The Hurt Locker

Starring: Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, Brian Geraghty
Directed by: Kathryn Bigelow
Written by: Mark Goal
Studio: First Light Productions

THE HURT LOCKER is a weird film. In a way, it represents a union of faux-documentary directing with the older, more respected tradition of the psychologically-driven war story (think Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now, etc.). As a result, the flick carries a real feeling of intensity to it the majority of the time. But at the same time, the film's moments of subtlety and candidness almost costs it some excitement. Needless to say, my feelings are mixed about this out of the norm soldier's tale.

The story takes place in 2004 during the 2nd Iraq War, but the precise setting matters little here (thankfully, I don't need more overwought THIS WAR WAS WRONG messages). Our protags, stationed in a war-torn, anarchic place, carry out the last job anyone would want to have in an urban war zone: bomb investigation and defusal. Except Sergeant James isn't like everyone else in that he kinda loves fucking around with things designed to explode and kill. Time and time again we see James enter outrageously dangerous situations, often without provocation, and save the day, only to go and smoke a cigarette and wait eagerly for the next round of harrowing missions.

From the scenes where James is alone or otherwise off-duty, one quickly hypothesizes how this guy became a nutcase: he's an innate altruist that, as a result of his many death-defying acts of self-less, since developed a strong taste for an adrenaline high. These auspicious groundings, combined with the stress of the environment he prefers to work in, rendered him a bonafide junkie: someone that would sacrifice all other values and safeties in order to get high. A tragedy, really.

But while this very powerful and complex message sublimes through little talk and mostly show (good writing!), we pick up on it before the middle of the movie...and nothing else really gets revealed or changes about the character (no so good writing). Mission after mission James either fucks up or saves the day, and his reactions follow a strict line of predictability. At the very end, we see him decide to abandon his family yet again and return to Iraq for another tour of disarming bombs; this, although still depressing, wasn't as devastating of a scene as the writer thought it would seem. I left feeling underwhelmed, not upset.

Direction: I usually hate "ultra-realistic" shaky-cam, but Bigelow used it in just the right doses (unlike, say, BATTLESTAR GALACTICA). No one could bare to look away from the close, tense shots of the combat scenes.

Writing: I get that this film was more of a "case study" of an adrenaline junkie rather than a traditional narrative, but I had trouble staying interested in James when I realized the character lacked an arc. And while the richness of his personality was great, his squad members came off as dull and reactive by comparison.

Acting: Jeremy Renner knocked that shit out of the park. All the little cameos by "big" names rocked too, minus Evangeline Lilly naturally.

Editing: Some of the non-combat scenes moved at a snail's pace.

Sound: Crisp, which is important given the plurality of nail-biting situations where a sound meant someone ate it.

Soundtrack/Score: eh.

Self-Awareness: Ain't that kind of movie, soldier.

Overall rating: ***

~Ian

Frailty

Starring: Bill Paxton, Matthew McConaughey
Directed by: Bill Paxton
Written by: Brent Hanley
Studio: David Kirschner Productions

SERIAL KILLER MOVIES, as a genre, are tapped out. Case in point, we have movies about serial killers that capture people and kill them on a webcam broadcast, serial killers targetting shitty actors, serial killers obsessed with copycatting famous serial kilers (META), etc. There will always be something fascinating about serial killers, not because of the infinite supply of conceivable (ridiculous or otherwise) modus operandi to tap into, but because they are forces of calculated, ritualized destruction. And because they tend to be smart (and white), they easily escape suspicion. Muahahahaha.

Frailty gives us a unique view of how this functional insanity creeps into an otherwise down to Earth, God-fearing family. Although the film never explicitly names the impetus of the father's (Bill Paxton) descent into murderous delusion, it doesn't have to - what's more important here is to see how his belief of being God's agent of vengance concretizes and then spreads. It is rare to see such a metamorphosis happen on screen, and even rarer to see one that isn't brimming with zany or diabolical hallucinations (e.g. Jacob's Ladder). Bill Paxton totally owns the memorable role, which mixes southern comfort with hellfire (good drink too by the by).

However, the film definitely misses its target in other respects. For one, it feels way too long - by the time we get to see the father murder his third victim, we've seen all the motions and "horror." For two, despite Boothe's stellar performance, Matthew McConaughey (heh, he has 'ghey' in his name) manages to kill every scene he's in - thank god he doesn't share one with Paxton. What really fucked this film though was when the introduced possibility of SUPERNATURAL forces behind the serial killer and his son's murderous work. No joke; it's tonally jarring and totally destroys the coherence of the film. Ya blew, Brent Hanley.

Direction: This was Bill Paxton's feature length directing debut - and it shows. The camerawork is especially bad during the creek scenes.

Writing: The dialog's ok, some of the details about the father's peculiar brand of visionary psychopathy were cool, but CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT ENDING?!

Acting: While he can't direct, Bill can definitely act. His usual calm, almost pleading voice is perfect for his character here. The kid that played Young Fenton was quality too. And I always loves me some Powers Boothe.

Editing: The entire last act dragged like obese man's bodybag.

Sound: The sound work in phenomenal in the lonely, suspenseful scenes where Jake snoops.

Soundtrack/Score: Pretty solid orchestrals, nothing groundbreaking. The OMG HE'S GONNA CUT THAT GUY music wasn't particularly spine-tingling.

Self-Awareness: This movie knows it needed a twist in the third act, but ultimately decided on one of the oldest in the book. Groan.

Overall rating: ** 1/2

~Ian

Chinatown

Starring: Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway
Directed by: Roman Polansky
Written by: Robert Towne
Studio: Paramount Pictures

I LOVE FILM NOIR, and while theorists and critics may argue about what exactly makes a film a black picture, no one doubts the genre fits into its own little, neat section of cinema. And since the genre is so particular and unique, its motifs and aesthetic can only undergo so many variations or explorations before degrading into dilution or cliche. The traditional setting of noir, your gritty and alienating metropolis, was one of the first elements positively drained of its meaning by the 1950's.

Noir produced outside of the 1940's, early 1950's (some people classify them as neo-noir, but I hate that name so fuggit) often step outside the classic setting. Extreme examples of this are Brick, where the setting is a contemporary high school and the surrounding suburbia, and Blade Runner, which is a Toyko-ized Los Angeles of the future. Chinatown is a less extreme example, but the alterations it makes to the noir norms are still pronounced and resounding.

For instance, Chinatown takes place near the middle of the 20th Century in Los Angeles, a noir city of many choices. But rather than take place in the classic period (again, the '40-'50's), we see the city a decade prior. Sure, practically every guy is wearing fedoras and suits, the cars are old-timey, and bureaucrats keep their fat with impunity...but there's also a liveliness to many of the sets (versus say in LA Confidential). We get the sense the city itself is youthful and still growing up. There's promise and commotion abound, everybody wants some scene to explode within it's limits (the Golden Age of Hollywood and then television). Seeing how the corruption other noir films simply assume of the City of Angels's came about, as it happened, strikes a different, more fatalistic cord.

The protagonist Jake Gittes fits the mold of the noir detective nicely, but is far from a Sam Spade clone. Like all noir (anti-ish) heroes, he is a man with foibles and perilous shortcomings: he is loud, arrogant, a bit of a sexist, and at times sloppy. He loves fine suits and his picture in the newspaper. He has a terrible haircut (then again, everyone does in this flick) and his nose is bandaged for a good portion of the time (see above). No one seems to like Jake, not even his operatives. But he does have the skills of a master PI and the balls of an ox, and that's exactly what's needed for the biggest and strangest case of his life.

The case itself is, again, a modified throwback to the likes of The Third Man, what with its intricacies, sidetracking, and entanglements with institutionalized corruption. But the true criminality here, what this movie is "really about", its far more twisted than what we're used to from a classic black picture. Incest, rape, state-sponsored ghettoization (I could go on and on about the Chinatown title choice/motif) - these tragic story elements aren't the crimes you see in the classic era. Undoubtedly due to the loosening of moral mandates that accompanied the rise of New Hollywood, we finally get to see how dark and brutal a detective story can be. And, boy, does it look good too.

Direction: This is Polansky at his peak. He tactfully highlights the categorical qualities of the classic genre (e.g. exclusion of light, shadowing, etc), while incorporating novel visual techniques to arise suspense and horror (e.g. seeing the costar dead from a headshot, exit wound and all). The setting switches between lavish and barren, exotic and grimy, but stays firm and true to the rigor of early Los Angeles. I read he fought with the producer over preserving a (tragic) ending: it was clearly worth it, Roman.

Acting: Jack Nicholson, usually one bring a little creepiness to a role, is here cavalier, wisecracking, at times bumbling, and even morose. Fantastic. Faye Dunaway shows excellent range as well in first presenting herself as a classic femme fatale, but ending up enviable and innocent.

Editing: Some of the scenes run a little long in the first act (of course, it is noir), but it's all neat and crisp after Mulwray hires Jake. The final scene is a perfect length.

Sound: The sound work in phenomenal in the lonely, suspenseful scenes where Jake snoops.

Soundtrack/Score: Eh, honestly, wasn't paying attention.

Self-Awareness: It's the caliber of a dark picture Ulmer always wanted, and I'm sure Polansky/Towne had this goal in mind. Also, like many of the "neo-noirs" attempts in the 1970's, it also depicts the misdeeds and accidents that drive the plot with a greater realism and gore than was allowed by the Production code of the mid-20th Century. Chinatown does a much better job at jarring us than, say, Mean Streets.

By the way, the writing's up to snuff, shut up NYTimes.

Overall rating: **** 1/2

~Ian

Terminator: Salvation

Starring: Christian Bale, Sam Worthington
Directed by: Mc-*MOTHERFUCKING*-G
Written by: John D. Brancato, Michael Ferris
Studio: Halcyon

I'M JUST GOING to post questions and hope someone, someday gets back to me with the answers. Thanks in advance, wise man of the future:

• Why would Skynet centralize all of its West Coast operations (terminator production, mission coordination, secret lab experiments, human prisoner facilities) in one place, e.g. San Francisco?

• Why would Skynet spend so much time experimenting on humans to figure out their physiology? Doesn't it have access to the sum total of human knowledge?

• Why does Skynet HQ have hallways, computer monitors, instructions in English, doors, etc. etc. etc.?

• Why are all of the resistance leaders housed on the same submarine?

• Why would Skynet construct huge, lumbering, anthropomorphized robots who can't give chase for longer than a mile for the purposes of capturing surviving humans?

• Beyond the elementary attempt at a symbolic motif, why did Marcus Wright get to keep his heart for the transformation when a cybernetic equivalent would probably work much, much better and for much, much longer?

• Better yet, how hard is to conduct open-heart surgery/transplant in the desert, with very little on-hand medical resources and trained staffed (being it's the after Judgment Day and all) AND when you have no idea if the new heart for John Connor is compatible with his biology?

• Who's decision was it to make this movie PG-13 and thus deprive us of awesome amounts of gore, human experimentation and Blair Williams' tits?

• Who told Christian Bale he didn't need to act?

• Who the fuck does McG think he is and how did this project land in the hands of the man who directed Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle?

Writing: Pain. Dialog rested on action movie cliches, there was a plot, yes, and that plot was gay. Sheer idiocy on Skynet's part. Why the hell Marcus Wright was the hero of the film instead of John Connor will forever bother me.

Direction: McG, please self-immolate.

Acting: Robotic Christian Bale ###ONLINE###.

Sam Worthington is worthless, stop saying he's the next big thing.

Editing: 12 continuity errors and camera goofs on the imdb page...and still counting...

Sound: LOUD = EXCITEMENT, QUIET = SERIOUS

Soundtrack/Score: It was all instrumental waste except the classic terminator theme, thank God they didn't remix it or insert will.i.am singing.

Self-Awareness: I'LL BE BACK COME WITH ME IF YOU WANT TO LIVE CGI ARNIE WOULDN'T IT BE COOL IF TERMINATORS HAD MOTORCYCLES?! BETTER YET, WHAT IF THEY WERE MOTORCYCLES?!!?!

Overall rating: * 1/2

~Ian

Star Trek

Starring: James Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Simon Pegg
Directed by: JJ Abrams
Written by: Robert Orci, Alex Kurtzman
Studio: Paramount Pictures

As I stood in line to see Star Trek 11 a few weeks ago, I did promise myself (AND THEREFORE YOU TOO, FAIR READER) I would separate my fanboy nitpicks and protectiveness and evaluate this movie on its merits qua a blockbuster by any other name. It also probably helped I was a little stoned, so as to unbridle my mind from the shackles of purist thought. "I probably should have taken another toke," I thought to myself as the procession started. At least I had popcorn.

Even with tree and corn inside, I still didn't like it. Granted, the acting turned out to be (surprisingly) top notch (thanks Zachary Quinto :-3) and the CGI took my breath away. Kudos, Evil Eye Pictures. That withstanding, I took three strong issues with this movie:


1 - The antagonist was a goddamn clown

So we got this Romulan miner guy (from the Original universe) that holds Spock responsible for this supernova consuming Romulus and the rest of the galaxy or something, gets sent into this other universe alongside Spock, doesn't really give a fuck about how he's just passed through a black hole and goes about nuking everything in sight. Then, after fucking up a handful of starships, he hangs around for twenty-five years, he and his crew just chilling, until Spock finally shows up (TIME TRAVELING MINDFUCKERY) and Nero resumes his imbecilic rage quest. Nero's situation is analogous to what would happen if a downs-syndrome, Asperger's boy got his hands on cache of rocket-propelled grenades and was dropped off by his oblivious parents at the playground frequented by the children who, only his fuck-demented head, plotted the destruction of his teddy bear.

In the end, Nero was nothing more than a cheap version of Khan. Allow me to explain: Rather than swearing jihad on a feisty and stubborn flabby guy who steps on toes all the time (Kirk), he goes after the logical and serene one; rather than have grasp of tragedy befell him and who was to blame, he lashed out at the first thing that came to mind; and rather than develop a keen understanding of the technology and resources at his disposal, he charges like bumblefuckhead into combat. There have been some ugly and horribly conceived bad guys in the history of Trek, and Nero is just another accessory. Also, message to Eric Bana: Stop acting.

2 - Why the fuck bother with the alternate universe crap

By the end of the movie, the original fucking crew (all with their prior positions intact) still goes out on its five year mission to explore the final frontier. All the bullshit about Kirk's dad and Spock's mom and Uhura's green hussie of a roommate had no effect on the character's choices whatsoever (except maybe the Uhuru/Spock romance): Spock and Kirk are buddies just like in the original series by the end (despite Spock beaming Kirk onto an ice planet at one point), Scotty's still a bad Russian stereotype (but now he has a vaguely Asian alien sidekick), and Uhura is still marginally useful as the sole (hetero) sex object. Even Old Spock, the only leftover from the original universe, explicit states he'll take a backseat in this timeline and swears to go off and help those remaining Vulcans of the universe. Oh wait, that's right, I forgot, NERO BLEW UP VULCAN...BUT IT AIN'T NO BIG DEAL. It's a just a plot point, a way to get rid of Spock's mom (god knows what fucking for), nothing more.

The only reason I can imagine why the plot got so twisted up in time travel and red matter and all kinds of potentially important but ultimately irrelevant incidents was to somehow fudge out fanboy outrage. "We can't sell it to them without SOMETHING of the original intact...so let's throw in Shatner! Oh wait, he's being a tool...get Nimoy then!" Well, ya fucked up guys, this fanboy's not pacified (see below).

3 - The things Abrams et al changed didn't improve the quality of the production enough to counterbalance what they left in that people no longer (or never did) like

Ridiculous plots, over-the-top-and-illogical-villains, technobabble and pseudoscience galore, time MOTHERFUCKING travel, and uninspired dialog: these elements are what I (and lots of others) didn't like the original series/movies. The crummy acting, the lack of shine, the exploration of new space (versus fighting in this heavily-combed subregion), and the playfulness was what was endearing. So, instead of putting a new angle on these elements that people liked, the guys at Paramount just threw a new coat of paint on the Enterprise and it's gadgets, gave the character new and young faces, and boldly continued to shove b-level, replicated storytelling down our throats.

And now, with the objective evaluation out of the way, here's the fanboy outcry:

HOW THE FUCK DID THEY GET AWAY WITH BLOWING UP VULCAN?! IT'S THEIR FUCKING HOMEWORLD, CHRIST ARE YOU SERIOUS?! AND WHERE ARE THE ROMULANS NOW?! WHAT THE HELL IS RED MATTER?! THERE'S PLENTY OF MADE UP PHYSICS ALREADY THAT WOULD SEND NERO, THAT 99¢ STORE VERSION OF KAHN, ACROSS THE MULTIVERSE!! AND WHAT ABOUT THE BORG TECH, WOULDN'T THE COLLECTIVE PICK UP ON SOME JUICY FUTUREWARE JUST HANGING OUT IN THE ALPHA QUADRANT FOR TWENTY-FIVE YEARS?! AND DON'T GET ME STARTED ABOUT UHURA & SPOCK BUMPIN' UGLIES IN THE FACE OF PON FARR AND WHAT HAPPENED TO ODO AND CHEKOV AND EVERYONE ELSE IN THE ORIGINAL UNIVERSE oh well the Kobayashi Maru scene was pretty cool WAIT WHAT SPOCK PROGRAMMED IT?!?! CHRIST MY BRAIN...


Writing: Silly, old-school Star Trek plot with some mind-boggling additions (e.g. older, less-homo Spock). Lots of campy throwbacks which, I guess, is what Star Trek is all about...but I thought this was supposed to be a reinterpretation? Nero sounded and acted like a re-re.

Direction: The space battles were pretty cool. Standard, boring action shots otherwise.

Acting: Unquestionably the best feature of the film, and the only major departure from the feel of the original series that I really liked.

Editing: Kirk was on not-Hoth for way too long, Kirk and Scotty were in the tube room for too long, Nero was on-screen for too long...

Sound: They definitely carried over some sounds from the original, like the transporter sound, which felt out of place.

Soundtrack/Score: Eh.

Self-Awareness: This film reveled in campiness half the time and motifs of FAMILY TRAGEDY and THE HONOR OF SACRIFICE for the other half. I just can't take the latter seriously with the former around.

Overall rating: **


~Ian

Batmanime aka Gotham Knight

Starring: Kevin Conroy

Directors: Yasuhiro Aoki; Futshi Higashide, Futoshi Higashide, Toshiyki Kubooka, Hiroshi, Morioka, Jon-Sik Nam, and Shoujirou Nishimi

Writers: Josh Olsen, Brian Azzarello, Jordan Goldberg, Greg Rucka, Alan Burnett, David S. Goyer

Studio: Warner Brothers

There are a great many things to thank the Wachowski siblings (don't forget that one of them is a girl now) for. One of them is the plethora of animated tie-in movies released direct to DVD. I'm not gonna lie; I haven't seen The Animatrix in years. Memories of the sequels have kept me far from anything Matrix for a while now, but I do have fond memories of The Animatrix. I remember it being uneven, but some of those short films stood out as being better than the sequels. A few interesting little stories set in the then untapped and rich world of The Matrix.

Sadly, Batman has had his rich world thoroughly tapped harder than a keg at a phrat party. Movies, TV shows, comic books, radio shows, novels, picture books, and even trading cards have told stories about Batman, his friends, his enemies, and people who just know of him. This leaves the Batmanime team with the problem of going over things other people have done before. Even in the confines of the Nolan Batman films, there aren't a terrible amount of questions that beg to be answered. The recent movies give us a good picture of what Gotham City is like, how the public and police relate to Batman, where he gets his wonderful toys, and how he trained to become Batman. A few of these short stories just answer these question again but with anime. A few just have him fight a villain that won't be in the movies anytime soon. One does a new version of a classic Batman story that started as a comic, was an episode of the nineties cartoon show, and now has an anime version.

The bottom line is that none of this is ground breaking. It's a concept borrowed from another film franchise and applied to Batman. It honestly feels disposable and forgettable; they had one of my favorite obscure Batman villains, Deadshot, and even with that little touch of fanboy pandering, I was still pretty unimpressed with the affair. I fell asleep during the third or fourth short, and I can't even remember which one now.

Writing:The biggest problem is making the story line interconnect; it kills the pacing for the entire project. It's also glaring because the different writers and animators handle some of these characters very differently. Instead of being a few short films or a full animated movie; it becomes an awkward hybrid of the two. The interconnected story lines give the feeling like the shorts are building to something, but they aren't. It makes the ending to the entire thing feel arbitrary. It also makes some of the shorts feel slow and uninteresting because they aren't a part of this bigger narrative that's more of an illusion than anything else.

On top of that, the dialog isn't as sharp as it could be; it's often too obvious and expository. It gets a little George Lucas in terms of characters describing their feelings and the themes of a scene. There are some good ideas here and there, but it just never quite comes together.

Directing: The Matrix and The Animatrix had a shared background in their visual style and even the writing. The Wachowskis took from anime, Hong Kong action films, and Grant Morrison comics (don't get me started) to create the iconic first part of their trilogy. It was an easy transition to make.

Batman Begins is not connected to anime in any major way. Parts of the Narrows neighborhood in the film were modeled on Tokyo neighborhoods, but otherwise, these are not styles that work together to well. It's a bit jarring to see the more realistic mobsters of the new Batman movies suddenly look completely different and then have an all out John Woo style gun battle. It simply does not jive with the parent product. Also, certain directors use designs for the characters that are simply hideous looks for Batman and his supporting cast in any style.

Acting: Keving Conroy is still awesome. The rest of the voice work is not.

Editing: For the most part it looks fine.

Sound: Acceptable.

Soundtrack/Score: It sounds like a diet version of the recent film scores.

Self-Awareness: Not at all.

Overall Rating: Wake me when it's over.

-Pete

The Tattooist (2007)

Starring: Jason Behr, Mia Blake
Directed by: Peter Burger
Written by: Matthew Grainger, Jonathan King
Studio: Eyeworks Touchdown

THE TATTOOIST faithfully follows in the tradition of rigorous anthropological case studies found in cheap-thrill horror movies over the past quarter-century or so. For example, we can see traces of the ambitious thinking behind the lauded 90's movie about magic gypies THINNER and the perennial classic exposing Southern brutality disguised as theme house hospitality HOUSE OF A 1,000 CORPSES in the stream of urine that is Burger's newest creation. Here, though, it's the long-abused peoples of Samoa that get the heavy handed treatment. Yay white people.

Jason Behr's character is a tattooist that claims his work can HEAL THE SICK. Naturally, people get pissed off at him when his inkings don't do shit but hell, it's not like he set up shop in a place where bloggers get convicted of sedition. Oh wait, he does live in Singapore, maybe he shouldn't be writing checks (i.e. doing "magic" with his tattoo machine) that his ass can't afford (the resulting caning). But before he figures out that he'd be smart to hightail out of there, he runs into some Samoan chick and, given his appreciation of her and the islandic culture, steals some of her cousin's traditional tat equipment. He's a lovable scrapper, really.

After he accidentally cuts himself good with the stolen goods (I really would want this guy sticking pointy drills in me, yeppers) and moving to New Zealand, the dbag then gets all caught up in some kind of fucked up Samoan ghost story that I quickly lost interest in. Turns out there's a ghost of some young dead Samoan boy that, rather than take revenge on his murderers (who turn out to be his family members, as expected for such a uncivilized and barbaric race), is killing people that the dumbfuck protag inks up. yeah, I don't get it either - there might have been an explanation given beyond Jason Behr cutting himself with the stick and therefore opening up a "channel" for the spirit, but fuck if I cared by the end of this crapfest. I'm pretty sure the damn stick has cut into other people before, e.g. customers.

Honestly folks, I read the back of this, saw that there was nudity and decided, "Fuck it, Blockbuster owes me a free rental anyway". Sure there were tits, sure there was blood, sure there was blood on said tits, but nothing other than your standard VOODOO COLORED PEOPLE BAD, LET'S SOLVE THE MYSTERY AND THEN FLY BACK FOR SOME COSMOS. I'm so done with this movie.

Writing: Boring plot, all the deaths occur over the course of only three or four hammy scenes, I guess there's a twist?

Direction: Boy this guy really likes tattoos. And women coughing up really viscous ink. And overwrought flashback sequences.

Acting: Behr conveys the emotional state of befuddlement quite well but I guess that's all the character ever felt. That and the occasional constipation.

Editing: The first act drags on and on, then we get a bunch of quick ghost-murderer scenes and then a CLIMATIC CONFRONTATION SCENE that I couldn't be bothered to even watch with both eyes (one was focused on porn).

Sound: They try to make the sound of hitting a stick with another stick the new Jason Voorhes murder cue.

Soundtrack/Score: When the protagonist first arrives in New Zealand, some annoying grunge band sounding fifteen years too late out of Seattle busts our movie-watchin' world WIDE OPEN. Who ever put the soundtrack together should go with a more relevant, maybe even talented band next time - perhaps one from New Zealand (don't ask me to name any).

Self-Awareness: This film recognizes the wholesome and unexplored culture of Samoans - and decides to depict them as either a bunch of conspiring child-killers or wannabe gangstas blasting trashy hip-hop from their tricked out whips. Remarkable.

Overall rating: *

~Ian