PHILIP BARRETT: I’d never been introduced to the Ice Age films until this most recent outing. Oh sure, I’d heard of them and was mildly interesting in seeing the first one, but for whatever reason I never got to it. The first did receive pretty decent reviews while the second was pretty much reviled by anyone under seven. Fox still thinks there’s an appeal (or they heard the term “STRIKE!”) and have decided to give us a third entry in the franchise.

ANDY GATHMAN: I saw the first Ice Age when we were visiting relatives and my then-three-year-old happened upon the movie box and insisted on watching it with us. Though he was enthralled, laughing wildly throughout, I felt I could take it or leave it. It seemed very much a movie for children and not nearly as well developed as, say, Shrek (Dreamworks) or Finding Nemo (Pixar/Disney). On this third installment, however, the Ice Age franchise seems to have improved upon the original formula and worked in plot and character nuances that held my attention and interest through the duration of the film. My son (now four) loved it, and I enjoyed it as well.

PHILIP: And I’m sure the film will play well to kids, as well it should. It’s not exactly a terrible movie, but it’s not without it’s problems either. The biggest one in my opinion stems from how unnatural the actors seem to be at times. A couple of times I felt the actors were talking “at” each other rather than “to” each other. The best example I can use is in the begging when Diego and Manny are having a discussion. Denis Leary and Ray Romano seem to be operating on different plains.

ANDY: I agree that the film has some problems. In particular, it doesn’t get off the ground very smoothly. The conflict Sid and Diego have with Manny as he is preparing for a child isn’t very convincing to begin with. At the same time, I applaud the attempt to explore one of the difficult dilemmas faced by every new parent: how to maintain loyalty to one’s friends on the verge of a change that is bound to change everything. And as clumsy as the conversation between Manny and Diego was, that is when I thought things really picked up steam.

PHILIP: It’s a theme the film builds upon over the course of it’s run time and no doubt it’s a nice one to follow. Things didn’t really kick off for me though until we’re introduced to Buck voiced by a true talent in Simon Pegg. He’s silly without going overboard and gives the picture a much needed shot to the arm that it was teetering with before he came into the fold. He’s Solid Snake but more outlandish, and the film is way better for having him.

ANDY: For me it picked up considerably when Sid happens upon the dino eggs, and begins attempting to raise them as his own. Though it was a brief section of the movie before mama T-Rex takes Sid and her babies away, they made the most of the scenario and piled on plenty of gags. How can you not when you have a prehistoric sloth attempting to be mommy to three baby dinosaurs. Favorite moments for my son (judging by the laugh-factor) were the toboggan ride with the three eggs and the playground mess. But your point is well taken—without the addition of Buck, the mad one-eyed weasel, the movie would have groaned to a dragging conclusion. As it turns out, he stole the show from the moment he makes his vine-swinging entrance, until he finally says goodbye and destroys the cave linking the surface with the cavern that time forgot.

Like Vince says, "you're gonna love my nuts."

PHILIP: That’s what surprised me most about the film was that I was able to feel something good for a character. A sense of depression came to me when Buck wanted to go back. I wasn’t crying my eyes out but at the same time I wanted him to go back with the rest in case there’s an Ice Age 4. Touching on Sid though, I absolutely hated him. Understandably he’s the village idiot but there was something in John Leguizamo’s voice that didn’t sit well with me. Whatever it was had me rolling my eyes anytime he ungraced us with his presence.

ANDY: Certainly that’s one of the main themes of the Ice Age movies—a herd formed not because everyone is alike but in spite of everyone’s differences. When you get down to it, there’s something to dislike about each character, and yet their commitment to one another is what keeps the “family” intact. Sid, though, is certainly is the least lovable of the bunch. Still, they choose to love him, even when they are given an obvious out (“Uh oh, the dinosaur took Sid away. Too bad…may he rest in peace.”) Manny in particular risks not only himself but his whole family to rescue the “village idiot.” Why does he do this, when he loathes the creature as much as we do?

PHILIP: Because of the dedication to family, and also an interesting point. Plus, you’d be hard pressed to find a group or family that doesn’t have the moron of the bunch (some parts of my own family would make the case that it’s me, but they can snuff it.) The point Andy is making is that Sid, regardless of how bad of an idiot he acts like, is still a part of their family. Thus they feel the need to protect him and rescue him, even if he’s the black sheep. We might be being a little bit too analytical of a kid’s film, but it’s nice to see that some thought was put forth rather than none.

ANDY: Yes, we digress, but as I mention earlier, I appreciated that the filmmakers found a script that worked on multiple levels. Woven through it all are plenty of jokes and sight gags to keep you laughing, right up to the end. All told, it was a better than average kids movie, and I’d say probably the best of the Ice Age trio. Two days later, my four-year-old is still talking about it, and I didn’t find myself cringing when he asked if we could see it again sometime soon. For anyone considering this movie, chances are your kids will love it, and you won’t hate it.

PHILIP: I concur. I fully expected to come into this getting another silly, asinine kids film. While at times this is what the movie gave me, I came away liking parts and was completely taken with Buck. A note though, I saw this film in 3D and I don’t know if it’s the glasses but the animation didn’t look as pristine as it should. Up had a similar problem too but this was just atrocious. In any case though, the film will play fine to it’s audience and at the end of the day, that’s all that really matters.

Andy’s Grade –

Rating: ★★★½☆ 

Rating: ★★★☆☆ 

Nothing Like the Holidays

Nothing Like the Holidays is a typical home-for-the-holidays movie that brings a slice of life realism and a touch of warmth to the Christmas season with a Latino twist. In a similar vein to The Family Stone or Tyler Perry’s This Christmas, you have all the typical players: The favorite son, the son whose married to someone no one is sure they like, the daughter who is isn’t who everyone thinks she is and the parents whose great marriage may not be so great. All surrounded by a cast of lovable extras who reminds them of what family is all about.

Why make this type of movie again? Because it works so well.

It works especially well by giving a fresh glimpse at the tried but true story through the eyes of a Puerto Rican family in Chicago. Edy (Alfred Molina, Dock Ock in Spiderman Man 2) runs a market/café in a Hispanic neighborhood and dreams of turning it over to his youngest son Jessy (Freddy Rodriguez)who’s just returned home from Iraq and is dealing with painful scars. Edy’s wife Anna (Elizabeth Peña) is the mom who is trying to keep her family together even as she senses her marriage is falling apart. Mauricio (John Leguizamo, The Happening) is the oldest son who wants everything to stay the same even as his go-getter white, Jewish wife Sarah (Debra Messing, Will and Grace) seems to be the only one that understands everything going on. And daughter Roxanna (Vanessa Ferlito) rounds out the family as the struggling actress feeling a strong pull back to home.

Yes, it’s typical. Yes, the trailer comes across as a minority remake of a white Christmas tale. But, honestly, I thought it was fantastic. I think we need more films like this and similar ones by Tyler Perry. I want my kids to know Christmas and family fun and family problems don’t just come in one color.

My favorite line from the movie, which is in the trailer, comes when Mauricio’s wife Sarah whispers to him, ‘Why’s everybody fighting?’ as things get louder and more intense around the dinner table, to which Mauricio responds, ‘We aren’t fighting, we’re conversatin.’ (no ‘g’)

This is a movie where you can picture yourself being part of the conversation. It just feels like home.

Rating: ☆☆☆☆☆ 

When you first saw the trailer for John Avnet’s introspective buddy cop film Righteous Kill, did you honestly hope for fantastic dialogue, an award-winning plot, and heart-pounding action scenes? Probably not, and for that reason alone it had almost no chance of failing. It successfully delivers exactly what it promises – a movie starring De Niro and Pacino, even if we had to wait for the twilight of their careers to see it.

It’s been 13 years since these two giants shared a few short scenes in Heat, and another 11 years before that since they both appeared in The Godfather: Part II, in which they never shared a scene at all.  To see them side by side for an entire feature could be the main reason you were interested in Righteous Kill.

There are few scenes that don’t feature Turk (De Niro) and Rooster (Pacino). two old cops who crack jokes as they kick asses and try to solve crimes. Interestingly, they aren’t portrayed as fantastic cops or great detectives, just seasoned veterans who’ve been together forever.

When the two maverick cops watch a child-murderer go free, Turk forms a plan to put the criminal away for good. While Rooster initially tries to dissuade him from the crusade, he keeps his partner’s secret for years.

At this point, things get complicated (for the viewer even more than the characters). Turk and Rooster are on a case of a serial killer who leaves poetry at his victims’ crime scenes. The victims are all criminals, and Detectives Perez (John Leguizamo) and Riley (Donnie Wahlberg) are convinced that only a cop would have access to them all, and they take their suspicions to Lieutenant Hingis (Brian Dennehy).

Meanwhile, Officer Corelli (Carla Gugino), Turk’s masochistic girlfriend, is becoming more and more curious about what’s really happening. And all of these scenes in the present are constantly interrupted by non-sequential scenes of Turk, in a black and white video, confessing to the serial killings and explaining why they were necessary.

The movie resembles Lethal Weapon and Showtime’s Dexter combined in strange harmony. A buddy cop movie that vaguely poses some philosophical questions about the nature of right and wrong.  And there’s potential for a great, out of the ordinary story that showcases those kind of questions. Instead, it wraps up with a safe but tired gimmick that threatens to rip the story apart.

In the end, you won’t stay in your seat for dialogue like, “you pick up a check sometime and then I’ll believe in miracles” or for action that’s made up of a few people being shot.  You might even get annoyed or frustrated by the long, complicated road the storyline takes or the clichés it visits along the way.

But if the reason you’re going to see Righteous Kill is because it stars Robert De Niro and Al Pacino, well, it does. Have fun.

Rating: ☆☆☆☆☆ 

First I would like to say that going into this film, I really wanted to cheer for M. Night, because as of lately all the douche bags have come out of the woodwork to pick on his films and how they have gone down hill. “The Lady in the Water was terrible, The Village was so so and really didn’t produce”. Well, I enjoyed them both for what they were and would probably watch them again. The Happening is a different story.

The Happening is M. Night Shyamalan’s latest creation and should be called for what it really is,  “What the Hell is Happening”? What happened to a storyline like Unbreakable or even The Sixth Sense. What happened to actors doing more than reading off a few lines? This film delivers 1 chilling scene and really was misplaced amongst the story.

The Happening is a supposed thriller that follows a family on the run from a natural crisis. A science teacher named Elliot Moore (Mark Wahlberg), runs for his life together with his estranged wife, Alma Moore (Zooey Deschanel), in order to survive an unknown killer all while the world goes into a violent whirlwind of self destruction.

While the directing was okay, the acting was sub par. From the likes of Mark Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel and my personal favorite, John Leguizamo, a lot more was expected. The characters came off as shallow, and lacking in all aspects. At the end of the film I was okay with what had played out for each character. Dead or alive, some seemed better off out of the picture, and others definitely weren’t missed.

For those die hard fans of M. Night – please don’t see this, you will be so turned off. That, and I don’t want to hear you moan for another two or three weeks about this. As for you other folks looking to see this film, I would advise seeing something else like Kung Fu Panda or The Incredible Hulk.

After spending 1.5 hours with Marky Mark and the lack-of-acting bunch, I wanted to cheer on those critics of M. Night. This movie did nothing for the haters of M. Night except fuel the fire.

[imdb]0949731[/imdb]

Rating: ☆☆☆☆☆