"Red Riding Hood"

Richard's Review: 2 1/2 stars

The familiar lines, "I'll huff and I'll puff…" and "Grandma, what great big eyes you have…" both appear in "Red Riding Hood," the new Amanda Seyfried supernatural romance, and our heroine does wear a bright red cloak, but any resemblance to the source material ends there.

Set in a medieval village, Seyfried plays the anachronistically named Valerie, a pretty young woman in love with one boy but engaged to another, richer man. That's not the worst of her problems, however. A big bad werewolf has been reigning chaos on her village for generations, and now, with a blood moon rising and a silver-finger tipped werewolf hunter coming to town it looks like her story might take a grim -- but not necessarily Grimm -- turn.

Following in the footsteps of so many of today's angsty supernatural romances for teens, "Red Riding Hood" (which was directed by "Twilight, Mach One" director Catherine Hardwicke) plays like an odd but imaginative hybrid of "The Crucible" and "Twilight."

Filled with dramatic moments that aren't really as dramatic as I imagine Hardwicke would hope and a mystery filled with red herrings and heaving bosoms "Red Riding Hood" has a weird rhythm to it.

Hardwicke, a former production designer has made a terrific looking movie -- in wide shots the village looks like an illustration from a high end kid's book of fairy tales -- and Seyfried's movie star face, with it's beautifully exaggerated features -- bee stung lips and Bette Davis eyes -- holds the screen, but Hardwicke never met a steady cam shot she didn't love and her restless shooting style seems to have influenced the story as well. The narrative is a bit all over the place as though it is trying too hard to hit all the points that make up teen entertainment in 2011. A bit of script streamlining would have helped the big bad wolf from blowing this house of cards down.

And while I'm at it, can we discuss Gary Oldman for a moment? He's probably having more fun and making more money now with films like "Kung Fu Panda 2" and playing Sirius Black in the "Harry Potter" films than he did when essaying Joe Orton in "Prick Up Your Ears" but I miss watching the volatile and versatile actor who disappeared into roles like Sid Vicious and Albert Milo.

Despite its title "Red Riding Hood" isn't kid's stuff, but it also isn't quite well developed enough to be adult fare either.

"Battle: Los Angeles"

Richard's Review: 2 stars

Given the content of the film "Battle: Los Angeles," the new alien invader movie starring Aaron Eckhart, it's surprising it isn't subtitled "Marine Recruitment Movie."

The movie begins with the hoariest of cliches, the battle weary Marine, Michael Nantz (Eckhart), thrown into the biggest fight of his life just hours after he has announced his retirement. His mission is to lead a group of soldiers against some well-armed ETs who have captured every major port city in the world. As the title suggests, his job is to save Los Angeles.

The first twenty-five minutes or so of the film is spent with the Marine characters; getting to know the folks we're going to be spending the next two hours with. But instead of meeting believable people we are handed a roll call direct from Central Casting with dialogue that sounds like it was written by an actual G.I. Joe doll.

Director Jonathan Liebesman's relentless shakey-cam tries to distract the eye from the total lack of anything interesting going on with the characters but simply clutters the screen with jittery images.

Then things start to blow up and for the next hour-and-a-half there is a fairly constant video game barrage of bullets and bombs and dialogue like, "You kill anything that is not human!"

The movie's pace certainly picks up from here, but the story doesn't get much more interesting. Liebesman breaks a few of the rules regarding alien action movies. Firstly: He shows too many humans, not enough aliens. We can see humans anywhere -- look out a window! Turn on the TV! Aliens, not so much. Too often in "Battle: Los Angeles" the extraterrestrials are obscured by smoke or so far in the distance it's hard to get a good look at them.

Secondly, and this doesn't just apply to alien invasion flicks but to all action movies, show us the action. Sure there is lots of action on screen and the soundtrack is filled with kabooms and pows, but the images are so frenetic it's often hard to tell who is shooting who.

Lastly, all the great alien invasion movies are actually about something other than aliens. Recently, for instance, "District 9" was a potent mix of space invaders and apartheid. Any search for subtext here, however, will be met with disappointment, as "Battle: Los Angeles" simply plays like an only sporadically entertaining Marines propaganda film.

"Mars Needs Moms" 

Richard's Review: 3 stars

I think "WALL-E" is the pinnacle of science fiction for kids but after seeing "Mars Needs Moms"... I still feel that way. It's not really sci fi anyway; it's more action-adventure in zero gravity, with voice work by "Robot Chicken" guys Seth Green and Dan Fogler.

The earthbound portion of the story is set in Anywhere, USA. Little Milo (voice of Seth Green) doesn't like taking out the garbage. When his mom (Joan Cusack) gives him a firm, but effective talking to, she unwittingly becomes a Martian overlord's first choice as the model mom for the nanny bots that raise that planet's young'uns. When she is abducted Milo hitches a ride, determined to rescue his mom from the alien invaders.

The earth bound portion of "Mars Needs Moms" bored me silly but once the movie hits Mars it perks up. Milo stops being a whiny kid, the action kicks in, the female Martians look like ET's younger sisters and the Mars background animation is spectacular, kind of "2001" by way of "Triumph of the Will" and "Brazil." Too bad the character animation isn't as consistent. Milo's mom has a-not-quite-human feel about her, and there's some fluxuation in Milo and his friend Gribble but for the most part look amazing.

"Mars Needs Moms" is standard Disney. It's a well made piece of family entertainment -- it should appeal to eight and nine year olds, but anyone younger than that might find it a bit intense -- with some action and good messages for kids about family and friendship. And even though it's probably the first Disney movie to feature a purple nurple, it doesn't strive to be anything more or less than standard.

New on DVD: "Inside Job" 

Richard's Review: 4 stars

This year's Oscar winner for best doc -- "Inside Job" is pretty scary -- the villain isn't Freddy Krueger but a bigger villain named Freddie Mac. The ghouls and goblins of this piece are the creatures who feasted on the corpse of the American dream.

The story of the 2008 financial meltdown begins with a title card that says, simply, "This is how it happened." There is nothing simple about this story of fiduciary irresponsibility but director Charles Ferguson and narrator Matt Damon carefully lay out the greed and systemic failure that brought America to the brink and beyond during the biggest bubble in history.

With the collapse of the U.S. economy so went many world markets. It's a small world, one analyst says, "economies are all liked together." It's fascinating stuff, too complex to be recounted here, but Ferguson takes his time uncovering the intricacies of world finance without the kind of stunts that Michael Moore might have been inclined to include. It's straightforward, kind of a big budget power point presentation, which allows the facts and figures to tell the story.

Many of the names will be familiar -- Director of the White House National Economic Council Larry Summers, Richard Fuld, the former Chief Executive Officer of Lehman Brothers and Chairman of the United States Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke for instance -- but the depth of the information will likely not be. Ferguson has assembled a varied and credible cast of characters to explain how we came to brink of a global financial collapse. Many key players declined to sit in front of his camera, but luckily archived CSPAN footage fills the missing gaps.

Despite the film's steady tone, anchored by Damon's matter-of-fact narration, Ferguson can't seem to resist including a few "gotcha" moments. Occasionally the camera cuts away after difficult questions are asked without allowing the interviewee to respond. It's a cheap trick to make the subject look guilty or uncooperative and the film would have been better without this obvious stylistic trick. Ditto the use of unflattering photos to subtly vilify people. More often than not Larry Summers is shown in unflattering close-up, his Hugo Boss suit spotted with dandruff. Again it shows a bias that the film doesn't need to make its point.

"Inside Job" is occasionally a little too exhaustive. One of the least shocking revelations involves Wall Street a-type's predilection for drugs and hookers and eats up more time than it should, but the film's final point is probably the most chilling part of any movie this year. Like the bad guys who haunt Elm Street and Camp Crystal Lake the villains featured in "Inside Job" can't seem to be killed. The film's final cautionary note reminds us that many of the people who set us on this very destructive path are still in positions of financial power. Now that's scary.