TRANSFORMERS - REVENGE OF THE FALLEN

Previously I spoke regarding the characters of this movie prior but I went the night of the premier to see what the audience thought of the movie. It was a not a charm, not the script not the acting and definitely not the body of work. I enjoy rude, sarcastic and sometime racist movie jokes when the plot calls for it, but this Michael Bay movie was all of the above plus more when there was not absolutely point for it. Let's review this movie reel by reel or scene by scene whatever you prefer.

The action revolves around a long-buried machine capable of destroying all life on Earth, and an ancient Transformer known as The Fallen (in case anyone misses the good vs. bad angels Identity) who returns to set those old whirring and take vengeance on the humans he so inexplicably hates, why no ones knows. The Fallen orchestrates the resurrection of mega-bad-robot Megatron to help him find the hidden 'Matrix'(Where's Neo) ignition key for the machine – You can tell which are the good robots -- they have blue eyes and are nice and round and shiny and look like Japanese motorcycles or gas-guzzling, all-American pickup trucks-- and you can tell which are the bad robots: they’re very pointy and have red eyes. Beyond that, there’s a lot of high-falutin’ about wrongs done eons ago and such:and so Sam finds himself once again drawn into helping the Christ-like Autobot leader Optimus Prime to save humankind.

Both Prime and Sam must make some messianic sacrifices (again) in order to beat the Decepticons to the Matrix and then beat The Fallen to kingdom come – but since their martyrdoms are not permanent (there's the franchise's future to consider), they lack all substance. Here, as in a video game, all the players can call on more than one life, which serves to reduce considerably any sense of real peril.

First of all the plot doesn't make sense, I thought the "Allspark" was their origin of life and the reason for the war between the Decepticons and Autobots, obviously Michael Bay (Director) missed the continuity of that plot in the first installment of Transformers. Now, the Fallen has something to do with an ancient blood feud between the good robots (the Autobots) and the bad robots (the Decepticons)blah, blah blah. it’s impossible to understand 90 percent of the Transformers’ dialogue, which is probably a blessing, because the other 10 percent sounds like Gandalf explaining to Frodo about the Ring, or Darth Vader grumbling about the damn Jedi Knights.
Still, as much fun as you want the film to deliver, its successes are usually sabotaged by Michael Bay's baby-brained sense of humour. He seems to find the idea of throwing inappropriate sexual references into the mix endlessly hilarious. If it's not a mini transformer humping Megan Fox's leg, it's a shot of a pair of wrecking balls suggestively attached to the mega-sized Devastator to give the impression it has titanium testes. Let's not forget the "Amos and Andy" robots who supposedly resemble what blacks are to Michael Bay, gold-toothed wearing, non-intelligent, loud, and illiterate. Honestly, If this isn't Hollywood racism at it's best then we are all in trouble. While this been a year of change in politics, racism and anything and everything positive, Michael Bay took it upon himself, Hollywood and someone I'm shock was part of degrading black people--Steven Spielberg to make a ridiculously movie which portrait a certain race in that form. I never saw Spielberg name attached to a movie that was degrading Jewish people and he shouldn't be at all which make you wonder why did he approve of this project showing how black people are supposed to act in robots standards by watching the world wide web.

If you ever wondered what a movie would look like geared toward the underdeveloped brain of a gestating zygote, if you think elements like plot, characterization, and logic just get in the way of your mandatory (over)dose of eye candy, then Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is the insipid illustration you’ve been waiting for. This is junk as justification, the mandatory sequel that feels less like a follow-up and more like a purposeful attempt to wipe the previous film off the face of the Earth. Within its incessantly long running time (as another critic pointed out, just 10 minutes under 2001) and overreliance on special effects is a philosophy so wrongheaded, so antithetical to what we believe is decent popcorn entertainment, that it practically asks to be smacked around. While it’s doubtful, here’s hoping the general public wises up to this waste of time and opens up a can of flopsweat whoop-ass on this atrocious turd.

There are so many things wrong with this movie that to discuss them at length would be pointless. Instead, a Hall of Shame checklist is probably more effective. In no particular order, we get: humping dogs; crying robots; pot brownies; robot slobber; tired tech geeks; female Terminator-lite; American Chopper, Megan Fox style; machine scrotums; John Turturro as a tortured mama’s boy; Prime gods; yet another ineffectual DC bureaucrat; Borscht Belt level jokes; indistinguishable desert mayhem; wussed out BMOC; and the most racially insensitive sidekick characters ever in the history of cinematic spectacle (take that, Jar-Jar George). That’s right, someone decided to invite Leroy and Skillet to the 2009 PC party, and these despicable little examples of big budget bigotry make the famed Dolemite comedy team look like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern by comparison. It’s not just the jive-talk and cultural clichés (gold teeth? On a machine?). Buried within the ebonics is a litany of inflammatory ethnic fallacies that do nothing but denigrate and defile.

Even the action scenes, Bay’s purported strong point, are (rare) hit and miss. The movie starts out strapping, a city crushing cruise through Shanghai establishing the entire Autobots/Army connection. But things go rapidly downhill as we spend way too much time with Shia LaBeouf’s sitcom slapstick family. They make Jerry Lewis look subtle. Another stellar sequence set in a surrounding forest pays off in some edge of the seat thrills. But toward the middle, when Bay and his scriptwriting rejects have to basically tie in twenty differing narrative threads, the life is literally sucked out of the film. It’s at this point where the director starts channeling his previous canon, lifting moments from Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and Bad Boys, as if dealing with giant battling robots was just not enough. Indeed, what Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen needs is more Robot Jox like stand-offs. We come to a film like this to actually SEE the machine on machine spectacle, not try and interpret it from inside a blur of editing and extreme close-up conniptions.

This is not to say that this seemingly unnecessary sequel won’t placate the faithful. Anyone with an actual jones for bigger and badder Transformer travails will feel their wavering attention spans rewarded. This is all polish and presentation, plasticized cheese painted in the grandest of studio supported patinas. It’s all go, Go, GO!!! There is never a moment to catch one’s breath, to drink in the proposed grandeur of man and massive shapeshifting alien machine co-existing and artfully interacting. There is no sense of scope, no awe-inspiring concept of the epic or the magical. Instead, we are stuck inside Bay’s adolescent fantasies, a place where all women are willing, all guys are dork champions, and all evil is vanquished by that most simplistic of moves - the convoluted script rewrite. Nothing makes sense here, but that’s not important for true fans of this material. They just want Bay to blow shit up - and blow it he does.

For some, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen remains critic proof. It’s the kind of hotwired celluloid crack that keeps the mainstream mesmerized by its pre-natal tendencies for colorful shapes and shiny objects. It’s like a rotten carrot covered in glitter being dangled in front of a dead mule - somehow, it makes sense, but on closer inspection, it’s kind of cruel…and definitely insane. With the amount of money waiting overseas for an easy to translate slice of hackwork Americana, we will most likely be seeing another alien gearhead grudge match a few summers from now. If the Go-Bots are indeed the K-Mart of Transformers, then this film translation of the toy is its Dollar Store sales pitch. Michael Bay may never make that minor character study, but one thing is clear. In the history of half-baked blockbusters, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is raw and runny.

I give it "TWO EYES CLOSED & SHUT"

THE HANGOVER!!!

Best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Stu (Ed Helms) take their pal Doug (Justin Bartha) to Las Vegas for his bachelor party, accompanied by Doug’s weird soon-to-be brother-in-law Alan (Zach Galifianakis). But when Phil, Stu, and Alan wake up the next morning in their Vegas hotel room, they can’t remember what they did during the previous evening and, more importantly, what happened to Doug, who has vanished.

After seeing so many movies set in Vegas, our Capital of Crass, you may think this particular location and its stories have been exhausted. And indeed, at first sight, the "The Hangover," about a bachelor party gone awry, feels like a patchwork, borrowing ideas and characters from other male comedies. There are three amigos and there's a crying baby (in a closet, though, not in a stroller).

But trust me, there's much more to this ruthless comedy, a raucously twisted "whatever-happens-in-Vegas" adventure with a foul language that more than justifies its R-rating. In addition to an absent groom, not to mention a missing tooth, there's a tiger that belongs to Mike Tyson, wandering chickens in the lush hotel, unexpected renditions of Phil Collins' pop tunes, and outrageous words that may become part of popculture lore.
The narrative assumes the structure of forward-in-reverse, a classic detective story, in which the "detectives" just happen to suffer from pounding headaches. Starting with that fateful morning, the trio has to "think smartly," and then to pursue one potential lead after another that will take them back through every twist and turn and screw-up of the debuachery of the night before—and the place where they last saw Doug. As viewers, we are willingly and joyously taking the ride along with them. The beginning of the story lures us in one direction, before stopping to swing another way. We never really know what to expect, because every subplot is out of left field, and scenes often seem to come out of nowher. But it all fits together in the end, and for a comedy, the movie is much more than just a series of disconnected set pieces. Almost every action scene moves the story forward, pushing it into overdrive until it all gets explained the end.

Like all good road comedies, the humor resides in the stops along the way of retrieving Doug, and the steps taken by Stu and Alan after they wake up from a wildly crazy night. If the last reel is not as funny as the previous ones, it's perhaps because the fillmmakers feel the pressure to tie everything up rather neatly.

Even so, they make sure to add new wacky characters and new sight gags, some of which are daring and even audacious. We've seen chubby guys (Jack Black) in tightie-whities or semi-naked on screen before, but the movie ups the ante when Zach Galifianakis appears in a jock strap.

Other characters include Rob Riggle of "The Daily Show," who appears as Officer Franklin, not exactly one of Vegas' finest but still talented with a stun gun. Ken Jeong ("Pineapple Express") is the unhinged Mr. Chow intent on revenge for offenses none of the men even vaguely recalls. Comedy club headliner Mike Epps ("Soul Man") involves the three in a subplot of mistaken identity that could cost the guys a lot of money they don't have. But the most dramatic encounter is with Mike Tyson, who appears as himself, taking a playful jab at his badass image while performing an "air drum" number. Remarkably, Tracy's father Sid is the only man who remains calm, considering he is the father of the bride and also the owner of a classic Mercedes he loans to his future son-in-law.

You could charge the comedy with being mostly male-driven and you would be right. There are three minor, rather passive female roles. Doug's increasingly frantic fiancee Tracy, who's engulfed in wedding preparations back in L.A., is holding her breath for she hasn't heard from her groom-to-be in 48 hours; whenever Tracy calls, she gets voicemail or a hurried response from Phil assuring her that everything is OK. Heather Graham plays Jade, a quirky stripper-escort with a sweet disposition and a relaxed point of view on love, who might also be the wife of a dentist who's missing a front tooth. Stu's domineering girlfriend Melissa (Rachael Harris of "Notes from the Underbelly"), held at bay on the other end of a long-distance cell connection, is frustrated for having lost control of her man for the first time in their relationship

DVD TUESDAY!!!!

It’s been a really bad month for DVD releases. Luckily for us we usually choose the films we review. Unfortunately the only movie on the list to reviewed is Revolutionary Road.

The director Sam Mendes’s 1999 debut, American Beauty, looked at the emptiness of contemporary American suburban life. Now, two unsuccessful films later, Mendes returns to the soullessness of suburbia, only this time his film is set in the 1950s. But whereas the entertaining Beauty was sad and bittersweet, the tedious Road is all Sturm und Drang.

Based on the 1961 novel by Richard Yates, it’s the story of a young couple, Frank (Leonardo DiCaprio) and April Wheeler (Kate Winslet), who, with their two young children, live in a nice house in a beautifully wooded part of suburban Connecticut. Yet the Wheelers feel oppressed by what Frank calls the “hopeless emptiness” of their lives. She’s a housewife, he writes copy for a company that manufactures “business machines”, which would become office computers. The young Wheelers once had bigger dreams; she was going to be an actress and he was going to be something special. Now they’re both choking on the compromises that came with kids and adult responsibilities. They fight. He has an affair. They fight some more, and April suggests that they move to Paris and start to live again. There are no points for guessing that this doesn’t have a happy ending.

Sadly, Revolutionary Road recycles all the clichés and stereotypes about suburban life. Instead of showing us something new, we get suburban men with their lives of quiet desperation and weepy, unfulfilled wives on the brink of going gaga. And no film about suburbia is complete without at least one nuisance neighbour. Here, it is Kathy Bates, who keeps turning up at bad moments and shrieking: “Yoooohooooo! Is anyone home?”

Where this suburban saga differs from so many others, however, is that in April and Frank, we have a couple whose dreams of escape from the suffocation of suburbia are shown to be self-destructive delusions. They are meant to be a tragic couple, in the sense that they can’t happily fit into the suburban rut, but they are not talented or bohemian enough to rebel. Their dream of going to Paris is the Chekhovian equivalent of going to Moscow — but these two can’t even make it to Greenwich Village, much less the Left Bank. Nobody in 1950s Paris would want to hang out with these two square, suburban dullards. Yet they think they are something special.

Just how wrong they are is revealed in a conversation before they are married. Frank tells April he doesn’t want to do things — “I want to feel things.” (How dumb is that?) When she replies, “Frank Wheeler, you’re the most interesting man I’ve ever met”, you think, lady, you need to get out more and meet people.

The trouble is, Mendes doesn’t give us anything we can like about the Wheelers. She’s a brittle ballbreaker who sleeps with the neighbour; he’s a boorish bloke who has it off with a secretary he meets at work. We are meant to be charmed by what — their good looks? The Wheelers think they’re so superior to the suburban drones they call their friends, but they’re not really much different from them. The film is set in 1955, the year of Nabokov’s Lolita, Arthur Miller’s A View from the Bridge, Nicholas Ray’s Rebel Without a Cause and Robert Rauschenberg’s Bed — but the Wheelers have no life of the mind or interest in the arts.

Revolutionary Road reveals how ridiculous and dated Yates’s book is when the Wheelers discuss going to Paris. April believes Frank can give up the boring job he hates and find what he wants to do. (Never mind that she will now have to do the boring job: secretarial work.) At first, Frank doesn’t understand her whole thing about him finding out what he wants to do with his life. He admits he’s not an artist or a writer, so what’s the point?

No, says April: “You’re the most beautiful and wonderful thing in the world . . . you’re a man.”

So, there you have it: the suburbs emasculate men. And I love this idea that simply being a man makes you the “most beautiful and wonderful thing in the world”. Try telling that to women today and you’ll be labelled a lunatic. I know, I’ve tried.

At heart, the trouble with Revolutionary Road is that it has no heart. Watching the Wheelers tear their love and lives apart should leave us with a sense of sadness, but Mendes’s careful and clinical direction just leaves us cold. He has employed the composer Thomas Newman, whose music was so effective in American Beauty, but Newman, like his director, can’t find the right emotional note.

Mendes seems to think that simply bringing Leo and Kate back together — for the first time since Titanic — will generate enough on-screen magic. Though Winslet has the odd great moment, it’s Michael Shannon, as the visiting “lunatic” son of Kathy Bates, who steals the show.

Winslet is let down by her sparring partner, DiCaprio, who is badly miscast in this role. With that podgy babyface of his, he looks like a little boy dressed up in daddy’s suit. And when the Wheelers go into battle, the film displays a stiff theatricality that betrays Mendes’s roots in the stage. Even the dialogue sounds like something you hear only in Arthur Miller, as when April says: “Tell me the truth, Frank. Remember that? We used to live by it.”

If ever there were a film that aimed for the zeitgeist and missed badly, it’s this one. I suspect that when Mendes first contemplated this project, he must have thought that a study of the poverty of affluence would strike a contemporary chord. Post-credit crunch, however, we consider ourselves lucky to have boring jobs. The stifling comforts of suburbia have never looked so sweet as now








Revolutionary Road (DVD, Blu-ray)
He’s Just Not That Into You (DVD, Blu-ray)
Defiance (DVD, Blu-ray)
Spring Breakdown (DVD, Blu-ray)
Anacondas: Trail of Blood
Eddie Murphy: Delirious: 25th Anniversary Edition
Elsewhere (DVD, Blu-ray)
Home (DVD, Blu-ray)
Razortooth
Retardead
Silent Venom
Prison Break: Season 4, The Final Season
Reaper: Season Two
Weeds: Season Four (DVD, Blu-ray)
Blood Ties: Season One
Army Wives: The Complete Second Season
The Hunger: The Complete First Season
The Jetsons: Season 2, Volume 1
Raising the Bar: The Complete First Season
Air Force One (Blu-ray)
Anaconda (Blu-ray)
Bruce Almighty (Blu-ray)
Dark Blue (Blu-ray)
Dragon’s Lair II: Time Warp (Blu-ray)
Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children Complete (Blu-ray)
Fletch (Blu-ray)
Glory (Blu-ray)
The Graduate (Blu-ray)
Inside Man (Blu-ray)
Navy Seals (Blu-ray)
Road House (Blu-ray)
Rollerball (2002) (Blu-ray)
To Live and Die in L.A. (Blu-ray)
Walking Tall (2004) (Blu-ray)

NEW MOVIE MONDAY

Hello folks, we are back with New Movie Monday. Today feature is Star Trek the early years. I hope I don't offend the star trek zealots, but I owe it to the people to give my review.

For over thirty plus years Star Trek has been an institution in American culture like Ford to automobiles like the name Rockefeller, young to old, yuppies to underground, left to right wings knows about Star Trek. Unlike Star Wars who ended up showing how young Luke Skywalker became Dark Vader, we never new much of how Captain James T. Kirk got his start and how he had such loyal friends among the U.S.S Enterprise. This new Star Trek film attempted to answer all of those questions, who was Captain Kirk before the Federation, what was their early young adults life like and how did they become a crew. We hoped and wish that this new movie answered all of these questions and for the most part they did but overall there were too many gaps in between.

The story takes James T. Kirk and makes him a space-born child whose father is killed by a time-traveling Romulan mining ship led by the Romanesque captain Nero. Where he was when Romulus was burning had nothing to do with fiddling, so the choice of names is a bit odd. Along the way, we’re introduced to the film’s only other important character: Spock who is shown in childhood being bullied by emotionless Vulcan children only for Spock to show his human side emotions of kicking that bully in the posterior.

Some of the casting is less than perfect. While I liked Zachary Quinto’s Spock, I was less enthused by Chris Pine’s Kirk. Even while granting that Kirk as embodied by William Shatner could be both smug and annoying, Pine is just too smirky for my taste. I don’t find it a plus to spend large chunks of the film wanting to slap the lead actor. Bringing in Tyler Perry for what amounts to a cameo is simply distracting to no real point. That said, the bulk of the new cast is pleasant enough without being particularly remarkable, while Eric Bana as Nero Looking like a leftover from Mad Max, a shaven-headed Eric Bana with (Little Wayne) tattoos on his face leads a gang of peeved Romulans from the future on a hunt to destroy Earth, just the right attitude for a Star Trek villain.

Then there’s Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime. He brings such a sense of gravity leavened with humor to the film that he makes Star Trek seem more than it is. Nimoy has the ability to spout the most outrageous faux scientific pronouncements and make them sound plausible, while hinting that he knows it’s nonsense. (The script has the wit to suggest this, too, in his last appearance in the film.)

Frankly, I was taken aback by the degree of emotional resonance Spocks brings to the film. Whatever the case, there is an elegance to his performance here, and his recitation of some very familiar words at the end affords the film an emotional punch it would otherwise lack. His casting was just as much a stroke of genius as was not casting William Shatner.

As we’re introduced to the rest of the cast, Uhura, Scotty, Sulu (why is it everytime I saw Sulu in this movie I kept thinking of "Harold and Kumar), Chekov and Dr. McCoy, we’re given very one-note examples of these characters, most of them included only as comic relief, not as any real necessity to the successful inner-workings of the U.S.S. Enterprise. Sulu and Uhura are the only ones that aren’t made fun of or made into mockeries, and Sulu is the only one that actually becomes far cooler than he ever was.

Saying all of this one could see that the director main focus was on the relationship between James T. Kirk and Spock, who don’t exactly hit it off when they meet as young adults. When we first see them, each is emerging from difficult childhoods. Kirk lost his father in battle, and it affected him negatively--he’s a brawler with an attitude. Since Spock is half Vulcan and half human, he struggles not only with whether to eschew emotions completely, but also how to find his place in a prejudiced world that refuses to accept him

Overall, Star Trek is a big-budget summer entertainment. The Director direction is hardly groundbreaking than his previous work on Mission: Impossible III (2006). Visual and the realness of the movie with a sub-par screenplay is more concerned with connecting the dots—and cheating to do so—than with crafting much of a story in its own right. But the results are undeniably entertaining

Since it's the summer and it's exactly the type of movie everyone was expecting, I give it. "Two Eyes Open"

OLD SCHOOL GUYS THURSDAYS

MOVIE OF THE WEEK!!!!

That's right folks one of the movies addicts favorite "Reservoir Dogs"
Senseless, Filled with violence, sharp witted, and great acting. A movie a guy can see, drink his drink, have some wings and watch a senseless movie that was put on the screen for nothing else but pure entertainment.

Reservoir Dogs focuses on a failed jewel heist, but maintains suspense without ever showing the actual robbery. Most of the action takes place in a warehouse, though Tarantino makes you think you've seen more than he's actually shown. When Michael Madsen, playing the sadistic "Mr. Blonde," cuts off the hostage cop's ear, the audience squirms. But up on the screen, Tarantino discreetly swings his camera over to a loading dock and a sign that says "Watch Your Head." He also makes hugely imaginative use of flashbacks, explaining the origins of certain characters, and even showing scenes of "fictional" stories that never took place.

Tarantino at his finest, I mean you couldn't pick a better cast, each of those actors are no big names but good enough actors to steal each scenes as if they did do a heist. Even though this movie is filled with dialogues but they are quick and follow by a Story which every guy like then finish with over the top violence.

"TWO EYES OPEN"

DVD Tuesday

"DEFIANCE"

I really like this film, this is a true story reagrading brothers and friend who decided to fight back against nazi occupation in thir homeland. One of the reason I think this movie is wonderful, there's no green screen, no cgi none of what make a hollywood movie these days. Defiance is a true story about the Jewish Bielski brothers who escaped the Nazi slaughter of their town and escaped into the Belarussian woods. Their plan is to hide and save themselves but soon find they are responsible for the many Jewish refugees who keep joining them. The numbers multiply as more refugees join the group. They set up three self-sustaining villages over a 3 year period in the wilderness. The movie wasn't perfect, I am sure they had to edit hour of hour of film in order to make the length of a movie, so in doing so they had to overlook some minor details. I ahve to be honest, I really don't like any of those actors but they were able to pull it off efforlessly, my hat goes out to Daniel Craig whom I do not like as James Bond but he acted wonderful in this movie.
I give Defiance "Two Eyes Open"

NEW MOVIE MONDAY

Today we are going to highlight two movies. First one is the Johnny Depp and Christian Bale "Public Enemies" and the second movie is "Taking of Pelman 123"Denzel Washington John Travolta.

This is going to be hard because you have two of my personal favorite actors and two actors that I believed are just OK. Want to take a guess?




Public Enemies, this movie has been made and re-made over and over again but each time seem outdid the last one and with this cast I believed is going to be a mus-see movie of the summer. For those that don't know anything about this movie or that era, the movie revolves around the beginning stages of the FBI. Watching Public enemies the original maybe one hundred times, I came to the realization that's it's not about Dillinger or his gangs of bank robbers yet about the story of the man played by Christian Bale this time who helped kick start the FBI into America ultra elite agents by capturing who they dub Public Enemy #1. The reason many people miss the FBI story is because we as a nation are more fascinated with the bad guys than the good, we are more intrigue with a certain criminals aspect especially when they have a larger than life personality and love my many by seeing them going against men laws and by some seeing them as modern day Robin Hood, even though they only helped themselves. This movie is going to be great not only because it has a wonderful story attach to it but they have cast the one actor beside Brad Pitt that could have pull being "Dillinger" everyone favorite "21 Jump street" Johnny Depp.
Johnny Depp has the range and charisma to play someone like Dillinger who looks are charming but can and would kill you for looking at him the wrong way. The premise of the movie is the life and times of "John Dillinger" and his crew of murdering bank robbers as well as what it took the government to bring him down.
I give this movie "Two Eyes Open"




"Taking of Pelman 123"
I hate to do this because I like both actors but I really believed that this is just a generic movie. The writing seem to be third rated, I mean this type of movie has been done over and over again too predictable and ABC type writing. Okay, here's the backdrop bad guy take over train with passenger, everyone think of terrorist, then talk to the one operator who is really good at his job knows everything and bad guy pick him to be the gofer. Then bad guy ask for money and have this elaborate escape plan only to go awry when operator figure out his real motive and plan. Blah, blah, blah there you go folks, spend your money on a HBO film of the week, bottom line the movie lack substance and a unpredictable ending. I think both actor pick a bad written film or maybe it's good on paper but the director direction went south as soon as he said "Action". When are they going to get it, you can't just put two marketable actors in one movie and expect a bang even though the movie stinks. I am fed up and so should you because I like good movies and the price I pay and I want to see good movies.
"Two Eyes Closed"