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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

There are lots of little nods to the kung fu flix of old that will likely appeal to genre fans, but I couldn't help wondering while I was watching the film who the intended audience really was. True genre fans would likely find this film to be childish and unengaging on the whole. Casual fans whose primary exposure to the genre has been through crossover films like "Crouching Tiger" would also likely find this film lacking in emotional depth and motivation. And kids--well, kids would probably like most of it, though a lot of the violence did seem a bit harsh for a young'un. I guess the idea was to make something for young teens whose parents might have been Shaw Brothers fans back in the day? I'm just guessing here.

The bottom line is that if you're watching this with your 13-year-old son, you'll probably come away mildly entertained and he'll come away with possibly a new favorite movie. But if there's no 13-year-old boy in your scenario, then you might want to skip this one and seek out something a bit more decisive--a movie that has actually something to say or at least an innovative way of saying it.

The only word that keeps popping into my head when I think about this movie is "cute". If "cute" is enough for you to justify a couple of hours, then more power to you. Otherwise, don't lose any sleep over missing this one.

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.

First of all, it is directed by and stars Wong Jing, hardly a hallmark of quality kung fu films. Second, it has a funky sci-fi story element, and stars a funky little kid. Third, Jackie Chan is not in it.

What it does have going for it is action choreography by Tony Leung Siu-Hung, whose stock in trade seems to be turning out quality fight choreography without ever getting much credit for it. Here he action-directs a mix of martial artists and non-martial artists, with impressive results. Andy Lau, not particularly renowned for his martial arts prowess, really shines here as a nearly invincible kung fu machine, holding his own alongside the likes of Cynthia Rothrock and Richard Norton. The choreography is innovative and fun, and the falls look agonizingly painful--pretty much all you could ask for.

I won't go much into the downsides of the film, as they are many, involving bad comedy (thanks, Wong Jing and Nat Chan), and that bizarre little kid playing with his magic crystal. In fact, the crystal is even more annoying than the kid--quite a feat.

Bottom line: you need to watch this film, and simply tune out the bad parts, because the good parts really shine. It's a safe bet that you'll be very impressed by the fight sequences here.

But don't let my crotchety critical opinion prevent you from watching this doc, since it is truly fascinating and, yes, emotional. All the good stuff is here, it's just in disproportion to Lisa Ling's screen time. Oh, and the CLASSIC part of this film is towards the end, when one of the the American fathers asks Lisa Ling in the airport, "So, when's the next 'Charlie's Angels' coming out?", clearly mistaking her for Lucy Liu (whom she does closely resemble). For me, that only drove home the point that Lisa Ling is not really anyone of consequence to the general public, and certainly not someone who should have been the focus of such a potentially amazing documentary.

The film's strongest point is its star, Ken Watanabe, whose portrayal is at times wincingly effective. The scene in which he collapses into a shrill, squealing breakdown in front of his wife was agonizing--in a "good" way. I totally bought him as the character he was playing. (On a selfish note, I did miss seeing him perform in English with a Japanese accent, since he has one of the coolest Japanese accents of all time. But that's my issue, not the film's...) Overall, a job very well done for Watanabe.

The film's primary drawbacks--aside from the painful subject matter, which may or may not be a drawback to you depending on your level of masochism--are twofold. First, the story, while compelling, felt too simple to fill out a 2-hour movie. There's not much to it aside from the protagonist's disintegration and its effect on his loved ones and colleagues. As a result, the second issue I had was that the establishing portion of the film (let's say, the first hour) felt repetitive. We keep witnessing Watanabe's lapses in memory and his resulting disorientation, over and over. You can only see this happen so many times before it gets irritating. It's one of those instances where the director should have opted to imply and summarize rather than explicitly show each single event to the audience.

The bottom line is that this is a very good film if you view it as a "tour de force performance" or as a "moving story". But as a film on the whole, it does have some flaws, primarily its tendency to overstate through repetition. But I say it's well worth a watch for anyone.

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.

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.