tj19

Part 2 of the final installment of the Harry Potter series begins as Harry, Ron, and Hermione continue their quest of tracking down and destroying Lord Voldemort's three remaining Horcruxes, the dark magical items posed as everyday things that are responsible for his immortality. But as the legendary Deathly Hallows are uncovered, Voldemort finds out about their mission, the fight of good against evil will come to an explosive end. Deathly Hallows: Part 2 picks up right where Part 1 left off, searching for Horcruxes. I was never really a fan of the Horcruxes plot line, but I had always tolerated it as I read the novels because even though it felt like a plot line that would be in a sub-par video game, it still felt planned, thanks to Tom Riddle's diary back in Chamber of Secrets. The Horcruxes plot line also worked well on the pages, because they were spread out in the book. However, on screen, it felt repetitive and tedious, with little to no break in between each one, especially in Part 2. Part 1 was an atmospheric and emotional movie, and even though it was basically a prelude to the conclusion of the series, it stood alone as a film rather well. Part 2 was supposed to be action-packed and also emotional, and while it was action-packed (although it felt like it took forever to get there), it wasn't as emotional as I had hoped it would be. The film felt a bit rushed and was single-noted. Part 2 is the shortest Potter installment, and it felt like it. Many scenes left me wanting more. The single-noted aspect made the film feel incomplete. It felt like it was strictly about Horcruxes and the Potter/Voldemort confrontation, with some other sub-plots barely sprinkled in. Maybe if they hadn't split the film in two, but made it one long film, it would have felt more complete. The acting was as solid as ever, with Daniel Radcliffe giving his best performance of the series. Ralph Fiennes was as evil as ever and Alan Rickman gave his best performance in the series too, as Snape. Everyone else was solid as well, but unfortunately we don't get to see them nearly as much, which was a shame. The visual effects were top-notch and can only be rivaled by Deathly Hallows: Part 1. The spell-casting, creatures, and explosions were dazzling and suitably, magical. Some of the CGI was a bit spotty, but I honestly can remember only one instance and it literally lasted two seconds. I loved that the film was all about how there is darkness in all of us, but we can learn how to overcome it. We learn quickly that no character in this series (including Dumbledore) is totally pure, and Harry must completely accept this or else he will fail. Overall, as a film, it's a good one. But when you deal with sequels and a series, as well as the most famous book series of all time, as well as expectation, Part 2 doesn't make the grade. I expected a lot more, and didn't get it. It felt rushed and wasn't at all cathartic, which is what a Potter fan who not only grew up reading the books but grew up watching the films as well was deserving of. There are a lot of variables as to why the film was not excellent, and one could argue Book 7 was one of the weaker books anyway. Still, it's a good movie and whenever you deal with an ending people are very critical if it is not exactly they way they envisioned it. Harry Potter was one of the greatest film series of all time, and even though Part 2 wasn't the best, I'm still satisfied with the series as a whole, which stuck to the books faithfully, upheld Rowling's wishes, stuck with the same actors, and above all, stayed consistently great with four different directors and the transition from kid-friendly to much, much darker themes. That is an achievement unto itself. In the 10 years since Harry's big-screen debut, the spell has never been broken.

Visionary director Darren Aronofsky's (Requiem for a Dream, The Wrestler) latest film, Black Swan, is a psychological thriller set in the competitive world of New York ballet. Natalie Portman (Closer, V for Vendetta) is Nina Sayers, a featured veteran dancer who finds herself locked in a web of fierce intrigue with a new rival at the company (Mila Kunis). She then finds herself to be the affection of her director (Vincent Cassel), and also must deal with her vicariously overbearing mother (Barbara Hershey), as well as the harsh reality of the ballet business when her fellow colleague (Winona Ryder) is forced to retire. But, even with all these distractions are seemingly in her way to become the perfect Swan Queen, the only person standing in her way is herself. Most of Darren Aronofsky's films relay love/hate relationships with their viewers. Arguably his most notable film, Requiem for a Dream, was labeled as a masterpiece by some, and was totally panned by others. However, Black Swan is much more refined than his other works, whilst still staying true to his vision as a director. Aronofsky has grown as a director, and he shows it in Black Swan. Aronofsky is known for his "style over substance" filmmaking, and while their is more style than substance, it is still exhilarating and contemporary cinema. Natalie Portman gives an outstanding performance, the best of her career, and will undoubtedly get a much deserved Oscar nomination. She deserves accolades for her physically demanding role that she made look effortless, as well as her seemingly quiet and strictly devoted character hiding bottled-up rage and painfully submerged lust. Mila Kunis (The Book of Eli) also gives her best performance as Portman's rival. Her performance was so care-free and bold, just like the character she portrayed. Black Swan is a film about that strive for perfection, and the toll that strive takes on one's self. It is a film dialed up on full-blown hysteria. And the too-much-is-never-enough approach may turn some people off, for Black Swan is a singular and unrelenting experience. I found the tension, music and cinematography to be brilliant. It is engaging and seductive from start to finish. Black Swan picks at our deepest fears; in most fright films, danger lurks in the shadows. Here it is devilishly grinning in the mirror. It is pure horror mixed with backstage melodrama, and Aronofsky's high-flying style of directing makes Black Swan one of the best films of 2010. It is a must-see for anyone who lives and breathes movies.

David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin form a cinematic union to tell the story about the founders of the social-networking website, Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) is an eccentric and brilliant Harvard undergrad who intellectually and fundamentally creates the social-networking site we all know and love, Facebook. "The Social Network" is a dramatization of the creation of Facebook, but also the civil case(s) Zuckerberg went through to create the one of the biggest sites in the world that is worth billions of dollars and is used by over 500 million people across the world. But to make 500 million friends, Zuckerberg had to make a few enemies. "The Social Network" is an absorbing film that makes you question yourself, 'What is Facebook?' It's a philosophical question that essentially bridges the gap (More like chasm) between the sides of baby-boomers, and the sides of Gen X and Y'ers, and stimulates meaningful discussions about viewpoints, ideas, and values. This is a very talky film, but thankfully the dialogue is excellent, and Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, Charlie Wilson's War) pens an exceptional screenplay that will likely get an Oscar nomination (And perhaps even a win). Besides a fantastic script, the film is beautifully directed by David Fincher (Fight Club, Se7en), who paces a talky, 2-hour film while keeping the audience more than just entertained. He also directs a fine cast; all members of the cast give their best performances to date. Jesse Eisenberg especially gives an astonishingly sophisticated performance of calculated detachment. Every movement he makes is a stimulating one, he makes you laugh and happy, and at times makes you hate him and question his morals. The rest of the cast is solid as well, particularly Andrew Garfield, who is a star in the making, as well as Justin Timberlake, who proved that his breakout performance in 2007's "Alpha Dog" was not a one-time thing; He can definitely act. A lot of people were not sure what to expect of "The Social Network." It really doesn't matter whether you love or hate Facebook, or even have one. Cinematically, it is a great film. It is a ballsy and risky first effort by Fincher and Sorkin, which turns out to be rather brilliant and controversial (Many people are wondering how factually accurate the film is). The Social Network reminds me of the "Rise and Fall" narrative of the gangster film narrative, with Networking being the subject of the rise and fall. More directly, the film is a lot like "Citizen Kane," with our protagonist (who infuriates us and pleases us at the same time) reaches the heights of the communications empire. This film isn't for everyone. It requires thought, and I foresee some people being bored by it (Mainly the average ADD movie-goer who isn't entertained unless they see an explosion or hear a one-liner every three minutes); It's flashy, entertaining, funny and interesting. Unlike Facebook itself, "The Social Network" has little to no flaws, and is well worth "friending."

Rating: 8/10