Now Playing

Here's a look at the films now playing in theaters.

Immortals

Starring: Henry Cavill, Mickey Rourke, Stephen Dorff, John Hurt, Luke Evans, and Frieda Pinto

Synopsis: If you liked "300," this is for you. It's all CGI backgrounds, swords, sandals, odd costuming choices, fake accents, fake acting, and LOTS of bloody violence. If you're concerned about story, this isn't the film for you. There is plenty of action, but it's hard to see what the point it. I don't know a ton about Greek mythology, so it was a little harder to follow the parts pertaining to the Gods. That being said, I don't think the movie was really meant to be that informative. It's pure fantasy... or at least someone's version of a fantasy. If you're looking for a couple hours to kick back, watch some ridiculous action, and laugh a bit of unintentional comedy, this is a pretty good time. I didn't love "300," or even really like it, but I would say "300" is a much better film than this. The dialogue is beyond ridiculous, Mickey Rourke and Stephen Dorff have no place in this kind of film, and the point is totally muddled. It's a very hammy film with some ridiculously over-the-top violence.

Rating: R for sequences of strong bloody violence, and a scene of sexuality.

Verdict: One star out of four

Jack and Jill

Starring: Adam Sandler, Katie Holmes, and Al Pacino

Synopsis: There is a moment near the climax of “Billy Madison” where Adam Sandler’s character, competing in a trivia section, gives a weird rambling answer to the question asked. The principal, who serves as host of the competition replies, “Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.” It was a classic Sandler moment, and I couldn’t help but think of that response and how true it felt as I watched “Jack and Jill.” We’re long past the time when Sandler has given us great films, but it is offensive to cinema in general to even call his latest film passable. It isn’t. And it’s oddly marketed to younger audiences even though the subject matter seems sort of inappropriate for kids. “Jack and Jill” is a misfire so great you begin to marvel at the fact it made it through the creative process at all. It marks a significant decline in Sandler’s ability to make a film and sell it to an audience. The “plot” in this film really exists to set up a series of spastic interactions between Sandler and himself, so I won’t go into too much detail here. The film is about twins — both played by Sandler — who have a contentious relationship. As Jack, Sandler is kind of a self-absorbed jerk. As Jill, Sandler is a weird-looking, overly needy, self-absorbed black hole. Not hard to tell how these two are related… In addition to Sandler’s dual role — and the fact he pretty much dominates all the scenes of the film that way — there is a parade of celebrity cameos. In addition, Katie Homes plays Jack’s long-suffering wife and Al Pacino plays an ultra creepy version of himself. The film is a series of sight gags, irresponsible and racist comments and wacky moments. All of it is designed to get to the root of the problem, which I gather seems to be the fact that Jack is annoyed by and doesn’t appreciate his sister. I felt the same way, so apparently in this film I could have qualified as a villain too. There are awkward scenes at Lakers games, on a cruise ship, around the Thanksgiving table and on “The Price Is Right.” Basically, the whole film is designed to showcase Sandler’s “range.” Frequently comedians get the bug to play dress up, and rarely does it work well. Eddie Murphy is perhaps the best at it, having delivered some enjoyable films like “The Nutty Professor” in addition to hideous bombs like “Norbit.” Sandler seems to have been tickled with the idea of trying it out himself, making yet another muddled film that serves as an excuse to tell “jokes” and hang out with his friends. He even gets others — such as David Spade — in on the dress up “fun.” There are two things that sort of work for the film. First, it is fascinating to watch Pacino’s performance and to wonder what drew him to the film. Clearly he’s at ease making fun of himself — which led to the best celebrity cameo involving Johnny Depp at a Lakers’ game. But it’s unclear why Pacino was drawn to the role. He provides some of the laughs, but often in an oddly creepy way or at the expense of some of his classic roles, such as “The Godfather.” You’d like to say it’s all in good fun, but there’s little fun to be hard with this film. For me, the best part of the film was young Rohan Chand, who played Jack’s adopted son Gary. He had some of the funniest lines in the film and seemed to be genuinely enjoying being in a movie. He was too young to realize the horror show being constructed around him, and he made me smile on occasion. That may not seem like high praise, but it is for a film that’s as epic a misfire as “Jack and Jill.” “Jack and Jill” was an early frontrunner for the Golden Raspberries, and having seen the film I know why. It’s hard to imagine we’re going to get a film that’s worse than this thrust upon the public for the remainder of 2011, although, that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

Rating: PG for crude and sexual humor, language, comic violence and brief smoking.

Verdict: Zero stars out of four

J. Edgar

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts, and Judi Dench

Synopsis: Three years ago, I was in the bag for Clint Eastwood the director. He had a string of films in the first decade of this Century that I thought were incredible. With "Million Dollar Baby," "Mystic River," "Flags of Our Fathers," "Letters from Iwo Jima," "Gran Torino," and "Changeling," Eastwood put together quite a resume. That hasn't been true the past few years. "Invictus" was a story that should have been great and emotionally resonate, but it just wasn't. In fact, the ESPN "30 for 30" documentary on the same subject nailed that emotional resonance in half the time. Eastwood followed that up with the utterly forgettable "Hereafter," and now comes "J. Edgar." On paper, the film should be an instant Oscar contender. Eastwood is a great director, it's a biopic, and DiCaprio took the lead role. But somehow, this film just doesn't work. It's boring, oddly constructed, and seems to focus too much on one particular aspect of Hoover's life and one particular perspective on his work. The script was written by Dustin Lance Black — who penned the script to "Milk" — and it's no surprise the film focuses on J. Edgar Hoover's repressed life, curious relationship with his mother, and life-long bond with his associate Clyde Tolson. There is a lot of time devoted to this aspect, which remains little more than a rumor. The exact nature of their relationship is unknown, but that doesn't stop the script from speculating and making this a big focus of the film. Also disappointing to me was the way the film is constructed. It's completely non-linear and seems to come solely from the perspective of Hoover, who is dictating his life story to a series of young agents. In some ways, I suppose the movie fits the man. Hoover should be remembered for his advancements in law enforcement and forensic technology. But, like so many, the megalomaniacal aspects of his personality overshadowed some of his accomplishments and drove him down some dark, self-destructive paths. The film is an interesting character study, but it's hard to tell what we're supposed to make of the man when it's all done. This is a movie that I had high hopes for. I thought it would be great and a solid award contender, but it just isn't. DiCaprio does a decent job, but the movie feels a little too muddled to have any long-term effect this awards season.

Rating: R for brief strong language.

Verdict: Two stars out of four

Upcoming Releases:

Nov. 18 — "Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 1," "Happy Feet 2," "The Descendants"

Nov. 23 — "The Muppet Movie," "The Artist," "Hugo," "A Dangerous Method," "Arthur Christmas"