This week's featured adaptation is "Red," the Willis/Freeman/Malkovich shoot-em-up crafted from the graphic novel by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner. Looks like a wild ride with the "Retired Extremely Dangerous" crew. Don't forget to wear your Old Guys Rule cap to the theater. Here are some reviews to help you plan your weekend:

Tribune newspapers -- Movie adaptations of graphic novels as disparate as "Road to Perdition" to "Sin City" can seem awfully thin. Around the midpoint, "RED" starts repeating itself and spinning its wheels and looking for an ending, well before the ending arrives. The actors have considerable fun with it, though I can't be the only one who would prefer not to see another movie containing the line "Wow. You really are CIA!" until the summer of 2011.

New York Times -- If you are in the mood to revisit some of the bad movies of last summer — there was no shortage — then “RED” may be just the ticket. You might even say that this movie, directed by Robert Schwentke and based on the comic books created by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner, represents a do-over, a moderately successful attempt to restore the entertainment potential of two much-abused genres.

L.A. Times - Conceived of as an action comedy with a tongue-in-cheek, Tarantino-lite sensibility, "Red" can't stop itself from trying too hard to be hip. It's not that it doesn't have effective moments, it's that it doesn't have as many as it thinks it does. The film's inescapable air of glib self-satisfaction is not only largely unearned, it's downright irritating.

CNN -- Hardly a bull's-eye, the movie barely makes sense, but it's performed with enough gusto to give it at least the sham of a personality and the semblance of a good time. Box office hits have been made from far less.