Yesterday marked the 50th Anniversary of the release of the Mothra in Japan.  It is a beautiful film to watch.  The effects by Eiji Tsuburaya are top notch.  Ishiro Honda's direction brings us a film that is masterful in it simplicity.

On Facebook, a number of fans marked the occasion by taking part in a combined viewing where by they all started it at the same time and then "chatted" with each other as it played.  It was a great, communal experience that was a big hit with all who were able to take part.

We hope to make it a regular experience that anyone added to the group can take part in.

So in an effort to back up my words, I will post my review of the latest entry in the Marvel comics come to life genre, THOR.  I went with the family to take in Thor in 3D on Friday night.  We all enjoyed it a great deal.  I didn't think it was great but I enjoyed the heck out of it and felt it was a very strong lead in to the upcoming Avengers release of 2012.  The showcase Marvel film of 2011 is Captain America, as he is more central to the Avenger's line up. 

Thor may be considered a lesser member to some but I loved the character.  I dressed as Thor in 5th grade for Halloween.  I don't know if it was because of the long hair and my growing up in the 1970s when only rock stars and cool big brothers had hair like that but I wanted to be Thor with his muscles, long hair and the cool hammer.  I achieved a few of those items but was nowhere as cool and powerful.

The Thor film benefits from a very stong cast consisting of Chris Hemsworth in the titular role, Anthony Hopkins as his father Odin, Stellan Skarsgård and Natalie Portman as love interest Jane Foster.  I felt the cast was very strong with the exception of Portman.  She was bad in the Star Wars prequel trilogy and delivered the same wooden, unconvincing performance here.  Hemsworth on the other hand was great.  He was very likeable and handled teh role with the power and majesty it deserved.  Fortunately he was strong enough to overcome Portman's weakness. 

I left the theater all ready for Captain America later in the Summer and the Avengers in 2012.  I give THOR 3 and a half Billys.

Today, we saw the last of the Oscar Best Picture nominees that we will see before the ceremony tomorrow night.  And I believe we saved the best for last.  When we saw True Grit on Christmas night, I was sure we had seen the best film of the year.  That lasted until today when we saw The Kings Speech. 

The King's Speech was a dynamite film.  It tells the story of the Duke of York in the years before England was pushed into WWII.  The Duke finds himself being put in a position where is called upon to engage in public speaking.  That would not be a problem for most people raised in royalty but for the Duke, this was a very big problem as he is a stutterer.

Colin Firth will likely get the Oscar for his role as Albert, the son of King George V of Britain.  Unfortunately for Geoffrey Rush, who plays speech therapist Lionel Logue, Christian Bayle will likely get the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.  If not for Bayle's performance, Rush would also be a shoe-in.

The King's Speech is not so much a film about the Royals as it is a film about the human condition and the fight to overcome's one's problems.  That is something anyone can relate to.

I give the King's Speech 4 and Half Billys.

Several websites have posted this story with photos of a possible design for Legendary's 2012 Godzilla from many media outlets. I personally don't think the real thing would come out without a lot of fanfare on the part of Legendary.   They have made it very clear that they will not be repeating the mistakes made by Tri-Star in 1998 and intend on remaining faithful to the iconic character that has been popular around the world for over half a century.

I think when they do unveil their Godzilla design, it will be accompanied by footage, press releases and at least one still.

That said, this does look cool.

Godzilla fandom was buzzing this afternoon after news broke that Legendary Pictures, the studio behind the latest Batman films, 300 and The Hangover, in a joint venure with Warner Brothers and Toho Company Ltd, would be rebooting the Godzilla series with a new film they hope to release in 2012.  Most encouraging to fans who were sorely disappointed by the 1998 Tri-Star debacle was the quote from Legendary Chairman and CEO, Thomas Tull...

"Godzilla is one of the world's most powerful pop culture icons, and we at Legendary are thrilled to be able to create a modern epic based on this long-loved Toho franchise.  Our plans are to produce the Godzilla that we, as fans, would want to see. We intend to do justice to those essential elements that have allowed this character to remain as pop culturally relevant for as long as it has."

After the thumbing of their noses by Dean Devlin and Rolland Emmerich at the 22 films that came before theirs and the elitist attitude they displayed towards the real Gojira, only to release a steaming pile of crap dubbed GINO (Godzilla In Name Only) by Godzilla fan Richard Pusateri, Mr. Tull sounds like he's one of us and that he gets it.  This presents a real breath of fresh air.  Warner Brothers PIctures President Jeff Robinov added "Godzilla is emblematic of the kind of branded, event films for which Warner Bros. and our partners at Legendary are best known."

Could this be the Hollywood Godzilla film that fans have waited for?  Could this film turn out great and make up for the ill will created by the Devlin/Emmerich junk-fest?  Only time will tell but it is off to a great start.

More coverage at The Hollywood Reporter, Obsessed With Film and Coming Soon.

What started out as a dark, windy, snowy Chicago day ended up a movie marathon that none of us expected.

We had decided to take in Diary of a Wimpy Kid at the local googleplex on Friday.  Circumstances in the positive caused a delay so we decided for a Saturday showing, instead.  The kids had read and loved the Wimpy Kid series of books by Jeff Kinney.  Lillie, especially, was a fan and we would soon find out this was not a good thing for the film.

Most of learn as we grow older that film that are based on great books rarely live up to the source material.  Sadly, Lillie learned that lesson yesterday.  There were a number of scenes that presented things differently than the books as well as characters that didn't existing the universe of the written word.  As a result, she proclaimed this the worst movie she'd ever seen.

Was it really?  Likely, no.  Living in the family of a Godzilla fan, who loves sci-fi, horror and comic book movies, she has seen a lot of bad, bad movies.  But like all of us who have seen a film version of a beloved book, she was let down that it did not live up to her preconceived expectation of what a film based on these books should be like.

So for the non-reader of the series, was it a bad film.  No, not at all.  It was very funny.  It was full of life lessons and characters we could all relate to.  The grownups liked it more than the kids because we had no preconceived ideas of what the film should be like.

Afterward, we carried out a less thn acceptable haircut on the boy.  I wanted a good four inches taken off.  The hairdresser loved his hair so she would not cut it.  Instead she got rid of the unsightly ends to the strands.  At least we had a coupon for half off the cut.

A bit of shopping and dinner later and it was time for more movies.  I decided it would be Astro Boy.  As most fans of the original animated series found out, this was not our Astro Boy.  Sure the CGI Astro Boy looked a bit like the 2D Astro Boy we loved and the characters all had huge noses but it was watered down.  It didn't have the magic that the original did.  It was entertaining enough but not what I had hoped.  I know exactly how Lillie felt earlier in the day.

After that, we got ready for The Return of Dr. Phibes on Svengoolie but Mary requested District 9 since we'd recently seen Phibes on Sven.  I was happy to oblige.  I'd seen District 9 at the theater and really enjoyed it.  Much like Cloverfield, it took a film genre that we were very familiar with, in this case Alien Invasion, and presented it in a light that was ground breaking and very riveting.  Happily, Mary shared my appreciation for the film.

So it was a Movie Marathon Saturday.  Perfect for the turn the weather took.  Now if I can just get rid of this stinking cold, I'll really be happy.

We watched 2012 over the weekend.  It seemed like a movie that would have been much more enjoyable on the big screen.  The destruction scenes were very well done.  Sure the plot is based on shaky theories that the Mayan's predicted the end of the world because their calendar runs out.  Maybe they decided it was far enough in the future that they would pick it up again when they got closer to the end, only to be wiped out before they got there.

The science behind the film is that the solar flares are causing the interior of the Earth to liquefy which in turn causes the crust to shift leading to earthquakes, sinkholes, volcanoes, tsunamis, death, destruction and stuff.  It's more Roland Emmerich "End of the World" because it's what he does so well.  It is a popcorn movie that the whole family can enjoy.

John Cusack goes through a never ending parade of dilemmas as the world comes to an end.  Danny Glover stars as the President.  Thandie Newton is his daughter.  Oliver Platt is a government bad guy.  And Woody Harrelson plays a whacked out, conspiracy nut, radio talk show host.  Again, typical Roland Emmerich.

It is not a thought piece.  This is not a serious, dramatic film.  It is eye candy that should be seen when you need entertaining.  When it gets closer to December 2012 and the world starts to really come to an end, that may change.  Until then, it was a decent enough disaster flick that is best seen on the home theater where you can stop it to get a snack or take a nature break.

I give 2012 two and a half Billys.

The second trailer for Iron Man 2 has been released.  Makes the movie look even cooler.  Hopefully it won't suffer from over saturation of characters as most super hero film sequels with more than one hero and one villain (Batman Returns, et al) do.

Iron Man 2 is out May 7th.

Last night was the 82nd Academy Awards ceremony.  I watched it with my entire family and many friends by posting about the festivities on THE Facebook.  There were some high points and some low points.  Makes sense.

Among the high points were the little films that could.  The shut out of Avatar in the non-technical categories may have been a surprise to some, but not everyone.  The Hurt Locker did what few thought it would by making history with Kathryn Bigelow becoming the first female director to win the Best Director Oscar.  The night was capped with her film winning Best Picture.

Jeff Bridges' win and acceptance speech were another highlight.  We had to explain to our daughter that he grew up in the 1960s in California so that's why he kept saying man.  Sandra Bullock's deek of Meryl Streep as she headed to the stage was silly funny.

The Supporting Actor and Actress statues went to deserving but unsurprising winners Mo'nique and Christoph Waltz in great performances by both.

The Tina Fey / Robert Downey Jr. presentation of screen-writing awards was great.

On the flipside, Ben Stiller's presentation dressed as a Na'vi from Avatar was funny for about a second or two.  As he noted, there was an irony that he was dressed as a character that was completely CGI while giving the award for acheivement in makeup.

The low point was sadly the delivery of some pretty clever jokes on the part of hosts Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin.  We weren't sure if it was intentional or not.  As the evening went on, it was pretty clear that it was not.

This was the first year that I recall where the best song nominees were not performed.  I missed them.

The biggest problem was the In Memoriam section.  Every year, there are oversites and this year was not an exception.  The problem is the person who was not included was a cultural icon who appeared in many films and was a Golden Globe winner.  They included Michael Jackson who was in one film but left out Farrah Fawcett.  To me, that was the low point of the Academy Awards ceremony.

Just returned from The Wolfman.  This film is a remake of the classic 1941 movie from Universal starring Claude Raines and Lon Chaney Jr.  This version stars a stellar cast, as well.  Anthony Hopkins, Benicio Del Toro, Emily Blunt and Hugo Weaving.  With makeup by Rick Baker and score by Danny Elfman, this film should have been a monster.  Sadly, it misses the mark.

THE REST OF THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER FILLED.  SO IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE AND WANT TO AVOID SPOILERS, STOP READING NOW.

This film was originally to be released in April 2009, then it was delayed to November and lastly this weekend.  What went wrong?  I'm not sure how it was changed from the original scheduled release but I do know what they ended up with. 

The pacing was bad, bad, bad.  It moved quickly, then it dragged after Larry's escape in London on his way back to Talbot Manor, then it would move quickly again.  It was just uneven.  The scares were all based on things jumping out at you.  There was no tension built up prior to them jumping out, either.  That's just cheap, short attention span horror film making.  Being Directed by Joe Johnston, who directed Jurasic Park III to a similar fate, likely has something to do with it. 

In the beginning of the film, we find out that Larry Talbot (Del Toro), an actor who just happens to be performing Hamlet in London, is summoned to his family home by his brother's fiance, Gwen Conliffe (Blunt), after he goes missing for a month.  Between the time he is notified and returns to the mansion, his brother's body is discovered.  He has been killed by a beast.  It is thought to be the local gypsies and their trained CGI Bear.  We are told that Larry left his home to live in America long ago.  How does the fiance know to reach him?  Small detail, it moves the story along.

Benicio's acting is very wooden.  I'll give him a break because there are many tips of the hat to the original and maybe he was channeling Lon Jr.  Emily Blunt was just there.  Nothing special about her performance.  Hopkins was good as Sir John Talbot, as was Weaving as Inspector Abberline .

After Larry's first transformation, his father sets him up and he is returned to the Asylum in London.  He is treated with the latest methods so his psychological problem can be cured.  While locked up, he is visited by his Father who tells him he, too, is a werewolf.  As soon as we find out that Sir John was also a werewolf, I knew there would be a fight scene.    

There's a short run around in London which may or may not have been in tribute to American Werewolf In London.  If it was, it was somewhat clever. If not, it should have been.  After the long, dragged out return home, Larry gets ready to off his Father but curses, he's foiled.  His father beats him with a cane that resembles Claude Raines' cane in the original and we get a close up of the handle to show us just that.  Uh-Oh, the moon comes out and it is full. 

This brings us to the payoff... Wolfman vs Wolfman.  As soon as the fight starts, Wolfman Sr tears off his shirt.  Why??? So we can tell them apart, of course.  They battle.  There's some bad CGI and Gwen and Abberline show up.  For some reason, she stops the Inspector from shooting Larry only to shoot him herself at the end.  That is even set up badly as Larry howels at his hunters just to let them know where he is.  Gwen grabs a gun that she has dropped and slowly pulls it on Larry as he conveniently lets her in a laborious setup.

The movie ends with a wounded Inspector Abberline looking up at the moon which would have turned him into a werewolf if only this movie wasn't so bad and called for a sequel.

So is there anything redeaming?  Much like the 1976 King Kong remake, Rick Baker is the star of this movie.  And not just because he has a brief cameo where's he killed by the werewolf.  As expected Baker's wolf makeup is great.  It is worth paying admission alone.  Sitting through this film just to see Rick Baker's makeup job is advised.  It's too bad it was wasted on such an uneven film but it is what it is.

Elfman's score was nothing special.  There was a spot when Larry is about to walk out the door from Blunt's antique shop where the music was a soft tinkering of the piano taht made me think of Bill Bixby's Hulk whenever he would leave at the end of the show.  That brought a smile to my face.

I really hope this doesn't bring an end to making monster movies for a while.  There is still a large audience as demonstrated by the box office success of recent vampire and zombie films.  The problem here is it is a remake of a film that is a classic.  In order to succeed, it doesn't have to be perfect but it at least has to be good.

I give the Rick Baker's work Four Billys.  I give the Wolfman Two and a Half Billys.