'Halloween' review

Rating: *1/2 out of ****

‘Halloween’ is the story of young Michael Myers, who, as a boy, murders his family except for his mother and baby sister. He is institutionalized until he breaks out, 15 years later. Michael goes on the hunt for his long lost baby sister. Meanwhile, Dr. Loomis, the psychiatrist who treated Michael while inside, aids the police in the hunt. John Carpenter’s ‘Halloween’ was a dark, violent piece of cinema. Nevertheless, it was crafted with a skill not seen since Hitchcock. Carpenter knew how to imply violence with lighting and tone rather than exploit it. He could play with an audience without manipulating them. He knew exactly what he wanted us to feel and when, and he could masterfully construct the story, plot and pacing so that we felt it. Rob Zombie’s ‘Halloween’ is a more gruesome, mean-spirited version of Carpenter’s original masterpiece. There is little inspiration in Zombie’s world and it tries to operate with a screenplay filled with ill logic, and ends up feeling manipulative and ineffective.

The opening scene in Carpenter’s film still stays in my mind. The whole scene being Michael’s point-of-view added the element of mystery, building the suspense since all we were able to see were the reactions of a murder victim. We didn’t need to be introduced to what’s inside Michael’s head because we were seeing it through his eyes. Cold, vicious, evil is all he was. Killing was as simple to him as breathing. We didn’t need to know much about him except that he is evil, plain and simple. We didn’t need to know what happened at the meetings between Michael and Dr. Loomis or what occurred behind the walls of the asylum. Most importantly, we knew we couldn’t sympathize with Michael because no matter how sympathetic, it's hard to agree or empathize with such slaughter.

Trying to explain the ‘why’ behind evil is extremely difficult. Zombie makes a noble effort to tell us why Michael is this way, but the mark has been missed. It turns out that there is a young tormented child behind the mask, one that has been abused by his family and schoolmates. With this kind of back-story, we don’t see Michael as a soulless killing machine, but more along the lines of Norman Bates, a psychotic momma’s boy. I find there’s a difference between an enemy who is completely evil and a villain that is in direct conflict with the hero. The latter can be given sympathetic qualities that can allow the audience to somewhat identify with their motives. The former cannot because ‘evil’ does not need explanation. Michael is the former, but Zombie tries to paint him as the latter.

Perhaps the most shocking and disappointing revelation to the film is that all of this back-story is perfunctory. Sure, we learn of Myers’ dysfunctional home life and problems at school, but before we even learn this about his character, it is revealed that Myers is a fan of mutilating animals and has been for some time. What does this say about him? To me it says he is a disturbed little boy, prone to violence and very well could become a killer anyway. So why then would Zombie spend a third of the film with these details of his upbringing if they didn’t matter and only detract from the menace of the character? This film takes a half an hour (or more) to tell the same events that the original told in five minutes.

Originally, we didn’t need a moment where Michael transitions from good to evil. That transition could not be defined because presumably he has always been evil. There’s literally no transition into Michael’s madness in the new ‘Halloween’; but with Michael’s past on screen, one is needed. If the audience is expected to understand this killer, we need to see that moment of transformation. His conversion from killing animals to people happens effortlessly and without deliberation. Then suddenly on Halloween, he decides to kill his family, except his baby sister for some reason. The fact that he leaves her alive could have been a great plot device and perhaps Zombie’s only hope of giving a human quality to a killer. It is wasted in the third act, however, when Laurie is trying to escape. If Michael loves her so much why is he trying to kill her? I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a serial killer contradict himself in such a way.

Rob Zombie’s ‘Halloween’ feels like two movies. The first film is the back-story leading up to Michael’s escape. Everything there-after is the second film. The two films never really come together. The first could have been a rich character study into the mind of a serial killer. The second is a montage of sex and violence. Though neither live up to the original, the second half rings truer of Carpenter’s film. In fact, steps are taken to ensure that the fans are reminded. Tyler Bates’ music is a dead-ringer of Carpenter’s original score and adds that feeling of authenticity. Zombie also recreates many shots and sequences, at times literally shot for shot.

In the end though, what does it say about a movie when its best quality is that it skillfully recreates scenes from a better movie?

'Superbad' review

Rating: **** out of ****

There is a shot in ‘Superbad’ that summarizes the whole movie’s mentality. It’s a stedi-cam shot that features the movie’s three heroes, Seth, Evan and Fogel on a city bus heading to a liquor store in an attempt to buy booze with a fake ID that will never pass. The team sits there among the masses, looking dejected and yet the whole scene is played to ‘Are You Man Enough’ by The Four Tops. It lets us know that being ‘Superbad’ is a state of mind; the folks on the bus can’t see it, but once our heroes get off the bus and back into high school life, they will be superbad because, after all, they have a fake ID.

‘Superbad’ falls in the tradition of movies like ‘Dazed and Confused’ where the whole story is self-contained in one day, culminating on that epic night where the characters’ lives will be changed forever, at least in their minds. This time around, it happens to be the night of the final high school party before the summer. Seth and Evan (Jonah Hill & Michael Cera) have been friends since grade school. They are now planning to go to separate colleges and be apart for the first time in their friendship. Their plans for the final party night includes getting booze for a whole party, having sex (or at least getting to third base) and secretly cherish their last times together – though in that true superbad way, they both know it without saying it. Meanwhile, their nerdy friend Fogel (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) is caught up in a wild ride with some police officers (Rogen himself and Bill Hader of ‘SNL’) who commit more felonies than they prevent. A series of interlocking incidents occur and the adventure eventually leads everyone – even the officers – to the same party. Before getting to the party however, the boys go through a series of adventures that lead to car crashes, fistfights and detergent jugs filled with beer.

For a while, the high school of the movies was the most unbelievable place in the world. It was the place where mid-thirties actors played eighteen year olds, everyone was having sex, kids drove Mercedes’ to school, and every kid was wheeling and dealing drugs. ‘Superbad’, on the other hand, is the most realistic high school comedy since the original ‘American Pie’ and one of the most authentic ever made. In fact, Christopher Mintz-Plasse had to be tutored during production because he was actually in high school. ‘Superbad’ captures the youthful dreams of parties and third base that many films either fail at, or blow extremely out of proportion. Sure, some of the film is exaggerated, but that is understood; the characters in ‘Superbad’ though, like in real life, talk big but act small. They claim to be able to get booze and girls before they ever have either. There is a scene in which Seth says he’ll go get booze and fantasizes about an old woman buying it for him and then the two of them being murdered by a security guard.

Even though it does not say ‘based on a true story’ in the opening credits, you can tell that ‘Superbad’ is somewhat of an autobiographical tale, based on the high school careers of Seth Rogan and Evan Goldberg, the film’s writers. Everything about ‘Superbad’ feels authentic, from the way the teens speak to the way they interact and their immediate goals; the latter comprised of ways to get girls and alcohol.

The film has an absolutely filthy mouth, with more profanities than a Tarantino flick I’m willing to bet. Nevertheless, its heart is pure. There is a bond between Seth and Evan that comes across so naturally on screen. I believe that these friends have been together since childhood. There is a scene in which Seth and Evan are lying drunk on a floor, and in their inebriation, have a genuine moment of platonic love between friends, summarized in the simple act of a hug and a pat on the back. It comes across as more authentic than hundreds of screen kisses I have seen. The film also ends perfectly, with a quiet resolution that simultaneously offers an understanding between Seth and Evan as to the future of their relationship and gives a message of hope for our heroes.

‘Superbad’ is the latest collaboration between Seth Rogan and Judd Apatow, the dream team behind ‘The 40 Year Old Virgin’ and ‘Knocked Up’. Apatow isn’t in the director’s seat this time, rather as producer, but still, this film has his name all over it. It is the funniest film I have seen all summer and I found myself laughing aloud frequently in a packed theater. Entire lines of dialogue were lost to the laughter. After ‘The 40 Year Old Virgin’, ‘Knocked Up’ and now ‘Superbad’, I can confidently say that the Rogan/Apatow team is the North American equivalent of Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright.

(NOTE: A positive detail I noticed about the film: none of the character’s we’re supposed to care about does drugs in the film. Aside from a scene with some stoners at a party doing cocaine, there are no drugs in the film, not even marijuana. I thought this was a pleasant surprise as compared to most high school movies, which have kids casually smoking (cigarettes and pot), drinking and having sex. I know that may be the truth, but the whole point of going to the movies is to escape.)

'Black Snake Moan' review

Rating: ***1/2 out of ****

Two distinct sounds define ‘Black Snake Moan’. One is the wail of a guitar. The other is the rattle of a chain. Both objects play indispensable roles in what is a weird, dark, and strangely sexy film. I didn’t know exactly how to feel during much of ‘Black Snake Moan’ and I think many audience members won’t either. That is where the films’ magic lies. It is a twisted character study, not manipulative drivel.

Samuel L. Jackson stars as the aptly named Lazarus, an aged blues musician and vegetable farmer whose wife has recently left him for his brother. One day he finds a young white girl lying on the side of the road in nothing but a torn t-shirt and panties. She has been beaten and abandoned. A god-fearing man with a past of sin, Lazarus does the right thing and takes her into his home to care for her. Her name is Rae (Christina Ricci) and she is a nymphomaniac who goes through sexual cravings as bad as a drug addict going through withdrawal. Lazarus aims to cure her of her wicked ways and so he chains her to the radiator, keeping her there until it is out of her system. I was reminded of Renton locking himself in his room until he is clean in ‘Trainspotting’.

From here, the film gets weirder and more absorbing as the relationship between Lazarus and Rae gets stronger. They begin to change each other. Rae reminds Lazarus of his young days of sin as a wild musician, bringing life and verve back to him. Rae sees Lazarus as a long-needed father figure. They never have sex, per say, but there is a heat between them that culminates at a local bar, as Lazarus gets on stage with his guitar for the first time in what we believe to be decades. This is the most intense of the films’ many musical scenes, and perhaps the sexiest scene of the film.

‘Black Snake Moan’ is writer-director Craig Brewer’s follow-up to the great ‘Hustle and Flow’. Brewer revisits familiar territory in the themes of love (in all its forms), sex and redemption. Both films are about neglected people who find solace in one another. Brewer also uses music as a guide in both of his films. The music is a voice of the characters, to express that which they cannot say. I was impressed that Jackson chose to sing his own songs. His voice is raspy and cracks. He’s no longer able to hit every note. It adds age and soul to Lazarus.

The material of ‘Black Snake Moan’ is incredulous. In the wrong hands this film could have been exaggerated, over-the-top tripe. Brewer comes at the material in a refreshing straightforward manner. He knows the situations and actions of some of the characters are downright ludicrous, and so he doesn’t make excuses for them. He lets his actors embody their roles so that the actions are believable because we believe these characters would do them.

This is an actor’s film; a film built on performances. Both Jackson and Ricci turn in Oscar worthy roles. They go balls to the wall in their roles, opening themselves completely. Jackson owns the character of Lazarus and delivers him as a tired soul, looking to be invigorated. Ricci gives the bravest performance of her career. We get the feeling that Rae has experienced much pain and no real love through her life, except by Robbie (Justin Timberlake) who she feels abandoned by since he left for the Army.

There are also strong performances here from S. Epatha Merkerson as a good spirited pharmacist who shares an attraction with Lazarus. Their scenes together are natural and warm. Justin Timberlake follows up his role in ‘Alpha Dog’ with another strong performance as Robbie, Rae’s Army-bound boyfriend who is discharged because he suffers from crippling panic attacks.

‘Black Snake Moan’ may be hard for some to watch. Then again, some may not want to. Nevertheless, given the chance you’ll see some richly textured characters played superbly by great actors. Worst comes to worst, you can kick back and enjoy some good ol’ fashion blues music.

'Ocean's Thirteen' review

Rating: *** out of ****

If Danny Ocean were a timeless character in the tradition of James Bond, I bet he would have escaped from Alcatraz, robbed Fort Knox, and infiltrated Area 51. There simply is no feat this character cannot pull off if he has his usual crew of people. Said crew has returned for their greatest challenge yet in ‘Ocean’s Thirteen’, the latest caper flick from Steven Soderbergh, who has become a simultaneous master of gritty, intelligent films, and polished Hollywood moneymakers.

This time around, Danny Ocean and his crew bring the caper back to Vegas to pull off the robbery of a lifetime against Willy Bank (Al Pacino), the biggest boss in Las Vegas. As most villains in these kinds of movies do, Bank gains power through muscle and intimidation. Through a business deal gone wrong, Bank leaves Danny’s old friend Reuben (Elliott Gould) catatonic and near death. In an act of revenge, Danny gathers the crew together yet again to get back at Bank by robbing him of what he treasures most – his collection of diamonds that he wins every year for having the best hotel and casino on the strip. Oh yeah, and they also plan to steal 500 million dollars from him in a window of three and a half minutes. The latter part of this scheme is impressively pulled off and is the most exciting moment in ‘Ocean’s Thirteen’. To pull this off, the ‘Ocean’s’ gang go to such lengths as heading to Mexico to rig the casino’s dice at the source, magnetizing the casino to rig the roulette balls, and using the drill used in the construction of the Chunnel to create a man-made earthquake underneath Las Vegas. Uh-huh.

The crew once again consists of Rusty (Brad Pitt), Linus (Matt Damon), Basher (Don Cheadle) and a slew of celebrities that make the film look like a moving version of People’s ‘Most Beautiful People of The Year’ issue. There are some new additions to the cast this time around, including Pacino, Eddie Izzard and the great Ellen Barkin as Bank’s personal assistant. Not returning is Julia Roberts, which I enjoyed, as I found the ‘Julia Roberts playing Julia Roberts’ shtick from the second film to be one of its major downfalls.

While I was a big fan of ‘Ocean’s Eleven’ and I was extremely disappointed with ‘Ocean’s Twelve’, ‘Ocean’s Thirteen’ falls somewhere in the middle. It’s more fun than the second movie with a plot that makes more sense, but the magic of the first movie is gone. Soderbergh is a great filmmaker, which shows in ‘Traffic’, ‘Out of Sight’ and ‘Sex, Lies and Videotape’ and the ‘Ocean’s’ films are well made. It just feels like every time Soderbergh wants to take a chance with something (‘Bubble’), or has a colossal letdown (‘The Good German’) he has to run back to the ‘Ocean’s’ franchise to make a quick box office smash and get back in the game. It’s almost as if he’s contractually obligated to make one every three years. The only problem is that the first two times, we could sense the actors having fun, while this time you can feel them going through the motions.

The ‘Ocean’s’ films have always contained enough plot to fill two or three movies and ‘Thirteen’ is no exception. It is near impossible to follow every detail of the wheeling-and-dealings that go on in these films and so it’s best to just hang on and enjoy the ride. As usual, there are elements that don’t make much sense. Vincent Cassel has a pointless cameo as François Toulour, his character from ‘Twelve’, and there’s a reprisal by Andy Garcia which serves nothing. Not everything that happens in ‘Thirteen’ is made entirely clear and as usual you’ll leave the theater running the film back through your head to put the pieces together. The plot is far easier to follow than ‘Twelve’ which is a positive mark on the film.

In the end though, no one watches this franchise to ‘get’ everything anyway. We watch them to see attractive celebrities doing cool things while looking, acting and talking slick. In that measure, ‘Ocean’s Thirteen’ does not disappoint. It’s a fun piece of eye-candy that is able to revive some of the classic Vegas feel of the past. With the third film in the series, you get exactly what you’ve come to expect. No more, no less.

That being said, I hope the ‘Ocean’s’ franchise can be put to bed and Soderbergh can get back to making some of those great films again.

'Evan Almighty' review

Rating: *1/2 out of ****

I’ve always heard about the supposed ‘rules’ of comedy, of which there are many. Rules such as ‘timing is everything’, or ‘always leave them wanting more’. I’m not sure if those are concrete rules, or more guidelines. One rule I know for sure though and that is ‘it must be funny’! Unfortunately, this is a simple rule that ‘Evan Almighty’ cannot follow.

‘Evan Almighty’ is the sequel to the 2003 hit ‘Bruce Almighty’ that starred Jim Carrey and Jennifer Aniston. Neither of them has chosen to come back for the sequel and instead have been replaced by Steve Carell and Lauren Graham. Carell revives his performance from the first ‘Almighty’ film as Evan Baxter; a former news anchor turned US Congressman. Evan moves his family from Buffalo to Washington to begin his new career. One day he has an encounter with God himself (once again played by Morgan Freeman). God tells Evan that he must build an arc before the city is wiped out by a massive flood. From here on, Evan grows a long beard, wears a robe and sets out to build his arc. Of course, everyone in Evan’s life thinks he’s crazy, including his wife (Graham) and his children. That is, until the inevitable miracle happens that shows he is really doing God’s work.

‘Evan Almighty’ could have worked, but it runs into simple yet massive problems along the way. For starters, Evan is a nice person right from the get-go. In ‘Bruce Almighty’, Bruce resented and blamed God for his misfortunes. In the end, he goes from bitter to nice and sees how to correct his own problems with the messages he’s taken from caring for the world as their God. Evan does not resent God and has no real problems (except his family misses home) and so there is nowhere for this character to go. He has no arc to speak of, excuse the pun. God chose Bruce because he wanted Bruce to see the truth and change because of it. But what is Evan’s truth? I found myself constantly wondering why Evan was chosen, and the film’s paper-thin moral explanation wasn’t enough for me. Surely, there could have been people better fitted to build this arc – morally and logistically speaking. You’re telling me there isn’t a single carpenter in the world going through a crisis of faith?

It is a short film with a running time of 95 minutes. However, it features more 80’s-style ‘fixing stuff up’ montages than a John Hughes film festival. As well, the climax with the flood felt more at home in the opening scenes of ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ and was simply not funny as we see the streets of Washington go underwater. In fact, instead of laughing I found myself wondering about all those who drowned in the flood. The last thing a comedy should have you thinking about is dead people, unless it’s a Tim Burton comedy.

Steve Carell is one of the best comedic actors working today and I foresee him having a great career in the tradition of Robin Williams and Jim Carrey. He shines in A-material such as ‘The Office’ or ‘The 40 Year Old Virgin’ and even sparks in supporting roles as in ‘Anchorman’. Here, he does his best with what’s given, though it feels as if he’s phoning it in; mugging to the camera all too often with a dance that may entertain five year olds. So much talent is wasted here, from Morgan Freeman’s God, to John Goodman, Wanda Sykes, Harve Presnell and John Michael Higgins (who was hilarious in Christopher Guest’s ‘For Your Consideration’). In fact, the character I laughed at the most was that of Eugene, the office suck-up whom borderlines stalker. He’s played by the wonderful Jonah Hill who is quickly climbing the Hollywood comedy ladder, appearing in such hits as ‘The 40 Year Old Virgin’, ‘Accepted’, ‘Knocked Up’, and this summer’s ‘Superbad’.

‘Evan Almighty’ isn’t an ill-intentioned film. I certainly have seen worse movies and worse comedies (‘Evan Almighty’ is an Oscar winner compared to most Rob Schneider films). It simply isn’t funny. You can feel the good intentions all over the place, from the writing, to the performances, to the special effects. It just seems to take steps down the wrong path at every turn. I’ve read that ‘Evan Almighty’ is now the most expensive comedy ever made. It’s ironic that this movie has hit such a landmark record, but will surely be forgotten soon after its opening weekend.

'The Host' review

Rating: *** out of ****

‘The Host’ has gone on to become the highest grossing film in South Korea’s history and I can understand why. Joon-Ho Bong’s throwback to the classic monster movies of yesteryear (‘Godzilla’, ‘Them’) is part monster flick, part social/political commentary and part dysfunctional family comedy. That could have been a recipe for disaster in the wrong hands, but Bong balances the three so well it creates a modern monster movie that all together impresses on a modern scale and acts well as homage.

The film centers on Park Hee-bong, an elderly man who runs a small snack bar on the banks of the Han River. His oldest son Gang-du is an immature and incompetent man in his 40’s, whose wife left home long ago. Nam-il is his youngest son, is unemployed and generally seems to complain about everything that is going on. Park Hee-bong’s daughter, Nam-joo is an archery medalist and member of the national team. It’s funny how we are never exposed to Nam-joo’s archery skills until the end of the film. I assumed she would have been shooting left and right, becoming an action heroine of sorts.

One day, an unidentified monster suddenly appears from the depths of the Han River and wreaks havoc. Gang-du's daughter Hyun-seo is taken by the monster. It is assumed that the monster has killed her. However, when they find out she is still alive, they launch a mission to find her.

‘The Host’ opens impressively enough. We’re first given a minimalist explanation as to how the monster came to be. Given that it is not essential to the story, the details given are just enough so we don’t have to ask. It’s simple in that traditional way, like Godzilla being created by the atom bomb. After that, we’re treated to the most impressive scene, when the monster makes a daring daylight attack on the Han River. The creature resembles a demonic tadpole with legs, insect eyes, and a mouth harking back to John McTiernan’s ‘Predator’. It is not a creature that feels alien, but rather like something that could come from the deeps of our oceans. Though the visual effects seemed mediocre at times, I was impressed at how Bong had the courage to put his monster in the daylight, not relying on darkness to hide or create shortcuts. Since horror movies have always revolved around night, darkness and shadow, there has always been something scarier about the daylight (the original ‘Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ for example). This opening sequence starts the movie perfectly; hooking us right from the get-go and in some ways is reminiscent of the immortal opening scene from ‘Jaws’.

Though the movie, at times, seems to be a random series of events, the whole is greater than the sum. We’re treated to plenty of political commentary and satire. Bong does not hide his Anti-American sentiment and the film makes concurrent statements about the American medical establishment and the events in New Orleans. Though this aspect of the film is involving, it is vague and confusing when we find out the ‘bad guys’ true intentions. Their motives are never really made clear; we just know they’re doing something wrong and that they’re bad for doing it. Again, maybe that’s all we need to know.

‘The Host’ would have been right at home in the 1950’s, but impressively enough, makes its mark quite well in 2007. These days we don’t see many monster movies that have a political agenda. It’s nice to see. It also features a twist ending that plays against the usual formula. Also nice to see. With ‘The Host’, Joon-Ho Bong packs multiple genres into a monster flick that is simultaneously gross, funny and poignant. It has been rumored that this will be one of the next Asian horror films to have an American adaptation. I’m curious to see if it can carry over or if it becomes just another monster movie.

'TMNT' review

Rating: ** out of ****

There comes a time when you realize that the things you loved as a kid really weren’t that great. You still enjoy them in the nostalgic sense, but the realization of their overall quality sinks in over time. While the 'Transformers' may be there, I’m not sure if the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are yet. There is still something creative, rich and compelling about a story of four walking, talking turtles and their master who is a giant fighting rat. Unfortunately for those who are still fans of this franchise, ‘TMNT’ doesn’t quite take off the way it should and thusly, may be a nail in the coffin for the series.

‘TMNT’ is the fourth film in the series that follows Leonardo, Raphael, Donatello and Michelangelo as they battle evil in New York City, while feasting on pizza along the way. After defeating their arch-nemesis, The Shredder, the turtles have gone their separate ways. Leonardo has left New York and is on a spiritual quest in Central America to become a better ninja and leader. Michelangelo now works as a children’s entertainer and Donatello as a technician in a call-center. Raphael, meanwhile, has picked up the slack as a lone warrior named ‘The Nightwatcher’ who wears so much metal, it’s a wonder he can even raise his leg to kick bad guys. The would-be villain this time is Max Winters (Patrick Stewart), a billionaire with a secret who hires the Foot Clan to find him thirteen monsters that have been on Earth for thousands of years, yet no one has ever seen them. Leonardo decides to return to New York after a visit from April O'Neil - who has given up the reporting gig to become a Lara Croft of sorts. It’s then up to the turtles, with the help of their old friend Casey Jones, to stop Winters and send the monsters back where they came from. Master Splinter also comes along for the ride, occasionally offering some ancient wisdom. The voice work on him is either a blatant Asian stereotype or has been performed phonetically by the actor (Mako). Either way, every scene Splinter occupies really lets you know you're watching a cartoon.

The first three Ninja Turtle films were live action and showed the mastery of Jim Henson Studios in full effect. Even now, there is something imaginative and believable to those suits with the motorized heads. The fourth film has gone the CG way, with animation that may not be as impressive as most Pixar films, but still shows off a dark, gloomy New York City while allowing the characters to be colorful and animated in nature.

The problem with the fourth installment is that it contains two stories: one that is not developed enough, and another that is such a mess, I couldn’t have cared less about it. The first story centers on Leonardo and Raphael’s sibling rivalry - a recurring theme throughout all four films. Raphael feels abandoned and betrayed by Leo for having left, and Leo thinks Raphael is too hotheaded and stubborn. This conflict culminates in a rain-drenched, rooftop battle between the two that is far more epic than you normally see in a children’s movie. I enjoyed this plotline very much and wanted to see more of it, however it takes a back seat to the ‘monsters’ story, which makes very little sense and may be confusing to children.

‘TMNT’ contains some attractive animation, exciting fight-sequences and interesting voice work, (Kevin Smith appears in a cameo and Laurence Fishburne is the narrator). I also enjoyed how the low-level thugs were more realistic by carrying guns and not using kung-fu to carry out robberies. I’m sure this will be seen by some as a fitting reinvention of the franchise. However, with a story that plays more like a video game than a movie and a plot that may confuse its target audience, it may be a good idea if the turtles stayed in the sewers a little longer before coming out for a fifth film.