I try not to make generalizations when it comes to movies. Just when I come to the conclusion that I don’t like music documentaries, I come across something like Thunder Soul or The Weird World of Blowfly that I really enjoy. When I read a description of Last Days Here, it didn’t really sound like something that would appeal to me, but I had heard glowing endorsements from others about the film, so I decided to check it out. I’m glad to hear that other recent first-timers fell in love with it, but I was not as enamored with the film as I’d hoped I would be.

The heavy metal band Pentagram has been around on and off for over 40 years. And for virtually all of that time, lead singer Bobby Liebling has been taking drugs. Not just marijuana, but harder stuff like heroin, crack, and various kinds of pills. He’s logged over 50 trips to the hospital and has been on the verge of death so many times that even his parents (with whom he still lives) have a hard time getting worked up about it any more. He suffers from delusions and hallucinations, and on the increasingly rare occasions in which he’s lucid enough to play, he is so difficult to work with that Pentagram has many more former members than current ones.

But there’s something about Pentagram’s music that appeals to their dedicated fans. When Sean Pelletier, who worked for a small indie record label, first came across a Pentagram album around the year 2000, he was inspired enough to track down Liebling and found that they didn’t live too far apart. While Bobby was clearly on the road to killing himself through drug abuse, Sean held out hope that he could be saved by music. Perhaps if Pentagram could play again, Bobby could clean up his act enough to live a little longer and inspire a new generation of fans.

There is no denying that

Last Days Here

evoked just about as strong an emotional response as I’ve ever had to a documentary. But unfortunately that response is probably not what the filmmakers intended. I found Bobby so completely detestable and such an obviously lost cause that it was at times painful to watch. About the only fortunate aspect of his life for humanity in general is that his parents take care of him so he’s not collecting welfare, but that still doesn’t keep him from leeching off society in other ways.

I think that perhaps part of my aversion to the film lies in how Bobby’s changes affected my attitude toward and about him. It was easy to hate him when he was a complete waste with no redeeming quality of any kind, but if he did something to indicate that perhaps he may be capable of contributing something to society after all, I found myself strangely disappointed by that. I think that I somehow got more satisfaction from being able to completely write him off than from the idea that there may yet be hope for him, and I don’t like what that implies about me as a person. It’s a slippery slope on the path to watching reality television and professional wrestling that I’d rather stay as far away from as possible.

Every once in a while, a movie comes along which repeatedly surprises you with how bad it is. It’s not uncommon to encounter a movie with bad writing or a stupid premise, but they usually stay at about the same level of bad over the course of the whole film. It’s much rarer to see a movie that starts bad, but then continues to find new ways to get worse. Lockout starts out awful, and yet somehow it manages to take several big steps down in quality as it progresses.

It starts at some unspecified time in the future (although since we know that President Warnock is the 56th President, we can assume it’s probably no more than 100 years from now). We see motorcycles and helicopters that look a little different than they do now, but people aren’t driving flying cars or wearing jetpacks or using the metric system. People are still using guns to fight, and if they have important papers to carry around then they use the kinds of briefcases with combination locks. But there have apparently been advances in both space travel and prison design, because the height of supermax prisons is M. S. One, where society’s worst criminals do their time frozen in cryogenic chambers in a big jail in orbit around the Earth. Since they spend all their time as human ice cubes, there’s no chance for them to escape, but even if they did they’d be trapped in space.

But there are reports of the freezing process causing a kind of space dementia, so the President sends his daughter Emilie (Maggie Grace) to investigate. It is of course completely safe from her, since she’ll never even be in the same room as the inmates, nor will the criminals be in contact with anyone carrying weapons. Except of course for the secret service agent who for some reason deems it necessary to leave the First Daughter to be in the room with the hardened criminal, and to ignore the order to give up all his weapons. And in a completely unforeseeable turn of events, the criminal gets the secret service agent’s gun, kills him, un-freezes all of the other bad guys, and the inmates take Emilie and all the other guards and staff as hostages. The only one who can possibly save the day is Snow (played by Guy Pearce), who used to be a CIA agent before he was framed for murder and espionage.

The film starts with a ridiculous action sequence with some of the worst CGI I’ve ever witnessed. There were parts of a high-speed motorcycle chase that ended up looking much more like a hand-drawn cartoon than live action. But soon the horrible dialogue and inane plot caught up (or down) with the with the quality of the effects, and we end up with a terribly convoluted story that only gets worse as the film progresses. It’s like they had some not-so-clever action sequences they wanted to use in the movie and tried to piece together a story around them, and they ended up with a whole other plot line about trying to find the location of a hidden briefcase that is supposed to have the information needed to exonerate Snow. But these two plots aren’t well intertwined, so it’s like they stop caring about one whenever they’re in pursuit of the other.

Lockout is easily among the worst films I’ve seen this year, on par with Project X and Tim and Eric’s Billion Dollar Movie. The only thing Lockout has going for it is that it’s one that could be fun to watch with other people who get some sick pleasure from bad movies (and I’ll throw myself in that category much of the time), whereas the other two are simply bad all the way around. But I’m certainly not in the mood to test that theory by watching it again.

It’s not unusual to hear stories of “zero tolerance” policies at schools that cause a kid to be punished or even expelled because he included a butter knife in his lunch box or brought an action figure with a tiny toy gun. This is the kind of nanny state overreaction that is typical of our modern society, and it’s the same kind of flawed logic that prevents nail clippers and normal-sized shampoo bottles on airplanes. At best, these kinds of policies simply make it look like someone is trying to do something about the problem while simultaneously showing that they have no idea what the problem actually is.

When Ja’Maya Jackson brought a gun with her on the school bus, it was because she was tired of getting picked on by bigger kids. She was a rather normal-looking honor student who had been the victim of bullying on so many occasions that she just got tired of it. She didn’t shoot anyone, and the time she spent in a juvenile correctional facility was absolutely warranted as a result of her behavior, but had she been able to find help in some other way, perhaps there would have been a better outcome for all involved. She’s certainly not the first to feel the need to bring a gun to school to level the playing field against bigger kids, and some of those cases don’t end so peacefully.

But not all instances of bullying turn out this way. Many, like Alex Libby (a 12-year-old weakling from Sioux City, Iowa), simply take it and bottle up their emotions. Perhaps they try to tell someone about what’s going on, but all too often this doesn’t produce a very satisfying result. It certainly seems like his assistant principal has a very “boys will be boys” attitude and no real understanding of the degree to which Alex is being harassed, or perhaps even a wanton denial of what is painfully obvious to someone after watching only seconds of what he’s subjected to on a daily basis. And as bad as things seem for Alex, he’s at least able to shut himself down emotionally to the degree he’s able to tolerate it. For others, like Tyler Long or Ty Smalley, things got so bad they felt suicide was the only way out.

There are those who say that Bully is the kind of documentary that should be shown in every school. While I agree with that, it’s not for the reasons I expected. It’s hard to believe that anyone who is a bully will watch the film and see the error of his or her ways. And while it may be good for those who are perpetual victims of bullying to see that they’re not alone, but they probably already know that, and that knowledge by itself may not be all that comforting. However, I think that the best targets for this documentary are those in the middle, who aren’t themselves instigators or victims, but who may be swayed toward befriending those who often get bullied, or at least think twice about joining in. But it also seems to demonstrate the complete lack of understanding that some teachers and school administrators have about the severity of the problem, and could perhaps help them understand that it’s not something that’s healthy to ignore.

I found it interesting that all of the cases of bullying that were examined in this film were from relatively small towns. These aren’t inner-city kids from bad neighborhoods, but are from generally rural areas in Iowa, Oklahoma, Georgia, and Mississippi. Some of the schools did have police officers on campus, and some had cameras on the buses, but we didn’t see any metal detectors or overcrowding or violent gangs. I’m not entirely sure whether that always worked to the film’s advantage, since it’s kind of understandable (albeit still completely inexcusable) that “the gay kid” would be picked on in a school where there’s only one or two of them. It seems that had they shown at least once instance of bullying (or its result) in a big school, then people in that kind of environment may be better able to identify with at least that subject of the film.

Although there is apparently a PG-rated version of the film, I believe that the Alamo Drafthouse is showing the unrated cut. If that is indeed the case, it’s downright revolting that the MPAA ratings board threatened to give it an “R” classification for language. The only “bad word” I remember hearing in the film was “faggot”, but that was in the context of a kid telling someone else what he was called — we don’t even hear him called that. It’s merely used in a statement of fact, and seems like it would fit under the same umbrella as indigenous nudity as seen in films depicting African tribes. If the only reason you’re hesitant about seeing (or letting your kids see) the film is concern about it being unrated, you can rest assured that its content is far more tame than what you’ll see in The Hunger Games or Titanic 3D.

If you’ve ever seen Bugs Bunny cartoons, then you’re probably familiar with the idea of the Tasmanian devil, although you might not have realized that it’s a real thing. It’s also called the Tasmanian tiger, and it’s a sleek cat with a striped back that is apparently a pretty vicious killer. Unfortunately, though, they’re believed to be extinct.

But maybe not. The biotech company Red Leaf has reason to believe that there’s at least one still alive and roaming about the Tasmanian wilderness, and they also believe that there’s something special about its DNA that could be extremely valuable to them if they were able to obtain a sample to study. It’s also something that could be extremely valuable to their competitors, so if they can’t get it for themselves, then they want to ensure that no one else gets it either. And that’s why they’ve called in expert hunter Martin David (played by Willem Dafoe) to track down the devil if it exists, get blood and tissue samples, and then destroy the animal to keep it out of the hands of their competitors. There’s a lot of money on the line, so they’re willing to take a very relaxed approach to things like laws and ethics.

Martin made his way to Tasmania under the guise of a biologist who intends to conduct research in the vast wilderness where they have all kinds of exotic creatures that don’t exist anywhere else on the planet. His contact put him in touch with Jacky Mindy (played by Sam Neill) to act as a guide, and Sam directed him to a cabin where he could rent a room for the duration of his trip. Martin quickly learned that this wasn’t going to be a luxurious trip, with amenities like electricity and hot water hard to come by, and locals not exactly rolling out the red carpet for visitors. There’s a battle going on between loggers and environmentalists, so everyone is just a little bit more on edge than normal.

The marketing material for this film was (probably intentionally) reminiscent of the recent Liam Neeson film The Grey, but the content was quite different. For one thing, The Grey was an exciting thriller with lots of action and suspense, while The Hunter was much slower, less exciting, and more predictable. Dafoe’s character spends more time babysitting than he does hunting, but even the scenes in which he’s out in the wilderness leave something to be desired. There’s more “waiting for something to happen” in the film than I would like, which I’m sure is what hunting is really like but doesn’t make for a very riveting movie.

It’s also hard to get excited about much that happens during the film. The audience has more knowledge about what’s going on than Martin does, so when something happens which he doesn’t expect, it’s less a surprise for us, and it’s harder to sympathize with him. I suppose that it’s kind of fitting that the film has an unsatisfying ending, because everything else in the movie is so low-key that it’s not as much of a let-down as it might have otherwise been.

There are many sports documentaries that cover a team over the course of a season, and they always seem like a real gamble because past results don’t guarantee future performance. I wonder how many filmmakers have had their hopes dashed when they start covering what should be an unstoppable force only to have their first “off” season in years. It’s even riskier to film the underdog, because they’re expected to lose. A film like Quantum Hoops (about the historically awful Caltech basketball team) would probably still be very good even if the team performed down to everyone’s expectations, but Undefeated would not have been the film it was if the team hadn’t made a dramatic reversal when the cameras were rolling.

Manassas High School is located in a particularly run-down area of North Memphis. The poverty rate is as high as the crime rate, and few kids are lucky enough to grow up with both parents around to care for them. Most people who grow up there don’t have any hope of college or of getting a decent job. The school is strapped for cash, and the only way they can afford to have a football team is that richer schools with much better teams actually pay the Manassas Tigers to play them for what’s sure to be an easy win. That was the norm when Bill Courtney came to coach six years ago, and he certainly didn’t turn things around right away. But in whatever season the film covered (I’m guessing it was 2009 or 2010, but I don’t think they mentioned it), things were looking up for them. They had a couple of great seniors, including O.C. Brown, who was able to run through just about any opposition thanks to his combination of size and speed, and Montrail “Money” Brown (who I’m pretty sure is not related to O.C.), whose intelligence allows him to overcome his size disadvantage. They were also getting back Charvis Daniels, a promising player who had missed the previous season because he was in jail. The Tigers had never won a playoff game in the school’s history, but perhaps they had the right team to finally make it over that hurdle.

The team’s first game of the season makes it obvious that the title doesn’t refer to a lossless record, but rather it’s the more sappy “our spirits won’t be defeated” sense of the word, but even that doesn’t really hold for everyone. They have a number of challenges to overcome, and more than one occasion in which someone is ready to throw in the towel. Coach Courtney is clearly not the most eloquent of speakers, and some of his pearls of wisdom don’t actually make any sense if you think about them too carefully. But it’s clear that he and the other coaches really care for the players and go the extra mile to ensure that they’re in a position to succeed in life in addition to on the field.

Undefeated recently won the Academy Award for best documentary, and while it may well be the best of the films that were nominated (although I can’t say that authoritatively, since the only other nominee I’ve seen was the very disappointing Pina), but it’s hard to call it the best documentary of the year with films like Senna and Tabloid not even nominated for some reason. Undefeated is not always easy to watch, and it skirts around some touchy subjects, but it comes together so well in the end that it’s easy to forgive the sometimes rocky path it took to get there.

Snow White is a classic story by the Brothers Grimm that’s old enough to be in the public domain, so there are several adaptations of the tale. Disney would like you to believe theirs is the authoritative release (although apparently not enough to take it out of “the vault” to actually offer it for sale), but there are at least dozens of other versions of the story. In fact, one of the trailers before Mirror Mirror was for Snow White and the Huntsman, scheduled for release this June. If there is to be room for another telling of this story, then it needs to provide some unique perspective, and the UK version of the film is marketed as “Mirror Mirror: The Untold Adventures of Snow White“, so I was foolish enough to believe that they might bring something new to the table. But it’s primarily just a retelling of the traditional story.

In this version, Lily Collins plays Snow White, a princess whose father the king (played by Sean Bean) is beloved by everyone. Her mother died in childbirth, and while her father provided her with everything she could ever hope for, he realized the need for a female influence in her life, and he eventually married a new queen (Julia Roberts) to fill that role. But as characters played by Sean Bean are wont to do, the king met his end in the forest surrounding the castle and the queen took control of the land. This should have been just a temporary arrangement until Snow White was old enough to succeed her father, but the queen loved her power, loved keeping Snow White locked in her room, and loved throwing lavish parties using tax money collected from her subjects.

When she turned 18, Snow White managed to escape from her room and made her way out of the castle, where she was shocked to learn about what a dismal place the kingdom had become. She was also surprised to encounter a couple of men who had been tied up and robbed by bandits. She would later learn that the better looking of the two men was a prince from another land (played by Arnie Hammer), and the bandits were actually dwarves (who disguised themselves and wore stilts) that had been scorned by the queen. When the queen learned of Snow White’s expedition and the effect she had on the prince, she decided to send Snow White to her death and take the prince for herself.

Even if it shares much of the story, Mirror Mirror isn’t just a live-action version of the Disney cartoon. For example, the dwarves have different names (Butcher, Chuckles, Grimm, Grub, Half Pint, Napoleon, and Wolf), and Snow White isn’t fed a poisoned apple. It’s also hard to believe that even a magic mirror would consider Julia Roberts prettier than Lily Collins, although perhaps it was just being respectful until she was 18. But the differences aren’t so substantial as to warrant yet another version of the story. And because you know pretty much exactly what’s coming, there’s very little excitement to be had, and it makes some lame but ultimately unsuccessful attempts at comedy. There’s really no compelling reason to watch the film, but if you do want to see it then I doubt it would lose anything significant by waiting to see it on the small screen.

I was excited for The Cabin in the Woods like no movie before it. When it first played at Buttnumbathon last year, I didn’t hear a single comment about it that was anything less than over-the-top enthusiasm, and the trend continued through its official premiere at the SxSW film festival in March. I wanted to go into the movie as pure as possible, so I avoided all discussion of it, and even took to leaving the theater if they played its trailer before some other movie. When Mondo announced a special screening of the movie, I jumped at the chance to see the movie before its Friday the 13th release date not because I get any real extra pleasure from seeing a movie early or even because of the poster (although it’s pretty great, too), but because it would relieve me from a week of vigilance against potential spoilers. And after seeing the film, I can appreciate how hard it is to say something about it without spoiling anything. I’ll do my best to be interesting without ruining anything, but you’d be best served by just going to see the movie before learning anything about it). You won’t be disappointed.

On the surface, it’s an extremely cliché take on the theme for which it is named. It features five students (a jock, a nerd, a stoner, a slutty girl, and an innocent girl) who pile into a Winnebago and head out into the wilderness where there’s no cell phone reception and no one around for miles. They of course make a stop at a creepy gas station with a creepy attendant who doesn’t like outsiders before the final leg of their journey into complete isolation. And when they finally arrive at the rickety old cabin there’s the usual disappointment with the quality of the accommodations and the usual discussion of sleeping arrangements. There’s swimming and drinking and smoking of pot and flirting before the real stuff starts to happen. It’s the kind of thing you’ve seen in every Friday the 13th movie and everything inspired by that theme since then like Cabin Fever and Pumpkinhead. But all of this is done in what is kind of a tongue-in-cheek manner, and the rest of the film is decidedly not a rip off of the same old story.

I rarely find anything in movies scary, so I’m not really the best judge of whether a horror movie is scary or not, but I don’t think that there’s really anything in The Cabin in the Woods that will cause your skin to crawl if you’re familiar with other stories with this kind of setting. The violence and gore look good and are very satisfying, but you can see it all coming so that you’re prepared for it when it does arrive. However, that’s not to say that it’s boring or lacks entertainment value, because that is decidedly not true. Writer Joss Whedon (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, Dollhouse, and the upcoming The Avengers) has a good amount of experience combining genres like horror and action and comedy, and that’s done with great effect here. Even if you aren’t scared by what is only a surface-level horror, you will be thoroughly engulfed in the story and constantly reacting to something.

It’s exceptionally difficult to explain what makes this movie so great without running the risk of spoiling something. However, this is not the kind of film that’s only good the first time and loses something the second time around when you know what’s going to happen. I know a few lucky people who’ve already gotten to see it a couple of times, and none of them are any less enthusiastic after their second viewing. I also don’t know anyone who’s already seen it once that isn’t chomping at the bit to see it again. I’ll definitely be seeing it again next weekend.

Apparently there’s something about salmon fishing that makes it more exciting or challenging or interesting than going after other kinds of fish. Maybe it’s got something to do with their habit of swimming upstream in order to spawn, but I’d think that would make it less challenging (since fish would be traveling more slowly upstream than they would be if they were headed downstream). There must be some reason that a Sheikh who already has plenty of access to other kinds of fishing in his native Yemen would want to invest a great deal of time and money to try to introduce salmon, but that’s something that will apparently remain a mystery.

Dr. Alfred Jones (played by Ewan McGregor) is a very straight-laced man, even by British terms. He has a very dry sense of humor, is in a passionless marriage with Mary (Rachael Stirling), and is a government ichthyologist by trade and fisherman by hobby. On the other hand, while Harriet Chetwode-Talbot (Emily Blunt) has an extremely British-sounding name, her personality is less subdued than you’d expect for someone with that name. She slept with her new boyfriend Robert (Tom Mison) on the first date, never seems to get discouraged, and works for an agency that represents the extremely wealthy Yemeni Sheikh Muhammed (Amr Waked).

Harriet and Alfred are brought together when she conveys the Sheikh’s desire to bring salmon fishing to his native country, and Alfred immediately (and sensibly) rejects it as a completely ludicrous idea. However, others higher up in the British government hear of the idea and see it as a potential way to improve British-Arab relations, particularly as their participation with the US in the war in Afghanistan is not well received by all (including Harriet, since Robert’s army unit was recently deployed there, taking him away from her). Alfred receives pressure from his superiors to try to make the idea a reality. The Sheikh’s willingness to spend absurd amounts of money (including to double Alfred’s salary, and to spare no expense in any other part of the endeavor) and Alfred’s ability to work in close proximity with Harriet for the duration of the project helped soften the sting of being ordered to do this idiotic thing, but even under the best conditions, he didn’t have much reason to believe it would actually work.

It seems that the film is based on a novel by Paul Torday, and as far as I can tell, it’s purely fictional. But that’s a little hard to believe because I can’t imagine that anyone would come up with a story this lame when there are so many ways they could improve upon the plot. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to place so much emphasis on salmon fishing when there’s ready access to other kinds of fish and no explanation as to what makes salmon better. It doesn’t seem realistic that Harriet would be so completely hung up on Robert when they’ve only known each other for three weeks and there’s no telling how long he’ll be gone, when they could’ve just as easily made their relationship last for months or years It’s hard to see the Sheikh as a generous man who wants to help his fellow countrymen with this project when there’s so much wasted money for so little benefit (and what benefit there is may only be enjoyed by a small number of individuals), and that’s only on the off-chance that the idea actually works.

In addition to the lack of credibility, the film also suffers from a lack of depth. There are more serious issues in the movie than the Sheikh’s fishing options, but they’re either so obvious or so ridiculous that it’s hard to care about them. It’s not an outstanding romantic drama, and there are far better British political comedies like In The Loop, Four Lions, and The Guard. It’s not so much that Salmon Fishing in the Yemen is a bad movie as it is simply not a good one.

When I went into Norwegian Wood, I knew almost nothing about it. I knew that it was a Japanese movie (based on a rather popular book, which I haven’t read), and I was vaguely familiar that its title was also the title of a Beatles song. I foolishly allowed myself to think that perhaps the film would be similar to Golden Slumber (an excellent Japanese movie that shares its title with a Beatles song) or Fish Story (an excellent Japanese Movie whose title is also the title of a song featured prominently in the movie). That was not a good assumption.

Watanabe, Kizuki, and Naoko were like three peas in a pod when they were growing up, but when Kizuki and Naoko started dating, they still hung out with Watanabe but he was kind of a third wheel. When Kizuki committed suicide, both Watanabe and Naoko were devastated, and they kind of went their separate ways. But after they run into each other in a Tokyo park, they rekindle their relationship and start to get together again on a regular basis. On Naoko’s 20th birthday, their celebration turns amorous, and they make love. But being a typically insensitive guy, Watanabe manages to upset Naoko and she needs some time away from Watanabe and from the memories of Kizuki that accompany him.

Months later, Watanabe receives word from Naoko and learns that she has checked herself into a kind of mental health commune where she’s had some time to think things through. She is ready to declare her love for Watanabe, but not her sanity, so she is to stay at the treatment center, where all visits must be chaperoned (although they’re apparently really bad about enforcing that). But all this time away from Naoko has made Watanabe realize his interest in another woman (Midori, who also has a boyfriend, but neither of them see their current dysfunctional relationships as a significant hindrance to their own satisfaction), and Watanabe’s roommate Nagasawa doesn’t set the best example with his own constant cheating.

If I did have to compare Norwegian Wood to another movie, I’d say that it seemed pretty similar to last year’s Like Crazy. Both feature overly-emotional young adults who can’t seem to tie themselves to just one person and, and I found myself unable to sympathize with the protagonists for either film when they are bemoaning their situation when it is mostly of their own creation.

I found it very hard to get pulled into the story, in part because the suicide near the beginning of the film comes out of nowhere and is left completely unexplained, but mostly because the film progressed very slowly and without any kind of real reward for the viewer. I couldn’t really relate to any of the characters or to their problems, and it didn’t give me much incentive to try.

Every so often, a movie comes along that can’t be adequately described using mere words. The Raid: Redemption is one of those films. The best I can say is that if you like violent action movies, then go see this one.

At its core, it’s a “storming the castle” film. The castle in this case is a plain-looking cement high-rise which serves as a low-rent apartment complex for what must be hundreds of people, but it’s also the not-so-secret headquarters of a huge drug manufacturing and trafficking operation, run by Tama, his henchmen Andi and Mad Dog, and tons of underlings. The residents all know what’s really going on in the building, but fear of Tama and fear of homelessness cause them to at least turn a blind eye to the less legal parts of the operation, and some of them actively try to get in Tama’s good graces by tipping his people off if they see something suspicious. And a large SWAT team amassing outside the gate certainly qualifies.

The bust has been orchestrated by Lieutenant Wahyu (played by Pierre Gruno, who must be at least a distant cousin of G.W. Bailey) and is being led by Wahyu along with Sergeants Rama and Jaka. A lot of the men they brought along are pretty young and inexperienced, but hopefully numbers and firepower will help them out. Unfortunately, they don’t have the advantage in either of those categories, since Tama has a lot of enemies on both sides of the law and this isn’t the first time he’s come under attack. His men are very well armed, have lots of experience, and aren’t hindered by conscience or a need to adhere to the law. But then again, Wahyu isn’t all that concerned with the law himself, since he didn’t bother to get any kind of authorization for this mission, so there’s not going to be any backup if they get themselves into a jam.

There are a few points in the film that are a little light on action, but not many more than absolutely necessary to craft the story for the film. But the rest of the time is full-on hard-core ultraviolence. There are a lot of casualties, and there are a lot of skilled fighters creating interesting ways for those casualties to occur. There’s plenty of gunplay, but there’s also a lot of hand-to-hand (and every other body part to every other body part) combat, and several instances of such awesome brutality that the audience (and I’d strongly recommend seeing it in a packed theater) can’t help but gasp and in unison as an expression of simultaneous disgust and approval. Given that everything happens in a packed apartment building, there are plenty of hallway fight scenes, and some of them rival and perhaps even surpass the infamous Oldboy corridor battle. In fact, the movie is almost a kind of feature-length version of that.

I was both awed and slightly disappointed by film’s climax. It’s obvious pretty early on that there’s going to be a big showdown at the end, but given how much awesome action occurred throughout the movie there’s no way that the climax could match the splendor of what came earlier. And then it did. But then they followed that up with a little too much “wrapping up the story” so that some of the excitement has dissipated by the time the credits start to roll. But if you watch the credits then you can see the sheer number of actors/fighters and the awesome descriptions given to their nameless characters, and you can immediately re-live those scenes in your mind.

I don’t really understand why they chose to tack the word “redemption” onto the title for the U.S. release, since it’s just called The Raid everywhere else, and there’s really not much redemption to be found in the story. But this is a film that’s so incredible to just watch and absorb that you shouldn’t spoil it by trying to think too much about those kinds of trivial details.