As you can probably infer from the blog title, I've seen three movies since I've been back in North Carolina. All were good, though not as good as they could've been, but I figured I'd enlighten you with my ever so educated (not) opinion of said films.
The first, Vacancy, was a well-made taught thriller. Following a trend of recent horrors trying to concentrate more on character than previous waves of the genre, Vacancy succeeds in that its characters seem real. More disturbing is that, despite being entirely fictional, there is a higher sense of "this could happen to me" than in other, supposedly "based on true story" horrors such as Hostel. Vacancy was refreshing in that it avoided most horror-movie conventions and, despite its less than completely satisfying ending, is worth seeing.
Spider-Man 3 is, as we all know, the capstone to one of the most successful movie trilogies of all time. That being stated, it felt a bit rushed, and while having an excellent script, delved more into camp than the previous two films. In addition, fan clamouring for the appearance of Venom only wound up hurting the film, and one wonders if Sam Raimi did that on purpose in order to keep fans out of the development process of any possible future Spider-Man films. As with most trilogies, this installment failed to surpass the quality of the first, but unlike the third Matrix film, deserves to make its way into your DVD collection.
Another "part three," Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, did a decent job in wrapping up that respective trilogy. A bit too long (almost three hours), and more than a bit chaotic, it still managed to be better than the second film (though admittedly not as funny). Once again, however, the first installment still holds the bar for how good this movie could have been.
On a side note, is anyone else "insulted" by the way MySpace places movies and television with celebrities in its blog categories?