So this is another of those "Without NetFlix I wouldn't have seen it" movies. And thank goodness for NetFlix that I was able to experience this movie. It took me a LONG time to even bother to watch it.. I've had this movie for about two weeks, MAYBE MORE. But this story hits you. Watch it. It's really touching.

Introspective conversation piece: How appealing would it be if you could date on a lack of short term memory like Lucy in the movie - JUST for dating though?

This movie is funny, touching, and delivers a good kick to the gut. Talk to me if you've seen it.

The LXG: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was based off of work by Alan Moore - just as From Hell was. Like LXG, Moore recontextualized classic stories/characters into alternative versions/ environments. From Hell is based on Jack the Ripper and there are new twists.

I'm not sure if the new twists are factual - but nevertheless, the new contexts are really interesting.

The Hughes brothers direted this movie and the only other work of theirs I've seen were Menace II Society and Dead Presidents. Obviously, From Hell is a totally different movie and I thought it worked. The score, the cinematography, and the acting were all pretty good. Johnny Depp is a master. I don't think the character offered too much range, but he completed the role nonetheless.

Basically, this is a really stupid movie. Leave everything at the door and just walk in and laugh even if the shit is majorly offensive.

Ben Stiller is probably the best character/sketch comic in the business now - maybe ranked just a bit higher than Mike Myers due to more movies. Jim Carrey is also great, but he's not doing the character/sketch comedies like he did early in his career. Ben Stiller does not let his fans down in this movie.

For the offensive part - there's racist, sexist, homophobic, and sexual harrassment images/jokes in the movie to fit the formula.

But I'm guilty.. I laughed through most of it. Shaking my head at times.

It was great to see Tom Hanks in a totally atypical role for him. I haven't watched a lot of mafia movies in the past, so I couldn't compare and wouldn't anyway.

Simply put, it was a great experience.

I'm not really into British movies much - and the zombie thing seemed bland to me when I watched the trailers - but this movie is actually not about zombies per se, but it is also much more than a simple horror flick.

There's morality and integrity being preached in this sci-fi/ horror - just as Science Fiction always has been most nobly used for since its evolution (mythology, parables, etc.)

I think one of the MOST interesting parts of the DVD was EXTREME alternative ending that was done with storyboards and creators reading the the script. Also, the deleted scenes showed a lot more. In the EXTREME alternative ending and the deleted scenes, there were more witty, dry humor parts than what ended up being depicted. The final product is much more darker and serious. The other version of it might have been interesting too.

It wasn't Kill Bill. I will admit to supporting Ben Affleck, but I'm a much bigger fan of him in off-beat comedies like Chasing Amy than in action movies. And the Rachel role for Uma was no [bleep] Kiddo. AND - the visuals of this movie did not match MI:2 or FACE/OFF. That said, I still enjoyed the movie.

Despite having a plot that could easily be nitpicked for continuation and logical mishaps, I just sat back and got caught up in the story. There was nothing spectacular about the acting, the story, the plot, the characterization - it was pretty much a brainless action movie that played off of one gimick (no twists) that was spoon fed to the audience.

Why I enjoyed it? Why do I enjoy John Woo movies? For the sake of their brainlessness and their dedication to fun and fast paced aesthetic action.

The movie was interesting and very funny in a not laugh-out-loud type of way. The character quirks and conflicts between Charlie and his brother Donald were fun to witness. Foreshadowing gags on the whole script made me analyze a bit too hard at the end especially with the weird twist the movie went into after you thought that Charlie Kauffman-struggling-to-write overt plot was coming to a meaningful end. Instead i was like, "what the fuck is going on". I'm not sure how much I like the end for this movie but the prior 1 hour 20 minutes were meant for a struggling artisan to watch.

"Why can't the movie exist and not be plot driven?!" - Charlie

"You are what you love not what loves you." - Donald

Definitely worth watching - for my tastes, primarily the before the twist at the end.

American Splendor - the movie, the comic book, and the play are all the media forms of Harvey Pekar's REAL LIFE. So this was a biopic - completely adapted from the frames in the comic books completely adapted from the moments in his life. The movie goes back and forth between acting and actual footage of Harvey.

So as I said, I really didn't know what to expect - and maybe that was the great thing because I fully enjoyed the movie. Who would've thought that a movie about such a grouchy person would be so endearing.

Harvey Pekar defines "lovable loser" with the greatest charm even though he's not a loser at all - as well as the other real life characters portrayed/showed in the film.

BTW, as a social work student, I LOVE the references to the DSM-III (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). HAHA. I'm such a nerd.

So Cowboy Bebop completes my first full run with NetFlix. I think I picked an eclectic mix - this being the most blockbuster in nature. This is an action movie, but a bit more. I don't know much about state-of-the-art ANIME, but the animation was good. There were explosions. Bounty hunters searching a Terrorist with depth.

I think my favorite aspect of the movie was the score/soundtrack. It was an interesting mix, but the jazz and funk tunes took my greatest attention. Imagine - an anime movie taking place in Mars playing some nice jazz numbers. Cool shit.

OH, I remember what got my attention about this movie when it was released (on DVD). The fact that it was a futuristic tale but had "cowboy" in the title. The movie plays on this metaphor a bit - even showing a retro Drive-in Western flick. Though it wasn't heavy on the genre homage like Kill Bill was.

It was a cool experience - but it didn't get me like Ghost in the Shell or Vampire Hunter D.

I am coming into the movie with a completely clean slate. I know no history, future, and definitely no present. After reading fan reviews ripping the movie for being too liberal with the story adjustments, I'm glad I didn't come in with a stick up my ass, because it would have ruined it for me - EXPECTATIONS ruin all pieces of art.

Though it's wonderful to have high expectations in life, of others, of yourself, and of society - the reality is that expectations in less life altering issues like movies, books, paintings, and CDs may hurt a bit but ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Movies are adaptations - not verbatim preservations of intricate details. I would be offended if a story was skewed so badly that the main plot was abused and characters were not given their just due in terms of development. That part I appreciate - but a movie has limitations. Had I had a hissy-fit regarding the X-Men movies, I wouldn't have enjoyed their superficially endearing entertainment value. Until I read the book, all I can say is that this effort may be a struggling adaptation of the book and its spirit, but it is not a bad movie.

Aside from that soapbox - I thought it was dark for a children's movie - some of the images may be a bit too disturbing for the younger ones. I am totally enwrapped in the characters now - Harry and his friends.

I am going to read the franchise and I will reflect on my thoughts on THE LIT because of my experience with this movie. My suggestion would be to watch the movie with as clean of a slate as possible - then buy the DVD or watch it again in the theater and then nitpick it. Why ruin the experience of watching it raw as the writers, actors, and director saw fit? There are obvious limitations - key villains are under developed - but the heroes are quite endearing enough to fully get behind. Hardcore fans might not be swept off their feet, but any "movie-watcher" could enjoy this broomstick ride!

Maybe I was being unfair to the movie starting it at 11pm after being dead tired from lack of sleep. It kept my attention through most of it, but I eventually dozed off for a few minutes. I missed some important stuff.

Anyway, my initial reaction to it is that it is very fast paced and at times too busy. Overall, I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I had watched it with full energy and attention. Val Kilmer is really good.

The hook to this crime drama was that it was a true mystery and it involved legendary porn star, John Holmes (Kilmer). In terms of the movie, Holmes was much more a drug addict in a tailspin of destructive behavior than the passed-his-prime porn king. "Boogie Knights" is all about John Holmes and the porn industry. His porn lifestyle is not much of an issue in this movie - instead dominated by a "whodunnit" and why feel.

I enjoyed it, but wasn't blown away.

It's hard for me nowadays to hear or read great reviews for movies because when I finally see them, I tend to turn my expectations into the greatest downfall of the movie. AND that is so unfair to the film. That's what happened with Lost in Translation.

I heard Eternal Sunshine was a good movie through Joyce and my friends. I was very excited to watch it even when I saw the preview - so I was afraid that I was shooting myself in the toe again.

The first 20 minutes or so were fun - nothing spectacular in terms of the story, but great in the editing - the use of lights and darks and fluid transitions with the audio despite the frantic pace.

I knew the movie had to do with memories from a review I read, but the introduction of the company was a bit hazy. I tried hard to break free from understanding it so I could just enjoy it - then analyze it later. Once I did that, the movie just took off.

I think Quentin Tarantino showed in Kill Bill Vol. 1 that he is a visual/aural genius and the pace/plot/ and character development was on key. With a far less glitzy approach, Charlie Kaufman showed his own genius. The love story really is the essential gem in the fantasy of the plot, but there really was great success in allowing me to become part of the scene like Kubrick's known for.

I sound like a film geek. I really love the movie. I kinda foresaw parts of the end early in the story, but I was excited anyway. GYEAH!

""Troy" is based on the epic poem The Iliad by Homer, according to the credits. Homer's estate should sue. The movie sidesteps the existence of the Greek gods, turns its heroes into action movie cliches and demonstrates that we're getting tired of computer-generated armies. Better a couple of hundred sweaty warriors than two masses of 50,000 men marching toward one another across a sea of special effects."

IF THAT CAN'T KEEP YOU FROM WATCHING A MOVIE.. shoot, you are a generous being! I don't really like Ebert much, but I respect his writing and insights enough to peruse his thoughts occassionally. The first line is a killer in this review. I agree that I'm getting sick of computer generated movies. GEORGE LUCAS.. please be sick of it too and make a quality final installment of your landmark - now victim of your addiction to cgi - intellectual property!

I have to admit that I placed Ghost World on a high pedastal despite not knowing anything at all about the graphic novel, the story, or the plot of the movie. It was just a comic book movie that wasn't JUST a comic book movie and therefore I was excited. Throughout the first 15 - 20 minutes, I thought the movie was slow - mainly due to the expectations I had of the movie. Again, my lack of knowledge of the Ghost World franchise didn't help.

AFTER I let go of the fillm-geek OCD, I settled into the movie and began to enjoy it. There are a lot of funny scenes in it - my favorite being the last session of the art class. JUST PAY ATTENTION TO ENID, and you will realize the humor and characterization in such a simple scene hit on point.

Part of the reason I could not completely cheer on my lead characters was that I could not identify with them completely. I can't deal with suburban adolescent whining. I got over it. Enid is a very endearing character despite my differing experiences from hers. Seymour (Buscemi) was another hapless character of wavering admirabilty but was charming throughout.

I was also trying to figure out what Ghost World meant, and not only after watching the special features did I realize that Ghost world was a play on the idea of a "ghost town". AND DESPITE the environmental conflict was obvious in the movie, the term GHOST WORLD really took life during that brief documentary.

Ghost World is definitely not another teen movie and definitely not another comic book movie. It is a change of pace - and it is nothing close to a ghost of a movie.