A Handy Guide to the Villains of the DieHard Franchise

Published February 12th, 2012 

Bruce Willis is bringing one of the great action heroes of all time back to the big screen as John McClane battles terrorists alongside his son in "A Good Day to Die Hard." Of course, a great movie hero is only as great as his nemesis. In four previous outings John McClane has faced off against a who's who of terrific villains. Here's a closer look at John McClane's best bad guys.

Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) "Die Hard"

When terrorists take over Nakatomi Plaza amidst a company Christmas party they playact the role of terrorists out to punish the Nakatomi Corp for its greed. The sinister reality as laid out by terrorist leader Hans Gruber is that the terror plot is merely cover for the theft of $640 million dollars in bearer bonds. Alan Rickman plays Hans Gruber as a brilliant but arrogant criminal with a barely concealed admiration for the New York City cop with the uncanny ability to disrupt his well-oiled machine of a plot. Rickman's well-dressed smarm and charm thief was the perfect foil for Willis's blue collar hero.

Colonel Stuart (William Sadler) "Die Hard 2: Die Harder"

One of the many reasons "Die Hard 2: Die Harder," aside from the awful subtitle, comes up far short of the original "Die Hard" is the lack of a great villain. No offense to character actor William Sadler who brings a veteran's capability to the sneering, sniggering traitor Colonel Stuart but he's no match for Rickman's Hans Gruber in the charisma department. The proof of Sadler's lacking is everywhere as two more villains are brought in on top of Colonel Stuart to try to make up for the deficit; Franco Nero's South American drug kingpin General Esperanza and John Amos as turncoat Major Grant. Even with three top villains, "Die Hard 2: Die Harder" remains the least of the "Die Hard" franchise.

Simon Peter Gruber (Jeremy Irons) "Die Hard with a Vengeance"

The true sequel to "Die Hard" came in 1995 with the release of "Die Hard with a Vengeance" featuring the return of the Gruber name as a worthy foe to Willis's John McClane. With the plot shifted to New York City, Simon Peter Gruber attempts to pull off the same heist his brother died trying in the original "Die Hard," a multi-multi-million dollar heist disguised as a terror attack. Of course, the plot is given a real edge by Simon Peter Gruber's intent to take revenge on John McClane for the death of his brother Hans. Jeremy Irons is expertly cast as Simon with an accented charm that perfectly evokes Rickman's Hans and a wealth of devilish charm; also reminiscent of the series seminal villain.

Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) "Live Free or Die Hard"

Having abandoned any pretense of reality by having John McClane once again happen accidentally into a terror plot, the makers of "Live Free or Die Hard" nevertheless chose a timely, relevant villain for its outlandish action. Thomas Gabriel is a former State Department analyst turned cyber-terrorist who roils the national and world financial markets with cyber-attacks while paralyzing the seats of power in the U.S by tying up power and traffic grids. Timothy Olyphant is maybe a tad too handsome to be believed as a guy whose spent years at a keyboard but like Hans and Simon Gruber before him, he doesn't lack in the charm department. Gabriel is maybe a tad more strident and political than the Gruber's who were more defined by their greed, but he makes up for it by being a shade more evil than the Gruber's forcing McClane to ever more insane levels of action including flying a jet and driving a car into a helicopter.

Alik (Rasha Bukvic) "A Good Day to Die Hard"

"Taken" bad guy Rasha Bukvic is saddled with the task of living up to the standard set by Rickman and Irons as the big bad of "A Good Day to Die Hard." Bukvic plays Alik the top henchman of a high ranking Russian politico eager to murder a whistleblower who is under the protection of the CIA, led by none other than Jack McClane ("Spartacus" star Jai Courtney), son of our hero John. Can Bukvic bring the chilling charm and evil of Rickman and Irons, or at the very least, the handsome evil of Olyphant? We will have to wait and see when "A Good Day to Die Hard" opens on Valentine's Day across the U.S.

Movie Review: Die Hard

Die Hard (1988) 

Directed by John McTiernan 

Written by Jeb Stuart, Steven E. de Souza 

Starring Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman, Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald Vel Johnson, Paul Gleason

Release Date July 15th, 1988 

Published July 15th, 2018 

Die Hard is my favorite Christmas movie. Mostly because it is set on Christmas but it is not about Christmas. If I’m being honest, Christmas isn’t a favorite holiday of mine. I don’t care for most Christmas movies including supposed classics such as A Christmas Story and the loathsome, grotesque, and lowbrow National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation. Die Hard is a Christmas movie for people like me, those who don’t enjoy Christmas movies. 

On Christmas Day, John McClain has arrived in Los Angeles in hopes of reuniting with his estranged wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia). Things get off to a bad start when John arrives at Holly’s office and finds that now living in Los Angeles, she’s dropped the last name McClane, in favor of her maiden name Gennero. The two begin to argue but they never finish the argument, first after her boss calls and then when terrorists arrive and begin taking over the building, known as Nakatomi Plaza. 

John is changing clothes when he hears gunshots. He quickly intuits the situation using his instincts, he’s a New York Police Detective whose job has been a significant strain on his personal life. John quickly assesses the situation and after escaping to an upper, unfinished floor of the building, he attempts to contact the police. Unfortunately the cops don’t believe him when he calls and only dispatch one cop to the scene. 

Sgt Al Powell (Reginald Vel Johnson) was thinking it would be a quiet night of enjoying twinkies in his cruiser but when he arrive at Nakatomi Plaza the shooting starts and his quiet night turns into a major hostage situation and the only things keeping a bloodbath at bay are Al and his new friend who won’t give his name. The two veteran cops bond quickly and even more when other less capable cops arrive on the scene and begin to screw things up. 

The terrorists are headed up by the nefariously ingenious Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman). Making it appear as if they have taken hostages, Hans has the cops running around in circles while his real plan unfolds. Only John McClane stands between Hans and his ultimate goal, a whole boatload of money. Hans’ ruse is brilliant and Rickman’s supremely intelligent and superior performance gives the whole film gravity. 

In many ways, Willis and RIckman were perfectly matched as hero and villain. Where John is instinctive and primal, Hans is calculating and manipulative. Hans is a buttoned up, professional criminal, used to telling others to do the dirty work, McClane is a blue collar cop who acts on hunches and well worn experience. John’s unpredictable nature isn’t merely a character trait, it becomes a strategy and Willis is remarkable in deploying it. 

Willis brings an authenticity to John McClane that matches his star power and charisma and makes John McClane an indelible hero. The film has an old school western feel in terms of the battle of good and evil. John may not be the picture of white hat virtue, but rather, he’s a more down to Earth and believable kind of good. Hans meanwhile, has an alluring evil, though you’re never on his side, you wouldn’t feel too bad if he fooled you. 

Rickman’s arrogant superiority is his most nefarious quality. Even more than his murderous plot, his stuffy, accented, suited persona is a relatable sort of evil. He’s not the picture of either a terrorist or a killer, yet he feels more real than many actual, real world villains because Rickman is so incredible at playing him. His arrogance and his suit are reminiscent of the kind of Wall Street villains that Oliver Stone had recently introduced us to. He’s just more honest than them because he robs and murders people in front of you and not from behind a desk. 

The blue collar qualities of Al and John make them our automatic allies. More of us relate to John and Al than any of the stuffy, suited types in Nakatomi Plaza. It’s part of their charm and a big part of the performances of Willis and VelJohnson. John and Al seem like people we know, people we could have a beer with. The divide between them and the suit wearing villains are signifiers that director John McTiernan clever uses to create a subliminal divide underneath the the obvious criminal and not a criminal divide. 

The action in Die Hard is top notch. Director McTiernan stacks the odds against John McClane brilliantly. The stakes rise in each passing scene with John and Holly’s identity as husband and wife acting in many ways like a bomb about to explode the story at any moment. The name game with Holly is also a terrific piece of screenwriting as the argument over the name tells us everything we need to know about the strain between John and Holly. 

Many screenwriters need a page and a half of dialogue to tell us what the names Gennaro and McClane and the hurt in John’s voice and manner do in a single scene. Die Hard is rarely thought of as being a great screenplay but Jeb Stuart and co-writer Steven E de Souza deserve nearly as much credit as director John McTiernan. The economy of character building in John, Holly, Hans and Al is really remarkable. We learn  more about them from their actions than we would from endless pages of expository dialogue. 

Die Hard is Christmas for me because I watch it every Christmas. It’s the kind of smart, well-worn action movie that is perfect holiday comfort food. The familiarity, the easy good versus evil story, the action that even after 30 years feels refreshingly new and ever exciting. Die Hard is the gift that keeps on giving. 30 years of thrills, 30 years of pithy hero banter, and 30 years of watching Hans Gruber falling to his death. Merry Christmas indeed. 

Movie Review Sense and Sensibility

Sense and Sensibility (1995) 

Directed by Ang Lee 

Written by Emma Thompson

Starring Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, Hugh Grant, Alan Rickman

Release Date December 13th, 1995

Published May 14th, 2011

Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility helps me get over my childhood fear of period chick flicks.

Movies are not living things; they don’t grow or change or evolve over time. Once a film is completed it will, generally speaking, be as it is forever. What does change? We do. We age and we mature and our intellect and tastes evolve over time. Our ever-evolving tastes and growing intellect can change the way we experience a movie.

It is with this in mind that I endeavor to look back 10, 20 and 30 years at some of the most well remembered movies of all time and see how my own evolving tastes affect the way I experience these movies. I invite you to join me on this unique journey and offer your own insights ever changing opinions.

Period Chick Flick

Were I to ask my 1995 self about Sense and Sensibility he would have dismissed it as a chick flick. I have no doubt that my naïve, headstrong younger self would have no time for period pieces. Choosing to seek out Sense and Sensibility today in all honesty was a random, flighty decision and not the academic pursuit of a mature film buff that I would have liked it to be.

Regardless of my curious motivations I’m glad I chose to watch this film. The story by Jane Austen transformed by the scripting of the intelligent and insightful Emma Thompson and elegantly captured by the astute camera of director Ang Lee is a cinematic feast.

No Place Like Home

The death of Mr. Dashwood (Tom Wilkinson in cameo) leaves his second wife and three daughters at the mercy of their well meaning but cowardly step-brother John (James Fleet) and his domineering wife Fanny (Harriet Walter). The new Mrs. Dashwood is eager to take hold of her husband’s inheritance, the estate on which Mother Dashwood (Gemma Jones) and her daughter have lived all their lives.

Seeing as neither Elinor Dashwood (Emma Thompson) nor her younger sister Marianne (Kate Winslet) have a suitor, or even a prospective suitor, who might rescue the Dashwood women from their circumstances they are quite lucky to have a distant relative who offers them a cottage on his land to live in.

Secrets and Love Triangles

It’s not that the Dashwood women aren’t desirable. Indeed, Elinor had recently caught the eye of Fanny’s brother Robert (Hugh Grant); an attraction Fanny made sure to interrupt. The mutual ardor between Robert and Elinor is something they both seem aware of but neither can bring themselves to speak of it. That Robert also has a secret that holds him back will be revealed as the story unfolds.

Once decamped to their new cottage home, and after they have weathered the good nature of their hosts the gregarious Sir John Middleton (Robert Hardy) and gossipy Mrs. Jennings (Elizabeth Spriggs), Marianne finds herself the object of the affection of two men; stoic and earnest Col. Brandon (Alan Rickman) and the dashing John Willoughby (Greg Wise).

Engaging and Entertaining

Romantic travails are the main subject of Sense and Sensibilities which doesn’t so much offer a plot as a group of characters and series of experiences. There is a good deal of waiting and wailing; horses and carriages; sewing and piano playing. What makes Sense and Sensibility engaging and entertaining is the witty dialogue and the charm of these wonderful actresses.

Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet have a tremendous sisterly chemistry punctuated by quick clever dialogue that sounds authentic to sisters. The fraught romances ring true to a period where feelings bubbled under masks of propriety and societal expectations. Yes, if certain characters were slightly more forthcoming it would alleviate a good deal of anguish but the characters sell the contrivance.

Elegant and Understated

Finally, Ang Lee’s elegant, understated direction perfectly captures the mood and romance of the period. As Roger Ebert points out in his more mixed review of Sense and Sensibility Ang Lee’s background makes him perfectly suited to give life to this material. Many people in Lee’s home country of China still live by a code of conduct very similar to that of Austen’s period.

There is a scene shortly after Elinor has fallen for Edward. He was supposed to visit the family in their new cottage but he does not come. Lee’s camera slowly backs away from Elinor as if to spare her from the piteous glare of the audience. The subtle suggestion of the camera to the audience that we should not witness Elinor in this way is very moving and evocative of a period where emotions were a great deal more guarded than they are today.

There are a number of subtle moments, like the one I just mentioned, throughout Sense and Sensibility. Lee’s direction is expert in its sensitivity and acute observation of these characters. There are flaws here; the film could stand a bit of a trim from the two hours and fifteen minute run time among other things, but that and other flaws are minor compared to the rich pleasures found in Sense and Sensibility.

Movie Review Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) 

Directed by Tim Burton

Written by John Logan

Starring Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Timothy Spall, Sacha Baron Cohen

Release Date December 21st, 2007

Published December 21st, 2007

Tim Burton and Johnny Depp's Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street is filled with such self congratulatory irony that one is forced to call it arrogant. Arrogance is often seen as a negative quality and it is certainly nothing less than a pejorative here. However, the line between arrogance and confidence is thin here because of the talent involved.

It grows odd then that some of the arrogance of the creators of this Steven Sondheim adaptation comes from insecurity. Tim Burton is no fan of musicals. He never wanted to make one. He chose to make Sweeney Todd because of the almost anti-musical qualities of Sondheim's creation. This however, leads to a violent form of ironic detachment from the music and sentiment of the songs that leaves the filmgoer outside the emotion of the piece.

In not wanting to make a musical, Burton has attempted to make an anti-musical and as such forgotten that involving an audience is necessary even when you are rebelling against a form many audiences find so easily involving.

Johnny Depp stars as Sweeney Todd, though Barker is his real name, he became Todd in a British prison colony. When he was a young man Benjamin Barker's wife and child were taken from him by the jealous machinations of one Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman). Envious of the young barber, his beautiful wife (Laura Michelle Kelly) and baby, Turpin had Barker arrested on a trumped up charge and sent to Australia, then a British penal colony.

Returning 15 years later as Todd, Benjamin Barker seeks his revenge on Turpin and the hellhole London that has risen up around him. Returning to his old shop where his former landlady Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) has kept his beloved silver razors, Sweeney will pick the shave business and use it as a base of operations for his revenge.

The sub story of Sweeney Todd involves the young sailor Anthony (Jamie Campbell Bower) who rescued Sweeney at sea and brought him to London and who also happens to fall for Sweeney's now teenage daughter Johanna (Jane Wisener), now a captive in Judge Turpin's home staring listlessly from a gilded cage. The teenage lovers work to leave the oppressive violence and sadness of the Sweeney story and the young actors are effective in that.

Now if only Tim Burton gave a damn about them, we'd have something here. Unfortunately, Burton doesn't take much care with the young lovers, bungling their coupling and their involvement with Sweeney to the point that what should be a major revealing moment hits with little flourish and is shuffled quickly offstage in favor of more revenge and viscera.

Fans of Viscera, I'm talking serious blood and guts here, will be more than satisfied with Sweeney Todd. The film is soaked in viscous fluid. However, do not mistake Sweeney for the blood stopped likes of Hostel or Halloween. No, Tim Burton is more humorous in his detachment than the frightening seriousness of Eli Roth or Rob Zombie who come off as real life Sweeney's seeking revenge on humanity in their hateful attacks on audiences.

Oddly enough, Burton would have to be more engaged in Sweeney Todd for that level of commitment to hatred. Thus Sweeney has an ironic detachment that leaves audiences little place to be appalled, repelled or won over by it. We are left merely as observers of rich cinematography, performances of great commitment and songs that offer glimpses of emotional involvement and dark humor.

Tim Burton has always been the disaffected genius working within the system and subverting it with his art-pop. Conversely, at a certain age disaffection becomes an old pose struck with boredom and stagnation. Sweeney Todd is far too big budget busy to be boring but stagnant is not far off. From a creative perspective Tim Burton's imaginative whimsy and his attempt to subvert it by covering it in blood fails to beat away the stagnating emotional distance.

In interviews Burton has discussed how the Broadway approach to Sweeney's blood soaked tragedy, the belt it back of the room, typical Broadway approach, was inappropriate for such dark brooding material. Yet here he seems to demonstrate that a more dramatic, Broadway approach, heightened emotions, heightened reality, may be the only way to render such awesome grand guignol tragedies.

I can tell you that Burton's minimalist approach takes the wind out of the sails and translates what should be grand emotional developments into something we in the audience merely observe without involvement.

Movie Review Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) 

Directed by Alfonso Cuaron 

Written by Steve Kloves 

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Alan Rickman, David Thewlis, Gary Oldman 

Release Date June 4th, 2004 

Published June 3rd, 2004 

When Chris Columbus announced that he would not direct the third Harry Potter film, Alfonso Cuaron was not the first director who came to mind. His most recent work, the coming of age drama Y Tu Mama Tambien, earned an NC-17 rating. Not exactly the sensibility one would bring to one of the largest family movie franchises in history. A closer look however at Cuaron's body of work shows that he indeed may be the best choice they could have made. Cuaron's innate understanding of teenage emotions and adolescence are exactly where the Harry Potter series is headed with its young characters and the combination is electric.

As we rejoin our hero Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), he is back in the world of muggles, living with his awful Aunt and Uncle. This is not the same Harry Potter however who has cowered from his family's unreasonable behavior. Harry is becoming his own man and when a family friend insults Harry's late parents, he exacts a revenge that could get him kicked out of Hogwarts.

After running away from home, including an exciting ride on a ghostly wizard bus, Harry is told that he won't be punished for his illegal use of magic and he will be allowed to return to Hogwarts. The intimation is that Harry's destiny is so closely linked to that of Hogwarts that he can't be kicked out.

Soon, Harry is reunited with his friends Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint). Before the kids leave for school Harry is told that the criminal Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) has escaped Azkaban prison and may be looking for Harry, though it is unclear why.

On the train to Hogwarts, Harry meets one of his new teachers, Professor Lupin (David Thewlis). He also meets an entity called a dementor, a ghostly creature that is supposed to be hunting Sirius Black but whose actions are uncontrollable. Professor Lupin saves Harry from the dementor's soul sucking attack and once on campus at Hogwarts, the Professor becomes a mentor and friend to Harry as Sirius Black looms. Both Lupin and Sirius Black both have links to Harry's parents that are revealed late in the film

The first two Harry Potter films had the feel of self-contained action movies. One could exist without the other. This third film in the series however feels more connected to the series as a whole. There is a transitory feel to the story with more backstory and fleshing out of the characters. This is why the film feels deeper and richer from a character standpoint than the first two films but also why it has less narrative force.

The building of the backstory and characters shove this film’s main plot into the background. The main plot is supposed to be Harry's confrontation with Sirius Black yet Gary Oldman's character only comes into the film in the third act. The thrust of the film is laying out the characters not only for this one episode but also for the future of the series.

There are a number of good things about this film on its own. Alfonso Cuaron's artistic sensibilities bring a more artistic look to the series. His visuals are richer and deeper than ever before. His use of colors reminded me a little of his underappreciated remake of Great Expectations in 1998, a film that used the color green as the third lead character. This is a beautiful looking film and yet the visuals never overwhelm the characters, they deepen and enrich them.

There has been talk that the young actors (Radcliffe, Watson and Grint) may be getting too old for their characters and may be replaced when Mike Newell directs the next film in the series. I hope that isn't true, as each becomes increasingly comfortable as these characters. Especially good is Watson who has stardom in her future. Her spunk and smarts make Hermione shine even brighter than the star in name. Daniel Radcliffe is improving with every outing. While he still at times looks a little overmatched, another film and he could really show us something.

If I were to choose my favorite Potter film, I would say Chamber Of Secrets, which is the most artistic and exciting movie Chris Columbus ever made. That said, Alfonso Cuaron's Prisoner Of Azkaban is the most visually impressive of the three and it's the most deeply emotional. It lacks only the narrative force and adventure of Chamber. If this is the way the Harry Potter series is going to evolve, the best of all may be yet to come.

Movie Review The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005) 

Directed by Garth Jennings

Written by Douglas Adams, Karey Kirkpatrick 

Starring Martin Freeman, Mos Def, Zooey Deschanel, Sam Rockwell, Alan Rickman

Release Date April 29th, 2005 

Published April 28th, 2005 

The tortured development process for the film adaptation of Douglas Adams' cult novel The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy is one of those "Only in Hollywood" tales. As told in David Hughes' book "The Best Sci-Fi films Never Made," the story begins in 1982 with a series of Hollywood Producers following the money rather than any quirky well told sci-fi story. After Douglas Adams' radio series became a smash in Britain and then became a best selling book, Hollywood took notice.

Once the film was transferred to British TV and once again became a hit, Hollywood heavyweights came calling. First, Ivan Reitman wanted to make the film with Bill Murray and Harold Ramis in the cast. He abandoned the project after a year of stops and starts and budget battles, instead he took Murray and Ramis and made Ghostbusters. After that a number of big names (i.e. Bruce Willis, Michael Keaton, Jim Carrey) all floated into and out of the development process.

Poor Douglas Adams waded through bad adaptation after bad adaptation, some with his name unfortunately attached to them. Until 2001 when it looked as if the sun were finally shining on the project. Adams completed what looked like a final script and director Jay Roach, fresh from the hit Meet The Parents and with Austin Powers in his recent past, was ready to helm the project. Fate can be very cruel; Douglas Adams died of a heart attack before the film could even begin scouting locations.

Five years later with the assistance of first time director Garth Jennings and execs at Disney, The Hitchhiker's GuideTo The Galaxy finally made it to the big screen and though it is flawed and not entirely satisfying to its loyal cult audience, it is a solidly entertaining and a surprisingly welcoming sci-fi comedy.

Arthur Dent (Martin Freeman) is having a bad day. His home on the outskirts of some tiny unnamed British hamlet is about to be bulldozed in favor  of a new expressway. That, however, is the least of his problems, as his good friend Ford Prefect (Mos Def) is trying to tell him. It seems Arthur's house is not the only thing on Earth about to be bulldozed.  The entire planet has been scheduled for demolition by an officious race of aliens called Vogons.

Luckily for Arthur, his buddy Ford is an interstellar hitchhiker who is able to spirit Arthur off the planet before it's destroyed. Thus begins a most extraordinary adventure that will cross the galaxy with a cast of characters not seen outside of an acid trip. After escaping the Vogons, Arthur and Ford stow away aboard the most beautiful ship in the galaxy, the heart of gold, which is currently captained by the new President of the Galaxy, Zaphod Beeblebrox (Sam Rockwell).

Along with Zaphod is Marvin a super intelligent but constantly depressed robot (voice by Alan Rickman, character by Warwick Davis) and Trillian (Zooey Deschanel), an earth girl who has brief history with Arthur; she blew him off at a party to go into space with Zaphod just prior to the world exploding. The crew is on the run, one of Zaphod's two heads, yes I said two heads, has kidnapped the other and stolen the spaceship. They are headed across the galaxy to ask a giant computer the meaning of life.

If that is not esoteric enough for you the film is filled to the brim with other subtle bits of humor and wordplay, the best of which comes from the voice of Stephen Fry narrating from the Hitchhiker's Guide. Accompanied by colorful illustrations, the Guide often interrupts the film to deliver an interesting and helpful tidbit about this or that. Fry's eloquent British tones lend an intellectual air to the film's unusual details and the books' quirky dialogue.

By far my favorite part of the film was the opening song called, "So long and thanks for all the fish ''. Sung from the perspective of dolphins, the song tells us that dolphins had for years tried to warn humans about the impending end of the world but we mistook the warnings as cute tricks. Clever and imaginative, the song is the perfect example of the film's oddball humor.

Director Garth Jennings is one half of a commercial and video directing team called Hammer and Tongs who have directed music videos for REM and Blur. Jennings is inexperienced as a feature film director but it's likely that aided his work here rather than harmed it. Jennings directs with wild abandon, never pausing to consider what can't be done. While the story has been compromised for the sake of mainstream appeal, Jennings' direction is perfectly in sync with the books' bizarre humor.

Martin Freeman is best known for his supporting role in the original British version of Ricky Gervais' "The Office". Freeman has the perfect everyman quality that fits with Douglas Adams' conception of Arthur and, better yet, Freeman whines and complains and begs for a good cup of tea just as you would imagine Arthur from the book would. Unfortunately Freeman fails miserably in connecting with American actress Zooey Deschanel in the film's romantic subplot.

The best performance in the film is Sam Rockwell as Zaphod. Rockwell combines the manic energy of Jim Carrey with the rock star look and manner of David Lee Roth. The two heads bit is funnier than it sounds and provides a number of good gags. Mos Def is a calming influence in the sometimes manic, over the top film. His Ford Prefect is often beatific and obtuse but always supportive and helpful to Arthur. Mos Def may not be what fans of the book had in mind when they thought of Ford but he puts any misgivings away with his performance.

Naturally, with such a well known cult object as "Hitchhiker's Guide" the battle between what appeals to the cult and what can appeal to mainstream audiences is a difficult balancing act. Hollywood studios would prefer every film had the same set of easily salable elements so obviously something as quirky as Hitchhiker's Guide is not their cup of tea. The books are esoteric and dry and very British. To Americanize them and make them more mainstream some things are lost in translation and others are added, like a romance between Arthur and Trillian that is the film's weakest element.

Nothing about the romance ever feels right, likely because it was not part of the book. The whole thing feels shoehorned into the plot and because it's all so earnest it does not fit well with the oddball elements of the surrounding film. Zooey Deschanel could really do something with this part but unfortunately with the romantic element forced on her she becomes a functionary of the plot as opposed to a fully fleshed out character.

Jennings does not linger on the romance plot, though.  He is more concerned with cramming the film with exciting visuals and he succeeds more often than not. Watch out for John Malkovich as a half man, half machine in one of the picture's most striking visuals and a terrific scene in which the entire cast is turned into string. These scenes vividly bring to life some of the off-the-wall elements that made "Hitchhiker's Guide" such a cult object.

Overall Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy is an imperfect but highly enjoyable sci-fi comedy. It is not exactly what fans of the book would want, but it's not a bad thing that the filmmakers opened up just enough for new fans to get it. The balance is difficult but works for the most part, enough at least for me to recommend it for your movie dollar.

Movie Review Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (2009) 

Directed by David Yates 

Written by Steve Kloves 

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman

Release Date July 15th, 2009 

Published July 14th, 2009 

The last decade has been dominated by franchise films from the return of Lucas's Star Wars to the supposedly unfilmable Lord of the Rings to Sam Raimi's greatest of all superhero series Spiderman and the wholly original Matrix films of the Wachowski Brothers. It is arguable however that the franchise with the greatest staying power in the minds of fans and even film aficionados may be that of J.K Rowling's Harry Potter. It helps that it is the longest of all of the franchises but there are also the wonderful characters, the extraordinary set design and fabulous effects.

Also there is the way Harry sort of encompasses elements of those other great franchises within itself. The parallels between Potter and Star Wars, LOTR and The Matrix become clearer in the latest installment in this ever increasingly epic film franchise.

In Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince we are merely weeks removed from when Harry watched his beloved uncle Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) murdered by Belatrix LeStrange (Helena Bonham Carter) and then watched Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) battle the Dark Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) to what can only be described as a tie.

The Dark Lord is weakened but not defeated as Harry is confronted by Dumbledore in a muggle train station where he is hiding out. Dumbledore wants Harry for a special mission, they are to attract a former Hogwarts professor, Slughorn (Jim Broadbent) to come back to the school. Professor Slughorn has a particular piece of information that he is not wanting to give up. It's urgent that someone get it out of him because it is the key to stopping the Dark Lord whose evil intentions have begun to extend out of the magical world and into the muggle world.

Back at Hogwarts Harry is reunited with his friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Emma Watson). Teenage hormones are beginning to run wild at Hogwarts. Sometime in the recent past Hermione has developed a crush on Ron while the thick headed Weasley misses all of the signals and goes out with a wacky little thing named Lavender (Jessie Cave).

Harry meanwhile has developed a crush of his own on Ron's little sister Ginny Bonnie Wright). The young romance is handled with delicacy and great care by director David Yates who does a masterful job of allowing the characters moments of childish fun while the ever deepening darkness continues to rise around them.

The stunning supporting cast continues to turn in stellar work as has been the case throughout the series. Especially good this time around are Alan Rickman's ominous Professor Snape and Tom Felton's Draco Malfoy. Felton's work prior to Half Blood Prince hasn't gone much beyond malevolent sniveling but in 

Half Blood Prince his surprisingly conflicted nature is among the most compelling elements of the film.

Director David Yates has become the unlikely auteur of the Potter series. Having never directed a feature before, Yates was an unlikely and controversial choice to direct Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. That film quickly quieted fears of millions of fans and now with Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, Yates has come to own the franchise.

Yates and his exceptionally talented ensemble leave you wanting more and really that is what the film is supposed to do given that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows 1 and 2 are still to come in 2010 and 2011. Yet, despite being a table setter, Half Blood Prince offers so many wonders it really stands as a triumph of its own.

Where other franchises have lost steam after just three outings the Potter series looks stronger than ever headed to sequels seven and eight. It's quite a testament to the remarkable storytelling of JK Rowling who has taken elements of some of the greatest stories ever told and fashioned them into something wholly original and all her own. What a remarkable piece of work.

Movie Review Love Actually

Love, Actually 2003 

Directed by Richard Curtis

Written by Richard Curtis 

Starring Hugh Grant, Emma Thompson, Alan Rickman, Colin Firth, Liam Neeson, Keira Knightley

Release Date November 7th, 2003 

Published November 4th, 2003 

In Hollywood, the romantic comedy has been beaten to death by clichés and predictable, cookie-cutter plotting. For fans of the genre, our only solace comes when Working Title Films out of Britain releases yet another ingeniously witty, romantic comedy written by Richard Curtis. The man wrote Four Weddings and A Funeral and Notting Hill, and adapted the screenplay for Bridget Jones's Diary. Now, stepping behind the camera for the first time, Curtis shows he could be an industry all to himself writing and directing hit romantic comedies forever. His seemingly endless wit is once again on display in Love Actually, an epic romance if only for the names in its cast.

There are so many different actors and plots in Love Actuallythat it's difficult to condense, so I will lay out the best of the numerous plots individually. Hugh Grant has the best part as the newly-elected British Prime Minister. The film is set apparently sometime in the near future and there are some very funny moments where the script takes loving shots at current real-life Prime Minister Tony Blair. 

As the new prime minister prepares for the arrival of the American President, he begins a flirtation with his tea server Natalie (newcomer Martine McCutcheon). Curtis does an excellent job in balancing the job of prime minister with the script’s flights of romantic fantasy. When the American President arrives, a priceless cameo that I won't spoil, Grant's Prime Minister is allowed to have a point of view on world politics, especially Britain's perceived position as America's bitch, where less courageous directors would have glossed over any actual politics.

Laura Linney has another terrific part as a shy American transplant who is constantly glued to her cell phone. She is nursing a serious crush on one of her co-workers, a crush that everyone in her office from her boss (Alan Rickman) to the bitchy secretary knows about. Even the object of her affection knows about her feelings but is waiting for her to act. This subplot is bittersweet because Linney has a secret that is linked to her constantly ringing cell phone. It's another great piece of work by Linney who has long been one of my favorite actresses.

The most romantic of all the plots involves Colin Firth as a writer who moves away to France after finding his wife cheating with his brother. After moving into his French villa, he hires a maid named Aurelia (Lucia Moniz). The two have an interesting working relationship because Aurelia is Portuguese and doesn't speak a word of English. Their attempts at communicating are sweet and funny moments of misunderstanding. This plot shouldn't work but it does because of the subtle complicated work of Colin Firth. The plot is rushed and predictable but Firth is so winning you can't help but cheer for his happiness.

That is only a minor brushing of the characters in Love Actually, each of the characters I already mentioned have connections to other characters who have their own subplots. Emma Thompson plays Rickman's wife who wonders if her husband is cheating on her. Liam Neeson shows up as a widower left to raise a 10 year old stepson. Keira Knightley is a newlywed who has a secret admirer who happens to be her husband's best man. Bill Nighy plays an aging rocker, modeled on Mick Jagger, whose awful Christmas song plays throughout the film. The song, a holiday reworking of the pop standard “Love Is All Around '' is intentionally bad and Nighy's character freely admits it and his honesty makes the song defiantly a hit.

And there are still more plots I don't have the time or patience to describe. The cast is unwieldy but Curtis finds an almost awe-inspiring way of giving each time to develop and be resolved in ways that are satisfying and funny. Towards the end, just when you think there is no way to resolve all of these plot strands Curtis returns to a piece of dialogue from Hugh Grant's opening voiceover and uses it to unite the entire cast and make a grand point about the nature of love and life. It's a work of subtle brilliance that will cause audience members to leave the theater smiling at the conclusion of the film.

This is a wonderfully exuberant film filled with music, love, and romance that is never saccharine. That wonderful British wit is always in place and keeps the plot from spilling over into super sweetness. Something about the British accent that makes even the most wildly over-the-top flights of fancy seem smart and meaningful. This is one excellent romantic comedy from the last group of producers, director, and actors that can do it right.