Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

Away We Go (2009) -vs- Juno (2007)

THE SMACKDOWN. Did you ever have to make up your mind? Both "Away We Go" and "Juno" are about those decisions that come from life that can't be fudged, postponed or ignored. Even though both films involve pregnant leads who aren't married to the fathers of their unborn, there's more here than childbirth.  Each film lets us see a big life question presented in a way that shows there isn't always a "right" answer. Sometimes life forces us to choose. To pick up on one and leave the other behind. Well, we have to choose now, too. Should we go with the the couple of thirtysomethings who have to decide where to make their stand with a new baby; or the teenage girl who has a "go-no go" decision to make about a baby of her own and the boyfriend who's in way over his head?

THE CHALLENGER. "Away We Go" comes from the same director who gave us "American Beauty," Sam Mendes. The common thread in his work between these two films is the sharply drawn characters he finds living in an America he doesn't seem to like all that much. Written by the married couple of Dave Eggers and Vendela Vida, it tells the story of Burt and Verona -- who aren't married and are muddling through their lives knowing the clock is ticking, not biologically, but socially. Depending on who you talk to they're either nice or narcissistic, but either way they feel like their peers are getting along better than they are, they know something's wrong and they still haven't quite grasped what to do about it. When Burt's parents (Verona's are deceased) announce that they are moving to Belgium and, thus, won't be around to see their grandchild born, the young couple decides to hit the road, looking for a place that will have the right vibe to start their family (and, hopefully, their new & improved lives). Then it's planes, trains and automobiles as the story bounces from Arizona to Wisconsin to Florida and finally lands in what, for them, is supposed to be the land of Hope. Along the journey, they run into a lot of parenting advice and all kinds of disappointing people.

He’s Just Not That Into You (2009) -vs- Four Weddings And A Funeral (1994)

EDITOR'S NOTE:  "He's Just Not That Into You" is now on DVD after making $94-million at the box-office since coming out in February 2009. Smack ref Sherry Coben reviewed it then and, if you're looking for a romantic comedy to balance out what's in the current summer box office, Movie Smackdown offers a reprise of her Valentine's review...

The Smackdown. Valentine’s Day is in the air; the stores are filled to the rafters with cards and red hearts -- and even giant chocolate bunnies as merchants rush the holidays and compress our year alarmingly.  So. You buy a card, perhaps some chocolate, some roses, some lingerie. Good for you. How about dinner and a movie? That’s the ticket. Ah, but which movie? What do women want? They want movies about women and love. They’d prefer good movies about women and love, but even mediocre to bad ones will do in a pinch. They like their chickflicks like they like their men. There. But in a perfect movie-watching universe such as ours, with a multiplex in every town and classic films readily available, for the perfect romantic date night, which movie to watch?

The Challenger. "He’s Just Not That Into You" (2009) A wise, if snarky, friend once explained his secret of a happy love life, claiming that once he accepted the basic premise that all men are (pardon his French) assholes and all women are insane, there remained precious little left to argue about. Director Ken Kwapis, screenwriters Abby Kohn and Marc Silverstein, bestselling authors of the source material Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo  all apparently got the same memo. Movieworld “Baltimore” is a bucolic urban shire mostly peopled with hobbit-sized beautiful crazy (read: needy) women looking for marriage and the commitment-phobic assholes who refuse to love them enough. Everyone is diminutive except for the biggest asshole of all, Bradley Cooper’s Ben, a blue-eyed satyr who lopes through the film in unblinking disbelief that both superhotties Scarlett Johansson and Jennifer Connelly want him. Ben Affleck plays the saintly Neil who woos and wins sad-eyed Jennifer Aniston’s Beth and gets to keep his pants in the bargain.

No Reservations (2007) -vs- Mostly Martha (2002)

 Food for Thought 

The Smackdown. I've been thinking about food a lot (like this is news?) because I'm developing a TV series for my friend Mark Dacascos who plays "The Chairman" on Iron Chef America.   His current show turns gourmet cooking into a gladiator sport and that reminds me of a couple films dedicated to the behind-the-scenes clashes in the kitchens of high-end restaurants.  "No Reservations" is an almost scene-by-scene American re-make of the German film, "Mostly Martha."  Both tell the story of a woman chef at a top restaurant who has life plans rocked by the arrival of a child in her home after the death of a sister, complicated by the simultaneous hiring of a male chef at work who, at first, she sees as a challenge to her authority and later as a lover and a friend.

The Challenger. Kate (Catherine Zeta-Jones) runs her kitchen with rapid precision, intimidating her co-workers, and necessitating therapy to keep it together. When her sister is killed in a car accident, she becomes the guardian of her nine-year old daughter Zoe (Abigail Breslin) and, suddenly, life does not revolve around the kitchen anymore, no matter how much she wishes it did. Nick (Aaron Eckhart) joins the cooking staff as a rising star who could be the head chef of another restaurant, but wants to work under Kate. They are competitive, but ultimately they realize they need each other. Love blooms, and a new family is born. People differ on whether Zeta-Jones and Eckhart have any magic together but one thing is certain: Abigail Breslin is great again, stealing this movie the way she did "Little Miss Sunshine." She provides the true, authentic heart of this version and everybody else feels like support to her lead.

Ghosts of Girlfriends Past (2009) -vs- Star Trek (2009)

 Girls Night Out 

The Smackdown. A warning: I’m stepping way outside my wheelhouse for this smack. Plenty of Smackdown critics live for the Boys With Toys genres. They endlessly and seriously dissect Wolverine and X-Men and Batman and Hulk and all the rest. Show me an explosion in a movie trailer? I’m a no-show. Graphic novel/comic hero pedigree? Pure Kryptonite. So… Let’s say it’s date night and you’re the girl. Common wisdom might suggest you’d be happier arm-twisting your significant (or insignificant) other into the theater for a dose of movie star magic featuring McConnaughey and Garner. Your distaff half’s pining in an entirely different testosterone-fueled direction. Should you give in and check out the Trek or put your high-heeled foot down and insist on the rom-com? Let’s do this. Captain James Tiberius Kirk vs. Connor Meade. Two alpha/hound dogs who have their way with women.

In This Corner.  It’s never a good sign when a film takes place at Christmas time, based on Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, gets released in May. Trust me. In "Ghosts of Girlfriends Past," Michael Douglas gets to play his age, a dead guy returned to his Hefner-esque Rhode Island manse to wheedle and cajole his young ward, every bit as sleazy as his mentor and possessed of an anachronistically inexplicable Texas twang. Is McConnaughey really that big a star that (like Costner in “Robin Hood”) he doesn’t even have to try to sound geographically related to the rest of the characters in the film? While I recognize that not all actors are Meryl Streep, the ego involved in that decision offends…but wait. Perhaps there’s something more sinister at work, something deeper and darker; think back a few months, years, decades. Another New England dynasty raised one son with a similarly unexplained Texas twang. The scion and the others proper sons of Maine. Wait. Gimme a minute. Can’t place the name…but the face is familiar. Oh yeah, and he broke the world. Maybe that’s why the sore-thumb accent grates so.

Duplicity (2009) -vs- I Love You, Man (2009)

 Grown-Ups: Romance versus Bromance 

The Smackdown. Finally, we’re faced with a weekend of hard choices at the movie theater. Fresh and new and full of promise. The long cold winter of my cineast’s discontent is over. No more dutiful catching up with all those earnest Oscar winners and also-rans. Beyond January’s formulaic chickflicks and hapless mall cops. Beyond February’s horror franchises and March’s glowing blue phalluses. Hallelujah! Movie stars Julia Roberts, Clive Owen, Paul Rudd and Jason Segel have been tag-team tearing up the small screen, relentlessly charming and ubiquitous in their Herculean efforts to lure you into your local theater to help them win their crucial opening weekends. But where to go first? Which star vehicle gets you the most entertainment mileage for your time and money?

In This Corner. Two corporate spies with major trust issues portrayed by the impossibly gorgeous, ridiculously charismatic Julia Roberts and strapping Brit Clive Owen, play a dangerous high stakes confidence game with and against worthy castmates and adversaries Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti. The movie’s chronology-fracturing structure and complex subject matter demand the viewer’s undivided attention, ultimately rewarding if occasionally confusing along the way. “Duplicity” plays like the prettier, lighter and frothier version of Tony Gilroy’s last offering, “Michael Clayton.” Gilroy makes movies for adults, about adults complete with histories and baggage and depth, and this one’s more fizzy fun than any synopsis (or any of his previous films) might suggest. They don’t make movies like this any more; honestly, they hardly ever did. Would that they had. 1963’s classic “Charade” might be its closest spiritual progenitor, sleek and stylish and smart as a whip. Avoid reading any spoilers; the twists are just terrific, and the less you know going in, the better.