Garry Marshall is brilliant. He made a mildly entertaining movie with an A-List cast and a name that virtually guarantees it a place in holiday rerun history. [New Year’s Eve] is like Crash-light. Really, really, really light. It follows a bunch of folks whose lives intersect in various ways as they [embrace, reject, and reflect on all that is New Year’s Eve as the ball is about to drop in New York City].

The cast is a virtual who’s who of stars from the big and small screen – including [Hillary Swank, Robert De Niro, Sarah Jessica Parker, Josh Duhamel, rocker Jon Bon Jovi, Halle Berry, Katherine Heigl, Zac Efron, Michelle Pfeifer], Jessica Biel, Ashton Kutcher, Lea Michele, Hector Elizondo… Need I go on?

There’s no real way to review the storyline without giving too much away. All I can say is the movie is enjoyable enough, if not particularly deep. Director Garry Marshall knows how to deliver a solid mainstream chick flick. And as a fellow Northwestern alum, it’s always fun to spot his quick nod to our alma mater – in this case [if there was one, I somehow missed it!]. It’s also worth sticking around for the end credits. Among the outtakes – a fun, little salute to [Valentine’s Day].

Watching [New Year’s Eve] is like watching a special, star-studded edition of The Love Boat. If that floats your boat, then go and enjoy.

There ya have it. A re-purposed review that matches a re-purposed premise that – if it does well enough at the box office – will surely spark yet another entry into the star-studded holiday “franchise”. Place your bets now for Christmas Day, Hanukkah Nights, Labor Day, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Columbus Day…

The couple is Jacob (Yelchin) and Anna (Jones). They meet at a university in California where she is studying English and he is learning furniture design. She leaves a vaguely stalkerish note on his car and they meet for coffee. They bond over Paul Simon’s Graceland album (seems an odd choice, but okay) and quickly become a couple. The connection between them is powerful. Then senior year is almost up and they wonder “What are we going to do after we graduate?” What she should do is go back to England where she’s from so that she doesn’t overstay her student visa. But, matters of the heart trump legal matters for her and she stays. Too bad love doesn’t actually conquer all – especially immigration law. When she takes a quick trip back to the UK and then tries to return to the U.S. and Jacob, Anna isn’t allowed back into the country. This is when things get difficult.

She can’t resolve her immigration issues and he can’t/won’t give up his furniture business to move to England. So what are they to do? They text, he visits, they both fall into other more convenient relationships. He with a California blonde played by Jennifer Lawrence (who will most likely become a household name come March when The Hunger Games hit theaters). She with a yuppie Brit named Simon. As the months and years go by, Anna and Jacob drift apart and back together trying to figure out if they can overcome all the obstacles and whether this thing they have is really worth the effort.

It’s a fine little love story, well acted and directed. But like I said I just didn’t care about the couple. In fact, they kind of annoyed me. Her heartfelt poetry… His block-like furniture… Graceland? Really? One thing I did admire was Anna’s penchant for single malt whisky. I left the theater wanting a scotch. And one of the reasons I didn’t want to leave early to get one was the movie only runs 90 minutes. I can put up with anything for 90 minutes. I suspect if you consider yourself a romantic, you may enjoy this one more than I did. So don’t let me put you off it completely. I’d say get it on pay-per-view or Netflix when it’s available and you’re in the mood for some sappy romance, and pour yourself a scotch.

I won’t bother delving too much into the plot, because it will just propel the non-Twihards among you to wonder how and why the “young adult” novels by Stephenie Meyer grew to such Potter-esque proportions. It is what it is, people.

Breaking Dawn picks up where Eclipse left off. Eighteen-year-old Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and her immortal boyfriend, the intense but charming vampire Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) tie the knot. Bella gets pregnant on their honeymoon and the ‘baby’ grows at an accelerated pace, feeding off the ever-weakening Bella, and triggering a potential war between the vampire clan and the local werewolves whose pack includes Bella’s best friend Jacob (Taylor Lautner). Jacob remains ever-protective of Bella despite his hate for all things vampire. I know – it’s absurd. But every time Jacob rips off his shirt and leaps into werewolf mode, you can almost forgive the cheesy, stilted, so-bad-it’s-funny acting that often fills the screen.

This particular movie is simply a means to an end – the end being Bella’s transition to life as a vampire. For the rest of the story, you’ll have to wait for Breaking Dawn – Part Two, hitting theaters just in time for Thanksgiving 2012. Twihards, save the date. As for the rest of ya – don’t be hatin’ or criticizin’ or mockin’ (too much). Just skip it and move on, knowing it’ll all be over soon.

For the two-and-a-half minute version of the entire movie, watch the official trailer:

J. Edgar is good and interesting (no real surprise since it’s directed by Clint Eastwood), but it’s Leonardo DiCaprio’s performance in the title role that really makes it worth seeing. Yes, that kid from Growing Pains (and Titanic of course) has matured into a mighty fine actor. He’s already shown his chops in movies like Catch Me if You Can, The Aviator, Blood Diamond, The Departed, Revolutionary Road, Inception, etc.… but this movie showcases his talents in a much more subtle and nuanced way. He should (and probably will) at least be nominated for a Best Actor Oscar. Who knows, he may even win this time.

DiCaprio is surrounded by some top-notch talent too. Naomi Watts plays Edgar’s longtime and ever-faithful secretary Helen Gandy; Armie Hammer is charming and sympathetic as his right-hand man and not-so-secret love interest, Clyde Tolson; and Dame Judi Dench plays his over-protective mother (who he lives with for a really long time). Their relationships with Edgar give the movie its emotional core.

Hoover is both hero and villain in J. Edgar. He’s obsessed with digging up and leveraging other people’s secrets, while harboring plenty of his own. He can creep you out one minute with his eavesdropping antics, and redeem himself the next as champion of things like fingerprinting and forensics to help fight crime. The FBI is his baby. He is consumed with protecting, promoting and growing the agency – which he led from its inception in 1935 until his death in 1977 – by whatever means necessary. And yes, that is DiCaprio playing J. Edgar across the decades.

It’s hard to know for sure just how close the movie comes to the truth about J. Edgar Hoover and his grip on power through eight presidents, three wars, and numerous high-profile cases from John Dillinger to the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. But the curious in general, and modern American history buffs in particular, will have fun wondering. And I, for one, will never look at the FBI Headquarters, a.k.a. the Hoover Building in Washington, DC quite the same way ever again. What an odd duck.

J. Edgar feels (and is) a bit long at two hours and seventeen minutes. It’s rated R but I’m not sure why. Apparently, for “brief strong language”. Whatever. It’s PG-13 in my book.

It’s about the “haves” and “have-nots” in a future world where time is – literally – money. Everything is bought and sold in units of time: minutes, hours, days, months, years. So a cup of Joe might cost ya four minutes… a nice car could set you back a few years… and there’s a “99 seconds only” store on the corner. Get it?

Oh, here’s the big catch: Everyone is genetically engineered to stop aging at 25. Then a clock embedded in their forearm starts ticking down. If it zeroes out, they drop dead. So folks need to make more “time” to survive.

Justin Timberlake stars as Will Salas, an inherently good guy who lives “day to day” in the equivalent of a futuristic ghetto. When he suddenly comes into a whole lot of time, he also becomes a wanted fugitive. Though on the run, Will is determined to challenge a system that basically decrees, “For a few to be immortal, many must die”. In other words, the “one percent” is golden. The other 99 have a rough go of it. Sound familiar?

Timberlake rocks this role, proving he can do much more than romantic comedy, SNL skits, singing and dancing (all of which he does remarkably well – it’s really not fair). He is at once sympathetic, empathetic, endearing, mysterious, serious, cocky, cute and charming – even when he’s taking a rich, rebellious and beautiful young woman (Amanda Seyfried) hostage at gunpoint.

Click here to watch the official trailer

It’s a little bizarre to watch a movie where everybody looks approximately the same age regardless of their relationship to one another (Olivia Wilde plays Timberlake’s mother. How creepy is that?). But you get used to it. The movie has some flaws. But overall, it’s a nice mix of drama, humor, action and eye candy, and it manages to tackle some heavy issues without being too heavy-handed. So for a PG-13 sci-fi twist on our own twisted reality, consider “Occupying Theaters” for In Time. For 110 minutes. Or 10 bucks.

Carla Gugino plays Cathy Rush, a young woman who takes on coaching duties at Immaculata College, a small, all-girls Catholic school outside Philadelphia. It’s 1971 – the first year that college women’s basketball teams will compete for a national championship. Immaculata doesn’t have money for uniforms or a team bus or even a new gym to practice in (the old one burned down). But Rush doesn’t let that – or the skeptics, including her husband, NBA referee Ed Rush (David Boreanaz) – diminish her spirit. She rallies her girls, challenges them on and off the court, and teaches them the value of teamwork. And wouldn’t you know it – the Mighty Macs of Immaculata become the Cinderella story of the college sports world, making it all the way to the finals. Do they win? What do you think? (you can’t really spoil an ending that’s in the history books – or Wikipedia).

The Mighty Macs is not the best in its genre. It aint no Rocky – not even close- and it tends to get ridiculously preachy and cliché-ridden. But overall, it’s hard not to cheer – along with the nuns – for The Mighty Macs, and for the movie’s groovy 1970s wardrobe. It’s not a must-see, but if you’re looking for a sweet and simple G-rated drama to take the girls to, this movie does help showcase how far they’ve come, and how far they can go.

The Ides of March

The Ides of March takes place during the frenetic run-up to a heavily-contested presidential primary in Ohio. Ryan Gosling – who’s in everything this year but is oh so good – plays a campaign press secretary/whiz kid who gets caught up in a scandal that threatens to cast a long, dark shadow over his grassroots candidate, Governor Mike Morris (George Clooney).

The movie is loosely based on Farragut North, an off-broadway play that was written by Beau Willimon, a guy who worked on Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign. I saw the play a few months ago so it was interesting to see how it was adapted for the big-screen. There are more characters – and more scenes- but ultimately, the core premise remains the same and the weight of the story rests squarely on the shoulders of Gosling’s character, Stephen Myers. His supporting cast is rock solid – including Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman as a veteran campaign manager who values loyalty above all else, Paul Giamatti as a rival campaign manager who wants to steal Stephen away from the Morris campaign, Evan Rachel Wood as a sexy intern who catches Stephen’s eye, and (a very under-utilized) Marisa Tomei as a hard-nosed newspaper reporter covering the campaign. Gosling shines with a range of glances, smirks, stares and smiles that subtly convey his character’s soul-sucking moral dilemma(s).

In many ways, The Ides of March is for political junkies what Moneyball is for baseball junkies – a good, thought-provoking drama about a ‘sport’ that is flawed and largely resistant to change. The problem with The Ides of March, however, is that it feels so authentic as to lose any “escapist” value. With the 2012 campaign season just heating up, do we really need a reminder of the backroom shenanigans, high-level wheeling and dealing, collusion and cover-ups that could very well be considered “politics as usual”? I would vote “no” – if not for the intensely captivating Gosling and the debonair, twinkle-eyed Clooney. Perhaps this will be the role that finally gets Gosling some love from the voting bloc that really matters: The Academy.

The premise may sound off-putting… a buddy movie about a guy with cancer. But it works. Joseph Gordon-Levitt (500 Days of Summer, 3rd Rock from the Sun) plays Adam, a 27-year-old public radio producer whose life is turned upside down when he’s diagnosed with a rare form of spinal cancer.

The movie finds its heart and humor in Adam’s relationships with his crude but caring best friend Kyle (Seth Rogen), his conflicted girlfriend (Bryce Dallas Howard), his uptight mother (Angelica Huston), and his novice but well-meaning therapist (Anna Kendrick). It’s all very real and raw and poignant and funny, and the performances are first-rate across the board.

50/50 is loosely based on the real-life experiences of its screenwriter, Will Reiser, a cancer survivor and real-life buddy of Rogen’s. Writers are often encouraged to “write what you know” and Reiser knows cancer and comedy. The result is a remarkably moving, entertaining, and ultimately uplifting film that should appeal to a broad audience.

50/50 is rated R for language, sexual content and drug use that is never gratuitous and definitely serves the story. It’s a great movie for adults, so don’t let the premise scare you off. I’m counting on word-of-mouth to help this movie succeed at the box office. It deserves a positive outcome.

Moneyball

Pitt plays Billy Beane, a former player-turned-general manager of the Oakland A’s who must rebuild the team – on a shoestring budget – after its star players are poached by baseball’s wealthier franchises. Forced to think outside the box, Beane recruits a nerdy but numbers-savvy Yale grad, Peter Brand (Hill), to help him fill the roster. Brand makes his picks based on a sophisticated computer-generated analysis of attainable (i.e. cheap) players who know how to get on base. Everything else becomes secondary, or totally inconsequential.

The computer-model approach doesn’t exactly sit well with the team’s old-school scouts or its manager, Art Howe (Philip Seymour Hoffman). But they don’t have much choice but to go along – and bite their tongues when the strategy starts to work. Cue the montage/highlight reel as the A’s embark on an unprecedented 20-game win streak!

The premise would sound like a non-starter if not for the fact that it’s based on a true story, as told in the 2003 book, “Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game” by Michael Lewis, the same guy who wrote “The Blind Side.”  Moneyball doesn’t have the same emotional pull as The Blind Side, but it does raise some interesting questions about salaries and statistics and what goes into building a championship team in the modern sports world. Who am I kidding? All I really cared about was the chemistry and clever banter between Pitt and Hill. Their relationship makes the movie– especially for the non-baseball aficionado. Pitt is ruggedly handsome (in a Robert “The Natural” Redford sort of way) and Hill is truly endearing as Beane’s unlikely sidekick. Let’s go A’s!

I went into the movie armed with Kleenex and sunglasses and expecting a coming-of-age Terms of Endearment. But it just didn’t move me, despite its heartbreaking premise.

The film stars Mia Wasikowska and Henry Hopper as Annabelle and Enoch, kindred spirits who meet at a funeral that Enoch has crashed. Annabelle helps the recently-orphaned Enoch reconnect with life even as she faces imminent death from brain cancer. The film has some sweet moments and some strange ones too. For instance, Enoch’s best friend is the ghost of a Kamikaze fighter pilot named Hiroshi (Ryo Kase). Still not sure what that’s all about.

Anyway, it’s possible that Restless is one of those indie films that works on some deeper and more profound level than my brain was willing to process… kinda like The Tree of Life (except, thankfully, Restless does have a story with an obvious beginning, middle and end). But as cancer movies go, I suggest you take a pass on this one and wait a week for 50/50, a poignant movie about cancer that will make you cry, and laugh a lot too.