Yesterday (May 23, 2011), marked one year since “The End” aired. It has been 365 days since the final episode of “Lost,” a fact I had no idea about until late in the day. Interestingly enough though, I recently had a revelation about the end of the show and why some people hated it. I have heard a lot in the past year about how bad the ending was, but I loved it. I knew going in that there would still be some lingering questions. I thought the ending they chose was the perfect way to end the series.

The main bone of contention is that there are questions that were not answered. These people were watching a different show than I was. Yes, things were not answered, but to me, the show was never about knowing everything there was to know. I loved those questions and I spent hours upon hours online looking at theories and talking through my own with my friends. Despite the endless hours I spent on the mysteries of the island, that is not what defined my enjoyment of the show.

The survivors of the crash of Oceanic 815 were what the show was really about. If you look at season one, it focused heavily on who these people were. All the flashbacks were there to fill in the background information that helped define the character. The show was the characters’ experience on the island—not the viewer’s experience—on the island. Leading up to the finale, I heard executive producers, Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse, say that they would answer a question if it was important to the characters. That right there tells you everything you need to know about the show. The questions, while fun, were not the driving force behind the show.

That is why I loved the ending. It was not about knowing everything there is to know about the island, DHARMA, and all those strange things we saw in six seasons. It was always going to be about the people we were watching. Strong, good characters beat out mysteries any day of the week. To those who hated the ending and saw it as a waste of six years of their lives, think back really hard to season one and tell me if the show was about an island or the survivors of a plane crash?

Well, the summer movie season is upon us. There will be a big name release every week for the next four months. A few weeks ago the summer opened with “Thor,” the latest in a very long line of comic book movies. It is also the first of at least four comic book movies opening this summer.

Thor (Chris Hemsworth), the arrogant son of Oden (Anthony Hopkins) is the god of thunder. With his mighty hammer he is unstoppable and that combined with his arrogance leads to him reigniting a war with the Ice Giants, a race his father beat a long time ago. As punishment Oden strips him of hammer and banishes Thor to Earth. As he casts out his son, Oden sends the hammer to Earth as well with the words “Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.” The hammer crashes to earth and no one can pull it from where it landed. When Thor lands on earth, he encounters Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), a scientist studying unusual phenomena in a small town. Thor is forced to change his ways and learn to live on Earth if he ever hopes to wield the hammer every again.

Chris Hemsworth, was actually pretty good as Thor. He was really funny as well as great in the action scenes. As much as I do not want to say it because it is super cliché, but this is a classic fish out of water story. We spend the first part of the movie seeing Thor in Asgard where he is at home and has power. When he is thrown out he has lost his power and is in a place where everything is different. This is where much of the comedy comes from. There were moments where it could have been too much, but Hemsworth is able to pull of these moments and make them genuinely funny.

Despite winning an Oscar, Natalie Portman was out of place in the movie. I was really not convinced with her performance. I understand her purpose in the movie. She has to be there to make the end of the movie more powerful, but her role never amounts to anything more than that.

I was worried going into this movie that it was not going to be good. There is a lot riding on this movie. If this movie or “Captain America: The First Avenger” fail, “The Avengers” fails as well. Since Joss Whedon is writing and directing “Avengers,” I want to see the movie succeed. I hope that “Captain America” is as good (if not better) because I have a lot emotionally invested in how these movies do. That being said, there is a lot to like about this movie, it is fun, action packed and funnier than I thought.

8 out of 10
115 min
Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence

When it comes to writing reviews, I need a starting point, that one thing in the movie that sways me one way or the other. In any movie this could be the acting, a certain scene or some aspect of the movie that helps to shape the review. In the past few months, I have been jotting down my thoughts in a notebook so that I have something to refer to when I write reviews. The page for “Hanna” is blank because I could not come up with why.

When she was young, Hanna’s (Saoirse Ronan) father Erik (Eric Bana) took her away to protect her. He raised her to be an assassin and taught her the skills she would need to survive. Marissa (Cate Blanchett) and others at the CIA will do whatever it takes to get Hanna and Erik.

If I need a jumping off point to get the review done, then the action is as good a place to start as any. There were some pretty intense action scenes in the movie. Hanna is a trained assassin. She has been working all her life to gain these skills in order to survive, whether that is hunting for food or evading and killing CIA agents who are after her.

Hanna is an interesting character and Saoirse Ronan plays her with a hint of innocence, which is tough when the character is a killer. She is cold and calculating. Her childhood was made up of training, so her social skills are lacking. At one point, Hanna meets a girl her own age and the two form a sort of friendship. Hanna, the killer, is seen as Hanna, the () year-old girl.

Neither the action nor the character of Hanna helped me form a coherent opinion about the movie. It is frustrating for me to sit here and not be able to explain why I liked it. The action was cool, but not outstanding and the character of Hanna was interesting, but the performance was not mind blowing. I should give this movie a 5, because looking at the review, I thought it was “good not great.” There is something about the movie that I really enjoyed. The time flew by and I was toughly engaged, but I just cannot figure out exactly what it was. My hope is that when I rewatch the movie I will be able to see what it is I missed. If I can figure it out, I will let you know.

8 out of 10
Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, some sexual material and language.
111min

Two posts below this one is a movie that had a cool concept and failed to live up to that concept. Now we have another movie where the concept is what put my butt in the theater more so than the actors or director. This time though, I went in expecting one movie and got a completely different one.

One day Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up to find himself in another man’s body. He is on a train sitting across from Christina (Michelle Monaghan). As he tries to make sense of what is happening, the train blows up. Suddenly he is in what appears to be a capsule. Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga) appears on screen and tells him that he is part of a program that is trying to stop a series of terrorist attacks by entering the mind of a man who died in the first attack that morning. Think “Groundhog Day” with terrorists.

The movie was actually pretty good. In this case the concept and the story work well together. The plot was not bogged down with the concept. It is not a love story more than it is a science fiction or crime story. It is well told, well acted and over all a worth a trip to the theater.

If you have not seen the movie, do not read any further because spoilers will follow.

My problem with the movie is the very end. In the end, as expected, Stevens finds the bomber and is able to stop the bomb from going off, therefore thwarting the future attacks. After he stops the bomb, he asks to go back in one more time. He makes it a perfect ending. He and Christina end up kissing and the rest of the train car is happy. The movie freeze frames on that. And that is how it should have ended. Instead, it continues. Colter Stevens has taken over the body of the man and walks off the train with Christina. There are implications that there are now two Colters — one in someone else’s body and one still in the Source Code program. There is a lot that the movie leaves open and that really just bugs me, but not enough to dislike the movie.

8 our of 10
Rated PG-13 for some violence including disturbing images, and for language
93 min

I have no problem admitting I am a geek. Movie geek or Whedonite, I have no problem copping to either. There is nothing wrong with obsession when it is channeled the right way. Sometimes when I go to see a movie, I feel like I should love it. Some movies are right up my alley. So, by all accounts, I should have loved “Paul.” Simon Pegg and Nick
Frost love movies and it has been shown in “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz.” Yet, when I walked out of the theater, I was under whelmed. It was just so-so. A comedy that I should have loved, was just a mediocre movie at best.

Two friends, Graeme (Simon Pegg) and Clive (Nick Frost) decide to cross America and visit all the UFO hot spots. Just outside of Area 51 they run into an alien named Paul (voiced by Seth Rogan). The government is perusing Paul after he broke out of his cell. Graeme and Clive decide to help Paul get off the planet and back home.

Let’s get the good stuff out of the way. Normally I hate Seth Rogan. In the past few years he has become way to overexposed. He was the best part of this movie. At first, I had a problem hearing his voice come out of the digital character, but he actually did a great job of it.

The animation on Paul was amazing. He looked real which is quite the feat considering the nature of the character. In other science fiction movies/TV shows, it is pretty obvious that the aliens are fakes, but Paul felt like he belonged in each and every scene.

So that was the good. Here is the bad. The humor was not that humorous. Much of it came from the fact that Paul was a crude, crass character. The novelty of a CGI character swearing, drinking beer and flicking people off wore off quickly. After that it was just cussing for cussing’s sake. I was over it, but it did not destroy the movie for me.

Some of the humor comes from likes that are from other movies. They are not funny because of the content, but more of “oh, that is from ‘Aliens.’” It does not make the movie funnier. It just makes it more inside for those who have seen movies like “Star Wars” and “Aliens.” Other references like Paul being responsible for writing the character of Fox Mulder from “The X-Files” or being the inspiration for all alien merchandise since he crashed in the 70s were nice, but added nothing to the movie.

I wanted to like this movie. I tried hard to like it as much as everyone else in the theater did, but I could not. It ends up being a decent comedy, but nothing I have not seen before.

6 out of 10
Rated R for language including sexual references, and some drug use.
104 min