Movie Junction

One of the most-anticipated movies of 2012, “The Hunger Games” finally arrives in theaters, with record box-office receipts for a non-sequel in midnight showings, as well as a record for the highest single day opening. The film, based on the record-breaking “Hunger Games” trilogy, written by Suzanne Collins, is vying to become the next big thing after the “Harry Potter” and "Twilight" series. Surely, the mad rush to see the film bears all the hallmarks of a cultural phenomenon. So, what’s driving the record crowds to theaters? For one thing, the female protagonist, Jennifer Lawrence playing as a young adult Katniss Everdeen, becomes the central draw of the show, because we see our heroine, among other teenagers in the film, left vulnerable and exposed to the cruel world. It’s a theme that pleads for sympathy from the audience, as we hope these teenagers can survive on their own. “The Hunger Games” starts with a brief introduction on the concept of the hunger games. We l

By its nature, film is a visually dynamic medium, carrying power to entertain us, be it a drama, documentary, or an action film. There are different components at work; the mix of visual images with sounds, along with actors, makes film one of the complex art mediums to work with. The real challenge lies in creating a series of shots, although metaphorically speaking, in which several components coalesce seamlessly for a meaningful experience:  The acting has to be good, the script arouse right emotions, and the setup conjure memorable images. Directors often employ several components, and, therefore, there is no magic formula that works for a particular theme. Surely, this opens room for more experimentation, giving filmmakers additional freedom to push the boundaries of film as an art medium. Terrence Malick and Lars von Trier are two directors that can safety be pegged with the label of “experimental” filmmaker. Malick with his recent effort, “The Tree of Life” (2011),

Has HBO set a new standard in television with its new series “Game of Thrones”?  With the huge success of “Six Feet Under,” “The Sopranos,” “Deadwood,” and “Rome,” HBO remained synonymous with the best theatrical experience, right in your home. By “theatrical” experience, I am implying HBO’s effectiveness in picking a fascinating theme and employing every filmmaking technique, especially modern special effects and rich production values, without any compromise. Indeed, some of the best and highest quality shows come from HBO. But, with “Game of Thrones,” HBO has again raised the bar of modern television that won’t be challenged anytime soon. HBO’s “Game of Thrones” is based on the first book, “A Game of Thrones,” in the hugely popular “A Song of Ice and Fire” series, written by George R.R. Martin. “A Game of Thrones” is no ordinary book; it is dense with convoluted plot lines, featuring many characters. The story takes place somewhere in Middle Earth, in which we are prese

The complicated and unhappy life of nurse Jackie continues in the third season of the “Nurse Jackie” series. Before I go any further, I want to highlight that this review is, in fact, for the third season, because my review may sound repetitive or similar to my earlier reviews of the first and second seasons. This is because the third season is basically the rehash of the first two seasons, lacking excitement and drama in the main story line. In addition, the story elements and show’s structure remain the same, making the show overly predictable and boring at times. After watching the twelve episodes of the third season, I can say that this is the worst season for the series so far.  I had a hard time putting down my thoughts about the story and characters because, as it turns out, the story goes nowhere and the script fails to develop the characters and Jackie’s world to the next level. The third season picks up right after Kevin (Dominic Fumusa) discovers Jackie’s (Edie F