This wonderful fantasy tale stars Johnny Depp as a not-quite-real teenager who was built by an eccentric inventor. The old man died before he could finish him, so Edward has knife blades where his fingers would be. A well-meaning Avon lady (Diane Wiest) finds him living alone in his crumbling castle, and brings him home to live with her family, which includes daughter Kim (Winona Ryder). Edward is naive and timid, but so sweet and helpful that he soon becomes the darling of the neighborhood. He is smitten with Kim, which angers her bully of a boyfriend (Anthony Michael Hall).

Diane Wiest is perfect as the ditsy and always-cheerful mom. Ryder is convincing as a selfish and spoiled teen. Hall is the villian you love to hate. The star, of course, is Johnny Depp. As Edward, he is painfully shy and lovelorn; his performance is so heart-wrenchingly delicate that you ache for him in every scene. Covered with white make-up and with only a few words of dialogue, Depp proves he is a very talented actor. The wonderful and quite frail Vincent Price, as Edward’s loving creator, will surely bring a tear to your eye.

This completely unique film blends comedy, fantasy, and romance to make a sentimental fairy tale that both teens and adults will enjoy. It is a heart-breaker; bring your hankie.

Last summer, director Christopher Nolan reinvigorated the BATMAN legend with a character-driven thrill-ride chock full of surprises and endless invention, but the same can’t be said of Bryan Singer’s SUPERMAN RETURNS, which feels like a retread for much of its lethargic and bloated running-time. I can’t say this was a major disappointment since my expectations going in were modest at best, but this thing was sooo shockingly mundane; nothing in this movie stirs up much excitement or comes close to matching the awe and wonder Richard Donner’s film fashioned so exhuberantly.

With few exceptions, the casting is disastrous: Bosworth takes the plucky Lois Lane and imbues her with the sum energy derived from digesting a handful of sleeping pills; Spacey’s Luthor, while more faithful to the source material than previous screen versions, isn’t half as memorable as Gene Hackman’s playful take on the character, and Frank Langella is sooo lackluster a Perry White I’m not even sure he was awake when his scenes were shot. As for Routh, he improved as the film progressed, but he still looks more like Superboy (or, more precisely, RUSHMORE’s Max Fischer) than the Man of Steel. (His adolescent looks and awkward first attempts to mimic Christopher Reeve’s Clark Kent are painful to watch)

The missteps in casting could have been glossed over if the film delivered some truly jaw-dropping scenes of Super-derring-do, but there’s little suspense or excitement to the action set-pieces that seem regurgitated from previous films, and the special-effects — the one area it was reasonable to expect improvement in leaps and bounds — are competent but unambitious and not that big an upgrade from what Donner achieved in 1978. In fact, director Bryan Singer, who did such a fine job with the first two X-MEN films, seems so intent on capturing the style of the Donner classic that he leaves little of his own imprint on SUPERMAN RETURNS. SUPERMAN RETURNS most reminds me of Tim Burton’s “re-imagining” of PLANET OF THE APES; each had heaps of money lavished on them, but both are completely lifeless. And since when did Clark Kent wear glasses as a young boy??

Ultimately, this new SUPERMAN may appeal more to those who didn’t grow up with the Christopher Reeve movies, but at 2 1/2 hours, it may be too slow to become the smash Warner was hoping for; it certainly won’t rule the box-office for 13 consecutive weeks as the 1978 original did. In the end, it’s ironic the filmmakers chose to feature the song “Heart and Soul” when SUPERMAN RETURNS had neither.

Already breaking box-office records with each passing week, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” promises to be the top grossing film of 2006… and possibly of all time without question. Millions of people, eagerly waiting since the premier of the first installment, have generated $400+ million in sales for this movie thus far and the numbers continue to grow. But sales… those are just numbers, at the end of the day, the true question is… How does this “Pirates” stack up to the first?

Although this movie was relatively well done, it pretty much is a two and a half hour teaser for part three, which is a bit disappointing. It really lacks the sarcasm and witty humor that made the first one such a great movie among all ages. The jokes and one liners in “Dead Man’s Chest” fall a bit short of funny, and by the end of the film are just lost in the epic that this movie tries to be. The plot seemed a bit dull (chasing a human squid around the seas, while trying to recover a beating heart in a chest), but it would have been ample if the movie would have just cut out the filler and kept the time around the two hour mark. It was obvious that the audience (in the two times I’ve been to theatres to see it) was growing quite restless and bored.

With that being said though, I should point out that Johnny Depp (Jack Sparrow) does, in fact, make it more than obvious that he carries this movie. His ability to take on a character in full and entice movie-goers all at once is astounding. He creates and refreshes a charcater that adults and children alike will find appealing, funny, and eccentric.

Overall, “Dead Man’s Chest” follows the makings of any sequel… lack of developed plot, quite the teaser, and overdone. But it’s still worth seeing… even if just to have more background for the upcoming Pirates III. Some scenes might be a little much for children, but it is a film that would be great for a family outting.