Reviews

What is "Movie 43″? It's a mostly weak excuse to gather together a massive mega-star cast to generate massive box office revenue as a film about massively disgusting things. Okay, so I've actually seen worse. But "Movie 43″ certainly doesn't pull any punches, and in striving to push the comedic envelope it misses more often than it hits. The novelty of watching very respectable actors do and say unmentionable things wears off eventually, but on perhaps three or four occasions the laughs simply can't be denied. "Movie 43″ is a collection of shorts with the singular goal of entertaining those that appreciate sick humor. But even those people will likely find 43 reasons to be underwhelmed with this movie.

-Thomas Bond

The Guillermo del Toro produced "Mama" is an overwhelmingly creepy film, rich in fine acting and startling visuals. It tells the tale of two young girls who, after having lived alone in the woods for five years, are rescued by a young couple. What was keeping them alive? We soon find out, as a very protective ghostly Mama reveals herself at the family's house, and quickly begins trying to take "her" girls back where they belong. This is a solid ghost story, atmospheric and frightening, but softened by an overuse of unnecessary CGI and far too many cliché genre inclusions. But the amazing performances, especially those of the two young girls, summon this thriller back from the dead and into the realm of Good Movies.

-Thomas Bond

I appreciate mindless, genre-embracing, wacky, over-the-top violent movies as much as the next guy, but they still have to meet a few requirements, namely that they are first and foremost not boring. "The Last Stand" falls flat on its face in that department. A promising premise involving a bad guy speeding towards the Mexican border and the small town and its sheriff (Arnold Schwarzenegger) that stand in his way seemed destined for senseless greatness. But bad acting (acting is, in fact, still a requirement in these films) and a plot that moves slower than a small town on a Sunday morning result in a terrible film whose title aptly describes the state of the theatre after the film's showing, where countless numbers of people remain unintentionally rooted to their seats, long after the credits have ended. They're asleep.

-Thomas Bond

"Silver Linings Playbook" is a rare kind of film. It's a difficult task to honestly and realistically present characters who are struggling deeply with heavy issues, without tipping over into emotional goo and sentimentality But David O. Russell is the man for the job, expertly leading four of his talented actors to Oscar nominations in a film that gives a delightfully raw edge to screwball comedy. Bradley Cooper stars as a recently released mental patient, trying to put his life back together and reunite with his estranged wife with the help of a similarly struggling Jennifer Lawrence, who is recovering from the death of her husband. Their relationship buds and grows around their practice for a dance competition that Lawrence wants to dance in, and around Philadelphia Eagles football. Co-starring Robert De Niro, Jacki Weaver, and Chris Tucker, "Silver Linings" is a quirky, affecting love story about the power of staying optimistic and the strength of family bonds, brimming with characters you want to cheer for. That I wouldn't be at all upset if this poignant comedy took home Best Picture, in a year of so many fine candidates, should be enough to get you to go see it today.

-Thomas Bond

"Django Unchained" is without a doubt the best film of 2012, a slick, sharp-tongued, bloody action epic that has Quentin Tarantino's fingerprints all over every smartly homaged frame. Smart dialogue, an incredible soundtrack, and more blood than all the horror flicks of 2012 combined are what usually make Tarantino's films so indulgently fantastic, the kind of movies that real movie-lovers love. And that's all here, with a double check on the amount of blood as Django teams up with a Dr. Schulz to rescue his wife from the hands of a mad man, and violently exacts vengeance on her captors. But Tarantino's films have also always featured strong, wonderfully defined performances, and there's no shortage here. Jamie Foxx as the vengeance-seeking Django, Christoph Waltz as the dentist-turned-bounty-hunter King Schultz, Leonardo DiCaprio as the violently eccentric plantation owner Calvin Candie, Kerry Washington as Django's lost love, and Samuel L. Jackson in a scene-stealing performance as Steven, Candie's right-hand man. That only Waltz managed to get Oscar's attention is a travesty. I would have given a nomination to Foxx, DiCaprio and Jackson as well, if I had the choice. Unfortunately, I don't. An incredible host of famous faces rounds out the epic cast, including a bit part by a lazy-eyed Jonah Hill and a hilariously explosive cameo by the director himself. Don't like Westerns, you say? This will be your exception, as it both affirms and breaks the sacred and longstanding rules of the genre, and throws in some new elements to redefine and reinvigorate (an Oscar-worthy original rap song, for instance). At 165 minutes, the film seems to be reaching a ridiculously violent climax during a shoot-out for the ages, but Tarantino is only beginning to turn on the heat at this point, and the ending will have you boiling over with excitement.

-Thomas Bond

Judd Apatow returns to the director's chair with a hilarious vengeance as he directs his wife (Leslie Mann), two daughters (Maude and Iris) and Paul Rudd as a family who are all simultaneously reaching an awkward age where nothing seems to gel. Rudd is secretly taking Viagra and sneaking cupcakes behind his wife's back, while she's hiding her smoking habit and trying to account for twelve-thousand dollars of lost merchandise at her clothing store. The oldest daughter is addicted to "Lost" and a wimpy boy, while the youngest girl simply wants to be noticed. "Chaos" would seem to be the theme that carries through "This Is 40″, told in a series of episodes that altogether show a family under fire. As always with Apatow, the film has a raunchy heart of gold, and while these characters may not like each other, their love for one another is never doubted, a love that is present in each of the actors' excellent performances. Filled to the comedic brim with an outstanding supporting cast (Jason Segel, Megan Fox, Chris O'Dowd, Albert Brooks, John Lithgow, Melissa McCarthy), this movie will tickle your funny bone as many times as it will strike a poignant nerve.

-Thomas Bond

Tom Hooper's emotional wallop of a film is easily the biggest spectacle in recent years. It's a lavish musical that hasn't been seen since "Chicago" took a stab at it back in 2003, complete with intricate and ornate sets, lush costumes, and of course, singing. Lots of singing. In fact, there's only singing, and while it may take a bit of getting used to, the skill and expertise of the actors is put on display in a rare and marvelous way that no one dare not appreciate. The film, based on both Victor Hugo's sprawling novel as well as the famed Broadway production, takes us into 19th-century France, where Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman), who for decades has been hunted by the ruthless policeman Javert (Russell Crowe) after he breaks parole, agrees to care for factory worker Fantine's (Anne Hathaway) daughter, Cosette (Amanda Seyfried), a fateful decision that changes all of their lives forever. Throw in a couple of hilarious scene-stealing performances by Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter, and a solid turn by young Eddie Redmayne, and you've got a a minor casting miracle on your hands. What makes this film really stand out among musicals is the choice to use live singing on set. No voice-overs or dubbing of any kind here. Every word and note are presented as they were sung on set, raw and true. The result is both refreshing and gritty, lending a darker edge to a usually uplifting genre. While the title may suggest great sadness, the power and triumph and beauty of life in this grand film cannot be overcome, and I challenge anyone to emerge from this film feeling "miserable".

-Thomas Bond

Tom Cruise is at his snap-crackling best as Jack Reacher, a mysterious drifter with a skill set dangerous enough to make Liam Neeson shake in his boots. Called in to help solve a crime involving a military sniper, Jack soon realizes the stakes are much bigger than what he signed up for. But armed with quick one-liners, macho moves, and a charisma that breaks violently through the silver screen, there's nothing Reacher can't handle. Save for a ruthless and emotionless killer played by the one and only Werner Herzog, and perhaps the charms of Rosamund Pike. Written and directed with a slick, smooth confidence by Christopher McQuarrie, "Jack Reacher" is both a genre-defining action flick and an exciting character that you'll want to watch again and again.

-Thomas Bond

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is mostly what you'd expect it to be. If you've seen Peter Jackson's "LOTR Trilogy" and have been keeping an eye on the TV spots and movie trailers, it's just like that. Not much more. And not that that's bad, the film is fantastic entertainment. However, it feels so much like a rehash of some of "LOTR"'s most famous scenes that one could begin to think that the filmmakers, as they tried to stretch out a single book into three films, were running low on originality. Perhaps that's why they decided to go with the High Frame Rate format, a gimmick even cheaper than 3D that displays the film at twice the frame rate of standard projection, resulting in a hyper- realistic, sped up look that feels like a daytime soap opera. It is anything but cinematic (see it in IMAX, instead!). However, HFR and 3D do indeed compliment each other, and there are certainly grand possibilities here for the advancement of cinema. Just don't experiment with it on such important works as Tolkien's "The Hobbit". Save that for "Avatar 2″. But I digress. The film itself covers the first third of the book, and introduces us to a much younger Bilbo as he reluctantly joins Gandalf the Wizard and a company of Dwarfs determined to reclaim their homeland from a wicked dragon. We won't see that fight until the second movie, though, so this film fills its nearly three-hour running time with trolls, giant spiders, goblins, and orcs. While some parts stretch a bit, there is plenty of adventure, sweeping vistas, and fighting to please every fan boy (the film has already shot to #88 on IMDb.com's Top 250, a sure sign of bloated fan boy love). The best scene by far, however, takes place deep in a cave, between Bilbo Baggins and a familiar face, Gollum. Their game of riddles to determine Bilbo's fate is perfectly written and is so full of wit, charm, and suspense that it threatens to spill out of the screen. Andy Serkis's masterful motion- capture performance outdoes anything he has ever done before. The man is sheer brilliance, and the day that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences recognizes that will be a great day indeed. He earns a spot as one of five Best Supporting Performances of 2012, in my book at least.

-Thomas Bond

This powerful true story based on the life of Mark O'Brien hits all of the right notes and is full of heartwarming surprises. Adapted from bed-ridden O'Brien's article about his experiences losing his virginity to a kind sex surrogate (and learning about the even greater pleasure of loving and being loved in return), "The Sessions" is witty and true, with performances that will certainly garner attention come Oscar time. Helen Hunt has a shot at a supporting nom as the caring sex surrogate, but it is John Hawkes' dedicated role as Mark that is easily one of the best lead performances of the year. He is inspiring, and so is this moving film.

-Thomas Bond

After the 16th President of the United States was somewhat lampooned earlier this year as he chopped off the heads of vampires, Steven Spielberg was finishing work on a more serious look at Honest Abe, aptly title "Lincoln", and though it may lack the action of Vamp Abe it is certainly every bit as powerful in its portrayal of a torn nation, and the man who will stop at nothing to bring it back together. The intensity in the film is drawn from heated conversations about slavery and the Civil War, and this word-sparring is stuff for the ages as a whole host of famous faces get screen time to connive and throw insults across the House of Representatives floor. Tommy Lee Jones is stellar as a Republican whose verbose insults are like bolts of electricity jumping out of the screen. But of course it is Daniel Day-Lewis who offers up yet another transforming performance as the titular character. His mannerisms, voice, look, and style give us not just a character, but another person entirely. He channels the spirit of Lincoln in every form and fashion, and it's scary-good to watch. He'll be in a familiar place come time for the Best Actor nominations to be passed out.

-Thomas Bond

This pitiful remake is nothing more than a hurried excuse to make money off of an 80′s action brand that made its money off of the pretty faces that starred in it, by doing more of the same. Oh well, we've got Chris Hemsworth and Josh Hutcherson, right? (both fine actors, by the way). But wait, hell with them, let's have a greasy-looking, stoner-faced, mumbling Josh Peck as our war-torn hero. These "pretty faces" fill out the empty space where the rest of the story about a hostile North Korean attack on American soil should be. Wait, where's the United States military? Hell with them, there's some device that shut them all down, and these kids are our last hope! Yeah, right. If you can tie an anchor to every last one of your disbeliefs and drown them in the waters of horrible cinema, then maybe you can appreciate one or two of the well- orchestrated and intense action scenes that "Red Dawn 2.0″ has to offer. Maybe you can even grow attached to some of the characters. But hell with all that, and hell with an ending. That's the reward for your investment. But hey, the studios probably made enough money for a sequel. So there's that.

Disney's latest animated adventure is a wild ride that nerds and boring people alike will find irresistibly fun! But "Wreck-It Ralph" is ultimately for the gamers, who will likely have more fun chuckling at all of the clever in-jokes and cameo appearances by famous video game characters. Beneath it all is a plot-structure older than Atari, but it's the shiny box the story comes in that makes it so desirable. John C. Reilly voices Ralph, a video game villain who longs to be loved and appreciated, desiring more for himself than his angry job description dictates He game jumps (Gasp! What will his home game do without him?) in search of a way to become a hero, and in doing so meets new friends and risks his life (if you die outside your home game, you die for good) to give them a better one. Sarah Silverman, Jane Lynch, and Jack McBrayer also offer their voices to this high-energy sugar rush that gives life to impossible characters and situations in an exhilarating way that no one has done since Pixar dunked us deep into the waters of Australia.

-Thomas Bond

"Cloud Atlas" is jaw-droppingly, awe-inspiringly, eye-poppingly stunning in every way. I could leave it at that, for no review, article, essay or book could do a description of this movie justice (except, of course, for David Mitchell's original novel upon which the film is based. But even then, only maybe). What directors Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski, and Lana Wachowski have accomplished here is a film that is felt deeply, a film that is an experience through everything that makes us human, the good and the bad. Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Hugh Grant, and many more play multiple roles across many ages of time. Their characters' actions cause ripples in the pond of endless existence. A curious birthmark, a common theme, and an unstoppable force of masterful pacing are all that seem to connect their stories at first glance. But the magic the filmmakers have accomplished occurs on deeper levels, within us, the audience. "Cloud Atlas" adds to you. It becomes a part of you. Let the film wash over you and inspire you to greatness. Who knows how your actions of today could affect someone generations from now. This film boldly visualizes that notion in an Oscar-worthy tale that is among the year's best. See it! Because if ever a film could boast that it "has it all", it is "Cloud Atlas".

-Thomas Bond

Daniel Craig has now starred in the two greatest James Bond movies ever made (let the criticism begin), and although he also starred in the worst ("Quantum of Solace"), it wasn't all his fault and can be forgiven. But enough comparing, because "Skyfall" needs no comparison, and would embarrass its competitors anyway. Sam Mendes has delivered a riveting thrill machine of a movie, with a rich character at its heart – James Bond. That's right, the cold, calculating killer reveals even more of his soft side as we delve deep into his past. The emotional feeling we get from the famed agent is entirely due to Craig's acting, who has brought more to the psychological side of Bond than the rest of the players combined. Sure, his films may lack some of the quirk and humor of the earlier offerings, but the character is still finding himself (six years ago he didn't even know what drink to order). And trust me, there is plenty of humor, and a dash of quirk, in this fantastic entry. "Skyfall" gives us a compelling story that we can actually wrap our heads around, as it is nearly as simple as revenge. We get a wildly sinister villain from Javier Bardem (who reminds me of Ledger's turn as Joker, and Bardem is equally Oscar-worthy), a multi-dimensional M from Judi Dench, the introduction of Q and Money Penny, as well as some throwbacks towards the films of old. Directed by Oscar-winner Mendes and filmed with a master's touch by Roger Deakins, this is a Bond film that redefines Bond films (after "Casino Royale" rejuvenated them in 2006) and offers up something for everyone. Two amazingly choreographed (and photographed) action scenes and Adele's soul-stirring theme song, with the accompanying and superb opening credits, are the icing on the cake. So I suppose the 23rd time's the charm. "Skyfall" drops strongly in first place as the best of Bond.

-Thomas Bond

Ben Affleck's third film as a director, "Argo", about the 1980 Iranian hostage crisis and the fake film created as a ruse to facilitate the rescue of six Americans, is undoubtedly his finest and most sure-handed offering. It's smooth story-telling that's gripping and balanced, offering up thrills and laughs aplenty. That he has been once again blessed with a slew of extremely talented actors is just an elegant spice on top of this superb cinematic treat. It's a Hollywood winner that is stylistic and suspenseful in ways that so much of the boring box-office sure-bets grossly lack. Even if it lacks some of the intense bite of his "Gone Baby Gone", it's still Best Picture nom quality for sure, and a Best Director for Affleck, as well as a handful of other guaranteed nominations. And if I'm not mistaken, nothing seems destined to stop it from actually winning in all of these categories.

-Thomas Bond, TheFilmDiscussion

"All the activity has led to this." At least that's what the posters say. But what exactly have three movies about paranormal things that occur while we sleep led to? "Paranormal Activity 4" doesn't say. The latest installment of the scare-a-minute franchise brings back directors Joost and Schulman, who breathed new life into the franchise with "Paranormal Activity 3", but who seem to have run out of air here. Sure, their new film is scary enough and still retains a more personal touch than the first two films, but it lacks any significant contributions to the building universe of the franchise. "PA4" brings us to present day Nevada and introduces a whole new family (read: victims). The married couple with a teenage girl and a little adopted boy soon begin taking care of another little boy from across the street after his mom has an accident and goes to the hospital. This new boy is creepy. Damien from "The Omen" has nothing on this little guy. Soon enough, strange things begin to happen at the house. Chandeliers crashing inexplicably, knives plunging themselves into marble counter tops, doors opening and closing, and a virtuoso scene involving a running car and a seemingly inescapable garage. These strange happenings raise many questions regarding who the creepy boy actually is, the history of the family's adopted son, and who the creepy boy's mom is and where she came from. Not to mention the baffling addition of what seems to be a new evil spirit in addition to the one that has been haunting these films since day one, and killings during the climax that seem entirely unnecessary. The final scene connects parts three and four with one outstandingly disturbing shot using night vision, but that too only begs more questions. It should be no surprise that many scenes from the trailer aren't in the actual film, including one that I found particularly clever involving a speaking alarm system gone haywire. Too bad. Many other gags were underused as well. A knife that inexplicably disappears comes back for a shock that is as bland as it gets. I had hoped for something far more creative. As always, the film still has its fair share of truly frightening scares, but none of them feel as fresh as they did in part one or even the third installment. Maybe it's an even numbers thing. The highest marks for this film go to the use of webcams and Skype as part of the repertoire of angles from which we see the film. This new technique offers us more "face time" with the characters, rather than simply seeing what they point their cameras at. It's much more involving and helps form bonds with the characters that make the terrifying situations all the more horrifying. Some night vision shots involving an Xbox Kinect's tracking-dot system are pretty clever as well, but again, they're underused. In spite of its brief moments of inventiveness, solid scares, and a climax that is truly nerve-shattering, the film begs so many unanswered questions that the best accolade it can be given is that it will make you have to see the unavoidable part five. And maybe you'll want to see it as well. Heck, I still do.

-Thomas Bond

Stephen Chbosky directs the film version of the novel that he wrote, and that personal touch is felt deeply through every frame of "The Perks of Being a Wallflower". The heart of this fantastic coming-of-age film is its performances – raw, true, and overflowing with youthful energy. Logan Lerman plays the shy freshman with a past, who doesn't quite know where he should try to fit in at his new school. Enter Ezra Miller and Emma Watson, seniors at the school with a rebellious streak and hearts of gold big enough to let the new kid into their world. Through their adventures they form bonds that may or may not last forever (you'll have to watch to find out), and memories that will undoubtedly guide them into greatness for the rest of their lives. The movie feels so John Hughes-y, bursting with style and substance, traits that most "teen" flicks of today lack desperately. So "Superbad" was deeper than most because it dealt with…the fear of loneliness, the unknown? "Perks" hits much harder with themes of sexuality, intense depression, molestation, and suicide. But you'll laugh too, it's not all a sob story. It's a true-life tale about growing up and fitting in, and allowing others to help you when you're at your worst. "Perks" is coming-of-age at its best.

-Thomas Bond

A man must serve a master, or a higher calling, in order to have peace and purpose. That seems to be the message of Paul Thomas Anderson's latest film, anyways. And while the message doesn't seem clear until the very end, there is plenty of cinematic gold to keep your mind ticking through its more than two hours of running time. "The Master" tells not so much a plotted tale, rather it presents us with two men who are both struggling in one way or another with the concept of something more than themselves, something bigger than their own lives. Joaquin Phoenix plays Freddie Quell, a sailor who at the end of WWII is more lost than ever, and whose taste for alcohol, even in toxic forms, grows more every day. He stumbles into Lancaster Dodd, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, a man whose life is devoted to The Cause, based on a book he wrote that purports to "awaken" humans unto their past and future lives, thus fully unlocking their potential. For some, like the volatile Freddie, it's a welcome avenue of purpose and belonging. For others, even Dodd's own son, it reeks of cult. What makes "The Master" so intriguing is the real world questions it raises about greater purpose and whether or not serving a higher power is a necessity. Dodd presents himself as being fully aware and realized, yet cracks begin to show as the years wear on him and his fame grows. We ask ourselves if he can keep it up. What's "it"? His followers start to wonder too. But who does Dodd serve? Who is his master? For Freddie Quell, his master is Dodd, and he serves him to the best of his ability, yet it's not enough for him. Freddie is a torn individual, desperate for belonging and purpose yet hell-bent on never being caged up like an animal. The mere presence of these characters is enough to fill hours of potential stories, whether the plot truly goes anywhere or not. With a film like "The Master", the journey is in the souls of the characters, and with us as well. It's a beautifully shot film, directed by a man who has yet to commit a cinematic foul, and acted by two men who disappear into their characters so fully we forget we're watching a movie. And isn't that the point? Here is a film that should surely earn Oscar noms for Directing, Cinematography, Art Direction, Best Actor (Phoenix), Best Supporting Actor (Hoffman), Best Supporting Actress (Amy Adams, as Dodd's frigid wife), as well as Best Picture, which it will surely win until I am convinced otherwise (Ben Affleck's "Argo", perhaps?). This film just "feels" like a winner. Not only that, but PTA might just have gotten away with presenting an (sometimes harsh) analogy to Scientology, as well as slyly suggesting that both of his lead characters are closeted gays. Talk about a loaded film.

-Thomas Bond, TheFilmDiscussion

Wow. After picking your jaw up off the ground, you'll have plenty of thinking and discussing to do when you see the best serious time travel movie ever made: Rian Johnson's "Looper". "Looper" sets the bar high early on with a breakneck pace and infectiously energetic atmosphere that pervades the entire film, as Jospeph Gordon-Levitt's character, Joe, violently kills a body that randomly appears in front of him in a desolate cornfield. Huh? Turns out it's his job. In the future, time travel exists, of course. But so dangerous is it that it is outlawed, meaning of course that only the bad guys use it. They set up an ingenious system where men are sent back 30 years in time to be killed and disposed of, a method so clean because the person doesn't even technically exist when they appear in the past to be blasted away and burned. The targets come with a hefty vest full of silver bricks, the pay-day for the killers, who are known as Loopers. Confused yet? Joe lives a cushy life, staying expensively drugged-up and sexed-up when he's not working, but a mistake by a fellow Looper throws a wrench in everything. The other Looper (Paul Dano) let his target go. Why? Because it was his future self, a pre-determined end for every Looper known as "closing the loop", so there are no messy ends. The bodies on these jobs are loaded with gold bricks, a step-up for killing yourself. Dano's Looper tells Joe that his future self warned of a man known as the Rainmaker who was closing loops with reckless abandon. With this new knowledge, Joe is faced with killing himself, and in a bizarre series of events that would take more than a book to explain, ends up in a race against time to stop his older self (Bruce Willis) from doing some very bad things. What's ingenious about the script is its ability to make us root for both versions of Joe, and yet pray that they are both stopped as well. The subtle make-up job for JGL is Oscar quality stuff, as are the special effects. The world that Johnson has created is simply stunning, and feels so realistic that we are immediately pulled into the mind-boggling loop of time travel without looking back. The actors are solid, and the action is fantastic. I have never seen a more flawlessly scripted movie about the paradoxes of time travel. This film is as clean and precise as a Looper's kill, and as exciting, original and ingeniously action-packed as anything else you'll see this year.

-Thomas Bond, TheFilmDiscussion

"Dredd 3D" is one of the best sci-fi actioners I've seen this side of the millennium. Karl Urban plays Judge Dredd, a ruff n' tuff cop in a violent future where his employer, The Hall of Justice, dispatches judges to extract justice on the lawbreakers of Mega City One, a sprawling wasteland of concrete and crime from Boston to the Capitol. These judges have been given the power of judge, jury, and executioner, so you don't cross them. On the day of the film, Dredd takes up a rookie cop (Olivia Thirlby) to train in the ways of 20xx law enforcement. As a bonus, she's a psychic, which comes in handy in quite a few situations, of course. They answer a homicide call at a 200-story futuristic project, where the crime boss Ma-Ma (Lena Headey) has taken complete control. Afraid that the cops will edge in on her drug business (Slo-Mo, which makes the brain fell as if it's experiencing life at 1% normal speed – this allows for some absolutely amazing sequences of slow-motion photography and violence), she hacks the building and locks them in, with one ultimatum over the loudspeaker: The doors won't open til the cops are dead. And that's the rest of the movie, a wonderfully action- packed wallop of stylistic violence and gore that understands it's a high-end B-movie and revels in it. The dialogue is so gruff and packed with machismo that you're guaranteed to grow chest hair by the film's end. What pulls this film up to a higher notch is the care given to the look and gadgets of the players. The judges' armor is incredibly intimidating, and their guns are a marvel that never stops surprising. The violence is intense and in-your-face (literally, if you see it in 3D, which I fully recommend, surprisingly), and the final result is a film that is so much fun you'll forget that it doesn't mean much when it's over.

-Thomas Bond, TheFilmDiscussion