Eastwood gives possibly his most searing performance as a crotchety old man who seems to be losing his grip on everything that holds meaning to him, and yet continues to hold on tight in the face of inevitability. He's a war veteran who's seen and done horrible things in the name of god and country and simply wants to live out the rest of his life in peace and dignity. But the world around him just doesn't seem willing to do everything his way. And that's where his blood really boils.

He's unapologetically racist and unbending in his world view. And he's none too pleased when a family of Asian immigrants moves in next door to him, with their smelly food and strange customs, and their seeming involvement with a small time local gang. But after a strange series of events, he is forced to look past the prejudiced facades he's erected around them and see them for who they are: fellow humans. And it's not long before his life becomes intertwined with theirs, to an amazing degree.

This is my favorite Eastwood performance, and one of my very favorite of his films as director as well. His constant simmering and relentless glares of pure disdain fly off the screen, making you at once afraid of, repulsed by, and sympathetic towards this broken old man who is just trying to stay true to a code which has worn sorely out of adjustment from years of reclusion and hard-line extremism. Yet as this character evolves, we get to see the best of both his old and new selves, as his particular powers are put to use towards good ends rather than bad. It's almost as if this man were a phoenix who burned his own soul to the ground, only to rise up from the rubble in a powerful selfless ascension.

You'll have to see it for yourself to judge. But do make sure you see it.

Why did I wait? This turned out to be one of the best martial arts movies I've ever seen. Yeah, sure, it's not realistic that this little chick could kick all this ass; but let's call a spade a spade: we don't watch martial arts movies for realism. Uma Thurman got to do it in "Kill Bill", and Jeeja Yanin deserves the same kind of props for the incredibly acrobatic, intricate, and downright dangerous screen fighting she unleashed in "Chocolate".

I know that giving a film 5 stars is a loud statement, and I'm not trying to state that this film is perfect. It's not. Definitely not. But despite its imperfections, the action was just so fun, the choreography so exciting and often unexpected, that I'm willing to err on the side of generosity for this little film that could.

I, for one, can't wait to see more of Jeeja Yanin. If this is just her starting point, I can't imagine what else she could achieve onscreen in the coming years.

In many action films, the fights are performed by screen-fighters and are heavily stylized so they "look good on camera". But here, somehow, the director defies all of this by showing us authentic Karate performed by two non-actors, true Karate masters, and it's a spectacle you will not soon forget. There is no camera trickery, no fast edits. These fights are short and fast and devastating, their goal to disable an opponent as quickly and efficiently as possible. And you'll be rewinding and replaying them over and over.

The film culminates in an exhausting and ferocious battle between two masters, filmed almost entirely in one take. In later interviews, the cinematographer recalls the spectacle bringing tears to his eyes as he filmed. These two martial artists and their director poured all their formidable years of training into this fight, and the result is a stunning document of pure Karate and pure filmmaking.

It did.

The basic story has been recounted elsewhere (such as in our product synopsis), so I'll refrain from rehashing it here. What you need to know is that this is an amazing story of a man whose spirit had been broken, who had built walls around himself to the extent that he would rather sleep on the streets than give the American government--or in fact society--another chance after he had been so thoughtlessly tossed into an internment camp for Japanese-Americans during WWII, completely disowned by his native America. After being physically released from the camp, his mental internment continued inside his own head, a sort of self-imposed solitary confinement. To see those walls begin to come down as the filmmaker takes this man into her home and begins to shower him in a kind of selfless maternal giving, well, it's just a beautiful thing.

This film has so much going for it, it would be easier to list the types of people who shouldn't see it than those who should. Simply put, this film is the perfect prescription for anyone who wants to see people connecting with each other in meaningful ways, or be reminded that humanity is still alive and well in America.

Reviews so far seem to be divided into two camps: "zero stars" or "five stars". It is my suspicion that the "zero stars" reviewers went into this film expecting a "straight" action film, and as such were insulted by what could easily be misconstrued as an illogical, mindless procession of action insanity. The "five star" critics, on the other hand, may have instead allowed the movie to define itself, as it most brazenly does, as one of the best dark comedy satires ever made.

The general premise is that Clive Owen plays some type of nearly invincible modern-day gunslinger. He accidentally gets sucked into an overly elaborate plot between an endless supply of bad guys (headed by an unexpectedly-cast Paul Giamatti) and a newborn baby whom they want to kill, having already offed its mother. Clive must now protect the baby--with the help of a prostitute (Monica Bellucci) who conveniently specializes in lactation fetishes--and himself from the constant barrage of baddies and their bullets.

But the plot is really irrelevant.

Things start within the first few minutes, when Owen begins a massive gun battle with dozens of bad guys--WHILE DELIVERING THE BABY. After it's born, he "cuts" the umbilical cord by shooting through it. If you can't see the crystal clear humor in this ludicrous sequence of events, then this movie is not for you. If you can, then you're in for a treat; because this movie has it in spades. What ensues is basically 90 minutes of Clive Owen performing ridiculously impossible feats via some of the most hilarious, fun, and exciting action sequences ever filmed. It's a rollercoaster ride that you will never forget. And even if you're just in it for the action, you'll be pleasantly surprised to see that it more than gives the best output of John Woo a run for its money.

Writer/director Michael Davis has redefined both the comedy and action genres here, with a prodigious flair for--well, seemingly everything. We can't wait to see what he does next.

Our favorite examples of director Mina Shum's comedic brilliance include the "karaoke microphone as the hand of God", and the "lazy Susan P.O.V. camera". The irreverent youthful mischief of the younger sister Pearl (Frances You) is also presented in a way that maximizes the humor of her character without exploiting her sincerity. Sandra Oh, as usual, pulls off her comedic scenes with a humanity and a seemingly effortless comic sensibility that comes across with such effectiveness thanks to the three-dimensional character of Jade that she has created. Once Oh creates this empathetic and believable character from her first scene in the film, it serves as an unshakable foundation upon which she can layer nuance upon nuance while never coming across as excessive. Consequently, both her dramatic and her comic scenes are heartfelt and moving.

We've worn out at least one copy of this film on VHS, and have been anxiously awaiting the day that it would be released on DVD. Lord knows why it took so long for this relatively unappreciated gem to finally see the light of day on DVD, but we're very happy to see that day finally arrive. We hope that once you've seen "Double Happiness" for yourself, it will surely find a special place in your collection and in your heart, as it has for us.

Vowing to exact revenge on Pun Mei, the traitorous villain who set his family up to be massacred, Gordon Liu--in what has become his signature style--bullies his way into a local monastery, insisting that they take him in for training. You'd think that by now every monastery in China would have a picture of Gordon Liu up on the walls with a sign saying "Don't Let This Guy In!". Refusing to take the monks' collective "no" for an answer, Gordon Liu shaves his own head, and immediately begins to train with the others, threatening to burn down their temple if they don't include him in their training regimen.

Eventually, of course, he becomes the world's ultimate bad-ass monk. And when his sister, 8th Yang, is kidnapped and held hostage by the very villains that slaughtered his family, he heads off with a couple hundred bamboo poles to begin his counter-massacre. What ensues is spectacular, and the choreography of so many people fighting at once is astounding to watch.

While the storyline and characters are perhaps not as engaging as some of Liu's other films from the period (36th Chamber Of Shaolin; Shaolin Challenges Ninja; etc.), the fight scenes are awe-inspiring and plentiful enough to earn this film a permanent place on anyone's old school martial arts top-ten list.

Note: this DVD also includes a nice interview with Jackie, taped for the release of "Rush Hour". It's in Cantonese with English subtitles, so you get to really see him answer questions naturally and honestly. We were pleasantly surprised by the quality of the interview.

What we can say, however, is that we absolutely loved this film, and are trying to spread the word to everyone that it is absolutely not to be missed. Whether you're a fan of David Mamet's films, with their intriguing origami-like plots; or you're drawn to Andrew Lau's films, with all the style and hip characters currently allowed by law; or you're a big Tarantino film fan, who loves a great story told in a fun, non-linear way; this is for you.

Just sit back with a big bowl of popcorn and a good friend and check this one out--allow your brain to be twisted into a pretzel, and your eyes and ears to be treated to a devilishly stylish little bit of magic.

Then when the film's over, just stay in your seat and watch it again to figure out exactly how the magic trick was performed, to see exactly how the wool was pulled over your eyes, and to revel in the beauty of this witty contemporary masterpiece.

Unfortunately, just as the fishboat seems to be really getting some momentum going--and we the viewers are starting to build up our hopes that the film will be nothing more than a couple hours of frolicking fishboat footage--the ocean begins to recede into the ground, and the seagoing practicality of the fishboat is soon put to the test. The fishboat doesn't seem to be faring too well in the struggle against the current, which is pulling it out to sea. Of course, this only makes for more exciting viewing, as the fishboat struggles desperately to tread water, peddling and paddling frantically in the now shallow waters. Luckily for the fishboat's occupant, it eventually makes it ashore, as its big round nose dramatically enters the screen frame left and the child's fathers rush in to save him from the ocean.

The trio quickly head for home, where there appears to be a large metal robot in their basement-slash-command-center. No mention is made of why there is a large metal robot in their basement, or why their basement is one huge command center, or what their huge command center commands. Presumably, the filmmakers didn't want the audience getting too far ahead of the complex plot. The only clue we have is a large diagram on the wall in the shape of the robot, with flashing lights for each part of the robot's body--including the crotch, which has a nice red flashing light (notice during one scene that the crotch light is burned out?--don't ask). It is soon revealed that one of the two men has invented this robot, whose purpose is none too clear (sex toy? janitor? landscape architect?). We even get to witness the exciting moment when the proud inventor gives his robot a name--no, not Crotchbot--Jet Jaguar. "Jet Jaguar?" you ask yourself? "Why would they name it 'Jet Jaguar' when it isn't jet-like or jaguar-like, and the name 'Crotchbot' wasn't even taken yet?" The inventor soon explains his reasoning: "Jet Jaguar, that's a good name". Can't argue with logic like that...

As soon as the would-be Crotchbot is christened Jet Jaguar, the trio are assaulted and tied up by an unknown assailant, and Jet Jaguar is hijacked and the command center commandeered. The assailants soon reveal that they are none other than representatives of the underwater kingdom of Seatopia, and they proceed to divulge all the intricate details of their plan for Earth's destruction. Apparently, their argument is that they don't like the Earth people's tendency to test nuclear weapons and wage war. And so they plan to destroy the Earth in order to end...war? Yes. But wait, it gets better: their leader is a moist middle-aged white guy with very hairy shoulders wearing a satin toga, a skirt, tights, and a tiara--we ask you, does it get any better than this? In a dramatic speech to his people, he declares that he will release "Megalon" (a power-drill-like underwater cockroach that flies, and who shoots bombs from his mouth and lasers from his tele-tubby-like antenna). Megalon is to be sent topside to spearhead Seatopia's battle to destroy Earth in the name of...peace? Yes. Once topside, Megalon is to rendezvous with Jet Jaguar and coordinate the Earth's destruction.

Though the Seatopians have control of Jet Jaguar's command center, Jet Jaguar's inventors have other plans. They are luckily able to escape from captivity, in a memorable scene where they are thrown about a mile through the air, only to land safely. They then stop by a model shop (which coincidentally has on display every model used in the production of this film) and pick up a remote control airplane. This airplane, they reason, is the perfect weapon to use against the Seatopian who has taken over control of their basement command center. Sure enough, they ring the doorbell of the command center, and when he answers, they fly that little SOB right into his face. Who would have ever guessed model airplanes could be used for such purposes? They are soon able to intercept Jet Jaguar and reprogram him to go fetch Godzilla to defend Tokyo against the Seatopian nemeses.

Jet Jaguar heads out for Monster Island (yes, really), gives some clumsy hand signals, and makes some odd noises at Godzilla; and that seems to convince Godzilla to come save Tokyo. Jet Jaguar and Godzilla, now a full-fledged crime-fighting duo, head back to Tokyo with the intent of destroying Megalon and any other Seatopian empathizers that cross their path. (Let's get this straight: Godzilla and Jet Jaguar refuse to have their war-like nation threatened by the war-faring peacemongers of Seatopia, so they declare a war on peace? Wait, no, Godzilla and Jet Jaguar want peace, so they declare a war on war? No, wait...agh, forget it.) As an added bonus, Jet Jaguar spontaneously decides to increase his size so that he is roughly that of Godzilla. He also decides that he will no longer take orders from his inventors, but rather will act on his own free will. (Note: Jet Jaguar has a habit of increasing or decreasing his size depending on whom he's standing next to, a person or a monster.)

The hairy toga greaseball czar from Seatopia, seeing that his Megalon is now outnumbered, summons Gigan to assist--Gigan, of course, being the exceptionally pointy pterodactyl-like Cyclops from outer space. And thus the epic tag-team battle begins: Jet Jaguar (now in large mode) with Godzilla vs. Megalon with Gigan.

We won't divulge the highly climactic ending for fear of ruining the shocking surprise of who wins and who loses, but suffice it to say that the Seatopians will think twice next time they decide to initiate a war for...peace? Yes.

Upon viewing the film for myself, I could definitely agree that it was weird. It seemed as though the director and cast all had some type of oddball shorthand that was unique to them and them alone. In the context of "normal" movies, it was quite unusual. But in its own context, it totally worked.

There are about 35 different Wilson brothers in the film--maybe even a couple dozen more that I didn't notice--but it's Owen that really steps up and makes his mark here with what has become his trademark overly-sincere buffoonery. Coupled with director Anderson's tendency to focus on the insignificant and the anti-climactic, the result is an impossibly quirky, original, and fun story about a group of pathetic would-be robbers.

In my opinion, this is far and away Anderson's best film. I also loved "Rushmore", but this film is much more innocent and fun. As for Anderson's later films--well, I'd just as soon he keep his mopey, depressed, self-indulgent white people to himself. Stick with the early flix for a quirky good time.

Watching the film the second time, with the filmmakers narrating and filling in the backstory on the whole production, I was amazed to find that this was in fact almost the exact opposite of the laissez-faire film I thought I was watching. The filmmakers and cast actually prepared with many months of rehearsals, where they took ideas from a loose script and improvised their own dialogue and actions on top of it, which in turn became the new script. And I was amazed to hear director Ramin Bahrani mentioning in passing that in one scene taking place inside a garage, they actually put out some bird feed so that they would have a pigeon wandering around in the background--or that in another scene they rode a bicycle through a large puddle before filming so that the puddle would be rippling in the background--or that doing 50 takes of any given scene was common--or that they went through countless footstools, an insignificant prop I had hardly even noticed on first viewing, before the director resorted to borrowing one from his local laundromat because it was the only one he liked.

This was no low-energy film. In fact, it was probably one of the most obsessively sculpted films I've seen. And yet the result is a paradoxically spontaneous, "real" feeling.

Some viewers may prefer a bit more of a traditional storyline to go with their obsessively sculpted faux-documentary ultra-realism; and hell, maybe I would too. But I can't deny that I was enraptured by what I saw on the screen from start to finish, and that it left an exceptionally pleasant, warm aftertaste. So I say kudos to the cast and filmmakers for a truly unique and soulfully rich film. I eagerly look forward to viewing more of Ramin Bahrani's work.

The basic story is that a very small group of diabolical computer hacker geniuses decide to bring the entire country to its knees by shutting down pretty much everything--yes, everything. Using their laptop. Their powers seemingly know no bounds--except when it becomes inconvenient for the story--and the big, stupid government is impotent against them. Enter New York detective John McClane (Bruce Willis), the one man in the country--the world?--physically able to survive their gauntlet and stop them. Also enter an oh-so-witty young computer hacker who is apparently the one man in the country--the world?--mentally able to outsmart them via his own computational inclinations. What are the odds that these two would wind up together? 100%. And so the two must track down the bad guys and put a stop to this madness all on their own with no help from anyone (almost).

Thankfully, in addition to that mega-powerful laptop, the bad guys have a couple martial arts prodigies on their team (of course). This provides an excuse for some really awesome fights, featuring the amazing Cyril Raffaelli ("B13"), and the ever-popular Maggie Q. But Bruce Willis is no slouch either. Despite a complete lack of formal martial arts training, his character seems able to hold his own against these two. I should note that he also fares quite well against several non-human foes, such as a fighter jet and a helicopter (in what is probably the single coolest helicopter destruction in cinema history).

All of the action sequences, however implausible, are phenomenal. My typical thought-process trajectory during an action sequence in this film went something like this:

1. This movie is retarded
2. Oh come on, they wouldn't actually...
3. Oh shit, they're actually going to...
4. Oh my god, that was the best [X] I've ever...
5. This movie is BRILLIANT!

Now, before I get ahead of myself here, I should qualify some of these comments... In addition to being one of the best action movies ever made, this is also one of the stupidest. Bruce Willis's John McClane has surpassed "superhuman" and proceeded ridiculously into "superhero". The bad guys laughably use a mobile laptop to effectively shut down the entire country in a matter of minutes. A baddie gets rammed straight into a concrete wall by an SUV at full speed, then survives to put up an acrobatic fight. And the entire plot disintegrates when we discover that the sole motivation behind the terrorist attack is money--which they can't just get electronically using their super computer wizard powers? But it seems that the filmmakers made a conscious decision to overlook these issues--and MANY more--with a little wink to the audience to let them know it was intentional. They decided to film a Wile E. Coyote cartoon rather than a logical progression of events. And the result is so blatantly over-the-top, so undeniably fun, that you won't stop grinning guiltily until the end credits roll.

This movie is unique in that the story's protagonist, in many ways, wasn't the focus of the film. In the end, the film was as much about the people around him, and the changes that happened in the wake of his life, as it was about his life itself. In this sense, the film is allowed to broaden its scope somewhat, to allow various characters to evolve and various peripheral events to unfold, without feeling like it's lacking focus. Consequently, at the end of the film, the viewer feels like he has gone on a journey with an entire town rather than just one man, without sacrificing any of the intimacy of a traditional story's more "focused" structure.

A success on all fronts, "Udon" is yet another example of exceptional Japanese filmmaking--filmmaking with sincerity, humor, insight, technical mastery, and undeniable intelligence--filmmaking that other countries would do well to study. This isn't a film about box office gross, or about appealing to the lowest common denominator. This is a film about a story, about a place, about a cast of appealing characters. Indeed, there are few things in life finer than watching a film that was clearly made by master storytellers who first and foremost just wanted to tell you a tale. And "Udon" delivers just such an experience.

The film centers around a 16 year-old girl named Lilya (or Lilja), living with her mother "somewhere in the former Soviet Republic". When her disgusting mom (who looks like an off-duty second-rate male circus clown) meets a new boyfriend who lives in the United States, he promises to take them to America. But after Lilya finishes burning all her bridges and telling all her friends she's leaving, it turns out mom and her new beau aren't actually interested in bringing Lilya along. And so Lilya is left alone in a depressing tenement building with a few bucks as mom speeds off to her new future, promising to send Lilya money for food and rent.

When Lilya returns to school the following day, she is met with nothing but ridicule from friends and even her teacher, who taunts her and makes vicious, sarcastic remarks about her grades. This is a terrifying and painful existence, even with parents. But take away the parents, and it goes from terrifying to unbearable.

Lilya's friend Natasha takes her to a nightclub in the city, and tries to talk her into turning tricks to make some money. Lilya stands by and watches, refusing to sink to her level, as Natasha whores herself out. But when Natasha's dad finds the money she's made from whoring, Natasha convinces him it's Lilya's money and that Lilya is in fact the whore. She even goes on to convince the entire school of this fact, at which point Lilya understandably decides to drop out.

No parents, no friends, no education, no money, and no prospects. It looks like things are pretty bad for Lilya, but in fact things are still good. Soon we meet Lilya's "Aunt Anna" (who looks like an off-duty second-rate haggard male trucker), who makes the Wicked Witch Of The West look like, well, the Good Witch Of The North. It turns out that Aunt Anna is going to be the one "taking care of" Lilya while mom's away, and Aunt Anna's first order of business is to move Lilya out of the projects and into Hell. The apartment Lilya is forced to move into would make a cockroach cringe. Everything is worn and broken and wet and stained, all the walls and furniture pale shades of off-green, the toilet has a small pool of dark brown liquid festering in its bowl, and we learn that the previous tenant died here last week. Lilya is forced to accept these new living quarters when Aunt Anna informs her that her only other choice is the sub-zero streets outside. And following this, Aunt Anna uses Lilya's spending money to move herself from her disgusting shantytown structure into Lilya's previous apartment. When Lilya complains, Anna offers a feeble explanation: "I'm a sick old woman, I need a nice place to live." And when Lilya demands to have some money so she can eat, Anna offers some more helpful words of advice: "If you need money, why don't you go downtown and spread your legs like your mother did?"

The only saving grace of Lilya's entire existence is the companionship of an 11 year-old boy, Volodya, who lives in the same deathtrap building. Volodya spends all his time either moping around outside playing basketball with an old can and a paper hoop, or getting kicked out of his apartment by his abusive father. His father is still there, but he may as well be in America with Lilya's mother for all the care he gives his kid. Lilya slowly develops a close friendship with Volodya, as they each have no one else to turn to for anything. And seeing as Lilya does have a place to stay, she lets Volodya stay with her rather than sending him to sleep in the freezing streets outside like his father would.

It's not long before the electricity in Lilya's new rat-trap apartment is cut off; and, not surprisingly, mom hasn't sent any money. The crusty old landlady seems to take a perverse joy in informing Lilya that her electricity's been cut off--is there anyone in Lilya's world who doesn't have ice in their veins? Lilya next receives a letter from social services informing her that her mother has officially renounced guardianship of her and leaving her in the care of the state. But the kicker is, the state doesn't even care, and explains that "you can't do that". So it seems now that Lilya's childhood is officially over. She must be 100% self-sufficient at age 16, and is quickly headed towards either homelessness, starvation, or both. Desperate, Lilya heads into town to begin earning a living the only way she knows how. It's the only chance she has to keep herself--and her adopted brother Volodya--alive for even a short while longer.

From the first frame of the film, it is clear that Lilya leads a very antagonistic life. She doesn't just tell her friends she's leaving for America, she gloats. And when that falls through, they ridicule her. The landlord always seems to be itching for a reason to scold or evict Lilya, and Lilya returns the favor with sarcasm and name-calling. The neighborhood boys hurl insults and spit at Lilya. Even a trip to the market is a battle for Lilya, as the cashier is rude and self-important when Lilya is short on cash. Of course, once she gets some money, Lilya is appropriately condescending back to the cashier. Everywhere we follow Lilya, there is contention and antagonism. It is emotionally grueling to watch, and it just drives home the point that she's alone in the world.

But no matter how bad a situation is, it can ALWAYS get worse by throwing child prostitution into the mix. And, as you can surely imagine, that's exactly what happens here. It wouldn't really be possible to continue to explain the storyline from here without revealing pieces that should not be revealed. But suffice it to say that Lilya and her young friend Volodya are just violently dragged through the muck, and you have a front row seat to watch the whole thing.

Watching this movie is kind of like watching someone be tied to the back of a car as the car accelerates very slowly over the course of a month. At first, they're pissed off that they're tied to the car; then they resign to walking along behind it and sucking its exhaust fumes 24 hours a day; then they get to jogging despite their exhaustion; and then running desperately while being tugged forward relentlessly; until finally, they just collapse and are dragged along as their bodies are ripped and worn down to nothing.

It's true that this film deals with some very important subject matter--the dire circumstances surrounding the people of poor nations; teen angst; abandoned children; homelessness; prostitution and child prostitution; drugs; rape; kidnapping--but just the fact that the film portrays these things doesn't necessarily mean that it's a good idea to watch it. All aspects of this film were handled with true quality--from the writing to the acting to the directing--but when all is said and done and the credits roll, you've just watched an innocent young child get fucked and fucked and fucked again in various ways, and how does that benefit you as a viewer or as a person? What exactly is this film attempting to accomplish? Is its aim to inform the world of the plight of motherless or homeless children, or the evils of child prostitution? Because if so, what is it the filmmakers would have society do about these issues? And why not use the medium to portray some constructive ideas rather than just to show the world in great detail the horrors of something that the entire world is already aware of? Everyone knows that things like this go on in this world, and anyone who would be watching this film would hopefully be among the camp that wishes these things would stop. All this film really does is show step by step how a child can go from point A (a "normal" or at least bearable existence) to point B (a desperate existence), and puts a name and a face to the child making it all the more heartbreaking to watch.

It is our ultimate opinion that showing someone a film of a child being systematically abandoned, ridiculed, abused, raped, and succumbing to starvation and prostitution does not help anyone, unless the person watching is either 1) completely unaware of these things, or 2) already participating in or supporting these things. In the case of #1, you've been living in a cave and are in for a rude awakening. But maybe by seeing this film you'll be inspired to do something on your own to help the cause. But let's be honest, #1 is not the case here. Because the film doesn't even hint at any recourse for people to do anything about any of these issues. Plus, films simply aren't made to appeal to such a small, oblivious segment of society. In the case of #2, it seems doubtful that this film would make any difference to you at all. Because if you can somehow justify having sex with or raping a child to yourself, then what do you care about the child's welfare? And, in the case of #2, the film should suggest some kind of recourse for child rapists to seek help, yet it does not. So our conclusion is honestly that this film was not intended for either of these audiences. And we are therefore unsure what audience this film was intended for, and what the overall intention of the whole film was. The film does stir up deep emotions inside you, but it still seems to us that if you're going to tackle such a painful and important subject, you should use your energy and influence to try to help the situation somehow rather than just stick people's faces in it. The film just strikes us as overly vague and voyeuristic if its aim is to guide some kind of social change--or dangerously irresponsible if its aim is simply entertainment.

But as to the merits of the film itself--its effectiveness, its incongruous beauty, its performances--it was a stunning accomplishment. And since it effected us so deeply and will surely stay with us forever, we have to recommend it and suggest that you see it and decide for yourself what the film's "point" (if any) was and how effective it was in getting it across.

They decide to take on one student each, and then pit the two students--strangers who have no prior friendship--against each other in 10 years' time. The winner will settle their rivalry for once and for all, and determine which fighting style is superior. They each quickly find their protégés, and the training begins. In a very interesting twist, Sammo plays Lau Kar Wing's student; and Lau Kar Wing plays Sammo's student. This makes for an interesting role-reversal towards the end of the film, and should give you some hint that the filmmakers actually had their thinking caps on when they penned this script.

The storyline has some nice little tricks up its sleeve, and the characters are mostly memorable and interesting, but where this film truly excels is in the fighting department. These guys can really move, their speed and accuracy is simply astounding. And with fight choreography by Jackie Chan, Lau Kar Wing, and Sammo Hung, hopefully you know that you're in for a real treat. Most of the fights pit the short sword against the spear, but there are several others peppered throughout, each one unique, and each one a classic. As always, Sammo's agility and speed are poetic, but his acting and quirky sense of physical humor are what elevate his performance here from amazing to ingenious. And the fact that you get Sammo and Lau Kar Wing playing two roles each is just an added bonus. This film is a total blast, we heartily recommend it to any fan of martial arts or physical comedy.

Every morning, Mr. Waiter has to go over to the bean curd shop to pick up the day's supply, and he uses this time to practice and discuss his martial arts with Mr. Bean Curd. Mr. Waiter explains how during his childhood, his father wouldn't let him eat unless he could snatch some food away from dear old dad. Subsequently, he became very adept at using anything and everything as a weapon, often using bowls and chopsticks to duel with dad to earn his evening meal. He demonstrates this to Mr. Bean Curd, who is impressed by Mr. Waiter's versatility.

Mr. Waiter, in turn, is very impressed by Mr. Bean Curd's talents. We soon learn that Bean Curd was taken in by a martial arts master who never spoke a word, and whose name Bean Curd never learned. But his years of training with the silent master endowed him with great skills using his Mantis Style. The two foodservice workers soon confide in each other and agree that they must die famous, they must accomplish something great within their lifetimes. Until that day however, they will just keep sparring and causing trouble...

One day, a mysterious man comes into the restaurant and seems to be badly injured. After he collapses outside the shop, Mr. Waiter takes him in and tucks him away in a back room, calling over Mr. Bean Curd and some others to check him out. They discover that he is a true Chinese hero, a rebel patriot who has been fighting bravely for the rights of China's citizens. When he comes to, he asks for a special medicine made of ground rhino horn, and the ragtag foodservice duo have to resort to some nefarious means to get enough money to purchase this pricey potion. They are also joined by two others, who are anxious to help save this important man.

Don't try too hard to figure out who the people are who join our protagonists, or what their relationships to them are, because it's all pretty thin. What matters is that they can all kick butt in various ways, and after nursing Mr. Patriot back to health, they have a leader and a teacher. They all vow to save him from his pursuers, the vicious government posse that's tracking him down to eliminate him. They decide that this will be their chance to do something important with their lives, and they commit 100% to the project.

What follows is an epic martial arts battle between the government henchman and the five warrior patriots. As you can probably imagine, what follows is a butt-kicking to end all butt-kickings, and surely one for the history books. Using various weapons and styles--and aided by a weird musical score that sounds kind of like a mix between a broken record of The Phantom Of The Opera and a baseball game in Transylvania--the combatants give their all and initiate a fight to the death to save their hero and protect their freedoms.

This film absolutely has more fighting in it than any other we've seen. For its 107-minute running time, at least 90 minutes are made up of sparring, fighting, or playful martial arts antics. While it's a bit hard to care too much about the characters--who are truly bizarre, even for a film of this genre--the skill and relentless energy displayed by these masters of kung fu is a spectacle unlike any other. All things told, this film offers a great time in many ways, and is a must-see for any fan of high-octane cinema.

The "Zatoichi" films and TV series from the 1960s and 70s had been so pleasantly burned into our collective minds; the news of this film had some of us ecstatic, some pessimistic, others feigning disinterest while secretly keeping their fingers crossed. Zatoichi is like the Japanese Wong Fei Hung: a warrior folk legend who is, for better or worse, in the public domain. As such, the story has been sequeled, remade, reimagined, and rebooted many times over the years, often with mixed results. The 1980s saw a decidedly Caucasian Rutger Hauer unofficially take on the role in the USA-made "Blind Fury". And, more recently, one-of-a-kind Japanese actor/director Takeshi Kitano ruffled feathers in 2003 with his unique action/comedy/musical take on "Zatoichi", featuring himself as the iconic samurai--but with a bleach-blonde do.

So 2008's "Ichi" had spectacle written all over it before it was even done filming--albeit spectacle of uncertain specifics. Would this be a somber period tale of a stoic samurai? An action-packed popcorn flick with little regard for tradition? We all patiently held our collective breath in anticipation of what this film would bring to the table. And now that we've had the fortune to experience it, we can gladly report that it is an undeniable success.

Haruka Ayase's Ichi is a terrifically understated yet intense female warrior, particularly sensational in her un-sensational-ness. The traditional hallmark of a great cinema samurai is an almost effortless ability to dispatch foes. There are no fantastical aerobatics or elaborate take-downs a la Donnie Yen, no grindhouse excess a la "Machine Girl", just a quiet woman who reluctantly fights, but fights without reluctance. During the film's steady boil up to the satisfying finale, the filmmakers never lose sight of the fact that the characters are the focus of the film, not the action.

We highly recommend giving "Ichi" a look, and we're sure you'll appreciate the integrity of its storytelling as much as the superior aesthetics of its cinematography and the choreography of its action sequences. Sit back, settle in, and embark on a quietly determined quest of vengeance with Haruka Ayase in "Ichi".

The story has nothing much to offer IMO, it's just another implausible slasher plot with a hint of supernatural mystery. That could well be your cup of tea--in which case, more power to ya'--but it's not mine. Whatever.

Where this film truly succeeds is in the visuals. And as far as I can tell, this is due primarily to two people:

1. Cinematographer Jonathan Sela makes almost every scene in this film look like a masterpiece photo or painting. At first it's a bit of a sensory overload--all the overt shadows and artificially tinted scenes--but once you adjust to it a bit, you can start to really appreciate that each shot is just visually amazing. You could pause the film at any random frame from start to finish and sell prints of that frame to art collectors. Color me impressed.

2. Director Ryuhei Kitamura. I have enjoyed his films in the past, though perhaps never to the point of rabid obsession that his many fans seem to feel. However, his creativity and confidence in shooting this film is undeniable. There are some really "out there" kills in this film, that are filmed in some really "out there" ways, but in this day and age when we've all "been there, done that" cinematically, I appreciated Kitamura's having the balls to push things forward a bit, even at the risk of going too far. And just for the record, I think he walked that line perfectly here. I'm the first to admit that the CGI in this film is not quite up to task, lots of the blood and other elaborate camera effects are obviously not real. But I'm willing to overlook that since the creativity behind them was so very impressive and fun and fresh.

This film is no masterpiece, mainly because the story simply becomes too outlandish and fantastical for its own good by the end of the film (and, again, your opinion will vary depending on your tastes). But the film works both because of its envelope-pushing visuals, and its incredibly gory and plentiful kills. Check your brain at the door and bask in the orgasmic aesthetics on display here.

But then a curious thing happened. The movie won back my attention. I found that I was repeatedly reminding myself that this was just a movie, these were only actors. It kept sucking me into its reality over and over again. And before long, I had to admit that, despite its quite unoriginal plot, the film was doing an admirable job of surpassing all my expectations. And, unlike its contemporaries, it got better and better as it went on, building suspense and amping up the scares to a near fever pitch.

"28 Days Later" was a watershed moment in zombie filmmaking, it redefined the parameters of zombiehood and victimhood, and the plight of the survivor. "Rec" doesn't redefine anything, but it does refine it, offering up possibly the most effective--and efficient, at only 75 minutes--telling of this old story to date. If you can find enjoyment in this feat--as I did--then you're sure to be impressed.

This is one of those films that appears to be about one thing and then kind of takes a turn all of a sudden and ends up really being about something else. So I don't want to ruin anything for other viewers. But the overall story is about an awkward high school freshman named Colin, who spends much of his time doing medieval reenactments with a local group of--well, dorks. But, just like the people in "Trekkies" and "Spellbound"--and, yes, "King Of Kong"--their dorkiness is also their charm. It's the fact that they don't live their lives like everyone else that makes them interesting in the first place.

Colin hasn't seen his dad since he was less than a week old, so he's come to rely on his mom, brother, and one of his fellow reenactors--an incredibly caring man whom Colin refers to as "my knight"--for support. It is his relationships with all of these people that serve as the foundation for this touching portrait of adolescence.

There you have it in a nutshell. If you like underdogs and outcasts, people trying to forge a path in a world that often feels very foreign to them, then this film should hit the spot. 14-year-old Colin's candor and insight, and his unflinchingly honest humanity, are a true breath of fresh air.

So why didn't they just make a "normal budget" movie with grown-up cameras? I later learned that the low budget was the film's primary selling point to the studios in the first place. Apparently the filmmakers basically approached the studio and said, "we can make a great horror movie for $X". To which the studio said, "Rock on!". Which they did.

And in that context, "Cloverfield" is nothing less than a spectacular success. However, personally, I'd rather have seen these talented filmmakers given a bit more cash to play with. The film does wind up feeling like a bit of a tease at times, as it's clearly lacking a lot of the big, impressive shots that we want to see.

Plus, I have to deduct some points for the ridiculous decisions some of these characters make. I know that's par for the course in a horror flick, but come on. It's not impossible to make a horror movie that's smart too. A little bit more effort in the script would have gone a long way. But anyway...

There you have it. The final choice, as always, is yours to make. I say check it out.

Here Sammo plays a criminal ne'erdowell who talks policeman Jackie into helping him smuggle a shipment of arms away from both a corrupt police force and a gang of bad guys. Yuen Biao plays a rival police officer who always seems to butt heads with Jackie, but eventually concedes that they are on the same team.

There are some truly classic action sequences here, primarily Chan-centric ones (which is, of course, to be expected). Of particular note is the bicycle chase/fight, and Chan's death-defying fall from a clock tower (a stunt which nearly cost him his life).

But this really brings me back to my original point. Though Chan's high-flying and boundary-breaking stunts often proved to be the most memorable aspects of his films from this era, they are often more noteworthy for their blatant dangerousness than for their contribution to the film as a whole. And in that context, Sammo, as second-banana, comes to the fore in this film as well as most of his others, with a solid, "meat-and-potatoes" performance that's just plain fun to watch--whether he's defying death, defying a mahjong table, or simply defying a healthy diet.

It is one of those films that's hard to discuss in depth without revealing things that are best left unrevealed until viewing. But suffice it to say that the film succeeds in basically every arena despite some subject matter that could have been lifted straight out of a soap opera--and not a great soap opera either.

The direction is respectful and makes excellent use of the beautiful seaside landscapes. The acting is especially effective through its restraint, getting across the inner longing of these damaged characters. And the story--though perhaps a bit bloated with certain characters and events that could have been cut out to tighten things--works powerfully on a basic level. This is a kid trying to find a parent (aren't all of us, after all?), but neither he nor his parent figure knows quite what to do with each other despite knowing that they each possess some missing piece of the other person's life puzzle.

Aside from the primary two characters--the teenaged boy and his would-be mother--there are several other key players, some more realistically drawn than others. The "evil stepdaughter and her evil father" were far too evil for no real reason, bordering on the cartoonish. The boy's troubled female friend has a tragic secret, but perhaps takes away too much screen time from the primary story to reveal it. On the other hand, the wacky, disco-dancing bar-maid friend brings an impressive amount of vivacity and realness to her fun-loving but sincerely caring character with very little screen time.

This is a cast of characters that are all fascinating and do hold your interest. It all makes for compelling viewing, and is definitely recommended.

The story begins with Matsutaro (the excellent Ken Ogata, from Yoji Yamada's "The Hidden Blade" and "Love And Honor") at his late wife's memorial. With an incredibly compact bit of dialog we learn that there is little else but bad blood remaining between him and his daughter, and that he is moving out of his home to places unknown. Thus we follow his move to a run-down, shabby apartment building where we can't help but wonder if anything other than solitude and regret await him in the final phase of his life.

Immediately upon moving in, he discovers that his neighbors--a woman, a man, and a child--have some very serious problems. The woman appears to be more or less a strung-out prostitute; the man her unemployed junkie boyfriend; and the child an odd, withdrawn, and dirty little girl who always has a pair of homemade angel's wings on her back. It is quickly revealed to Matsutaro that the girl is living in a horribly neglectful and abusive situation, and that her immediate future includes the potential for all manner of horrific fates including sexual molestation and even murder.

After a particularly creepy bit of molestation at the hands of her mother's boyfriend, the little girl's cries stir Matsutaro into action, and he effectively kidnaps the young girl with the dual intention of showing her a better life and making up for his own regretful and abusive past. The two set off together on unsure footing on a journey with no definite destination, only a definite origin from which they both wish to escape.

The girl, who thinks her name is "Brat" after being referred to as such for so long, bears the physical and emotional scars of a chronically abused child--screaming whenever she is touched, her little body covered in bruises and scrapes. It is this portion of the film that is perhaps the hardest to watch, as we see the debilitating consequences such a horrific life can have on such an innocent being. Nonetheless, through patience and caring, the two slowly develop a trust as they travel together. It eventually becomes clear that their idyllic journey is destined to be cut short when the police become involved at the inexplicable behest of the child's despicable mother.

This very touching story features beautiful cinematography, and a lovely simple score that emphasizes the purity and simplicity of these two characters' desires. The quiet longing of the old man and the young girl for healthy human interaction, despite pasts that have taught them that they will never find it, is what moves this film forward; and the filmmakers leave a good deal of ambiguity in the characters' motivations and fates, which audiences may either appreciate or resent depending on their expectations.

There are several films with similar story points--a crusted-over adult teaming up, either willingly or otherwise, with an abandoned or troubled young child. This one, along with the 1998 Brazilian film "Central Station", top my list. Other films to consider along these lines include the fantastic 2003 French film "Monsieur Ibrahim", with an amazing performance by the great Omar Sharif; and perhaps 2001's "Mostly Martha", which I didn't enjoy so much but is widely held in high regard.

It does seem unlikely that people living in that era would have questioned the restrictions imposed on them to this degree; but the director's application of a somewhat modern perspective to the plight of lower caste samurai and citizens of mid-19th century Japan makes for a very compelling story. Highly recommended.

Regardess, it's terrific to see footage of legendary real-world fighters like Benny "The Jet" Urquidez in the ring--jeez that guy's vicious--and respected martial arts instructors demonstrating their techniques and theories for you in person rather than just explaining them. All in all, this was a captivating and highly informative watch.

"Shaolin Wooden Men" is more or less in the vein of some of our favorite Shaw Brothers movies, with some fun kitschy gimmicks to make it original--like the awesome (but, let's face it, ridiculous) automated wooden fighters of the film's title. All in all, a very fun flick, which should absolutely fit the bill for old school fans. Just don't come in here expecting "Police Story" or something, because this is a different Jackie Chan.