Well, here it is. I have finally seen Spider-Man 3. After waiting for three years, 34 months, nearly 1095 days, the wait for me is over. I know you're all curious as to what I think of the movie, and naturally you would be. How did Spider-Man 3, in the eyes of a Spider-Maniac, perform? Well, we'll get to that in a little bit. Spider-Man 2 is, as you know, my favorite movie of all time, and that means that Spider-Man 3 has some large shoes to fill. But, I wasn't asking it to be better than Spider-Man 2, that's just ridiculous because it was so amazingly good to begin with. But even going in with three years worth of anticipation and ridiculously high expectations, did Spider-Man 3 deliver? It's also quite poetic in a sense that on May 4th 2002 I saw the original Spider-Man and that movie transformed me into the movie buff I am today, and now, on May 4th 2007, exactly five years later, the one movie I have spent every single day for the past three years looking forward to, has finally been viewed by me.

OK, I'll get straight to the point. Spider-Man 3, while not as good as Spider-Man 2, is still a knockout and not only one of the best comic book films ever, it's flat out one of my favorites. My expectations were astronomically high and to be able to say that I walked away extremely satisfied is really saying something. As with the other two movies, one of the main strengths of Spider-Man 3 is the acting. Tobey Maguire is back once again as Peter Parker/Spider-Man and does a bang up job. He really makes the character believable and sells everything in the movie, and it's important in this one because of all the emotions being poured out. Kirsten Dunst is back as well as Mary Jane Watson and once again, in my opinion, does a great job. JK Simmons is JJJ and is as hysterical as ever. His scenes are really great and are some of the best in the movie. Stan Lee has a really superb cameo and actually has some dialogue! Great one Stan! But one of the best is Bruce Campbell. His cameo is a complete scene-stealer and is simply hysterical. I was dying in the theater during his part. Thomas Haden Church is Flint Marko AKA The Sandman. He's absolutely perfect for the role and plays it very well. Topher Grace plays Eddie Brock/Venom and is really good, but underused. His Brock spews one-liners, which are generally humorous, and his Venom is good, even IF the voice is a little silly for the character. Bryce Dallas Howard plays Gwen Stacey, Peter's first true love in the comics. She's good with the character but is like Brock where she's underutilized. James Franco really impressed me though as Harry. He really shone here and it was nice to see him play more than a character who verbally abused Spider-Man. Overall, this had a strong cast that helped the movie greatly.

Danny Elfman opted out of this movie and Christopher Young replaced him. I rather enjoyed the score in this one. I still think the best score belongs to the previous movie but it was rather nice to hear something a bit different that also sounded really great to boot.

Now, this movie has come under some scrutiny whenever footage was shown because of the spotty looking effects. I can tell you now that the special effects in this movie are astounding. They aren't convincing 100% of the time and some spots do stick out, though nothing as obvious as the wretched helicopters at the end of Spider-Man 2. Overall though, the CGI is simply amazing. The first introduction to Sandman after he has been transformed into the villain is simply a work of art. The way the scene is shot, the music that is played and the CGI effects all combine to give us one stunning image. Seeing Sandman trying to re-form himself for the first time is a sight to behold. He begins to take shape and then completely falters and falls apart. He tries again but can't get a grip on it but finally manages to. The whole scene is just wondrous to behold. The rest of the Sandman effects are great as well. Everything flows smoothly with him and looks stunningly realistic.

But, this movie is definitely not perfect. It has its fair share of problems and things I just didn't like. For starters, the whole movie feels rushed. There is too much going on and in turn the pacing is off and the movie feels bloated. You've got Peter and MJ's relationship, Harry as a villain, Sandman, Eddie Brock, Gwen Stacy, the black costume, the Symbiote and Venom. There's just too much going on here. Scene transitions are jarring at times and it seems like some things are rushed for the sake of the running time. The whole climax feels completely rushed too. Don't get me wrong, it's an absolute blast to watch and the effects are wonderful, it's just over too soon and it could have been so much more. Aunt May is also vastly underutilized. It seems that now she only shows up to give Peter sage-like advice when he needs to get his life back on track. Whatever happened to her pretty much knowing Peter's secret from the speech she gave near the end of Spider-Man 2? Either way, Rosemary Harris is great in each of the few scenes that she is in and it was great to see her again. Another thing I disliked was Sandman's method of transportation around the city. He travels in a large sand cloud. It looks absolutely ridiculous on the screen and made be wonder what the hell someone was thinking. But, one of my biggest gripes has to be emo Peter. When he turns "evil" he changes his whole look and looks like a Fall Out Boy reject. At one point he actually pulls his hair down to form what I call the "emo drop". The crowd burst out laughing and that was definitely not the intention. There's also a specific scene with Harry's butler that completely threw me for a loop. The butler says something that he should've said years ago to save everyone a ton of trouble. It was a bad move by the screenwriters. Probably the biggest gripe from fans will be the dealings with Uncle Ben. Some already know what I'm talking about; others don't so I won't give anything away. I agree that they shouldn't have done what they did but in the context of the movie it actually worked. I still like to believe what we have believed for the past five years but it doesn't really harm anything.

One of the biggest things that Spider-Man 2 has over Spider-Man 3 is its villain. Alfred Molina's Doc Ock is one of the greatest villains in cinematic history, in my opinion at least. He never hams it up or goes overboard with the character and he is as grounded in reality as a person with four arms fused to his body can be. We also care deeply for the character because we have spent time with him from the beginning and we know that he is really a great guy. In Spider-Man 3 we are introduced to Flint Marko as an escaped convict, Eddie Brock as a sniveling weasel and to Harry as a vengeance seeking killer. The only character we really have any connection with or feeling towards is Harry because he was in the last two movies. Either way, the villains do end up turning out nicely. Sandman is enjoyable and Eddie/Venom is pretty darn cool too. Harry is the best part though. The last negative I want to touch on is the team up of Venom and Sandman. It's quick and wholly unbelievable in the way that it is pulled off. The exchange goes something like,

"Hey, you aren't Spider-Man"
"No, I'm not. Wanna join up and kill him?"
"Sure"

Ok, so the actual exchange is different and longer than that, but you get the general idea. It could've been pulled off better and in a more believable way. The frustrating part is that all the raw materials for a great film are here. Brock and Marko both have potentially fascinating backstories and motivations. The idea of a self-serving, revenge-minded Spider-Man is intriguing. There are themes of redemption and forgiveness woven throughout the movie, but they're delivered tritely and without the skillful touch that characterized the emotional aspects of the other films. Sometimes the film feels chaotic, as though scenes are missing, as if they're still sorting out what to keep and what to throw away.

Those may seem like a lot of complaints but they really aren't that big of a deal when you look at the big picture. There's still plenty to love here. The action is bigger and better in this installment. There really isn't anything that stands up to the amazing El Train scene in Spider-Man 2 but the action we do get is great. The whole battle royale at the end is breathtaking. The choreography is superb and the effects are as well. There are some happenings in the scene that I cannot really talk about but emotions run high and something happens that I've been waiting to happen for three years and it just made me ecstatic to finally be able to see it happen and happen so well. This leads me to another point. With the ever-rising budget for these films and the need to outdo themselves with each new sequel, the filmmakers never once lose sight of the most important part of this trilogy: the characters. We care so much about these people we have spent the last five years following and it really pays off in this one. When one of them feels sad you feel the exact same way and the same goes with every other emotion. This film is also a lot funnier than the previous entries. JJJ is hysterical as mentioned and Bruce Campbell is very memorable in his cameo. Eddie Brock also has a couple of funny quips. One scene that will divide all fans is when Peter has first changed into emo Peter. He walks down the street to music and looks so ridiculous that you can't help but laugh. He's the most pathetic bad-boy ever. This scene probably wasn't needed but it was hysterical either way. I rather enjoyed it but I know that not everyone will, and not everyone has. While watching the movie, I thought of something, Spider-Man 3 is really like Spider-Man 2.5, and I mean that in the best way possible. I say that because I think that if you were to watch SM2 and SM3 back-to-back it'd be much more fulfilling. If you look at it as maybe one movie, things might not seem so disjointed and rushed. Then again, maybe it wouldn't matter. I just kind of noticed how a back-to-back viewing would work perfectly with these two movies.

So there you have it, Spider-Man 3. After three years of waiting, it has finally come upon us. It isn't a perfect movie by any stretch of the imagination but it sure is fun. It will definitely be one of the best movies of the summer (probably will end up being my favorite) and is already one of my favorites of all time. It is inferior to Spider-Man 2 but, as I have said before, that was a hard act to top and I think that it followed it up rather well. The movie is fast, exciting, funny, dramatic, romantic and just plain fun. What more can you ask for out of a summer movie? Spider-Man 3 may not be fans favorite movie of the trilogy, but it's a damn fine entry into the greatest comic book franchise of all time.

 4/5 or 8/10

Taxi Driver – A-

“The days go on and on... they don't end. All my life needed was a sense of someplace to go. I don't believe that one should devote his life to morbid self-attention, I believe that one should become a person like other people.”

This movie is a tough film to review because it is so…different. It’s a weird movie but in the best way possible. By the end of the whole thing you kind of just sit there and take everything in and this is definitely a movie that needs to be seen more than once.

Taxi driver Travis Bickle drives along the scummiest streets in the world, New York City. He doesn't know "much about much", but he does know that he does not like the continuing propagation of the pimps, hookers, junkies and lowlives in his fair city. He also likes a girl. She doesn't like him back. He is lonely. He likes to drink. He gets depressed. He gets angry...

New York City is Bickle’s Hell. He is a developing sociopath living in an all too real hell. Even though he is mentally unstable, Bickle is instantly relatable in the sense that he’s a nice guy but just couldn’t take it anymore. The whole movie is through Bickle’s point of view, which may make the city seem worse than it actually is, but that’s the character study this film offers. Bickle focuses on the bad things while blocking out all the nice things. DeNiro is very effective as Bickle. He plays the character in such a realistic way that he is 100% believable. He tells us as much if not more about his character by his body language than by his narration. Cybill Shepherd is great too as Betsy. She really looks like the angel in this hellish world. Jodie Foster is surprisingly good for her age. Iris is not an easy part, especially for a young girl, but she's excellent. Harvey Keitel is very interesting as the despicable Sports, as are Peter Boyle as the articulate but unambitious Wizard and comedian Albert Brooks as the silly campaign organizer Tom (whose look is a highlight. At least it was for me).

Martin Scorsese masterfully directs the film. Each scene is impressively crafted. Right from the first shots we sink in the movie's eerie universe. The visual style is superbly bleak yet colorful and combined with Bernard Herrman's haunting score, it helps us understand the nightmare Bickle is living all the better. Scorsese uses lots of symbolism here such as the ticking of the cab fare ticker representing Bickle's growing dissatisfaction with the world around him (like a bomb) or the red and green of traffic lights signaling Bickle’s moods. The whole world created here is full of vibrant colors while remaining bleak as I mentioned earlier. This only adds to the surreal ambience already emanating from this film and it really sucks you in completely.

Bernard Herrmann’s score is perfect in the sense that it allows you to feel the perversion of Bickle’s being. There’s one part in the movie that sums up Bickle at that particular point in time. Jackson Browne’s “Late For The Sky” is playing on the television set and it perfectly captures Bickle and what is going through his mind compared to who he was at the beginning of the movie. It’s personally one of my favorite scenes in the whole movie. The overall score though is moody and perfectly fits each scene. This is a great film for Herrmann to go out on (he died mere hours after finishing the final recording sessions).

Taxi Driver is a different movie. It’s not for everyone but if you give it a chance, you’ll find a real gem here. There’s not a weak link throughout the whole movie and although it is 20 years old, the movie still holds up very strong today. This is the film that gave us “Are You Talkin’ To Me?” and, while not quite as famous, a final shootout, which will stick in your mind for a while to come.

The Godfather Part III – B+

“ You know, Michael; now that you're so respectable, I think you're more dangerous than ever. I liked you better when you were just a common Mafia hood.”

I have finally seen all three entries in The Godfather trilogy. Part III is widely considered a bad film and has been named one of the worst sequels of all time. But after finally seeing all three movies I can justly say that this movie is not deserving of the bad rep it gets.

In the final installment of the Godfather Trilogy, an aging Don Michael Corleone seeks to legitimize his crime family's interests and remove himself from the violent underworld but is kept back by the ambitions of the young. While he attempts to link the Corleone's finances with the Vatican, Michael must deal with the machinations of a hungrier gangster seeking to upset the existing Mafioso order and a young protégé’s love affair with his daughter.

This movie was probably not necessary but its here and although it is leagues behind Parts I and II, its still a great movie. I think that’s it greatest fault too, that its predecessor’s were so great that it couldn’t help but be inferior. Al Pacino gives us an aged Michael Corleone but, at least to me, he wasn’t as believable as he was in the previous two. Here he was Al Pacino and lacked the intensity and, well, believability of the character he showed previously. Maybe that’s because of the character’s age and he’s so different than what we have perceived him as in the other two movies. But, you eventually accept him again as Michael and Pacino gives another stellar performance. Talia Shire returns as Connie, Michael’s sister only this time she tries to pull some strings and get into things. Shire’s performance is good but the problem is that this is unbelievable for the character. In the previous two Godfather films she was there, not involved in the business in any way and suddenly here she’s thrown herself into the fray. Andy Garcia plays Vinnie, Sonny’s illegitimate son. He plays Pacino Sonny’s role in the original Godfather and it seems he’s trying to imitate James Caan’s presence instead of being his son. It works in the long run but it feels like he could have done something more with the character. Diane Keaton is Michael’s ex-wife Kay. She doesn’t really do much until near the end of the movie and seems like she is only there to further the ending of the movie. Her role is very detached from what she did in Parts I and II where she was Michael’s loving wife whom he was trying to hold on to. Here, she’s married to another man and doesn’t have an impact on Michael until, as I said, the ending and even there her role isn’t vital. Sofia Coppola is Mary Corleone, Michael’s daughter, and she completely slaughters the character. Did she know that this film wasn’t a comedy? She doesn’t speak in the movie, she awkwardly yells and is reminiscent of the stereotypical bad actor that reads their lines monotonously. And George Hamilton takes over Robert Duvall’s role as B.J. Harrison. George Hamilton? Whoever the hell decided to replace Duvall after he refused to reprise his role should be shot but then to go and cast George Hamilton was just wrong. He sticks out and I was waiting for him to rip open a bad of Baked Ritz crackers and start munching on them. I’m sorry but I just couldn’t take him seriously. The rest of the cast does their job well and their really isn’t a weak link outside of Sofia.

I personally didn’t think the music was as good as it was in the previous two installments. There wasn’t anything memorable outside of the “Godfather Waltz”. That’s not to say it was bad, because it wasn’t. The music perfectly complemented each scene it was used in. It’s just that it wasn’t as good as previous efforts.

I don’t think this should have been called The Godfather Part III, it should have been titled The Godfather: The Musical because after every few scenes another musical piece would pop up. This, accompanied with the editing, made it feel like a TV movie. At the end of 97% of each scene the transition was a fade to black. I was honestly expecting a commercial to pop up one of these times. There were just too many musical pieces in the film as well. We get a long one at the beginning, a few shorter ones scattered throughout the middle and another long one at the end. The whole final movement of the film in which two intrigues are inter cut with Anthony performing in an opera are supposed to be suspenseful, but they’re not. They’re so confusing that we don’t even know where the hell one of the intrigues is taking place. Is it in Rome? Sicily? London? I don’t know.

The whole of the movie is a tad convoluted and hard to believe. Michael is trying to go legit with…the Vatican? This only adds to the confusion of the movie. This entry is easier to grasp and understand what’s going on than Part II was but you are left scratching your head at some points. This will definitely require a second viewing just as Part II does. Another problem is that this feels like a sequel unlike Part II, which felt like a natural continuation of the original. You’re also just thrown into this world without so much as an introduction or a re acquaintance to some characters so you’re left to figure it out on your own which can be pretty annoying when you’re trying to do that and follow the complex storyline all at once. But one of the biggest eyebrow raisers is the incest plotline. That’s right. Vinnie and Mary are first cousins but are in love with each other. The movie even acknowledges that this is wrong but it’s still kept. At the it is supposed to hit us hard due to the circumstances but it just doesn’t because you didn’t believe in it in the first place because it is wrong. That plotline was unneeded and came out of left field. That was probably the worst addition to this film next to Sofia herself. But what really brings this movie together is its spectacular ending. The whole scene on the steps is superbly shot and you really feel the raw surge of emotion that’s going on in that scene. You feel for Michael because of everything he did to try and right his wrongs thus far. But directly after that is the death of Michael Corleone which is tragic yet fulfilling. He is 77 years old and retired to Sicily, alone and distraught when he dies from a stroke. Before he dies he thinks of the women he loved and ultimately lost due to his choices in life. We feel for this character and when he dies, at least with me, a surge of emotion came over because you think back to the journey we went through with this man and here is the end of a legacy. The whole way it is shot and presented struck a chord with me and was the highlight of the movie Michael is alone with nobody left because they are either dead or have left him. It’s a sad way to go but perfectly executed here. I cannot say enough good things about this ending. Its just superb and a truly great way to end this monumental series.

The Godfather Part III is a great movie. It isn’t up to snuff with its predecessors but it can’t be expected to be. It is wholly undeserving of the bad rep it gets because underneath, there is a great movie that has just gotten flack for being inferior and a sequel. Despite some rough edges and lacking in areas that the original two excelled in, The Godfather Part III is very worthy of bearing the Godfather name.

Million Dollar Baby – A-

Released in 2005 to critical acclaim, Million Dollar Baby
premiered with nary any prerelease hype. The film went on to be
nominated for 7 Oscars and ended up winning 4 of them, one for Best
Picture of 2005. However, the Academy who hands out these awards is not
right all too often and many times they snub more deserving films out
of the big award, but is it possible that they were correct this time?

Weathered boxing trainer Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood) loses his best
fighter right before he wins the championship, but an eager female
boxer named Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank) asks him to take her under
his wing. Although he refuses to train "girls," his long-time friend
and gym custodian Eddie (Morgan Freeman) convinces him to help her out,
creating an inseparable bond between the three.

Clint Eastwood produces, directs, scores and acts in this movie and
does all three superbly. First though, the acting. Eastwood turns in
another truly wonderful performance as Frankie. Everything is black and
white in his eyes. It's not about "getting your shot" or at least
making a run for the title. Nothing less than winning that fight is
worth it to Frankie. It's simply not worth the pain to get there and
lose. Everything
is black and white. Eastwood does a marvelous job of playing this up
though. His facial expressions say what he doesn’t need to. You know
just by looking at his face what he feels. Morgan Freeman’s character,
besides being Frankie’s friend, is the narrator of this movie. Freeman
has such a great voice that he can make anything sound like art. But he
truly excels here. The biggest problem though with the narration is
that sometimes it comes in at unneeded points and it seems somewhat
overbearing at times. It isn’t a glaring problem though, rather a
personal qualm with the picture. But, this is clearly Hilary Swank’s
movie and she deserves that Best Actress Oscar. The age of her
character is a bit surprising (she’s 32), since you might expect a
younger woman to be breaking into the spot, but she has a fascinating
character arc, going from the bubbly enthusiasm that hides a dark past
to forming a true bond with Frankie as she proves herself in the ring.
This is what is particularly impressive about Swank’s performance; she
got into amazing physical shape and did all her own boxing scenes. She
is so convincing as this character that it makes it so much easier for
us to believe in her and in turn, make the ending that much more
powerful.

There's a scene near the beginning in which Frankie tells Eddie, to buy
the cheap, generic bleach to clean up around the gym. Eddie tells
Frankie that the cheap stuff doesn't smell as good as the real Clorox
bleach. "Bleach," Frankie says in turn, "smells like bleach." This is a
line that, in any other movie, would have probably been meant for a
small chuckle or a throwaway. Here, however, that very conversation
about bleach tells more about the transformation that takes place
within Frankie Dunn throughout the film than any other moment in the
film.

There was a lot of controversy that surrounded the film upon its
release having to do with Frankie’s transformation as a person. Whether
or not you agree or disagree with what Frankie (and, essentially,
Maggie) do near the end of the film does not make one iota of a
difference. Everyone has their opinion and that's fine, but the more
important question is whether or not you believe that Frankie and
Maggie would have made the decision that they make. It's a difficult
question, to be sure, but the way that this film sets up Frankie and
Maggie's characters throughout the first half of the film, the answer
to that question becomes strikingly clear as a resounding "yes." It is
totally believable that these characters would do exactly what they do
near the end of the film. That's the thing that I find so baffling
about all the controversy. Million Dollar Baby
isn't preaching to you. It's not telling you to act in this way, were
you ever in the situation, but it's simply showing you what Frankie and
Maggie do. It is absolutely true to their characters at that point in
the film, and for that, everyone involved with the film should be
applauded for finding the truth in these people.

Eastwood composes the film also but the music isn’t very apparent,
which is not a bad thing for a film like this. There’s no memorable
theme to go with the movie nor are there moments of swelling music to
heighten the drama because there doesn’t need to be. The images you are
seeing don’t need to be heightened or added to because they do a
tremendous job of conveying that feeling by themselves. The slow music
certainly helps though.

The pacing is incredibly slow but not one minute throughout the film’s
132 minute running time does it drag. None of the film’s slow buildup
prepares you for the film’s powerful third act. This doesn't mean that
the film isn't visually interesting, as Eastwood's use of older
filmmaking techniques makes it seem like a movie straight out of the
'60s or '70s, while the creative use of lighting and the camerawork
helps give it a very distinctive mood. The film never seems dated,
though, thanks to the subject matter of women's boxing that keeps it
firmly set in the modern day. Those action-packed boxing scenes are
also shot so inventively that it makes them look better than many of
the previous boxing dramas.

So yes, believe all the hype you’ve heard about Million Dollar Baby, it’s really that
good. Don’t be confused though, this is not a boxing movie. It is a
human drama set in the world of boxing. The main focus is the strong
bond between Frankie and Maggie, not the next match. Million Dollar Baby
is very much deserving of its Best Picture Oscar win and further proves
why Clint Eastwood is one of America’s finest filmmakers. He has made a
truly brilliant masterpiece.

Crank – B+

This movie sort of came out of nowhere. All of a sudden trailers were
released and TV spots were shown without much of a warning. It looked
to be reminiscent of Transporter 2 in the sense that it looked like an all-out action movie (with Jason Statham). However, Crank
is a completely different animal than the aforementioned movie or any
other movie released this year for that matter. First time directors
Mark Nedveldine and Brian Taylor relentlessly bash you over the head
with the action hammer and boy does it feel great.

Chev Chelios (Statham) learns that a poison injected into his body will
kill him if his heart rate drops slows a certain point. Now he must
exact his revenge on the people who injected him before he takes his
last breath. Basically, this plays out like Speed on foot, but more frantic.

Wake up. First person shot. Things are blurry. Clumsily walking, we
make our way to a flat screen TV with a DVD sitting there. The DVD is
popped in and the situation is explained to us. Suddenly the nice TV is
ripped from the wall and stomped on and ruined. A destructive car chase
ensues (eventually ending up in a mall with the car on an escalator)
and phone calls are made. This is all in the first 15 minutes of the
movie. Oh yeah, the action is plentiful.

Jason Statham is best known from the Transporter movies.
Here he plays a much different character, but kicks much more ass. As
expected, Statham gives a great performance. He is a true action star
and makes everything come alive. Amy Smart plays his girlfriend who
plays the standard ditzy blonde who does and says questionable things.
Efren Ramirez (AKA “Pedro”) is Kaylo, Chev’s gay friend who is there
for some comic relief for the short time he’s in the movie. The rest of
the cast is solid and everyone is believable, with some going a little
over the top at times.

The beginning of this movie had me worried with its frantic MTV-style
camera work. I was hoping the whole movie wouldn’t be like this. I’m
happy to say, it was not. The beginning is like this but once we get in
the car it stops. The film is not shot normally either. The heavy
MTV-style is gone but the camerawork is different. There are things
when Chev is talking on the phone to someone and you’ll see them
randomly in the environment on the other end, be it in a rearview
mirror or on the side of the building. They are some pretty nifty
effects and add to the overall tone of the movie. This is not a
traditional action movie by any means. As you can see above, the plot
is very thin. The movie starts and we’re given the situation and it
throws you right into the whirlwind from the get-go. This is definitely
not a problem though because the movie is so entertaining that it
doesn’t matter if the plot is a little thin. Besides the action, there
is humor. There are some seriously hilarious moments in this movie that
will have your stomach hurting from the laughter (its all intentional
too). This is sort of like Snakes on a Plane,
if you go into this movie expecting something else, you’ll be
disappointed. Just go into this expecting a fun movie with little plot
and not a traditional movie and you should have a great time.

There really aren’t too many negatives to this one. The running time is
a little on the short side (83 minutes) but it doesn’t feel rushed or
short, nor does it drag on for too long. The ways Chev gets his
adrenaline pumping are interesting, to say the least. The worst part
about the movie though, is the lack of story. Again, this isn’t meant
to be a story heavy movie but just a few minutes more of…something
would have helped. But, the lack of this does not hinder the movie in
any way because it’s still extremely entertaining.

Crank is quite possibly the most fun movie of the summer. It
delivered big action, fun times, great laughs and pure entertainment.
The catch phrase "a thrill a minute" doesn't really go the distance to
describe how ridiculously action packed this film is. A thrill every
ten to fifteen seconds is more like it. Everything about this movie
gelled wonderfully and I dare you to have a better time at the movies
this year.