In fact, if you saw Dear John, you may actually think you’re watching a remake of the same movie, only this time it’s starring Zac Efron (instead of Channing Tatum) as the war-scarred soldier (er, Marine) and Taylor Schilling (instead of Amanda Seyfried) as the blonde chick he falls for. And instead of a letter, there’s a photograph.

The plot doesn’t really matter much. It’s basically about a U.S. Marine (Efron) who serves three tours of duty in Iraq and is convinced his life’s been spared time and time again because of a good-luck charm in the form of a photo he found resting in the desert sand after a particularly brutal ambush. When he’s finally sent home from war, he goes in search of the woman in the photo – and finds her, of course. But will he tell her why he’s really there? Will there be lots of miscommunications and drama and steamy kisses that leave little to the imagination despite its PG-13 rating? You betcha! It’s a Nicholas Sparks book-turned-movie!

So – bottom line. If you’re a fan of Nicholas Sparks books-turned-movies, or you think Zac Efron is hot, then don’t let those Rotten Apples at Rotten Tomatoes spoil your fun. And if you’re not a fan of Sparks and/or Efron, then definitely take a pass.

May the odds be ever in your favor

The premise is admittedly bizarre. Every year, a teenage boy and girl from the 12 districts of Panem are sent to the Capitol to compete in a nationally televised, fight-to-the-death competition known as The Hunger Games. The Games were created as punishment for an uprising against the Capital decades earlier – and perpetuated as a way to keep the districts in line. Think of the 12 Districts as home to the 99 percent. The Capitol houses the 1 percent.

The Games’ participants, known as Tributes, must fight one another until one survivor remains. And just like Texas with the Miss America pageant, some tributes are better prepped than others for the competition.

The heroine of The Hunger Games is Katniss Evergreen, played with an impressive mix of fear, stoicism, sarcasm, bravery and cunning by the very talented Jennifer Lawrence (Winter’s Bone). Katniss volunteers for the brutal competition in order to spare her little sister Prim – so you can’t help but root for her from the get-go. But these games aren’t just about winning. They’re about the lines we draw – and the lines we cross – in an effort to survive, and our willingness or reluctance to challenge the status quo. The books and the movie are tinged with themes of war, politics, morality, ethics, desensitization to violence and absurdity, and the role of reality television in feeding the frenzy. It’s also just good storytelling/drama. 

Here’s the rub:  I loved the first book (“The Hunger Games”), liked the second one (“Catching Fire”) and was less than satisfied with the third (“Mockingjay”). So I’m a bit concerned with how it might all play out in the end. But first thing’s first…

The Hunger Games movie is well cast and beautifully shot. I had some trouble warming up to Josh Hutcherson (The Kids Are All Right) as Katniss’s fellow tribute and potential ally/love interest Peeta. But he grew on me as the movie progressed. And I definitely look forward to seeing more of the hunky Liam Hemsworth (The Last Song) as Katniss’s long-time friend, hunting partner and potential love interest Gale. Other casting coups of note: Stanley Tucci as the colorful emcee of the Games, Elizabeth Banks as the flaky tribute chaperone Effie Trinket, and Woody Harrelson as drunken mentor Haymitch Abernathy. They add a strong shot of color and humor to the twisted proceedings.

Parents, be forewarned however. This movie is PG-13. Kids do kill kids. The violence is tempered with quick cuts and montages, but it’s still the stuff of nightmares. That said, if you’ve read the books, you’re going to see the movies. It’s really as simple as that. I highly recommend reading the trilogy beforehand to help plug in holes in character development and recognize the bits of foreshadowing. But reading the books is not mandatory. The Hunger Games can still hold its own for the general audience – including those adults who don’t want to be caught reading “teen lit” and still don’t ‘get’ the whole Twilight thing.

Bottom line: The odds will ever be in favor of this trilogy meeting hyper-expectations and selling oodles of tickets over the next few years. And did I mention that Taylor Swift is on the soundtrack? Cue the record sales. The book sales. And the box office.

Normally, I’d embed the trailer below. But the studios must have blocked the embedding option in their efforts to fan the flames of anticipation. Oh well. You can see it on YouTube if you’re really desperate. http://youtu.be/RNxb28j5C1w

In the meantime, in the spirit of rebellion, I offer this up instead:

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen

Emily Blunt (The Young Victoria, The Devil Wears Prada) plays Harriet, a British public relations executive who is given carte blanche to help a wealthy sheik realize his dream of bringing salmon fishing to the desert. She turns to the UK’s leading fisheries expert, Dr. Alfred Jones (Ewan McGregor) for help, but he finds the entire project completely absurd. So does the British government – until the Prime Minister’s press secretary (played by Kristin Scott Thomas) decides that the salmon project is just what the government needs to divert attention from another Middle East ‘project’ that isn’t going so well – the war in Afghanistan.

As the eccentric sheik eventually points out, the project isn’t just about fish. And neither is the movie. It’s about politics, diplomacy, cultural divides, and the hint of romance between the optimistic Harriet and the skeptical Dr. Jones.

The film has its flaws. The Sheik’s character (played by Amr Waked) is all over the place. One minute, he’s a cartoonish stereotype, and the next he’s a complex and sympathetic man on a mission – to bring peace, water, and lots of salmon to the people of Yemen.

But despite the occasional unevenness of character and tone, Salmon Fishing offers up a nice mix of drama, humor, sarcasm, cynicism, and inspiration. Hey, anything is possible – as long as you’ve got enough money, resources… and faith!

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen isn’t terribly deep or dark, which is probably why I liked it (and why I’m a Mainstream rather than an Arty Chick). It’s beautifully shot, well-acted, and well-paced (not too surprising, coming from the director of Chocolat and the Oscar-winning screenwriter of Slumdog Millionaire). And most important, it’ll leave you smiling – and perhaps wondering where Yemen is on the map. Look it up. I did.

The Kevin we need to talk about is the demon child born to young Eva and Franklin played by Tilda Swinton and John C. Reilly. From the beginning, he torments his mother and acts like the angel when his dad is around. And so of course, Dad doesn’t believe Mom when she speaks ill of her child. Kevin manipulates Eva and revels in her pain, but he’s not a horror movie character like Damien in The Omen. Instead, this is a more nuanced character and the story unfolds in flashback. As the film begins Eva is struggling to cope with her post-catastrophe life. Someone has thrown red paint on her car and her house and she is heading out to interview for a menial job at a travel agency. In bits and piece we learn that Kevin killed a bunch of his schoolmates in a Columbine-style massacre, and as much as Eva knew how damaged her son was, she was powerless to do anything about it.

Watching We Need To Talk About Kevin is like watching a train wreck. You know exactly what is coming and yet it is so well done, you cannot look away. Fortunately, the major part of the violence is off screen. Tilda Swinton is amazing as a mother who is trying everything she can to get through to the son whose psycho inner life only she knows. And the two boys who play the son as a young boy, then as a teenager are scary good at portraying a very smart little monster. It is hard to recommend this to most people because the subject matter is so disturbing, but it has stayed with me. It is unlike anything else I’ve seen. And if you can get past the basic idea of it, it is amazingly good film making.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

First-time actor Thomas Horn (a former Kid’s Week champion on Jeopardy!) plays Oskar Schell, a possibly autistic boy whose father (Tom Hanks) dies in the collapse of the World Trade Center. A year later, still reeling from the loss, Oskar finds a key hidden among his father’s belongings. He’s convinced that his father meant for him to find the key – and the lock it goes to. So Oskar embarks on a mission/journey that takes him through the five boroughs and into the homes and businesses of a vast array of characters who are all struggling in one way or another. It kind of reminded me of Pay It Forward.

Oskar is distant with his mother (Sandra Bullock), but he does allow one person in on his plan: a mute old man (superbly played by Max von Sydow) who lives at his grandmother’s apartment building across the way.

The movie starts off slow – and stays that way for well over an hour – but it packs a powerful emotional punch in the end. If you could judge a movie by the number of tissues I massacre in the final five minutes, then Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close would get a thumbs-up. However, since the first two hours failed to bowl (or bawl) me over, I can only give it an “eh”.

Albert has been living as a man in service since she was 14. We find that a rape was the catalyst for the choice, but that is all we are told. Close’s performance is contained to the point of characterlessness. She plays Albert as if he could be blown away by a wisp of air. He has no friends, no social skills, no personality. He decides to marry to keep up the masculinity ruse, and to that end he sets his sights on the prettiest of the maids (Mia Wasikowska), unaware that she is involved with one of the other servants. There is nothing sexual or even slightly loving about Albert’s way of courting. It is merely a part of his delusional master plan, along with saving up to buy a building where they will live and run a tobacco shop together.

The film’s best scenes arrive with painter Hubert Page who is hired to touch up the hotel. Lacking space, they decide he can share Albert’s bed. Of course, Albert is petrified at the prospect of being discovered, but the lovely surprise is that Hubert is also a woman passing as a man. (I don’t think I am giving anything away here. I knew right off.) If there is an actress in this film who deserves accolades it is Janet McTeer. Her Hubert is warm and deep and shows Albert that is is possible to have a happy existence even in their predicament. She has a wife she loves dearly and a full life. Her story would have made a better film, with an Albert chapter for contrast.

I can’t say I recommend Albert Nobbs. Close’s performance is getting a lot of attention, but I couldn’t see any change in the character from scene one to the end. Nor did I feel like there was anything interesting going on behind that masculine mask. The supporting cast were all quite good and it looked beautiful, but the problem is the title character. I would be interested to read the short story from which it was adapted, but this movie was just kind of hard to watch.

Based on a book and a stage play and a real life story, the film tells the tale of a young Russian woman named Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley) who arrives kicking and screaming at the Swiss hospital where Dr. Jung practices in 1904. She is in desperate need of help for a whole slew of severe neuroses. His treatment is the new “talking cure,” and it turns out she is no mere hysteric, but a very intelligent girl who hopes to become a doctor and is very curious about these new techniques in the emerging field of psychoanalysis. After Jung treats and cures her, she heads to the university and an intellectual relationship blossoms, but then sparked by their discussions of Freud’s ideas about sexual repression, it turns into a passionate affair. It is doomed, of course, to fail. He is married with a rich wife and several children, and she is a former patient and a Jew.

And while this relationship is evolving, Jung is developing his most important relationship. As his treatment of Sabina moves forward, he corresponds and debates with his dear friend and mentor in Vienna, the great psychologist Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen). He is at first sure that Freud is wrong about every neurosis having a sexual cause. But as he gets to know Sabina he learns that she was not simply abused, but she became aroused by the humiliation. And as the relationship between the two pioneers of modern psychoanalysis develops, a rivalry emerges. Early on Jung refers to Freud as his “father figure.” Freud’s theories were revolutionary and he was happy to have younger doctors taking up his cause, but when Jung begins to assert his own ideas, Freud is at first disparaging, and ultimately unable to sustain the friendship, resulting in a break-up that deeply wounds both men.

David Cronenberg (Dead Ringers, The Fly, Crash) is not known for making restrained movies, but A Dangerous Method possesses a subdued, intelligent elegance. Except for Keira Knightley’s early grotesque histrionics, and a bit of naughty spanking, the film is mostly fascinating conversation and beautiful locations. The performances are all stellar, including a few manic scenes with Vincent Cassel (Black Swan) playing a patient who believes that sexual repression is the greatest sin. With A History of Violence and Eastern Promises, and now this beautifully subtle piece of film making, I think Cronenberg has moved into his intelligent adult period, and I cannot wait for his next one.

[I think we can all be grateful for scheduling conflicts. Christoph Waltz was initially cast as Sigmund Freud, but was replaced by Viggo Mortensen. Christian Bale had been in talks to play Carl Jung, and the role of Sabina Spielrein in the screenplay was written for Julia Roberts.]

As the War breaks out, Albert’s father is forced by circumstances beyond his control to sell Joey to a cavalry officer to use in battle, and from there the horse goes through a series of owners, across battles, from the British to the German side and back again with a sojourn in a little girl’s care. Where we have seen a war through the eyes of many human’s over the years, here it is seen through an equine lens. The film is rated PG-13 for its realistic depiction of the war, and it is horrific. I am sure that many people have no idea how brutal the First World War actually was. And there is something of the same feeling in many of the scenes as in Saving Private Ryan, that brothers in arms camaraderie kind of thing– total carnage beautifully captured by cinematographic genius Janusz Kaminski.

Everywhere the horse goes, he finds a person who recognizes his greatness. There are lots of those triumph of the spirit moments. Joey is the fastest, the most beautiful, smartest, loyalest, etc. And he makes an equine friend early on in the war that stays with him through his many tribulations. Then mid-way through, Albert joins the army and you just know that he and Joey will end up somehow coming together one way or another, because it is a Spielberg film after all, and there just has to be a happy ending.

War Horse is designed to be a total crowd-pleasing, tear-jerker movie — good for the family (not the little ones) or a date — though I didn’t cry as much as I expected. Spielberg can be a little too sappy at times for my taste (especially that ending Steven!) Unfortunately, most of the characters are not all that well-drawn, and the horse, which should have a big personality, really doesn’t. He is just beautiful and brave. And it is a bit long (146 min). Ultimately, it is a throwback to the good old fashioned Disney family film with fairly generic salt of the earth characters. It does have a decent though mostly low-key cast including Emily Watson (Breaking the Waves), David Thewlis (Naked), Niels Arestrup (A Prophet), and Tom Hiddleston (Midnight in Paris). Bonus: My nephew tells me the lead actor who plays Albert (Jeremy Irvine) looks just like a young Tom Brady (as if I knew who that was.)

Damon plays Benjamin Mee, a young widower struggling to raise his two kids, Dylan, 14, and Rosie, 7, in the months following his wife’s death. Desperate for a change of scenery and a fresh start, Mee moves the family out of the city and into a fixer-upper in the country that happens to be situated in the middle of a zoo that also needs some major fixer-uppin’.

The zoo has a small but dedicated group of caretakers led by Kelly Foster (Scarlett Johannson). Mee represents their last great hope for restoring the zoo to its original grandeur– or at least bringing it up to code and avoiding closure by an evil (and somewhat cartoonish) state inspector.

Of course, there are many challenges along the way. Mee is still grappling with grief. His teenage son (Colin Ford) is full of angst and anger and oblivious to the doe-eyed advances of Kelly’s niece Lily (Elle Fanning). Mee’s brother Duncan (played with his usual crass wit by Thomas Hayden Church) wants him to cut and run, i.e. “lose the zoo – but keep Kelly”. Time and money are running out. You get the picture.

And then there are the animals – a menagerie that includes a roaming bear, a monkey, an elephant, some snakes, birds, and an aging tiger that has some valuable lessons to impart in his waning days. You can’t help but root for the whole lot of ‘em, even the snakes. And, you can’t help but smile every time young Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones) declares “We bought a zoo!!!!” She amps up the movie’s cuteness factor whenever she appears on screen.

Ultimately, as I alluded to before, it is Damon that saves the zoo and the movie. He manages to be adorable and accessible in dare I say, a Clooney-esque sort of way. His portrayal of a journalist-turned-zookeeper is honest and authentic and does great service to a story that is actually based on real-life events. You may even be inspired to quit your day job and go in search of a zoo that needs fixin’. Or at least get a dog.

From a purely visual standpoint, The Adventures of Tintin is rather stunning with its use of motion-capture technology. But the story itself falls a bit flat, even at the direction of the almighty Steven Spielberg.

Here’s the gist: Tintin (voiced by Jamie Bell) buys a model ship at an outdoor marketplace, only to discover that a nefarious dude named Red Rackham (Daniel Craig) wants the ship so badly that he’s willing to kill for it. Turns out the ship, called The Unicorn, is one of a series of three model ships that together will unlock the ancient secret to a hidden treasure. Rather than relinquish the ship, Tintin (who can’t resist the urge to follow a good story) embarks on a dangerous journey on the high seas, where he ends up joining forces with a drunken Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). Haddock holds the key to the entire mystery if he can sober up long enough to figure it out.

The movie, like the comics, is peppered with slapstick humor, social commentary, and quirky characters. In many ways, it feels like an animated version of Pirates of the Caribbean, with a couple of keystone cops thrown in (a pair of detectives named Thompson and Thomson, voiced by Nick Frost and Simon Pegg).

The Adventures of Tintin should appeal to nostalgic fans of the comic series and boys aged 8-12. Beyond that, it could be a tough sell. Then again, family movies are big this time of year, so perhaps Tintin will be able to capitalize on that.

The movie is rated PG for adventure action violence, some drunkenness and brief smoking. And while the motion-capture technology is awesome, the 3D doesn’t add much.