Reviews by PvtCaboose91

It's delightful to believe that one of Dr. Seuss' novels has finally been successfully made into a movie. After the atrocious Cat in the Hat I was unenthusiastic to approach another movie adaptation of a Seuss novel. I am happy to report that Horton Hears a Who! is a fantastic, entertaining movie that is guaranteed to provide entertainment for the whole family.

Horton (voiced by Jim Carrey) is an elephant enjoying life in the Jungle of Nool. One morning while Horton is having his bath, he becomes convinced that he is hearing tiny voices coming from a microscopic speck of dust. Horton is confident that there is an infinitesimal world living inside that speck of dust and vows to protect the small community from the harsh jungle that surrounds them. The animals around him believe that Horton is going insane as they can't hear these supposed voices. But of course Horton is in fact right: in that speck of dust lies the town of Whoville. But it becomes apparent that the entire population is vulnerable to destruction with Horton being their only hope. As the disaster is about to strike, Horton sets off on a journey to find a safe place for the town of Whoville.

Horton Hears a Who! is animation at its best. Like all films from companies like Pixar and Dreamworks we have come to expect nothing but computer generated animation of the highest order. Here we have superb looking animals, realistic terrains and inventive cinematography. All the images are bright and colourful. It's all extremely eye-catching and fun to watch.

This sublime animation is accompanied by the accomplished voice cast. Jim Carrey isn't as overzealous as he usually is. Being an animation film his over-the-top antics wouldn't be as powerful. He still puts on a number of peculiar, wacky voices throughout the film. I thought that Carrey did as exceptional job. Steve Carell is another actor famous for overacting and being silly. Here, he is restricted to more childish humour but he is still given quality lines of dialogue to work with.

Horton Hears a Who! also contains a fairly decent screenplay. Throughout the movie there are a number of great laughs, funny lines and amusing situations. I will admit that the laughs weren't always first-rate. There is no abundance of great laughs unfortunately. Even after saying that, I will also admit that I found some of the gags quite hilarious. The kids will definitely appreciate the over-the-top mannerisms of some of the animals. For their age range they just need pretty pictures to look at to ensure they don't get bored. I can assure you that the kids won't get bored.

I liked the whole style of the film. The Dr. Seuss nature of the film is retained; there's rhyming narration, enlightening characters and a kid-friendly atmosphere. I cannot judge how faithful the film is to its source material because I haven't read the book for several years. From what I remember the filmmakers made a harmonious transition from book to film.

Horton Hears a Who! is simple family entertainment. It's corny, predictable and clichéd; however at least it's a fun film that guarantees the interest of a young child for its duration. It succeeds in getting its target audience interested while also inserting laughs that ensure an adult (or teen) will have a suitably fun time as well.

I still remember when I was a tender age of 3 and first saw The Lion King on the big screen. When it was released on VHS it became a film I watched almost everyday. I would not be alone in saying that this film was an essential part of my early childhood. Because I had watched this film so much I have basically committed every scene to memory.

It had been about 5-10 years since I last watched this brilliant Disney movie. Needless to say, a re-screening was highly necessary because of how powerful this film was on my childhood years. The Lion King was first released in 1994. Now the film is regarded as a classic. Currently as a teenager I can say that this film still has the same impact and power despite what age range you have reached. As a child you appreciate the slapstick humour on screen. When characters do amusing antics the kids will have a good laugh. Of course they don't know what is going on most of the time. In later years the magic is still present. You can devour the film for its plot and clever script. You can analyse how innovative the animation is. And yet, you can still laugh at the mannerisms of the animals.

The Lion King is the story of a young lion cub named Simba (voiced by both Thomas and Broderick) who is heir to the throne of Pride Rock now run by his father Mufasa (Jones). But Simba is forced into exile when he is at the receiving end of a treacherous, deceptive plot courtesy of his jealous uncle Scar (Irons). After the death of Mufasa the kingdom is now ruled by Scar who will essentially spell doom for Pride Rock. While Simba lives another life he becomes the unlikely friends of a meerkat named Timon (Lane) and a warthog named Pumbaa (Sabella). But as Simba's rightful kingdom is crumbling due to its poor leadership, his past returns and leads him to his rightful destiny of becoming king.

The Lion King has a fairly straight-forward plot that will work on the surface for the kids. As you grow older you look past its pretty pictures and see something a lot deeper than you would have originally remembered. In a nutshell, the film is loosely a Shakespearean drama rich in themes of jealousy, deception, betrayal, murder and redemption. In essence this formula we have seen countless times before. It's just not as noticeable because of its pretty new packaging for the clichés to breed inside. Of course this is a children's film so these clichés and formulaic plot points can be excused.

The Lion King is one of the cleverest Disney films in existence. Its appeal stretches to each and every age range. The film has its adorable moments, hilarious moments and of course the intense or tragic moments. This is not your average Disney movie at all!

The most memorable image for me was the introduction of the renowned Timon and Pumbaa. These two were a particular favourite of mine when I was a youngster. Nathan Lane is a piece of perfect casting. His excellent lines of dialogue had me in stitches. The rest of the voice cast are outstanding. Jeremy Irons is another stand-out as the sadistic, evil Scar. Many of his lines are memorable because of how brilliantly he delivers them.

The animation is indeed incredible even after all these years. The film is breathtaking in its amazing images shown using simple animation techniques. Naturally, the cherry on top is the music. Elton John contributed to the music here. In addition to Elton we also have Tim Rice and Hans Zimmer collaborating to produce the music, songs and score. Do you expect this to go wrong?

The Lion King is a treasure chest rich in nostalgic memories from my childhood. It has been so many years but this film is still one of my favourites. The Lion King is the fundamental embodiment of a children's animation film. Laughs, clever characters, witty dialogue and great animation. If you haven't seen this for several years I suggest another screening is required. You will become addicted once again.

John Ford was one of the many luminaries of the western genre. With one of his final western films, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is truly one of the most elegant westerns in cinematic history. The two principal actors featured here are enough to guarantee unfathomable success.

Set in the Wild West, James Stewart plays a United States senator named Ransom Stoddard who travels to the town of Shinbone to pay respects to one of his old friends. Newspaper reporters begin speculating about the senator's business in such an insignificant western town. Ransom concedes to the press and decides to share his story. Subsequently the film is a series of extravagant flashbacks that shed light on Ransom's close friendship with a cowboy named Tom Doniphon (Wayne). His friendship begins after Ransom is beaten badly and robbed by a group of outlaws lead by the renowned Liberty Valance (Marvin). Vowing revenge, Ransom utilises his skills as a lawyer in an attempt to clean up the west without using violence. He teaches those in need how to read and write. His use of literature and words makes him a respected member of the community. However he realises that the west is not controlled by law and order but by murder and violence. Cowboys and gunslingers take the law into their own hands as they decide who lives and who dies. Ransom's story then uncovers how his political career became so successful after he became known as "the man who shot Liberty Valance".

A quality western is only guaranteed if there is a stellar plot. In this case, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance has what could be the best plot for a western I have ever seen. The 50s and 60s were certainly the decades dominated by loads of successful westerns. It's impossible to forget westerns helmed by Sergio Leone, or westerns that starred such stars as Clint Eastwood, Gary Cooper or John Wayne. These three men were the essential embodiment of a western protagonist.

With this film, John Wayne plays a fairly original role. Wayne still has the baggy trousers, the trademark walk, the recognisable facial expressions and the fast gun-touting skills. Despite this pile of conventions his character is explored to be a man of more moral depth. His portrayal is engaging and engrossing. I found it easy to get into the movie due to his dynamic performance. Because John Wayne was so famous during the period of the film's release this is an offer too tempting to resist. On top of this we have a straight-forward, intriguing plot and one of the world's all-time greatest actors: James Stewart. When this film was made it was clear that Stewart was aging. This doesn't stop him from delivering one of his most memorable roles to date. He still has his charm and charisma now mixed with bravery and honour. It's very easy to empathise with his character.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance of course has the usual conventional bad guys: they are dirty, have bad teeth and look very unsavoury. Although a contemporary audience would usually find this far too stereotypical you must remember that this was made during the period of the westerns. It was tradition to have these characters included.

The film is topped off admirably with smart direction and an exciting score. John Ford will always deliver when it comes to the western genre. Each director made their own mark on the genre. Each director has a different way of staging the action, placing the camera and building up intensity. Ford is a natural when it comes to this style of movie.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance was pasted and criticised upon original release. Decades later and the film is now considered as a classic and one of cinema's greatest westerns. It depends on your taste in film whether you will enjoy this one or not. Especially if you like westerns, this is a film you cannot afford to miss.

Lions for Lambs marks the first feature from the now Tom Cruise owned company of United Artists. Despite its poor box office profit and heavy pasting, I found the movie to actually be quite decent.

The film is three different stories told in parts throughout the movie. The main story is concerned with action in Afghanistan by U.S. soldiers. Two soldiers end up wounded and vulnerable on the top of a snowy mountain. Low on ammo and low on energy, their superiors back at base do what they can to launch a rescue mission. The next story is about a journalist (Streep) who visits a congressman (Cruise) to interview him for a story. The final tale is about a young student (Garfield) who arrives one morning in the office of a university professor (Redford) to discuss his future among other things.

The film is straight-up dialogue, talking and exposition. Those expecting anything action-orientated will be disappointed. The lack of action was the biggest problem. I know it was meant to make a political statement and not be an entertainment piece, but it's rather impossible to do so towards the audience by just using scenes of dialogue. The performances were good and the script was intelligent, but the whole thing feels so boring. Black Hawk Down, for example, made an exceptional statement with scene of action and dialogue.

The lack of an actual meaty story is another problem. There are 3 stories to tell, but without an actual solid plot to drive these tales it feels very hollow and empty. Instead it relies on the audience's knowledge of the war on terror as a basis for the plot. So what will happen in 20 years when it's revisited long after the war on terror is over? Some who approach it may think of it as an entertainment piece, but they will be clueless about which war it is meant to be symbolising. Such other political war films like Black Hawk Down give the viewer insight into what has happened and what is planned, rather than diving straight into the action. Still, I liked the performance and the precious little action was kind of satisfying (although the special effects looked a bit dodgy).

Tom Cruise's performance wasn't too bad. As a congressman, he does okay. But he just appears to be Ethan Hunt behind a desk discussing political issues. Meryl Streep was one of the stronger actresses in the film. She makes a very stern journalist. As for Robert Redford (who also directed), well I think he did a pretty good job.

It's a shame that Lions for Lambs didn't turn out as good as some other dialogue driven war films like Ed Zwick's Courage Under Fire. Instead we're fed a bunch of biased American propaganda that attempts to be more than it actually is.

It's not powerful enough to make a worthwhile political statement, and it's not enjoyable enough to be considered an entertainment piece. I don't really know how to describe it, really. Worth seeing, but one of 2007's biggest disappointments.

Most people were very sceptical about Scorsese approaching a remake of a highly successful original Asian movie. Personally I really liked the original Asian film Infernal Affairs and was hoping Scorsese could once again pull off his magic.

The Departed is an infinitely better movie than its Asian counter-part in my opinion. I found myself completely engaged in this movie from start to finish. The Departed has all the same key plot points as the Hong Kong picture that spawned it.

For this film Scorsese is not focusing on the usual Italian American gangsters; instead the film is set in Boston where the Irish gangsters dominate the mob and the police. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Billy Costigan; a man on the wrong side of the tracks who has mobster blood in him. Billy graduates from the Massachusetts State Police Academy with plans to bury his mob heritage. But those higher up in the police force have other plans. Because of Billy's background he's the perfect man to infiltrate the Irish mob. Billy is assigned to work undercover (extremely confidentially) and penetrate a group of Irish gangsters lead by infamous Irish mobster Frank Costello (Nicholson). Billy's mission: to acquire enough evidence to have Frank Costello arrested.

Unbeknownst to the police, Frank Costello's protégée Colin Sullivan (Damon) is another young cadet who graduates from the police academy with excellent results. Because Colin reaches a position of such power and importance he is the perfect man to be Frank's mole inside the police. New clues lead to some unfortunate discoveries and both sides soon realise that they're being scrutinised by the enemy. Of course both sides do not desire this close scrutiny; each respective side assigning their mole to discover the identity of the other mole.

One of the main elements of The Departed that made it far superior to Infernal Affairs is that Scorsese takes his time to develop the characters. Infernal Affairs moved so fast and contained cryptic dialogue, hence I had no idea what was actually going on. The characters in that film were also poorly distinguished. With this film, we take a deeply penetrating look at the life of each character. Scorsese is never in a rush to get anywhere. If anything this slow pace made the film a lot more fascinating.

The Departed is an incredible crime thriller that also contains some truly breathtaking performances. Leonardo DiCaprio was an actor I had little respect for. Prior to 2006 he was too much of a pretty boy who gets the girl. With this film and Blood Diamond in the same year, DiCaprio produces his best two performances to date. At the Golden Globes he was nominated twice for Best Actor; one for each respective film. What makes DiCaprio so excellent is his deep and confronting portrayal. Billy Costigan is a profoundly insightful, multi-faceted character. At first he displays professionalism. But when he is put undercover he has become the bad boy. I never expect him to pull off such a stunning portrayal after all his 'pretty boy' roles. Matt Damon is every bit as brilliant as DiCaprio. He shows a wide range of emotions and he never strikes a false note. Jack Nicholson is truly electrifying! He plays Costello with an intimidating screen presence. Like each amazing performance, there is believability and vulnerability expressed throughout the film.

The film's screenplay is fantastic. Heavy drama is balanced out with a high level of violence and bloodshed. When Scorsese wants a character's death to be violent he doesn't hesitate to add endless amounts of blood into a shot. After decades of moviemaking and decades of making the best quality crime films around, Martin Scorsese finally scored an Oscar at the Academy Awards for his extraordinary directing. The film clocks at approximately 140 minutes; however director Scorsese maintains focus and concentration for every frame that appears in the film. It's impossible to fault the filmmaking in any way.

I particularly liked how classy its style is. There's catchy music played frequently, compelling drama and violent action. You know this is definitely a film by Martin Scorsese.

The Departed could be Scorsese's best film. Personally I loved his movies like Taxi Driver, GoodFellas and Casino. Like the films he made beforehand, Scorsese does not disappoint. He continues to remind us why he is the guru of the crime thriller genre. The only drawback on The Departed would be its shocking and depressing conclusion. Although because of the film's nature and style it was almost to be expected.

Overall, this is a thriller you simply cannot afford to miss. Winner of several Academy Awards including Best Picture and Best Director.

The sci-fi genre has resulted in the release of several absurd space films. You can forget about Hollywood blockbusters like Armageddon, Pitch Black, Deep Impact, Lost in Space, Mission to Mars and several others. Not since Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey has there been a real space movie that captures the wonder of space; that captures how mesmerising and stimulating the experience would be. My prayers were finally answered when Ron Howard was given the green light to make this phenomenal film.

In a nutshell: Ron Howard's Apollo 13 is utterly exceptional. Director Howard has been able to meticulously recreate such an extraordinary scientific occurrence in stunning detail that firmly places the viewer inside the spaceship with the men who are in mortal peril.

Apollo 13 is a film that tells a dramatic account of the true danger that three frail humans faced while in outer space when an explosion on board their vessel cast doubt on them ever reaching it back to Earth. When the explosion occurs and the danger becomes real, the scientists back at NASA would not rest until the crew were brought back home safely.

We follow the three protagonists up in space whose lives are challenged, we follow the NASA scientists back on Earth working to bring the crew home, and we follow those on the home front who are worried sick about their loved ones: three different perspectives of the one heart-stopping event.

Ron Howard's direction is just exceptional; because of the skilful directing I actually forgot it was a movie due to its realism and flawless special effects. It's very hard to believe that this film was made when CGI was still in its youth. Of course Howard's direction was also accompanied by a spectacular cast.

The one thing that struck me about Apollo 13 was its striking realism and believability despite an abundance of well-known actors. Tom Hanks emerged as the principal character here. Hanks is one of the world's greatest actors and he is capable of convincingly pulling off any role that falls into his lap. I couldn't think of anyone better suited to this job. His portrayal is both powerful and moving. Needless to say, each and every other cast member did their job to a high standard. Gary Sinise was a particular surprise as one of those present at NASA during the crisis.

I will admit that the film's opening is fairly slow-paced. It demands patience from its audience. Because when the action moves into space it's extremely hard to drag your eyes away from the screen. In space the film is brimming with realism and an engrossing sequence of events.

I thought one of the most significant things that made this movie so brilliant was its spectacular special effects. I have not seen special effects of this high standard since Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Everything was scrupulously detailed: the space ship (both interior and exterior), as well as the interior of the NASA building. The exterior of the Apollo 13 is particularly well executed and almost impossible to fault. For a film of the 90's this high level of quality is extremely rare.

Apollo 13 scores higher than any space-oriented Hollywood blockbuster fluff, and firmly positions itself amongst the best movies ever made. This filmmaking is tremendously close to perfection. Just think that it was only about 40 years ago when the world held their breath while watching footage of Apollo 13's perilous situation in space. If this film was not a true story, I couldn't have believed it was possible.

The Monty Python troupe scored much success with their long-running TV series Monty Python's Flying Circus. This introduced the world to a very unique style of British humour, and also gave the Monty Python troupe a big name. This was a positive when it came time to release the first film outing of the Monty Python gang.

And Now For Something Completely Different is essentially a very amusing anthology of famous, memorable (very silly) skits from their former TV show that are given an elaborate reworking. The production values are a whole lot better and the scripts have also been altered. During some of their memorable skits the higher production values equalled improvement over the original TV show version. However some of the more classic Monty Python moments were of higher standard when first broadcast in Flying Circus.

And Now For Something Completely Different has got all the basics...Dead Parrot, Lumberjack Song, Upper Class Twit of the Year, Self Defence Against Fresh Fruit, Marriage Guidance and several others, so you know you're all set. Much of the dynamic skits are of the usual outrageously hilarious Monty Python standard we've come to appreciate over the years; random humour, cerebral humour and slapstick humour. If you like the comedy style utilised by the Pythons you will without doubt have a tremendously fun time. If you're not a fan of the Pythons this is probably one to avoid.

Unless you count the numerous sub-plots that vary between skits, there is absolutely no discernable plot or storyline to speak of. The whole film is an extended episode of the former TV show; funny skits that are stitched together with a few transitional shots that take the random humour even further (for the most part these transitional shots are just random images of people saying "And now for something completely different"). I think it's pretty much impossible to get sick of such great Monty Python skits, and in my opinion it's impossible not to find the Python troupe's amusing antics anything short of hilarious.

I have been a fan of Monty Python for years and I am never disappointed in their unique humour. And Now For Something Completely Different is a fantastic film that supplies a number of great laughs and can make a rainy afternoon go by in no time. This is a reminder of the outstanding work the team were capable of producing when they were in their prime. The first Monty Python film is a top-notch effort on everyone's part. For the Python fans, this is absolutely unmissable. After the success of this film the Pythons were then given the green light to make Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Apocalypse Now is a genuinely revolutionary war movie from legendary director Francis Ford Coppola. The film is a confronting, haunting war epic that is stimulating and monumental. Not only is it a fantastic war movie but it's also the most honest account of the futility of war.

Loosely based on Joseph Conrad's classic novella 'Heart of Darkness'; Apocalypse Now is a film that tells a story set in the Vietnam battlefields. The year is 1969 and the Americans are still battling the on-going Vietnam War. U.S. Special Forces Captain Willard (Sheen) is sent on a confidential mission that officially 'does not exist - nor will it ever exist' to terminate a renegade Green Beret named Walter Kurtz (Brando) who has established himself as a God amongst a local tribe. Captain Willard travels up the Nung River in a U.S. Navy Patrol Boat into Cambodia to carry out his mission. He is accompanied by a faction of soldiers who don't have a clue about the nature of the mission due to its high level of confidentiality. As Willard descends into the jungle, he is slowly taken by the jungle's mesmerising powers. As he battles the insanity around him, the journey slowly makes Willard more and more like the man he was sent to kill.

Apocalypse Now is a harrowing war film that will always be distinguished due to its power as well as its hypnotic, virtually unsurpassed brilliance. The unnerving, unforgettable images only heighten the film's reputation as one of the most graphic war films ever made. It will take days, perhaps weeks, to get over the haunting visual images that are a prominent element of this outstanding movie.

The production was plagued with troubles; including wild weather that destroyed the sets, and the elongated production period due to unforseen consequences. Regardless of this troubled production director Francis Ford Coppola delivers an extraordinary, controversial addition to the multitude of Vietnam War movies. And of course the film was shot beautifully on location; showcasing some utterly gorgeous landscape and some eye-catching dense jungles as well.

However the film is about 150 minutes in length, and unfortunately outstays its welcome and loses the attention of the viewer at about the two hour mark. Of course, it was still tremendously well made but I felt that some trimming would have been necessary. And that's only the theatrical version - there's also a 200-minute 'Redux' cut.

Although my attention was thrown a few times as I was watching the movie, Coppola's directing always ensured there was something fascinating going on during the film. This could be a battle, an absorbing dialogue scene or some haunting voice-over narration.

Martin Sheen makes a very credible American soldier. There is always something about him that keeps the audience enthralled during the scenes of heavy drama. Marlon Brando had already made a name for himself after such films as The Godfather and On the Waterfront. Surprisingly his role is very minor in this movie. Nonetheless his performance is superb. During his final monologue it felt like he was a man on the edge; someone who is very close to insanity. His credibility is never thrown. As Brando aged he only became better. The supporting cast is a mixed bunch of now-famous actors including Robert Duvall, Laurence Fishburne, Harrison Ford and Dennis Hopper. All of these actors made an appearance before they became really famous. With this film they are given the opportunity to display talent while still youthful.

Apocalypse Now is a stunning film that will always be not only one of the greatest war movies, but also one of the greatest movies in cinematic history. This Vietnam tale is one that does justice to its source material. Be warned that the film is quite painfully long.

American Beauty is a virtuoso, provocative, multi-faceted, incisive and unconventional drama that takes a comprehensive glimpse at the American dream gone wrong. I had approached this movie with a great deal of hesitation. There were reviews aplenty from people who praised this film as a wonderful masterpiece of the highest order. Before watching this film I could never have believed that making a film of such stature and power would actually be possible.

American Beauty is a magnificent psychological drama that takes a satirical look at the American community. The characters are versatile and intricate. The movie demonstrates the darkest things of a person's personality. Even though the characters do some truly appalling things the audience can still be involved with the characters because although bad, they are still shown as unexaggerated and human.

Lester Burnham (Spacey) is a forty-something year old suburban father who is depressed and unhappy. He has a wife (Carolyn; played by Benning), who is looking for sexual pleasure elsewhere, and he has a daughter (Jane; played by Birch) who hates her father and falls in love with their new next door neighbour Ricky (Bentley). Lester's job is leading nowhere when his company decides they have to cut back on their staff due to money issues. Lester also becomes fascinated and infatuated with one of Jane's friends; Angela (Suvari). Lester's behaviour drives him further and further away from his family that already detest him. From there, we follow each family member who are on their own emotional journey of life.

American Beauty is an extremely powerful drama carried by some superb performances. The acting is truly amazing with Kevin Spacey in a performance that won him an Oscar. Spacey has the look and feel of your usual stereotypical suburban American father. He may seem conventional but these stereotypes are explored; revealing a personality with a lot more depth and complexity. There are several horrible character traits he exhibits; however it's impossible not to empathise with him. His family drifts away from him and we can genuinely feel his motivations.

The driving force behind the film is not only the performances but the screenplay. Each line of dialogue is intriguing and enthralling. There is never a wasted minute during the film's duration because of how meticulously the dialogue was written; intelligent, fascinating and profoundly insightful.

The direction, which also gained an Oscar, is utterly flawless. Sam Mendes compliments the great screenplay with equally accomplished directing. Each scene is both engaging and meaningful; it gives the audience further insight into the characters that are being examined so deeply. On top of this, it's compelling storytelling as well as being occasionally humorous.

American Beauty is a lot more complex and eloquent than it sounds; it's a brilliant and amazing story that constructs an indication of the sad reality of contemporary American society. I never expected a film like this to be as brilliant as it turned out to be. It's relevant to today's society, it carries a good message about life and it is extremely potent. Winner of 5 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Cinematography and Best Writing.

Judd Apatow's company have been popular and successful in recent years. Face it: now the man is going to be known as the God of contemporary adult sex comedies. Personally I think the first few films he made were of a higher standard than his more recent work (I was slightly disappointed with Knocked Up and Superbad). Thankfully by altering the typical formula, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is one of the funniest movies of 2008.

Peter Bretter (Segel) is an unsuccessful musician who does music for a TV show called Crime Scene. The main star of Crime Scene is his girlfriend Sarah Marshall (Bell) with whom he has been together with for over 5 years. But the relationship between Sarah and Peter slowly disintegrates, resulting in them splitting up. At first Peter is significantly disheartened about living life without Sarah as his partner. After an unsuccessful burst of womanising and one-night stands he comes to the realisation that he love life is now ruined because of his heart-breaking split with Sarah. Peter's brother Brian (Hader) suggests that Peter takes a vacation to take his mind off everything. Predictably, when Peter takes himself over to Hawaii for a vacation he is confronted by his worst nightmare: his former girlfriend Sarah staying in the same hotel with her new British rock-star boyfriend Aldous (Brand).

Because of the talent involved you can guarantee that Forgetting Sarah Marshall will deliver the laughs. I hadn't seen the trailer before watching the movie so a majority of the laughs were fresh for me. Maybe if you've seen the trailer too many times the whole film won't be as great.

The movie has a surprisingly high film value in addition to just an entertainment value. Instead of just focusing on the laughs the filmmakers also focused on drama. I have seen many comedies that try to hard to create hilarious situations for the actors. In this case there was focus on this and creating something more than just your average sex comedy.

Jason Segel not only starred in the lead role but he also wrote the screenplay. This is a bonus because the screenwriter can create the character on screen that he imagined while putting the film on paper. His performance encapsulates everything a guy feels after a serious relationship is terminated. This is far from Oscar material but at times his emotions were very palpable and naturalistic. Of course, maintaining the tone of the film there is a lot of overzealous crying as well. There are a number of Judd Apatow regulars that appear in the film's cast. Most notably is Jonah Hill who has been a favourite with Apatow in recent productions. And then of course recognition has to go to Kristen Bell for being a very realistic Sarah Marshall. Like all the cast members, this isn't Oscar material; just a bit of overacting and hilarious mannerisms to guarantee a bunch of laughs.

The director Nicholas Stoller is able to keep the laughs constant without an awkward abundance of them. Particular credit must go to director Stoller for staging many of the scenes in very creative ways. I'm sure it would have been difficult filming when the action moves out to the water at times.

I thought one of the film's only real downfalls is that the film is slightly formulaic and clichéd. That being said, the film manages to stay away from about 75% of the typical clichés found in this genre. Beware that there is plenty of profanity and lots of sex scenes. This includes graphic moaning, full frontal nudity (of a guy) and graphic discussions of a sexual nature. You know this is definitely a movie from producer Judd Apatow.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall is everything we've come to expect from a modern adult sex comedy. Within the film you'll find a large assortment of memorable quotes and raunchy gags. If you enjoy other Apatow films like The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up you will have a blast watching this one.