A mixture of “Faustus” and “Phantom of the Opera” 1974’s twisted “Phantom of the Paradise” combines rock and roll, do-wop and early heavy metal to create a intense horror/love story musical for the ages.

“Phantom of the Paradise” centers oncomposer Winslow Leach, the hero and phantom of the film, as he attempts to gain musical recognition and the girl of his dreams after having his music stolen by the head-hanchos of the music business. When Winslow becomes horribly mangled in a record printing machine accident he winds up looking for help from the very man who has stolen and changed his life’s work, Swan (Paul Williams).

There’s a shift in the air

A bone-trembling chill

That tells you she’s there

There are those who believe

That the whole town is cursed

But the house in the marsh

Is by far the worst

What she wants is unknown

But she always comes back

The spectre of darkness

The Woman in Black.”

It is in the small town of Crythin Gifford in the misty marshes of northeast England, overlooked by the strange Eel Marsh House, that the children in “The Woman in Black” lament this poem.

Here that the horror-depicted in Susan Hill’s novel of the same name ensues. Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe), travels to Crythin Gifford to settle the final affairs of the late Alice Drablow. However, there’s a secret about the town that tries to put him on a train as soon as he arrives. Something that propels them to beg Kipps to not go to Eel Marsh House. Something that, if seen, will mean the imminent death of a child by the malevolent Woman in Black (Liz White). Now that Kipps’s son, Joseph (Radcliffe’s godson, Misha Handley), is at risk, he must solve the mystery of the ghost of the Woman in Black and put her at peace before she takes the only family he has left.

Yet “The Woman in Black” is so much more than the story of a haunting. It is a macabre treasure hunt set forth by a tortured spirit (the titular Woman in Black), who has vowed to seek revenge for the wrongful loss of her son. The story becomes tragically beautiful, a gorgeous depiction of the effects of loss and woe and what it will drive a person to do.

To increase the feeling of an unabating presence, director James Watkins uses scenery in a very effective way. By producing small shadows in inconspicuous places in the shot, or capturing a glimpse of a figure in a mirror in the corner of the screen, Watkins puts you in the place of Arthur Kipps — you always see a little disturbance out of the corner of your eye, but you never see what haunts you full-on. In this way, the character of the Woman in Black is much more mysterious and disquieting.

For the die-hard Potter fans and skeptics alike, I’m here to set the record straight. Radcliffe has proven that he can shed his Potter facade and really become a new character, in turn playing such a convincing role that you clean forget he vanquished the Dark Lord only five months earlier.

To say that this is arguably one of the freshest films to grace the horror genre in this decade would be an understatement. Iconic to the horror industry, the British film production company Hammer manages to make a classic ghost story completely horrifying without the use of gore or other modern practices. Pure psychology and sentimentality is what makes this particular story stick with viewers. So if you’re mom’s a screamer, don’t take her to see this film. I already made that mistake; but I’d rather see it with her than alone in a shadowy screening room.

1. The Hunger Games (Mar. 23)

Possibly the most anticipated film of the year, “The Hunger Games” has been gaining buzz all over the Web, which is unsurprising considering that the books have been on the top-seller list for over 100 consecutive weeks.

“The Hunger Games” takes place in a dystopian America that has been divided in 12 districts and every year one boy and one girl from each district, between the ages of 12 and 18, must fight each other to the death. The series focuses on Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence), a young girl from District 12 who volunteers to fight in order to save her sister from competing.

What is most interesting about “The Hunger Games” film will be finally seeing the over the top Capitol Fashion and the arena and hearing the Capitol accent (and of course finally seeing Gale and Peeta in the flesh). The things that readers could only imagine will be brought to life on the big screen, already stills from the film have garnered attention from all corners of the web.

As an avid obsessive fan of the “Hunger Games,” I will definitely be attending the midnight premiere, dressing as a character (probably Effie Trinket) and purchasing “The Hunger Games” line of nail polish.

2. Frankenweenie(Oct. 5)

A stop-motion animation version of the original live action short, “Frankenweenie” is the story of a boy who brings his beloved d og back to life after a terrible accident.

Directed by Tim Burton, the film is a full-length, black and white feature in the style of “Nightmare Before Christmas” and“The Corpse Bride.” An obvious parody of Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” the film is sure to be heart-felt, funny and just the right amount of creepy.

3. Dr Seuss’ The Lorax (Mar. 2)

Having grown up with this book, I should be annoyed that they are (probably) going to ruin Dr. Seuss’ “The Lorax” by turning it into an animated feature film. But I’m not,mainly because Danny DeVito is playing the Lorax and because this film has a great message: saving the environment.

Straying a bit from the book, this film takes place in a world where everything is artificial: there are no trees or bees oranything natural. When Ted (Zac Efron) ventures out of the city to try and find a real tree he encounters the Once-ler (Ed Helms), an old recluse with a story to tell, the story of The Lorax.

While the trailer seems to hint that the film takes place in two different times, Ted’s present life and the life of the Lorax, it seems like all the magic of the Truffula Trees and Brown Bar-ba-loots remain intact.

***

Honorable Mention:

The Amazing Spider-Man (July 3)

Three words: Andrew. Garfield. Shirtless.

With the unfortunate theatre invasion of “Twilight” era vampires it is more important than ever to remember those classic, actually terrifying films that brought the vampire to the forefront of pop culture. “Near Dark” is the twisted love story of Caleb (Adrian Pasdar), a country-boy who gets the ultimate “love-bite.” After meeting Mae (Jenny Wright) Caleb finds himself one of the un-dead and on the run with a group of vampires.

The film’s beauty comes not only from its multi-dimensional characters but also from the snarky writing and iconography. The film opens with a close up image of a mosquito sucking the blood from a human, a wry parallel between the real world and the storyline to come. But it is the director and writer Kathryn Bigelow’s (“The Hurt Locker”) dark yet humorous dialogue that gives the film a real bite.

The character that stands out the most is Homer (Joshua Miller), a vampire turned when he was only a young boy and has been trapped for decades in a pre-pubescent body without anyone his age around (honestly, this is how Edward Cullen should feel. Think about it, he is like 300 and Bella is 18…that’s creepy). Homer is not only brutal when he needs to be but also has heart and is the character that is, ironically, the most human.

Emotion, wit and horror are all qualities that give “Near Dark” the lasting quality that many other vampire films are now missing. This movie is a definite must-see from the 80s and in general.

At first glance, “War Horse” looks like little more than a sappy, clichéd (although admittedly big-budgeted) family flick. One horse touching the lives of many civilians and soldiers, overcoming exceptional obstacles as it courageously fights through World War I sounds like an overly sentimental ABC Family original movie. Yet upon closer examination, this holiday blockbuster proves itself just as genuinely beautiful as the creature it celebrates.

Two outstanding elements mainly account for this–not only is it based off the 2011 Tony award winner for Best Play, but it’s also directed by virtuoso Steven Spielberg. Adapted into a rousing war drama from one of cinema’s greatest directors, this grand tale overflows with terrific performances, sprawling landscapes and gorgeous cinematography–not to mention heartfelt emotion and an astounding, intense representation of WWI.

At the center of “War Horse” lies the relationship between teenager Albert (newcomer Jeremy Irvine) and Joey, the tenacious stallion he raises and loves. Joey helps Albert and his family seemingly save their farm in what’s probably the coolest field-plowing scene ever filmed, but at the onset of WWI, with no money left, they have no option but to sell Joey to the British cavalry–despite heartbroken Albert’s complete protest.

This begins the episodic structure of the movie as Joey’s ownership switches to a sterling army captain (Tom Hiddleston) on the frontlines in France, alongside a valiant major (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his mighty horse. Later Joey connects with two young brothers (David Kross and Leonhard Carow) among the German soldiers, and then with an older French farmer (Niels Arestrup) and his spirited granddaughter (Celine Buckens). Eventually Joey is thrust into the harrowing trenches of the battlefield, and by this time Albert has enlisted himself in the war, determined to find his beloved horse and bring him home.

Each of these segments prove engaging as co-writers Lee Hall and Richard Curtis give the characters developed stories that all tie in with Joey’s journey, exhibiting man’s devotion and admiration for the fierce will of the horse. Among the uniformly excellent European ensemble cast, Irvine’s display of resounding hope and compassion certainly drives this theme home, and he serves as an effective emotional anchor for viewers. Cumberbatch also stands out through his commanding presence and vigorous energy, showing he’s primed to soon hit it big.

The most impressive performance, however, comes from the different horses that play Joey. Their actions and expressions never feel forced as Joey interacts with the people and environments, thus earning the affections of the characters and viewers simultaneously. And with some of the astonishing feats Joey accomplishes and suffers through, you’ll really care about this horse.

A mesmerizing sequence in the third act wholly exemplifies this as Joey flies through the trenches and across the battleground, without a rider. All soldiers make way for his majestic stride, fireworks in the sky and explosions in his wake. During scenes of such gripping power and enormous magnitude, you know you’re watching a Spielberg movie.

An incredible earlier set piece dives head-first into the heat of trench warfare as the British try to fight across No Man’s Land, reminiscent of a similar aggressive attack in the Kubrick WWI classic “Paths of Glory,” as well as the D-Day battle in Spielberg’s own “Saving Private Ryan.” The steadfast, amazingly precise control Spielberg exerts over the action ups your heart rate and efficiently conveys the horrors of WWI, without going to the graphic, extremely realistic lengths of his aforementioned war masterpiece–this is a family-friendly film, after all.

Imbuing each character’s struggle with an empathetic importance and larger scale, Spielberg brings poignancy to every segment of the movie. Yes, this is a melodrama, but Spielberg’s deft direction makes it a melodrama of the highest order, still authentically heartwarming in delivery and tone.

Heavily contributing to this accomplishment are two of Spielberg’s longtime collaborators, John Williams providing a swelling original score and Janusz Kaminski achieving remarkable cinematography. Composed of giant war-torn backdrops, breezy open fields and magnificently colored skies, and utilizing expansive, sweeping overhead and fast-paced tracking shots, the camerawork is a marvel to behold, giving the film quite the breathtaking scope.

In fact, “War Horse” feels less like typical Spielberg movie magic and more like the wonder of traditional, old-school Hollywood epics of the ‘50s and ‘60s. By all means that’s entirely appreciated here, considering he hasn’t directed a truly great, crowd-pleasing blockbuster in nearly a decade. And with his other new film, the animated spectacle “The Adventures of Tintin” proving his mastery of visual splendor as well, Spielberg has given quite the extraordinary cinematic gift this holiday.

Steven Spielberg, welcome back. We’ve missed you.

Three and a Half out of Four Stars

Their previous movie debuted in 2010, bringing together some of the most renowned and talented actors of our time, and “New Year’s Eve” is no different. Featuring stars like Ashton Kutcher, Robert De Niro, Sarah Jessica Parker and Halle Berry, “New Year’s Eve” covers all of the different stories of New York City on the international holiday: from broken hearted to just married, from death beds to newborn babies, from deployed to employed. It certainly proves to be better than “Valentine’s Day” and one of the best feel-good movies of the year.

The great thing about romance comedies is their ability to make audiences believe in happy endings, which is quite a feat in a society where those are hard to come by. For the cynics out there, I challenge you to give this movie a chance. Get past your qualms about stereotypes and flat characters and just let yourself enjoy the story. Sure, it’s cliché when one of the characters shows up to meet her man in a carraige, but that’s what rom-coms are all about.

The motion picture opens on the day of New Year’s Eve, with Claire Morgan (Hilary Swank) preparing for the night’s upcoming events. As Vice President of the Times Square Alliance, she is in charge of the ball dropping, the confetti falling and entertainment – and she refuses to accept anything that doesn’t bring out the “magic” of the holiday season. Meanwhile, Ingrid (Michelle Pfeifer), a middle-aged woman, has just quit her job and finds herself on an adventure with a delivery boy named Paul (Zac Efron), who is helping her achieve all of her New Year’s resolutions before midnight in exchange for tickets to the hottest party of the year. Paul’s sister, Kim (Sarah Jessica Parker) is recovering from a divorce and struggling with her daughter’s (Abigail Breslin) stereotypical teenage rebellion. Randy (Ashton Kutcher) is a New Year’s Eve grouch who refuses to go out that night until he gets stuck on an elevator with the new girl in his building (Lea Michelle). Oh, and, of course, Ryan Seacrest plays himself.

Going into this film, I wasn’t sure that it would live up to my expecations. The beginning of “New Year’s Eve” had me worried; Hilary Swank’s opening voice-overs were boring and the first few scenes didn’t assuage my fears. But as the movie progressed and got closer to the countdown to midnight, the audience was drawn in by its witty jokes (“New Year’s is the worst night of all to go out. People who don’t drink or party all year suddenly going all Kanye on you.”) and ­cheesy, romantic lines (“Don’t be afraid to follow your heart.”).

All the different stories told in the film may make it hard to follow in some places, but the ability for this one movie to connect to so many different people makes any possible confusion worth it. In today’s society, a New Year’s celebration is different for everyone; this movie takes a realistic route to show how it differs from person to person, to class to gender. Whether or not you believe in the holiday “magic” like Swank’s character does in the movie, the holiday season impacts everyone. And despite all the different stories, the movie still manages to weave them all together in the end.

This movie will make you wish you had a significant other to spend the upcoming “New Year’s Eve” with. It will make you wish you had a kick-ass list of resolutions or lived in a crappy apartment so you could meet an extraordinary person while stuck in an elevator. It will make you wish you were experiencing your first kiss on New Year’s Eve or falling in love for the first time.

Yes, “New Year’s Eve” is cheesy. It’s even annoyingly happy. But, if you give it a chance and don’t take it too seriously, it will leave you with a warm and fuzzy feeling when leaving the theater and hope that Marshall and Fugate will team up again for another motion picture soon. “Memorial Day,” anyone?

Three out of Four Stars

Whether you’re a newcomer to the Muppets or you’ve loved them since early childhood, the franchise revival “The Muppets” is guaranteed to make you feel like a giddy, carefree kid in the company of your favorite group of fuzzy characters all over again. So genuine and innocent are its intentions that you’ll forget the cynicism of the real world (and of the weighty awards pictures too, for that matter) as you become wrapped up in its unconventional wit, catchy musical numbers and overwhelming enthusiasm.

Over 35 years of Muppet shows and films, from classics like “The Muppet Movie” to “The Muppet Christmas Carol” have nearly always delivered great entertainment that’s enjoyable for the entire family–yet this installment accomplishes an even greater feat. Not only is it a respectful tribute and spot-on continuation of the series, but it also addresses the waning cultural relevance of the Muppets. It’s able to reignite the love many fans had for them while they were younger and makes Muppets popular again, providing an extremely clever and surprisingly heartwarming adventure that’s one of the year’s best comedies.

It begins with the introduction of two lively brothers growing up together as devoted fans of “The Muppet Show”: Gary (Jason Segel) and Walter (voiced by Peter Linz), who’s a Muppet himself. When invited to join Gary and his girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) on a trip to Los Angeles for their 10-year anniversary, Walter becomes ecstatic to tour the old “Muppet Show” theater there. Upon arrival, however, they discover the theater totally dilapidated and learn that ruthless oil tycoon Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) plans to excavate the site for oil once the title deed expires in several days.

Unwilling to stand by and let this happen, Walter, Gary and Mary locate Kermit the Frog and convince him to get the old crew back together, all the Muppets proving as happy to reunite with each other as viewers are to see them return to the big screen. After assembling everyone (there are just enough Muppets to satisfy all viewers without losing focus on the notable characters), they all join efforts to put on one final show, hoping to raise the $10 million needed to buy back their theater before time runs out.

Muppet movies are known for their endearingly silly, tongue-in-cheek style of humor, and like the previous films, this one is quite a refreshing change of pace from the vulgarity and unoriginality of typical comedies. Its self-aware nature and the sincerity with which it embraces its own ridiculousness offer flourishes of audacious comic genius rarely seen in blockbusters anymore.

The menacing Chris Cooper even breaks into a rap at one point, with sing-a-long lyrics at the bottom of the screen. This wry sense of humor permeates the musical numbers too, from the huge dance group collapsing in exhaustion after finishing the big opener, to songs like “Man or Muppet,” which involves Segel belting out about an unusual identity crisis of his.

An avid fan of the Muppets himself, Segel is actually the one responsible for convincing Disney to resurrect the franchise, and he co-wrote the film with Nicholas Stoller. His kind, clueless demeanor is charming as always here, though more exaggerated and simplified than usual to keep with the innocent tone. Similarly, Amy Adams is a total sweetheart, like a more subdued version of her vivacious character in “Enchanted.” Chris Cooper is the real treat among the humans however, exuding villainy with cool wickedness and a slightly corny side. Anytime his evil plan is coming together, he just says “maniacal laugh” repeatedly, and it’s hilarious.

But this is a Muppet film after all, so naturally they’re the main source of humor and the ones we really care about. Wise leader Kermit, cheesy Fozzie Bear, over-the-top Gonzo, wild drummer Animal, sassy Miss Piggy and new addition Walter give the film its true heart, struggling with unexpectedly deep themes for a family movie.

Sure, Walter’s search for where he belongs in the world is simple enough for the kids to understand, but Kermit and Piggy’s faded love for each other feels quite adult. Even more complex is how the Muppets have drifted apart as friends and have been virtually forgotten by the rest of the world, but reconnect as they try to save their legacy and fulfill their passions to entertain people one last time. With such sympathetic, detailed characterization, as well as sublime manipulation of each Muppet, these characters easily transcend their inanimate confines and seem more like living, breathing creatures.

Safe to say, they accomplish their goal to delight viewers, and with resounding success. It’s clear the Muppets haven’t been forgotten by Hollywood, evidenced by more cameos than you can keep track of–from Jack Black to Neil Patrick Harris, Mickey Rooney to Selena Gomez. All the famous actors that show up to support these lovable oddballs stand as a testament to the special place the Muppets hold in many people’s hearts, showing that this franchise of nostalgic, unadulterated fun is alive and well.

Veronica is deep, romantic, wears monocles and yet she still hangs out with the Heathers, each of whom has an assigned color, eat foie gras and play croquet. So when Veronica meets J.D. (Christian Slater), the new, rebellious boy in school, she is instantly drawn to his dark mystery. After finally becoming fed up with The Heathers, J.D. suggests that Veronica finds a permanent solution to her problem: murder.

After J.D. does what Veronica couldn’t, they find themselves in over their heads and decide to cover it up with a suicide note. Unfortunately, popularity has a way of causing people to imitate others. As suicide becomes the new trend, Veronica finds herself in deeper and deeper trouble with J.D.

Though the film has a dark subject matter, it handles the morbid topic with the wit and hilarity of a Tim Burton film. The sheer absurdity of suicide becoming popular mixed with the outrageous fashion statements and colors of the ‘80s create a truly unique film that has yet to see an equal in originality.

Hollywood mass produces love stories.

Studios usually spew out a mediocre romantic comedy several times a month, frequently with lowbrow audiences in mind. But once in a while a refreshing independent gem comes along, free from the gloss and cliché of those big name, over-produced romances. The down-to-earth “Like Crazy” offers such an experience, bound tightly in honest emotion, gritty realism and performances so convincing, with such astounding chemistry, it feels like real life unfolding onscreen.

“Like Crazy” follows the relationship between Anna (Felicity Jones), an enchanting, bright-minded Brit, and sweet, charming American Jacob (Anton Yelchin), two college students in Los Angeles who quickly fall for each other. The first act shows the blossoming of their blissful relationship, the couple so madly lost in love that nothing else matters to them. This all-consuming passion leads Anna to overstay her student visa for the summer after graduation, a fateful mistake that gets her deported back to London and banned from re-entering the U.S.

Anna is legally unable to leave the U.K., while Jacob is too rooted in his successful furniture design business in L.A. to move his life to her country, relegated only to sporadic visits. The distance fractures them, and each engages in another relationship, though in their hearts they know they belong together and they persist in their attempts to achieve this.

Their struggle to overcome this conflict of separation drives the movie, so captivating and relatable that the viewer pains for them to be together, with a genuine power rarely seen in romances anymore. Every tight embrace, every longing gaze and every contemplative text message convey more about that special connection between two people than any holiday centered rom-com or tween vampire saga ever could.

Director/co-writer Drake Doremus delivers a real love story here, capturing the full essence of the wondrous magic and heartbreaking pain of true love. He heavily bases the film off his own experiences, and that authenticity shines through in every scene. Most of the dialogue between Yelchin and Jones was even improvised, furthering the realistic feel that pervades “Like Crazy.” Additionally, Doremus manages to present it all in a stylish, visually-luscious package, especially utilizing montages to superb effect–all the more impressive considering the whole film was made on a meager budget of $250,000.

But it’s really Yelchin and Jones who make this such a remarkable journey, both delivering outstanding, star-making performances that never once lack in conviction. Yelchin has already made a name for himself as an endearing, witty young upstart the past few years from “Charlie Bartlett” to the recent “Fright Night,” but with this, he proves his impressive talent as a dramatic lead too. Jones is the real find however, a tender, mousy little beauty that’ll melt your heart and pull at your heartstrings.

And that feeling is exactly what “Like Crazy” is all about–illustrating the sweetness of love as well as the anguish that comes with it. The true-to-life version, not the Hollywood one.

Three and a Half out of Four Stars

A true comedy is funny, sure, but there’s more than just typical jokes—and leaving the theater, I wasn’t completely satisfied. I’d prefer to have spent eight bucks on a movie that I would actually recommend before “Real Steel.”

Ben Stiller plays Josh Kovacs, the affable manager of one of New York’s most elegant apartment buildings that’s known simply as “The Tower”. His staff includes former-Burger-King-employee-turned-elevator-operator Enrique (Michael Pena), his flaky brother-in-law Charlie (Casey Affleck), long-time doorman Lester (Stephen Henderson) and Jamaican housekeeper Odessa (Gabourey Sidibe).

When CEO and penthouse owner Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda) is arrested for fraud, Josh is forced to tell his staff that, three years ago, he asked Shaw to invest their pensions, which added up to $2 million. Now that Shaw’s at risk of losing everything, Josh and his staff can only hope that he is innocent—and of course, he’s not.

Josh finds that his only solution is to steal from Shaw. Convinced that Shaw has a vault in his penthouse living room that contains millions of dollars, he hires his neighbor, a thief named Slide, played by Eddie Murphy.

Finally, an hour into the film, Josh has his team; Slide, Odessa, Enrique, Charlie and former Tower resident, Mr. Fitzbugh (Matthew Broderick). Together, they plan to “storm the castle.”

Does this story sound ridiculous yet? I’ll admit, it was entertaining, but so is watching my dog jump up and down before I take her for a walk.

The plot is crudely sewn together and I can’t decide whether there’s either no climax, or five different ones. There are also many moments when I turned to my friend on my right and whispered, a bit too loudly, that there was no way this would ever happen. I suppose that’s what made it entertaining, but no way would a solid gold car be lowered down the outside of a skyscraper and not be noticed by one of the thousands of people participating in the Thanksgiving parade on the streets below.

Yes, there were one or two laugh-out loud-moments, but they were basically caused by how ridiculous the situation was or perhaps the specific actor that said a line.

So, it is what it is—a movie based on cheap humor and clichéd jokes. If you’re looking for a temporary escape from your day, then “Tower Heist” is your movie—as long as you can tolerate meek performances and a dragging plot for the chance of a few jokes.

 One and a Half out of Four Stars

“Valley Girl” takes “Romeo and Juliet” to the 80’s with its story of an impossible love between a popular valley girl and a punk. The film stars Nicolas Cage (in his beyond hot days) as Randy, a rebel from Hollywood, and Deborah Foreman as Julie, the “like, totally tripendicular” prom queen from the valley.

As their romance blossoms, Julie begins to feel pressure from her friends to dump Randy and get with the obvious right choice for her, Tommy (Michael Bowen). As Tommy and Randy pursue Julie, Randy’s dorky pal Fred (Cameron Dye) chases after her BFF Stacey (Heidi Holicker).

An adorable date night film filled with montages, a classic soundtrack and the fashion and vernacular of the 80’s, “Valley Girl” is a feature that has withstood the decades of wear and tear.

Theories calling into question Shakespeare’s true authorship have been tossed around for over 150 years, but they’ve never held weight with scholars. “Anonymous” finally brings the idea from fringe conjecture into mainstream consciousness, and it’s an intriguing debate, without a doubt–even if it lacks in real evidence.

The film offers one interpretation, but it’s a convoluted, occasionally perplexing story that takes liberties with historical accuracy, likely to lose viewers not paying close attention. Here’s the simple version: secretly genius playwright Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (Rhys Ifans) is limited by the royal court’s disapproval of theatre and his own position of nobility. Feeling it’s time for his voice to be heard, he winds up publishing his provocative writings through proxy Will Shakespeare (Rafe Spall). His plays heavily influence the public, and he uses this power over the masses to support a rebellion for his colleague to become the elderly Queen Elizabeth I’s (Vanessa Redgrave) immediate successor.

Throughout all the rampant political duplicity of the plot, writer John Orloff intersperses flashbacks of de Vere as a younger man (Jaime Campbell Bower), showing how he was taken in by the royal family and his early poetic brilliance. The illicit romance he develops with the queen in her younger years (Joelyn Richardson) provides the most interesting facet of the story, carrying severe consequences and dramatic heft in both timelines.

Unfortunately, the first third of “Anonymous” suffers from some clunky shifts between these two narratives, and the large number of characters introduced in such a short time span is fairly overwhelming. Confusion arises out of this jumbled storytelling, and it takes about 40 minutes to get comfortable enough with all the situations and players.

After this it still requires an effort to follow the plot, but Orloff balances it out and manages to weave the rest of the events into an engrossing, intellectual journey with a devastatingly powerful twist, soaking the whole tale in ironic tragedy. He also rewards viewers for their familiarity with Shakespeare’s works, showcasing snippets of many of his plays and incorporating them thematically, without bogging the movie down in outlandish Shakespearean language.

The real head-scratcher here, however, is the director of this Elizabethan drama: Roland Emmerich, disaster movie extraordinaire and destroyer of worlds. It’s a wonder why the hack behind big, dumb and loud blockbusters like “2012,” “The Day After Tomorrow” and “Independence Day” decided to make such a specialty piece like this. Maybe he wanted to create something respectable and thoughtful for a change. Surprisingly, he actually accomplishes just that.

Emmerich’s film “The Patriot” is notorious for its historical inaccuracies, and the same can be said of “Anonymous” (a Shakespearean scholar even wrote an article in the recent New York Times Magazine debunking the film’s premise and the faulty chronology). That said, Emmerich’s movies always require pretty high suspension of disbelief, but the way he plunges viewers straight into each world definitely makes it easier.

His main tool for this is usually grandiose, over-the-top special effects and action, but here he utilizes hardly any CGI. The extravagantly detailed costumes and meticulously crafted sets offer the entrancing visuals this time around. But, like Shakespeare, Emmerich lets the characters and story take center stage.

Maybe it’s the lack of famous faces, or maybe Shakespeare just brings out the best in actors–either way, Emmerich draws refined, rousing performances out of his entire cast. Ifans clearly stands out, imbuing de Vere with a constant gravity of importance, but Campbell Bower equally impresses, commanding the screen as de Vere in his fiercer, more willful youth. Richardson even brings an inviting warmth and beauty to the film, although the real highlight comes from David Thewlis as the queen’s villainous and conniving advisor. So courageous and kindly as Lupin in the “Harry Potter” series, he’s a dastardly pleasure to watch here.

“Anonymous” succeeds in casting a shadow of a doubt into viewers’ minds about the full authenticity of Shakespeare’s authorship, just don’t expect a strong, plausible and historically accurate case for an alternative author. Instead it provides an engaging period piece of manipulative lies and betrayal, costly romance and political upheaval in the royal court–the kind of captivating, layered drama Shakespeare is all about.

Three out of Four Stars

Going into the movie, I thought that because it was based on a classic book by Alexandre Dumas, maybe it wouldn’t be as awful as Resident Evil. But alas, the movie is not an adaption, but an odious and loose “reinterpretation.”

The plot is convoluted to the point of ludicrousness, so much so that I could spend all the space I have trying to explain the various facets of it. It stars Matthew Macfadyen, Ray Stevenson and Luke Evans as the Three Musketeers—Athos, Porthos and Aramis, respectively. After the Musketeers are disbanded by the King’s minister Cardinal Richelieu (Christoph Waltz), the Musketeers try to win back the favor of the teenage King Louis XIII (Freddie Fox) of France. They are also trying to seek out revenge upon Milady de Winter (Milla Jovovich in her typical wooden fashion) and upon the Duke of Buckingham (Orlando Bloom always with a sword in his hand) musketeers’ plan is to steal back the diamonds that Milady stole from Queen Anne (Juno Temple) and gave to Buckingham on Richlieu’s orders in the hopes that it would provoke war between England and France as a result of the fabricated affair between the Queen and Buckingham.

I told you it was convoluted.

In place of actual character development, or any good performances, Anderson has each character proclaim their reasons for actions. None of the actors even appear to be trying. Especially Matthew Macfayden, who seems to be delivering his lines as if he was the stand-in for the actual Athos. Academy Award Winner Christoph Waltz’s performance didn’t seem awful, but it was hard for his talent to shine while uttering the abhorrent dialogue.

The movie indulges in over-the-top fantasy. I found myself saying “that would never happen” so often that it was impossible to suspend my disbelief. There is a scene where Milady limbo-skates through Leonardo Da Vinci’s booby-trapped vault with hundreds of spiked metal balls shooting from the walls and not one of them does as much as graze her dress for the 25-yard-long slide.

‘The Three Musketeers’ is very clearly just a tent pole movie–a movie that is made primarily for profits—like 2010’s ‘Alice in Wonderland’ where the producers attempt to draw the audience in through spectacle and gimmicks like 3D, and forget about the things that actually matter: good writing, directing and acting.

The most evident shortfall is that ‘The Three Musketeers’ never builds to a climax, and will assuredly have the viewers finding their eyelids a little heavier than when they stepped into the theater. It is an action-filled yawn-fest of horrendous performances and cheap thrills.

In the original “The Thing” we join a group of American scientists in Antarctica as they study a possible extraterrestrial being found in the ice. About a third of the way into the film the scientists discover the abandoned Norwegian camp where this installment takes place.

In this prequel to “The Thing” we follow Kate (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) as she embarks to Antarctica to a frozen camp full of Norwegian men. When the creature breaks out of its icy encasement the scientists find themselves face to face with an alien life form that does not come in peace.

As Kate studies the creature she discovers that it has the ability to take on different forms, including the human form, and that no one in the camp can leave and no one can be trusted.

While the prequel does many things the original didn’t, it lacks some of the subtle nuances that made the original “The Thing” great. One of these instances is the immediate reveal of the monster.

In the original, we do not get to see the creature’s real form until about three-fourths into the movie. This makes the alien far more mysterious and terrifying because we do not know what to look out for.

In the prequel the creature’s true shape is revealed almost immediately. This works surprisingly well. Because the special effects of modern films are obviously more realistic and thus more frightening and we also get to see the thing as it devours humans and when it is between forms we get a real sense of terror from the creature.

Another strength in the prequel is the leading lady, Mary Elizabeth Winstead. Known to many as Ramona Flowers (from the 2010 film “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.”) Winstead isn’t as charming without pink hair but she is the driving human force of the film and proves to be a strong and level-headed female character that is also able to kick some alien ass.

What’s great about this film is the fact that it convincingly mixes horror film with the thriller of a who-dun-it. Throughout the film we are given red herrings as to who the thing could be while also supplied with the good-ole’ classic gory mutilations and explosions of a horror film.

The movie genuinely feels like it has been crafted with love for the original and sticks to the logistics that original film espoused. The end scene is exactly shot-for-shot the same as the first scene in the original as well as the set-up of the Norwegian camp. These subtle nuances of faithfulness to the original make the film feel more like a labor of love than just another money grab.

As a huge fan of the original “The Thing” I hope that this is the end of its remakes and that there isn’t a follow-up next year. Yet at the same time I found this film to stay true to its roots while also allowing modern innovations to be woven in.

Anyone looking for a good Halloween fright-night flick should definitely check out this, as well as the original. The two “The Thing’s” would make for a very scary and smooth-transitioned double feature.

Amongst the regular crowds for the KIFF of predominantly middle-aged, independent film enthusiasts, I stood out as an apprehensive, wide-eyed high schooler. Going in last year without knowing anyone I was nervous about being surrounded by volumes of older people for seven days, but I knew it would be quite the interesting experience. And since it was the city’s best exhibit of distinctive filmmaking all year, I was guaranteed to learn a lot about the art form.

As an annual, weeklong event at the Glenwood Arts theater, the KIFF showcases more than 50 movies, with a lineup of independent and arthouse features as well as a wide array of unique documentaries. Most of the films haven’t been picked up by a distributor and likely won’t find much of an audience outside of festivals. However, a handful of the movies include upcoming, studio-produced arthouse flicks, building hype on the festival circuit before their theatrical release within the following few months.

As one who devotes his life to films, the prospect of seeing these much-anticipated arthouse movies ahead of most other people, and for a flat price, was more than enough reason for me to go last year. The clincher here being that I’d watch “127 Hours” and “Black Swan” several months before the general public.

A week of great arthouse films was a thrilling break from real life for me, and I thoroughly enjoyed the festival. So much so that I took a chance on the Film League meeting the next week. At this monthly gathering at the theater, about 15 people sit around and discuss several movies from the previous month, with this meeting focusing on KIFF films.

Upon my entrance I immediately felt out of place, similar to when I first entered the festival – except now I actually had to interact with these strangers. Looking around at the other attendees, the youngest one must have been been at least 25 years older than me, many of them much more than that.

But as the conversation got rolling, I slowly found myself easing in and began contributing to the discussion. By meeting’s end an hour later, I realized that the age barrier no longer presented a threat; I connected with them through the language of cinema.

Throughout the year I continued attending these meetings, developing a special bond with the group. Nowhere else have I found such a quirky, interesting and knowledgeable assortment of movie lovers, not to mention I’ve learned lots about the mindset of those from the Baby Boomer generation.

By the time this year’s KIFF arrived, my familiarity with the Film League members gave me companions with whom I could converse and compare reactions before and after screenings, putting me more at home this time around. They even helped me step out of my comfort zone as I went to far fewer studio pictures than last year, opening up to more independent, experimental and controversial fare.

One of the coolest screenings of the festival showcased a collection of odd, wacky silent short films, with a live performance by a three man ensemble known as the Alloy Orchestra providing the eclectic, fascinating score. Then, an Australian movie called “Nude Study” exemplified bizarre, experimental filmmaking with extreme stylistic flair, and was one of the weirdest yet strangely captivating features I’ve seen all year.

As if that didn’t already open my mind to new cinematic exploits, the subversive flicks certainly deepened my appreciation for films that make a statement.

The documentaries tend to deliver most of the insightful, haunting and thought-provoking experiences at the festival. A doc by the name of “Peep Culture” took a thoughtful, sometimes shocking look at how social media has evolved communication and personal privacy. But a mockumentary titled “Moment of Truth: The Andy Meyers Story” undertook the most ingenious style to make its point. The movie shows a documentary crew following an autistic 65-year-old on his last day of life before he plans to kill himself, and when it ended, the filmmakers came out for a Q&A and played it off to all be real, until the main actor appeared at the back of the theater.

This “Gotcha!” trick angered several audience members, one even threatening the director, but it totally blew me away. It amazed me how they got under viewers’ skin with such a simple concept.

The filmmakers stuck around afterwards and chatted with those remaining, so I had the opportunity to ask them and learn more about how they made the film. As an aspiring filmmaker myself, I certainly took in quite a bit from this conversation, inspired by how they had created a powerful, award-winning movie for only $15,000.

Such connections with filmmakers of the festival made the biggest impression on me. I wanted to see first time filmmaker Kevin Foster’s feature, and even though I missed it, I met him at the festival after-party. Not only did he give me a DVD of his movie, but we also talked for an hour and a half as he explained the entire process of making the film. He even gave me advice on starting out in Hollywood. I was dumbfounded with excitement as he also told me stories of on-set experiences from other movies he worked on, describing Robert Downey, Jr. on “Iron Man,” Sean Connery on “The League of Extraordinary Gentleman” and director Sam Raimi on “Drag Me to Hell.”

My whole exchange with Kevin stood out as my coolest experience at the festival, really giving me the drive to continue pursuing my filmmaking dreams. However, as far as lasting connections I made at the festival go, I’m now even closer to the Film League members, and I even discovered a SM South senior who’s just as well-read and obsessed with cinema as I am. Predictably, our new friendship consists of geeking out over movies and having long discussions about them.

The Kansas International Film Festival is a place to explore edgier, provocative and absorbing cinema. But personally, I cherish it more for the connections I’ve made through it – even if most of those connections do jump a couple of generations.

In Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, that is what a fortune teller warns the Roman dictator. The fortune teller is referring to March 15th on the Roman calender, the day Caesar dies by being stabbed 23 times by his fellow senators. The warning is an ominous message of what can happen when people turn on one another.

It comes as no surprise that the movie “The Ides of March” carries over much of these themes: Politics, loyalty, betrayal and backstabbing.

The all-star cast includes Ryan Gosling, George Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Evan Rachel Wood and Marisa Tomei. Add that with a pulse-pounding pace and tastefully artistic cinematography, “The Ides of March” has all the ingredients of an instant-classic.

The film follows junior campaign manager Stephen Myers (Gosling) working for Democratic presidential hopeful Governor Mike Morris (Clooney). Myers, along with his mentor and head campaign manager Paul Zara (Hoffman), are the best at what they do. “The Ides of March” centers around the Democratic primaries in Ohio, a state that’s support would almost certainly guarantee Morris’s nomination as the Democratic candidate.

It is a very complex time for Myers, who is approached with a job by the opposing candidate’s campaign manager, Tom Duffy (Giamatti). When he admits to Zara that he met with Duffy, his loyalty is called into question. Myers also has an encounter with young Molly Stearns (Wood), an attractive intern who harbors a dark secret–a secret that has the power to change the outcome of the election.

Things with the campaign heat up as Myers learns that his candidate, Morris, is not the warm and kind man he appears to be. And as time leading up to the Ohio election shortens, Myers comes under fire for some of the campaign-altering secrets he withholds. The decisions he makes lead up to a climactic and tragic ending, where everything will be on the line come voting day, Mar. 15.

There is a feeling of intensity throughout the movie because of the gravity of the situation. Something that would mean disaster to the average person is magnified greatly because of the fact that these issues involve a man who has a high possibility of leading the nation in the future.

The entire cast had superb performances, with a particularly strong job in Philip Seymour Hoffman, who delivered many intense speeches, most notably one about the value of loyalty. He portrays his character with a gritty and serious demeanor that combines the feeling of an experienced leader with a no-nonsense attitude. His performance is reminiscent of Jeff Bridges in “True Grit.”

Ryan Gosling portrays his character with a charming and intelligent aura, and paired with his recent movie “Drive,” it wouldn’t be surprising to see him taking home an Oscar at the next awards, or at least in the near future. He radiates confidence in his acting, and his ability to be cool without trying too hard could make him this generation’s Brad Pitt. He is a breath of fresh air in an era of cliches and wannabes.

The movie is based off Beau Willimon’s play “Farragut North”, and the movie version was directed and co-written by George Clooney. This is not the first film Clooney worked behind the camera on, directing and co-writing two other movies, one of which (“Good Night and Good Luck”) received nominations for multiple writing and directing awards.

The world of politics is a distant one for most viewers, but “Ides” shows a rare behind-the-scenes look at presidential campaigns, and proves to be as entertaining and thrilling as it is interesting. The events that unfold keep the viewer on the edge of their seat from the opening scene to when the credits roll.

All in all, the movie is an insight into the lying and two-faced world that is modern-day politics. With flawless acting and a captivating plot, “The Ides of March” is definitely a movie you won’t want to miss.

Three and a Half out of Four Stars

That said, I really enjoyed this film. The remake, of the same name, has everything that the original lacked: charm, comedy and even a couple explosions. The film also included the fresh, and extremely attractive, faces of Kenny Wormald (as Ren McCormack), Miles Teller (as the hilariously goofy Willard) and Julianne Hough (as Ariel Moore).

Now, the story is simple enough: three years prior five kids are killed in a car crash after spending a night drinking and dancing and then going for a drive. In an attempt to keep this from ever happening again Reverend Moore (Dennis Quaid) proposes a curfew, a couple new laws and a ban on public dancing for all minors in Bomont. Then enters Ren (Wormald), the young, hot rebel from Boston who just happens to have a love for dance and a thing for the preacher’s daughter, Ariel (Hough), who also isn’t as innocent as she seems.

The storyline doesn’t leave much for the imagination yet oddly enough it works far better in its modern setting than it did during the ‘80s. The script doesn’t just ignore this fact either. It addresses our generations obsession with the media and technology as well as the vulgarity of music and dancing during a speech given by the Reverend Moore.

The movie also includes the perfect amount of homages to the original film. Revamped versions of numerous numbers from the musical and movie are used throughout the film but are almost unrecognizable unless you look for them. Along with that are the infamous angry dance scene and the unforgettable red suit jacket from the prom scene.

The charm of this film lies heavily on the minor characters in the film. Teller carries the majority of the movie as Willard with his goofball country-boy act. Willard is Ren’s tough talking, all-American, dumb as a post buddy who provides physical comedic relief as well as verbal. When Ren tries to teach Willard how to dance, Teller completely steals the show and captivates the audience for the rest of the film.

The major downfall of “Footloose” has to be it’s leading lady, Julianne Hough. Other than her insanely blue eyes, Hough is nothing but utterly uninteresting. All she does in the movie is wear short-shorts, low-cut blouses and dance skank-ily. Her performance is basic at best and the only scene in which she shows any sign of spark is too short for development of character to take place.

Although the film runs a full twenty minutes too long, has a few too many fist fights and I’ll never understand the logic behind the angry dance scene, this movie holds up well, is far superior to its original and makes for a fun (if not annoyingly catchy) film.

Footloose hits theaters October 14.

In his best performance yet, Joseph Gordon-Levitt stars as Adam Lerner, a healthy 27-year-old with a good job at the local NPR station, a nice house and a gorgeous girlfriend (Bryce Dallas Howard) to share it with. Then after a trip to the doctor, Adam learns there’s a tumor growing on his lower spine. Suddenly, all his priorities change as he requires a cancer treatment with a 50 percent chance for survival.

The extremely dependable Gordon-Levitt stands among the best of today’s younger actors, and his mere presence has become a near guarantee of high quality. A far cry from his last role as an intimidating, apathetic metal-head in the indie film “Hesher,” the role of Adam offers a wide range of emotion, and Gordon-Levitt seizes this opportunity with nuance and vigorous focus.

Beginning the film as a pushover nice guy, he slowly evolves through the chemotherapy and sickness, in a sympathetic progression through weakness, depression and anger until ultimately developing an acceptance of his mortality. His sarcastic wit becomes more and more cynical, and his frailty advances in crippling him. When Adam lashes out in fury as he eventually breaks down, Gordon-Levitt’s emotionally-charged frustration is sure to make viewers tear up.

Best friend Kyle (Seth Rogen) supports Adam throughout the whole process with humor and hope, becoming his caretaker after his girlfriend buckles under the pressure. In a more endearing performance than usual, Rogen still delivers the laughs, but this time around he’s not as obnoxious and there’s more dramatic weight in his friendship. He might seem fairly selfish at first, exploiting Adam’s cancer to get them laid and using marijuana to ease Adam’s suffering for them both, but he proves a worthy companion in the end.

Where that other Rogen dramedy about a life-threatening disease, “Funny People,” overloads on the depressing drama, Rogen imbues “50/50” with a lighter tone and he feels right at home here, partially because he lived the role in real life. Inspired by the cancer experience of the screenwriter, Rogen’s real-life best friend Will Reiser, the movie and the characters consistently sparkle with honesty.

Reiser scripts the proceedings with an enlightened understanding, never bogging the film down in too much sadness, while keeping the humor brisk and evenly paced. Even Adam’s realizations about his life, brought about by his assigned, newbie cancer therapist (Anna Kendrick, building on her charming timidity in “Up in the Air”), offer sharp insight, echoing from Reiser’s own cancer survival.

Director Jonathan Levine sublimely ties the experience together, eliciting universally strong performances from his cast and poignantly portraying the importance of the relationships in Adam’s life. Adam rejects his overbearing and worrisome mother (Anjelica Huston), and Levine handles Adam’s attempt at reconnecting to her with a somber, resonating delicacy.

More interesting, however, is the tender, light friendship Adam develops with two spirited old men (Matt Frewer and Philip Baker Hall) he goes through chemo with, and the appreciation for life they impart to him. That includes sharing pot-laced macaroons with Adam, which Levine shows with a fuzzy, hilarious and happy-go-lucky slo-mo stroll through the gloomy hospital halls.

Adam’s worsening condition builds his journey to a powerfully stirring climax, assured to ignite audience tear wells, and by the time it ends, “50/50” stands as one of the most fulfilling, emotionally intense movies this year. Gordon-Levitt’s achingly heartfelt, affecting performance isn’t always easy to stomach, but the bittersweet ride proves hugely rewarding.

Three and a Half out of Four Stars

Whether you’re a baseball fan or not, this true story about how the Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) changed the recruiting game should give all moviegoers something to cheer about this baseball season. Pitt stands as possibly the most reliably impressive, consistently charming superstar working in Hollywood today, and he’ll no doubt hit it out of the park here. And in an atypical, serious yet deadpan performance, Jonah Hill stars as the whiz who helps Beane build a winning team based off straight statistics instead of star power. Even for those who don’t care about the sport, “Moneyball” should deliver an entertaining crowd-pleaser, while also achieving a clever, highly enjoyable look into the inner workings of the game.

The Ides of March – Oct. 7

George Clooney’s making some big plays for an Oscar this year. Not only is he an early contender in the Best Actor race for the dramedy “The Descendants,” but with “The Ides of March” he has a shot for Best Director as well, especially if he delivers like he did with 2005’s subtly poignant “Good Night, and Good Luck.” Ryan Gosling stars as the maverick young campaign manager for the democratic presidential candidate (played by Clooney, a political activist in real-life too) in the upcoming election. But along the campaign trail, the opposing side tempts Gosling and he becomes entrapped in a game of dirty politics. A timely political thriller bolstered by a sizzling cast, “The Ides of March” holds lots for thoughtful viewers to look forward to.

J. Edgar – Nov. 4

Over the past decade, Clint Eastwood has become one of the most dependable directors for strong, effective dramas, and after the slight misstep of last year’s “Hereafter,” Eastwood returns to form with a biopic on J. Edgar Hoover. As the first FBI director, he reigned for nearly 40 years, but his personal secrets could have wrecked his career. Leonardo DiCaprio certainly has his work cut out for him in portraying the extremely powerful, widely influential and surprisingly controversial leader. Insights into Hoover’s alleged homosexuality and relationship with his longtime roommate Clyde Tolson (“Social Network” twin Armie Hammer) look to further the intrigue, and as is par for Eastwood films, expect all-around superb performances.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy – Dec. 9

The high-octane spy action of the new “Mission: Impossible” is going to blow up the box office in December, but this adaptation of John Le Carré’s classic novel takes center stage in the spy genre this year, telling a realistic suspenseful tale of espionage and deception during the Cold War. While “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy” is much lower-key spy fare than standard genre entries, it’s equally as intense. Veteran Gary Oldman leads as a retired secret service agent called back into the field, tasked with uncovering a Soviet mole who’s infiltrated the highest levels of MI6. Supported by the likes of Colin Firth, Tom Hardy and Mark Strong, this twisting slowburner should be among the year’s best.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo – Dec. 21

As engrossing as the original Swedish film is, this American remake almost guarantees a superior adaptation of the best-selling novel, and there’s one main reason for that – director David Fincher. A master of the serial killer mystery genre (look no further than “Se7en” for proof), Fincher perfects every aspect of his productions and creates compelling atmosphere and searing tension like few others can. With devoted performances from Daniel Craig as the journalist trying to solve a 40-year-old disappearance and up-and-comer Rooney Mara as the titular punk-hacker who assists him, Fincher’s “Social Network” follow-up assures one hell of a gritty, electrifying thriller.

The Adventures of Tintin – Dec. 23

Rarely, if ever, has an animated film held as high a pedigree as “The Adventures of Tintin.” Co-produced by Peter Jackson and directed by Steven Speilberg, this adaptation of the Belgian comics about a boy and his dog’s adventures (here searching for a lost, mystical treasure ship) will provide the family-friendly, wondrously exciting hit of the Christmas holiday. It’s easy to get lost in the dazzling visuals of “Tintin’s” world from the trailer alone (this one needs to be seen in 3D), and with lots of motion capture work, including from mo-cap acting master Andy Serkis, the performances should offer great depth as well. If Spielberg knows one thing, it’s how to captivate audiences, and here’s a prime example.