I don't really know where to begin with Star Trek. In the interest of full disclosure I will tell you that I am familiar with the original series, but have not seen any episodes in a really long time and I don't rememeber many of the details. I will also tell you that I loved this movie. If you are not familiar with Kirk and the gang and still want to see the movie I wouldn't worry about thinking you will be a step behind. Because the story takes place at the beginning you don't need any prior knowledge. That being said, if you have prior knowledge you will be able to pick up on some of the smaller details.
I will avoid giving away plot (mostly cause I saw it a week ago and don't want to screw up any of the details) and stick to observations. While I don't remember all of the original characters very well, I was able to pick up on some of the mannerisms that the new actors included in their characters. Chris Pine plays an excellent Kirk (and has such pretty eyes). He is a lady's man that is not quite as corny, but still includes the crossed leg pose in the captain's chair. Zachary Quinto also does an Spock. Besides managing the balance between logic and emotion well, he also worked in the Spock raised eyebrow. Chekov was so amazingly adorable. I loved his accent and am pretty sure he was not that awesome in the tv show. I also enjoy Leonard Nimoy very very much and am glad he was in the movie. Oh, also Eric Bana plays a Romulan and while he seemed kind of familiar I had no idea it was him until after the movie. Cameron from House and Winona Ryder also briefly appear.
I would definitely recommend this movie to people because it has great action, but also quite a bit of comic relief worked in. A really good mix of styles. Also, if you do care about Star Trek characters it is really cool to see how they all came together.
Star Trek gets 3 kernels - good action, good comedy, and Chekov's wonderful accent.
I don't have a heck of a lot to say about Taken. Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) is a former CIA kind of guy who has retired so that he can spend more time with his daughter Kim (Maggie Grace). At first you kind of get the impression that she is roughly 7 to 9 years old. Then he gets to her birthday party and you see that she is turning 17. However, when they bring out a horse for her and she jumps up and down, runs over to it, and jumps on she totally looks like a 7 year old and continues to act like one throughout. She runs everywhere with arms and legs flailing. It really makes me wonder.
And now back to the actual plot. Kim really wants to go to France with her friend and eventually her dad agrees even though he is worried about her. She goes and while on the phone with her father she sees her friend get TAKEN (hey, there's the title) and then she gets taken as well. Bryan immediately goes all CIA on the kidnappers. He finds out that the people who took her are going to sell her into the sex trade and he has 72 hours before it is a hopeless search.
Neeson kicks some ass and is involved in a few car chases that seem to be missing something (not sure if it was the editing or music or what, but they were kind of boring). Eventually he finds his daughter and all is well. Aww, how nice.
Taken gets one kernel - Liam Neeson is alright in the movie, but you might as well wait until you happen to see it on tv.
If you know the book Angels & Demons, or are familiar with either form of The Da Vinci Code, then you know this is a complicated plot. Instead of giving you much of the actual plot I will stick to observations. I don't want to ruin anything, and I am too lazy to go into the detail that would be required to fully explain the end of the movie.
Your short plot synopsis: Vatican in trouble. Robert Langdon smart. Robert Langdon help Vatican.
In regards to the movie v. the book:
As I am pretty sure you are aware, Angels & Demons comes first in the book form, but the movie made it a sequel to The Da Vinci Code. This has very little impact on the movie except for the fact that the Vatican already has more of an opinion of Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks).
The movie also leaves out or changes a few of the characters. In the book the director of CERN (yes it is a real thing) plays a pretty vital role and I was looking forward to seeing him on screen. However, in the movie the director is mentioned once and his plot responsibilities are put on another character. Besides the time aspect the movie also may have cut the role of CERN out of the plot substantially because they had been less than thrilled with some of the things said in the book and were perhaps insistent that the same misinformation was not included in the movie. The movie also kind of rushes through the first part of the plot, which I get cause of time restraints, but I was looking forward to seeing it play out how I had it in my mind while reading.
The other change that I can think of that was rather noticeable to me was how they changed the relationship of the scientists. In the movie Vittoria (Ayelet Zurer) and her research partner were just partners. In the book they are father and daughter. This is a small change, but it adds so much more to her character. Not only is she helping Langdon cause she doesn't want the antimatter to annihilate, but she is also seeking revenge on her father's killer.
In regards to just the movie:
If I try to ignore the fact that there is a book that was changed to fit the criteria of a movie then I have few complaints. Tom Hanks didn't have the groos hair like in the last movie...he was however wearing a speedo for abou 30 seconds. Ayelet played a really good Vittoria. The best performance of the movie would have to go to Ewan McGregor for his role as Comerlengo McKenna. He had a few speaches and he delivered them well...very captivating. I also enjoyed seeing the papal conclave at work (though you do get more details in the book).
The only other thing I want to mention about this movie is the ambigram. Ambigrams are awesome. Essentially they are a word that is written in a way that you can flip it and still read the same word (or sometimes a different one). There are many different kinds and properties of an ambigram. The 'villain' in this movie is a group called the illuminati (which appears as an ambigram). They use a few others in the movie as well. I find them fanscinating and suggest you pick up the book and flip through it until you find them (or read the whole thing if you really want to). Also of note, the title Angels & Demons was designed as an ambigram for the first edition of the book.
Angels & Demons gets 3 kernels - intersting plot, good action, and ambigrams are cool.
17 Again, also known as 17 For The Second Time (but that just doesn't have the same ring to it), is Zac Efron's latest movie and Matthew Perry's latest attempt at not being forgotten about. Seeing as Perry is only in the movie for about 10 minutes it would be a stretch to call it a Matthew Perry movie. It is also the movie in which Leslie Mann pretty much steals the show.
Basically, when Mike O'Donnell (Matthew Perry and Zac Efron) was about to play a really important 'the scouts are watching you' high school basketball game he got some shocking news from his girlfriend Scarlett. Jump many years into the future and we find Mike (Perry) married Scarlett (Mann) and they have two kids. Oh yeah, Mike hates his life. He meets a strange old man that doesn't seem to exist in the real world and then he falls into a crazy spinning water hole thing.
Next thing we know, Mike (Efron) is 17 again (Hey! That is the title of the movie.) A rather amusing fight occurs between Mike and his friend Ted...Ted, who owns an insane amount of movie memorabilia (mostly Star Wars and Lord of the Rings). The two come to the conclusion that the old man was his spirit guide and the only way Efron can go back to being Perry is to set things right...which he later decides will be accomplished by helping his children Alex and Maggie.
Mike makes friends with his son by helping him with his basketball game, helping him get on the team, and helping him have courage to talk to the girl that he likes (head cheerleader). Winning his daughter's friendship is a little more difficult, but essentially he tries to get her to realize that her boyfriend is an ass.
In the process of becoming friends with his children, Mike also builds a new relationship with Scarlett. A very awkward and yet hilarious relationship. Some of the best moments in the movie are definitely between Efron and Mann.
Before I get to spoiling the ending, the humourous B plot in the movie is the relationship between Mike's friend Ned and the principal from the school (Jan from The Office). Ned tries many tactics to win her affection (mostly by buying stuff) but she is having none of it. He finally convinces her to go out to supper with him and he is trying to be all fancy and impressive but he is just a huge dork so it is not working. Ned tries to explain that he is just a dork and makes a reference to LOTR. Jan corrects his reference and the cheesing 'falling for each other' music begins. They start speaking Elvish to each other (which the moving mistakenly calls Elfish) and you know they are meant to be. They are pretty great together in their scenes.
On to the end of the movie...which is rather predictable yet still enjoyable.
Mike is due in divorce court, but he has not changed back yet so young Mike and Ned show up to read a letter. By this time Scarlett is already thinking that Efron is somehow Perry. As he reads the letter, Scarlett is clearly touched by it and asks for a delay in the proceedings. She looks at the piece of paper the letter was on and it is just a note she had written...this is confusing to her.
At the basketball game, Mike gets a chance to relive the game he walked out on so many years ago. Just as the game starts, Scarlett realizes that Efron is most definitely her husband and runs out. Efron follows her and turns back into Perry. They kiss and all is well. We then see that Mike is the new coach of the basketball team and that Ned and the principal are still together...and wearing elf ears in bed. Lovely.
Funniest nerd joke of the movie:
Principal: You can plunder my dungeon any day.
Ned: I'll bring the long bow.
17 Again is a pretty wonderful movie. It has a lot of laughs in it a well as some depth when it came to the story. I really enjoyed Zac Efron (and in case you are wondering I am not a High School Musical fan). The only thing that really made me wonder about this movie was, will Michelle Trachtenberg ever age? I mean Buffy had to be about 10 years ago and she looks exactly the same. Also, when they showed the actors' pictures from their youth hers looked like a current shot. What up with her?
17 Again gets three kernels - it will make you laugh for many reasons and the actors are all quite enjoyable. While the story has been done to a certain extent (13 Going On 20) it still seems like a pretty original plot.
