Twenty five people in the theater is a crowd where I go. Fifty is the movie of the year. I almost stood in disbelief when I turned around at the end of Holes and saw more people than I've ever seen in that place since... I can't even remember. Even
Attack">http://www.epinions.com/content_64354553476">Attack of the Clones didn't bring them out in droves like this.

It's actually kind of surprising because as far as I've seen, Holes didn't get all that much advertising. And the trailer? Well, the only thing I found even remotely memorable about that was that one of the kids called himself "Armpit".

I never read the book; in fact I never knew it existed. But it sounds like it must be a pretty interesting book. The movie packs a considerable amount of storyline into two hours of time. Best advice I would give, though, is to be prepared for a shift in timeframe as often as four or five times in a ten minute period! (Hey, at least it doesn't insult your intelligence...)

The "main" story is that of Stanley Yelnats IV (I'm Stan-ah-ley the Fourth I am...). He's an ordinary kid on an ordinary day taking an ordinary walk, when a not-so-ordinary pair of shoes falls out of the sky (seriously) right next to him. Turns out that the shoes were donated by a famous ballplayer to charity, and Stanley is branded as the thief who stole them. The court sentences Stanley to 18 months at Camp Greenlake, where kids are forced to dig holes in the desert as a way of "building character".

The "other" stories are told through flashbacks, including Stanley's trial in court. That's one thing the movie definitely does right -- it jumps into the main story as quickly as possible, and picks up the pieces as it goes along. It also never leaves too many pieces on the floor at one time, so that you know just enough at the right time not to be overwhelmed by the rather large number of questions the movie sets out to answer.

The casting of the kids turned out to be terrific. Shia LaBeouf as Stanley, has that old familiar "kid that doesn't fit in but grows on them" aura about him. Khleo Thomas is both cute and completely startling as Zero, the quiet "nobody kid" who turns out to be a hell of a lot smarter and stronger than he looks. Byron Cotton is perfect as the overly large but sensitive kid Armpit, who refuses to answer to his real name. Brenden Jefferson could pass for a fifteen-year old Morpheus with the goofy black goggles and his unofficial "leadership" amongst the clan, and Miguel Castro ideally depicts a kid who just needs someone on whom to take out his frustration.

The adult cast is nothing to sneeze at, either. I didn't even recognize Sigourney Weaver in all that hot country attire. She plays the Warden (Excuse me?) of the camp, a very unpredictable character. One minute, she's sadistic, the next she's this close to showing compassion for the children. Seems like no one can please this woman!

Then Jon Voight plays another of the drill.. er, camp instructors, and insists that the kids call him "Mister Sir". Pretty funny, huh :) He's one of those guys that's not really all there, but he's there enough to bark orders on a whim. He tends to be funny in an unintentional, Walter Matthau kind of way. "Grumpiest Old Men", anyone?

Tim Blake Nelson hangs off on the side as an underappreciated third camp instructor, who waxes ecstatic on occasion. He tries to be mean like them, but most of the time he fails. I don't care how many times I see him fall into one of the holes, it'll always be funny.

Patricia Arquette is as hot as Laura Linney in her role as Katherine 'Kissin Kate' Barlow, but I think the biggest surprise of the movie was how well she and Dule Hill (as Sam, the Onion Man) worked together. Being that her role takes place entirely within the flashback sequences, she's stuck in a time when a relationship between a white woman and a black man is considered taboo. But Sam is a perfect gentleman, and there is something about the relationship between those two that I found so charming. I actually felt really bad when this tragedy waiting to happen happened.

Holes, the movie, is actually written by the same guy who wrote the book, Louis Sachar. So I guess it's not a big surprise that those who have read the book seem to be pleased with the movie.

If you haven't read the book (like me) then you'll probably get lost in all the subplots going on. But as a "whole", the movie is not hard to follow once you get used to the frantic pacing. The narration is nice. Even now, a day later, I'm still making little "connections" with things in the movie that seemed trivial when I was watching.

Boo hoo hoo
Even though the ending seemed a bit more "wrapped up" than any book I've ever read, I'd be a liar to say the screen didn't get blurry at one point. I had to look away, lest I make a fool of myself in front of the trio of little girls sitting behind me. But what can I say? You get attached to the characters, you just can't help it.

Go ahead and see this one. Just don't trust your first impression, because the more you think about it, the better it gets.

Movie Reviews, Music Reviews, and other Nonsense
http://www.flamepillar.com

Recommended: Yes

Movie Mood: Feel-good Movie
Viewing Method: Studio Screening/Premiere