I’ve never understood why so many people place “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” on such a high pedestal, because it’s easily one of Steven Spielberg’s most overrated movies. Though the nostalgia factor has certainly played a role in its sustained popularity over the years, when viewed without those rose-colored glasses, the film’s flaws are pretty evident. Not only is the acting terrible for the most part, but a lot of the special effects don’t hold up that well, particularly the flying bikes. It’s also way too long – a fact that’s even more incredible considering the director cut 40 minutes from the original version – and it has some strange tonal issues, including the arrival of those creepy men in the astronaut suits in the final act. Still, while “E.T.” is hardly worthy of joining “Jaws” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark” on the list of cinema classics, it’s a sweet and often funny film that every parent should show their children at least once.

Blu-ray Highlight: There are two new extras included on the 30th Anniversary release, and they’re both excellent. “The E.T. Journals” offers nearly an hour of behind-the-scenes footage from production, while “Steven Spielberg and E.T.” features the director reflecting on the making of the film, including where the idea originated from, showing the movie at Cannes and the White House, the aborted sequel talk and much more.

The latest in a growing line of projects driven by Hollywood’s fascination with revisionist history, James McTeigue’s “The Raven” proposes that in the weeks leading up to his death, American poet Edgar Allen Poe helped solve a series of copycat murders based on his grisly tales. It’s difficult to view the film as anything other than a half-hearted attempt at cashing in on the success of Warner Brothers’ “Sherlock Holmes” reboot, because it’s every bit the dull, cookie cutter thriller that the trailers suggested. Not only is the premise ridiculous, but it’s executed so tediously that McTeigue could have lopped off 20 minutes from just about any part of the movie and no one would have noticed. The legacy of Poe deserves so much better than this generic murder mystery, and although John Cusack has some good moments as the eccentric writer, it would have been a lot more interesting to see the actor play him in a traditional biopic as opposed to this preposterous and lifeless piece of schlock. The next time Hollywood thinks about defiling a respected literary figure, they would be wise to heed Poe’s famous words and simply say “nevermore.”

Blu-ray Highlight: There aren’t any extras on the disc that stand out, but the making-of featurette “The Raven Guts: Bringing Death to Life” provides the usual behind the scenes fluff on things like casting and production design for those who are interested.

With the upcoming release of Universal’s “Alfred Hitchcock: The Masterpiece Collection,” it only seems fitting that Warner Bros. should take the opportunity to debut some of their Hitchcock films on Blu-ray as well. Though “Strangers on a Train” and “Dial M for Murder” predate many of the director’s most popular movies, they still showcase the Master of Suspense at the top of his game. “Strangers on a Train” is probably the better known of the pair, but despite a solid turn by Robert Walker as the eccentric villain, the film’s sluggish pacing and ridiculous finale prevent it from being as great as its reputation might suggest. In fact, although it doesn’t get as much credit, “Dial M for Murder” is the stronger movie – an adaptation of the Frederick Knotts stage play that’s as tautly thrilling as it is smart. It also helps that everyone in the cast is so good, from Grace Kelly’s adulterous victim to John Williams’ police inspector, but it’s Ray Milland who absolutely steals the show as a “villain” so likable that you’re practically rooting for him to get away with murder. Though it’s a bit strange that Hitchcock would chose one of his less visually interesting movies to shoot in 3D, “Dial M for Murder” is every bit as captivating without the silly gimmick.

Blu-ray Highlight: Though most of the bonus material is from previous DVD releases, there’s a retrospective on each film – “Strangers on a Train: A Hitchcock Classic” and “Hitchcock and Dial M” – that provides some excellent insight from various friends and historians about the movies’ productions and the key Hitchcockian elements in both.

The really fun part of setting up an interview with John Cusack is telling people about it and getting their reaction. The still boyish star of such classics like “Say Anything,” “Grosse Pointe Blank,” “Bullets Over Broadway,” “The Grifters,” “Being John Malkovich,” and recent ‘plex-fare like “2012” and “Hot Tub Time Machine,” is one popular guy, and not only with women.

Now in his mid-40s, the former teen rom-com leading man is also something of a paradox in that he’s been able to keep the details of his private life private while also being unafraid of a little controversy. He maintains a direct connection with his fans via his well-known Twitter feed that often touches bluntly on his strongly left-of-center politics. We interviewed Mr. Cusack back in 2008 about his somewhat underrated satirical broadside, “War, Inc.,” and he makes some revealing comments about its production below. He has nevertheless avoided becoming a Sean Penn-style right wing whipping boy, though his recent election-year bashing of the Obama administration’s civil liberties failings on “CBS This Morning” attracted some attention from conservative outlets.

The fact of the matter is that Cusack, still best remembered by many as idealistic aspiring kickboxer Lloyd Dobler, is the closest thing modern audiences have to a Jimmy Stewart. He’s a low-key, yet charismatic and highly energetic actor who never seems to act at all. That’s high praise, but it does make him a slightly counterintuitive choice for the role of Edgar Allen Poe, the flamboyant, floridly romantic author who largely invented modern horror and crime fiction.

Directed by James McTeigue of “V for Vendetta,” “The Raven” has the master of the macabre trying to solve a “Se7en”-style killing spree inspired by his own stories. Critics have not been impressed by the film and the crowded opening weekend box office returns have been kind of dismal, but that won’t have been for any lack of effort on John Cusack’s part. The actor spent weeks promoting the film everywhere from “The View” to our humble selves. He did, however, take a moment to receive a very special Hollywood honor.

Bullz-Eye: It’s been a good day for you; you just got your star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

JC: Yeah man, thanks.

BE: What’s that like at your relatively young age?

JC: I don’t know. I’ve never got one before so I don’t know. It was pretty surreal; pretty cool. I liked that I was right next to the Singing Cowboy, Gene Autry. That was pretty cool.

BE: That is cool.

JC: I was right across from Musso and Frank’s, so I thought that was pretty damn cool. That’s such a great place. I’m also next to this great book store, so I’m well represented. I liked it.

BE: Speaking of books — a great segue there — I know that one of the reasons that you took on “The Raven” is it gave you an excuse to read up on Edgar Allan Poe. Why do you think he has remained kind of contemporary all of these years?

JC: I think he’s this classic sort of archetype for all of the shadow parts of ourselves that we don’t want to admit out loud or you’re not supposed to admit in polite company or society. You know, all of these terrors and fears and phobias and anguishes and torments, and also this kind of grave, deep love of language and poetry. I think he’s a genuine genius and he spoke to the language of the subconscious and he was a great poet and artist. A great storyteller; a wild creator of different genres and hybrids of genres and mash-ups of genres. He was a pretty talented man, and he was also just wired way too tight, so it was a volatile mix.

BE: It’s interesting, when I mentioned on Facebook that I would be talking to you, I got a kind of unprecedented reaction from my friends.

JC: Oh yeah?

BE: They were very excited that I was going to talk to you.

JC: Oh cool. Tell them they can follow me on Twitter and they can talk to me directly.

BE: I think we’re mostly aware of that.

JC: Okay.

BE: Speaking of which, it kind of brings us back around to “The Raven” because the price of fame is a little bit the film’s theme. You’ve kind of done this interesting dance where you’ve never been turned into portmanteau word with another celebrity [a la "Brangelina"], yet you’re on Twitter and you’re very much in touch with people. Was an interest in sort of the up-and-down side of fame part of what got you involved in “The Raven”?

JC: No, I just really loved Poe so I was just ready to immerse myself in that guy and play around with all of the different themes of his work. Then, I [also] think there is a contemporary aspect to the ongoing sort of fixation and love affair with that writer. He’s got his hand in so much of culture, literature and films and music and fashion and poetry — not just in the United States, but in Europe as well. I was just interested in that. Fame was part of the theme, but not really; it wasn’t the primary theme.

BE: We know what Poe looked like, but we don’t know much about the way he talked. Now, I understand you’re going to be playing Richard Nixon in Lee Daniels’ next film, “The Butler.” Have you thought about the differences, that we all know what Nixon sounded like and moved like? That must be an interesting new challenge for you.

JC: Yeah, that just sort of happened so I haven’t really even thought about it too much.

BE: You haven’t been working on your Nixon impression?

JC: No. You try not to do an impression because if people want to see an impression they can see impressionists and they can also watch footage and documentaries and TV. [It's] the same thing with Poe — you want to catch some essence of him or some truths about the person and you don’t really need to impersonate somebody or dress exactly like them. But if you can inhabit them and get in contact with some things about them that are true [that is enough]. You’re never going to do a definitive version of anybody because one book or movie or song couldn’t ever really encapsulate their entire life.

BE: This is going to sound like one kind of question, but it’s going to take a sharp left turn. I’m sure you’ve already been hearing a lot about your [widely quoted] statement on “The View” that you’d be open to playing Lloyd Dobler again….

JC: Oh right. Well, that’s mostly a media kind of thing, you know people keep asking about it so…that’s been basically a repeated media question from reporters.

BE: Right, but here’s the sharp left turn. What I thought was interesting about that was that you’re not, in theory, opposed to sequels. I’ve always wondered about this. [Before “War, Inc.” came out] it seemed like you were going to be doing Martin Q. Blank again [but the quasi-heroic assassin in the movie was actually named Brand Hauser, and was presumably a different guy].

JC: Well, we sort of were. That was sort of my unofficial sequel to “Grosse Point Blank.”

BE: So why didn’t you just call him “Martin Q. Blank”?

JC: Because we couldn’t get the rights and nobody wanted to let us do it. To a certain point, I just don’t believe in asking permission to make things; you just make them. So, if they weren’t going to let us make them or people weren’t into the idea of it, we just made that. I think smart people can make the connections. You know my sister [i.e., the great Joan Cusack] was the secretary [in both films] and it was a similar kind of vibe.

BE: I’ve always wondered about that. Okay.

JC: Yeah, that was definitely what we had in mind.

BE: You’ve written and produced several movies now. You’ve picked out some very good directors, people like George Armitage ["Grosse Pointe Blanke"] and Stephen Frears ["The Grifters" and "High Fidelity"]. Did you decide deliberately that you’re not going to direct something or are you thinking about doing that?

JC: Well, I sort of co-directed a bunch and directed “War, Inc.,” as it turned out, with the other guy [documentary director Joshua Seftel]. So I’ve done my share. I’ve directed stage. So yeah.

BE: Are you thinking about doing it again sometime?

JC: Yeah, it just takes so long, you know, it takes a year, year and a half, to do and it’s like you have to swim upstream like a deranged salmon. So, I think I’m just going to do some acting jobs and somewhere down the road, I will.

BE: You’ve been a martial artist; you studied with [legendary kickboxer and fight choreographer] Benny “the Jet” Urquidez. I’ve always been interested in how many really good actors there are out there who also are skilled at things like martial arts, ballet and sports. For you, is there any particular link between athleticism and acting?

JC: Yeah, it’s the momentum of sports. You have to be warmed up. You have to be disciplined. You have to try to experience all of your emotions and control them and control your energy, so there are lots of parallels.

With the summer movie season just around the corner, Hollywood is gearing up for what promises to be its most exciting slate of films in a long time by heading into the blockbuster-filled madness of May on a high note. This month has something for just about everyone, including several promising comedies, an innovative horror film with “Scream”-sized potential, and a new movie from action guru Luc Besson. It may not compare to what this summer has to offer, but it’s better than the doldrums of winter.

Who: Jason Biggs, Alyson Hannigan, Seann William Scott and Eugene Levy
What: The gang is reunited in East Great Falls, Michigan for their high school reunion.
When: April 6th
Why: I’ve been a fan of the “American Pie” series (not including those terrible direct-to-DVD spinoffs, of course) since the original film was released back in 1999. It’s a purely generational thing; when the characters are having the same major life experiences as most people your age, it makes them easy to relate to. The movies also happen to be pretty entertaining in a guilty pleasure kind of way, and it’ll be great to see the whole cast reunited for the first time since they all went their separate ways to become big movie stars. Though that didn’t exactly work out for any of them (Alyson Hannigan and Seann William Scott are arguably the most successful of the bunch), as long as their chemistry is still intact, “American Reunion” should be a fun trip down memory lane.

Who: Chuck Rozanski, Holly Conrad, Eric Henson, Anthony Calderon and Skip Harvey
What: A behind-the-scenes look at the fans who gather by the thousands each year in San Diego, California to attend Comic-Con.
When: April 6th
Why: It’s actually quite surprising that no one has thought to make a documentary about Comic-Con until now, because although it’s not really a hard-hitting subject matter, it already has a built-in audience that continues to grow every year. Morgan Spurlock isn’t the first person you’d think of to direct a documentary about the popular geek Mecca, but he’s wisely chosen to stay out of the spotlight this time around, instead opting to focus on the lives of five attendees (including a toy collector, an aspiring artist and a costume designer) who have traveled to the annual convention for various reasons. And with guys like Stan Lee, Joss Whedon and Kevin Smith all involved in some form, Spurlock’s latest doc has the makings to be the perfect love letter to comic book geeks everywhere.

Who: Kristen Connolly, Chris Hemsworth, Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford
What: Five friends head to a remote cabin in the woods for the weekend where they get more than they bargained for.
When: April 13th
Why: I’ve had the good fortune to see Drew Goddard’s “The Cabin in the Woods” twice now, and it’s every bit as original and entertaining as you’d expect for a movie co-written by Joss Whedon. This is one of those films that you need to go into knowing as little as possible, so while the trailer has been provided below, I’d recommend that you don’t watch it in order to avoid spoiling anything. It may look like just your average slasher flick on paper, but the movie has a few tricks up its sleeves. Fueled by a great script that not only defies most horror conventions, but does so with tongue firmly planted in cheek, “The Cabin in the Woods” is either going to be the movie that everyone can’t stop talking about, or that no one goes to see. Do your part and make sure it’s the former.

Who: Chris Diamantopoulos, Will Sasso, Sean Hayes and Jane Lynch
What: While trying to save their childhood orphanage, Moe, Larry and Curly inadvertently stumble into a murder plot and wind up starring in a reality TV show.
When: April 13th
Why: I’ve never really understood the appeal of “The Three Stooges,” so I’m not too surprised that the Farrelly brothers’ big screen adaptation looks as terrible as it does. Despite my personal feelings on the Stooges, however, it’s strange to see their fans showing so much animosity towards the film, because it looks like the Farrellys have absolutely nailed the slapstick brand of comedy that the bumbling trio is known for. Though the movie has been in development for years (with Sean Penn, Jim Carrey and Benicio del Toro all involved in the project at some point), it no longer has the star-studded cast it once did, although that may be for the best. Then again, the Farrellys haven’t made a good movie in almost 15 years, so there’s definitely cause for concern.

Who: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Joseph Gilgun, Peter Stormare and Lennie James
What: A wrongly convicted man is offered his freedom if he can rescue the president’s daughter from an outer space prison taken over by violent inmates.
When: April 13th
Why: When the first trailer for “Lockout” was released, there were some people who jokingly referred to it as “‘Taken’ in space,” and to be honest, they weren’t too far off. Writer/producer Luc Besson (who also co-wrote the Liam Neeson action thriller) has essentially been making the same movie for the last 20 years, and although most of his Euro-trash action films haven’t been as successful as “Taken,” they’re always a lot of fun to watch. Plus, this marks the first time that Besson has dabbled in sci-fi since “The Fifth Element,” and we all know how that turned out. Maggie Grace must be thrilled that she has more to do this time around, but it’s the pitch-perfect casting of Guy Pearce that could prove to be the real coup behind turning “Lockout” into this month’s breakout hit.

Who: Jason Segel, Emily Blunt, Chris Pratt, Alison Brie and Rhys Ifans
What: A comedy that charts the ups and downs of an engaged couple’s relationship.
When: April 27th
Why: There are a number of great comedy writing teams in Hollywood, but perhaps one of the most underrated is Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, who already have a pair of terrific films to their names in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” and “The Muppets.” Those are both difficult movies to outshine, but Stoller’s third trip behind the camera (having previously directed “Sarah Marshall” and its quasi-sequel “Get Him to the Greek”) promises to be his funniest yet. Not only is it an interesting twist on the rom-com genre, but it’s loaded with tons of comedic talent, including Segel and fellow TV stars Chris Pratt and Alison Brie. Nevertheless, it’s the involvement of Emily Blunt that has me most excited, because the actress doesn’t get nearly enough opportunities to show off her comedic chops. And believe it or not, she might just be the funniest one of the bunch.

Who: John Cusack, Luke Evans, Alice Eve and Brendan Gleeson
What: When a madman begins committing murders inspired by Edgar Allan Poe’s stories, a young detective joins forces with Poe to stop any more from coming true.
When: April 27th
Why: In what can only be described as a half-hearted attempt at cashing in on the success of the “Sherlock Holmes” films, James McTeigue’s “The Raven” re-imagines American poet Edgar Allen Poe as a sort of makeshift action hero who solves crimes. It’s the latest in a line of projects driven by Hollywood’s new fascination with revisionist history, but is Poe really that popular of a literary figure that people will care? Don’t get me wrong: the idea of someone performing copycat murders based on an author’s work of fiction has potential (even if it’s been done before, most recently in the pilot for the TV drama “Castle”), but there’s nothing in the trailer that suggests the film will be anything other than a generic whodunit. John Cusack deserves much better than this.

Who: Hugh Grant, Salma Hayek, Jeremy Piven, Brendan Gleeson and Imelda Staunton
What: Pirate Captain sets out on a mission to defeat his rivals Black Bellamy and Cutlass Liz for the Pirate of the Year award.
When: April 27th
Why: Considering how long it takes to make a stop-motion animated film, “The Pirates! Band of Misfits” likely went into production way back when pirate movies were still in the midst of a mini-renaissance. Of course, now that the subgenre has been exhausted by the very same franchise that brought it back to life (please stand up, “Pirates of the Caribbean”), it’s hard to tell whether moviegoers will be in the mood for another pirate adventure so soon. But if there’s anyone that can make it worthwhile, it’s the guys at Aardman Animation, best known for their witty and charming “Wallace & Gromit” shorts. And between its excellent voice cast (led by an unrecognizable Hugh Grant) and the involvement of Aardman co-founder Peter Lord, the movie couldn’t be in better hands.

Who: Jason Statham, Catherine Chan, Chris Sarandon, Anson Mount and James Hong
What: A former cop must protect a Chinese girl who’s been entrusted with the combination to a safe that every criminal organization in town is after.
When: April 27th
Why: The fact that Lionsgate has already pushed back the movie’s release date several times doesn’t exactly exude confidence on the part of the studio, but I’m still cautiously optimistic about director Boaz Yakin’s first foray into the action genre. Although “Safe” looks eerily similar to just about every film to come out of the Jason Statham Factory of Ass-Kicking since the original “Transporter,” at least his movies are rarely dull, and that has a lot to do with Statham’s seemingly endless supply of charisma. He’s probably the most entertaining action star working today, even though he’s a good enough actor that he doesn’t need to rely on his fists so much. But regardless of how bad the movie may actually be, I’d gladly watch Statham kick ass and take names any day of the week.