Sly 'Mr. Fox'

I haven't watched many animated films while writing this blog, save for "Up", which was excellent, and the unique "Fantastic Mr. Fox", which was actually filmed in "stop-action" animation. Stop-action moves the figures frame by frame, and in this case, are animated characters, with the frames sped up. It's an awesome visual, and makes the film a stand-out among the 2009 releases. The fact that it was nominated for the Oscar for Best Animated Film (losing to "Up") and that many thought it should have been nominated for Best Picture is just more of a testament to its impact on viewers. Add to the fact that it's directed by Wes Anderson ("Rushmore", "The Royal Tenenbaums") and he brings along the voices of some of his usual crew: Owen Wilson, Bill Murray and Jason Schwartzman. And don't forget the voices of Academy Award winners George Clooney and Meryl Streep. Wow, that's a lot of talent.

The film begins with Mr. and Mrs. Fox (Clooney and Streep) getting caught in a trap while stealing birds from a farmer. Mrs. Fox encourages them to find a new line of work (if the escape) because of the danger and she tells him she's pregnant. Two years later (they escape), the foxes are living in a hole, with Mrs. Fox staying home and Mr. Fox working as a newspaperman (of course!). He clearly misses the thrill of stealing, and is resigned to his life as a suburban father. He decides to move the family to a tree house, which his lawyer, Clive Badger (Bill Murray) warns him against, saying it is too dangerous. Fox disagrees and moves the family.

Once they move, long-lost cousin Kristofferson Silverfox (Eric Chase Anderson) comes to live with the family because his father is sick with "double pneumonia." Immediately Mr. Fox takes a shining to cousin Kris, who seems to be good at everything while his forlorn son Ash Fox (Schwartzman) is more of a "wet rag" type.

Soon after moving, Fox can't resist his life of stealing any longer, and decides to target the farms of Boggis, Bunce and Bean, who have turkey, apples, alcoholic cider and chickens. Fox recruits the hilarious Kylie Sven Opossum (Wallace Wolodarsky) to be his side kick, and the game is on. But once the farmers get wise to the plot, things get pretty wild for the animal kingdom, and they need to find a way to survive...

The story isn't terribly complex, but what really makes the film is the excellent animation and stop-action and the wonderful, funny animal characters. Humans can hear the animals talk, and the interactions between them and their fellow animals is pretty funny. The animals have an interesting society that is just like humans, from lawyers to real estate agents to schools and gym class. Though rated PG, this isn't a film for children. It has adult themes and they use the word "cuss" as an all around curse word (like when they refer to something as a potential "cluster cuss" or "he's a cuss of an athlete") which is actually a pretty funny running joke throughout the film. It's fun and really enjoyable movie that I hope most people like as much as I did.

8 out of 10 stars

"Fantastic Mr. Fox" is rated PG for some mild animated violence, smoking (?) and sayign the word "cuss." Like I said, it's definitely an animated film for adults.

Here's the trailer:

Flying high with some serious lows

The bad economy has been a major topic in nearly every medium. You can't go one single hour, it seems, without reading, hearing or talking about the stagnant housing market, job market and how perilous each indicator of economic strength may prove to be. Up until last night, I hadn't seen a movie that really symbolized the feeling of the economic situation. "Up in the Air" isn't about the economy, per se, but it wouldn't be as effective without the massive amounts of layoffs that have been taking place in the last few years. But there's a lot more to it than that.

George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a "career transition counselor" or as he describes it: "the person who sacks somebody when their boss doesn't have the [courage] to do it." His company is based in Omaha, Neb., but Bingham travels everywhere: Tulsa, Wichita, Miami, Detroit, St. Louis. He is good at his job, and can walk in and tell someone they've been "let go" even as they stare at him, never having seen him in their life. Bingham also is a motivational speaker, giving talks at conferences about "What's in your backpack?" and basically advising people to let go of their relationships and problems to live a simpler, less complex life. Bingham clearly lives by this philosophy, traveling more than 270 days a year, firing people for a living. During his travels, Bingham meets Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga), another frequent flier/traveler. They compare cards, proving to one another how much they travel, and in their world, how exclusive they may be. They begin a romantic relationship, both seemingly living by the same philosophy of casual sex and no commitments. They check schedules to plan other meeting points when their paths cross in different cities.

Bingham is called back to Omaha for an all company meeting. Once there, his boss Craig Gregory (Jason Bateman) introduces the team to a young, up and comer that is revolutionizing their business. Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick) is a recent graduate of Cornell who has come up with a video link system that will eliminate traveling by the firing squad and allow them to work from Omaha. Bingham, clearly a veteran and one of the best workers, is not happy because he admits, he loves flying, traveling and being anonymous. Before they implement the system, Gregory asks Bingham to take Keener on the road with him to show her the ropes, and how the whole operation works.

Immediately the differences, stark and obvious, between the two become pronounced. Bingham is the savvy, veteran traveler while Keener shows up with luggage to check, clearly a violation of any Bingham philosophy. She is young and idealistic, he is a grizzled veteran who knows his profession inside and out. It is clear from the beginning that she might not have the stomach to fire people.

I really enjoyed this film. The characters are well developed and interesting, presenting different viewpoints that tell a complete story. Sure, it's somewhat predicatable and follows a somewhat familiar storyline, but Clooney is perfect in the role and Farmiga is excellent as well. It's kind of funny because the role almost mirrors bachelor Clooney's real life, at least as portrayed in the media. There are funny parts and a good cast, but it is also sad and somewhat real, with deeper storylines than just what the plot synopsis can really give. It's worth seeing and an interesting movie. It won't necessarily make you happy, but it has a genuine message that people can relate to. The fact that Clooney, Farmiga, director Jason Reitman and the whole film were nominated for Oscars says a lot too. The aerial shots Reitman utilizes are pretty cool as well, including the opening sequence and the different cities Bingham travels to. It's a thought provoking film, and may cause you to evaluate or reevaluate your own life.

"Up in the Air" is rated R for some sexual content/brief nudity and language. Some more adult themes.

8 out of 10 stars.

Here's the trailer:

It's the end of the world as we know it....

Apocalyptic movies have been around forever because honestly, who knows if or when the world will end? Plus, you get to use some pretty serious CGI in these disaster films and really go to town. Sometimes aliens (think "Independence Day", both directed by Roland Emmerich) convey the wrecking of planet Earth. But as we approach the end of the Mayan calendar, conspiracy theorists and people worried of the unknown fear the approach of Dec. 21, 2012. Thus we have "2012", where it isn't aliens or some other force exploding the planet, but rather planet Earth itself taking it out on all of its inhabitants. And with the recent mega-quakes in Haiti and Chile, people might start taking a little more notice of the changes happening on Earth...

The film begins in 2009, when geologist Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor) travels to India and discovers a meteorological event that will eventual heat the earth's core to unsustainable levels. He informs the White House and is promoted to a high ranking position under the President. Other heads of state are notified of the impending disaster, which Helmsley estimates will end the world at some point. We travel ahead to 2012 as the people who know of the impending disaster begin to prepare for the worst.

Introduced next is Jackson Curtis (John Cusack), a writer living in Los Angeles. He wakes up, late to pick up his two kids for a vacation to Yellowstone National Park. Upon arriving, Curtis tries to take the children to a favorite lake of his and his ex-wife. Curtis finds it and sees that it is dried up. While looking around, the trio is surrounded by U.S. Army vehicles and kicked out of the site and told it is dangerous. While retreating to his campground, Curtis meets Charlie Frost (Woody Harrelson) who comes of as crazy, but predicts the world will end soon because of the Mayan calendar. He also mentions her has a map to the location of spaceships that he believes the rich and famous have access to in the event of world disaster.

Curtis and the kids head back to LA after receiving word of serious earthquakes there. Upon arriving home, the earth begins shake and disintegrate as Curtis grabs his ex-wife and her boyfriend, two children and heads for the airport as LA falls into the depths of the earth. Finally heading Charlie's warning, Curtis hopes to make it to Yellowstone and find the map to save himself and his family.

The CGI is really cool for their escape scene from LA, and throughout, "2012" is an exciting film. I also enjoyed the stellar cast, which included Cusack, Amanda Peet, Harrelson, Danny Glover and Oliver Platt. Yeah, it's kind of cheesy, and yeah, its pretty unrealistic, but overall it's an entertaining movie (but a little too long). Not to mention it's timely, with earthquakes and 2012 fast approaching. Are you prepared?

"2012" is rated PG-13 for some language and intense, apocalyptic scenes of destruction.


6 out of 10 stars

Here's the trailer:

Not so 'Law Abiding'

Revenge movies are awesome. "Man on Fire"? Check. "Gladiator"? You know it. "Kill Bill"? The definition of awesome. "Law Abiding Citizen" is a revenge film at its core, but it has a sort of twist: maybe this guy is taking it TOO far.

Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler) seems to have a nice life and a nice family. Until the night to would-be thieves break into his home, murder his wife and daughter and leave him for dead. When one of the criminals (the actual murderer) is given a lighter sentence to testify against his partner, who is put on death row, Clyde is not happy. He might be even more upset at the criminal justice system, which he feels has failed him, and prosecutor Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx), who seems more concerned with his conviction rate than actual justice. Nick just happens to have a wife and young daughter as well.

Fastforward 10 years. The criminal on death row has his number called and is set to die. He still denies he committed the murders, and once injected with the drugs, undergoes a horrible, painful-looking death. Talk of violation of his 4th amendment right is tossed around, and the cops immediately suspect his partner in crime, now released from prison, may have had something to do with it. They try to go find him, but he's already been apprehended by someone more vicious than the police: a law abiding citizen, who has some gruesome plans for him.

This begins a crusade against those who have wronged Clyde. The best part is that a lot of what he does is from prison. Pretty cool stuff, but there might come a point when he goes to far....but that's up to you to decide.

Overall, this was a pretty entertaining movie. The twist wasn't as good as I'd hoped, but it didn't kill the movie. Some things did bother me, like the fact that Nick, a prosecutor, runs around like he's a cop when he has no business investigating the case in such a way. Whoever researched for this movie how the criminal justice system works did a pretty piss-poor job, but honestly, it doesn't take a whole lot away from it. This isn't an Oscar winner, people, but it will keep you entertained for two hours.

6 out of 10 stars.

Here's the trailer:

Future 'Surrogates'

The movie idea of human beings having the capability to move other human-like robot things has had a resurgence this year and last. Look no farther than "Gamer", "Avatar" and now "Surrogates", which explores the world run by robots. Except the robots are controlled by humans, who have become so boring and lazy and scared of dying that they use robots to complete everyday tasks.

The surrogates in the film are controlled neurologically by the humans, usually from their homes. Beautiful surrogates can be bought; sometimes a female surrogate is actually being controlled by a man. The advantage of the surrogate is they go to work and do all the things a person normally would, except you sit and home and control it. Sounds boring huh? I guess this is some idea of the future.

The surrogates are unable to die, and in the film, crime has been virtually reduced to nothing. Surrogates record everything they see, leaving concrete evidence in the event a crime is committed.

Somehow, a loophole is found, and a surrogate's human controller is killed after the surrogates brain is zapped by a light-emitting weapon that in turn, turns the human's brain to mush. That human also happens to be the son of the inventor of surrogates, who has had a bad break from his former company. Enter Bruce Willis and his hair-having surrogate as Tom Greer, one of the detectives investigating the murder case. He's having marital problems, not to mention investigating a crime that shouldn't have occurred.

Important to consider is that there ARE human's in this future world that enjoy being themselves and hate the fact that people have bought into this surrogate lifestyle. This people live on "reservations" where the robots are not allowed and they have some sort of sovereignty. Sound a little like "Avatar"?

Anyways, the movie follows Tom's attempts to solve the murder, coming to grips with not using surrogates and dealing with his marital issues.

This is a pretty bland, predictable film that doesn't exactly make you think, but it has some decent action and the premise is kinda cool. Ving Rhames plays "The Prophet", the leader of the humans, so that's pretty sweet too because he's a good actor. But I wasn't exactly taken away with this film. Like at the beginning. Really? Every person IN THE WORLD can afford a surrogate? Those starving children in Africa prefer a robot over food? I don't think so. I guess it's a small detail, but still: DUMB.

4 out of 10 stars

Here's the trailer:

Lots of baggage in 'The Hurt Locker'

Lots of films, both documentary and fiction, have been made about the still ongoing conflict in Iraq. I have seen many of these, but as a few film critics have said, "The Hurt Locker" may be the best and most realistic of the bunch, and I'd probably have to agree. The film has a great sense of authenticity, as it was shot in Jordan and Kuwait, sometimes mere miles from the Iraqi border. This, and the use of Middle Eastern refugees for certain scenes, make the audience feel like they are there. I also saw this film at a screening in Washington, D.C. before it came out, and seeing it again on DVD only cemented my sentiment that this is a great movie.

The film follows the travails of an Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal unit in Iraq during 2004 (this is not a documentary). The three man team is led by William James (Jeremy Renner), a newcomer to the squad after the original team leader was killed. Rounding up the group is J.T. Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) and Owen Eldridge (Brian Geraghty). When we meet them, the team has about 40 days left in their tour in Iraq. Sanborn and Eldridge take exception to James's brash, unorthodox ways of working, but can't do much because he is the leader. Sanborn is a good soldier, but likes to run operations by the book and with a lot of communication. Eldridge has stress issues, and seems to be out of his element and unsure of how to respond to battlefield situations. Each characters different personality creates an interesting dynamic as the crew tries to make it through their tour disabling IEDs and participating in one of the most dangerous units in the Army.

The realism is enhanced by slow motion shots and first-person shots, artfully directed by Kathryn Bigelow. That, the realistic personalities of all the characters (helped by great acting) and the filming on location in Jordan make this seem like the real deal. The other thing about this film is that it is an action-packed thriller, as you can expect with a movie about a bomb squad. Each scene has suspense that keeps you on the edge of your seat, giving you the feeling that these soldiers must have while being constantly on edge in a war zone. It's hard to convey the feeling of roadside bombs and insurgents, yet this film, through its 2 hour plus run time, does. It also brings up a lot of questions, which make discussing the film after watching it all the more interesting. My favorite scene is a desert battle scene that is slow but well shot and extremely intense. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

"The Hurt Locker" is rated R for wartime violence, language and some gore.

8 out of 10 stars

No Oliver Twist-kind of 'Orphan'

When a horror/thriller movie uses a child as the protagonist, you know that character is going to be really scary. I think this has to do with the "innocence of childhood," and all the preconceived notions society has of how a 9-year-old girl should act. "Orphan" takes those preconceived notions and shoves them out the door, while also preying on another unknown: adoption. In this case, the adopted child, Esther (Isabelle Fuhrman) is even more shadowy because she has come to the Connecticut orphanage she resides at from Russia.

After Kate (Vera Farmiga) and John (Peter Sarsgaard) Coleman's third child is stillborn, they decide to adopt a child. They have two young children already: Daniel and Maxine (or Max), who is deaf and communicates with sign language. When the couple visits the orphanage, they decide to adopt Esther, a smart, artistic girl who is from Russia. At first things are good and the family gets along. Esther picks up sign language quickly, and seems to be doing well. Things quickly take a turn for the worse. A girl breaks her ankle at school, and Esther is nearby. She wears old fashioned type clothes, and is never without a choker necklace and bracelets on both wrists. She shows up at weird intervals, and generally creeps out some of the family, mostly Daniel and Kate, who begin to sense something is off with their new family member. We see just how "off" as the film goes on.

The acting is solid on all fronts, and is a different take on the "evil child" movies like "The Good Son" and "The Omen." This has some good twists and turns, though it does follow a similar formula to those other two films. Fuhrman does a great job as Esther, and really seems to be evil. I would definitely recommend this for anyone who liked either of those other two movies, or if are in the mood for a horror/thriller movie. It's well done, and has plenty of scares.

"Orphan" is rated R for disturbing content, violence and gore, adult language and situations.

7 out of 10 stars

Sad or 'Funny People'?

I'm kind of on a comedy kick these days, so I rented Judd Apatow's latest comedic endeavor "Funny People." Though the movie came out on Nov. 24, I rented it this week because I had seen new releases "Public Enemies" and "Julie and Julia" and really had no desire to watch the new "Harry Potter" as I would be completely lost.

The premise of the film is that an aging, comedic superstar named George Simmons (Adam Sandler)finds out he has a lethal form of leukemia. Simmons had made a bunch of bad comedy movies that he has been paid a bunch to make. Maybe it's an autobiographical look for Sandler of his own life. Seeing his life in a different perspective than his normal womanizing, money spending ways, Simmons meets Ira Wiener (Seth Rogen) during a stand up gig at a small improv. Simmons takes a shining to Ira and hires him as his assistant/joke writer first for a corporate MySpace gig and then full time. And of course, there's the one who got away, Laura (Leslie Mann), Simmons ex-finacee whom he rekindles his relationship with once she visits him after finding out he's sick.

The movie, overall is a comedy, but I'd almost call is more of a "bromance." The reason I use this word is because it's used by an agent in the movie, but a "bromance" would be like the movie "I Love You, Man." Instead of being a romantic comedy per se, most of the film is focused on the heterosexual relationship between two men. Hence "bromance": a man romance (but not sexual). And that's what "Funny People" is. Sure, it's a bunch of comics coming together and having fun in a movie. But the focus is on the relationship between the lonely Simmons and the struggling Wiener. And yes, each has a romantic female interest as a side storyline, and yes, Simmons illness is another issue, but the relationship between the two male leads is the main storyline between beginning and end.

That beginning to end is a long time too. This movie seemed to run on about 3 hours too long, and there were a bunch of scenes that really dragged. The movie has a good concept, but I wasn't impressed with the execution, which surprised me because of the stockpile of comedic talent on the cast, and the great cameos throughout the film. A lot of the lines seemed improvised, which is appropriate for a comedy and a format I'm a big fan of. But it seemed like a lot of the jokes were bad: overused and stupid sex jokes and not enough funny, original comedy. That was disappointing to me. I've liked movies that every single one of the characters has been in, but combined, they sort of fizzled. I did like the actual scenes of stand up they did during some parts, and there are some parts that made me laugh out loud, but a lot were too much. The story is interesting, and the audience sees George learn from his ordeal, but it's kind of hard to have sympathy for him at the same time. Ira, on the other hand, ends up being the more sympathetic character, and seems more real.

"Funny People" is rated R for nudity, adult language, adult situations, etc. Not for kids.

6 out of 10 stars.

'Bruno'

"Vat's up, it's Brunnnooo!' Sacha Baron Cohen's absurdly flamboyantly gay character is back for his own 80 something minute full feature film. In the beginning, Cohen created a TV show based on his ability to interview high profile people under the guise of three distinctly different characters. "The Ali G Show" featured Ali G, the white, wannabe British gangsta that hosts a TV show for inner city youth. Borat was the reporter from Kazakstan, bringing unruly customs in his quest to learn about America. And finally Bruno, the gay Austrian host of a fashion show. As you can imagine, the show was insanely funny, mostly because Cohen had the ability to play each of these characters as well as the next, and manage to land big names who unwittingly played right into Cohen's mockery of them. Playing off the success of the show, Cohen created a feature length film about Borat. The film made a ton of movie, but obviously came with some controversy. Now playing off the success of Borat, Cohen brings Bruno to the big screen.

After ruining a fashion week catwalk in Milan (he wore a velcro suit and fell into all the models), Bruno's Austrian TV show is canceled. He decides to head for the United States to become a huge star. Along the way, he comes up with all sorts of ploys, from adopting an African baby to heading to the Middle East to mediate peace talks. In between, ridiculousness ensues, much like it does in "Borat."

The problem, though, is that this film isn't executed as well as "Borat" or the TV show (which is the best of all three, in my opinion). His accent and dress up is overdone, as is the acting. He is so flamboyantly gay that is doesn't bring up gay stereotypes in a logical manner, but rather perpetuates them. If his goal was to help gay rights, he didn't. Rather, he makes people angry by acting too crazy.

There are a lot of funny parts, but an equally amount that are just too over-the-top. I think the show was much better than this movie and "Borat" too, just because it was simpler then. He was more subtle, while this time he is in your face, non-stop, which becomes overwhelming for the viewer and the mocked person in the film. If you like these kinds of movies, I'd recommend the show over this. But check it out and let me know what you think.

5 stars out of 10

'Angels & Demons' and Priests, Oh My!

The all powerful Catholic church has a lot of sway, but even they couldn't stop the production of either "The Da Vinci Code" or "Angels & Demons" (though 'Demons' was banned in Samoa). And in some regards, despite my belief in the First Amendment, I can see why these movies would worry the Church. Yet people who watch it need to understand that it's a movie and not real. In a sense, it would be like security guards being offended by the movie "The Fan" because they didn't realize De Niro's character was actually the umpire before he killed someone. I mean, stuff happens, whether you're a powerful church or stadium security guard.

Anyway, I've read both "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels & Demons," two wildly popular novels by Dan Brown. After reading both, I liked "Angels & Demons" a whole lot more. Both subsequently had movies made of them, and again, I liked "Angels & Demons" a whole lot more.

Despite a few significant departures from the novel, I did enjoy "Angels & Demons." For those few of you who know nothing about it, I'll give a brief plot synopsis.

A bunch of scientists at CERN, the Swiss physics mecca, finally make antimatter, a highly explosive substance that sets off on contact. As soon as it is created, someone breaks in, killing a scientist and stealing the antimatter.

Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks), the esteemed Harvard professor of symbiology, is called in because the dead scientist is left with an ambigram with the word "Illuminati" scorched into his chest. The whole story of the Illuminati, a true organization, is somewhat glossed over, but the book goes into much better, interesting detail.

Langdon and a CERN antimatter scientist named Vittoria Vetra are summoned and paired up in Rome in Vatican City where the antimatter is discovered. But a catch: the guards can't find the antimatter. Rather, it is hidden somewhere with a wireless camera showing it in the vicinity. In a few hours, the antimatter will go off, demolishing Vatican City and the thousands that have gathered in St. Peter's Square to mourn the death of the pope. That's the other catch: a papal conclave is ongoing to find the next Pope, and Langdon must find the antimatter. Add to that that the Illuminati have kidnapped the preferiti, or the four cardinals most likely to be voted Pope, and chaos ensues.

As you can tell, the plot is very confusing, and after reading the book, I wondered how a director would create a movie. Overall, it is well done, and gets the practical basics in to the film. There's too much detail in the book to fit into the film. But it gets it done, which is impressive. Some of the changes I didn't like, and it's pretty long (understandably so, but there's some good acting and a couple of pretty cool scenes. The book is better, so if I were you, I'd read the book first, then watch the movie, and then complain, like me, about why the book is better. You'll understand.

"Angels & Demons" is rated PG-13 for violence, language and Catholic Church bashing (not really).

6 out of 10 stars

New movie Tuesday

I'd read the book, and now I get to see the movie. "Angels & Demons" came out today and I'll watch it tonight. I though the book was great, so here's hoping. I've heard this movie is better than "The DaVinci Code," and I sure hope so. I disliked that book and the movie. I'll try to have a review up tomorrow. Anyone else that's scene it, let me know what you thought. And if you haven't, read the book first. It's really good.

In theaters, the box office smash "Twilight: New Moon" remains in Polson, as does "Old Dogs." Reporter Aimee Niles will have a guest post reviewing "New Moon"; should be a good one, stay tuned for that. In Ronan, "The Blind Side" will play for at least another week. It's a true story about an offensive tackle who was actually drafted by the Ravens in the NFL this past April. Looks like an inspirational one; I'll try to get that up. Enjoy the rest of your week, happy Thanksgiving and check out some movies!

And if football isn't your fancy on Thanksgiving day, Crazy Mike's in Polson will be OPEN on Thanksgiving, so there's always that option. Enjoy!

An Awesome 'Trek'

I'm not a "trekkie" by any means, but the newest film, "Star Trek" is great for new and old fans of the show. My mom, a casual fan of the show when it was out, saw it in theaters and raved about it, so I had no choice but to watch it when it came out on DVD last week, and I was not disappointed.

The film gives a background on all the key characters from the show (I presume) and sets the stage for a series of these movies. We see how James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is born, and how he starts at the Starfleet Academy. We also see the journey of Spock (Zachary Quinto), a young genius whose father is Vulcan and mother is human. Other more secondary characters are introduced as well, and the stage is set for an exciting adventure where the young heroes quickly ascend the ranks of the Federation. Wow...just reading the last paragraph makes me sound like a total trekkie; you will too once you watch this film.

The dialogue is smart and funny, and any references to the TV show are pretty subtle, and not a major part of the movie that will take anything away if you weren't a fan (as far as I know). The acting is good too; I thought Pine was great as a young, brash Kirk. The action is excellent, with some very cool scenes. The scene on the drill may be the best in the movie, and is pretty intense. I think lots of people will enjoy this film, not just people who like action. Like I said, the three major important parts of a movie: dialogue, acting and action, are all very good, so definitely check this one out. I hope they're planning another.

"Star Trek" is rated PG-13 for language, space violence and some adult situations.

8 out of 10 stars