The Wolf of Wall Street, Killing Them Softly

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

• Martin Scorsese's latest is outrageously entertaining.  Over the daunting (but typical for the director) runtime of about 3 hours, the viewer is bombarded by one surprising, shocking, usually illegal action after the next.  By the time you've reacted to one outrageous scene, we're already halfway into the next.  The pacing is lightning fast and the dialogue ricochets along with it.  It's dynamic and impressive work.  Viewers will have one of two reactions: 1) laughter the ridiculousness of the characters' actions and that any of this behavior is remotely based on actual events or 2) complete and utter disgust.  You'll know within the first minutes of the film.  Scorsese throws you into the world of the film and doesn't let up.  Leonardo DiCaprio gives another incredible performance, one that draws comparisons to his other roles (i.e. con man Frank Abagnale in Catch Me If You Can and his title role as The Great Gatsby).  If you've seen the trailer, you know what tone to expect for the film.  You could never predict the film itself.  DiCaprio has stated "we're not condoning this behavior, we're indicting it."  But they sure are having fun doing it.
• Rating: 5 out of 5

Killing Them Softly (2012)

• Andrew Dominik's crime thriller comes across as a heavy-handed, un-engaging indictment of capitalism.  Its heart is in the right place, but its ideals are forced into the plot via various political interviews and press conferences of Presidents Bush and Obama.  I watched a behind-the-scenes special in which Dominik said the film's message was for "crime not to be glamorous, but that it's a job and kind of a drag."  That works, in theory.  But when you have an extended, beautifully filmed slow-motion sequence of a character being shot multiple times as bullet casings grace against rain droplets, that statement becomes a bit hypocritical.  Brad Pitt and Scoot McNairy shine in their respective roles and serve the film well.  Unfortunately, the James Gandolfini character (which the film seems obsessed with given his amount of screen time) was exceedingly boring and more of a cliche than a truly developed character.  Killing Them Softly had the potential to be a unique crime thriller with brains to match its brawn all within a lean runtime of 98 minutes.  However, the end result is a mixed bag that drags along, never really satisfies its ambitious goals, and denies the casual viewer very many action sequences.
• Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Sources for Above Images:

TWOWS: http://www.nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/wows2.gif

KTS: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCgitvuOzQnfJaFLz3E_urc_HCgLA7vG0bXSMn3Zcwz5UMjcDk04X9XbBOmGuMIkXpokGMYnMeHmW82YcTPRUbL2XryL-W0zbZfKO7rSUo8Fi5Z0EPXAAd-58ackK2JxepribndxGN9iY/s1600/killingthemsoftly.jpg

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Dallas Buyers Club, Frozen

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

• The critics got it wrong with this one.  Currently sitting at 47% on Rotten Tomatoes, Walter Mitty deserves higher praise than it seems to be getting.  The film is gorgeously shot and scored, featuring song choices that perfectly accompany the visuals.  It's what my sister would (accurately) call "a life movie."  Ben Stiller (who also directed the film) portrays the title character with honesty and subtlety, but effectively.  Walter Mitty finds just the right balance of laughs, emotions, poignancy, and surprise.  And it's only rated PG!  This is the type of film I suspect that the late critic Roger Ebert would have championed.  Walter Mitty dreams big and has a great imagination, showcasing a love for life itself.
• Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Dallas Buyers Club

• Matthew McConaughey leads the fight against pharmaceutical companies, the DEA, close-minded physicians, and anyone else who stands in his way to find a way to beat AIDS.  The performance is phenomenal.  His character (based on a real person) transforms from a frustrating state of numb apathy and drug-filled risk behavior to a take charge leader in the fight against AIDS.  Fittingly, we see the self-proclaimed cowboy getting "back on the horse" at the end of the film, back in take-control-of-my-life fashion.  The film is inspiring on several occasions and never fails to engage.  McConaughey is helped by a slew of adept supporting characters, notably Jared Leto and Jennifer Garner.  With the help of clever direction (i.e. the shot of what seems to be vocation candles, pulls back to reveal they're candles at a strip club) and a brilliant screenplay, Dallas Buyers Club is a "based on a true story" film done right.
• Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Frozen

• Frozen represents old-school storytelling in new-school clothes (i.e. stunning digital animation).  It's a classic story of sisters torn apart, true love, and a town caught in the middle.  Frozen has already gained well-earned praise for its memorable soundtrack.   It's fun, familiar, and family-oriented entertainment.  Frozen is thoroughly enjoyable.
• 3D: I saw the film in 3D, and my initial reaction was that it didn't add much to the story.  The real value of seeing the film in 3D would be for the short film played before Frozen, which was absolutely genius (it blends classic Mickey Mouse cartoons with the latest 3D innovations).
• Stick around: There's a scene after the credits.
• Rating: 4 out of 5 (the short film before the feature gets 5 out of 5!)

Sources for Above Images:

TSLOWM: http://www.daveonfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/walter-mitty-publicity-still-photo.jpg

DBC: http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/i/2013/09/09/DALLAS-BUYERS-CLUB.jpg

FROZEN:http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131103205461/disney/images/6/66/Frozen_castposter.jpg

American Hustle, The Hunger Games 2: Catching Fire, A Madea Christmas

American Hustle

• WOW.  Just great from start to finish.  I love the nostalgia.  I love the absurdity.  I love ALL of the actors.  And I love the director.  This is a thoroughly entertaining film that succeeds at being both flat out hilarious and gripping, often at the same time.  The great movies about con artists are often clever because the characters in them are clever.  The plot really depends on the characters being actualized and fully developed.  Director David O. Russell has proven time and time again that he can craft amazing, character-driven films, and he has succeeded once again.  There's no question that this one will be garnering some well deserved attention at upcoming award shows.  Even if it doesn't, it makes it onto my list of top films of the year.  
• Rating: 5 out of 5

THG2:CF

• The first of the Hunger Games sequels amps up the psychological elements, maintains thrilling set pieces, and continues upon the first installment's smart direction and elaborate costuming.  This is one of those few, cherished occasions in which the sequel surpasses the original.  I'm hoping the trend continues, because word on the street is that the 3rd and final novel is decidedly lackluster.  This will hopefully be corrected for in the final film(s).  In Catching Fire, the threats young Catniss must face become more immediate and her actions more crucial.  As the title implies, this is a story that's meant to be a midpoint between an introduction and finale.  That being said, it still has enough chops to stand on its own as a satisfying middle man.  The ending is unexpectedly abrupt (not a bad thing), and by the end of it, it's fair to say the fire has started.  Catching Fire makes for an riveting trip to the movies and succeeds at pumping you up for the sure-to-be exciting finale.
• Rating: 4.5 out of 5

A Madea Christmas

• Just kidding.  I didn't see this - YET!
• Rating: ?? out of ??????????

Sources for Above Images:

AH: http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/51fd708cecad04f144000041-1200-706/american-hustle.jpg

THG2CF: http://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/catching-fire3.jpg

Thor: The Dark World and About Time (2013 Reviews)

Can you find Malekith the Angry Elf?  He's waaaaay down there at the bottom!

Thor: The Dark World

• The follow-up doesn't quite live up to the original but does maintain the balance of humor and nicely executed action sequences that has come to define the Avengers saga.  Thor 2 (for brevity's sake) benefits greatly from the presence of Loki, who provides much of the cleverness and trickery in an otherwise Gladiator-dominated world.  The world of Asgard (and the other realms which are occasionally visited by characters throughout the film) remains incredibly beautiful.  It's truly masterfully crafted CGI that becomes even more immediate in 3-D.  Chris Hemsworth continues to epitomize his role and seems irreplaceable as Thor himself.  He's supported nicely by fine actors (Anthony Hopkins, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston as the aforementioned Loki, Stellan Skarsgaard, and others).  
• To those of us naive to the nuances of the comics (myself included), Malekith is the film's super villain.  He's basically a really angry elf with a superiority complex.  The plot hinges around control of the aether, a gooey substance that's really cool to look at in 3-D and would give Malekith the ability to turn the lights out (hence the DARK world) on his neighbors in the other 9 realms.  As far as super villains go, he's not particularly menacing or even that memorable.  I suppose the true die hard comic fans would enjoy his presence in the film, and I will say that his army of drones with those creepy masks was pretty cool.  
• All in all... Thor 2 continues to excel at what it's good at, offering Gladiator-style battle sequences juxtaposed with effective comic relief, all the while advancing the on-going Avengers plot line with seemingly no end in sight.
• Stick around for mid-credits and post-credits bonus scenes.
• Recommended in 3-D.
• Rating: 3.5 out of 5 

About Time

• About Time earns the distinction as one of the most enjoyable romantic comedies I've seen in a long time.  The premise (or at least the handling of it) is somewhat original for the genre, and effective.  All the actors are engaging in their respective roles, especially Tom Hughes as the lead.  This was my first introduction to the actor, and he just nails it.  His performance shines both on screen and as the film's narrator.
• The film's plot seems to falter slightly around the exact "rules" of time travel and doesn't really make sense completely… typically if a character time travels BACK in time, their actions impact the FUTURE (as in a certain 1985 classic starring Michael J. Fox).  That doesn't entirely happen here.  But I tried not to rack my brain around that aspect of the film too much.
• Just as 500 Days of Summer is a story about love (not a "love story"), About Time is chiefly a comedy about romance (and therefore, NOT a stereotypical "romantic comedy").  Regardless of the exact genre that film falls into, it makes for an enjoyable and clever trip to the movies.
• Rating: 4 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

12 Years a Slave (review)

One of many pivotal moments in the film, told via one of McQueen's long takes.

12 Years a Slave

Steve McQueen has generated another compelling, challenging film.  His work is always brave and never easy to watch.  RT describes the film as "unflinchingly brutal."  Yep.  Michael Fassbender's character chiefly represents that brutality in another ferocious and no-holds-barred performance.  There are a number of welcome cameos from some of the most skilled actors working today - Brad Pitt, Benedict Cumberbatch, Paul Giamatti, to name a few.  But the true shining star here is Chiwetel Ejiofor.  His performance will obviously earn him an Oscar nod (if not, he's truly been robbed of that distinction).  This is the moment in his career that will jettison him from supporting actor to lead.  The humility and bravery with which he portrays Solomon Northrup is commendable and requires absolute commitment to the role.  Likewise, skilled director Steve McQueen (whose previous, lesser known works include Hunger and Shame) will now be dead center in Hollywood's radar of talented filmmakers.  Combining masterful performances, dedicated direction, and a harsh reality that's part of our history, 12 Years a Slave is a demanding, brilliant film.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Mr. Nobody - Welcome to America!

Poster for the upcoming U.S. release of Mr. Nobody.

Mr. Nobody seems to be an overlooked masterpiece.  I saw this over a year ago based on a friend's recommendation, and now it's getting an overdue U.S. release.  The film is absolutely fascinating and brilliantly shot.  Its vibrant visuals enhance the vivid imagination of the film's main character.  The scope of Mr. Nobody is daunting, ranging from the history of the universe to entropy to family dynamics to love.  It's an incredible amount of ideas that branch off each other, all stemming from the nature of decisions.  Mr. Nobody suggests that a single decision can completely alter one's future and that, given the ability to decide, anything remains possible.  The runtime is lengthy at about 2 1/2 hours, but Mr. Nobody will keep your interest and your brain racing throughout.  Make an effort to see this movie.

Rating: 5 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Captain Phillips, Gravity, Insidious 2

I had to write up some overdue reviews of movies that I actually liked after scribbling about The Counselor.  Go watch any of these instead!

Captain Phillips

• Suspenseful?  Yes.  Masterpiece?  Not quite, but close.  The film maintains tension for about 2 hours, a feat which is far from easy (especially for a biopic).  However, it doesn't seem to utilize its setting to full effect (I thought more time should be spent on the main ship) and falls short of thriller perfection.  Nonetheless, the film is fraught with tension and showcases memorable performances from both Tom Hanks at the helm and all the supporting players.  Tom Hanks just nails his role and makes the real life character seem like a genuine hero.  The film's final act is particularly well executed (and awesome).
• Rating: 4 out of 5

Gravity

• A film that should be seen in theaters (in 3-D or IMAX) or not at all.  The film is an experience, and one that demands viewing on the big screen.  The image above is a perfect example; it fails to capture the sheer scale and impact the film has on a screen 20x its size.  Director Alfonso Cuaron has created a space epic that perfectly utilizes computer generated technology to craft a tale of survival in a way that's both artfully done and spectacular to no end.  This a film that isn't as much about plot as it is about spectacle and innovation.  Truly worth the price of admission.
• Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Insidious: Chapter 2

• An admirable follow up to the original.  Definitely delivers on the scares (had a few jumps in the theater myself) and the stylistics.  It cleverly taps into the original and plays with the "rules" laid down in the first installment.  Overall, a worthy sequel to the entertaining original).
• Rating: 4 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

The Counselor (Review)

Two of Hollywood's finest actors trapped in a film that's just all around miserable.

This movie was perhaps the biggest disappointment I've ever had going to the movies.  Michael Fassbender, Javier Bardem, and Brad Pitt are three of my favorite actors working in Hollywood today (not to mention Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz thrown into the mix).  Pair them with Ridley Scott (whose impressive canon of movies need not be mentioned) and you would think it'd be a match made in cinematic heaven.  In The Counselor's case, it couldn't be further from the truth.  The fatal flaw in the film is its abysmal script.  It's nearly completely devoid of suspense, overly complicated, uninteresting, and heavy-handed to the point of ridicule (hint: three different characters define the word "greed" for the viewer.  Hmm...).  The actors do their very best with what little they are given - Javier Bardem is always enjoyable to watch, even if his characters are typically unsavory.  This had such potential to be an amazing thriller and a new favorite of mine.  Instead, it made every possible wrong choice when it came to plot and fell flat on nearly every level.  It makes me sad how little I enjoyed this film, despite a few shining moments (i.e. the "bolito" was pretty unforgettable, in a good way).  Otherwise, what a complete and utter shame.

Rating: 1.5 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Summer's Over. (2013)

Better belated than never, right?

• The World's End
• I avoided as many previews for this film as possible (something I typically recommend).  So going into the movie I had one impression of what I was getting into, then the film convinced me it was something entirely different, & then finally I realized the actual final product was somewhere in between my expectations and insanity.  All in all, I enjoyed it.  This one definitely stands to benefit from its audience NOT knowing what to expect when they walk into the theater.  I suspect most of the previews would spoil the surprise.
• Rating: 4 out of 5
• Elysium
• A sci-fi film that could've been great or terrible but settled somewhere right in the middle.  Elysium plays with the notion of dystopia juxtaposed against paradise, separated into two distinct worlds.  Of course, the goal is to blend the two.  There are some really nice ideas here, but I'm not sure the film knows what to do with them.  The film boasts a number of expertly crafted sequences, a few popular actors in nicely casted roles, & topped off with a mixture of cliche and originality.  Don't go in expecting District 9 part deux (like I was hoping for), and you probably won't be disappointed.
• Rating: 3 out of 5
• The Way, Way Back
• An awkward coming of age tale that's somewhat rescued by a memorable performance by Sam Rockwell.  The movie did succeed in creating a character played by Steve Carell that I actually hated, a feat I never thought was possible.  The main character is just so painful to watch throughout the first half of the movie, which I guess is what they're going for.  That would all be OK if there was some sense of cleverness or originality, which I'd say was lacking (aside from the aforementioned turn by Sam Rockwell). 
• Rating: 2 out of 5 (all stars awarded solely to Sam Rockwell)
• Fruitvale Station
• Emotionally powerful and fraught with tension.  Fruitvale Station, of course, gains all the more weight from its heartbreaking true story behind the film.
• Rating: 4 out of 5
• Before Midnight
• The closing chapter to an insightful and thought provoking trilogy might just be the strongest entry of the bunch.  Each of the Before films stands tall on its own, but together they represent a fascinating chunk of American cinema.
• Rating: 5 out of 5

Best film of the summer?

• Last year that honor went straight to the movie that caught me most by surprise: Beasts of the Southern Wild.  This year, I'd have to say The Conjuring and Frances Ha were my two favorites of mine.  A close third & fourth would be Whedon's Much Ado About Nothing and Before Midnight.  
• Was it just me or did this summer belong to the "independent" films?  It seemed there was a dramatic lacking in (quality) blockbusters.  Last summer's The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises both were financial kingpins that critics & audiences both loved.  This summer...
• Iron Man 3 was boring.
• Hangover Part 3 happened.
• The Purge was terrible (please don't see it).
• The newest Die Hard movie came out... entitled White House Down.
• Man of Steel was largely disappointing.
• Didn't see The Lone Ranger, Pacific Rim, The Heat, This is the End, or We're the Millers.
• World War Z and Star Trek Into Darkness were actually pretty good.
• Happy Fall 2013, everyone!

White House Down

"Quick, Jamie!  Let's go see a different movie!"

I know I'm a bit late on this one, but don't worry.  You aren't missing anything if you haven't seen it yet.  White House Down represents a laughable squandering of a potentially thrilling premise.  Amidst the explosions, the highlight of the film is Joey King, the just-turned-14-years-old actress who plays the part of Emily in the film.  The young actress's resume already features impressive work including The Conjuring, Crazy, Stupid Love,  and even a small role in The Dark Knight Rises.  And her name is strangely very similar to mine...

The film is littered with cliches, subpar visual effects, and poorly executed action sequences.  Its third act walked a line so closely to The Office's "Threat Level Midnight" episode that it risked turning into a comedy.  White House Down features a number of "plot twists" that only serve to make the film bloated and overbearing.  Very few of the characters' motives actually make sense.  

          White House Down (2013)                           Die Hard (1988)

Take a film like Die Hard, which is the most natural comparison to make for a film like this.  Everything Die Hard does right, White House Down does wrong.  Die Hard has a simple, high concept premise with little need for unnecessary digressions, a hero who's badass but not superhuman, perfectly executed action sequences, and one helluva memorable villain.  White House Down features Jamie Foxx as a president who has an affinity for Jordans... literally.  

As the first few minutes of White House Down were underway, I was surprised by how many actors I recognized who were no where to be found in much of the film's marketing... James Woods, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Richard Jenkins, & Jason Clarke, to name a few.  Perhaps their agents recommended avoiding association with this debacle.  You should, too.  

Rating: 1 / 5

SKIP IT

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

The Wolverine (2013)

I feel that this review should start with a disclaimer: I am not a comic book aficionado. This isn't to say that I don't like them, but rather that the only graphic novels I have read are Watchmen and the occasional Spiderman when I was younger.  Therefore, I can't really comment on how the movie stacks up against the source material and judge it only as a film itself and as part of a series.  I mention this here because The Wolverine would, I think, be most enjoyed by fans of the comics.

Regardless, this edition to the X-Men canon is a considerable step up from the abysmal X-Men Origins: Wolverine, which managed to blend every action cliche with mutant-sized monotony.  The Wolverine starts off which an interesting sequence that plays with chronology (a notion that will be further explored in the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past).  When the time jumps settle down, the film finds its titular hero in what I assume to be "present day," after the events from X-Men: The Last Stand. If you're still on board, that's a good sign that you might actually enjoy the film and be able to comprehend the events and their significance.

The Wolverine introduces a number of new faces and a welcomed change in scenery, Japan.  What the film lacks is a truly formidable foe, but rather it's more about Wolverine/Logan's inner struggles and his purpose in life.  We are shown multiple dreamlike sequences in which Logan "interacts" with Jean Grey, who was supposedly killed in The Last Stand and seems to be central to his decision to go into early superhero retirement - both literally and figuratively.  As we learn from the extra credits scene, however, death is never really permanent in the X-Men / comics universe.  The film introduces the idea of Wolverine as a "ronin", a samurai without a master, which clearly defines his character.  As always, Hugh Jackman seems a natural fit for the role, and this film thankfully allows his character to have a brain (or at least moral dilemmas) to match his brawn.  Also featured are a number of nicely done action sequences.  One such scene is atop a bullet train that is as spectacular as it is preposterous, but entertaining nonetheless.  The Japanese aesthetic works for the X-Men universe, and the film steers the franchise in the right direction.  I just hope that what's up next (i.e. Days of Future Past) will blow it out of the water.

I saw the film in 3-D... take it or leave it.  Stick around for the extra credits scene.

Rating: 3.5 / 5 


Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

The Conjuring

You have to look despite being afraid of what you might find.

Finally!  A modern horror movie that's worthy of admission!  The Conjuring is a rather ingenious modern horror flick.  The best moments of the film direct you to look in one direction, then the scare comes at you from another.  It's tense and genuinely creepy.  The Conjuring benefits from a fine cast, seasoned direction from James Wan (whose creepy credits include Saw and Insidious), and atmospheric thrills.  Though it treads on multiple familiar horror themes (picture perfect family moving into a perfectly creepy haunted house, witchcraft, demonic possession, ghostly dolls, "based on a true story", etc.), I'm awarding it full marks because it was solidly entertaining and expertly crafted.  The film is far from boring or overly serious to the point of ridicule.  Director James Wan plays with your expectations right up until the final moments of the film, making for a modern horror film that's worthy of its title.  Its R rating, however, is more interesting.  According to MPAA, The Conjuring is rated R for "sequences of disturbing violence and terror."  Don't most PG-13 horror films also fit that description.  Perhaps the MPAA is simply a compliment, suggesting that the film is too damn scary for a PG-13 rating.  Agreed.

Rating: 5 / 5 

A note I left for my roommate to come home (alone) to after seeing the film.

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Much Ado About Nothing (Dir. Joss Whedon)

Joss Whedon can pretty much do anything.  His Much Ado About Nothing deftly blends a classic work of literature with innovative, modern filmmaking.  And he made it shortly after completing one of the highest grossing films of all time - The Avengers.  The film is fun, fresh, beautifully shot, and light on its feat.  Plus I'm a sucker for black & white.  For this one, I broke my usual rule of avoiding reading "source material" before seeing the film version.  But seeing as this is Shakespeare, I figured I'd make an exception.  Though I did read the play, Whedon's film would likely be enjoyed by anyone in search of a jazzy re-imagining of a classic work.  The actors all embrace their roles totally, and after about a few minutes of getting used to the "Shakespeare speak" it just sounds like witty dialogue.  And Dogberry is an absolute hoot.  Gender-swap Conrad was a nice touch and so well executed that the casual observer wouldn't even notice it.  Many of Shakespeare's thematics are timeless.  Under the helm of a skilled director like Whedon, Much Ado About Nothing is an immensely entertaining summer affair.  The only problem is finding a theater that's playing it amongst all the summer blockbusters.

Rating: 5 / 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

June 2013 Animated Films

Hello!
Both of these films represent admirable (albeit inevitable), creative, and entertaining animated films which feature humor that audiences of any age can appreciate... which is why they make a huge amount of money!  Sequel rant aside... I was laughing throughout and recommend them both.
Enjoy!

Despicable Me 2

• Despicable Me 2 finds its place at the crossroads between family film, spy adventure action, and some kind of Latino fiesta (EL MACHO!).  You'll know what I mean after watching.  At any rate, this sequel is just as fun as the original!  Gru and the gang are all back.  Yes, that includes Dave, Larry, Kevin, and all the other similarly named minions.  I was happy to see the return of Dr. Nefario and his "speedy" transports as well.  Despicable Me 2 continues much of the thematics from part 1 (i.e. Gru torn between good and evil... and the adventures of being a parent) while adding the potential for a love interest.  The flashbacks to Gru as a child are always tragically hilarious.  A key departure from the original is the delay in revealing the film's villain, which I think was a wise choice.  We are given the set up and the list of usual suspects, but the evil mastermind isn't revealed until well into the film.  There are some truly hilarious moments and clever twists on familiar cliches.  The film also makes nice use of the 3-D technology which often feels more at home and less clunky in animated features.  It was difficult to say whether the jokes were actually that funny or if it was Steve Carell's delightful (as always) performance as Gru that had me laughing... but I was laughing nonetheless.  Plus, who can't relate to those minions?
• Recommended in 3-D
• Rating: 4.5 / 5 ... SEE IT!

Monsters University

• Another nice follow up to the original!  This one's a prequel that follows Mike & Sully through their college scare training in a sort of animated geeks vs. jocks showdown.  Our heroes end up joining Oozma Kappa fraternity (chanting "we're OK!  we're OK!").  The set up is a series of "scare competitions" between rival school organizations that makes for both a proven plot device and an opportunity to showcase entertaining, Revenge of the Nerds style fun.  It's a nostalgic trip back a few years for college grads and an enjoyable one for youngsters as well.  I particularly liked one of the opening scenes (pictured above) where all the college student volunteers' names rhymed with each other.  Clever & hilarious.  Similar sequences poke fun at other college cliches and cliques which you can't help but laugh at.  There are a number of nice references to the first film, which help carry the film along and pique the keen viewer's interest, as well as some welcomed newcomers.  Monsters University seems less polished (and unfortunately less jazzy) than the original but nonetheless offers another edition to the Pixar canon that represents its predecessors well.
• 3-D... take it or leave it
• EASTER EGGS (I love these) HERE: http://www.businessinsider.com/monsters-university-easter-eggs-2013-6
• I'm sorry to say that I missed the Pizza Planet truck despite looking diligently... 
• Rating: 4.5 / 5 ... SEE IT!

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Grown Ups 2

For those looking for a review of Grown Ups 2, here it is:

I will not be seeing Grown Ups 2.  At least not in theaters or in any way that I will have to spend time or money to watch it.

This decision was based solely on how much I disliked the "original" and made before seeing the hilarious consensus on RT:  "While it's certainly the movie event of the year for filmgoers passionate about deer piss humor, Grown Ups 2 will bore, annoy, and disgust audiences of nearly every other persuasion."

June 2013 Summer Action Flicks

World War Z

• The crowning achievements in World War Z are its beginning and end.  The middle is all zombie-filled, choppily edited mush.  Thankfully, the first and third acts are actually quite good so the film is all-in-all entertaining.  There are several supporting characters whose screen time was cut too short (i.e. the virologist and his "mother nature as a serial killer" dialogue) and some missed opportunities to explore some potentially interesting subplots, but I suspect they might resurface in the inevitable sequel(s).  Brad Pitt has a pretty amazing track record and can carry even a narratively messy film on his shoulders, even with that pseudo-mullet of his.  I thought the story (didn't read the book) came up with a pretty ingenious method to combat the zombie epidemic and offered one of the most creative solutions to beating the undead I have seen.  Without giving away too much, the idea of the "camouflage" and the final sequences in the WHO research facility in Wales were pretty stellar and weighed heavily on my impression of the film.  The notion of a global epidemic has been an interesting cinematic topic in recent years (i.e. Soderbergh's Contagion) and one which I find quite compelling on screen.  If you overlook the numerous plot holes and the jumble that is the film's second act, you'll find a satisfying zombie summer action movie with a few nice surprises.
• Rating: 4 / 5

Man of Steel

• Thank the comic book movie gods Russell Crowe was in this movie.  The aussie's presence was the highlight of this promising-but-somewhat-of-a-letdown take on the Superman lore.  In Man of Steel, Superman surprisingly doesn't really get the hero status that he deserves.  The film is littered with frequent flashbacks that serve to highlight his backstory but unfortunately also prevent us from connecting with Henry Cavill's portrayal of the titular superhero.  I'm curious what percentage of Superman lines belonged to the young actors portraying young Clark Kent and what percentage belonged to Mr. Cavill.... The opening sequences are impressive, but the film then falters when the setting changes to Earth.  Too many things are being attempted at once and none really works.  It's difficult to make a Superman movie and truly make audiences feel a sense of danger for our beloved hero.  This one succeeds in terms of visual spectacle, but altogether feels like it should've been much grander than the final product.
• Rating: 2.5 / 5

SEE IT or SKIP IT?

I'm back!

After a several month hiatus buried in my optometric studies, I finally had some time to sit down and write up some quick movie reviews.  I condensed some thoughts about recent films below.

Enjoy!


NOW PLAYING...

"I like things that look like mistakes."

• Frances Ha
• Noah Baumbach's latest film is my favorite of his canon of quirky independent films.  Frances finds it home somewhere between French New Wave cinema & modern indie filmmaking.  Greta Gerwig turns in a pretty unforgettable performance as the ever-awkward, "undateable" title character.  The film oscillates deftly between sincerity and hilarity in its collection of vignettes.  And I love black & white.
• Rating: 5/5
• SEE IT

• Star Trek: Into Darkness
• The newest edition to the Star Trek franchise doesn't quite measure up to its immediate predecessor in many respects.  However, it surpasses the 2009 Star Trek in one key aspect - its villain.  Benedict Cumberbatch turns in a phenomenal performance as the brilliant, powerful, badass baddie in the film.  That performance alone makes the film worth seeing. As with the 2009 film, the best sequence here features one in which main characters are hurled towards a small landing area through space (recall the drilling sequence in the previous film).  Despite lacking some of the WOW-I-never-was-into-Star-Trek-but-this-is-awesome factor that greatly benefitted the previous film, there's plenty of good in this go around to make the voyage back to the Starship Enterprise well worth it. 
• Rating: 4/5 ...recommended in 3-D, especially because of Alice Eve :)
• SEE IT

• Now You See Me
• Now You See Me is a film that promises big surprises and a grand finale throughout the first two acts, but can't seem to fully deliver in the final act.  Unlike other "magic" movies of recent years (i.e. The Prestige, The Illusionist), Now You See Me stumbles a bit during its third act reveal.  The film isn't totally predictable and does feature some clever, well thought out sequences.  The cast does seem to be having fun in their roles, and a number of likable actors/actresses are involved.  If the film posed more so as good old-fashioned summer fun rather than taking itself just a little too seriously (with the promise of "something that's really going to amaze") I probably would've enjoyed it more.
• Rating: 2.5/5
• SEE or SKIP?

• The Purge
• When the highlight of the film is its opening sequence and the rest is downhill, that tends to be a little disappointing.  Such is the case here.  The opening sequence to The Purge features "found footage" of people "purging" (basically a nationwide annual catharsis for pent up rage & aggression) while set to the tune of the Clair de Lune, which happens to be a commonly used classic piece of music which I'm very fond of.  So I'm on board at this point.  90 minutes later, I'm not.  The film has a few good ideas which it beats over the head throughout its runtime (i.e. the motorized toy hidden camera, the homeless man with questionable motives, the juxtaposition of rich vs. poor).  However, all the film can think to do with its plot is divert into sustained sequences of violence.  We're trapped in the main characters' house being tormented along with them, hoping for some glimmer of originality or innovation.  But all we get is torture porn and recycled cliches.  What a shame that a potentially interesting commentary on violence & poverty in society became a part of it rather than a reflection on modern culture.
• Rating: 1.5/5
• SKIP IT!!!

• The Great Gatsby (2013)
• This is perhaps the most flamboyant, outlandish version of The Great Gatsby that will ever be made, and it's this fact that will determine whether you like or hate the film.  I fall somewhere in between.  I can say with confidence that this is not what I had in mind while reading the classic F. Scott Fitzgerald novel, but that's not to suggest that I hated the end result.  At times, the crazy world created by director Baz Luhrman is a little too much to handle, but at others it's too fun to resist.  I actually enjoyed the film's soundtrack which nicely blends old school sounds with modern beats - an idea which I suspect the film as a whole was attempting.  I'm not quite sure that goal was fully realized.
• Rating: 3/5
• SEE or SKIP?

ON DVD...

• Pitch Perfect
• The film is essentially a over-sized episode of Glee with very little substance or entertainment value.  If you enjoy Glee, you may enjoy this one.  Maybe.
• Rating: 1.5/5

• Sinister
• While certainly creepy, atmospheric, & assuredly disturbing, much of the film feels borrowed from other movies with similar horror themes.  It has its moments, but overall doesn't quite have the chops to stand on its feet as a modern horror classic.
• Rating: 3/5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

• 
  

Sequels, Prequels, and Re-Imaginings: The Hollywood Cash Cow

Oz the Great & Powerful got me thinking about an interesting subject - that of sequels, prequels, and re-imaginings.  Even if the stories aren't really anything particularly interesting, audiences are still drawn to them because they love the original so much.  It's an intriguing phenomenon, and Hollywood undoubtedly understands the psychology behind this.  Since the 1980's, sequels or similar re-imaginings usually dominate the Top 10 Grossing films of the year.  Do we really need 4 or 5 Shrek or Die Hard films?  No, but we've already spent so much money on the other films that we're at least curious what happens to our beloved characters.  

Some sequels slotted to be released in 2013 (left to right, top to bottom): Red, Scary Movie, Monsters Inc., Iron Man, The Hobbit

It's no wonder why many talented filmmakers have shifted their efforts towards television (ex. AMC = American Movie Classics, known mostly for their award-winning TV series).  With a television series, we follow a group of characters through various different plot lines week to week.  We stay tuned for one reason: curiosity.  What's going to happen next episode?  What hilarious Dwight prank will Jim pull off on "The Office" next?  What will Rick & the gang be faced with next on "The Walking Dead"?  We get to know the characters and care about what happens in their fictional lives.  Movies can do the same to the point where we "can't wait!" for the next movie in a series to come out.  We all experience this.  Hollywood producers have adopted a pseudo-TV-style method of operating - they generate sequels to create interest and then satisfy that interest.

Top Grossing Films of 2012 (from Wikipedia):

1. The Avengers = "sequel" to Iron Man, Thor, etc.
2. Skyfall = sequel
3. The Dark Knight Rises = sequel
4. The Hobbit = prequel 
5. Ice Age: Continental Drift = sequel
6. Twilight: Breaking Dawn pt. 2 = sequel
7. The Amazing Spider-man = reboot
8. Madagascar 3 = sequel
9. The Hunger Games = first in a series based on a book
10. Men in Black 3 = sequel

Top Grossing Films of 2011 (from Wikipedia):

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 = sequel
2. Transformers: Dark of the Moon = sequel
3. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides = sequel
4. Twilight: Breaking Dawn pt. 1 = sequel
5. Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol = sequel
6. Kung Fu Panda 2 = sequel
7. Fast Five = sequel
8. Hangover pt. 2 = sequel
9. The Smurfs 
10. Cars 2 = sequel

Top Grossing Films of 2001 (from Wikipedia):

1. Harry Potter = start of series
2. LOTR: Fellowship = start of series
3. Monsters, Inc. = sequel on the way
4. Shrek = start of series
5. Ocean's 11 = start of series
6. Pearl Harbor
7. The Mummy Returns = sequel
8. Jurassic Park 3 = sequel
9. Planet of the Apes = reboot
10. Hannibal = sequel

Movies are increasingly being made more available to the public than each year before it.  Many years ago (in the times before blu-rays, DVDs, and VHS), if you missed a movie in the theater, it  meant you missed the movie.  There were no re-screenings or take home versions until years later.  It, therefore, made no sense for Hollywood to start thinking about generating films that featured "returning" characters.  With the ever quickening availability of films on Netflix, Red Box, and the like, it becomes a race to generate the next film in the series as fast as possible... then get it out to the public quickly in all forms of media possible!  While convenience and availability are certainly on the rise, are originality and innovation taking the back seat?  In some cases, yes.

I certainly do not hate every sequel or re-imagining of a classic movie ever made.  I do think that many of them are complete crap and are designed to be purely cash cows.  The Harry Potter series is anomaly - a movie series that was based on a book series where each film was strong, respectful of the source material, but also unique enough experience to make it an amazing series... which still made a boat load of money!  Quality films can make money, and quality films can result in a quality movie series.  But often times, it's the factory-generated, assembly line sequels that make the most dough.

Joey Kane

04/06/2013

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

  

April 2013 Movie Reviews

"Hold on to your butts."

Jurassic Park - 3D IMAX

• I've honestly been looking forward to seeing this since I heard they were doing it.  Jurassic Park has always been one of my favorites, and it's back in theaters again with one helluva IMAX 3D conversion.  Many people (like me) who never saw the 1993 film on the big screen will likely to flock to see the big dinos on screen bigger than ever before.  For those who have never seen the film, I envy you - you're in for a treat.  The special effects were innovative 20 years ago and hold up today.  It was great sitting in a fully packed theater on 7:00 PM in Boston on Friday for the release.  Audience members sat back and enjoyed the journey to Isla Nublar set to John Williams' brilliant overture, lovingly chuckled at the dated technology in the film (look at that "state-of-the-art" interactive CD-ROM!), screamed during the velociraptor's big on-screen introduction, laughed at the Ian Malcolm quips, and, of course, marveled at the T-rex in 3D.  Jurassic Park is without a doubt the one film I have seen the most.  It's a classic.  Spielberg's film is a masterpiece  of sheer spectacle juxtaposed with intense sci-fi terror.  I would've still been at the theater even if it wasn't in 3D, but for fans of the film, the conversion makes it well worth the journey back to the island.
• Rating: 5 out of 5

"Spring breaaaaaak."

Spring Breakers

• Spring Breakers will likely be the most polarizing film of the year.  People will love it or hate it.  I gravitate more towards the former.  Aside from the gratuitous amount of young adult skin put on display in various obscene ways, the film is brilliantly shot and scored.  The original soundtrack (mainly by Skrillex and Cliff Martinez, who also composed the Drive soundtrack) is phenomenal.  Often, the film intentionally drifts into the realm of music video, with extended shots of partying with the soundtrack roaring away.  I've heard people call our generation (20-something and under) the "music video generation" - favoring quick cuts over long shots, immediate pleasures over long-term loves, the instant answer over the learned knowledge.  Spring Breakers seems to reflect this notion.  The main characters reject any form of structure, formal education, or "civilized" society in favor of violence (including robbery at gunpoint), promiscuity, drugs, and wearing bikinis (or less) throughout almost the entire movie - even during their inevitable court appearance.  The girls oscillate between their various dangerous pleasures until they finally latch onto the one person they feel some sense of connection to - "Alien" (whose name is no accident).  James Franco provides some of the much needed dark comic relief in a powerhouse performance that is guaranteed to be a fan favorite.  It makes for an immensely unique visual & auditory spectacle to say the least, but there's a lot more going on than sheer bikini candy.  Spring Breakers will be appreciated by two types of audience members: those looking for the aforementioned bikini candy (it delivers), and a cult following that will enjoy the film for its combination of music, cinematography, and character study of a reckless lifestyle that when mixed together results in one of the most provocative films in recent cinema.
• Rating: 4 out of 5

"You don't know much about witches, do you?"

Oz the Great & Powerful

• Here's James Franco again in a slightly different role!  The prequel-ish Oz the Great & Powerful makes for a fun, visually delicious that nicely blends elements of the classic Wizard of Oz with modern CGI and 3D technology.  My favorite moments were the old school storytelling and visual trickery techniques that director Sam Raimi adds to the film.  Without them, the film would just be another attempt to recycle a classic movie and modernize it (click here for my discussion of sequels/prequels).  Oz makes for an entertaining beyond-the-yellow-brick-road way of examining the world of Oz.  I really did not buy Mila Kunis in her 2nd/3rd act role at all; it certainly made sense for her character's development so I let it slide a bit.  Overall, it's a fun experience going back to Oz through a different lens.
• Rating: 3 out of 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

A Dangerous Method (2011) - Review

Dry, boring, and an overall squandering of talented actors and director.  The film isn't so much a dissertation on the founders of psychoanalysis as it is a sleep test (i.e. try not to fall asleep while watching the film).  What a shame.

1 out of 5


Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Oscars 2013

Which film will win BEST PICTURE this year?

• Amour - the only nominated film I haven't seen this year (I still would like to).  Doubt it will win.  I don't understand why foreign films or animated films are allowed to be nominated for Best Picture.  It seems to be an insult to the other films nominated for Best Foreign Language Film or Best Animated Feature - how would they stand a chance?
• Argo - this seems to be gathering the most steam with other award shows.  The fact that Affleck wasn't nominated for Best Director is interesting, but my money is on this one to win the big prize sunday night.
• Beast of the Southern Wild - this was my personal favorite film of 2012.  If ever a movie could be considered alive, it would be Beasts of the Southern Wild.  The film is bursting with life, filled with originality, and amazingly creates genuine emotion in the midst of a magical fable about a little girl named Hushpuppy and her daddy Wink.  Totally original and completely innovative.  My heart wants it to take home the Oscar, but it's more of a dark horse than a front runner.
• Django Unchained - what's imperfect for Tarantino is still better than most other directors' works.  But if Pulp Fiction couldn't bring QT the Oscar for Best Picture, I don't think Django can either. 
• Les Miserables - the film's structure (live recording) will likely prove influential for the musical genre.  But can this clunky, epic musical snag Oscars?  If your name is Anne Hathaway, I'd say yes.
• Life of Pi - probably the biggest long-shot to win.  It was visually stunning, but part of the punch from the novel's parable structure was lost on me with its transition to the big screen.
• Lincoln - right up there at the front of the pack with Argo.  Daniel Day Lewis is almost assured an Oscar for his portrayal of the former president.  The film showcases delicate storytelling centered around strong characters and historical relevance.  It all screams Oscar bait.
• Silver Linings Playbook - this movie belongs to its actors who all shine in their respective roles.  That's not to discredit the role Director David O. Russell and the writers played.  I thoroughly enjoyed the film, but don't think it will win the big prize.
• Zero Dark Thirty - the film is impressive and Kathryn Bigelow has a recent Oscar film under her belt.  Will this one be her second in less than 5 years?  Maybe, but I doubt it.  

• BEST DIRECTOR:
• Prediction: Steven Spielberg
• My vote: Benh Zeitlin
• BEST ACTOR:
• Prediction: Daniel Day Lewis
• My vote: same 
• BEST ACTRESS:
• Prediction: Jennifer Lawrence
• My vote: It would be AMAZING to see Quvenzhane Wallis win.
• BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:
• Prediction: Tommy Lee Jones
• My vote: same
• BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:
• Prediction: Anne Hathaway
• My vote: same
• BEST ANIMATED FEATURE:
• Prediction: Brave
• My vote: I didn't see any of them this year :(
• CINEMATOGRAPHY:
• Prediction: Life of Pi
• My vote: SKYFALL! :) (even though Life of Pi was pretty amazing...)
• COSTUME DESIGN:
• Prediction: Les Mis 
• My vote: same
• DOCUMENTARY: 
• Did not see any of them this year :(
• FILM EDITING:
• Prediction: Argo
• My vote: same
• FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:
• Prediction: Amour is going to win. Period.
• My vote: did not see any of them :(
• MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING:
• Prediction: Les Mis
• My vote: same
• MUSIC:
• Prediction: Argo or maybe Lincoln
• My vote: Skyfall
• BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:
• Prediction: Zero Dark Thirty
• My vote: Moonrise Kingdom
• BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:
• Prediction: Argo
• My vote: Beasts of the Southern Wild
• SOUND EDITING / MIXING
• I hope Skyfall takes them both.

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.

Zero Dark Thirty - Review

The woman behind the so-called "greatest manhunt for the world's most dangerous man."

Zero Dark Thirty is a story.  It's not meant to serve as a 100% factual representation of the events leading up to and including Osama Bin Laden's death.  Rather, it's a stylized exercise in strategic planning and military intelligence that ultimately resulted in a manhunt that has been cemented in the history books.  The heart and soul of the film is clearly Jessica Chastain (who seems to me to be Director Kathryn Bigelow's doppelganger... or maybe it's the other way around...).  At any rate, Chastain's character strikes the right balance between intellect, tenacity, and guts.  She's an intriguing character based on a real person, and Chastain's portrayal of her reveals various facets of her personality throughout the film.

The film features some striking sequences that underscore the shaky situation these military and intelligence operatives were faced with.  And the film's final act is completely captivating.  Years of hard work and due diligence are condensed into a slightly bulky 2.5ish hours... but it all comes down to that final sequence at Bin Laden's compound.  We all know the bare bones of the story because we lived through it.  Zero Dark Thirty operates on similar filmmaking strategies that made The Hurt Locker such a success.  While ZDT gains some power from its basis in "reality", I enjoyed Hurt Locker more.  However, both films represent different cinematic approaches to a topical subject and are worth checking out. 

Zero Dark Thirty 3.5 / 5

Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website.  They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.