The new IMAX feature: "Hubble 3D" is a film you really should check out with the entire family. The film centers around the May 2009 trip by astronnauts into space to fix the Hubble Space Telescope. The movie also tells the history of Hubble .

We also get a look at some interesting pictures that Hubble has taken over the last 20 years, which include places in space that are trillions of miles away. Leonardo DiCaprio does an excellent job narrating the 45 minute documentary.

It's only out in a limited number of IMAX theaters and only for a limited time but it's worth finding.

It's been 46 years since "Mary Poppins" was released. Four and a half years ago a new British nanny arrived in movie theaters. I didn't see the original "Nanny McPhee" when it came out in 2006, or on DVD, because it looked like a bad rip-off of the Disney classic. And I had low expectations for this sequel - "Nanny McPhee Returns", but, as I've learned several times before, you can't judge a film by it's trailer.

Emma Thompson reprises her role as the mysterious Nanny McPhee. This time she decides to visit a family that lives on a farm because the mother (Maggie Gyllenhaal) needs help trying to handle her three children while her husband (their father) is away at war. And two snotty cousins from the city have also shown up to live with them.

The kids need help, too. They won't stop fighting with each other and generally being crazy. So Nanny McPhee decides to teach them some lesson, by having them help each other through some difficult situations. The big issue is trying to save the farm.

This sequel, like the original, is adapted from the popular Nurse Matilda book series. But, even thought the title character of the movie is Nanny McPhee, she isn't the main focus of the story. The plot mainly centers around the mother and the kids, which surprised me.

The first half hour of "Returns" is just awful. It's filled with the kids fighting and screaming, mud and poo jokes, and more fighting. But when Nanny McPhee arrives on the scene, she not only saves the day, but she saves the movie. Once "small "c" big "P" (as she calls herself) starts working her magic, the script starts working and we begin caring about the individual characters and their problems. Yes, it may be predictable and silly at times, but it's also very sweet and enjoyable.

The performances are all pretty good. The five children each have their moments on screen to shine, and they're all o.k. Veteran British actors Maggie Smith, Ralph Fiennes and Ewan McGregor all have small roles. The special effects are cheesy, on purpose. The swimming pigs are fun to watch.

It's rated PG for some serious elements (which I wasn't expecting, but most kids will understand). It's appropriate for all ages and kids and parents will enjoy watching this one together.

"Nanny McPhee Returns"...and just in time. It's one of the best family films of the summer. On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, it gets a B.

Thompson (who wrote the script and is one of the film's executive producers) has confirmed that a third "NMcP" movie is in the works. After seeing "Returns" I hope we won't have to wait another four and a half years for the next one.

I need to say right at the start that I am not a gamer. That may be one of the reasons why "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World", which is basically a movie set inside a video game, doesn't work for me. But there are a lot of other reason why it simply doesn't work, period.

Scott (Michael Cera) is a 22 year old who lives in Toronto and plays in a band. He's dating a high school girl named Knives, but he sees this new girl in a dream, meets her and ends-up falling in love with her. But in order to have a relationship with Ramona, Scott has to fight and defeat her Seven Evil Exes.

The movie's look is a combination of a video game and a comic book. It's based a popular six-volume graphic novel series. The look is kinda cool in the beginning. In fact, I liked the first half-hour of "Scott Pilgrim", as you get to know the characters and can enjoy the unique style of the film. There are some laughs and some smiles.

But once the evil exes begin showing up all the fun comes to an end and the movie turns into this long...long series of  fight scenes that aren't exciting or interesting. It's the same punching and kicking over...and over. You stop caring for the characters or how things are going to work out.

Now, I guess if you're a person who enjoys playing video games for hours and hours with the characters battling each other for points and coins then you'll probably enjoy the last hour and a half of "Scott Pilgrim". That's just not my idea of a good time in real life, or in a movie.

There's a pretty good cast: Anna Kendrick ("Up in the Air") plays Scott's sister, Jason Schwartzman is the 7th evil ex and two superhero stars - Brandon Routh (Superman) and Chris Evans (Human Torch and Captain America) are also evil exes (a nice touch for the comic book fans). But the performances are overshadowed by the look of the film, which is the real star.

"Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" is rated PG-13 for some adult subject matter, action-violence (which is stylized and shouldn't bother anybody) and some language (but most of the "bad" word are bleeped out). It's appropriate for younger kids, but is clearly meant for the teen to young adult gamer crowd.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Scott Pilgrim..." only gets a D+.

Maybe if there were only three or four evil exes it would be tolerable for everyone. But, instead, this movie will only be a big winner with video game fans.

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *

Carl Winslow
Posts: 9

Re: Movie Reviews
Reply #9 on : Sat August 21, 2010, 22:25:27

---

I had written a long response, but realized it was pointless to use reason when considering responding to a Kid "Critic."

You are wrong. Taste is subject, but since you clearly lack taste buds, this does not apply.

Vic
Posts: 9

On Target
Reply #8 on : Tue August 17, 2010, 16:53:03

---

Hi there, Jackson.

I've been reading some of your reviews, and I think you've got quite a knack for interpreting and criticizing films. This one in particular seemed right on the money. I had some trouble following the plot, at one part I was unsure why he had to fight those two guys with the weapons. I felt very lost in this film, and the overall presentation seemed sloppy and lacking of any great production value. It reminded me of a film called Superbad, probably because that is the last time I've seen Michael Cera. It seems like these films are more geared toward teenage audiences who enjoy "Twilight" or "Spy Kids". Anyways, I'd pass on this one personally.

See you at the movies!

Guy
Posts: 9

Re: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (PG-13) D+
Reply #7 on : Mon August 16, 2010, 15:32:57

---

The fight scenes were boring? Since when is someone chopping through another human being with a Katana created from the power of love that turns people into piles of coins boring?

Take it easy fella, you're still a kid. Don't you ever have wishful thinking of being the hero who saves the girl? You don't have to be a gamer to feel that way.

Jill Housel
Posts: 9

Disagree
Reply #6 on : Sun August 15, 2010, 19:52:04

---

I'm sorry Kid Critic but I respectfully disagree with the opinion you have provided in this review. Scott Pilgrim is clearly not a D+ but at least.....a B-. I believe maybe you should try playing some video games and than you might have a better understanding of how significant this is to gaming culture and the world as a whole. Thank You for your time.

kevin
Posts: 9

Re: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (PG-13) D+
Reply #5 on : Sun August 15, 2010, 19:52:02

---

i just wanted to add that this movie deserves more than a d i mean really this movie is one the unique style of movie thats come around since avatar now its not on the level of avatar at all but the uniqueness of this movie should bring it up to at least a c. not to mention the soundtrack is one of the greatest i have ever heard flawlessly bringing the two generas of indie punk and 8 bit videogame soundtracks but also somehow making you aware of it by weaving it into the the action sequences. which by the way are not all the same granted the first to are quite similar. but once you get to the fourth and fith there all quite differnt. the twin evil exes are so great that whole scene is amazing for videogame to movie to music fans that its borderline impossible not to like this movie. i went and saw this with my mother sister brother and father my mother and sister both loved it for the romanticism my father thurly enjoyed the action aspect of the movie. my older brother was thrilled by the nostolgia factor of it by old video games that he once played that they weaved into the movie. while i loved it for the music aspect because i personally am a huge punk fan. all in all i think this movie is great for anyone and you cant go wrong and deserves a much better rateing then d

Hobo Joe
Posts: 9

.....? What....
Reply #4 on : Sun August 15, 2010, 06:39:19

---

Jackson, what is this? You give Scott Pilgrim a D+...yet you give Step Up 3D a B, which is only a cash in on the gimmick of 3D itself? But then again, mabye you weren't in the mindset for the movie

jekiwi
Posts: 9

Scott Pilgrim vs. LCJ
Reply #3 on : Sat August 14, 2010, 01:08:06

---

Although it's perfectly fine to have your own opinion about a movie, I believe that you should re-watch this movie when you're much older. Mind you, this is no attack to your young age, but there are things that you haven't picked up from this movie. There is an underlying subtext to the film and, in all honesty, I don't believe you picked up on it simply because of your lack of experiences in life. This is a film that carries much more meaning than just punches and kicks. There's a reason behind each fight. Not just to get closer to Scott's goal, being Ramona's boyfriend, but much more. Without wanting to give too much of the subtext, this is, beneath the video game references and fighting, a coming-of-age movie.

In all due respect,
jekiwi

Jack
Posts: 9

Re: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (PG-13) D+
Reply #2 on : Fri August 13, 2010, 14:01:55

---

Sometimes when you have to review a movie you can switch off and enjoy it. If you really are a kid then I think you're taking the movie reviewing a bit too seriously. If you honestly thought that the fight scenes were boring and that they needed to be cut then you're a pretty closed off kid who can't feel much for emotion. Scott Pilgrim is what every man wants to be. A guy who can be heroic and fight for his woman. Which since you're a kid you wouldn't understand.

raab
Posts: 9

Re: The Kid Critic
Reply #1 on : Thu August 12, 2010, 21:17:36

---

Guess he didnt read the books, or grow up on games. Im glad i dont trust this kid with what movies i see

The first two "Step Up" films ('06, '08) were surprisingly popular with movie goers, grossing a combined worldwide total of $262 million dollars. This third edition takes the series to a whole new dimension. But will it pay off?

"Step Up 3" (which I saw in 3D and therefore is called "Step Up 3D") is a combination of "Fame", "High School Musical" and "The Karate Kid", with a little "Glee" thrown in. Just take away the singing and Kung Fu and replace it with dancing.

The plot is nothing new: There's the college freshman who's parents want him to be an engineer, but he wants to dance. His name is Moose and he joins-up with Luke, who owns a studio where his team of dancers practice and live. The Pirates, which they call themselves, need to win the big dance competition to pay-off the bank or they'll lose the studio. And there's the mysterious girl who joins the group and becomes Luke's girlfriend. But is she who she says she is?

Oh, and Moose has a best friend (Disney Channel's Alyson Stoner). They're "just friends", though everybody but them know they really like each other.

The biggest problem with "Step Up 3D" is the 3D. The dance scenes (which make up most of the film) are extremely in your face, to the point where it gets very creepy. And there are way too many cheap 3D gimmicks, having objects flying at the screen just to show off the 3D. We hardly ever have things flying directly at us in real-life 3D so why do filmmakers do it in movies? I'm more convinced than ever that 3D was made for animated and fantasy films, not for live-action films.

There's nothing new of original in "SU3D". The script is pretty corny and most of the performances are weak. Stoner (who I met a few years ago) gives the best performance because she's an actor playing a dancer while the rest of the cast is made up of dancers trying to be actors.

However, the dancers are very good at what they do and most of the dance scenes are great to watch. And I'm sure I would have enjoyed them even more in 2D.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Step Up 3D" gets a C. It's rated PG-13 for some brief language, but there's really nothing for parents to worry about.

If there's another "Step Up" film in two years it can't be made in 4D, so maybe it'll just be a regular film. And maybe the writers will step-it-up with a better script.

Will Ferrell has been known to do some wacky things in his movies. And his performance in the "The Other Guys" is no exception.

Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg star as NYC detectives, and partners, who are at the bottom of their department. Ferrell's character, Allen, doesn't like being on the street where the action is and Wahlberg's Terry loves action, but is being punished because he once shot a famous sports star (I don't want to give too much away).

After the two top detectives in the department can no longer do their jobs, Allen and Terry decide to step-it-up and prove to everyone that they can be heroes by solving the big case.

In all Will Ferrell comedies, a lot of jokes and gags are thrown at the audience. Some work and some don't. The good news is most of them in "The Other Guys" work. The movie is unpredictable and very funny. The dialogue is clever and there are some classic scenes and situations.

You know Ferrell's going to get laughs but the big surprise is Wahlberg who is great in his first starring role in a comedy. And the rest of the cast fits right in. Samuel L. Jackson, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Michael Keaton and Eva Mendes are all part of the supporting cast and they all do a good job playing their slightly weird characters. In fact there really isn't a normal character in the entire movie.

One of the problems with the film is that it's a bit too long (1:50) and some of the scenes drag-on. A final edit would have helped.

"The Other Guys" is rated PG-13 for action-violence, adult language and subject matter. It's appropriate for the teen and above crowd. Fans of Ferrell and cop buddy films won't be disappointed.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "The Other Guys" gets a B. It's the funniest movie of the summer, in a year without a lot of summer comedies.

Ferrell next plays the voice of the title character in Dreamwork's animated, "Megamind." Let's hope he can go 2 for 2 in 2010, but, unfortunately, "Megamind" doesn't look too promising.

It was last December when I first saw the trailer for "Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore". After watching that trailer several times over the past 7-months I really didn't want to see the movie. After seeing the movie I wish I had followed my  instincts.

The story, and it's pretty lame, involves a police dog named Diggs, who loses his job because he doesn't follow orders, and gets sent to a kennel. But there he gets an offer to join an elite group of K-9 agents whose mission is to prevent the evil (and quite creepy) cat, Kitty Galore, from taking over the world.

Diggs and the other dogs have to work together with some good cats, but there's also a wisecracking pigeon and a mouse in the cast, and they all talk, with animated mouths.

This is actually a sequel to the first "Cats and Dogs", which came out in 2001, got a lot of good reviews, and made nearly $100-million dollars. 

But there are so many problems with this film: The set-up - animal having to save the world - we've seen it all before. Funny? There isn't a single good laugh in the entire movie. The 3-D (yes, they wasted 3-D on this) is awful.

There are some major Hollywood actors in "Cats and Dogs". Chris O'Donnell plays Diggs' owner and Bette Midler, James Marsden, Nick Nolte, Christina Applegate and Neil Patrick Harris voice the main animal characters, but it doesn't matter. The story is awful, the dialogue is awful and at times even the mouths and the voices don't match-up.

"Cats and Dogs" is rated PG for some very mild action. There were some very young kids, maybe 5 or 6, sitting behind me in the theater and when they weren't talking, they were laughing a little. This may be the age group that could enjoy this film. For anyone older, don't bother.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" gets an F. It's clearly the worst movie of the summer and will be in contention for Worst Film of the Year honors.

However, before the movie, Warner Brothers unveiled the first of three new Looney Tunes shorts, featuring the Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote. It's a tribute to the old cartoon, but updated in CGI animation. The next two will be out later this year, and there's a new show set for the fall on Cartoon Network.

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *

Resident01
Posts: 3

Re: Movie Reviews
Reply #3 on : Sat August 14, 2010, 00:33:35

---

I found this film to be absolutely terrible. I do have to correct you on a small detail though. The first film received fairly negative reviews when it was released, There were very few positive comments about it. What did you think of the new Road Runner short?

Noah
Posts: 3

I think it looks cool!
Reply #2 on : Thu August 05, 2010, 14:51:54

---

I don`t argree . I thought it looked cool and nice and the 3-D efeects very cool . It looks funny , and nice Im seeing it! Thanks for the review , though .

P.s I sad Hoodiwnked Too did not come out , maybe next year it will.

Nate
Posts: 3

Re: The Kid Critic
Reply #1 on : Sat July 31, 2010, 21:14:07

---

I completely disagree with this movie's rating. I just watched the first Cats and Dogs movie before seeing this one because I had never heard of it and didn't want to jump into the sequel. After watching the second, I must say it was MUCH better than the first. We had no problems with sound/video synchronization and my family and I found the movie very funny. The plot wasn't over complicated or necessarily original but hey, it's a kid's movie, not many are. There was a lot of play off of other movies which might have kept it interesting for adults much like the Shrek movies do (except a lot cleaner). My 5 and 7 year old loved it. And the fact is, if you're 11, you just might not get it. After 30 years of watching movies, especially kid movies, I give this no lower than a B.

Angelina Jolie has played a wide variety of characters in her movie career - from Lara Croft to Mrs. Smith to the Tigress in the animated hit "Kung Fu Panda". But her latest role may be the toughest of them all, because she may be a Russian spy. Or maybe not.

That's the premise of "Salt". At the start of the film Evelyn Salt is a CIA agent, with an ordinary life, a husband and a dog. But then a Russian defector walks into CIA Headquarters in Washington D.C. and tells everyone of a plot to assassinate the Russian President who's in NYC to attend the funeral of the Vice President of the United States.

The man says the person who will do the killing is a Russian spy named...Evelyn Salt. Then the craziness begins. I really can't tell much more of the plot without giving anything away.

There are a lot of twists and turns in the script, but, after seeing "Inception", any movie is easier to follow than that. Unfortunately the trailer gives away a little too much of the plot.

"Salt" is pretty short, only an hour and forty minutes, but there are no lulls in the action so every minute is fun to watch. The action scenes, and there are plenty of them, are very entertaining, starting with a chase scene that was shot near my hometown. I got to see Angelina do some of her stunts in that scene live when it was filmed last year. And the scene comes out great on the big screen. Everyone in the theater (myself included) applauded after the chase was over.

Jolie gives a believable performance, and keeps you guessing as to whether she good or bad right to the end. And she does a great job in all of the fighting scenes. Liev Schreiber plays her boss at the CIA. He's very good as well, as is the supporting cast.

One of the few negative things about the film is that there are too many flashback scenes. They break-up the flow. Fortunately most of the surprise moments happen in present day.

"Salt" is rated PG-13 for loads of action violence and some strong language. It's o.k. for older kids who are use to seeing people getting shot in movies. But "Salt" is mainly meant for adult spy/action fans. If you like the James Bond and Bourne movies, and especially if you're an Angelina fan, you'll love it.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Salt" gets a B+. It's now in the running with "Iron Man 2", "The A-Team" and "Knight and Day" for Best Action Film of the summer.

And, as promised (on Twitter this week), I got through my entire review without one "salt" pun. I bet I'm one of the few critics in America who can say that.

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *

jeffrey
Posts: 6

Salt
Reply #6 on : Wed August 18, 2010, 12:50:21

---

While Salt had good action sequences, there were many flaws in the plot.
One of the biggest flaws in this movie was the lack of character development. There is no one character in this movie you are able to relate to or really learn about. You never develop a relationship with Angelina Jolie's character and you end up not caring about her struggle for what appears to be "revenge".
This leads me into my next problem with the movie. The plot makes absolutely no sense. I was able to understand "Inception", but this just made no sense. It's not a "mind-bending" movie like Inception, it just was ridiculous. Some questions where explained later in the movie, but the whole theme of the of the movie was never explained.
It's hard to say Angelina Jolie's performance was good when there was only about 3 scenes she actually acted in.

Chris Fredda
Posts: 6

"Action" shouldn't mean "illogical"
Reply #5 on : Mon August 16, 2010, 18:23:13

---

I agree that this film is wall-to-wall action, but that ends up being a crutch that they rely on rather than focusing on writing or story. The flashbacks you hated so much were just awkward exposition being shoehorned into a plot that confuses complexity with ingenuity. What it comes down to is that this movie just didn't make sense, and I don't mean that the story wasn't simple to follow. It was that the characters didn't act according to their motivations or common sense, but to what the director or writer thought would look cool for a moment on screen.

As an example, I cite the scene where Salt is headed into the church, precisely where everyone is expecting her to go. She has blueprints and schematics, has planned a perfect route through hidden passages to bypass all of the security (which is ample and includes her highly-trained CIA buddies who know her face personally). So what does she do? Instead of just going right to her secret entrance, she decides to walk around directly across the street from the church for a bit so that she's within sight of the people actively looking for her while she doesn't so much as wear a hat or glasses. She didn't need to be there, it was out of her way, and it put her whole plan at risk for no reason other than to give Liev a moment to glimpse her and then...oh, no, maybe that WASN'T her. That was it, a cheap scare and simply bad writing.

The action was okay, but you need a better, more sensical plot to hang it on. If you just want good action, you can watch an Ultimate Fighting video. A good film requires something more between the set pieces.

Shannon H.
Posts: 6

Re: The Kid Critic
Reply #4 on : Mon August 02, 2010, 17:47:14

---

Just went to see this movie this afternoon. A-M-A-Z-I-N-G!!! Jolie gives a stupendous performance as Evelyn Salt. I went to see this with my friends and both of them agree with me that a sequel should be made (because of the cliff-hanger ending). Once it comes out on DVD, I am going to buy it for sure!!!

thomas
Posts: 6

awesome
Reply #3 on : Fri July 30, 2010, 14:40:37

---

i want to see this now. thanks!

anonymous
Posts: 6

Re: The Kid Critic
Reply #2 on : Thu July 22, 2010, 13:16:34

---

Thanks so Much!! I have been dying to see 'Salt' ever since Angelina Jolie came to Albany. Your review wants me to see it even more! Thank you for giving this action/thriller movie an AWESOME grade!- Shannon H.

mark
Posts: 6

best action film of summer
Reply #1 on : Thu July 22, 2010, 12:47:18

---

at least I worked on 2 of them!!!!

Another family movie based on a popular children's book series is out in theaters. This one doesn't involve wizards or talking animals or wimpy kids. Just a little girl with a lot of spirit.

"Ramona and Beezus" in mainly taken from two on Beverly Cleary's novels - "Ramona and her Father" and "Beezus and Ramona". Ramona is a nine year old girl (played by newcomer Joey King). Ramona has a huge imagination and loads of energy, but sometimes messing things up. She has a big sister, Beezus (Disney Channel's Selena Gomez), who gets annoyed with Ramona at times, but still loves her.

Their father (John Corbett) has lost his job and so he wants to spend more time with his kids during his time off. There are other issues the family has to deal with as well, including the possibility of having to sell their house, some new relationships, and the death of a family pet. I wasn't expecting some of these serious subplots.

But through it all, everyone comes to realize that even if Ramona is a little "odd", she's still very special.

I was expecting "Ramona and Beezus" to be predictable, and it is, but that doesn't mean it's not worth seeing. In fact it's much more enjoyable than many of this year's big summer blockbusters. You really care for these characters.

The acting is solid. Along with King, Gomez (who isn't in the movie as much as you think, though her fans won't be disappointed) and Corbett, there's Josh Duhmahel ("Transformers") and "Grey Anatomy's Sandra Oh. 

The special effects in the film are kinda cheesy - but they're supposed to be. They're used to show Ramona's imagination and are a fun part of the story.

"Ramona and Beezus" is rated G. There is some material that young ones won't understand, but the film is good for all ages. Kids will be like following Ramona and her adventures and parents will appreciate that it's a "feel good" film, with some nice messages.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Ramona and Beezus" gets a B, which is a higher grade than I thought I'd be handing-out. And you can add it to the list of quality family films of 2010, which also includes "Tooth Fairy" and "Marmaduke".

The first thing I need to say about "Inception" is that it's not for kids. And not because of bad language or extreme violence or adult subject matter. It's because the movie is very complicated to follow, and kids (myself included) and probably many adults, just won't get it.

Director Christopher Nolan's previous film - "The Dark Knight" worked for everybody. Movie fans from 8 to 88 enjoyed his twist on the Batman story. Trust me, there will be no Leonardo DiCaprio action figures at Walmart promoting "Inception". This story, of a man who runs a business that gets into people's dreams to steal their secrets, will appeal to only a certain group of movie-goers, who love fantasy, sci-fi, mysteries filled with special effects, flashbacks, flash-forwards and everything in between.

It's tricky for me to review a film like this. It's very cool to look at. There are loads of scenes that are amazing, visually. And the soundtrack is great. Composer Hans Zimmer does an amazing job, especially since he wrote the score without seeing one frame of the film.

However, one of my major pet-peeves with films is when conversations among characters are used to explain what's going on. And this movie takes that TO THE EXTREME! The Ellen Page character is only in the film so that she can ask questions and then get answers to help the audience follow the plot. Without her, no one, not even Christopher Nolan, could make sense of things.

And, believe it or not, even though most of the time it's impossible to know what's going one, the ending is very predictable.

Now, if you're planning on seeing "Inception" here are some easy-to-follow suggestions. I call them "LCJ's Mind-Blowing Inception Tips":

1) Get a good night's sleep before watching this movie (and hopefully no one will break into your dream and steal something).

2) Go into the theater with a clear mind. You can't be thinking about a bad day at work or where you're going to eat after the movie.

3) Be ready to pay close attention to everything. No distractions.

And, finally, GOOD LUCK!

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "Inception", gets a C.

I know there are a lot of critics and a lot of regular people who love this film. And for them - congratulations. For me, it's not a bad dream, just a really weird one.    

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *

Showing comments 1 to 10 of 16 | Next | Last

will
Posts: 17

predictable ending?
Reply #16 on : Wed August 18, 2010, 02:26:20

---

Perhaps you're just not thinking about it enough :P

Anyone who claims to have all the answers is kidding themselves, especially the first viewing. The film is fun because it's left to interpret. There are no right or wrong answers. Lastly, this movie was never intended for your age bracket, but I understand you have a job to do or something.

Tim
Posts: 17

C
Reply #15 on : Tue August 17, 2010, 22:48:21

---

To see that Salt, a diabolical movie in which there are twists upon twists, gets a better rating than this film is absurd. First off, the action in this film is unbelievable. Much like The Matrix revolutionized the way action films can be done, so does Inception. The plot is as confusing as you make it out to be, and of course an eleven year old will not have the slightest idea of what is going on. It's just as good as The Dark Knight, if not better, and your reviews no longer have any credibility in my mind.

Chris Fredda
Posts: 17

Ellen Page
Reply #14 on : Mon August 16, 2010, 18:30:51

---

Sure, Ellen Page is the audience surrogate, but most films of even moderate complexity have one. Especially given the mammoth budget that a film like this requires, you can't expect to leave everything up to the audience to just figure out since you so clearly demonstrated that even with all of the help that Christopher Nolan gives you, you still didn't get it. It was done subtly and doesn't bother me nearly as much as a movie like "Salt" which has lengthy scenes (such as the one in the bunker at the end) where characters basically give monologues about their motivations and history and secret plans simply because the filmmakers couldn't think of a better way to get out those convoluted ideas.

But I think Inception was fairly straight-forward and that Christopher Nolan placed enough ambiguity in the script for interpretation while still laying a guideline of what it is he wants your conclusion to be. But clearly Inception appeals to more than the group you dismissively referred to, which makes me think that maybe you weren't looking past the special effects and sci-fi elements.

Ano
Posts: 17

Re: Inception (PG-13) C
Reply #13 on : Fri August 13, 2010, 01:32:37

---

I don't agree at all that it was confusing. I thought it was refreshing to see a movie that really made you think, as opposed to something like Salt.
If your idea of a good movie is a predictable, easy-to-follow story line, then your review is spot on.

Aidan
Posts: 17

Re: Inception (PG-13) C
Reply #12 on : Thu August 12, 2010, 14:46:28

---

This film is not for kids. I got most of the film. Little bits i didnt get. Visually stunning and left me with a WOW feeling after,

anonymous
Posts: 17

Re: Movie Reviews
Reply #11 on : Thu August 12, 2010, 13:01:34

---

I do not know how you could give this film the same rating as twilight. You have much to learn if cannot find this film extremely interesting and visually arresting. The plot holds together very well through out the duration and explains the highly complex concept perfectly. It only takes a brief overview of the facts explained in the film to become aware of how everything in the film made sense. All of Nolans films deserve second viewings. I know you are young but this film is leagues ahead of twilight.

anonymous
Posts: 17

Re: Movie Reviews
Reply #10 on : Mon August 02, 2010, 11:04:13

---

I disagree.

Mark
Posts: 17

Re: Movie Reviews
Reply #9 on : Sun August 01, 2010, 01:40:09

---

Your reviews are insightful, but all this goes to say is that it's not a film for kids, which we knew. To count the fact that there won't be a Dicaprio action figure tie-in against it is a tad silly, but otherwise, nicely written, once again.

anonymous
Posts: 17

p.s
Reply #8 on : Sat July 24, 2010, 22:47:43

---

dnt b so harsh with ur ratings

anonymous
Posts: 17

Re: The Kid Critic
Reply #7 on : Sat July 24, 2010, 22:45:39

---

u can never give movies any credit!!!!!!!!!!!

Showing comments 1 to 10 of 16 | Next | Last

The first time we saw a "Sorcerer's Apprentice" from the Disney studio he was Mickey Mouse, wearing what has become one of the most famous and recognizable hats in movie history. Now, exactly 70 years later, the character is back, but without the hat or mouse ears.

In this new, live-action version, the apprentice, named Dave, is played by Jay Baruchel. But we first meet Dave as a grade school student. While on a field trip he meets Balthazar Blake, one of three master sorcerer's who learned under the great Merlin. Balthazar realizes that Dave will be a great sorcerer someday. 

10 years later, Balthazar recruits Dave to help him when an evil wizard named Horvath returns to Earth with a plan to take-over Manhattan. It's a good vs. evil battle to the finish. And there's also a love story, with Dave getting together with the girl he had a crush on in grade school.

Overall, the best way to describe "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" is predictable. There are very few surprises in the main story, the love story, or the dialogue. Some of the special effects are good and the action scenes, especially a car chase, are well done.

Director Jon Tuterltaub, who also directed the "National Treasure" films, keeps the story moving.  He does a great job with the best scene in the film - when Dave tries to use his magic to clean-up the workshop. Sound familiar? The mops come to life and the water gets out of control - the same problem Mickey had 70-years ago. It's a very clever tribute to the "Fantasia" short.

The performances are solid: Cage keeps it low-key and Baruchel is pretty believable as a guy who suddenly discovers he has all these magical powers. Those two have some nice scenes together. Alfred Molina plays Horvath. He was also in "Prince of Persia", the other Disney/Jerry Bruckheimer film from this summer. At least he doesn't kiss and ostrich this time.

The problem with "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" is that it just isn't exciting enough. It's rated PG for some fantasy action violence. It's appropriate for kids 8 and up, who may enjoy it and some adults may enjoy it as well, but there are better choices out in theaters right now for both kids and parents.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" gets a C+.

One of the big winners in Hollywood so far this year is Baruchel, who was also the voice of Hiccup in "How to Train Your Dragon." He is a young star on the rise.

Write a comment

• Required fields are marked with *.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *

CC
Posts: 1

Sorcerer's Apprentice
Reply #1 on : Sat July 31, 2010, 11:35:28

---

I sort of agree with you on this review. I think this movie was very exciting, with tons of action scenes and great acting. I do agree that Jay Baruchel is a great actor and this is the first film i saw with Nicholas Cage where we played a live action character. He was also excellent. Alfred Molina was also great, and yes he was better in this than prince of persia. I rate this movie more on the lines of B+.