even though it ran nearly 4 hours, I hardly noticed the time go by as Vito traveled to America and created his circle of trust a favors to become the Corleone family crime syndicate and as Michael slowly lost everyone through his necessary actions as the reigning Don of the Corleone clan.

The only real downside was that it ended very quickly and unexpectedly when it did end. In fact, I unintentionally paused the movie in what turned out to be the final scene an came back to find a short scene that faded into the end titles. I still understood the film, but it felt like a brief denouement was in order that we didn't get.

It was definitely worthy of its best picture award for 1974 and stands as a testimony to filmmakers everywhere that sequels can outdo their own original material.

The Grudge -- 2004 -- PG-13

Wow. This movie tops my list of creepy movies. It has now been several months since I've seen it and I still refuse to watch the Japanese version: Ju-On. It had a good range of scares, which in this case, were nearly always true scares (not the false ones we get a lot). The explanation of why this is going was good enough to suspend disbelief and roll with wht's going on. The scares are what drives the film constantly. The characters, while not really well rounded, serve their purposes decently.

When it comes to execution, I gauge how well it does by the numbers of times I feel like yelling at the movie based on its stupidity. This film does have two shortcomings in this category. In order to acheive the scares, it makes three rather unbelievable moves by its characters.

First, why can't anyone turn on a dang light? We've got characters going into rooms and halls and never once reaching for a light switch. Only in one room did a character reach for a switch and it not work. The others times when the light switch was flipped, let there be light. Granted this would spoil the whole "what's hiding in the dark" feeling, but it would have been better if the character tried to flip the switch and it not work instead of constantly wanting to go in blind.

The second has to do with people entering other people's houses without being invited. This film has to do with one house that has this grudge thing on it, and yet two characters entered this dwelling and felt free to look around at whatever they wanted to. One even rifled through pictures and read a diary. 

The last one has a character entering the house to destroy it. He has gasoline and he's ready to torch the place. Does he do it? No. No, he hears some noise in the house and has to check it out. My thoughts while I was watching? You idiot! You're in what amounts to a haunted house, and you hear a noise and you want to check it out EVEN THOUGH YOU JUST SAID that the house kills everything it touches. How annoying.

These things aside, the creep factor was through the roof, and I jumped more than once at the scares it provided. It gave even some psychological creepiness and its form of telling the story was very good jumping from one person's story to another in order to tell the story in the best manner possible. It has enough positives to outweigh the irriations, so if you want to be completely freaked out, give it a viewing and leave some time afterward for a comedy.

Ghost Ship -- 2002 -- R

A ghost story that attempts to explain why ships throughout history are discovered adrift without a crew or passengers. In this tale, a stranger entices a crew of ship salvagers to check out an ocean liner he discovered while flying over a particular area of the ocean. Once on board this desolate vessel, strange things begin happening suggesting what might have happened to the passengers and crew of the empty ship.

Not a bad ghost tale really. It has its share of scares and several moments of gore and disturbing images, the opening teaser especially. The ghosts start disturbing and pass from scary to downright interesting in some instances. The overall plot is rather tight and everything gets an explantion as to why it happened, and of course, we get the open end that all good scary movies have.

Where the film gets a little deficient is in the character department. This is, again, another propensity of horror flicks. Strangely, we do get some development though of a couple of characters. Katie, the ghost girl, gets decently rounded as well as one crew member, Greer. You can gauge how well a character has been developed by how you feel when they meet their untimely demise and I felt sorry for Greer. It's a horror flick; this means his dying at some point is really not a spoiler. And like most horror flicks, it's pretty predictable who will live through it.

The story has a good wrap up to it, so overall, it's a pretty good film. Definitely one of the better horror films that you'll find.

Goodfellas -- 1990 -- R

Ah, the inspiration for Animaniacs "Goodfeathers." I laughed at several points during this film for that reason alone, but I digress.

I'm not sure to what to make of this one. We're mostly cheering for the bad guys -- our hero being a boy who grew up wanting to be a gangster and dragging his family into the business with him. It runs like a series of tableaus of his life starting from when he was young and moving through his life until the end of his relationship with the wiseguys. One the one hand, we have great character development, and know very well who is who and why they act the way they do. That being said, on the flip side, the voiceover does 90f the explanation of why stuff happens. Maybe that's my beef. As soon as we get into the film, the voiceover reminds us that we're watching one.

It does give us some solid characters that we do feel for on some level, and it does give us the life of Henry and his family to follow as he winds through his trials and pitfalls working for Paulie and the rest of the crew. Through the latter part, it just becomes him working to support his family, and at some points it is very touching.

I do have some difficulty feeling very sympathetic for him or anyone else though. Business aside, he places the business before his family at many points and even has a few girls on the side that he supports as well.

It ends well enough for how it ran, and it does make sense. I understood this to be a contrapunctual film to the romantic mafia The Godfather presents. This one is more of a gritty, down to earth kind of film that says "this is how it is; deal with it." On that level, it works well.

The Great Train Robbery -- 1903

Now here we go. We're finally getting into some good stuff. This one is often called the first Western, but it has a lot of great action elements in it as well. It also has (drum roll...) color! Yup, for little parts, we get some color tinting where someone goes onto the print or something and actually colors in parts of the picture to add a little bit of flair to it.

This one involves a group of robbers who hop a train, rob its passengers, steal the engine, run into the woods, and are finally caught up to by a posse who takes them down. Got a fistfight, several people are shot, one is punched out and thrown from a moving train, and finally, a big shootout. Lots of excitement and a big leap from the simplicity seen so far. And they do it all completely without dialogue or intertitles.

The Golden Beetle -- 1907

I'm really not sure what was going on here, but I suspect the point of this short was not a clever narrative. I caught a guy doing some sort of ritual and this winged character appeared. From there, it went into this trippy sort of thing until the guy was thrown into a fire.

The high point of this one was exceptional color tinting and special effects. Got a character who fades in, some spinning, flashy color wheels, and the beetle character who floats here and there.

It was mostly a spectacle to watch, but considering it's 1907 and they're pulling effects like that, it was impressive.

Gigli -- 2003 -- R

Ok, I succumbed to temptation and watched this film that managed to sweep the Razzie awards (The Razzie Awards, for those who don't know, are the "Oscars" for the worst categories of the year). What I found was a mixture of things that were good and things that were bad. The trouble came when the bad outweighed the good.

The plot involves a mobster of some sort named Gigli (played by Ben Affleck) who is hired to kidnap the mentally challenged brother, Brian, of a big time prosecutor in order to get a buddy of the mobster's boss off the hook. He is joined by a lesbian hitman named Ricky (hit-woman?, played by Jennifer Lopez) whose mission is to make sure Gigli doesn't screw up. Yup, that's her whole reason to be there. So they kidnap this guy and keep him for awhile. As we move through this plot, we get little side stuff that goes on which further serves to develop these two characters, but really doesn't forward what plot there is much.

So let's start positive. Whatever its faults, the film had some good character development. It couldn't really help that, since it's 2 hours long and centered around 3 characters. By far, the best character is Brian whose character is built solely through his own actions and comes across as innocent and endearing. His own ending is perfect for him, and makes me wish the story were more about him than the actual leads. The other two are developed, bizarre as they are and weirdly as it was done.

I am not sure how it pulled this off, but although many of the scenes were very, very slow, the pacing wasn't that bad. I gauge pacing on how often I check the time on the movie to see when it will end, and I didn't glance up until over an hour had gone by. I was probably lost in the mess. However, this does indicate the director knew what he was doing, and the quality of the images goes along with this. Then again, this is the guy who directed Scent of a Woman, Beverly Hills Cop, and Meet Joe Black, so he's not exactly an amateur.

The single biggest problem with this film in my opinion has to do with the dialogue. We didn't start well with an apparent "f" word quota in the opening scenes. This quota diminished as the movie wore onward until the end had no profanity at all. The dialogue based scene went on and on and on and on, and although I know a cardinal rule of dialogue is "never be direct," you've got to at least make sense and forward the plot. The dialogue here was just a big mess, and all I wanted out of a lot of the scenes was just to get to the point and let the story go onward.

And let's be serious...Jennifer Lopez as a lesbian. At the time this movie came out Ben and Jen were breaking a rule of movie making when they were seriously dating (I believe engaged) and making this film. Since they were so public about it, a good deal of the audience was aware that the two leads were in a relationship, and we're supposed to accept that she's gay? Bad move. Most of the time, what stars do in their private lives I could care less about, but this time, it hurt this film. They have this incredibly long scene where Gigli talks about why men are the pinnacle of sexual desire and Ricky counters with why women are. While on some levels the argument was interesting, it really didn't do anything for the film or the story in my opinion.

Some of the scene issues may have resulted from the film being written and directed by the same person. Some people can handle putting their material on the chopping block and hacking away, but this one apparently can't. This movie was about a half hour too long. Almost every scene needed to be condensed or cut down in some way. The dialogue needed to be refined into something more streamlined and (sorry to say) more to the point than the ramblings we got here. Some people are too concise with their dialogue, but this one needed to be more concise with it.

We had several side stories & characters pop in and out which served to build on the characters, but we could have done without most of them to further shorten this film. If it had been tightened up and had a different female lead we could better accept as a lesbian, the film might have been a lot better.

However, in my humble opinion, the lesbian angle on Ricky was mostly pointless and only served as a plot device to create sexual tension between her and Gigli. If they wanted Lopez, a better tension device could have been found to make her unattainable until she decided to be so. This would have upped the believability of the film just a little bit.

In the end, it's works as a model of good filmmaking gone terribly wrong in many, many ways. Let us pray this film can be used as a learning device to show future generations what not to do when they try to make their own masterpieces.

Gone With The Wind -- 1939 -- G

Yes, I'll reveal the horrifying truth. This was the first time I've seen this movie from one end to the other. I'd seen bits and pieces before, but never all four hours of it.

For such a long movie, this one was very well paced. The scenes move very, very quickly from one point to another and never really let up or slow down. Scarlett is the clear lead here and she is very well developed along with the other main players. It is supposed to be bright and grand, and that it is throughout its tableaus and high speed tour through the Civil War.

The basic plot involves a spoiled brat by the name of Scarlett O'Hara who is obsessed with Ashley Wilkes, who she loses to his cousin, Melanie, in the first act. This thing between her, Ashley, and Melanie becomes an ongoing "thing" throughout the film as she makes trying to get Ashley her goal in everything she does. Rhett Butler meets her early on, and though not being a marrying man, he finds himself attracted to her, but no matter what he does, he can't get her past this Ashley obsession. This leads Scarlett to her ultimate downfall and loss of everything.

My main complaint is her ending. She loses everything, and we are thinking, "go after him!" What is her response? I'll do it tomorrow, because tomorrow is another day. There's a procrastinator if I ever saw one.

So the film is clearly superior is many ways, but that ending just sucked. She learned where her heart was, and failed to pursue it settling for nothing. But overall, it is a head and shoulders better than a lot of things you could put on.

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly -- 1966 -- R

Currently listed as number 5 on IMDB's top 250 movies of all time, this is the first "Spaghetti Western" I recall seeing end to end and pay attention too. This class of movies is called this because it was produced by Italian studios. I also learned that this film is the third in the "Man With No Name" or "Dollars" trilogy which includes A Fistful of Dollars and A Few Dollar More (titles you cna be assured will be showing up here in short order).

This film follows three men (can you guess how they're referred to?) who lead dissimilar lives that converge over a single thing: money. A lot of money to be specific, but to tell too much would be to give away too much. Lots of little twists and reversals all over the place, some more minor than others, make it difficult to discuss this film without giving away very much of the plot.

To give some generals, these thre are no buddies by any means. We get introduced to them one at a time as they do what they do in their lives before they converge. The opening seven or so minutes of the film is completely without dialogue and very well done. Little moments that a weaker filmmaker would have put some line in such as "come on, honey" were left fully visual as the dialogue would have given us nothing. Dialogue is given at moments whre it is needed, and left out at all the right moments.

The main three characters are pretty well rounded out and believable, even if we're given precious little info about who they are. We get their personalities and how they would act and they are kept consistent throughout, making it a lot of fun to watch them all go at it.

The plot unravels fairly naturally and logically as they go from place to place. I would say there was only one part where I wished they'd just skipped it and moved on, and this was fairly near the end when they ran across some Civil War soldiers...again. They had quite a few Union and Confederate run-ins and by the time they hit their last one, I was ready for the 3 hour epic to be over. This sequence really didn't add much to the overall tapestry beyond a cool explosion and some very humorous moments.

The ending worked out perfectly with a three-way shoot-out (come on, that's not really a spoiler, is it?), and of course, it ended the mot logical way it could end.

Definitely a classic that deserves the props it's been given. It contains one of the most famous western movie themes ever; here, I'll whistle a few bars. (...) Hear that? Oh, yeah, computer. Sorry. It's very well constructed and a great film to watch. And if you like Taratino films, you'll find he's rather fond of this film too; he homages it a lot. So it's a must see if you haven't and you're a film guru.

The Grudge 2 -- 2006 -- PG-13

Ah, the sequel to one of the freakiest movies I've ever seen, so it had a lot to live up. What happened? Well, the atmosphere was still there, we still have a lot of freakish stuff going on, but unfortunately, some of the actions of the characters to get that atmosphere fell far short of perfection.

The Grudge worked on three tales at once and the sequel does the same. The first tale is connected to the original film in that Karen's sister travels to Japan at the behest of their mother to bring Karen home. When Karen isn't coming home, her sister, Aubrey teams up with the reporter who rescued Karen from the house to try and lift the curse.

The second story is a group of girls from a local school who decide it will be fun to go into the house and torment their less popular friend with a good scare. Well, the scare is had and now the three of them are in danger from the curse.

Story three is in an American apartment where a father has married again and his kids adjust to a new mother. Trouble is, next door is someone who is very disturbed for some reason, and it appears the Grudge curse is in this building and tormenting not only this family but others on their floor as well. Stories 2 & 3 do tie together, but you've got to get through them to learn where the tie is. It's not hard to figure out before you get there, but it's still cool to watch it unfold.

Characterization in this one is a little better than in the previous installment that was more concerned with being vindictive than developing character. The characters here get a little more stimulation, but still not a lot. This lack of characterization, though, doesn't really hurt the creepiness factor that much.

What killed it for me is my number one pet peeve in horror movies, and it seems to be a requirement for scares. This is making people go into places they would not normally go or do not belong. What I find scary is someone doing what they should do and weird things happening. When people do stuff that they appear to be doing for the sake of getting into some kind of trouble, I am removed from the experience because I can't buy that anyone would do that. In the first film, most everyone belonged where they were. They were at home or work or went into the house under legitimate circumstances. This second installment stretches it to the limit.

I can accept exploring your own house, but an apartment building at night? Better yet, would an 8-10 year old follow someone down a flight of stairs in the middle of the night? How about entering someone else's apartment, hearing a noise in that apartment, and checking it out? Of course, the reason the girls are cursed in the second story is because they explore the house when they shouldn't. They break in, hear noises, and...can you guess?...check out the noise. Same with the reporter. He hears noises in the house and checks them out. Never mind that he is better informed than anyone else as to what this curse is. Aubrey puts herself in harm's way several times by going into places she shouldn't go. Karen leaves the protection of a crowd to be alone on a roof when threatened. That's my biggest problem here: people doing really, really dumb things so the plot can move or we can get our scares.

I never want to see the following scene again:

Knock, knock. Girl looks around. No one appears to be home. She grabs the knob and turns it. It's unlocked.

GIRL
Hello?

Girl enters the house. Someone watches her from another room.

GIRL
Hello? Is anyone here?

Girl goes into living room (or something) and rifles through killer's personal effects without regard to her surroundings giving the audience lots of exposition we could have gained in a more creative manner.

END OF CRAPPY SCENE

On another note, why don't people run from danger? We have a scene where a guy is looking at a photo. The photo starts moving and he watches it. Someone emerges from the photo. He knows who it is. He doesn't run. He stands there and stares as freaky ghost girl cracks her way out of the pic and comes after him...oh wait, he does back himself into a corner. Sorry, forgot that. I'd've been out of the room before that black hair started emerging.

The film creates a great atmosphere though. It is constantly creepy and keeps you on edge even in places where nothing is really going onl. You wonder if something should be going on. I will also note the "peek-a-boo" scene was severly warped; I liked that one.

So it's another mixed bag of a film. Great atmosphere, but bad character actions. I prefer characters that are in danger when they think they're safe instead of those that look for trouble. It does provide an interesting twist to the Grudge mythology once it all plays out, but you just have to accept a lot to survive the film.

The Gate -- 1987 -- PG-13

Sometimes, when someone recommends a movie to watch, you take it with a grain of salt. You decide whether or not it's worth spending time on based on what you know of the person, their tastes, their criticisms, etc. Such is the way I came across this film, and frankly, I feel like strangling the one who recommended and removing from my list everything else he thinks is so good. Really, I think the only thing this one has going for it is obscurity, and that's not such a bad thing in this case.

The Gate is the story of a couple of kids who find a geode is the backyard under a tree that collapsed (under some bizarre and almost dreamlike circumstances), but when they try to dig for more geodes, they come across this deep crevasse like a cave and one really huge geode. One thing leads to another and they find that this cave houses a gateway between our world and the demon world, and they have thus far managed to activate this gate and only the sacrifice of two people can bring the demons into this world to make it their hell (bwa ha ha).

Anyway, this film is wrought with ideas gone wrong beginning with the entire concept of how this gate is to be opened and how it is accomplished. First, the "magic words" were inscribed on a doodle pad when the big geode was broken open. This was early on in the film and where my belief started breaking down. A doodle pad? Come on. Now, said doodle pad (It's hard to say doodle pad without smiling, isn't it? Come now, this is a horror movie.) was originally in the house where the gate is located, but somehow, it found its way to the other kids house, so when he was listening to this satanic record album, he could discover the striking similarities between the writing on the doodle pad (hehe, doodle) and the writing in the sizable insert to this record album.

Turns out this tree was busted at the very time when the constellations aligned and the gate could be opened. It also just so happened to be the weekend when the kids' parents went out of town so the demons could attack without parental involvement. I'll bet you can guess what else happened in this movie...

If you said party with a bunch of irresponsible teenagers, then you would be 100% correct. We get all the good cliches of smoking and drinking and dancing, along with insulting the kid brother and general irritatingness that comes with movie teen parties when the parents are out of town.

It looks like this film was made on a shoestring budget. There were some decent stop motion animation effects that blended fairly well with the live action. However, some of the other effects having to do with some moths imposed on the background image were nothing short of shoddy. Huge black outlines around the whole mess which only served to take away from the experience. Sure, it's 1987, but these things could have been cleaned up back then too.

Finally, let's talk about pacing. It was 45 minutes before anything significant happened. We get a few bouts of weirdness, but nothing exceptional. The main kid levitating and a weird occurrence to the friend is about the limit of this first part of the movie beyond the curiosity of the hole in the backyard. There are some decent setups and payoffs here and there, but it just moves really slowly with no perceived threat beyond the gaping hole in the backyard that only threatens with B-movie proportions. This means we are TOLD what it's for, but we never SEE it do anything besides using up the budget buying more dry ice to keep the steam coming.

In the end, this movie was really nothing exceptional. The threat is barely threatening until it finally shows itself very late in the film. It does have some decent characters, but as soon as one of them says "wait here while I check it out," my eyes roll and they miss out on perfection. The plot was contrived, to say the least, and was difficult to accept given all of the coincidences that had to happen to make it conceivable. The main thing you'll have going for you here is a movie no one has seen so you can recommend it and look like a horror hound for having caught a movie from the 80's that no one else has seen. Gosh, I feel so privileged.

Then again, a horror movie with a zero body count is rather unique...I'll give it that.

The Gate II: Trespassers -- 1990 -- PG-13

So I opted to suffer through the sequel to a film I didn't think was very good to begin with. How's that for dedication? What I found was a film that actually measured up to itself pretty decently, and was actually crafted quite a bit better than the first one if you can get past some rather sloppy contrivances.

Terry, from the first film, is having some problems at home with his father in a slump of a depression and needing work something awful. To help his father, Terry decides to do the remarkably intelligent thing of going to Glen's house which (like all good former horror movie house) still stands in pieces where it left off at the end of The Gate in exactly the same state, but fenced in. I guess the city couldn't bring itself to tear the place down? There's your sloppy contrivance, nevermind the idea of someone who was practically killed the first time around willingly summoning something out of The Gate.

Anyway, he is discovered during his chanting by a group of rowdy teens who make fun of what he's doing before joining in with the summoning for some reason. What they get is one of those little demons and use it like a genie out of a lamp to fulfill wishes...and wishes it does fulfill, but with a bit of a humorous price.

What this one does that the original fails to do is keep the pace up enough to maintain interest in this mess. The original was slow, and made you wonder if anything was ever going to happen. This one starts right off with stuff going on and keep us moving through the questionable plot right through to its weird and somewhat unbelievable (and I don't mean that in a good way) conclusion.

Another thing this film does right is try to paint us some actual characters. Since body count is not the goal here, it works to create some characters who feel real enough and have a consistent personality throughout the duration of the film. You want Terry to succeed in fixing the mess he created even if you think he's dumb for making the problem to begin with. Even the little demon critter is given a bit of a personality, and I admit to even feeling a bit sorry for it in the midst of its treatment from our human characters.

But, ending = corny. Quite ridiculous there.

So it's a sequel in the classic sense of not being as believable as the original, but at the same time, doesn't make the same mistakes as the original...no, it makes all new mistakes. I guess no one's perfect, huh?

The Great Outdoors -- 1988 -- PG

Ok, got me a goofy summer vacation movie with John Candy and Dan Ackroyd. Like any good comedy, sometimes the jokes worked, and sometimes they didn't, but you could tell they made a good effort. On the whole, though, it wasn't a bad film, just a fun little flick to kick back and relax to.

So dad wants to take his wife and kids out to the lake...to the very same house where his dad took him and where he and the wife honeymooned as well. The house isn't what it used to be, and its upkeep is more than questionable, but it is livable for the duration of their vacation...or it would have been had the in-laws not shown up and busted in on their vacation. Now it's all about making the vacation work on a smile-and-nod basis between the brothers-in-law.

The film is more about the chemistry between the guys and the antics that ensue than about any kind of plot which remains loosely based around the vacation. John and Dan play off each other admirably in most scenes, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a fair amount of improv between them. It is this that makes the film fun to watch.

We did have our fair share of painful moments though...you know, those things tht could have been better lived without? The most painfully obvious was the subplot between the teen lovers. Boy meets girl in town and they have a short-lived fling. This fling did not tie into the vacation plot at all with the rest of the family, and in a lot of places, the scenes felt like they were written in after the filming was complete just to give the boy something to do. They maintain continuity with these scenes by the skin of their teeth, and in the final tearful "I'm going home" moment, the continuity is practically blown since it was stuck between the boy taking his bag to the car and everyone leaving. Every one of these scenes could be excised and the movie would lose nothing and even be a bit better.

The climax of the main plot was completely silly, but appropriate. You get your fair share of groans and laughs and leave ultimately satisfied with the way it all ends up. It's not a piece of contemplative art, but it's a lot fo fun to watch, and as long as you acknowledge it for that, it'll be enjoyable.

The Good Shepherd -- 2006 -- R

So back to movies. I finally got to watch "The Godfather of CIA movies," and I find I wasn't disappointed in it. It didn't have the depth of the Godfather, but it was a good drama nonetheless.

The story follows Edward Wilson, a character loosely based on one of the founders of the CIA, and his life leading up to his inception into this secret service, and what that life meant for him and his family. His skills were admired by those around him, and he was given roles deeper and deeper into the quagmire of the business to the point that "we don't talk about what I do." The secrecy of his position drives a wedge between him and his wife and son (who he didn't even see till the boy was six) to the point that she lives apart from him, and his son wants to follow in his footsteps, but manages to fail miserably.

The story is about Edward Wilson, and in that point it faithfully remains but to the detriment of all the other characters. No one else gets much of a fleshing, and not even many of the relationships get much. On the one hand, this seems like a waste, but on the other, it really mirrors Edward's life, because he didn't build strong relationships or understand the character of those around, so we actually learn about as much about everyone as he does. We try to trust who he tries to trust, and learn to dislike or misunderstand who he dislikes or misunderstands. He remains fully the central character in the story and the stry never departs from him to learn much about what else goes on.

Since it's a drama, the plot is Edward's journey; but what is this journey? What does he gain or lose? How does he change? He tries to grow closer to his family, but he doesn't really succeed. He does grow in his job, but that's all he does. He remains mostly a static character, which is the movie's greatest weak point. He ages throughout the film, but never really learns anything. He might get something about the importance of family, but that never really comes into play as the family takes as much a backseat as everything else (altough deleted scenes reveal this is because an entire subplot involving his brother-in-law -- dead in the bulk of the movie -- gives this family interaction).

So it makes for a great character analysis of one man, but while you get an understanding of who he is, you also get the understanding that he always was this way and likely always will be. The world kept shifting around him while he remained exactly the same.