411 Movies Roundtable: January 2009 (Part 2)

Posted by Owain J. Brimfield on 01.07.2009

The 411 staff continues their discussion of the upcoming big releases in January!

Be sure to check out PART ONE if you missed it!

Coming Attractions

JANUARY 9TH

Bride Wars
Studio: Fox 2000
Directed by: Gary Winick
Starring: Kate Hudson, Anne Hathaway, Candice Bergen
The plot: Two best friends (Hudson and Hathaway) become rivals when a clerical error results in their respective weddings being held at the same place... on the same day.

Lealos: When the wife and I saw this trailer, she immediately became interested. This movie is right up her alley, as well as that of many other women. It is also a movie that makes most men groan with the unbearable pain that they will be made watch this movie with said partner. I am one of the "lucky ones." My wife rarely makes me watch these movies with her and, on the times she wants to see them in a theater, will watch it while I am at work. Life is good. I remember a time when I dated a girl who made me go see Runaway Bride with her. I have a friend who will still not let me live down the fact I said it was "not that bad." Memories. Uh, Bride Wars is a chick flick directed by the guy who gave us 13 Going on 30, and starring the chick from The Princess Diaries and the ex-wife of the lead singer of The Black Crowes... and Murphy Brown. Women will flock to it and men will wish they were me.

Furious: Chick flick!

Gustafson: It was bound to happen. Gentlemen, we knew this day was coming. The day when every nightmare, every fear, all our anxiety over wedding movies, sappy storylines, chick-flick actresses would come together in one movie. THIS IS THAT MOVIE! All we can do is sit in our little boats and try to ride out the storm. But can I cut in and say that I find it extremely funny that the two leads here are both divorced?

Kristopowitz: This doesn't look too bad, as both Hudson and Hathaway are fine comic actors. But, after watching endless hours of shows like "Bridezilla" and whatever the heck that other show is on the We network and those other ones (TLC?), are women, the obvious target audience, going to show up? Maybe. I guess it depends on the advertising.

Tym: Kate Hudson is neither here nor there for me in terms of star appeal. Anne Hathaway, however, is proving to be a heavy-hitter given the accolades garnered from her role in Rachel Getting Married. This looks like a fun little flick that has more teeth than the previews let on, and there's no fault in Hathaway picking a role she can have some fun with after the more serious role I just mentioned. Still, a one-dollar Redbox rental seems to be in the cards for this release.

Chamberlain: Hi, I'm a single guy in my twenties. There is no way I'll be seeing this movie.

Thomas: Oh, please. I'm sorry, I love Anne Hathaway, and as much as she's been pissing her career away I still have hope for Kate Hudson to replicate her Almost Famous level performance. This… will not be it. It looks really just stupid as hell and I have zero interest. What was the last wedding rom-com that didn't suck? Anyone?

Brimfield: Isn't it odd how much like Jennifer Lopez they've made Kate Hudson look here? That is perhaps the only interesting thing I could think of when it comes to this film.

The Unborn
Studio: Rogue Pictures
Directed by: David S. Goyer
Starring: Odette Yustman, Gary Oldman, Cam Gigandet
The plot: Haunted by strange dreams and recurring ghostly visions, Casey Beldon (Yustman) turns to a spiritual advisor (Oldman) for help. Together, they learn that Casey had a twin brother who never made it to term, and that her intended sibling is tied to a curse that requires Casey's death in order to manifest itself in our world.

Lealos: January is setting up to be the month of bad horror movies. This specific horror movie has me interested. It is a take on The Exorcist where a girl's twin brother died before birth and now she finds herself haunted by a ghostly young boy who tells her "he wants to be born now." The trailer is all kinds of freaky, but Mirrors had some freaky trailers too and didn't set the world on fire. The question remains, will this be scary or will it suck? I like the casting of Gary Oldman as the priest brought in to do the exorcism and David S. Goyer is capable of great stories (Batman Begins, Blade II) and lackluster ones (Jumper, The Crow: City of Angels). I won't get my hopes up but wouldn't it be cool if it turned out to be scary?

Furious: Goyer is a fine writer but he's totally unproven as a director falling flat on his face with Blade: Trinity. So this gets dumped in January where it can't do much harm. It sounds like it has a little potential but nothing to get excited about just yet.

Gustafson: This feels like the movie that they forgot to release last year, found it in a pile of stuff, and said, "Hey! Let's see what happens." Movies in January are like going to Denny's. A little bit of everything, but don't get your hopes up. Probably good for 20 million or so, but will lose out to My Bloody Valentine 3-D

Kristopowitz: I don't know about this. Gary Oldman can act in anything, play any part, and somehow excel at it, but this is David Goyer, "the co-writer of The Dark Knight," who hasn't exactly had the best track record when it comes to actual directing (Blade: Trinity, The Invisible, etc). And hasn't this pseudo Japanese horror thing run its course by now? I mean, yeah, this is an "original" screenplay and all, but come on. How is this likely to be any different than One Missed Call?

Tym: Here's hoping the previews are a good indicator of the potential creepiness of this movie. I look forward to giving this a chance in the theater this weekend and pray that a script from David Goyer and acting from Gary Oldman raise this above other lackluster horror efforts.

Chamberlain: Hey, that's the hot girl from Cloverfield! And that's the extent of my interest.

Thomas: I hate PG-13 horror as general rule, although this at least looks appropriately creepy. I don't expect much from it and the plot is a pretty generic cookie-cutter horror formula, but the trailer gives me hope it might be more than that. And Gary Oldman rarely (sometimes, but rarely) lets himself be cast in bad films.

Brimfield: As much as Gary Oldman = win and can make any bad film passable, this looks intensely mediocre.

JANUARY 16TH

My Bloody Valentine 3D
Studio: Lionsgate
Directed by: Patrick Lussier
Starring: Jensen Ackles, Jaime King
The plot: Tom (Ackles) returns to his hometown on the tenth anniversary of the Valentine's night massacre that claimed the lives of 22 people. And when another horrific event occurs soon after Tom's appearance, he finds himself suspected of the deadly acts.

Lealos: This movie is getting the same kind of press that Punisher: War Zone got upon its release. It is nothing that will set the world on fire, but I have heard it is a whole ton of fun. I also heard you really need to see it in 3-D to enjoy in full. Here are a few tidbits I heard about the movie. (1) There are 22 people killed by the slasher killer in the prologue alone. (2) Star Jensen Ackles is, of course, Dean from the hit television show Supernatural and I am very happy to see what he is doing in his downtime compared to his on screen brother Jared Padalecki (Christmas Cottage). Come on Jared, stick with what brought ya! (3) Twenty years ago, co-star Tom Atkins starred in Maniac Cop. Here is someone paying back the genre that made him. In a month of seemingly bad horror movies, here is one that might actually turn out to be quite fun for slasher fans.

Furious: Say, a horror remake! I'm beginning to run out of ways to say that I'm not particularly interested in a film that was originally a hit in the 80's. I say "hit" but My Bloody Valentine wasn't even a hit. Now they're just re-making any old crap.

Gustafson: Speaking of! I've actually been hearing some buzz on this one. It's made a couple of appearances at some film festivals and garnered some positive reviews. I'm not the biggest horror genre fan, but I can see why this would be a decent draw. I'm still waiting for the adult film industry to embrace 3-D technology. (Thinks about it...) Then again, maybe not.

Kristopowitz: I absolutely love the commercial for this movie (the bit where the audience is shown cowering. It reminds me of that Day of the Dead commercial with the zombie in the theatre). And the early buzz sounds good. People keep calling it a "throwback" to the 1980's. I just hope that it doesn't wimp out on us. It's about time the world had a good, solid, incredibly violent slasher movie in 3-D.

Tym: This should make a decent date/horror film. While 3-D is a gimmick that has never truly sat well with yours truly (Friday the 13th Part 3 in 3-D notwithstanding), if they can pull off the promise of the "axe flying right at the viewer's head" shot shown in the teasers, it can't be all that bad, right?

Chamberlain: You know, I need to catch up on my Supernatural. Jensen Ackles is cool on that show.

Thomas: Sorry, I hate the 3-D trend, and the trailer for this just looks silly. I've got a couple "sneak peek" footage shots that haven't helped my opinion of it any. Lionsgate gets fully behind this, but they shit-canned Midnight Meat Train? God, I hate studios sometimes.

Brimfield: It's interesting to see how the concept of 3D cinema is evolving since it was re-introduced to the mainstream. I think this will probably be on a par with Journey to the Centre of the Earth quality-wise, though.

Notorious
Studio: Fox Searchlight
Directed by: George Tillman Jr.
Starring: Jamal Woolard, Anthony Mackie, Derek Luke
The plot: A chronicle of Christopher Wallace's (Woolard) rise from the streets of Brooklyn to become Notorious B.I.G., one of biggest and best rappers of the 1990s, under the tutelage of mentor/producer Sean Combs (Luke).

Lealos: Will this biopic be as good as 8 Mile or Hustle & Flow? The trailers seem like they are starting from his younger days, barely staying out of jail and then moving on to his relationship with Sean Combs and his rise to stardom. The story is an interesting premise and the actor involved, newcomer Jamal Woolard, looks like he can install BIG with the humanity needed for a picture like this. I don't think it will be as good as the two movies I mentioned above, but it is intriguing.

Furious: While I spend a great amount of my time on these roundtables bashing Fox and pointing out their faults as a studio Fox Searchlight has done the opposite. Its produced good films based on unique scripts and has even had profitable movies because of that. Biopics are usually good fare if they hire the right actor to play the main character. I don't know Jamal Woolard at all so it's anyone's guess as to whether he'll do a bang up job as Biggie. I hope he does it justice because this rivalry is celebrity gangsta-ism at its best.

Gustafson: applaud the marketing and timing of this film. Planned or not. This is going to be your number one film for the weekend. Laugh at me now, but see me later. Is it going to be a HUGE open. No, but with the Inauguration right around the same weekend, this is going to get a nice bump. As for the movie itself, it looks pretty harmless. It's going to bring up the unsolved case, which seems to be dusted off every few years to sell some "Best of..." Cd's. Man, when was the last time I bought one of those? Anyway, for those interested, I was living out in Cali at the time so that made me a Pac fan in the whole East/West thing. It wasn't till I moved back to Maryland that I got into Biggie. And if you don't know... now you know!

Kristopowitz: I don't know much about this movie, but I'm just going to venture a guess and say that it'll probably be much better than it has any right to be. Derek Luke hasn't really disappointed yet, so, again, this could be pretty decent.

Tym: I find the story of Notorious B.I.G. to be a bit fascinating, but it remains to be seen how factual this interpretation will be. The man definitely was larger than life (no disrespect intended) and a proper account of his rise and fall could be a nice bit of filmmaking.

Chamberlain: Man, Combs has been around a long time! Why didn't he just play himself? Is this the same movie Stallone wanted to do for a while, about the B.I.G. guy's murder?

Thomas: Music biopics either kick ass or they suck… there's rarely anything in-between. Which will this be? I'm hoping for not suck, and I've heard good things about Woolard's performance, so we'll see how it goes. It's one I'm very intrigued about, though with obvious reservations.

Brimfield: This couldn't be further from my comfort zone. Unless it co-starred a giant spider. Actually come to think of it, that might be a pretty sweet buddy movie.

Defiance
Studio: Paramount
Directed by: Edward Zwick
Starring: Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber, Jamie Bell
The plot: In 1941, a group of Jewish brothers organize the largest armed rescue of Jews during the Holocaust.

Lealos: On Christmas Day, the director of The Usual Suspects (Bryan Singer) and "The Man Formerly Known as the Greatest Actor in the World" (Tom Cruise) brought us a movie about a man who set out to kill Hitler during World War II. Three weeks later, the director who brought us Glory and Blood Diamond (Edward Zwick) and the new James Bond (Daniel Craig) bring us another Hitler era flick. This one is about three Jewish brothers who join the Russian resistance fighters and mount the largest rescue mission of Jews during the Holocaust. Which WWII movie will come out better here? I think it might be Defiance. The trailer makes it appear very similar to Braveheart in the action sequences and tone. The three leads are spectacular, as Craig is joined by the always awesome Liev Schreiber and the up-and-coming Jamie Bell. This one looks exciting and might be good enough to take the weekend box office.

Furious: I like Zwick. He's been quite the director since getting a hit with Glory in 1989. Excellent movie if you've never seen it. He gradually got colder during the 90's culminating in the mediocre The Siege. Of course he came back with The Last Samurai and Blood Diamond and now he's a Hollywood commodity again. Daniel Craig is great if he's committed to his subject matter (unlike The Golden Compass for example) but this does seem up his alley. I'm sufficiently interested that it's my pick of the month.

Gustafson: I'm a big history fan so I'll be seeing this...but I don't know how many other people will. With Valkyrie doing well, you can't expect too much. Are audiences going to go back for seconds when it comes to films dealing with Nazis? The cast looks great, strong script, and the few reviews I've read look positive. Bad timing is going to keep this film from getting the attention it deserves.

Kristopowitz: I like the trailer, I like the actors, and it's always cool to see Nazis exploding and whatnot. But some of the early reviews I've read for this pseudo Oscar contender have not been good. "Pandering" is the word I keep seeing. There's certainly nothing wrong with doing that, but, for a prestige picture ad campaign, that can't be good.

Tym: Craig and Schreiber could combine to present a compelling story, but something here just seems a little off to me. I just don't fully trust it (or my ten bucks) to deliver.

Chamberlain: You know who's in this movie? Alexa Davalos. As all fans of Angel know, she is worth the price of admission all by herself.

Thomas: More Nazi fun to follow on the backs of the many films that came out in December! I can't help but be sucked in by this and I'm seeing it soon. Daniel Craig needs that critical or commercial hit to show he's not just James Bond, and this could well be it, especially with the quality cast and crew behind it.

Brimfield: I don't think this will be rivaling Munich for "best movie featuring Jews kicking ass", but it should be decently entertaining, especially with some interesting names in the cast.

Hotel for Dogs
Studio: Paramount
Directed by: Thor Freudenthal
Starring: Emma Roberts, Jake T. Austin, Lisa Kudrow, Kevin Dillon
The plot: Orphaned teens Andi (Roberts) and Bruce (Austin) are sent to live with their aunt, which is just fine with the kids until they meet a stray dog who needs their help. Since their aunt is allergic to dogs, the siblings decide to turn a nearby abandoned house into a canine hostel. But can they kept their secret under wraps as more and more four-legged guests arrive?

Lealos: The cute family movie of January. A group of kids, led by seventeen year old Emma Roberts, make it their life mission to rescue stray dogs and give them a place to live in an abandoned house. Soon it is overrun and hijinks ensue. Nice cast with Don Cheadle, Lisa Kudrow and Kevin Dillon but this is just for the little ones.

Furious: Say Chad Webb…you wanted more movies about dogs right? I'm going to overlook the whole premise and go right into the awesome name of the director. Thor Freudenthal? WOO! This is his feature film debut and there's very little to recommend it on… apart from Kevin Dillon. Any Johnny Drama fans are happy this guy is getting work. VICTORY!

Gustafson: We can thank Beverly Hills Chihuahua for this! BUT... watch out for this one. It has sleeper hit written all over it. You've got a kid friendly movie in a month where kid movies are light. It's cold outside and rowdy kids inside, so what to do, what to do? No sense in trying to dissect this movie and just accept it for what it is. Family entertainment.

Kristopowitz: This looks both incredibly stupid and incredibly watchable all at the same time. I'm a sucker for these types of broad family comedy type movies. And it's got cute dogs in it. How can you really hate that?

Tym: Hopefully the kiddies enjoy this one. And what the hell happened to Lisa Kudrow? I actually liked her Phoebe character on Friends, and some of her independent departures from the role of ditzy blonde as well. I understand wanting to make family-friendly fare based on good intentions and a potential box office score, but think she is capable of much more.

Chamberlain: No.

Thomas: Hell no. HELL. NO. I pass.

Brimfield: Why on earth is a man named Thor directing a film like this? He should be helming a film called something like Viking Bloodlust II: Odin's Revenge. Now that I'd pay to see.

Paul Blart: Mall Cop
Studio: Sony Pictures
Directed by: Steve Carr
Starring: Kevin James, Keir O'Donnell
The plot: When a shopping mall is overtaken by a gang of organized crooks, it's up to the a mild-mannered security guard (James) to save the day.

Lealos: Sue me, but this looks funny. It's like Die Hard, but with an out of shape mall cop. It will probably be low brow humor with all the jokes centered around Kevin James' waist, but I can live with that. Ah, Happy Madison Productions - that explains a lot. The biggest downfall is not the garbage level humor on display, it is the director of worthless junk, Steve Carr. Here is his output: Dr. Doolittle 2, Daddy Day Care, Rebound, Are We Done Yet? Want more interesting trivia? He is tapped to direct the Iron Fist movie. Who is Iron Fist, you ask? He ain't no comedy character.

Furious: It's a chance for Kevin James to force his way into the comedy hierarchy. All you need is a hit and you're one step closer to standing side by side with Steve Carell, Will Ferrell and Jack Black. As a bonus this film also contains BAS RUTTEN! I'm also sold on that alone.

Gustafson: How did this get a theatrical release? I should see this for $1 at the Red Box when I'm grocery shopping. I mean, this has DTV (That's Direct To Video for those not in the know!) all over it! Hey, I'm cool with Kevin James, but I'm not cool with this movie. I know people are getting a little tired with the Apatow-ification of comedy films, but is THIS the answer? I think (and hope) not.

Kristopowitz: Kevin James, the former Doug Heffernan of "King of Queens" fame, gets his first major starring vehicle, and it looks like a perfect fit. Although I don't know if James is going for the "I'm a fat guy and when I fall down it's funny because I'm fat" thing too quickly. People are going to start comparing him to Chris Farley and are going to want to know why he hasn't eaten himself into a coma yet. I don't think the world wants to go through that endless conversation. I know I don't.

Tym: Another sitcom star whose work I enjoyed on King of Queens, this smells exactly like what it is: a paycheck. Sorry, Mr. James, but putting a pink Band-Aid on a scratch or running over a ratty little dog with a Segway does not high comedy make.

Chamberlain: I've got nothing against Kevin James, but this looks retarded. However, Die Hard in a mall DOES have potential.

Thomas: Against my better wishes, I found myself chuckling at times during this trailer. Kevin James has definite comic appeal, though he needs to be much more like he was in Hitch then he was in Chuck and Larry to earn my laughs. This will either heavily entertain or (sadly, more likely) fall flat on its face.

Brimfield: What's the best way to spell the noise one makes when expelling breath in a disinterested manner and flicking to a film that's likely to have more gags - United 93, say? "Pffffffff" ? Yeah, that'll do.

JANUARY 23RD

Inkheart
Studio: Warner Bros.
Directed by: Iain Softley
Starring: Brendan Fraser, Andy Serkis, Eliza Bennett, Paul Bettany
The plot: A little girl (Bennett) rallies her friends - both real and imaginary - to rescue her father (Fraser), a bookbinder who can bring characters to life by reading aloud, from the clutches of an evil-doer (Serkis).

Lealos: Family movie number two for January. Reading the synopsis, I am reminded of the Adam Sandler movie from December, Bedtime Stories. Watching the trailer, it is just another Brendan Fraser kid's action movie, with bits from The Mummy, Monkeybone, Journey to the Center of the Earth and even a little Loony Toons: Back in Action for good measure. It's nothing you haven't seen before and looks a little boring. Paul Bettany brings the goods but that ain't enough to sway my opinion of this one.

Furious: I've been seeing trailers for this for ages. On DVD's especially. It looks like a good enough children's movie. Brendan Fraser is fine in this sort of role and Andy Serkis will hold up his end. It's a concern that the film's storyline is beyond its budget (and ideally you'd like this concept to go to a story with more financial backing to tell it) but it should be a decent little watch.

Gustafson: One thing I've learned over time: Never bet against Brendan Fraser. I don't know how he does it but he has a strong and loyal base of fans. He's happily skipping down the road of being stereotyped, but if I was making the money he is, I'd be skipping too. The movie isn't going to recreate the genre but should be decent.

Kristopowitz: This doesn't look too bad, although, for the movie's sake, I hope people haven't tired of the whole "Brendan Fraser in big family action fantasy movies" thing yet.

Tym: Hmmm. Don't really know what to make of this one. On one hand, you have Anthony Serkis, who does some fine work. On the other, you have Brendan Fraser, who hits just as often as he misses. Slowly becoming a theme this month is the familiar cry of "rental!"

Chamberlain: This movie was made for me. I've been reading since I was a kid and the ultimate dream of any reader is to be able to live the story! And I'm a Brendan Fraser fan. This looks like a lot of fun.

Thomas: I don't know, I've tried to get into this but it's just not working for me. Maybe it's because it seems too much like Bedtime Stories - not that it's this movie's fault, just typical bad timing (see Deep Impact & Armageddon, Volcano and Dante's Peak and more). I like Fraser and the rest of the cast, and this could well surprise me, but I'm going in skeptical.

Brimfield: This looks like solid family entertainment and I'm sure it'll perform respectably. Besides, Serkis is always great in a villainous capacity.

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans
Studio: Screen Gems
Directed by: Patrick Tatopoulos
Starring: Rhona Mitra, Michael Sheen, Bill Nighy
The plot: A look at how the werewolf named Lucian (Sheen) led an uprising against an aristocratic vampire sect - a revolt that will mark the beginning of a centuries-old war between the two races.

Lealos: This is what I am talking about. The only problem I had with either Underworld movie was the flying Viktor CGI in Evolution. I can overlook that because Bill Nighy is like God with a British accent. We lose Kate Beckinsale, which many fans of the first two used as an excuse to admit to liking it. As a replacement we get Rhona Mitra, who was in the very fun Doomsday in 2008. I'm guessing Michael Sheen is the replacement for Scott Speedman, which is a step up in my opinion. Bill Nighy is back as Viktor and I already told you what I think of him. The new director, Patrick Tatopoulos, was the creature designer on the criminally under seen Trick ‘r Treat, as well as the more popular Silent Hill, I am Legend, and both previous Underworld movies. We know he can design some great monsters, let's see if he can direct the action. I'm pretty excited about this movie for my bubblegum pick of the month.

Furious: Seeing as Rhona Mitra basically played the part already in Doomsday they've gone ahead and replaced Kate Beckinsale with her. This would be a prequel that I'm not particularly interested in. I really, really disliked Underworld. I thought it was a poor excuse for a movie. This at least has the benefit of having the best cast of any of the series so far. Damn Scott Speedman!

Gustafson: If you believed everything you read on message boards... THIS is going to be AWESOME! But I don't, so I think... THIS is going to open moderate and quickly flame out! Not a fan of the Underworld trilogy but I don't find it insulting either. I will say that the trailer for this one has me a little curious to take a peek at it, but most likely on DVD.

Kristopowitz: I've enjoyed this series so far, and I like the whole "prequel" thing so we can see more of Bill Nighy. Hopefully by the time the movie is out the movie nerd world will stop asking itself "Why is Michael Sheen still doing this stuff?" Did anyone ever venture to think that maybe Sheen likes making these movies?

Tym: I know this franchise has its fair share of fans, so I wish them the best with this prequel. I for one could do without another needlessly complicated story adorned in blue hues. Bill Nighy, however, is and always will be da bomb.

Chamberlain: I know next to nothing about this, and I dug the Underworld movies. That said, I'll probably enjoy it. I'm sure it'll be a good time for all of us who like to see vampires and werewolves beat the ever loving shit out of each other.

Thomas: The Underworld films are guilty pleasures of mine. While this loses the hotness of Kate Beckinsdale in leather, it also loses the annoying Scott Speedman and brings back Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy, who were both great in the first. Instead of Beckinsdale, we get Rhona Mitra, who just needs that one big hit (that she should have had with Doomsday, as a side note). It looks quite good, if a bit too visually dark, and I'm really hyped for it.

Brimfield: This sounds like it should be about killer mushrooms.

Killshot
Studio: The Weinstein Co.
Directed by: John Madden
Starring: Thomas Jane, Diane Lane, Mickey Rourke, Joseph Gordon-Levitt
The plot: A botched scam sends an old-school hitman (Rourke) and a young stick-up kid (Gordon-Levitt) on a mission to find and kill an innocent couple (Jane and Lane) in order to protect their identities.

Lealos: I've been waiting for this movie for a long, long time. The Elmore Leonard novel the film is based on is one of my favorites by the author. I have been tracking this movie since it was optioned back in the 90s. Quentin Tarantino was originally slated to direct it and went on to direct another Leonard novel Rum Punch, renamed Jackie Brown. Finally, it went into the hands of Academy Award nominated director John Madden (Shakespeare in Love), with Tarantino as a producer. The story is about a couple (Diane Lane and Thomas Jane) in witness protection that are found and targeted by two assassins (Mickey Rourke and Joseph Gordon-Levitt). With those four great actors and a talented director, explain to me why the movie was originally supposed to be released two years ago? I guess with The Wrestler reminding people how great Rourke can be, they finally decided to dump the movie now. I don't care about the bumping of the movie and all the reshoots and turmoil. It is a book I love adapted with actors I respect. Despite not appearing in much since the fantastic Brick, Gordon-Levitt is still on my young actors to watch list and he looks great in the trailer as the mentally unbalanced hit man. I might have to see two movies this weekend if Killshot gets any kind of wide release.

Furious: Produced by Quentin Tarantino, written by Elmore Leonard and starring Mickey Rourke. I fail to see where this could go wrong. Tom Jane is better off when he's playing a less flashy character and that's the case here. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is swiftly becoming a star in his own right. I want to see this.

Gustafson: A great cast, cool little plot... it's got my money! With Mr. Mickey Rourke riding the comeback pony through town, expect this to get a nice push. I'm a big fan of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's (Pick up The Lookout and tell me you aren't!) and Thomas Jane is always entertaining. Well, maybe always. Plus, nice eye-candy with Diane Lane and Rosario Dawson along for the ride.

Kristopowitz: Is this even going to be released? Hasn't it been sitting on the shelf for like two years now? I guess with Rourke getting all of the buzz from The Wrestler it'd be foolish not to get it out to take advantage of that notoriety, but then again we're dealing with the Weinsteins here. By the end of the month they may decide to just release it on DVD and be done with it.

Tym: This looks interesting, and the cast ups the ante a bit. I'll cop to not knowing much more than that, and will wait for some advance word before a viewing decision is made.

Chamberlain: With Rourke's momentum coming off of The Wrestler, I wouldn't be surprised to see this do better than expected critically and at the box office.

Thomas: More Mickey Rourke goodness. Okay, maybe this won't be great, but it should be a lot of fun. The cast is very intriguing and the trailer looks pretty good. I know I'll probably be there to check it out.

Brimfield: The cast looks great, and though I'm not familiar with Leonard's work this does sound like an interesting watch. One to catch as a rental for me.

JANUARY 30TH

The Uninvited
Studio: Dreamworks
Directed by: Charles Guard; Thomas Guard
Starring: Emily Browning, Arielle Kebbel, Elizabeth Banks, David Strathairn
The plot: After her mother's death and her subsequent hospital stay, Anna Rydell (Browning) returns home to be with her sister (Krebbel) and her father (Strathairn), who has become engaged to Rachel (Banks), her mother's former nurse. During her first night back, Anna is visited by her mother's ghost, who reveals that the new woman in her father's life is not who she pretends to be, leading to a fateful confrontation between the women of the house.

Lealos: This looks creepy but I don't know what to think about it. A girl sees the spirits of dead kids who she thinks her dad's new girlfriend might have killed. The trailer gives away a lot and it is obvious (SPOILER) the new girlfriend is a killer. The movie is an American remake of A Tale of Two Sisters, a movie I have constantly heard great things about. That does not bode well for the remake. The director's chair is helmed by the brother duo, the Guard's. While Elizabeth Banks impressed me in Zack and Miri Make a Porno, she has really underwhelmed my in everything else I have seen her in, so I have doubts about her ability to play a menacing evil stepmother. The kids in the trailer look like they are carrying their weight but I am tiring of generic adult characters refusing to believe the kids until it is too late. That is the thankless role David Strathaim is tasked with playing here. Of the three horror movies we have covered so far, this is at the bottom of the list.

Furious: I thought from the title this was going to be another vampire movie. It's actually a re-make of a Korean horror film. I have a hard time buying Elizabeth Banks as the bad guy although it looks like she's aided by heavy CGI. And seeing as the target audience is teenagers I figure they'd be able to buy her as old enough to be dating David Strathairn even if it looks patently ridiculous to the rest of us.

Gustafson: More like the the unwatched! I mentioned before that I'm not the biggest fan of the horror genre because it's in desperate need of updating. Going back and doing remake after remake after remake is not the way to do it. Call me when you get something new.

Kristopowitz: This sounds like yet another lame pseudo ghost movie that I really don't want to take part in. I'll probably end up seeing it, though.

Tym: I'm sure the effort is there but I just can't buy Elizabeth Banks as a real threat. I keep picturing Seth Rogen on top of her in Zack and Miri (which, to be fair, was a great scene) or her nympho turn in The 40 Year Old Virgin. Pass.

Chamberlain: So this is "The Un____" month at the movies? I'll pass on this one too.

Thomas: Where Unborn looks like it has potential, this just looks like shit. Elizabeth Banks is great and all, but this A-horror remake (yes, another one) seems like a bomb waiting to happen.

Brimfield: You can tell modern mainstream horror is struggling for concepts when movies with titles as painfully uninteresting as this come along. Nice to see Banks branching out, at least.

Taken
Studio: 20th Century Fox
Directed by: Pierre Morel
Starring: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace, Famke Janssen
The plot: A former spy (Neeson) relies on his old skills to save his daughter (Grace), who was kidnapped by slave traders during her vacation in Paris.

Lealos: This movie looks like it will kick all kinds of ass. The trailer actually got my blood pumping and Liam Neeson is a great badass. I hate, hate, hate, hate Maggie Grace but we'll see how she does here. If she is just kept and tortured as Neeson tears through the bad guys, I can live with that. That might be the best use for an actress as annoying as she is. The minute in the trailer when he says, "If you let my daughter go now, that'll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you" I was sold. I cannot wait for this movie.

Furious: I'm sure we've done this one before. I like Liam Neeson but I think the film looks stupid. I think that's pretty much what I said last time.

Gustafson: I'm really torn on this one. My gut says, "UGH!" But my heart says, "Ahh!" Liam Neeson has that cool quality where when you see him sometimes you think, "I could take that guy..." Yet, when you meet him in real life you stop and say, "This guy is bad-capital-ass!" This will slip under the radar but I'm be picking it up to watch over and over in the comfort of my house.

Kristopowitz: Holy crap does this look great. Awesome. Liam Neeson, Qui Gon Jinn hisself (or Darkman hisself if you want to go all 1990), gets his chance at being an ultimate bad ass, and I simply can't wait. Will the phone call seen in the trailer give off the same kind of bad ass vibe in the actual movie? Or will it be even more bad ass? Holy crap I can't wait.

Tym: I definitely want to see Qui-Gon kicking some ass in a non-Jedi way. This should be a solid little action/thriller.

Chamberlain: Now here's a plot I can get behind. Liam Neeson as a spy? Famke Jannsen? Sold!

Thomas: A friend showed me the trailer for this mid-last year and I was immediately stoked. Neeson is the kind of guy who can play this sort of bad-ass beautifully, and I've heard better and better things as time goes on. I'm glad the morons at Fox have finally decided to release it state-side so we can check it out.

Brimfield: It's out here already and got a deservedly poor review in 'Empire'. Sorry folks, but save your pennies and don't waste your time. Kristopowitz will probably give it a 9.5 though.

New in Town
Studio: Gold Circle
Directed by: Jonas Elmer
Starring: Renée Zellweger, Harry Connick Jr., Nathan Fillion
The plot: A Miami-based consultant (Zellweger) is shipped out to small-town Minnesota for her newest project: supervising the restructuring of a local manufacturing plant. After a frosty reception, she warms to the townspeople (and vice versa), though a tough business mandate causes her to reconsider her personal and professional objectives.

Lealos: Ok, this will officially be my wife's favorite movie this month. Renee Zellweger is a fish out of water New Yorker sent to rural Minnesota where she will probably fall in love with Harry Connick Jr., and start to fit in to their small town ways. It also co-stars J.K. Simmons, who is also one of her favorite actors at the moment. Everything about this movie screams to me that it is "her type of movie." And the trailer actually made me laugh a little too. It should be good, harmless fun for you and the missus.

Furious: And rounding out a lame month for movies is this. At least Nathan Fillion is getting work but I consider a crying shame that he seems to get stuck with the most average of projects. This film sounds terribly cliché and predictable. I'm sure everyone will learn a valuable life lesson. That lesson being… if your movie got greenlit but then the studio realised it wouldn't be very good be prepared for a January release!

Gustafson: Looks like Zellweger is looking for Oscar gold. Too bad she'll come up empty with this one. Put a C-level actress in this role and you have your Movie-of-the-week (Or MOW for those on the INSIDE!), but this will come and go, and few will notice.

Kristopowitz: This sounds like a Hallmark TV movie. That's not meant to be a slight against it, but the story sounds kind of mundane for a big theatrical release. Why isn't this airing on CBS during sweeps?

Tym: After bitching above about all the non-new wide releases finally coming my way, I don't feel so bad. January truly is the dumping ground for many sub-par efforts, and this looks no different. Reaching the end of this list of January releases, I no longer feel guilty for lamenting the wait for so many other quality flicks that can be finally be seen by nationwide audiences.

Chamberlain: Oh, Nathan, it's times like these I miss Firefly even more.

Thomas: Well, that's a boring-sounding plot. However, the presence of Nathan Fillion means I'll be checking it out. Zellweger I can take or leave these days, as she hasn't done a thing for me since Cold Mountain, and Connick only works in small doses. I have little hopes for this.

Brimfield: When, when, when will Nathan Fillion get more material of the calibre of Firefly or even Slither? Poor guy, wasting away in dross like this.



The votes are in... Underworld 3 is the 411 staff's hit of the month, while The Uninvited is our shit of the month!


That's all for now, folks. Stay tuned next month for a look at Push, Friday the 13th and a whole lot more!

All poster images courtesy of IMDB.