tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3306134514198256972024-03-15T04:43:06.936-04:00Hello, Mr. AndersonI write about stuff. Mostly Movies. For your entertainment. Because I can.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.comBlogger481125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-60657176006200373912014-06-30T00:00:00.000-04:002014-06-30T08:51:22.988-04:00Another 2014 Catch-Up: The BaddiesOh, hooray! Another compilation review! Everybody loves those! ...right?<br>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
Okay, I've been away for a bit. There are a couple of reasons for it, but mainly it boils down to devoting most of my time to schoolwork during the summer semester. I <b>HAVE</b> taken the odd hours to get down to the movie theater or to the local Redbox to check out the latest DVDs, but for the most part that hasn't left much time elsewhere to pen my thoughts on them. I've missed a lot this year: even after my recent surge, I've only seen thirty-two 2014 movies at this time, and there are plenty more (<i>Non-Stop</i>, <i>Transcendence</i>, others) that I'm still waiting for an opportunity to rent on DVD. But I'm much further along than I was a few weeks ago, and now it's time to get it all down before I forget. I'll start off with some of 2014's truly horrible releases, and work my way up the ladder in the next couple of posts. Enjoy!</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YtmVe8pxBu4/U6yG_mXS2nI/AAAAAAAAM54/PV5V81tlfy4/s1600/MV5BMzM0MjE0Nzg1N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwODA4ODE4MDE@._V1_SY317_CR0,0,214,317_AL_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YtmVe8pxBu4/U6yG_mXS2nI/AAAAAAAAM54/PV5V81tlfy4/s1600/MV5BMzM0MjE0Nzg1N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwODA4ODE4MDE@._V1_SY317_CR0,0,214,317_AL_.jpg" height="320" width="216"></a></div>
<div>
Based on a story from the mind of Luc Besson, <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Pbz85vYdw">3 Days to Kill</a></i> follows veteran CIA operative Ethan Renner (Kevin Costner), as he goes from a botched operation, in which he is the only survivor, to learning he is in suffering from an advanced case of terminal brain cancer that has spread to his lungs to semi-retirement so he can reunite with his estranged wife (Connie Nielsen) and daughter (Hailee Steinfeld) for what little life he has left. But soon, the CIA's elite agent Vivi (Amber Heard) intrudes on his life, offering him a double chance at redemption. She wants him to continue the mission he had been unable to complete before, and in return Ethan will be given access to a prototype cancer treatment that could extend his time on the planet. All he has is to eliminate his target in three days... for some reason. Yeah, the title is by far the most confusing aspect of the story, but since this is a McG film, that's to be expected.</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
Yes, the middle-aged, absurdly-named action director who everyone agrees shouldn't direct action movies is back, this time with a straight-up cloak-and-dagger story with a deus-ex-machina plot device that sometimes get addressed, though not all that often. There are some obvious weaknesses here, from the banality of the character designs - they're either wonder-bread bland or overly silly - to McG's inability to blend the two dynamics of the tale, as the reuniting of Ethan and his family, which is done almost humorously, doesn't quite gel with the more action-y sequences that are supposed to be exciting. Supposed, being the key word. Too often it feels like we're watching two different movies by how night and day the tone changes, and even when the two halves are forced together at the film's end, they barely have an impact on one-another, making you wonder if they were two disparate screenplays in the beginning. The script is also chock full of contrivances that make little sense and serve only to push the plot forward to its uninspired and unsurprising conclusion.</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bZxcuDxOiPU/U6yG4KmwPVI/AAAAAAAAM4A/bfu9_OYs2Ls/s1600/3-days-to-kill-movie-wallpaper-16.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bZxcuDxOiPU/U6yG4KmwPVI/AAAAAAAAM4A/bfu9_OYs2Ls/s1600/3-days-to-kill-movie-wallpaper-16.jpg" height="201" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dear God, what a horrible dye job.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
The cast is at least talented, though that makes the fact that they have nothing good to work with much more frustrating. Costner is at least compelling as a veteran government agent, a screw-up who let his work ethic get in the way of raising a family. Of course, we've seen his emotionless performance a bunch already this year (in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/05/double-feature-sports-flick-drama.html">Draft Day</a></i> and <i>Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit</i>, which I'll get to next time), so better material would have let it stand out a bit better. But I digress. He and Steinfeld have great chemistry, and their scenes together (when McG remembers that she's supposed to be part of the story) are probably the best elements of <i>3 Days to Kill</i>. And add this director to the multitude of those who have no idea how to capture the numerous talents of Heard, who frustratingly keeps getting terrible roles in mediocre movies. Here, she's a leather-wearing, BDSM-promoting, blonde-dyed bad-ass, but the writing is so bad that she can't tap into her true potential. The action is likewise hit-or-miss, as there are some great setups here (especially with the beautiful Paris setting) that suffer from poor direction and lackluster implementation.</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dhwcxufIo5U/U6yG7bUuDFI/AAAAAAAAM4s/1sLYgD5ha10/s1600/kevin-costner-connie-nielsen-3-days-kill-570x294.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dhwcxufIo5U/U6yG7bUuDFI/AAAAAAAAM4s/1sLYgD5ha10/s1600/kevin-costner-connie-nielsen-3-days-kill-570x294.jpg" height="206" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Costner and Nielson are going to need a drink after this.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Of all of the movies I'm going to discuss today, <i>3 Days to Kill</i> at least doesn't pretend to take itself all that seriously. There are a few laughs, and occasionally the hits the upper notes of a standard Besson action production. But McG was simply the wrong director for this project, as the man hasn't made an enjoyable film since 2000's <i>Charlie's Angels</i>, and that was far more tongue-in-cheek than we get here. There are some times when you can see this movie wants to break out of its eternal humdrum, but the inability behind the camera to produce a decent film doomed this one from the start.</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mhGNXFNgm3Q/U6yG53suZhI/AAAAAAAAM4M/nNcV2eaN2VA/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mhGNXFNgm3Q/U6yG53suZhI/AAAAAAAAM4M/nNcV2eaN2VA/s1600/download.jpg" height="320" width="215"></a></div>
<div>
Of today's group, I probably had the <b>HIGHEST</b> hopes for <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1ERrnYunBg">Vampire Academy</a></i>, based on the teen fiction book series and from director Mark Waters, whose biggest contribution to date is arguably the much-loved <i>Mean Girls</i>. Come to think of it, my hope for this probably says a lot about my opinion about this group of flicks going in, but back to the details. <i>Vampire Academy</i> stars Hollywood youth Zoey Deutch and Lucy Fry as best friends and fellow creatures of the dark, Rose and Vasilisa, who live and learn at St. Vladimir's Academy, which I guess is supposed to be kind of like Hogwarts School. In Montana. For vampires. They've just been returned to the school after running away, for reasons that aren't entirely clear, even to the two young women. Upon their arrival, they become aware of a plot threatening to change the posh, upscale setting irrevocably, they are the only two able to put a stop to this diabolical plot. And then they get to go to the prom!<br>
<br>
The positives here are sadly few and far between. The cast has some real chemistry, and the dialogue is solid, as screenwriter Daniel Waters (Mark's brother) delves a little too deeply into Diablo Cody territory but otherwise manages to keep the written word on somewhat realistic terms. And, not surprisingly for a movie based on a whole series of novels, the lore presented is excellent and highly intriguing, even if the nature of the story means it needs to be spelled out with a monologue-heavy opening sequence and voice-over narration, and we the audience wish we could have learned a lot more. And as a highlight of the cast, <i>Modern Family</i>'s Sarah Hyland provides a nice spark of comic relief against the base dramatic story of vampires meets typical teenage romance coming-of-age.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3a_xe4s1Z8E/U7B4Cyy2ISI/AAAAAAAAM-g/pWnqAK4Jwts/s1600/vampire-academy-set-report.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3a_xe4s1Z8E/U7B4Cyy2ISI/AAAAAAAAM-g/pWnqAK4Jwts/s1600/vampire-academy-set-report.jpg" height="203" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">If only the movie was as good as their fashion decisions...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But <i>Vampire Academy </i>just can't find it in its heart to break free from the molds of the genres it is trying to combine. The teen story hits all the usual notes - high school politics, poor relationship choices, the prom - so there's nothing special there. And the vampire side of things is so rushed and maligned that it never really gets explored so much as it should. Audiences can't help but feel that they're missing some important bits, as characters and situations are introduced that don't have a lasting impact on the main plot, but are obviously represented <b>ONLY </b>because they were in the book, and to add to the potential of a franchise (which definitely won't happen, now). While the acting is solid, Deutch's leading lady is one of the more annoying and unlikeable lady protagonists in recent memory, never growing as a character and making the kinds of decisions that make her easy to hate and difficult to see how she's attracted the friendship of Fry's more proper vamp. The special effects are nothing to write home about, not surprising for a low-budget pseudo-monster movie. You'll be looking at the veteran support cast - which includes Olga Kurylenko, Gabriel Byrne and Joely Richardson - and wonder to whom they owed favors to appear in this mess. Even the soundtrack is uninspired, featuring songs from the types of musicians - Katy Perry, Iggy Azalea, Au Revoir Simone - that panderingly reach out to that young female audience, taking what is often the best part of a bad teen movie and reducing it to pop irrelevance. Finally, the whole story ends with one of these cliched speeches from the main character that sounds like a 50-year-old man writing what <b>HE</b> thinks a teenage girl sounds like. Or maybe this was the fault of the novel's author, Richelle Mead, but as I've never read her books I'm going to assume the former.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WBweCXcmeaU/U7B4CcAW3PI/AAAAAAAAM-k/Bs-WXkxmGP0/s1600/vampire-academy-movie-rose-dimitri-570x294.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WBweCXcmeaU/U7B4CcAW3PI/AAAAAAAAM-k/Bs-WXkxmGP0/s1600/vampire-academy-movie-rose-dimitri-570x294.jpg" height="206" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Oooh, computers... <b>DO SOMETHING COOL!</b></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Of this batch, there's probably no better example of missed potential than this adaptation of <i>Vampire Academy</i>, even if it is just the latest teen series to hit the big screen and fail miserably. There is that rare moment when Hyland is on the screen that something entertaining actually happens, but there was certainly a reason this title bombed as badly as it did when it came out last February. I simply didn't care about anybody who appeared on the screen, and that's a good way to guarantee I won't be recommending your shoddy adaptation to anyone anytime soon.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jCxdNsVOw80/U7B391Mpm8I/AAAAAAAAM9U/XKx8XIGszJs/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jCxdNsVOw80/U7B391Mpm8I/AAAAAAAAM9U/XKx8XIGszJs/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Poster.jpg" height="320" width="216"></a></div>
Remember when the <i>Paranormal Activity </i>series was groundbreaking and clever in its implementation? Just three years ago <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/10/gone-fishing.html">Catfish</a></i> directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman elevated the franchise with some impressive and inventive camerawork to make <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/10/m.html">Paranormal Activity 3</a></i> one of the most shocking and scary movies that year. Sure, their 2012 follow-up <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/10/double-feature-paranormal-activity-4.html">Paranormal Activity 4</a></i> failed to live up to that standard, but you could see the directors were at least still trying to put together something different than just another haunted house tale. That doesn't happen in <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6DYsGTMkCU">Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones</a></i>, which not only doesn't feel like a part of the same franchise, but apparently didn't even deserve to be part of the numbered series (<i>Paranormal Activity 5</i> is due to be released this October, barring any more delays). Maybe the directorial job of Christopher B. Landon - who wrote the last three numbered titles in the series - has something to do with it.<br>
<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RaG15I3RkyY/U7B39MINRmI/AAAAAAAAM9I/Q3pKMc06UII/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Andrew-Jacobs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RaG15I3RkyY/U7B39MINRmI/AAAAAAAAM9I/Q3pKMc06UII/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Andrew-Jacobs.jpg" height="210" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hold on, I think you've got something in your eye...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Yes, <i>The Marked Ones</i> is a bit of a mess. Though it is supposed to be based in the same universe as its predecessors, it doesn't contain any of the atmosphere, inventiveness or scariness that made the franchise so beloved in the first place. The story focuses on high school graduate Jesse Arista (Andrew Jacobs), and that right there is the most interesting thing this entry to the series does: it gives us a Latino protagonist. In fact, all but a few members of the cast are non-white, which is a curious and positive decision made immediately disappointing by the fact that Landon surrounds his characters with the most cliched Los Angeles settings, the story swathed in racial superstition and ethnic tropes, feeling very out-of-place compared to the other movies. The tale plays out much like the rest, with Jesse's like being plagued by demons and being targeted for possession himself, and all caught on camera.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fSs3ft3S3Jk/U7B4DDEvXsI/AAAAAAAAM-o/7gieRTK54JY/s1600/video-undefined-18CF033500000578-981_638x370.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fSs3ft3S3Jk/U7B4DDEvXsI/AAAAAAAAM-o/7gieRTK54JY/s1600/video-undefined-18CF033500000578-981_638x370.jpg" height="231" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ladies and gentlemen, your D-grade demon chow.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The <i>Paranormal Activity </i>series has always played it fast and loose with exactly why everything is caught on camera for our terror, but <i>The Marked Ones</i> is easily the fastest, loosest and silliest when it comes to the concept. By that I mean, the characters in the other movies were either narcissistic assholes, overly-curious investigators, or young privileged people who couldn't live without the latest technology, so their need to capture every action on camera kind of made sense. But these blue collar young people have absolutely no <b>REASON</b> to follow that same line of thinking, except to serve the plot. There's no <b>REASON</b> for a half-asleep teen to grab his camera when he wakes up to realize his dog ran out the curiously-open front door. There's no <b>REASON</b> for his associates to carry cameras themselves when he's not in the scene. There's no <b>REASON</b> for them to tape such boring scenes as getting a snack from a vending machine. It doesn't help that we never really get a sense of who these people are, as nobody has enough personality to stand out from the crowd. That is, with the possible exception of little-used Awesome Grandma (Gloria Sandoval), if only because she's Awesome Grandma.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-EaISxcH2rWE/U7B39ZJ_4zI/AAAAAAAAM9A/axxKCguhSg0/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Demon-Bite-Mark.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-EaISxcH2rWE/U7B39ZJ_4zI/AAAAAAAAM9A/axxKCguhSg0/s1600/Paranormal-Activity-The-Marked-Ones-Demon-Bite-Mark.jpg" height="210" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">People are into the weirdest fetishes these days...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
That's not to say <i>Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones</i> is a total loss. Well, yes it is, but there are still a few positives. The ending is actually quite clever, even if you have to accept some contrivances and idiotically-random foreshadowing in order to get there, and there are a few genuinely scary bits, though not as many as there should be. The Latino influences are an interesting turn for the genre, not to mention the series, but unfortunately they change the style so much that if you actually just called this movie <i>The Marked Ones</i> and took out the few tacked-on connections to the rest of the franchise, you wouldn't have known it was from the same universe. Landon simply isn't as good as the directors who came before, taking a series that was known for its edgy style and inventive camera techniques, and simply churned out a threadbare found footage flick, as though that were something special in this day and age.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gyV8kLOmJTE/U7B38cMJF-I/AAAAAAAAM88/RQQTYljJOPs/s1600/Hercules_%25282014_film%2529_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gyV8kLOmJTE/U7B38cMJF-I/AAAAAAAAM88/RQQTYljJOPs/s1600/Hercules_%25282014_film%2529_poster.jpg" height="320" width="204"></a></div>
To finish up, I present to you the most wretched movie I saw in this latest catch-up (and perhaps all year), January's <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0GMzQwO2l0">The Legend of Hercules</a></i>. <b>VERY</b> loosely based on the... you know what? It isn't even that. Besides appropriating the name of Hercules (and casting the suitably buff Kellan Lutz to play the part), popping in genre-appropriate names such as Hera, Zeus, Hebe, Amphitryon, Iphicles, and the like, and installing a few random feats of valor such as the Nemean Lion, this so-called "legend" has <b>NOTHING</b> to do with the mythical superhero and renowned icon of the written word. Obviously this is <b>NOT</b> from the same Renny Harlin who brought us <i>Die Hard 2</i>, but the one who brought us <i>Cliffhanger</i>, <i>Cutthroat Island</i> and <i>12 Rounds</i>. Oh, joy.<br>
<br>
You can see right from the opening scene (which bizarrely tries to blend visual cues of D-Day, video game <i>Total War: Rome</i>, and World Wrestling Entertainment in one go) to see just about everything wrong with this mess of a movie. The special effects and set pieces are horrible, the writing is laughable, and the acting isn't much better. And when you cast the likes of Gaia Weiss, Scott Adkins, Roxanne McKee, Liam Garrigan and Liam McIntyre in your lead roles, you can't argue that the poorly-written material was their sole downfall. This <i>Hercules</i> is a prime example of overreaching your boundaries, as all the elements in play look like the kind of work you would put into a direct-to-DVD or limited release, but someone actually looked at this and thought it was a good idea to push it into over 2,000 theaters, where it got exactly the amount of respect it deserved.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0kjCUZHMPhA/U7B4BlB6JjI/AAAAAAAAM-M/mS2ohNTCd5U/s1600/movies_ss_1397288904.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0kjCUZHMPhA/U7B4BlB6JjI/AAAAAAAAM-M/mS2ohNTCd5U/s1600/movies_ss_1397288904.jpg" height="236" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">He's not old enough for this $#!^...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
If <i>The Legend of Hercules</i> has anything going for it, it's Kellan Lutz. Oh, I'm not praising the <i>Twilight</i> alum's acting, which comes off as a slightly more charming Channing Tatum circa <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/04/average-joe.html">GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra</a></i>. Lots of folks think he has potential, and he'll get more chances to prove his worth, but you have to wonder if anybody sees potential in the actor beyond his admittedly-impressive physique. Granted, he does well in the scenes where he's given opportunity to emote, but the real reason he works so well here is that muscle mass, which does absolutely capture the raw physical nature of the Greek legend. And when Lutz is called upon to perform the more strenuous aspects of his gig, such as throwing his weight around in a gladiatorial arena, it looks genuinely impressive, really the only positive thing that can be said about the visual effects.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mHN7Du0hnFQ/U7B3_VrAhSI/AAAAAAAAM9o/-uGhoXX_1Qs/s1600/hercules-legend-begins-trailer-570x294.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mHN7Du0hnFQ/U7B3_VrAhSI/AAAAAAAAM9o/-uGhoXX_1Qs/s1600/hercules-legend-begins-trailer-570x294.jpg" height="206" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Aaand he's falling asleep.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Even more damning for <i>The Legend of Hercules</i> is that Brett Ratner and Dwayne Johnson are about to release their own <i>Hercules</i> later this summer, and it looks heads and tails better than any one scene of footage that Harlin has managed to translate to the big screen here. Perhaps I would be a <b>LITTLE</b> less harsh on this movie if the filmmakers had created an original story and not so terribly adapted a well-known, legendary tale, but even if this movie had not included the name <i>Hercules</i>, it would have been just as excreble. I have a hard time believing I'll see anything worse than this train wreck, which makes the writing in <i>Pompeii</i> seem cohesive and intelligent, and the acting straight out of <i>Ben Hur</i>. There's just no reason for <i>The Legend of Hercules </i>to have existed in the way it attempted, and hopefully we can all soon forger this bland, uninspired tragedy of the silver screen was ever conceived.</div>
Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-68677621925163758502014-06-27T13:52:00.001-04:002014-06-27T13:52:13.947-04:00Extinction Level Entertainment<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Eza6pHRessI/U6z-F_DmpUI/AAAAAAAAM7Q/Fln8UFw_-CE/s1600/transformers-age-of-extinction-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Eza6pHRessI/U6z-F_DmpUI/AAAAAAAAM7Q/Fln8UFw_-CE/s1600/transformers-age-of-extinction-poster.jpg" height="320" width="205" /></a></div>
I've been catching up on a lot of 2014 movies this past week, and I'm going to get on to writing about them soon enough, but right now I just have to talk about <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYDGqmxMZFI">Transformers: Age of Extinction</a></i>. I have to talk about it because the fourth live-action movie in the Hasbro toy franchise might just be the best movie of director Michael Bay's career.<br />
<br />
Now, I know what you're probably thinking: "That's not saying much," and normally, you'd be right. Bay has become known as a staple of big, explosion-laden blockbusters, dating way back to 1995 and directorial debut <i>Bad Boys</i>. The director has made a name for himself by making successful tentpole flicks ever since, and even though his stories and characters have been dumb as rocks (and getting dumber every time), people still want to see his movies. That's because Bay wants everything you see (in his own words) "to be awesome", and that energy tends to rub off onto the big screen and excite his audiences. But as I said, his storytelling has gotten dumber, and the first three <i>Transformers</i> movies are perfect examples of Bay's negative trends as a director: he doesn't know where to focus the story, his humor devolves into criminally racial stereotypes, he feels the need to pull a Lucas and create Jar Jar Binks-level caricatures for "levity", and despite everything we've been told in the past twenty years, he's really not all that great at directing action, where the characters clash in mishmashes of unreadable disaster porn.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kOCNML8G8ow/U6z-GjTpGUI/AAAAAAAAM7I/8DGm2Nx6IL0/s1600/transformers2_a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kOCNML8G8ow/U6z-GjTpGUI/AAAAAAAAM7I/8DGm2Nx6IL0/s1600/transformers2_a.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Take me to your Earth women."</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And yet... <i>Age of Extinction</i> is actually pretty good. Not "great", but also not just "good for Michael Bay". In his surprising fourth turn as director of the franchise (the third was supposed to have been his last), Bay actually seems to be growing as a director. I know, I can't believe it, either! The story takes place five years after the climactic battle of Chicago from <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/07/transform-and-roll-out.html" style="font-style: italic;">Transformers: Dark of the Moon</a>, and in the aftermath a black ops CIA strike force has been hunting down the robotic aliens with a vengeance, with both the noble Autobots and evil Decepticons in their cross-hairs. They're even getting aid from a rogue Transformer bounty hunter named Lockdown (voiced by Mark Ryan) who seems to have an agenda of his own concerning his brethren. With the remaining "robots in disguise" in hiding, nobody knows where Autobot commander Optimus Prime (Peter Cullen) is... until a damaged semi truck shows up in the barn of Texas technician Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg)...<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EapVlnkIuic/U62Ke1Gg-WI/AAAAAAAAM8Q/6x9t9-XG9KM/s1600/transformers-age-of-extinction-trailer-images-40.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EapVlnkIuic/U62Ke1Gg-WI/AAAAAAAAM8Q/6x9t9-XG9KM/s1600/transformers-age-of-extinction-trailer-images-40.jpg" height="166" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Not even Marky Mark can stand up to these baddies...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So, to be honest, the reason I enjoyed this latest <i>Transformers</i> flick so much is because the whole thing is actually <b>ABOUT</b> something. Whereas the first three were nothing but the hidden war between the Autobots and the Decepticons and Bay's love of all things military, and yet somehow focusing mainly on the spasming face of Shia LaBeouf, <i>Age of Extinction</i> actually seems to have something behind the exposition and explosions. It's about being a father, as Wahlberg's character must deal with the realization that he can't always protect his daughter (<i>The Last Airbender</i>'s Nicola Pelz) from the dangers of the world. It's about racial profiling in a post-9/11 scenario, as we see the human bad guys (played by Kelsey Grammar and Titus Welliver) expound "us vs. them" speeches without discerning between the evil and innocent under their gaze, with one even having lost family in the aforementioned Chicago battle. It's about cloning, corporate greed, the dangers of too-soon scientific progress, genocide, a veteran soldier's bitterness at being abandoned by the people he worked so hard to protect, and what it means to be a living being. There are deep, philosophical discussions to be made of any of these topics, and they all have a part to play in the plot. Now granted, Bay is not necessarily the best man to be putting these ideas out there alongside his CGI mayhem and robotic dinosaurs, but that he does so well introducing these ideas to a major Hollywood blockbuster makes you wonder if he's secretly been growing as a director while the world has scoffed as his "artistic achievements" thus far.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H6bsfPiuWVE/U62KbcgMvnI/AAAAAAAAM7o/RasXgNJKVxg/s1600/Transformers-Age-of-Extinction-Meet-Lockdown.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H6bsfPiuWVE/U62KbcgMvnI/AAAAAAAAM7o/RasXgNJKVxg/s1600/Transformers-Age-of-Extinction-Meet-Lockdown.jpg" height="210" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">If struts could kill...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Another major upgrade made to this sequel is the cast. Gone are the boring, adolescent hi-jinks of Sam Witwicky and his useless, pointless, interchangeable love interests Megan Fox/Rosie Huntington-Whitely. Gone are the requisite military bad-asses and really just pointless cameos Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson. Gone are wacko John Tuturro, Witwicky parents Kevin Dunn and Julie White (who were appreciated by absolutely no-one), and almost every racist and sexist stereotype (just almost, because... Michael Bay) that has plagued the franchise to this point. They're replaced by a mostly-solid group of actors, especially Wahlberg in the lead. Finally, <i>Transformers </i>fans have a thoughtful, likable human protagonist who actually does things that <b>MATTER</b>, far beyond just being a cosmic MacGuffin who improbably gets the girl through sheer audience annoyance. Wahlberg has showed a heft of talent over the years, and working with Bay again (they paired up for last year's awful <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/painfully-gained.html">Pain & Gain</a></i>) as an off-type everyman works surprisingly well, thanks to the equal parts tough guy and compassionate man that the role required, to which the actor took exceptionally well. He gets some good support as well, not only from Grammar and Welliver (the former also gleefully playing against type), but also Stanley Tucci as a results-oriented scientist dreaming of greatness, Sophia Myles (Madame de Pompadour!) as a geologist who discovers that what we know about Dinosaur extinction isn't necessarily true, <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-resident-evil-retribution/">Resident Evil: Retribution</a></i>'s Li Bingbing as Tucci's surprisingly kick-ass assistant, and even T.J. Miller providing a bit of decent comic relief in the first act. And the Transformers themselves get a bit more attention this time around, with the voices of Cullen, John Goodman, Ken Watanabe and John Dimaggio providing more personality and depth than we had seen from this group in the previous three entries. I've been saying for a while that the series needed to focus more on the titular heroes if it wanted my respect, and Bay actually seems to have addressed that issue, putting them front and center and writing some excellent material for the voice actors to work through. It's almost as if the director actually <b>WANTED</b> to make a <i>Transformers</i> movie this time around.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YKzcJAq_zEQ/U62KcuP9izI/AAAAAAAAM8M/Uj-dJ9aqECM/s1600/o-TRANSFORMERS-AGE-OF-EXTINCTION-TRAILER-facebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YKzcJAq_zEQ/U62KcuP9izI/AAAAAAAAM8M/Uj-dJ9aqECM/s1600/o-TRANSFORMERS-AGE-OF-EXTINCTION-TRAILER-facebook.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">'Murica!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Not everything works out, however. Bay's dislike of strong women seems to show no sign of ending, as the woman who gets the most screentime is the whiny, bratty, completely useless Nicola Pelz. And her character isn't that great, either (zing!). Frankly speaking, Tessa Yeager just makes no sense, in one scene decrying the head-in-the-sky nature of her inventor father and declaring herself the real manager of the household, the next screaming for her "daddy" to save her from the giant robots battle she's too stupid to run in the opposite direction from. Even her singular "redeeming" moment is shortchanged, as she really doesn't do anything besides help her boyfriend (played blandly by Jack Reynor) do one solitary - albeit admittedly important - task, and it never really makes up for how insufferably annoying she is. Forget comparing her to Megan Fox - whose uselessness was at least mitigated by her coolness and take-charge attitude - Pelz's role and performance make Rosie Huntington-Whitely look like an Oscar-caliber actress. If there's one thing that could be said positively about Pelz, it's that she does a better job here than she did in the abomination that was <i>The Last Airbender</i>, but anybody who saw that knows that pieces of rotting driftwood could have done better.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CNUIS2gEHdI/U62KcBDHglI/AAAAAAAAM7s/U62bFDQxoK4/s1600/images.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CNUIS2gEHdI/U62KcBDHglI/AAAAAAAAM7s/U62bFDQxoK4/s1600/images.jpg" height="268" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, wait, Chevy Camero! Better time! 'Murica!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Another downside - or at least a surprisingly inconsistent element - is the SFX use, which most of the time looks positively gorgeous but on occasion flickers into cartoonish territory. And it's not the Transformers animations, which you could forgive for having more uncanny valley than the average Robert Zemeckis movie. No, those look crisp as ever, and combined with the excellent voice-work, make for some amazingly compelling visuals. No, it's the smaller effects that stand out, such as when some human characters are scaling down a building side, and the CGI is just <b>SCREAMING</b>, it's so noticeable. Bay does use some practical effects, but when he uses computers to render something other than the title's main characters, it just doesn't look quite right. This is a shock when you consider how relatively flawless the previous entries were as far as special effects went (it was universally the best aspect of those moves) and how Bay has essentially built his career on said big screen spectacle. It's only a minor gripe, nowhere near the worst the film has to offer.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XjMXWLcGSfo/U62KdAqBG6I/AAAAAAAAM8A/rgV0uaBqWCw/s1600/super-bowl-trailer-transformers-age-of-extinction.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XjMXWLcGSfo/U62KdAqBG6I/AAAAAAAAM8A/rgV0uaBqWCw/s1600/super-bowl-trailer-transformers-age-of-extinction.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It's a robot... with a sword... riding a robotic T-Rex. I have no words.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now, despite the praise I've been heaping on the movie brought to us from Bay and screenwriter Ehren Kruger (whose last great screenplay was <i>The Ring</i>, and that was an American remake of a Japanese classic), I'm not saying that <i>Transformers: Age of Extinction</i> is great. Like I said, despite the surprising depth and metaphor present in the story, Bay still is still not the best director at developing the "human element". The ending is a bit rushed, the only reason they filmed the third act in Hong Kong was a blatant attempt to cash in on the Chinese box office, the product placement is fairly obvious, and the characters often refer to things they couldn't have learned but for a choppy film editing process. The movie also feels a bit long at almost three hours, though it should be pointed out that it never feels as long as, say, Zack Snyder's fellow advertising firm <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/06/dont-call-me-superman.html">Man of Steel</a></i>. But despite these perfectly obvious blemishes, to Bay's credit he doesn't do a half-bad job, either. The action is actually pretty clear, and despite some pointless slow-motion bits (like Pelz' dialogue, Bay doesn't always know how to properly emphasize) the battle sequences are engaging and pretty easy to follow, the antithesis of the first three.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aeA1rPEaFHo/U62KbXV_ygI/AAAAAAAAM8I/wlioWO7F6L0/s1600/Transformers-Age-Of-Extinction-011b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-aeA1rPEaFHo/U62KbXV_ygI/AAAAAAAAM8I/wlioWO7F6L0/s1600/Transformers-Age-Of-Extinction-011b.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Speech, speech! Oh, who am I kidding, we all know he's going to make a speech.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
For the director, this surprising maturity between the first three <i>Transformers</i> movies and now really does bring this fourth entry to a whole other level, blending some serious filmmaking with his usual bombast and bright shininess to create something that isn't entirely brainless and idiotic. I know that might sound like damning with faint praise, but I'm just <b>SHOCKED</b> that Bay was able to create a movie this <b>GOOD </b>and I'm not sure how to say good things about his work. Every action director usually has <b>ONE</b> really good movie, but as Bay really hasn't had one yet, I thought perhaps he had peaked back in the 90's. But - and I'm totally serious when I say this - Michael Bay has made the best movie of his career, and it's a good action film. Not just good compared to <i>Armageddon</i>, or to <i>The Island</i>,<i> </i>or to any of his previous <i>Transformers</i> movies. No, Michael Bay has actually created his magnum opus, a surprisingly cohesive popcorn film that doesn't automatically offend your sense of intelligence every time someone opens their mouth. And <i>Age of Extinction </i>is actually a whole lot of fun, to boot. Sure, you probably need to see the previous dreck to get a full sense of the storyline as a whole, but even if you're not a hardcore fan of the 80's toy craze, there's still a lot to appreciate about what has transformed here.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-84561510923527461082014-06-09T11:41:00.000-04:002014-06-09T11:41:01.741-04:00A Million and One Problems but This Ain't One<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3JXYmHc8ClE/U5TRM5AI5WI/AAAAAAAAMzE/Eruaad4SeKI/s1600/MV5BMTQ0NDcyNjg0MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMzk4NTA4MTE@._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3JXYmHc8ClE/U5TRM5AI5WI/AAAAAAAAMzE/Eruaad4SeKI/s1600/MV5BMTQ0NDcyNjg0MV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMzk4NTA4MTE@._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" height="320" width="202" /></a></div>
Seth MacFarlane never really gets the respect he deserves.<br />
<br />
Oh, don't mistake me, because if you've seen any of his work, you know it's entirely his own fault. If you can stand watching TV shows <i>Family Guy</i> or <i>American Dad!</i> for more than a few minutes at a time, it's obvious he's a smart, clever entertainer. In terms of wordplay, he can blow his contemporaries away with ease, and he his timing is so smooth and perfect that he will not only catch you off guard with his witty repartee, but do so in the best, most efficient way possible. But he torpedoes his own talent in two ways. One, he's at times excessively vulgar. A byproduct of the "extreme gross-out" comedy format that became big at end of the 1990's, MacFarlane lives and dies on his ability to deliver whatever shock value that the FOX network won't censor on his TV shows. Sometimes it works... and more often than not he goes a little too far, depicting gags that go on too long, or are so vile as to disgust. Naturally, this is only my opinion; your mileage may vary. The second complaint about the filmmaker is that he has one joke: the nostalgic non-sequitor accompanied by immediate visual recreation. Now, while I wouldn't say it's his <b>ONLY</b> joke, he used it so often on <i>Family Guy</i> that it's become his signature style, and since he definitely doesn't do anything in moderation, it gets old. Again, my opinion.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7cHKVuozvqU/U5W8H37JFOI/AAAAAAAAM0o/iJiR9RPctFQ/s1600/charlize-theron-in-a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-movie-10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7cHKVuozvqU/U5W8H37JFOI/AAAAAAAAM0o/iJiR9RPctFQ/s1600/charlize-theron-in-a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-movie-10.jpg" height="215" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Get on with it!"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So when MacFarlane's directorial debut <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-ted/">Ted</a></i> came out in 2012, what came as the biggest shock was that, from a first-time live-action filmmaker whose TV shows were <b>VERY</b> hit-or-miss, <i>Ted</i>'s gags were mostly hits. The humor was creative, the storytelling was solid, and the material was approachable and understandable while also undeniably being MacFarlane's usual brand of adult-only entertainment. <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhmP8UYtipA">A Million Ways to Die in the West</a></i>, however, is more like the director's previous work. That is, it tries really hard to force gags that don't work and winks for the camera to make sure you got it. If <i>Ted</i> was an example of MacFarlane successfully refraining from his too-frequently used vices, then this is his movie where he revels in them. Appearing live on the big screen for the first time, MacFarlane plays a Albert Stark, a cowardly sheep farmer in the 1882 who regularly bemoans the danger of living in the Wild West, where everything from nature to outlaws to sickness is out to get you. This thinking drives away the love of his life Louise (Amanda Seyfried), and as she was the only happy thing in Albert's life, he tries to get her back from her new douchebag boyfriend Foy (a hilarious Neil Patrick Harris). Along the way he befriends Anna, a tough-as-nails female gunslinger (Charlize Theron), pisses off a notorious outlaw (Liam Neeson) and take a drug trip with a Native American tribe. Truly, this is a story for the ages.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BlIX1JTY7ag/U5W8JL_D1xI/AAAAAAAAM1Q/0imSlV_lNMs/s1600/macfarlane3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BlIX1JTY7ag/U5W8JL_D1xI/AAAAAAAAM1Q/0imSlV_lNMs/s1600/macfarlane3.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The moustache is the real star of the show.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There is a lot wrong with MacFarlane's second feature, but the most obvious is that the story is so... ordinary. The themes are readily apparent, most of them drawn from the usual Western cliches. The only think that makes <i>A Million Ways</i> unique is the treatment of Albert, who readily admits that he is not a hero, but "the guy in the crowd making fun of the hero's shirt." It's a refreshing change of pace to not see a John Wayne or a Wayne-wannabe taking the top spotlight in this kind of movie. However, there's a definite message here for the "nice guy" (that they don't finish last if they try), and while that's kind of unique for a Western setting, we've seen it a million times in teen comedies, and it's no fresher for the change of locale. And MacFarlane's attack on the romanticizing of the old west comes out as not timeless, but out-of-time; the average movie-going public doesn't care about the Western genre, so making fun of it isn't so much a whimsical nostalgic homage as it is kicking someone while they're down.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B2SE5GYEyss/U5W8KIqHs8I/AAAAAAAAM1M/gb_OGUbYr3Q/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B2SE5GYEyss/U5W8KIqHs8I/AAAAAAAAM1M/gb_OGUbYr3Q/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Obviously, Theron's on a new diet...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It doesn't help that the characters are a bit of a bore as well, with most actors not nearly used to their best effect. MacFarlane could almost be called the exception, but for the fact that a man known for doing funny voices never once alters his speech, even as a joke. It's like having Michael Winslow in a movie and <b>NOT</b> having him do his human beatbox routine. In fact, the actor/director's performance highlights the holes in his acting talent, as he's just not the lead actor type. He's got some charisma, but his screen presence is just off, since he doesn't know how to actually work in front of a camera after years of work behind it and doing voice-over work. At least Harris knows how to mug for the camera effectively, adapting well to MacFarlane's brand of storytelling. He really is the film's best performer, even if he's not given nearly as much to do. It's not that the rest of the actors are <b>BAD</b>, but that they're just written poorly and have little to do, playing nothing but stereotypes. Seyfried is a classic "bitchy ex-girlfriend". Neeson is the deadly outlaw with no sense of humor (he doesn't even get good dialogue). Giovanni Ribisi is the "mild-mannered best friend". Sarah Silverman is Ribisi's golden-hearted, dim-witted girlfriend (points off for Silverman's limp performance, but I'll give the character credit for being a prostitute who wants to wait for sex with her boyfriend until marriage because she's Christian. That's clever.). Theron is the "cool girl friend (not girlfriend)", and Theron doesn't so much play her as show up to speak her lines. And no, I don't think the Academy Award-winning actress was doing such a good job that I couldn't tell the difference. At least she seems to be having fun, which is a trait most of the cast seem to be sharing. Again, Neeson appears to be the exception, because he's playing the villain so straight. A bit <b>TOO</b> straight, in face, considering this production.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jwDRTIJmovg/U5W8Gmsg9FI/AAAAAAAAM08/6xU-hFE6MJ8/s1600/a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-liam-neeson.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jwDRTIJmovg/U5W8Gmsg9FI/AAAAAAAAM08/6xU-hFE6MJ8/s1600/a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-west-liam-neeson.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Neeson: a straight shot in a winding narrative.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Thankfully, the dialogue and humor isn't bad, and redeems some of the film's more lifeless efforts. MacFarlane (who teamed up on the script with his <i>Ted </i>co-writers Alec Sulkin and Wellesley Wild) delves full into his chosen topic, the variety of deaths in the American West, and has a lot of fun playing around with the concept. And when he focuses his the story here and not on the primary plot, <b>THAT</b> is when <i>A Million Ways</i> lives up to its premise, with Albert ranting on about the dozens of diseases rampant in the area (dysentery is referred to as "the black $#!&"), to the occasional off-handed comments about the hostility of local Native Americans ("...we're basically sharing the country with them 50/50.") to the numerous surprising cameos that I will not spoil, because they're just too perfect. Finally, MacFarlane has always had a good feel when it came to music, and he and composer Joel McNeely do a great job scoring this picture, mixing classic western music with more modernistic parody songs like "If You've Only Got a Moustache" and title track "A Million Ways to Die", for which you will want to sit through the closing credits to hear. This is where we get the upper level of MacFarlane's creativity. It's just too bad that the main story needed some work, as if the director had put as much effort into the plot that as he did making it anachronistic and edgy and fun, this could have been a great movie.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AmX1OFUMzig/U5W8Jd-2D6I/AAAAAAAAM1A/Ae-7fvq4VnU/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AmX1OFUMzig/U5W8Jd-2D6I/AAAAAAAAM1A/Ae-7fvq4VnU/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I know, I can't believe I'm giving this a decent review, either.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So no, it's no <i>Ted</i>, but <i>A Million Ways to Die in the West</i> isn't that bad, either. Does MacFarlane have the chops to be a lead actor? Absolutely not. Does he need a filter on occasion? Yes, the man never found a barrier he wouldn't cross just to say that he did. Is the script surprisingly and incredibly lazy? Yes, but the actors do try to have fun with it anyway. There are enough laughs to get you through the surprisingly long (nearly two hours, unheard of for a modern comedy) run time, and they hit more often than they miss. Heck, even when they miss, they aren't as bad as say... the worst bits from his Oscar hosting performance. There's no denying that those who do not think much of MacFarlane's brand will do best to stay away, but that's not to say that you have to be a fan to "get" this movie. It's harmless fun, albeit of a decidedly adult nature. The biggest complaint I have is that MacFarlane definitely half-assed this production, and that's the main reason it doesn't compare to even his best televised work. He relies too much on his usual schtick, and that's just not good enough to succeed at this level. Maybe one day he'll live up to his true potential (as he got close with <i>Ted</i>) but for now he'll just have to settle for not getting that respect a little bit longer.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-32067488734232369742014-06-06T00:37:00.000-04:002014-06-06T08:10:03.738-04:00'Maleficent': Absolutely Malodorous<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gDr3WwCrOPk/U5Ej4u1nBcI/AAAAAAAAMxg/wpmeHdBlQV0/s1600/hr_maleficent_p.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gDr3WwCrOPk/U5Ej4u1nBcI/AAAAAAAAMxg/wpmeHdBlQV0/s1600/hr_maleficent_p.jpg" height="320" width="212" /></a></div>
No movie studio knows when to let a good thing stand on its own, but if any of these powerful entertainment companies have squeezing blood from a stone down to a science, it's the good folks at Disney. Drive off director Edgar Wright from Marvel's long-gestating <i>Ant-Man</i> due to corporate meddling? Certainly! Push for a new episode of <i>Star Wars</i> every other year, and fill the time in-between with spin-offs to overly saturate the market? Absolutely! Whitewash and cleanse free of controversial topics those pesky "based on a true story" flicks, whether they focus on <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/05/double-feature-sports-flick-drama.html">J.B. Bernstein</a> or <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/12/saving-mr-banks-from-himself.html">Walt Disney</a>? Par for the course! So it's really no surprise that the company decided to remake one of their own tales from the vantage point of one of their most celebrated villains. Ironically, Disney's <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> is one of the company's lesser animated films. Yes, it had its basis in the original fairy tale and the variant <i>La Belle au bois dormant</i> by Charles Perrault, but even as a story it doesn't stand up compared to even fare from twenty years ago: the plot is illogical, the dialogue and music are corny, and the "heroine" is a void shell desperately in need of rescue. In fact, <i>Sleeping Beauty</i>'s <b>ONLY</b> saving grace is its villain, the great evil fairy Maleficent, whose awe-inspiring presence and unique character design make her one of the greatest all-time animated creations.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Oy53re8maEA/U5Ej2st_yGI/AAAAAAAAMyE/ogbjQgNAem4/s1600/20140329192947%2521Maleficent_%25282%2529.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Oy53re8maEA/U5Ej2st_yGI/AAAAAAAAMyE/ogbjQgNAem4/s1600/20140329192947%2521Maleficent_%25282%2529.png" height="236" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">... and is <b>STILL</b> a great character.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Naturally, Disney does what it can to screw that up in the first few minutes of <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MFrlOKCqCE">Maleficent</a></i><i> </i>by giving the audience a painful - <b>EXCRUCIATING</b> - opening sequence, where we see young, totally-not-as-talented-as-Angelina-Jolie actors spit inane dialogue that could have been handled by animated sequences and the in-house narrator (Janet McTeer), who was already doing a fine job of laying out the exposition in a timely and appropriate fashion. Then there's the story, which insists that the future villainess (Angelina Jolie, who hasn't been in a movie since 2010's atrocious <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/12/like-three-hour-tour.html">The Tourist</a></i>) is not really evil, but forced into doing wicked things by <b>MAN</b> (in this flick, that word seems to be in reference to the gender, not the species), who seem to want to wage war against the mystical creatures over whom Maleficent rules, for no good reason. Really, none of the character motivations make any sense, as the only reason the kingdom of Man are so malicious and greedy is... because they're so malicious and greedy. There's never any exploration into <b>WHY</b> there's friction between these two next-door nations, as for the most part the magical realm seems quite content to keep to itself. So from moment one, you're already not buying the movie's premise.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mmg3iKa2KMk/U5Ej2dKLdiI/AAAAAAAAMxE/IGWHzq4Bvow/s1600/1395127744000-PAGE-2-MALEFICENT-MOV-JY-3280--62924968.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mmg3iKa2KMk/U5Ej2dKLdiI/AAAAAAAAMxE/IGWHzq4Bvow/s1600/1395127744000-PAGE-2-MALEFICENT-MOV-JY-3280--62924968.JPG" height="300" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Because the hot guy quotient must be filled. There are girls in the audience, after all!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The acting is at least solid across most of the board, though not completely. Jolie, returning to the screen after four years, picked a gem in which to make her return, as she casually and naturally personifies a character that remains powerful after 55 years. And it's not just the make-up, either (normally I don't bother to mention the make-up department, but they did an amazing job with all the characters, and not just the title heroine), as Jolie's charisma and talent do an amazing job, despite not having the best material with which to work. Not too far behind are Elle "not-Dakota" Fanning as Princess Aurora and Sam Riley as Diaval, Maleficent's lackey. Fanning has a much simpler role than Angelina (and it's not much of an improvement over her animated counterpart) but she does her absolute best to give Aurora a personality, which is more than I possibly could have asked. And while Riley falls squarely in the "comedic sidekick" genre, he also has his moments to shine. In fact, the best scenes of the movie often involve Jolie, either by herself or working opposite Fanning and/or Riley, and the trio present some of the film's most human moments. Sadly, good times pretty much end there. Sharlto Copley tries hard but is a disaster, and obviously not a good enough actor to overcome the deficiencies of a script that give him every cliched villain bit in the book. And the buffoonery of Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville and Juno Temple as the three good fairies gets achingly old after their first appearance, and their smaller, computer generated forms suffer from extreme uncanny valley. Finally, Brenton Thwaites' obligatory appearance as Prince Philip feels unnecessary, most notably because his presence <b>IS</b> unnecessary by the virtues of the plot and the concept, rounding out a simultaneously talented and disappointing cast. Obviously Jolie was always going to be the star of the show, but they could have at least <b>TRIED</b> to surround her with more interesting stories and people.<br />
<br />
Now, let's talk about the date rape.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PMPnt5WkOfc/U5Ej3qcpz-I/AAAAAAAAMx0/oSAFjKMEaPs/s1600/Maleficent-Dream-Trailer-2014.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PMPnt5WkOfc/U5Ej3qcpz-I/AAAAAAAAMx0/oSAFjKMEaPs/s1600/Maleficent-Dream-Trailer-2014.jpg" height="206" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Because seriously, you want to piss her off?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I know I'm not the first or only one who noticed this, but I'm honestly shocked there's not more of an outrage by parents who brought their young daughters to the theaters to see this. At the end of the first act, Maleficent is approached by the grown-up man (Copley) whom she'd fallen in love with in the first five minutes, settles into trusting him, is drugged, and then is violently stripping of her wings, which are not the source of her power but a powerful metaphor nonetheless. And in case you don't get the emphasis, it's nailed home in the following scene, which sees the woman awaken from her drug-induced coma, realize the physical violation that has come upon her, and break down emotionally and physically at the betrayal from someone she thought she could trust. She even has difficulty walking afterwards - to the point where she needs a cane to get around - and if that doesn't bring up flashbacks of <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/12/men-directors-who-hate-dont-really.html">The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo</a></i>, I don't know what will. And <b>THAT</b> movie was deservedly rated R.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gAnpVMlEzrQ/U5Ej3RLzL7I/AAAAAAAAMxc/IPQQEbx8ebU/s1600/Maleficent-2014-103.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gAnpVMlEzrQ/U5Ej3RLzL7I/AAAAAAAAMxc/IPQQEbx8ebU/s1600/Maleficent-2014-103.png" height="166" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Evil, and big hats. That's all Man seems to be exporting these days.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And the sad part is, I wouldn't even argue that the scene shouldn't be here, as the near-silent performance by Jolie speaks volumes and creates extremely powerful emotions in those who witness it. I am a man and have never been subject to that kind of cruel behavior, nor could I ever truly empathize with that kind of trauma, but my God as a decent human being, I <b>FELT</b> her pain. It is by far the best scene in the whole movie, and while that might seem like faint praise when I finish I assure you it is not. That this scene even exists is both a revelation and a tragedy when you really think about what it represents.Honestly, my chief complaint is that <i>Maleficent</i> isn't a PG-13 movie, as many recent fairy tale adaptations have been, and this kind of scene would have been more appropriate for that audience, rather than the age 6-12 set that this was film was marketed towards. Because of that, this scene feels woefully out of place.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-aJjj57KKL0s/U5Ej6fWpk2I/AAAAAAAAMyA/cT3na2ApGSk/s1600/maleficent-8.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-aJjj57KKL0s/U5Ej6fWpk2I/AAAAAAAAMyA/cT3na2ApGSk/s1600/maleficent-8.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You're not your sister, but you'll do.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Further complicating matters is that after so poignant, so powerful a scene, the film just can't keep up the momentum. Both the script (Julie Woolverton, whose last atrocity was Tim Burton's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/12/men-directors-who-hate-dont-really.html">Alice in Wonderland</a></i>) and direction (first timer Robert Stromberg, an award-winning Art Director) are completely lacking, disappointing when you consider the enormous potential this film had. There are a few decent scenes later on (most of which involve Jolie not just chewing the scenery, but dicing it up with her extra-sharp cheekbones), but the story is just so much of a mess that it derails the whole process every time you think it might just be getting started. However, the relationship between Maleficent and Aurora is given a ton of attention, and for the most part I believe this is one element that the filmmakers got 100% right. In this variation on the tale, Aurora believes the woman who put that curse upon her as a baby (which she knows nothing about, of course) to in fact be her fairy godmother, which goes hand in hand with Maleficent actually raising the child in secret, instead of the aforementioned doltish fairies who have no business caring for the her (again, the logic of <i>Maleficent</i> makes absolutely no sense) and developing feelings of her own towards the young woman whom she soon realizes she no longer holds a grudge against. That relationship (starting with the classic cursing scene in the castle throne room) is the only thing that keeps the movie from being a total train-wreck, but only by a few threads.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MQxlBx7s9Rc/U5Ej5AzRPBI/AAAAAAAAMxs/ViYBynLsd7M/s1600/maleficent-7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MQxlBx7s9Rc/U5Ej5AzRPBI/AAAAAAAAMxs/ViYBynLsd7M/s1600/maleficent-7.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">So, Robert Zemeckis was in charge of the CGI, right? That's why it's so bad?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The special effects are also shockingly uneven, with some of the more monstrous creature designs feeling so meticulously designed and gorgeous to behold (including a giant man-eating earth worm, tree-people warriors, and the obligatory fire-breathing dragon), while many of the elements take on a cartoonish appearance, most notably the atmospheric effects, but also the more "innocent" of the magical creatures. This also applies to the aforementioned Good Fairies, who never look remotely authentic when they're shrunken down to their smaller forms. The lack of chemistry between these two styles is jarring, and every time it upends the mood of the film, which definitely wants to be dark and brooding but just can't resist going down that comedic path every chance it gets. When you need your visual effects to keep up the spirits of your younger audience members, it helps when they look as though they were cut from the same cloth, something an Oscar winner apparently forgot.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BrZkuDFVUBs/U5Ej3D0XNBI/AAAAAAAAMx4/-ko-7Q77HDw/s1600/Maleficent-%25282014%2529-52.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BrZkuDFVUBs/U5Ej3D0XNBI/AAAAAAAAMx4/-ko-7Q77HDw/s1600/Maleficent-%25282014%2529-52.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Even at a distance, Angelina owns.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Disney plugged date rape into a family film geared towards young girls. And then they had the audacity to wrap a bad movie around it. Maleficent has its moments, especially when Angelina is deservedly front and center, and at the very least it's a visually appealing - if inconsistently so - couple of hours. But the story makes <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-snow-white-and-the-huntsman/">Snow White and the Huntsman</a></i> look like Shakespeare in comparison, and doesn't have nearly the talent behind the camera to pull everything together. The story is junk, the motivations are insane, and the morals are all over the place, as there doesn't even seem to be a message behind all this pomp and circumstance. I think Jolie can do no wrong, but even if she gets nominated for an Oscar I don't think that would justify sitting down with your family and checking out this movie. It's easily one of the year's worst, and exists as proof that Disney needs to reign in on its cash-cow business methods. They wrung blood from that stone, but it's a funky shade of puce, and I really don't want any more of it on me.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-91348089449454887642014-06-04T12:38:00.000-04:002014-06-04T12:38:29.665-04:00Catching Up: Four Films on DVDSo as I've mentioned, moving to Florida and going to school put a damper on my movie-going plans for a bit. But as you might have noticed, I've been writing on a semi-regular schedule lately anyway. That's because I only have one class at the moment, so when I'm not doing assignments or working, I've actually had time to make it to the local theater. Though I'm not seeing <b>EVERYTHING </b>(and even when I was, I really wasn't), most of what I want to see I've taken the time to drive the ten miles to see. But what about those titles that came out between January and April that I had missed? Was there anything that I didn't get the chance at the time that I <b>REALLY </b>wanted to see? All I can say is thank God for the quick turnaround on DVD releases (remember when it was a year's wait?) these days! Otherwise, I'd probably have forgotten all about these four flicks before too long.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2pofjUjdjAE/U4tgAXduvlI/AAAAAAAAMlo/xV1fVHYhmGo/s1600/TowerPosterArtOfficialBigKoreanfull1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2pofjUjdjAE/U4tgAXduvlI/AAAAAAAAMlo/xV1fVHYhmGo/s1600/TowerPosterArtOfficialBigKoreanfull1.jpg" height="320" width="224" /></a></div>
Okay, yes, I'm starting out with a film that technically doesn't count in comparison to the previous paragraph. But South Korean disaster film <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljiBRTKc0Wc">The Tower</a></i> was definitely a title I'd been itching to see since I'd caught a trailer sometime last year. It was originally released in its native country in December of 2012 - where it set box office records - and expanded to several international markets the following year, though I'm unaware of any US releases. Director Kim Ji-hoon was inspired by the classic Hollywood film <i>The Towering Inferno</i>, and imagining what it would be like trapped in a burning skyscraper. He sets his story on Christmas Eve in the fictional "Sky Tower", a 108-story luxury condominium complex built for the enjoyment of the wealthy and privileged. When disaster strikes, leaving hundreds of people trapped on the higher levels, firemen can barely get to the fire to contain it, let alone rescue everybody. The story focuses on a small group of determined survivors as they attempt to escape the deathtrap, though it's safe to say that most won't make it out alive.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_4YWrsdfZkk/U4413H5SYxI/AAAAAAAAMos/C3-K8LpRaxs/s1600/The-Tower-2012-Movie-Image-7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_4YWrsdfZkk/U4413H5SYxI/AAAAAAAAMos/C3-K8LpRaxs/s1600/The-Tower-2012-Movie-Image-7.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Did I mention he was three days away from retirement?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It's been a long time since we've had a really <b>GREAT</b> disaster movie, and with <i>The Tower</i>... you'll be waiting a bit longer. It <b>IS</b> quite a bit of fun, with explosions and collapsing structures and CGI effects beating much of what we've seen from our western shore this past decade. And yet it's disappointing that this film feels so westernized, being from the other side of the planet from the Michael Bays of the world. Some scenes are a little too gruesome (people cooking alive in an elevator, for instance), but for the most part the movie is your standard PG-13 action fare, from relentless (and physics-defying) explosions to basic character archetypes. The acting is quite good throughout, but suffers from a dearth of one-note roles that we've seen a billion times, from the single father (Kim Sang-kyung) and daughter (Lee Ha-na) separated in the tragedy, the woman he is in love with (Son Ye-jin), the rookie firefighter (Do Ji-han) and the veteran (Sol Kyung-gu) who is so dedicated to his job that you <b>KNOW</b> he's going to sacrifice himself at the end. There's even a pregnant woman, though I don't recall her name ever being spoken. Like <i>The Towering Inferno</i>, there is a ton of support cast present, and they all have the charisma to make an impression, even to the point of you liking them and not wanting anything bad to happen (well, for most of them). There's even a bit of comedy, in the form of a Christian group who break out into prayer and treat another fireman as an angel sent by God, to the point where he starts to believe them. But beyond the few leads, most of the characters don't get story arcs, existing solely as a source of expendable cannon fodder for the dozens of kills we're expecting to see.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BW1La-R3KxQ/U4419YMhgzI/AAAAAAAAMpE/n7_5qSlb_Tw/s1600/thetower_73a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BW1La-R3KxQ/U4419YMhgzI/AAAAAAAAMpE/n7_5qSlb_Tw/s1600/thetower_73a.jpg" height="223" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is really impossible.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The special effects are another downside to Ji-hoon's obvious infatuation with Hollywood cinema, as it's apparent the budget just did not quite support what he really wanted to show. The practical effects are used to great effect (whether it's torrents of fire or cascades of water washing over non-stuntmen actors), but when scenes call for major CGI use, they don't look nearly as realistic as they should. Distant shots of the fictional tower look like cardboard cutouts, and a scene where our group tries to cross a glass bridge that is cracking under their weight, you can see every single computer-generated imperfection. The story needed a face-lift, as well; there were two subplots concerning the owners of the building being warned of impending disaster and ignoring it, and the fire department prioritizing the rescue of politicians and the rich over the blue collar workers, but neither story goes anywhere, giving way to more death and destruction.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wkwk-EGSKE0/U4412k7gAXI/AAAAAAAAMno/NC79M7YHej4/s1600/The-Tower-2012-Movie-Image-11-e1351824393745.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wkwk-EGSKE0/U4412k7gAXI/AAAAAAAAMno/NC79M7YHej4/s1600/The-Tower-2012-Movie-Image-11-e1351824393745.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You might like these people, but you have no idea who they are.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But despite my griping, I actually did like <i>The Tower</i>. Yes, the script is manipulative and unfinished and the special effects don't always work the way they're supposed to, but you really care about these characters, since it's all too easy to draw comparisons between the story here and something like the tragedies of 9/11 (though as this is a Korean production, I'm sure the connection is merely unintentional). It's Western mentality also means that it's more open to American audiences than many Eastern flicks you'll see, so it's definitely worth a rental if you want to see something a little different from your usual fare, but not inaccessible.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6vId9JYmwwc/U4411nYnQSI/AAAAAAAAMpo/IP87hHEo1bw/s1600/Ride_Along_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6vId9JYmwwc/U4411nYnQSI/AAAAAAAAMpo/IP87hHEo1bw/s1600/Ride_Along_poster.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
For something more traditional, you can always check out <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdXo4vBgG7I">Ride Along</a></i>, the surprisingly funny movie starring Ice Cube and current comedian sensation Kevin Hart. For those few who aren't familiar with it (the movie broke box office records as the highest-grossing January domestic release), the story focuses on aspiring policeman Ben (Hart), whose life is going great, with his acceptance to the police academy and the love of Angela, played by Tika Sumpter. But Angela's cop brother James (Cube) isn't impressed, and gets the idea to take Ben on a 'ride along', and see what he does for a living. James hopes that by giving Ben the most insane initiation to police work, he can rid himself of an annoying hanger-on and what he considers an unworthy match with his sister.<br />
<br />
So yeah, <i>Ride Along</i> is your formulaic buddy cop story, with the main exception being that one of the pair is not yet an actual police officer. And this is a film that really relies on it's pairing to work, as almost every single joke revolves around how tough James is versus how geeky and physically inadequate Ben is. The side characters serve little purpose other than as narrative tools, prodding the story from outrageous scene to outrageous scene with casual indifference and substandard dialogue. So it's a good thing that Hart and Cube have as much chemistry as they do, overcoming the shoddy story though genuinely funny gags and playing to their strengths as performers. It also helps that director Tim Story is in his element making lighthearted comedies (and <b>NOT</b> blockbuster flicks like <i>Fantastic Four</i>), and the movie benefits from an experienced hand behind the camera, as Story has worked on similar comedic fare such as <i>Taxi</i> and <i>Barbershop</i>.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fcdcrHI3tzk/U4416U0rEJI/AAAAAAAAMoc/N2GmFXQskdw/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fcdcrHI3tzk/U4416U0rEJI/AAAAAAAAMoc/N2GmFXQskdw/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">...and the production truck just blew up. Keep filming!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But yes, by all intents and purposes, <i>Ride Along</i> is not a very good movie. The script (cobbled together by four separate screenwriters) is full of stupid ideas, ironically reminds viewers of the much better films on which it's based (most notably <i>Training Day</i>), has a stupid ending, and to make things worse the final product doesn't have a strong performance outside of it's co-leads. But it's Cube and Hart (who hasn't worn out his welcome yet after playing the same character in his last dozen roles) who effectively carry it to the point of respectability, if not quality. In fact, I'm glad I didn't do a full review of this movie, as all I would have talked about is how good the main actors worked, and it would have driven me crazy. This is brainless entertainment, and as long as you keep that in mind you'll make it through those 100 minutes in no time, and may be entertained just enough to have been worth it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BTJTgMo00dI/U4413knU4bI/AAAAAAAAMns/CXEzMFpeOOA/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BTJTgMo00dI/U4413knU4bI/AAAAAAAAMns/CXEzMFpeOOA/s1600/download.jpg" height="320" width="215" /></a></div>
I wish I could say the same for Paul W.S. Anderson's <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1h9yHNpvPg">Pompeii</a></i>, which sees the director of fun popcorn films <i>Mortal Kombat</i>, <i>Death Race</i> and the <i>Resident Evil</i> franchise try his hand at channeling his inner Ridley Scott, and failing miserably. Similar to his unintended attack on literacy in 2011's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/10/all-for-one-one-for-junk-pile.html">The Three Musketeers</a></i>, Anderson actually tries to tackle something that has historical and mythological significance - the destruction of the ancient city of Pompeii thanks to the eruption of nearby Mt. Vesuvius, only to turn in a final product that feels like the cloned baby of <i>Gladiator</i> and <i>Volcano</i>.<br />
<br />
The sad thing is that there's actually a talented cast wasted here. <i>Game of Thrones</i>' Kit Harrington continues to pay his dues by appearing in whatever schlock will have him as a gladiator who is also the last surviving member of a Celtic horse tribe (<i>wah wah</i>, irony!), while Emily Browning (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/03/fail-fatale.html">Sucker Punch</a></i>) does her absolute best to hem the wretched dialogue she (and everybody else) is given into something actually presentable in a big-screen motion picture. The support cast is easily strong, with Carrie-Anne Moss, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Jessica Lucas and Jared Harris filling their respective - if limited - roles well. And beyond the cast, the special effects are absolutely stunning, as Anderson's abilities working with CGI artistry cannot be understated. Argue if you want about how quickly death comes from Mt. Vesuvius, it looks <b>GREAT</b>. Even Anderson's worst movies are at least visually appealing, and that's absolutely the case here, where one-note characters will get offed in a multitude of imaginative ways (or, at least as imaginative as "death by volcano" gets).<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GWEg80civ9c/U4531uvXwWI/AAAAAAAAMrc/iye4b_f6GgE/s1600/kit_harington_pompeii_640x360.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GWEg80civ9c/U4531uvXwWI/AAAAAAAAMrc/iye4b_f6GgE/s1600/kit_harington_pompeii_640x360.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"You wear nothing, Jon Snow..."</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But, that's where all the good feelings end. It's apparent from the start that the director is out of his depth from the get-go, as he sets a chilling opening montage of ash-mummified Pompeii victims to a surprisingly upbeat, epic score, which is well out of place when we're being set up for the destruction of an entire city and its inhabitants. And it gets worse from there, as the script borrows every cliche and genre trope it can (or in most cases, can't) get away with. Character motivations are simplified to the point of stupidity, and the twists and turns are telegraphed a million miles away, meaning there are absolutely no surprises when all is said and done. That two of the three screenwriters were responsible for <i>Batman Forever</i>, but the third worked on <i>Sherlock Holmes</i>, so I'm shocked that the story could have gotten <b>THIS</b> dumb. My usual complaint about James Cameron's <i>Titanic</i> is that there was a whole ship full of interesting, compelling and complex characters, and the filmmaker decided he'd rather focus on two fictional, useless, boring individuals whose actors were far from their best. That's kind of what <i>Pompeii</i> is, only it manages to make <i>Titanic</i> look like a genuine masterpiece by comparison. And, let's not even get into Kiefer Sutherland and his head-shaking combination of poor casting and a mouth full of industrial strength cotton, though I will admit that as an actor he did make the most of his badly, badly, badly-written role.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i2LQREZbq7o/U45359Z8R4I/AAAAAAAAMsw/VGejsj50tsU/s1600/pompeii-jessica-lucas-and-emily-browning.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i2LQREZbq7o/U45359Z8R4I/AAAAAAAAMsw/VGejsj50tsU/s1600/pompeii-jessica-lucas-and-emily-browning.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You won't sway me with pretty faces and skimpy outfits... <b>THIS</b> time...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It's clear that <i>Pompeii</i>'s mid-February release was an effort to try and make a quick buck when there wasn't much more genre fare available, but also sweep it under the rug before people could take too close a look. I'm glad I saw it, if only to confirm that Anderson will never be the director he hopes to become, only the director he is. The same man who brought us <i>Event Horizon</i> and <i>Soldier</i> is never going to give us <i>Alien</i> or <i>Blade Runner</i> or the movie he's obviously trying to copy here, <i>Gladiator</i>. This was a bad, bad effort to build Anderson's repertoire, only to discover that he has a definite, inflexible limit to what he can do on the big screen. As long as his movies are something innocuous like next year's <i>Resident Evil</i> flick, he is a perfectly adequate, semi-talented filmmaker. But when he goes out of his way to try and create something <b>PROFOUND</b> or <b>IMPORTANT</b>, his products aren't worth his time or yours.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QSUo-yLkIGo/U4530pe2-oI/AAAAAAAAMrY/UufcEOugJUg/s1600/hr_That_Awkward_Moment_4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QSUo-yLkIGo/U4530pe2-oI/AAAAAAAAMrY/UufcEOugJUg/s1600/hr_That_Awkward_Moment_4.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
Oh, thank god I followed up <i>Pompeii</i> with <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRcVgJjnFLo&feature=kp">That Awkward Moment</a></i>. This ribald, adult comedy was just the antidote I needed to the previous film's dour, pointless, cliched drama. The story focuses on three friends, played by up-and-coming actors Zac Efron, Miles Teller and Michael B. Jordan, as they live day-to-day in modern-day New York City. Jason (Efron) is a successful ladies man and book cover artist whose single life is upended when he meets Ellie (Imogen Poots), with whom he can connect on an intellectual and emotional level. His coworker and co-Casanova Daniel (Teller) is the single lifestyle's biggest champion, while also developing feelings for the trio's female friend Chelsea (Mackenzie Davis). And Daniel (Jordan), the responsible member of the group, has just been dumped and divorced by his wife and struggles to figure out what went wrong. The movies plays out much like season 6 of <i>Sex and the City</i>, where the show concluded after successfully finding matching romantic partners for each of the four main ladies by season's end.<br />
<br />
Don't judge me, it was a great show.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3ZTxfq6Slyo/U48yPg2rUwI/AAAAAAAAMv0/Lf-hJnmTP7w/s1600/that-awkward-momentcb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3ZTxfq6Slyo/U48yPg2rUwI/AAAAAAAAMv0/Lf-hJnmTP7w/s1600/that-awkward-momentcb.jpg" height="246" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">In New York, the good-looking guys all run in packs.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The story relies on us liking these three guys who, for all intents and purposes, are the types that parents warn their daughters about with regularity. Naturally, their antics are never presented as malicious, dishonest or completely self-serving (as opposed to last year's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/10/double-feature-don-jon-and-cloudy-with.html">Don Jon</a></i>), simply as the way single life works in this day and age, as men and women who aren't attached just want to go out and have a good time. Heck, even the women out there just want to enjoy their single lives, as well. And it's a good thing it got three of the most charming young actors to play these roles, because I'm not sure any other actors could have pulled this off. Well, okay, <b>MAYBE</b> Jaime Bell. Efron of course has been around what seems like forever but now finally seems to have found his niche in adult comedies (see <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/05/like-some-good-neighbors.html">Neighbors</a> </i>for confirmation of this), much like Channing Tatum did in 2012. Teller and Jordan have emerged more recently, but have already shown an aptitude for comedy that translates nicely here. And the female cast is nicely represented by Poots (who looks younger with every film I see her in), Davis, and Jessica Lucas. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it's obvious this cast had a ton of fun working on this movie, as it would have been far easier for it all to fall apart under the tutelage of freshman director Tom Gormican, who also wrote the screenplay. It's obvious the actors involved worked well together, as it really shows up on the screen, whether the scenes are happy, sad, or somewhere in the middle.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pOxaGMuBsNI/U48yH583wGI/AAAAAAAAMuA/GhiYmE1ndcU/s1600/1b793c61-8a36-401c-ac88-7e3d80650760.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pOxaGMuBsNI/U48yH583wGI/AAAAAAAAMuA/GhiYmE1ndcU/s1600/1b793c61-8a36-401c-ac88-7e3d80650760.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is kind of what I imagine Zac Efron looks like in his own mind.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Naturally, the movie has its share of issues. Despite the marvelous cast, the script (again, Gormicon is a relative newcomer) doesn't give them a whole lot to do, nor does it really explain much of a setting or backstory, beyond that the characters live in New York City, and have jobs doing... stuff. That we rarely see impacting their everyday lives. Beyond that, not all the big laughs work, although most do, and the plot follows many of the usual tropes for a romantic comedy, but with only the genders reversed (or just seen from the other point of view). The film also suffers from trying to appeal to both sides; on the one hand, guys will get into the immature humor and the bro-tastic central characters, while women get to ogle naked Zac Efron and will appreciate the romantic plot more, but there's little that actually appeals to both sides.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zzMS5xK70rs/U48yJ1WfP8I/AAAAAAAAMwY/zHgRhVwHH3g/s1600/That-Awkward-Moment-Zac-Efron.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zzMS5xK70rs/U48yJ1WfP8I/AAAAAAAAMwY/zHgRhVwHH3g/s1600/That-Awkward-Moment-Zac-Efron.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nope, never mind. <b>THAT'S</b> what he looks like in his own mind.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Basically, <i>That Awkward Moment</i> looks like a male-centric <i>SatC</i> with a bit of Judd Apatow humor thrown in. That is to say, it doesn't reinvent the wheel (or even really try) but is charming and irreverent and gets by just fine. It'll be forgotten before too long, but hopefully helps provide career boosts for its cast, as this group is far too talented not to succeed in joining the next generation of Hollywood royalty. They help take this film from being a disappointing mess to an entertaining, if unambitious, time-waster. Worth a quiet night in.<br />
<br />
That's it for catching up this week! Anything from 2014 I haven't reviewed on DVD that you want me my opinion on? Let me know and I'll see if it's something I can do. I'll be returning to new releases with the next few reviews, but hopefully soon I'll be able to catch up on all of this year's entries that I've missed, even the truly horrible ones. Hope to see you then!Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-76743992998393973892014-06-02T00:00:00.000-04:002014-06-02T00:00:07.717-04:00These are the Days of an X-Men Renaissance<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PC39KThKJoM/U4fP9LwbeOI/AAAAAAAAMh0/RLnY37j6iTM/s1600/X-Men_Days_of_Future_Past_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PC39KThKJoM/U4fP9LwbeOI/AAAAAAAAMh0/RLnY37j6iTM/s1600/X-Men_Days_of_Future_Past_poster.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
It's actually kind of amazing how much information we got about <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6acRHWnfZAE">X-Men: Days of Future Past</a></i> between when its production was announced in May 2012, and now. Of course, we learned the title, which immediately heralded back to the classic X-Men comic book storyline of the same name. We were disappointed that <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/06/class-is-in-session.html">X-Men First Class</a></i> director Matthew Vaughn was leaving the project to focus on other work, but then excited again when we found out that Bryan Singer - who had directed the first two wonderful movies - was returning to direct the newest installment of the franchise he helped build. We learned that it would combine the casts of both pre-existing <i>X-Men</i> storylines, with Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan playing alongside their younger character counterparts of James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. We learned that Hugh "Wolverine" Jackman would once again be the face of the series. Empire magazine published their special issue about the film with <b>25</b> collectible covers. We were given what seemed like half a dozen full-length trailers, countless promotional clips and set pictures, and the sight of speedy newcomer mutant Quicksilver (Evan Peters) eating an X-tra Bacon, Egg & Cheese biscuit in a Carl's Jr. ad (yeah, that was kind of stupid). We also got some bad or potentially bad news, ranging from the complete cutting of fan favorite Rogue (Anna Paquin, whom the trailers had initially featured) to the current sexual assault allegations leveled against Singer. Point being, there was an almost insane amount of hype surrounding this entry to the X-Men film franchise, almost too much to actually hope the final product would live up to expectations. Well guess what? It lives up to expectations. And in some ways, it surpasses them.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yqTqtvKObEo/U4fP-_NCKXI/AAAAAAAAMiU/iqwLCwTlgSI/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past-trailer.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yqTqtvKObEo/U4fP-_NCKXI/AAAAAAAAMiU/iqwLCwTlgSI/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past-trailer.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Just promise me there'll be no singing.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Days of Future Past</i> takes place within two disparate timelines. In a chaotic, post-apocalyptic future, Professor Xavier and Magneto (Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan) lead a small band of mutants trying to avoid extermination at the hands of mutant-hunting Sentinels, robots built during the time of Xavier and Magneto's youth. Through one of the group's ability to send people backwards in time (because, you know, the story demands it), de-facto tough guy Wolverine's mind is sent back in time to his younger body to prevent the actions that have brought about the chaotic world in which our heroes live. When he wakes up in 1973, he must unite the two young mutant leaders, now at odds with one another, into a team that can halt the future war on mutant-kind before it ever starts.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MLxcD5Evg_0/U4jlknMDiKI/AAAAAAAAMjQ/8rbbfLm055Q/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past-mystique.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MLxcD5Evg_0/U4jlknMDiKI/AAAAAAAAMjQ/8rbbfLm055Q/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past-mystique.jpg" height="168" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">... I'm sorry, was I saying something?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The best thing about <i>Days of Future Past</i> is that it combines the greatest elements of the <i>X-Men </i>films. For the old-school fans, you have the return of several classic franchise actors, including Halle Berry (Storm), Shawn Ashmore (Iceman), and Ellen Page (Kitty Pryde), not to mention Stewart and McKellan. For fans of the most recent <i>First Class</i> kinda-reboot, you have the the unique (for a superhero film) 1970's atmosphere, the best from the cast with McAvoy, Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence and Nicholas Hoult, and the main focus of the narrative. And of course, there's Jackman in the lead role once again, not that the casting agent would let you forget. Singer melds these disparate parts fairly well, mixing timelines and art styles with precision, flipping from young Xavier's private plane in one scene to Sentinels battering down a door in the future, and the transition works without any loss of cohesion. The fact is, if you liked <b>ANYTHING </b>from the previous X-movies, you'll find plenty to enjoy here.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2Vk7WGwGcg0/U4jljsQAlHI/AAAAAAAAMjs/s2cEqIaFuKI/s1600/Final-Box-Office-X-Men-Days-of-Future-Past-Brings-In-302M-Worldwide.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2Vk7WGwGcg0/U4jljsQAlHI/AAAAAAAAMjs/s2cEqIaFuKI/s1600/Final-Box-Office-X-Men-Days-of-Future-Past-Brings-In-302M-Worldwide.jpg" height="263" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">One of these things is not like the others...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But Singer doesn't just rely on combining nostalgic elements when it comes to building his latest effort, and his newest additions make for a nice compliment to the preexisting franchise. <i>Games of Thrones</i>' Peter Dinklage is perfectly at home as an adaptation of classic X-Men villain Bolivar Trask, putting an appropriate face to the public discrimination and fear that has long been the dividing line the team from the likes of the <i>Avengers</i> or the <i>Fantastic Four</i>. And even Evan Peters' take on Quicksilver is surprisingly effective. Yes, that Carl's Jr. commercial was an incredibly poor marketing idea, and at first glance his costume is just plain silly. But when Singer actually uses the character in the context of the movie (in a slow-motion action sequence set to Jim Croce's "Time in a Bottle"), it's such a thrill ride that you wish it wouldn't end. Sadly, the character practically disappears after this, but hopefully he'll make a re-appearance further down the line, if the directors can capture the same level of fun and excitement that Singer nailed in that one scene.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AMfy1mD5BMc/U4jlmJLF1UI/AAAAAAAAMjo/WvvaLEsNio4/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AMfy1mD5BMc/U4jlmJLF1UI/AAAAAAAAMjo/WvvaLEsNio4/s1600/x-men-days-of-future-past.jpeg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Fifty bucks on him gutting the hippie!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And that actually sums <i>Days of Future Past</i> up quite nicely; it's fun, and it's exciting. People haven't been enamored with this particular superhero franchise of late, from the spottiness of the <i>Wolverine</i> movies to the bad script elements of <i>First Class</i> to the plain awfulness that was <i>X-Men: The Last Stand</i>. But thankfully <i>Days of Future Past</i> rises above those faults. The cast is perfect - even Lawrence finally seems comfortable sitting in the bright blue skin of pseudo-villain Mystique after conquering just about every other role she's been handed - and the script is not just well written, but includes more than a few inside jokes for the lifelong comic book fans. In fact, that the story was based on such a well-known comic book storyline is a main reason this new entry was hyped so heavily, and so effectively. And yet this isn't just a pandering adaption, or at least if it is, it's hidden well enough to not be immediately insulting to those paying for tickets. Beyond that, the visuals are stunning, the dialogue and character development are amazing, and - especially important when <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/05/not-so-amazing.html">Amazing Spider-Man 2</a></i> had so many jarring, bloated bits - it doesn't feel like too much has been crammed in to make the movie unwatchable. Instead, just the right balance means that you'll be riveted to your seat for the entire 131 minutes.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Qdss3cIRjUM/U4jljhHgFuI/AAAAAAAAMjc/Kw_ABOAaVr0/s1600/X_Men_Days_Future_Past_13838031568400.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Qdss3cIRjUM/U4jljhHgFuI/AAAAAAAAMjc/Kw_ABOAaVr0/s1600/X_Men_Days_Future_Past_13838031568400.jpg" height="253" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">They act like they've never seen a man in purple armor and a cape before... oh, wait...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In closing, I think it's safe to say that after years of mediocrity and unfulfilled potential, the <i>X-Men</i> franchise is back on its feet and on a path to glory with <i>Days of Future Past</i>. Sure, the story has a few hiccups, some parts kind of rely on the audience remembering the plots and unseen characters of the previous films, and the ending isn't particularly clear how the universe will play out in future films. But despite the weariness the hype might have on your decision whether or not to see this in the theater, let me assure you that this is a superhero movie well worth a trip to your theater, even if you're not a fan of the genre. It might be one of the best of its kind in recent years, and there's no better way to celebrate that than seeing it on the big screen.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-19803393996115460692014-05-27T00:00:00.000-04:002014-05-27T00:00:04.839-04:00Double Feature: Sports Flick Drama<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TAo67G8K4Jk/U36S26-m4yI/AAAAAAAAMdk/lXNIrLg29_w/s1600/MV5BMjAyOTMxMjA3Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMTMwNjQ4MDE@._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TAo67G8K4Jk/U36S26-m4yI/AAAAAAAAMdk/lXNIrLg29_w/s1600/MV5BMjAyOTMxMjA3Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMTMwNjQ4MDE@._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" height="320" width="206" /></a></div>
Sports movies are something special. Sports movies based on a true story are even more so. But sports movies based on a true story and produced by Walt Disney Studios?<br />
<br />
Meh.<br />
<br />
Today we're going to look at two sports flicks that have come out recently that aren't exactly the second coming of <i>Moneyball</i>. The first, <i>Draft Day</i>, is a fictional behind-the-scenes look of an NFL team - in this case, the hard-losing Cleveland Browns - whose General Manager, Sonny Weaver Jr. (Kevin Costner) gets the opportunity to trade for the #1 pick in the draft, just hours before one of the most celebrated sporting events in the United States goes live. He's under pressure from the owner (Frank Langella), his former championship-winning coach (Dennis Leary), and even his mother (Ellen Burstyn) to make a splash for a team and a city that have been suffering an epic Super Bowl drought. It's a lot of pressure on one man, who only wants the chance to build a team of his own and see what can be done.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CvElf-wItPE/U36S3Fb9JyI/AAAAAAAAMds/B4-s3dRadI8/s1600/draft-day-jennifer-garner-8001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CvElf-wItPE/U36S3Fb9JyI/AAAAAAAAMds/B4-s3dRadI8/s1600/draft-day-jennifer-garner-8001.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"You can't let them in here! They'll... they'll see the big board!"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It's not everyday you see the National Football League have an actual presence in a movie - usually, unless the movie in question is a biopic, NFL team names are either replaced by fictional fill-ins or mentioned in passing - but they're all over <i>Draft Day</i>, along with a healthy presence from ESPN for good measure. While on the surface that might seem like a raw, artificial deal, this is a film in which the combination of Hollywood and the showmanship of the NFL really works. Thanks to a surprisingly deft script (courtesy of newcomers Rajiv Joseph and Scott Rothman), it's got the strengths of both sides, with an excellent, stylized, expertly-edited narration that keeps you guessing as to the final outcome, and few of the weaknesses you might expect to come from that coupling.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z8796bOWCuQ/U388wrOA0zI/AAAAAAAAMeg/Wzmn9u0g5sM/s1600/draft-day-vontae.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z8796bOWCuQ/U388wrOA0zI/AAAAAAAAMeg/Wzmn9u0g5sM/s1600/draft-day-vontae.jpg" height="223" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hey, I didn't know the Browns were interested in drafting Jackie Robinson.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Despite the strength in presentation, does <i>Draft Day</i> have its faults? Well, sure, the characters are all kinds of cliches, the subplot of the office romance between Weaver and Jennifer Garner's otherwise-cool "female sports executive" (because a woman can't be in a sports movie unless she's the love interest, mother or daughter) is forced, a bit unsatisfying, and absolutely a pandering to a potential female audience, and when you cast rapper Sean "P. Diddy" Combs in a major role, need I say more? But under the expert direction of Ivan Reitman (yeah, I forgot the director of <i>Ghostbusters</i> was here) the actors mostly put in excellent efforts, the characters are at certainly memorable, whether it's Leary's gruff antagonistic Head Coach or Chadwick Boseman as a flamboyant, energetic potential draftee. Reitman is definitely a master storyteller, as this had all the potential to be an artificial-feeling romanticization of the real NFL. It still goes a little over the top, but <i>Draft Day</i> is a surprisingly fun football movie, and if you can still see this in the theater, you could do a whole lot worse.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ldR0GzGYm9Q/U3884YaltEI/AAAAAAAAMfM/OTgITI-__Zs/s1600/Million_Dollar_Arm_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ldR0GzGYm9Q/U3884YaltEI/AAAAAAAAMfM/OTgITI-__Zs/s1600/Million_Dollar_Arm_poster.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
And by "a whole lot worse," I'm obviously referring to<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEtNIoPxcq8"> <i>Million Dollar Arm</i></a>, which had all the potential in the world as a sports tale based on a true story, before Disney got its hooks in it. On the surface, the tale of a down-on-his-luck sports agent (John Hamm) who travels to India to recruit Cricket players as potential Major League baseball players seems like <b>JUST</b> the idea a clever storyteller brings to the big screen. In practice... well, if you were offended by the whitewashing and "white savior" controversy that was <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/08/helping-hand.html">The Help</a></i>, then you haven't seen anything until you see <i>White People Problems: The Sports Flick</i>.<br />
<br />
As far as acting goes, this movie has a ton of talent. Hamm transitions smoothly from TV, and while he's certainly helped by his square jaw and gruff demeanor, he shows a range that may surprise you if you havent' yet gotten around to watching <i>Mad Men</i>. He's also surrounded by a strong supporting cast, including <i>The Life of Pi</i>'s Suraj Sharma and S<i>lumdog Millionaire</i>'s Madhur Mittal as the two young athletes the agent recruits, Lake Bell as his neighbor/love interest, and Bill Paxton and Aasif Mandvi in smaller roles. Hindi star Pitobash steals many a scene as a young baseball fanatic, and while Alan Arkin tends to play the exact same character these days, you can't discount his presence or entertainment value whenever he's on the screen. In all, gun-for-hire director Craig Gillespie (<i>Lars and the Real Girl</i>, <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/09/twilight-meet-fright-night.html">Fright Night</a></i>) gets excellent performances from his talented team. Unfortunately, that's where this movie's upside just about dries up.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wTdgJlBTOTA/U3888N2PX3I/AAAAAAAAMgY/LMpu-hnSATE/s1600/million-dollar-arm04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wTdgJlBTOTA/U3888N2PX3I/AAAAAAAAMgY/LMpu-hnSATE/s1600/million-dollar-arm04.jpg" height="256" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I was feeling like Arkin when I saw this, too.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But while the story of these two young men and their introduction to the sport of baseball is interesting and occasionally inspirational, we really don't learn all that much about newfound pitchers Rinku Singh and Dinesh Patel. The script paints them as coming from typically poor settings, and even if the representation of their upbringing is accurate, it doesn't make up for characters that are shallowly written, despite the charm that Sharma and Mittal bring to the roles. Instead, the story focuses all its attention on Hamm's J.B. Bernstein, combining a typical fish-out-of-water story with money problems and a "will-they-won't-they" love story with Lake Bell's polar opposite neighbor (again, even if the events are remotely accurate, why does it all come off as classic Hollywood schlock?). As good as Hamm is, he really ought to have been a supporting character in this tale, but for the Disnification by the film's financiers.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_x0O7ojUkyc/U4POkCPFAnI/AAAAAAAAMg0/fZaBUZ8zkTQ/s1600/f0e3581da928caf36d33ea1e8ab22aba8dc2adcf.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_x0O7ojUkyc/U4POkCPFAnI/AAAAAAAAMg0/fZaBUZ8zkTQ/s1600/f0e3581da928caf36d33ea1e8ab22aba8dc2adcf.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>The Daily Show</i> auditions ran a little late...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Million Dollar Arm</i> has a slew of smaller problems, as well. The dialogue is full of genre cliches and familiar arguments. Worse, the arguments presented are forced and don't really make any sense from a logical perspective. For instance, many characters throw down in arguments with Bernstein in terms of his treatment of the players, even though the script makes things perfectly clear that in certain explicit situations he has no power over the topic in question, making the idea of his "redemption" (from asshole to nice guy) feel ill-conceived and baseless. And along those same lines, the redemption subplot is poorly implemented, and whether the numerous red herrings that are his out-of-nowhere character turns are due to poor writing or atrocious editing is pointless to ruminate on, as either way still kills much of the story's momentum. The film even wastes the musical talents of <i>Slumdog Millionaire</i>'s A.R. Rahman, whose unique style is wiped away to provide a simple, rote soundtrack completely void of character or identity.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-b9yIFA6UyeU/U4POjzHf7pI/AAAAAAAAMg8/V7jzVHz-FMQ/s1600/25226843.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-b9yIFA6UyeU/U4POjzHf7pI/AAAAAAAAMg8/V7jzVHz-FMQ/s1600/25226843.jpg" height="228" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Urge to kill... rising..."</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And despite that, I can't really call <i>Million Dollar Arm</i> a <b>BAD</b> movie. It accomplished exactly what it set out to do, as mistaken as the goals it postulated were. It's occasionally fun, inspirational and interesting. It's also brainless, with the focus in the completely wrong place. Not to mention that since this is a Disney movie, they avoid pointing out any serious negative about the story (like the fact that one of these young men has already been released by his major league baseball club, while the other has suffered a string of injuries and may never pitch in the majors). I guess Disney figured that nobody would want to see such a strong cultural tale told from the point of view of someone who <b>WASN'T</b> an American, but since nobody bothered to see this, either, I guess that concept backfired on them anyway. This <b>MIGHT</b> be worth a DVD rental sometime in the future, as there's definitely some interesting stuff to glean from the story's mere existence. But when compared to <i>Draft Day</i>, or <b>ANY</b> decent sports movie for that matter, <i>Million Dollar Arm</i> comes up a bit lame.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-62305313832494202712014-05-21T00:00:00.000-04:002014-05-21T15:37:30.227-04:00The Wrath of Godzilla<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qygUlr-xdmY/U3uNtWh63PI/AAAAAAAAMbQ/iLoVMvyr96w/s1600/Godzilla-Teaser-Poster-2.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qygUlr-xdmY/U3uNtWh63PI/AAAAAAAAMbQ/iLoVMvyr96w/s1600/Godzilla-Teaser-Poster-2.jpeg" height="320" width="217" /></a></div>
There's probably no better example of dumb Hollywood trend-following than the 1998 Roland Emmerich blockbuster <i>Godzilla</i>, an American adaptation of the popular Japanese monster movie series of the same name. While it was successful, Emmerich's re-imagining wasn't remembered fondly by those who sat through it. Newcomers were turned off by a stupid plot, annoying characters, and special effects that look dated compared to movies ten years older than itself. Established Godzilla fans were spurned by drastic redesigns of the creature itself, which ended up looking like a cheap knockoff of the T-Rex from <i>Jurassic Park</i>. In the end, it was a movie that pleased absolutely no-one, and it would be sixteen years before the famous city-destroying lizard would ever get back to the big screen, this time with <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/03/its-monster-mash.html">Monsters</a></i> director Gareth Edwards at the helm.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Z241G_GJYa0/U3uNtQtm5fI/AAAAAAAAMb0/8sa-o1rPuAc/s1600/godzilla-2014-movie-screenshot-old-monster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Z241G_GJYa0/U3uNtQtm5fI/AAAAAAAAMb0/8sa-o1rPuAc/s1600/godzilla-2014-movie-screenshot-old-monster.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That's no reef.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This new <i>Godzilla</i> is a very human-centric story as the world is suddenly and disastrously reintroduced to city-sized monsters with our smaller, slightly crunchy heroes left to scurry around avoiding being stepped on. As an American soldier traveling to Japan to bail his estranged father (Bryan Cranston) out of jail, Aaron Taylor-Johnson just wants to get things taken care of and return to his wife (Elizabeth Olsen) and son at his California home. Unfortunately, this trip coincides with the re-emergence of an ancient monster that starts destroying cities and absorbing nuclear power sources all over the Pacific. Soon both soldiers and monster are converging on San Francisco, as the military struggles to contain the destruction and save the lives of all of the world's citizens in the process.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AGgjranCLuY/U3uNuVL0QUI/AAAAAAAAMbs/tbzlFytgujQ/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AGgjranCLuY/U3uNuVL0QUI/AAAAAAAAMbs/tbzlFytgujQ/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Duct tape is all the rage with crazy people in Japan.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Oh, the problems <i>Godzilla</i> has. The biggest is the fact that the title character has little screen time to speak of. While we get glimpses of the monster throughout the film - and his origins are merely glossed over, by the way - we never really get a good, long look at him until the end of the final act. It's not as though Godzilla doesn't have the opportunity to wreak havoc, as he appears numerous times in scenes setting up grand spectacles, only for the scenes to abruptly cut to either insignificant conversations between insignificant characters about what to do <b>OR</b> to the same scene but immediately after the off-screen carnage that <i>Godzilla</i> fans paid money to see in action. Obviously this was due to one of two things; either it was a budget decision, because that CGI <b>LOOKS</b> extremely expensive to produce (even if 3D added little); or it was a conscious decision to focus more attention on the human characters witnessing this crisis.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G7C0_QwjZTc/U3uNuScGpUI/AAAAAAAAMb4/Ysvk5K3oErs/s1600/olsen+godzilla.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G7C0_QwjZTc/U3uNuScGpUI/AAAAAAAAMb4/Ysvk5K3oErs/s1600/olsen+godzilla.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Right... what was your purpose here, again?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And we know that's a story angle that Edwards can do; his <i>Monsters</i> was very character-focused, even while the audience seemed to waiting on the edge of their seat for a <b>GLIMPSE</b> of anything alien. There are two reasons why - despite it being a brave idea - Edwards' effort doesn't work here. One is that the movie is called <i>Godzilla</i>, and people did not pay $8 (or more) for their tickets to watch a bunch of humans talking about all the action - and far more engaging action, mind you - taking place off-screen. Second, the characters here are one-note cliches from the annals of monster movies past. Cranston - while amazing - is your standard man driven into obsession by tragedy only to be proven right about the existence of giant monsters in our world. Olsen - while amazing - is your standard wife/mother/love interest whose existence in the film is purely to be an object for our hero to return to. Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins - while amazing - are figureheads of a secret society who unsuccessfully tried to keep these giant creatures a secret, and take on a John Hammond-esque desire to not interfere and let nature take its course. David Strathairn - while amazing - is a typical military leader who doesn't hesitate to abdicate nuclear force against what he sees as a threat. And Taylor-Johnson - while struggling to wipe clean his British accent - is the MacGuffin, an American soldier with an unbelievably convenient skill set who gets caught up in trying to take down the monster before it can destroy his home. He also happens to be the luckiest man alive, as proven by the impossibility of the situations he survives. Though the acting is solid, there's not enough development here to make up for the lack of dedicated monster action we get.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6mZ10iEEAHQ/U3uNsVer7pI/AAAAAAAAMbE/I-UqZdQFpaI/s1600/Legendary-Godzilla-first-look.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6mZ10iEEAHQ/U3uNsVer7pI/AAAAAAAAMbE/I-UqZdQFpaI/s1600/Legendary-Godzilla-first-look.jpg" height="217" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ooh, do we see him now? Wait, wait... no...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So after all that, my opinion on <i>Godzilla</i> must be clear... It's absolutely awesome.<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong, this is a movie with some clear, easily recognizable flaws. Edwards and his filmmakers take <b>WAY</b> too long focusing on things other than the film's main character, and the script - credited to newcomer Max Borenstein but with contributions from mediocre established writers David Callaham (<i>Doom</i>), David Goyer (<i>Blade: Trinity</i>), Drew Pearce (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/suit-up.html">Iron Man 3</a></i>) and Frank Darabont (okay, he's actually quite good) - just doesn't do this story justice. The actions of the humans are inconsequential (or just stupid), their motivations forced and derivative, and the characters themselves mere caricatures of established cliches.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JjPQS4pRzHA/U3uNsSm7zQI/AAAAAAAAMbI/iHKj0KrGRrI/s1600/14850067-standard.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JjPQS4pRzHA/U3uNsSm7zQI/AAAAAAAAMbI/iHKj0KrGRrI/s1600/14850067-standard.jpg" height="265" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Amazingly, you can understand almost everything Watanabe says this time around.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But while the film struggles narratively, it still has excellent action, amazing special effects, and it uses its title monster effectively when we finally <b>DO</b> see him let loose. Whether or not you're a fan of the classic Japanese movie creature, seeing him smash buildings or fight other giant MUTOs (yes, they look like derivatives of the <i>Cloverfield</i> monster, but that design was awesome so I'll forgive it) gives a definite feeling of awe and excitement, much like last Summer's similar epic <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-biggest-screen-possible.html">Pacific Rim</a></i>. Better, Edwards knows to treat Godzilla as a heroic figure, as opposed to Emmerich's more neutral stance in 1998. Sure, he directly causes the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people (off-screen, naturally), but at the end of the day this is a monster you're still rooting for, if only because Hollywood got him right. Simply put, the best parts of <i>Godzilla</i> give you instant happiness, despite whatever else it does wrong. You might mentally tick off all the issues that this film has as you watch it on the big screen, but as the closing credits roll you'll find yourself putting down your 3D glasses, glancing at the screen, and uttering:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-deof66pPntY/U3uNuJEGgVI/AAAAAAAAMbg/Nr0xen1gzYQ/s1600/images.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-deof66pPntY/U3uNuJEGgVI/AAAAAAAAMbg/Nr0xen1gzYQ/s1600/images.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
"Please, sir, I want some more."Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-79544551308362753852014-05-20T00:49:00.002-04:002014-05-20T00:49:18.074-04:00Like Some Good Neighbors...<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XVNT89KjedA/U3lpba5FbMI/AAAAAAAAMYk/H4kf6tlJbqE/s1600/images+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XVNT89KjedA/U3lpba5FbMI/AAAAAAAAMYk/H4kf6tlJbqE/s1600/images+%25281%2529.jpg" height="320" width="202" /></a></div>
It's fair to say that just a few years ago, R-rated comedies kinda sucked. Sure, there were a few standouts, from <i>Tropic Thunder</i> to Edgar Wright's <i>Three Flavours Cornetto</i> trilogy, but for a while R-rated comedies were synonymous with unimaginative, gross-out humor and uber-offensive stereotypes. The drought was so great that people overrated <i>The Hangover </i>to so hilarious degree that it spawned two sequels that didn't feel the need to try. That trend of un-inspriation took a sharp upward turn in 2012, when <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-ted/">Ted</a></i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/jump-around.html">21 Jump Street</a></i> raised the bar by being clever and intelligent, while also keeping the silliness and gross-out humor that has become a staple of the genre. Was everything adult comedy oriented great? God no, not by a long shot, but for the first time in seemingly forever there was reason to actually look forward to R-rated comedies again. And <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHbBlYUOPXE">Neighbors</a></i> is definitely another step along that same direction.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xWUDuwhvGHY/U3rG0YifMXI/AAAAAAAAMao/AhfVencvayc/s1600/images.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xWUDuwhvGHY/U3rG0YifMXI/AAAAAAAAMao/AhfVencvayc/s1600/images.jpg" height="265" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">And yet, not quite Rogen's usual fare.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Directed by Nicholas Stoller (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/05/too-long-wait.html">The Five-Year Engagement</a></i>, <i>Forgetting Sarah Marshall</i>), <i>Neighbors</i> stars Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne as newly-minted parents and homeowners Mac and Kelly Radner, whose life is changing fast and complexly enough without the arrival of a fraternity in the house next door. Though both sides attempt to be amicable, a misunderstanding between the party-hardy frat and the sleep-deprived family ignites a war between their houses, as each side thrives to make their neighbor's life a living hell.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F6w6KdBI7p8/U3rG0oxn7UI/AAAAAAAAMaQ/vz1Tr1chBSY/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-F6w6KdBI7p8/U3rG0oxn7UI/AAAAAAAAMaQ/vz1Tr1chBSY/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">So yeah, it's got something for the ladies.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The reason <i>Neighbors</i> is so good is for the two reasons I often state as necessary for the making of a quality motion picture, but often lacking in R-rated comedies: plot and character. While presented as a somewhat simple clash of ideologies - adults vs. college kids - the depth of the conflict between the two parties is presented in a way that is balanced, intelligent and really quite interesting. It would be so easy to portray the fraternity (represented primarily by Zac Efron and Dave Franco) as so annoying that they <b>MUST</b> be the bad guys, or the Radners as <b>SO</b> out of touch with their younger days that they blow things out of proportion. But Stoller - with a screenplay by relative newcomers Andrew J. Cohen and Brendan O'Brien - chooses not to go that route, instead giving both sides equal reason to both respect and aggravate the other. Yes, the frat boys are too loud, but they're also young people afraid of what will come after college, wanting to make their marks in life. And perhaps Mac and Kelly are overreacting a bit, but they're worried that parenthood means that their young lives are completely over. This wealth of personality makes these people, their motivations and the story very real to the audience. Yeah, there are some one-note characters in the bunch, but they're mainly filler to build up some of the laughs, and most of them work fine.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-L21ieZpNxUE/U3rG2KWkRFI/AAAAAAAAMak/s9FIyH_gQm0/s1600/neighbors3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-L21ieZpNxUE/U3rG2KWkRFI/AAAAAAAAMak/s9FIyH_gQm0/s1600/neighbors3.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wow, they really raided their closet for those.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now, granted, good characters and a good story can actually <b>BACKFIRE</b> when the execution is shoddy, and Stoller should know all about this: his 2012 flop <i>The Five-Year Engagement</i> was a host of great ideas bogged down by poor pacing and direction. Fortunately, Stoller seems to have learned his lesson this time around, as <i>Neighbors</i> knows it's a fast-paced romp and never slows itself down to think too much about what it's doing, while still maintaining its surprisingly strong narrative. Sadly, its humor is merely second-rate. The dialogue is <b>SMART</b>, the antics are humorous, and the physical humor is well-timed. And yet, it never quite musters the courage to deliver on the hilarity it promises. It's sad, because Rogen is funnier than I've seen him in years, Byrne shocks - in a good way - with a performance that goes totally against her dramatic background, and Efron and Franco deliver equal portions of excellence in their roles as fraternity heads. Efron especially impresses - and not just due to his natural six-pack abs - quite possibly making 2014 the year he finally broke out in Hollywood.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9xIb-lfkv1w/U3rGzM-CXfI/AAAAAAAAMaw/iYosXUzjr98/s1600/1394342156000-2425-D005-00368R.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9xIb-lfkv1w/U3rGzM-CXfI/AAAAAAAAMaw/iYosXUzjr98/s1600/1394342156000-2425-D005-00368R.JPG" height="300" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'm... not sure what to do with this...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
If only second rate humor was the least of <i>Neighbors' </i>problems, though to be honest the list of negatives is not that long. Some of them are basic plot points - with this much partying, how are the Radners the only people complaining? - and others the misuse of certain actors - sure, Christopher Mintz-Plasse isn't the greatest ever, but all he gets is a glorified, unimportant cameo? - but most of those can be brushed aside as minor complaints. Slightly worse is the soundtrack, which includes no stand-outs, sounding like they were taken from the local Top 40 dance mixes at the time of filming. For a movie with so much heavy parting, a great soundtrack might have improved things greatly. Now, the presence of Ike Barenholtz and Carla Gallo as Mac and Kelly's divorced best friends presents a real problem. Their characters are as one-noted as many of the others, which wouldn't be a problem if they only played a small part in the movie. Unfortunately, the pair are jammed into the main story for little to no reason, chewing up precious screen-time and pumping out pure bile whenever they grace the screen. Their scenes are largely unnecessary, and ought to really have been edited out.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uTqN9QJxdEo/U3rGzTdXGSI/AAAAAAAAMaM/t8F02Olj0ag/s1600/Neighbors+3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uTqN9QJxdEo/U3rGzTdXGSI/AAAAAAAAMaM/t8F02Olj0ag/s1600/Neighbors+3.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Yes, they're judging you.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Thankfully, that pair doesn't stop <i>Neighbors</i> from being a good movie; it merely stops it from being a great one. It's not everyday that a smart, clever, adult-oriented romp hits the big screen in such a successful way as this one has, and its success already at the box office means many folk already seem to agree. Should you see it? Well, while it's not on the same level as <i>Ted </i>or <i>21 Jump Street</i>, if you're feeling the hankering for an R-rated smorgasbord of unfiltered, outrageous and absolutely juvenile laughs, then this is definitely worth your time. I promise you will be surprised.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-70723820080553091382014-05-16T15:39:00.000-04:002014-05-16T20:15:05.016-04:00'47 Ronin': The Untriumphant Return of Keanu Reeves<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZZnNi7lQjRE/U3QOGdeIdBI/AAAAAAAAMXk/iRsSZ7v8Uf8/s1600/MV5BMTc0MjE2NzE0OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNTU5MjE1MDE%2540._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZZnNi7lQjRE/U3QOGdeIdBI/AAAAAAAAMXk/iRsSZ7v8Uf8/s1600/MV5BMTc0MjE2NzE0OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNTU5MjE1MDE%2540._V1_SX214_AL_.jpg" height="320" width="201"></a></div>
You know whom we haven't heard from in a while? Keanu Reeves.<br>
<br>
Or more accurately, he's been trying to get in touch, and we keep hiding behind the furniture with the shades drawn until he goes away. How did this come to happen? Twenty-five years ago, we were more than happy to hang out with stoner Keanu when he was just trying to get "Wild Stallyns", the best rock band of all time, off the ground. Then there was that one time he worked with Patrick Swayze and turned into a Hollywood icon, but it was still cool. He remained grounded, even stretching himself creatively with some work based on classic literature from Bram Stoker and William Shakespeare, while speedily becoming known as a bit of an action star as well. Then he did a little movie for a pair of sibling directors that changed cinema as we know it. Granted, he also did the sequels, and that's arguably why we don't pay too much attention to Keanu these days.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-A13LfE3UGl8/U3QOEkaZGwI/AAAAAAAAMXw/wZPLr7EOO90/s1600/47-Ronin-horses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-A13LfE3UGl8/U3QOEkaZGwI/AAAAAAAAMXw/wZPLr7EOO90/s1600/47-Ronin-horses.jpg" height="225" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The best English speaker here is the horse on the right.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But should we? I mean, he's not the greatest actor out there. There's no getting around it. But his being punished for the sins of a couple of overreaching directors doesn't seem a good enough reason for <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwYhrgDc1uE">47 Ronin</a></i> to have become the failure it did. When it was released on a crowded Christmas weekend this past December, the oft-delayed directorial debut of Carl Rinsch had already seen its share of delays, from rewrites to exorbitant special effects to 3D conversion. But its story - a loose adaptation of the Japanese story known as <i>Chushingura</i> with the addition of fantasy elements - really isn't all that bad. What most people had a problem with - if they bothered to acknowledge the film at all - was the primary focus on Reeves as the "outsider" adopted into Japanese society, upon whom the Ronin are forced to put all their faith in for them to succeed in avenging their slain master. All praise the one white guy!<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-04Jy_gjv2r0/U3QOF9nSMxI/AAAAAAAAMXc/SAhFlZNFcPw/s1600/Hiroyuki-Sanada-in-47-Ronin-.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-04Jy_gjv2r0/U3QOF9nSMxI/AAAAAAAAMXc/SAhFlZNFcPw/s1600/Hiroyuki-Sanada-in-47-Ronin-.jpg" height="212" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Group photo!!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And yeah, I can see why that would be seen as a problem. This isn't like <i>The Last Samurai</i> or <i>Shogun</i>, which were absolutely an outsider's visions of feudal Japan. <i>47 Ronin</i> is based on traditional Japanese folklore and told from their culture's perspective, and so slapping an American hero (even one touted as being of mixed blood) on the front of that poster can leave a poor taste in peoples' mouths. But on the other hand, this release never pretends to be anything other than a fantastical, fictional variation on that tale, and from that perspective, as a movie it kind of works. It's not perfect, but yeah, this is absolutely a title worthy of a rental.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dEP2c4sYbrw/U3QOEZueIvI/AAAAAAAAMXI/zVMGu-njIrc/s1600/47-ronin-movie-poster-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dEP2c4sYbrw/U3QOEZueIvI/AAAAAAAAMXI/zVMGu-njIrc/s1600/47-ronin-movie-poster-4.jpg" height="165" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">She's pretty, so naturally her character is tragic. Or she's a pop singer. Or both.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Bad stuff out of the way first: language. Obviously this was a movie primarily intended for American audiences, but having the actors perform in English was simply a mistake, even if I could write it off as simple literary replacement (in real life, they're speaking completely in Japanese, but we see it in English anyway). This works against the film in two ways; one, much of the dialogue can be irrevocably lost due to a simple lack of inflection; second, most of the cast doesn't really have a grasp on the language they're supposed to be speaking, with the few exceptions being those who have performed in American cinema before (Hiroyuki Sanada, Tadanobu Asano, Rinko Kikuchi). I know it's not popular thinking, but this is a film that would have benefited from subtitles, as it would have allowed for not only more expressive actors, but more understandable ones, as well.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TMo9UA-OwXE/U3QOFWkOEWI/AAAAAAAAMYA/BAUgOOth5zc/s1600/47-ronin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TMo9UA-OwXE/U3QOFWkOEWI/AAAAAAAAMYA/BAUgOOth5zc/s1600/47-ronin.jpg" height="225" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"So, sign here for my 401k, right?"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There's also a distinct lack of characterization when it comes to the Ronin, as well, though it's not as bad as you might think. Yes, Keanu's Kai gets top billing, and he's the cliched MacGuffin without which there would be no central plot. He does do a good job, but to be fair that's mainly because Kai is written as so fitting to his usual onscreen persona that it would have been impossible for him to screw up. But Oishi, the band's de facto leader (Sanada), has a whole arc, and despite his name being below Keanu's on the movie posters, he's arguably the film's main - and most sympathetic - character. However, it does go downhill from there. Kou Shibasaki is a standard damsel in distress, waiting for Kai to rescue her from her fate. Kikuchi's enigmatic witch is a major plus, but she really doesn't get much screen time to work. Still, she's a huge step up from Asano, who apparently learned to mug for the camera and chew scenery during his recent Hollywood sojourn. The rest of the characters have little to no personality, playing one-note parts whose names you'll never remember and whose impact on the story are negligible at best.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DFtYsP1le3o/U3QOErl-zZI/AAAAAAAAMX0/ylOC9hJ0-uw/s1600/47-ronin-amazing-behind-the-scenes-video-and-tv-spot.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DFtYsP1le3o/U3QOErl-zZI/AAAAAAAAMX0/ylOC9hJ0-uw/s1600/47-ronin-amazing-behind-the-scenes-video-and-tv-spot.jpg" height="247" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">There's just something... intriguing... about Rinko Kikuchi... and not just her name.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But the biggest character in the film is by far the most evocative, and that's the imagery of fantastical, feudal Japan. Say what you will about Rinsch's work as director (and I though he did a solid job for the most part), but he oversaw a tremendous undertaking that included some of the most gorgeous special effects to hit screens since <i>The Return of the King. </i>The vistas are breathtaking. The camerawork is simply fantastic. The CGI environments are stellar. And the creature effects - with the exception of the quivering "Tengu" monks, which were predestined to look stupid - are far better than the professional standard that's been set of late. Yes, the actual mythology of this setting is surprisingly stark, with no explanations made as to how these monsters, witches and magic swords could possibly exist. But with the story moving at such a brisk pace, there's little time to dwell on what <i>47 Ronin</i> doesn't do and you can focus on how good it looks while playing to its strengths.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6eOW6f45h2A/U3QOFjMBt-I/AAAAAAAAMXU/NZmukeYXr1o/s1600/47ronin_a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6eOW6f45h2A/U3QOFjMBt-I/AAAAAAAAMXU/NZmukeYXr1o/s1600/47ronin_a.jpg" height="225" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">He doesn't know Kung Fu. But he does have a killer sword!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Keanu might be passe these days (his other 2013 film <i>Man of Tai Chi</i>, might also find its way here soon), but <i>47 Ronin</i> definitely didn't deserve to go down as the biggest box office bomb of all time (not counting for inflation). While certainly flawed, it succeeds as a simple popcorn actioneer that also treats its legendary subject matter with more honor than you might originally have thought. In fact, it feels so reminiscent of classic samurai films, both fantasy and traditional, that its appeal to fans of the genre is readily apparent. Should you rent it? Weak moments aside, there's plenty to enjoy in the two hours it will take to watch. And in the best case scenario, you might discover something you wish you had seen on the big screen when you had the chance.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-32345586615717595492014-05-12T00:00:00.000-04:002014-05-12T14:14:58.843-04:00Somewhere Alongside the Moonrise: The Grand Budapest Hotel<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pZFobBnW8jo/U2vcfujpapI/AAAAAAAAMUc/Vdt9IF_rJvA/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pZFobBnW8jo/U2vcfujpapI/AAAAAAAAMUc/Vdt9IF_rJvA/s1600/download.jpg" height="320" width="216"></a></div>
I still think <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/06/kingdom-come.html">Moonrise Kingdom</a></i> should have been nominated for Best Picture.<br>
<br>
Wes Anderson's 2012 nostalgic comedy was one of many casualties that Oscar season, which also saw Kathryn Bigelow and Ben Affleck (whose <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-argo/">Argo</a></i> took Best Picture) miss out on Best Director nominations. That year was... kind of a mess. It's almost as if people are ignoring little gems like this while overindulging on and celebrating David O. Russell and his admittedly good - but by no means <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/01/david-os-hustlin.html">groundbreaking</a> or <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/12/double-feature-silver-linings-playbook.html">original</a> - fare. Not that Anderson, the Texan director whose movies seem to run on whimsy and charm, is lacking in public attention. Though he's had a few bombs, Anderson has reached that point in his career where not only does the mere mention of his name elicit squeals of glee from fanboys and fangirls, but his films have also proven good, quirky and unique enough to draw in more mainstream audiences. And <i>Moonrise Kingdom </i>is one of his most inclusive, with all the nuttiness of <i>Rushmore</i> but more approachable at the same time.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H8vNpVTF2S4/U3AK3M2H6iI/AAAAAAAAMWU/UTQ4hAzEmPU/s1600/the-grand-budapest-hotel-618x400.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H8vNpVTF2S4/U3AK3M2H6iI/AAAAAAAAMWU/UTQ4hAzEmPU/s1600/the-grand-budapest-hotel-618x400.jpg" height="260" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ralph Fiennes: one less great actor who hasn't worked with Anderson.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So can <i>The Grand Budapest Hotel</i> capitalize on that and become Wes Anderson's greatest work yet? Well, yes and no. <i>Budapest</i> is arguably one of Anderson's most artistic efforts, as his distinct style is all over the German locations and sets in which the film was shot. Whether it's opulently-colored models, creative camera techniques or unique character models, Anderson is at his glee-inducing best. His story of a legendary hotel concierge (Ralph Fiennes) falsely accused of murder and on the run from the law with his loyal lobby boy Zero (newcomer Tony Revolori) would make for a great thriller, if the screenplay (also written by Anderson) wasn't content to throw every humorous anecdote and amusing situation along the way to lighten the mood. The fact that Fiennes can talk about sleeping with older women in the same nonchalant tone in which he tells of the violent passing of a fellow prison escapee proves that he belongs in this director's pantheon of recurring performers, many of whom make their presences known.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_dwrLJeWoU4/U3AK0w_OMXI/AAAAAAAAMV4/60FbR4qhNk0/s1600/Grand-Budapest-Hotel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_dwrLJeWoU4/U3AK0w_OMXI/AAAAAAAAMV4/60FbR4qhNk0/s1600/Grand-Budapest-Hotel.jpg" height="225" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I even liked Jude Law in this! Truly this Anderson is sacred!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And it's a great cast that the director has assembled here. Though there are a few returning actors that could have done more (no more than a small cameo for Bill Murray?), <i>The Grand Budapest Hotel</i> is surprisingly built upon its new talent, with the Anderson regulars filling out the smaller support roles. Fortunately, that new talent is headlined by Fiennes, who is simply put on of the best actors working today. Revolori also impresses, and the two make for an excellent pair, as the younger actor's innocent and eminently loyal sidekick plays beautifully against Fiennes' haughty, confident and charismatic leading man. And the cast is littered with excellence, Saoirse Ronan as Zero's dutiful but independent fiance to Tilda Swinton as a wealthy hotel patron, to Adrien Brody as her inheritance-seeking son to Willem DaFoe as his thinly-veiled violent sociopath of a lackey. Returning actors Edward Norton and Jeff Goldblum also find their marks as a police inspector and a by-the-book lawyer, respectively.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L1u97P4pqEI/U3AK4QqWJhI/AAAAAAAAMWs/my5_EdSwmhI/s1600/the-grand-budapest-hotel-international-trailer-0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L1u97P4pqEI/U3AK4QqWJhI/AAAAAAAAMWs/my5_EdSwmhI/s1600/the-grand-budapest-hotel-international-trailer-0.jpg" height="225" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, really, there's a funny story in here.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Budapest</i> also carries an extra dose of the zaniness that makes Wes Anderson more than just a standard filmmaker, from his use of four distinct narrators (F. Murray Abraham, Jude Law, Tom Wilkinson, and yes, I'm including the girl with the book at the beginning) to the Mexico-shaped birthmark on one character's face to having a man named "Monsieur Chuck" (Owen Wilson) to the beautiful cakes designed so that the prison would not want to disturb them looking for concealed escape tools. The atmosphere that the director creates never feels stale, and while there are times that a scene feels a tad overlong, it's a rare occurrence, and usually is made up for by the kind of irreverent humor and witty dialogue that feels reminiscent of the golden age of spoken comedy.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BvRmp5cSBB4/U3AK2CvwntI/AAAAAAAAMWM/fvLx5H__0o8/s1600/grand-budapest.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BvRmp5cSBB4/U3AK2CvwntI/AAAAAAAAMWM/fvLx5H__0o8/s1600/grand-budapest.jpg" height="266" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That's a lot of flattened cakes.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Unfortunately, <i>The Grand Budapest Hotel</i> is <b>SO MUCH</b> like a Wes Anderson comedy that.... it never really takes that next step you might have been expecting after the magic that was <i>Moonrise Kingdom</i>. Much like how <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/12/black-panther.html">Django Unchained</a></i> was Tarantino's sideways step from <i>Inglorious Basterds</i>, <i>Budapest</i> just doesn't feel that different from <i>Moonrise</i>, not in locale or story (which are obviously differing) but in tone and pacing. The humor is the same, and the character archetypes just <b>FEEL</b> as though they've got Anderson's hands all over them. Keep in mind, that's not a bad thing. I mentioned before how the story would make for a great thriller, and another director would have done just that. By subverting that story and combining it with his style of moviemaking, however, Anderson makes something undeniably, indelibly his. And like the excellent <i>Django</i>, that identifiabe voice is what makes <i>The Grand Budapest Hotel</i> the wonderful experience that it is.<br>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ft5jUzgLoFY/U3AK19VNttI/AAAAAAAAMWE/bFVESxXAKio/s1600/grand-budapest-hotel-film.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ft5jUzgLoFY/U3AK19VNttI/AAAAAAAAMWE/bFVESxXAKio/s1600/grand-budapest-hotel-film.jpg" height="200" width="400"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nope, nothing suspicious going on here!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And while that means that <i>The Grand Budapest Hotel</i> ultimately appeals a little more to diehard Anderson fans than the average moviegoing audience, it's still one of the best movies released so far in 2014. You never know where the story will go next, and it makes for an excellent quirky, lo-fi option if you're already tired out from the big-budget tentpoles films that are starting to make their way into theaters. If you haven't already gone out of your way to see this, now is the best time to make it happen. Just don't expect anything truly groundbreaking - by Anderson's standards, anyway - and you'll enjoy your time at the movies very, very much.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-58304259188780302572014-05-08T00:00:00.000-04:002014-05-08T09:11:42.365-04:00Not So Amazing<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VQDxX1rzweg/U2lYPobPTcI/AAAAAAAAMSo/Tbw4eljjn4M/s1600/20140319151353%2521The_Amazing_Spiderman_2_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VQDxX1rzweg/U2lYPobPTcI/AAAAAAAAMSo/Tbw4eljjn4M/s1600/20140319151353%2521The_Amazing_Spiderman_2_poster.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
People don't like to think about it, but the <i>Spider-Man</i> franchise <b>NEEDED</b> that reboot. After Sam Raimi's disastrous 2007 finale to his to-that-point beloved trilogy, Sony needed to get people excited about the franchise again, and reminders of "Emo Peter Parker" were not going to work. And so while the 2012 reboot <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/07/totally-amazing.html">The Amazing Spider-Man</a></i> was not universally loved for rehashing the character's origin story, it <b>WAS</b> a well-crafted, superbly-performed summer blockbuster that succeeded in washing away the stink of Raimi's failure. The question now was whether the first sequel in this reborn series could maintain that momentum, especially with at least two sequels and two spin-off films planned for the future. It's a lot to place in the lap of director Marc Webb, whose only experience before 2012 was the indie sleeper hit <i>(500) Days of Summer</i>. Could an inexperienced filmmaker with one monster hit under his belt be counted on for another slam dunk? If you read the title for this review, you have probably already guessed that no, he did not.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nPycRCYIIhQ/U2qENPmdKdI/AAAAAAAAMUA/xpelPP034ZQ/s1600/THE-AMAZING-SPIDER-MAN-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nPycRCYIIhQ/U2qENPmdKdI/AAAAAAAAMUA/xpelPP034ZQ/s1600/THE-AMAZING-SPIDER-MAN-2.jpg" height="250" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Suit up!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
To be fair, not everything that is wrong with <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpF5M-xkI4w">The Amazing Spider-Man 2</a></i> is Webb's fault. In continuing the story of Andrew Garfield's maturing superhero and his relationships with those closest to him, there were bound to be hiccups along the way. The sequel sees our hero during the summer after his graduation from high school, unsure how to pursue romantic interest Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) without putting her in danger, as he has made a name for himself cleaning up the streets of New York City. But he's also dealing with the fallout of mega-company Oscorp, whose CEO has just passed away, leaving son (and Spidey's childhood friend) Harry Osborne (Dane DeHaan) in charge of the corporation, and also accidentally birthing supervillain Electro (Jamie Foxx), whose obsession with the superhero turns deadly. On top of that, there are dozens of additional characters, plot threads, foreshadowing and aimless cameos (Hi, Paul Giamatti! Bye, Chris Cooper!) that keep the plot rumbling forward. And if you used that last sentence to sum up what was wrong with this film, you would be pretty spot on.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-94sOQyAYAr0/U2qELPGaqNI/AAAAAAAAMT8/ATItoJUmPs0/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-Peter-and-Gwen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-94sOQyAYAr0/U2qELPGaqNI/AAAAAAAAMT8/ATItoJUmPs0/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-Peter-and-Gwen.jpg" height="205" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The romance!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
You see, Sony - who owns the film rights to the character of Spider-Man - is trying desperately to compete with the "cinematic universes" which have become trendy among those studios out there powerful enough to be in the business, with Disney (<i>The Avengers</i>), Fox (<i>The X-Men</i> and <i>Fantastic Four</i>) and Warner Brothers (<i>The Justice League</i>) banking on those continuous, interconnected stories to fuel their respective franchises for years, if not decades, to come. Sony however has less to work with; they own the rights to one hero, one or two anti-heroes and a slew of imaginative villains. While <i>Spider-Man</i> is already a cash cow for them, they would love to make a bundle off of <i>Venom</i>, <i>Sinister Six</i> and <i>The Black Cat</i> if it was at all possible. And <i>The Amazing Spider-Man 2</i> definitely drops breadcrumbs in those diverging paths, setting up not only future sequels, but what they hope will become new franchises. But that's also what holds this sequel back, as the story itself suffers from a serious lack of focus due to all the clues that are cool on the surface, but detract from the primary plot.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wS4ZTHAllk8/U2qELDk_p8I/AAAAAAAAMTk/xb3UKxuSa-k/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Peter-Parker-Harry-Osborn.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wS4ZTHAllk8/U2qELDk_p8I/AAAAAAAAMTk/xb3UKxuSa-k/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Peter-Parker-Harry-Osborn.jpg" height="250" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The bro-mance!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So how does a film franchise transform from a refined storyteller to the rambling drunk down at your local pub? My money is on screenwriters Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Jeff Pinkner, who replaced the first movie's James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent and Steve Kloves. Kurtzman and Orci are certainly talented scribes, however their projects seem to swing the divide between fun and exciting (the recent <i>Star Trek</i> films, TV show <i>Sleepy Hollow</i>) and terrible (<i>Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen</i>) with alarming regularity, and with little middle ground. Their strengths (and presumably Pinkner's, from working with them on <i>Fringe</i>) tend to be bombastic, action-filled sequences fitted around frenetic bursts of character development. While that in itself is fine, their style feels woefully inadequate to properly represent Peter Parker, a character who is not so much about macho action (though he's no slouch) as he is about inner turmoil and conflict. I hate comparing a sequel to the first movie, but Webb and his previous screenwriters had an <b>EXCELLENT</b> understanding of what made their characters tick, while here the new team seems more interested in fueling new franchises than allowing their movie to stand all on its own. The Peter/Gwen romance is hastily constructed, poorly written and painfully trite. The Harry Osborne character - while excellently acted by DeHaan - feels tacked on and undeveloped, not given enough time for non-comic fans to ascertain his motivations. There are <b>WAY</b> too many secondary characters with too many shallow, unfulfilled storylines, and Webb isn't even allowed to address the dangling threads he left open in the <b>FIRST</b> movie, such as the hunt for Uncle Ben's killer. But worst might be the way the film treats Jamie Foxx's villain, whose origins and rationale are about as cliched as comic book bad guys get. For a the sequel to a film that helped usher in a new age of superhero flicks, this followup is definitely a bit too safe and familiar for fans to rally behind.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FfzuOCDUJSM/U2qEMQLsBRI/AAAAAAAAMT4/aBMd76jh3vY/s1600/amazingspiderman2_finaltrailer_blog2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FfzuOCDUJSM/U2qEMQLsBRI/AAAAAAAAMT4/aBMd76jh3vY/s1600/amazingspiderman2_finaltrailer_blog2.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, wait, forget the bro-mance...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
All this isn't Webb's fault, though he's hardly free from blame. His actors all acquit themselves nicely - which in addition to the ones I've already named also include Sally Field, Colm Fiore, Felicity Jones and Marton Csokas - lending to the fact that Webb is indeed an actor's director. Standing out, Garfield and Stone share some excellent chemistry, and even Garfield and DeHaan feel like genuine old buddies, despite the failings of the screenplay. And the action-packed fight scenes are well-done, though the special effects accompanying them don't look quite as impressive as they did two years ago. The 3D is especially disappointing - even by the low standards I've come to set - so I definitely don't recommend paying the extra cost to view it that way. But what Webb does most wrong is wilt under pressure, both from his corporate overseers (who doubtlessly demanded all the script's added nonsense) and from those who were disappointed in his work the last time out. While <i>The Amazing Spider-Man</i> carved its own image into the big screen, the sequel feels reminiscent and even derivative of Raimi's popular entries, from the bright colors to the cartoonish characterizations, diverting sharply from what we've seen before. And then he can't even get the pacing down, as whole storylines hinted at in the trailer are never even mentioned, no doubt edited out in a mad dash to meet deadlines and satisfy executives.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TTJXgDpA4zw/U2qELwRDPvI/AAAAAAAAMTs/PQA5K2JE74M/s1600/Still-from-The-Amazing-Sp-014.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TTJXgDpA4zw/U2qELwRDPvI/AAAAAAAAMTs/PQA5K2JE74M/s1600/Still-from-The-Amazing-Sp-014.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Explosions are much brighter this time around.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There are moments in <i>The Amazing Spider-Man 2</i> that live up to the pedigree that the first film afforded, but those are sadly few and far between. I'll give Webb some credit: this movie had lofty goals in mind, from its role as the catalyst to Sony's new cinematic universe to its adherence to the important Spidey stories fans grew up with. This man pulled his cast and crew together and collectively they did their best to turn a script with zero focus into something both entertaining and emotional. That they got as close as they did is primarily due to the talent in the director's chair. However, this is a spectacle that tries too hard to do too much and falls far short of even modest expectations, becoming easily the most disappointing superhero flick of the past decade. Whether this puts a hiccup in Sony's future plans of course cannot be known, but hopefully the next Spider-Man entry will be a step back up for a studio with their ambitions, because if <i>The Amazing Spider-Man 3</i> is not a major step up from this mess, the future of the franchise is in serious trouble.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-51221173047471567142014-05-04T11:46:00.000-04:002014-05-04T11:46:10.393-04:00Stay Crappy, Ron Burgundy<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kOVsMd4qj3Q/U2QPhx-BuuI/AAAAAAAAMQk/Vnsm45hnGIA/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kOVsMd4qj3Q/U2QPhx-BuuI/AAAAAAAAMQk/Vnsm45hnGIA/s1600/download.jpg" /></a></div>
At the height of Will Ferrell's movie career, the former <i>Saturday Night Star</i> was more unavoidable than Adam Sandler, Chris Farley and David Spade combined. Arguably his magnum opus was the 2004 comedy <i>Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy</i> which, despite being a minor hit at best, is probably the most fondly remembered of his comedic works. So when <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U5jgAcIUPU">Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues</a></i> was announced last year, it was met by fans of the original with great hope for a continuing franchise. Sadly, while it managed to accrue decent reviews and a better box office draw, its release during the uber-crowded holiday season caused it to fly under more than a few radars, mine included. The result was a so-so theatrical run that was almost completely forgotten by most. So now that a little time has passed, does this sequel stack up to the fun and quotable- and at times, brilliant - modern classic?<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WblkDjUB05Y/U2QPiTUwrjI/AAAAAAAAMQ4/E4pZj5YvSj4/s1600/maxresdefault+%25282%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WblkDjUB05Y/U2QPiTUwrjI/AAAAAAAAMQ4/E4pZj5YvSj4/s1600/maxresdefault+%25282%2529.jpg" height="250" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Proof that jheri curls are just plain wrong</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The film takes place several years after the conclusion of the first <i>Anchorman</i>, with renowned newsman Ron Burgundy (Ferrell) being fired due to his sloppy work. After sinking into drink and depression and separating from his much more successful wife Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate), Ron is recruited to anchor an all-new, 24-hour news channel. Alongside his loyal news team (Paul Rudd, Steve Carell and David Koechner), Ron wants to make the most of his second chance, though he is handicapped by a graveyard shift timeslot, a smug, superior rival in prime-time anchorman Jack Lime (James Marsden) and learning to operate under the heel of black, female studio chief Linda Jackson (Meagan Good). In overcoming those obstacles, Ron Burgundy succeeds in ways nobody could fathom and changes the way people watch the news for all time.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NVfP2TNNkw4/U2WWHtIsjqI/AAAAAAAAMR0/GUNkBBiZ6WI/s1600/Anchorman-2-Disappointed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NVfP2TNNkw4/U2WWHtIsjqI/AAAAAAAAMR0/GUNkBBiZ6WI/s1600/Anchorman-2-Disappointed.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'd say Old vs. New, but James Marsden is actually 40.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Well, there's no nice way to say this: here the sequel is vastly inferior to the original. It's not that <i>Anchorman 2 </i>doesn't have its moments, or isn't particularly funny when it wants to be. It's genuinely great seeing the four leads back again, their camaraderie just as fresh and entertaining as it was nine years prior. Returning director Adam McKay gets good performances out of his actors, and while not every line of dialogue is gold, the best ones can slip under the radar and catch the audience completely unaware, making the film work hard for its laughs. The film also takes an interesting turn in its portrayal of the news, in this case its look at racial integration, the empowerment of African Americans in the media, and the transformation of the news from the early days of Walter Kronkite to the buzz-word TMZ and FOX News style of today's guerilla journalism. No, it's not meant to be educational, but that <i>Anchorman 2</i> bothers to acknowledge it at all is reticent of the brains behind it. Finally, there are dozens of laudable cameo appearances, culminating in a sequel "News Team Battle Royale" that actually manages to beat the very good one from the first entry. Simply put, when <i>Anchorman 2</i> is on its A-game, it appears unstoppable.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ivyvTdkzP3E/U2WWHmPbw3I/AAAAAAAAMRs/jYaJ808ZDgw/s1600/article-2344851-1A69902E000005DC-947_634x352.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ivyvTdkzP3E/U2WWHmPbw3I/AAAAAAAAMRs/jYaJ808ZDgw/s1600/article-2344851-1A69902E000005DC-947_634x352.jpg" height="223" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That moustache is still hypnotic, though...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But for every worthy laugh, awesome cameo and genuine moment of mirth, there are dozens of dead zones where just about everything goes wrong. For some reason, the editing team does a lousy job pacing this flick, which is strange when you consider that it's the same team that worked with McKay on <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/12/new-year-doth-beckon-but-2010s-films.html">The Other Guys</a></i>, <i>Step Brothers</i> and the original <i>Anchorman</i>. So either Brent White was seriously off his meds, or nothing could possibly be salvageable from the lackadaisical story penned by Ferrell and McKay. The script does nothing of value with Applegate, who is still shoved in to the detriment of a superior, more interesting lead female character in Good's sassy, brilliant studio head. Whole storylines are introduced as a means to present some sort of conflict for Ron, but are then scrapped halfway through without any true resolution. McKay and Ferrell have <b>ABSOLUTELY </b>no idea how to use a creative genius such as Kristen Wiig, despite setting her character up in the most perfect of ways. And while Judah Nelson is positively the worst child actor I've ever seen, I still can't put all the blame on him because I'm not 100% certain that wasn't intentional. And either way, it didn't work.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-M6aW145mR54/U2WWHqVg9qI/AAAAAAAAMRo/mXGP-CpDsKk/s1600/anchorman-2-wiig.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-M6aW145mR54/U2WWHqVg9qI/AAAAAAAAMRo/mXGP-CpDsKk/s1600/anchorman-2-wiig.jpg" height="203" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Adam McKay doesn't recognize my true worth."</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Frankly, it all falls down to one solitary issue: <i>Anchorman 2</i> just isn't all that funny. It <b>TRIES</b> to pull out the big laughs, and when the script focuses on the interactions between the News Team, the outrageous cameos and some of the more nuanced dialogue, it manages to hit that sweet spot to which all comedies aspire. But too often the movie shoots for the stars, only to fall tragically short. Worse, the fake melodramatics are punched up a bit <b>TOO</b> much, making that lack of true humor all the more noticeable. And even the really funny bits aren't all that memorable. Any fan of the original <i>Anchorman</i> probably has a dozen favorite lines of dialogue that could be rattled off the top of their head, but there just isn't that level of immortalising here, with the only ones that stick being call-backs to those great lines from the first movie.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ceOkoa93_O8/U2WWJTOglvI/AAAAAAAAMSI/2zEW-gag39M/s1600/o-ANCHORMAN-2-MOVIE-facebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ceOkoa93_O8/U2WWJTOglvI/AAAAAAAAMSI/2zEW-gag39M/s1600/o-ANCHORMAN-2-MOVIE-facebook.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">And this is why we hate them.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The result is that <i>Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues</i> might amuse you for a couple of hours, but you'll forget why almost immediately afterward. Yes, there are a few funny bits, and again that News Team brawl - though you have to wait until the end - is one of the bawdiest things I've seen of late. But this is definitely a fan-only event, and even those who loved the original <i>Anchorman</i> won't be all that impressed by the watered-down schlock that wasn't worth a ten year wait. If you're desperate for a comedy to see, and you loved the original, there's definitely something appealing about this sequel. But those expecting a return to the glory days of Will Ferrell will be sorely tested by yet another missed mark.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-71596850651624090832014-04-30T09:34:00.000-04:002014-05-01T21:14:39.578-04:00Prepare for Extinction: A Summer Movie Preview<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F0mDR3xN2eE/U0sbIDsLqJI/AAAAAAAAMKc/qTFjXmnLD8g/s1600/Iron-Man-3-Wallpaper-Wide-Shot.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F0mDR3xN2eE/U0sbIDsLqJI/AAAAAAAAMKc/qTFjXmnLD8g/s1600/Iron-Man-3-Wallpaper-Wide-Shot.jpg" height="250" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Making over $1.2 billion last summer, <i>Iron Man 3</i> is a tough act to follow.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Well, it's that time of the year again. May 2 begins the annual Summer Movie season, and every major studio is pumping out their tentpole films, in hopes that they will not only be successful, but perhaps grow legs and attain the kind of box office receipts of something like <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/05/mashup-in-manhattan.html">The Avengers</a></i> or <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/suit-up.html">Iron Man 3</a></i>. And trying <b>NOT</b> to be the next <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/saddle-sore.html">The Lone Ranger</a></i> or <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/movie-review-battleship/">Battleship</a>,</i>while they're at it. But while these kinds of blockbusters have begun to prop up in other, less dense times of the year (such as the most recent November with the <i>Thor </i>and <i>Hunger Games</i> sequels or <i>Captain America</i> less than a month ago), Summer is still the time you'll see most of these big releases, especially with school out and people looking for any refuge from the oppressive heat. So with all these comic book thrillers, ribald comedies and immersive animated efforts, the question becomes: where do you spend your money? What looks good? What looks bad? What will get delayed at the last minute, completely screwing up perspectives like these? Here are the scheduled movies coming out between May and August, 2014, and some thoughts on each one.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">MAY</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">The Best Around</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fOhVwB1-lmQ/U0slQFcW9mI/AAAAAAAAMLU/uto-94eIT8w/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Official-High-Res-Banner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fOhVwB1-lmQ/U0slQFcW9mI/AAAAAAAAMLU/uto-94eIT8w/s1600/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-Official-High-Res-Banner.jpg" height="212" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
As is often the case, the film that opens the Summer season is one of the most anticipated. Yes, the marketing has been a bit relentless. Yes, the first installment wasn't universally loved (though to be fair, that was mainly because it was yet another origin story). But <i><span style="color: red;">The Amazing Spider-Man 2</span></i> still lives up to its name thanks to an all-star cast - both returning and added - exceptional SFX, and the direction of Marc Webb, which many people forget was actually quite stellar in the first installment. Sony is hoping for a lot from their new take on the comic book franchise, already planning future movies centered around villains <i>The Sinister Six</i> and antihero <i>Venom</i>, but their next step towards those goals and future sequels demand a successful release here. And from what I can see, this is a movie that could live up to that high standard.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">Goodfellas</span></b></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v3bF7vZRYUA/U0slQI6qkaI/AAAAAAAAMLQ/ABJyaagSCdA/s1600/Godzilla-2014-Roar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v3bF7vZRYUA/U0slQI6qkaI/AAAAAAAAMLQ/ABJyaagSCdA/s1600/Godzilla-2014-Roar.jpg" height="208" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Last year <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-biggest-screen-possible.html">Pacific Rim</a></i> rode the concept of giant robots fighting giant monsters but didn't draw many audiences. As visually engrossing as it was (and pretty good to boot), it just didn't appeal to much of an audience. But hopefully <i><span style="color: red;">Godzilla</span></i> is still a recognizable enough property to garner legitimate attention, and reinvigorate the "giant monster" genre... Director Brian Singer returns to superheroes and the franchise he helped build with <i><span style="color: red;">X-Men: Days of Future Past</span></i>. Now the question is whether we'll get the director who brought us <i>The Usual Suspects</i>, or the one who brought us <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-jack-the-giant-slayer/">Jack the Giant Slayer</a></i>... I'm only on board recently with Disney's <i><span style="color: red;">Maleficent</span></i>, as I'm not entirely sold on the villain-centric storyline. I am utterly convinced however, that if <b>ANYONE</b> can make it work, it's Angelina Jolie... Speaking of Disney, their latest based-on-a-true-story sports drama <i><span style="color: red;">Million Dollar Arm</span></i> will test the star power - and perhaps the throwing arm - of departing Mad Man Jon Hamm... Just because Drew Barrymore is costarring in an Adam Sandler flick doesn't mean it's automatic gold. <i><span style="color: red;">Blended</span></i> looks to be their most offensive pairing yet, so don't count on their usual magic... <i><span style="color: red;">Palo Alto</span></i> is based on the writings of James Franco, but otherwise the directorial debut of Gia Coppola looks pretty good... My cousin Mark works for Open Road, so my endorsement of <i><span style="color: red;">Chef</span></i> should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt. However, the last time he recommended one of his studio's projects to me (and probably everyone else in the family, come to think of it), it was <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/09/two-days-til-retirement.html">End of Watch</a></i>, and so his recommendations are definitely something to which I pay close attention.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">Bad Company</span></b></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zWws_KlPfog/U0slSYg3CeI/AAAAAAAAMME/F1VtaHdo4qA/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zWws_KlPfog/U0slSYg3CeI/AAAAAAAAMME/F1VtaHdo4qA/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
R-Rated comedies are a mixed bag, as for every <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-ted/">Ted</a></i> or <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/jump-around.html">21 Jump Street</a></i> are a handful of unworthy titles like <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/05/follow-supreme-leader.html">The Dictator</a></i>, <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/08/left-hanging-with-chad.html">The Campaign</a>, <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/06/bad-just-bad.html">Bad Teacher</a></i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/07/watch-out.html">The Watch</a> </i>dragging the genre down. Seth Rogen comedies tend to draw a lot of attention, but that doesn't mean that they're good, even when they have talented casts and crews like <i><span style="color: red;">The Neighbors</span></i>... Well, at least <i><span style="color: red;">Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return</span></i> is a more faithful adaptation of L Frank Baum's book series than last year's Sam Raimi massacre. But with animation reminiscent of a bad Saturday morning cartoon show, infantile humor, and Lea Michelle, I wouldn't expect too many people to care about it even if it were the only animated film all summer... Seth MacFarlane returns to cinema with western parody <i><span style="color: red;">A Million Ways to Die in the West</span></i>. <i>Ted</i> was a nice surprise, but I don't see a way that the director recreates the magic that made the 2012 surprise hit work. At best, it'll be okay. At worst, we're looking at career suicide...It's nice that comedy <i><span style="color: red;">Mom's Night Out</span></i> comes out on Mother's Day weekend. Now if it only looked even remotely funny... Elizabeth Banks is growing on me, but that doesn't mean her latest comedy <i><span style="color: red;">Walk of Shame</span></i> is going to be any good, especially when your director also did <i>Drillbit Taylor </i>and <i>Without a Paddle</i>... Jesse Eisenberg's new indie <i><span style="color: red;">The Double</span></i> sees him playing two different people with differing characters. So why is it that the actor appears to be exactly the same in both?... Is <i><span style="color: red;">The Angriest Man in Brooklyn</span></i> Robin Williams' attempt at regaining his relevance? If so, maybe he should instead get back into screwball comedies and step away from movies too ambiguously designed to be remotely approachable.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">June</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b> The Best Around</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_xIG9Rc9lQ8/U0vx1lE2PVI/AAAAAAAAMMk/Kyn2jcYW_i4/s1600/70efaa91-d7d5-4c4c-8424-e424347db0cb_20131217_22jumpstreet_greenbandtrailer1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_xIG9Rc9lQ8/U0vx1lE2PVI/AAAAAAAAMMk/Kyn2jcYW_i4/s1600/70efaa91-d7d5-4c4c-8424-e424347db0cb_20131217_22jumpstreet_greenbandtrailer1.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
As I've often mentioned, <i>21 Jump Street</i> was one of the biggest surprises for me in 2012, and directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller are back with stars Jonah Hill, Channing Tatum and Ice Cube with <i><span style="color: red;">22 Jump Street</span>. </i>But with the story itself seeming derivative of the first movie - a fact which the characters gleefully admit - and the fact that the trailers haven't really been standout, what makes this sequel so appealing? Well, with this team and the chemistry they showed two years ago, you can expect uncensored gags, irreverent madness, and witty dialogue. Add Peter Stormare as a strong villain, and you've potentially got the recipe for a sequel that surpasses the original, in spirit if not material.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Goodfellas</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rh-q2V4TsZQ/U0vx4nwMGUI/AAAAAAAAMNk/UdfK8BsOF8Q/s1600/maxresdefault-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-gets-an-eye-opening-new-featurette.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rh-q2V4TsZQ/U0vx4nwMGUI/AAAAAAAAMNk/UdfK8BsOF8Q/s1600/maxresdefault-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-gets-an-eye-opening-new-featurette.jpeg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Dreamworks Animation probably hasn't had so much demand for a sequel as must exist for <i><span style="color: red;">How to Train Your Dragon 2</span></i>. Continuing the story of viking Hiccup and his dragon partner Toothless, the company is absolutely attempting to dominate the Summer movie season after bombing out with <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/double-feature-ripd-and-turbo.html">Turbo</a></i> last year... Tom Cruise action thriller <i><span style="color: red;">Edge of Tomorrow</span></i> sees the star return to science fiction, which seems to be his most profitable genre of late. What makes this movie different? How about the casting of the uber-talented Emily Blunt?... After playing siblings in last month's YA adaptation <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/04/just-another-ya-blockbuster.html">Divergent</a></i>, Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort play romantic co-leads in another one, John Green's <i><span style="color: red;">The Fault in Our Stars</span></i>. The book's popularity ought to ensure a healthy audience... After all the studio edits, it almost might be better to wait for the Director's Cut on DVD, but sci-fi class struggle epic <i><span style="color: red;">Snowpiercer</span></i> finally hits theaters this month and marks the Hollywood debut of Korean director Bong Joon-ho.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bad Company</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8Etome8Cg0c/U159D7EZhlI/AAAAAAAAMQE/gkmHZCiX2ow/s1600/1383323499_transformers-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8Etome8Cg0c/U159D7EZhlI/AAAAAAAAMQE/gkmHZCiX2ow/s1600/1383323499_transformers-4.jpg" height="237" width="400" /></a></div>
You might be mistaken for thinking that <i><span style="color: red;">Transformers: Age of Extinction</span></i> will be different from the previous installments of the 80's TV show-adapted film franchise. Sure, the ads have been explosive and exciting to watch, and we all like to see Mark Wahlberg, but then you have to remember again that this is most definitely a Michael Bay movie. Haha, no, you won't fool me again, Mr. Bay... <i><span style="color: red;">Think Like a Man Too</span></i> takes the cast from the first <i>Think Like a Man</i> and just drops them in Las Vegas. Is there any point? Not that I can tell, and Kevin Hart is inching closer and closer to overexposure with every movie in which he plays Kevin Hart... Just when you didn't think Clint Eastwood could get any older and more out of touch, he directs a musical based on the nostalgic Broadway hit <i><span style="color: red;">Jersey Boys</span></i>. I think Dirty Harry might be completely incapable of telling modern stories anymore... Comedian Gillian Robespierre makes her feature directorial debut with <i><span style="color: red;">Obvious Child</span></i>, clearly an attempt to appeal to the same crowd that saw <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/10/double-feature-paranormal-activity-4.html">Sleepwalk With Me</a></i>. I just don't know if there's an audience out there for her work. It's certainly not me.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">July</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">The Best Around</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VhTu2olLaBM/U0vx4F90nJI/AAAAAAAAMNY/XxpqFr2_zZ8/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VhTu2olLaBM/U0vx4F90nJI/AAAAAAAAMNY/XxpqFr2_zZ8/s1600/maxresdefault+%25281%2529.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
In all honesty, we probably remember <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/08/rising-tides.html">Rise of the Planet of the Apes</a></i> with a little bit of rose-tinted glasses. Yes, it was a solid movie, but if it hadn't been for Andy Serkis doing his usual excellent CGI performance, would it really have stood out? Thankfully, we don't have to worry about that, as <i><span style="color: red;">Dawn of the Planet of the Apes</span></i> looks better in just about every conceivable way, from an improved cast (Jason Clarke, Gary Oldman), to the dystopian, futuristic setting and a compelling story. Although sadly Rupert Wyatt does not return as director (replaced by <i>Cloverfield</i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/01/vampire-movie-that-doesnt-suck.html">Let Me In</a></i> director Matt Reeves), I still have nothing but the highest hopes for this reinvigorated franchise.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Goodfellas</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XZ1BMuLQ-A8/U0vx5X-IGFI/AAAAAAAAMNw/PtQ3DpUVDZ0/s1600/wish-i-was-here-swear-jar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XZ1BMuLQ-A8/U0vx5X-IGFI/AAAAAAAAMNw/PtQ3DpUVDZ0/s1600/wish-i-was-here-swear-jar.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Ten years after winning over an entire generation by writing, directing and starring in indie favorite <i>Garden State</i>, Zach Braff gets behind the camera once again to present us with <i><span style="color: red;">Wish I was Here</span></i>. He brings with him a talented cast that includes Joey King, Mandy Patinkin, Josh Gad, Donald Faison and James Avery (in his last film appearance) so you know hipsters and other film buffs will be referencing this one for years... <i><span style="color: red;">Hercules</span></i> seems to mix elements both good (star Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson) and unsettling (director Brett Ratner), but I'm willing to bet it will be better than you might expect. At the very least it'll be leaps and bounds beyond what January's <i>The Legend of Hercules</i><b style="font-style: italic;"> </b>could have hoped to achieve... <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/06/double-feature-frances-ha-and-purge.html">The Purge</a></i>, a basic locked-house horror film, was a piece of garbage. It's sequel, <i><span style="color: red;">The Purge: Anarchy</span></i>, takes the interesting concept of the original and actually seems to <b>DO SOMETHING</b> with it, which really ought to make all the difference... <i><span style="color: red;">Sex Tape</span></i> is the latest debaucherous effort from stars Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel, but unlike <i>Bad Teacher</i>, the story and characters are easily approachable, and the film looks to provide some solid laughs. Maybe this is the movie that gets Diaz out of a lot of critics' doghouses... <i><span style="color: red;">Earth to Echo</span></i> mixes the found footage genre with <i>E.T.</i>, and if you don't at least think that sounds interesting in some way, I'm not sure how else you can understand how excited this concept makes me... <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/10/true-crime-spree.html">Sinister</a> </i>director Scott Derrickson returns to horror with <i><span style="color: red;">Deliver Us from Evil</span></i>, another haunted house movie that will scare the poop out of everyone... What makes indie romantic movie <i><span style="color: red;">Begin Again</span></i> watchable? For one, director John Carney is the man who brought us <i>Once</i>, a must-see for any music lover. Second, Mark Ruffalo leads an uber-talented and charming cast that includes Keira Knightley, Hailee Steinfeld, James Cordon, CeeLo Green and Catherine Keener. I can't imagine a situation in which I wouldn't want to watch this.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bad Company</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UISZAR-ajLk/U0vx30ONnlI/AAAAAAAAMNM/esqj6JfCXlc/s1600/jupiter_ascending_mila_kunis_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UISZAR-ajLk/U0vx30ONnlI/AAAAAAAAMNM/esqj6JfCXlc/s1600/jupiter_ascending_mila_kunis_1.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I'm not sure what happened to the Wachowski siblings, but it's a bad sign when their latest motion picture does nothing but reference their earlier, better work. Have their creative juices dried up so much that repeating <i>The Matrix</i> was the best they could do? Talented cast aside, <i><span style="color: red;">Jupiter Ascending</span></i> is one big budget spectacle I'm not looking forward to... Melissa McCarthy and Susan Sarandon star in comedy <i><span style="color: red;">Tammy</span></i>, which looks to be right in the R-Rated wheelhouse McCarthy has carved out for herself. Now if previews would show me that same spark I've yet to witness... <i><span style="color: red;">And So It Goes</span></i> continues the careers of Hollywood actors Michael Douglas, Diane Keaton and director Rob Reiner in a film that will surely be targeting older audiences uninterested in anything else already out... Disney's <i>Planes</i> was fortunate to come out at a time when there wasn't much family fare available, justifying the quick-release sequel <i><span style="color: red;">Planes: Fire and Rescue</span></i> for the tiniest of audience members in July, when <i>Dragon 2</i> will be winding down its own theatrical run. The question is which movie families will want to see at that point... Thought the <i>Step Up</i> franchise was done? Nope, <i><span style="color: red;">Step Up All In</span> </i>is a generic dance movie, but previews aren't showing me anything potentially "Wow"- worthy, compared to its earlier entries. Let's face it, this is a genre that has fully run its course... Well, maybe Kevin Hart's stranglehold on comedy concert films will come to a close with <i><span style="color: red;">The Fluffy Movie</span></i>, focusing on stand-up artist Gabriel Iglesias. More likely is that audiences won't care, as Hart had built up a following not only through stand-up but also in supporting roles in film, while Iglesias just hasn't earned that same level of goodwill.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="color: red;">August</span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>The Best Around</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cX8VKJH4m3o/U0vx3ml8xEI/AAAAAAAAMNg/D1933li2vtA/s1600/guardians-of-the-galaxy-concept-art-final.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cX8VKJH4m3o/U0vx3ml8xEI/AAAAAAAAMNg/D1933li2vtA/s1600/guardians-of-the-galaxy-concept-art-final.jpg" height="262" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i><span style="color: red;">Guardians of the Galaxy</span></i>, in many ways, signals a drastic change in how the public perceives and accepts comic book movies. For a long time now, the big two comic companies have been adapting their titles, but they've been focusing on proven names, like <i>Superman</i>, <i>Batman</i> and the <i>X-Men</i>. Even when Marvel began their contiguous universe, they started off with the safest bets; not just bestselling, but male, Caucasian, human heroes. That changes in August, when a little-known, multi-species team gets their shot at the big screen. The fact that this movie is coming out before DC and Warner Bros. have even <b>ANNOUNCED</b> a <i>Wonder Woman</i> movie shows just how far Marvel has come and how deep into their library they're willing to delve. And while it seems a little... offbeat when compared to its predecessors, that is also a sign that the studio is willing to reach out of their comfort zone and risk making something unique. And even if it <b>FAILS</b>, you know it would only be a minor inconvenience to the Marvel filmmaking juggernaut, and won't stop all innovation in its tracks, <i>a la</i> <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/06/brightest-day-or-blackest-night.html">Green Lantern</a></i>.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Goodfellas... and Ladies</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pa5934dAPNo/U0zq7FSiTCI/AAAAAAAAMOk/13Izz0bL4_o/s1600/Scarlett-Johansson-as-Lucy-photo-movies-2014.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pa5934dAPNo/U0zq7FSiTCI/AAAAAAAAMOk/13Izz0bL4_o/s1600/Scarlett-Johansson-as-Lucy-photo-movies-2014.jpg" height="240" width="400" /></a></div>
At first glance, you might not associate French filmmaker Luc Besson with strong female characters, but when you actually think about it, it makes sense. Anne Parillaud in <i>Nikita</i>. Natalie Portman in <i>Leon: The Professional</i>. Milla Jovovich in <i>The Fifth Element</i>. Now you can add Scarlett Johanssen in <i><span style="color: red;">Lucy</span></i> to that list. This fast-paced mind-fuck looks absolutely insane, with Johanssen at her ass-kicking best... Brendan Gleeson stars as a good priest under threat of death in <i><span style="color: red;">Cavalry</span></i>, John Michael McDonagh's follow-up to his critically-acclaimed <i>The Guard</i>. It looks like a good mix of humor and human spirit, though it might slip under many folks' radars, like <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/10/crazy.html">Seven Psychopaths</a></i> did two years ago... <i><span style="color: red;">Into the Storm</span></i> stars <i>The Hobbit</i>'s Richard Armitage and is a disaster movie involving tornadoes. Your mileage may vary on how good the script is, as what's been shown of the visuals is fairly impressive... Chadwick Boseman already tackled one African American legend in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/04/baseball-is-back.html">42</a></i>, and now he gets that opportunity again, playing James Brown in <i><span style="color: red;">Get on Up</span></i>, the latest from <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/08/helping-hand.html">The Help</a></i> director Tate Taylor. I don't know if lightning will strike twice for either actor or director, but it's a compelling subject, at least... <i><span style="color: red;">Let's Be Cops</span></i> has all the makings of an under-the-radar hit. It's got up-and-coming stars, a unique and way out there story, and - oh, yeah - it actually looks funny. Don't be surprised if this turns out to be the summer's best comedy... Little has been released about <i><span style="color: red;">The Hundred-Foot Journey</span></i>, but it stars Helen Mirren, so I'll buy it based on her alone... The same goes for Natalie Portman in <i><span style="color: red;">Jane Got a Gun</span></i>, which I can only assume continues the story of her little-explored character from <i>Cold Mountain</i>. No? Well, I'll still check it out... <i><span style="color: red;">The Loft</span></i> is a remake of a Swedish film and is from the same director, but it's the cast - which includes Karl Urban, James Marsden, Rhona Mitra and Eric Stonestreet - that colors me interested... I almost didn't mention it, but <i><span style="color: red;">One Chance</span></i> looks like a real charmer. It stars Craig from <i>Doctor Who</i>, so it already has a leg up. Yes, I know he's done other things, but he's <b>CRAIG</b> from <i style="font-weight: bold;">DOCTOR WHO</i>. Seriously, what else does he need to do?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red;"><b>Bad Company</b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t0l1OpKhTHc/U0zq6dxMRsI/AAAAAAAAMOQ/LFqbbKV_VvU/s1600/968full-the-expendables-3-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t0l1OpKhTHc/U0zq6dxMRsI/AAAAAAAAMOQ/LFqbbKV_VvU/s1600/968full-the-expendables-3-poster.jpg" height="350" width="400" /></a></div>
In the latest effort to ensnare audiences through sequel fatigue, <i><span style="color: red;">The Expendables 3</span></i> hard targets that 18-49 male demographic that isn't worn down by the cinema violence from the previous three months. It combines the classic, weathered crew from the first two movies with a younger cast that includes MMA fighters, boxers, <i>Twilight</i> castoffs and recovering antisemites. Without Chuck Norris cracking jokes about himself. And it will probably be as good as that sounds... <i><span style="color: red;">Sin City: A Dame to Kill For</span></i> is the sequel diehard fans have been waiting for ever since 2005. Unfortunately, nobody seems to know it's coming and fewer seem very excited. Those hoping for more from the mind of Frank Miller are likely to be disappointed... <i><span style="color: red;">The Giver</span></i> has the advantage of being based on the beloved, best-selling Lois Lowry novel. It however has the disadvantage of looking like low budget, semantic crap... <i><span style="color: red;">As Above, So Below</span></i> could be scary, but has the temerity to be a found-footage horror rip-off of <i>The Descent</i> in the year 2014. Hollywood, the audiences are shrinking, not growing. It's time to give it up... If you want to see a movie that has a decent cast, a director who has never filmed a feature narrative, cliched dialogue and a "been there, done that" premise, then you've already seen <i><span style="color: red;">If I Stay </span></i>and even Chloe Moretz isn't reason enough to check it out... With no Pixar movie this summer, there's absolutely a dearth of quality animated films coming out in its place. <i><span style="color: red;">Underdogs</span></i>, the latest flop (just watch) from Universal Studios, takes a shot at making a movie centered around the tabletop curiosity known as Foosball. I mean, why not just make a movie about soccer if you're not going to <b>TRY</b> and appeal to an audience?... Speaking of which, feel-good sports movies based on a true story really are dime-a-dozen (or at least their budgets appear that way), so it's no surprise that <i><span style="color: red;">When the Game Stands Tall</span></i> follows that same suit. The genre needs something special to bring it back to the forefront of cinema, but there doesn't seem to be anything here... <i><span style="color: red;">Jessabelle</span> </i>is your standard end-of-summer paranormal horror romp, complete with the standard tropes that came from everything before it. Unlike previous efforts like <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/09/scary-good.html">The Possession</a> </i>or even <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/09/twilight-meet-fright-night.html">Fright Night</a></i>, there just doesn't appear to be anything unique to justify an audience spending money to see this.<br />
<br />
That's it! What are you most looking forward to over the next four months? Anything you feel I failed to mention? Any predictions for this years winners and losers? I hope you all have an excellent movie-watching summer, and I'm excited to see what the tentpoles of 2014 bring to the table! Hope to review most if not all of these for you soon!</div>
</div>
Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-18520006918793384642014-04-14T00:00:00.000-04:002014-04-14T21:12:51.879-04:00"Most Wanted" a Deserved #2<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8vhPYJriP_w/U0qz4KAqWeI/AAAAAAAAMJ0/pxZTjs3U6_Q/s1600/hr_Muppets_Most_Wanted_11.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8vhPYJriP_w/U0qz4KAqWeI/AAAAAAAAMJ0/pxZTjs3U6_Q/s1600/hr_Muppets_Most_Wanted_11.jpg" height="320" width="217" /></a></div>
Kermit the Frog and company are quick to admit at the beginning of <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enf9eAQ8srw">Muppets Most Wanted</a> </i>that sequels usually aren't quite as good as the original. In song, no less. And true to form, the sequel we have in theaters now isn't quite as good or memorable as 2011's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/11/professional-puppet-productions.html">The Muppets</a></i>. It's not for lack of trying, however, as Jim Henson's creations crack every joke, drop in every celebrity cameo, and break every wall - especially the fourth - they can in their attempt to follow up the force of pure nostalgia that came before it.<br />
<br />
Director James Bobin and screenwriter Nicholas Stoller (sans Jason Segel this go-around) return to continue the story of the Muppets, fresh off their comeback show and ready to figure out the plot of the sequel. The plot sees the gang going on a world tour to take advantage of their rediscovered popularity, but subverted by an evil talent agent (Ricky Gervais) and a criminal mastermind Kermit look-alike named Constantine, who replaces everyone's favorite amphibian and sends his predecessor to a gulag run by a Russian Tina Fey. Together, the duo plan to use the Muppets as a cover in a plot to steal the crown jewels of Great Britain. Yes, the plot sounds silly. But considering this is a <i>Muppets</i> movie, it makes the best kind of irreverent sense.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_9iMZKuE6yU/U0qz4ZxD_cI/AAAAAAAAMJ8/Mtg5CHRzBaA/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_9iMZKuE6yU/U0qz4ZxD_cI/AAAAAAAAMJ8/Mtg5CHRzBaA/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="262" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Yes, everybody is back, even that one you forgot existed.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Freed from the shackles of a human-centric storyline (sorry, Segel; your heart was in the right place), <i>Muppets Most Wanted</i> focuses all of its attention where it <b>SHOULD</b>, on the felt-covered puppets with personality that we've become accustomed to over the previous decades. One of the major complaints about the 2011 <i>Muppets </i>is that it focused too much on Walter, a human-raised Muppet whose quest to join the group was the central theme. That the story gives more story to Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Walter (yes, yes, but it's okay now because now he's one of them), and Sam the Eagle as main protagonists, while relegating their human counterparts to chiefly supportive roles, is a real step up, allowing the characters to thrive on their own now that they've become re-acclimated to the spotlight. Characters sound more like themselves (no more out of tune Fozzie), and the workload is shuffled around a bit more so that the A-Listers aren't the only ones carrying the film, or spouting the best dialogue.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UCtpwkWHH4Q/U0qz4CMMipI/AAAAAAAAMJo/EIWESdFjaJM/s1600/1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UCtpwkWHH4Q/U0qz4CMMipI/AAAAAAAAMJo/EIWESdFjaJM/s1600/1.jpg" height="215" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Now Miss Piggy isn't the only one who wants him.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The film also capitalizes on two fronts, with both its human stars and soundtrack. No, <i>Most Wanted</i> was never going to upgrade from Segel, Amy Adams and Chris Cooper, but they get the absolute most they could out Ricky Gervais, Ty Burrell and Tina Fey. I've never been a big Gervais fan, but as a secondary antagonist with a snarky tongue, he fits in well. Fey of course shines, her lack of serious singing chops or accent skills actually adding to her humorous performance. And Burrell is pitch perfect as a French Interpol agent whose antics with Sam the Eagle (as a patriotic CIA agent, naturally) make for some of the movie's funniest bits. And that's not even including the numerous celebrity cameos, of which special attention needs to be given to Jemaine Clement, Salma Hayek, Josh Groban, Frank Langella, Usher, Stanley Tucci and Danny Trejo as standouts. Linking all this together is the soundrack by returning composer Christophe Beck and music supervisor (and Academy Award winner) Brett McKenzie (thus completing the <i>Flight of the Conchords</i> loop), which isn't quite as strong as it their collaboration in 2011 but doesn't have the glaring weaknesses, either (I still have nightmares of Chris Cooper attempting to rap). "Something So Right", performed by Miss Piggy and featuring Celine Dion, is engaging and beautiful while clearly meant to be remembered at awards season, and most of the other songs are varying degrees of entertainment. The only real complaint I have is with the variation, which sees the intruder Constantine overexposed and delivering two solo performances before Kermit even gets one from the confines of his prison cell. I hate criticizing Beck's work, since he's been delivering some great soundtracks over the years, but this is one that - while still good - doesn't quite compare with his previous efforts.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bxo3_XVFGcA/U0qz5hTd54I/AAAAAAAAMKM/JiRrtttXhP4/s1600/muppets-most-wanted-tina-fey1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bxo3_XVFGcA/U0qz5hTd54I/AAAAAAAAMKM/JiRrtttXhP4/s1600/muppets-most-wanted-tina-fey1.jpg" height="215" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Name those celebrity cameos!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
One final issue is the lack of focus on a target audience. Naturally, the Muppets gained their popularity from a generation that is showing more than a few gray hairs at this point. But at it's heart, they're supposed to be childrens' entertainment, and that's where the script fails. It's not that the movie isn't funny. It's <b>HILARIOUS</b>. but most of what makes the movie entertaining is dependent on the audience understanding pop culture references that sail well over smaller tykes' heads. How many kids would recognize Constantine wearing the iron teeth of James Bond villain Jaws? Or Kermit trussed up like Hannibal Lecter? Or gulag prisoners performing the opening number from <i>A Chorus Line</i>? This isn't a problem, per se, and fits in well with the personalities the characters have previously established. And there are a few gags (especially a couple of physical ones) at which kids will laugh raucously, but they're far overshadowed by those that will appeal only to those who understand the reference.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-I2OnOjpebq0/U0qz3Aul5TI/AAAAAAAAMJU/6WsEGSE9icI/s1600/Ty-Burrell-Muppets-Most-Wanted.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-I2OnOjpebq0/U0qz3Aul5TI/AAAAAAAAMJU/6WsEGSE9icI/s1600/Ty-Burrell-Muppets-Most-Wanted.jpg" height="215" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Easily the movie's best parts.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Without the nostalgia factor that made the 2011 film such a big hit, it was doubtless that <i>Muppets Most Wanted</i> would be a disappointment of sorts. But that honestly means little when this much fun is happening on the big screen. The irreverent story, self-referential humor, interesting characters and fun musical numbers make for something that is destined to come to rest in your DVD collection. Yes, it fails as a true "family" film, and it doesn't quite stack up against its immediate predecessor. It crosses just enough lines to be wittily eccentric, but is a bit too reliant on pop culture references to be "funny." But for those who grew up admiring the TV show's wackiness it's a worthy followup to the newly-reestablished movie franchise, warts and all.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-49523644438884772322014-04-11T10:56:00.004-04:002014-04-11T10:56:55.479-04:00Oscars 2013 Catchup: 'Dallas Buyers Club' & 'The Wolf of Wall Street'<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CgJgNzgIfA8/U0a3RPTBaaI/AAAAAAAAMIw/wzkSR5wwyCA/s1600/o-DALLAS-BUYERS-CLUB-facebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CgJgNzgIfA8/U0a3RPTBaaI/AAAAAAAAMIw/wzkSR5wwyCA/s1600/o-DALLAS-BUYERS-CLUB-facebook.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Well, all right all right all right.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
As I mentioned almost a month ago, my work status and living conditions cut into my movie-going availability for this new year. When the Academy Award nominations were announced on January 16'th, I had only seen four of the eight nominees for Best Picture (which expanded to five when I took in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-summer-in-winter.html">Philomena</a></i>). Consider the fact that last year's Oscars were the first in which I'd seen <b>ALL</b> of the Best Picture nominees and you can see what a precipitous fall that was. And despite needing to play catch-up on 2014 films (with movies like <i>Ride Along</i> and <i>Non-Stop</i>, I might be doing myself a favor waiting for DVD), I still want to know what made the most recent nominees tick and why they were so favored. And so I recently rented two of last year's Best Picture nominees, looking to see if either of them deserved to be spoken in the same sentence as big winners <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/10/newtons-law.html">Gravity</a></i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/11/12-years-best-movie-of-2013.html">12 Years a Slave</a></i>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AqBzGD_Ja4s/U0a3OuvuSuI/AAAAAAAAMIE/R3pT99Dz7QA/s1600/Dallas_Buyers_Club_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AqBzGD_Ja4s/U0a3OuvuSuI/AAAAAAAAMIE/R3pT99Dz7QA/s1600/Dallas_Buyers_Club_poster.jpg" height="320" width="217" /></a></div>
Unless you've been living under a rock, you know that Matthew McConaughey won the Oscar for Best Actor for portraying the real-life Ron Woodroof in Jean-Marc Vallee's <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhFYcnRPEfA">Dallas Buyers Club</a></i>, in which Woodroof goes from rodeo enthusiast and serial hellraiser to terminal patient during the giant AIDS scare of the 1980's. Faced with the impossibility of obtaining life-saving drugs in the United States, he heads south of the border to get help via non-FDA-approved medication in Mexico. With the assistance of a fellow patient and trans woman Rayon (fellow Oscar winner Jared Leto), Woodruff traffics and distributes this unapproved medication to others ostracized by the system.<br />
<br />
Let's be honest; as much as I love Chiwetel Ejiofor, and as <b>AMAZING</b> as he was in <i>12 Years</i>, McConaughey <b>ABSOLUTELY</b> put forth the best performance by a leading man in 2013. It's easy to point to his physical transformation - his Woodruff looks like he could be snapped in half by Lou Ferrigno - but its the acting side of this man which deserves the most praise. McConaughey absolutely masters the screen, and when you consider what he as already accomplished in the world of entertainment last year (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/double-feature-place-beyond-pines-and.html">Mud</a></i>, HBO's <i>True Detective</i>, and even stealing some early scenes in <i>The Wolf of Wall Street</i>, which we'll get to later), that this is his (and the) greatest acting achievement of 2013 is really saying something. And while he's surrounded by a good supporting cast - including solid second-stringer Jennifer Garner as the requisite fictional love interest - the only one who steals any of the naked bongo player's spotlight is Leto, whose transformation into the (also fictional) Rayon is haunting in its perfection and commanding presentation. And to address the elephant in the room, I understand peoples' opinions that a real trans woman should have played the role. Their arguments make a lot of sense, however, to that I have two responses. One is that Leto's work does absolutely nothing to marginalize, insult or make light of the trans community. The other is that this is <b>ACTING</b>, and if Leto was the best actor - trans or not - to portray the role, than he was the right one to be cast. I know it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but does that also mean Idris Elba, Damien Lewis, Emma Watson and Daniel-Day Lewis can only play British people? That seems a tad restrictive, and kind of unnecessary. If someone is the best fit for the role, then it should be offered to them. And when they do as good a job as Leto does, there's not that much left to complain about.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TKg0PRsIjRM/U0a3Q_iIwlI/AAAAAAAAMI4/1xD7YIKzKRs/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TKg0PRsIjRM/U0a3Q_iIwlI/AAAAAAAAMI4/1xD7YIKzKRs/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Two of 2013's best.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Okay, tangent over... The story itself is also standout, with the screenplay by relative newcomers Craig Borton and Melisa Wallack doing an excellent job developing the characters and setting the tone. Vallee really transports the viewer back to the 1980's and captures the fears, prejudices and events of the era with a camera style that feels appropriately intimate. We're <b>SUPPOSED</b> to fall in love with these characters, and the director does absolutely everything within his power to make that happen. The only thing preventing the film from being perfect is the editing, which more often than not is excessively jarring and takes the attention of the audience away from the well-crafted story. It also draws attention to the rare story weaknesses, putting a small chink into what could have been a flawless film.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Da-4g_1p9es/U0a3OoVALBI/AAAAAAAAMH8/MIFNTR-h54Y/s1600/27LETO1_SPAN-articleLarge-v2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Da-4g_1p9es/U0a3OoVALBI/AAAAAAAAMH8/MIFNTR-h54Y/s1600/27LETO1_SPAN-articleLarge-v2.jpg" height="208" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I love me some Rayon, even if she doesn't actually exist...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But even with those light missteps, <i>Dallas Buyers Club</i> is easily among last year's best offerings. Even if McConaughey and Leto hadn't won their well-deserved Oscars, you should do yourself a favor and see this movie if you haven't done so already. Between the excellent acting and mind-shattering story, this movie <b>EARNED</b> its Best Picture nomination.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9lEVnUPGdGo/U0a3OjJFFkI/AAAAAAAAMIA/CrLFN6frlTM/s1600/MV5BMjIxMjgxNTk0MF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNjIyOTg2MDE@._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9lEVnUPGdGo/U0a3OjJFFkI/AAAAAAAAMIA/CrLFN6frlTM/s1600/MV5BMjIxMjgxNTk0MF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNjIyOTg2MDE@._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" height="320" width="217" /></a></div>
But while you can see at a glance why <i>Dallas Buyers Club</i> earned a nomination, it's not so easy to say, unseen, where <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pabEtIERlic">The Wolf of Wall Street</a></i> fits in. On one hand, it's from a filmmaker (Martin Scorcese) who easily sits atop many experts' Best Director lists, and has absolutely earned that distinction. It's also headlined by superb talents in Leonardo DiCaprio and Jonah Hill (who now has more Academy Award nominations than an embarrassingly long list of talents like Gary Oldman and Bill Murray) and even a scene-stealing McConaughey. It's even got a screenplay by a man (Terence Winter) who cut his teeth on <i>The Sopranos</i> and <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. On the other hand, a <b>LOT </b>of controversy came out of this release, from the accusations that condones greed and sexism, amongst a litany of other transgressions carried out the film's characters. It has the distinction of containing the most uses of the word "fuck" in a mainstream motion picture, and that level of f-bomb dropping usually indicates a lack of creativity, rather than a surplus. Based on the best-selling nonfiction book by Jordan Belfort, this definitely wasn't going to be as cheer-worthy as any of the other nominees. Of course, that didn't matter as it still turned out to be one of the best flicks I've seen in recent years.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-da08vQVe038/U0a3QWgY_HI/AAAAAAAAMIc/7K71KjTfQTg/s1600/Wolf_Of_Wall_Street.jpg.CROP_.rectangle3-large.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-da08vQVe038/U0a3QWgY_HI/AAAAAAAAMIc/7K71KjTfQTg/s1600/Wolf_Of_Wall_Street.jpg.CROP_.rectangle3-large.jpg" height="246" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Little known fact: Leo doesn't crumple up and throw away money, but James Franco does.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
As I mentioned before, <i>Wolf of Wall Street</i> is based on Belfort's life, most notably his glorious rise on Wall Street to his equally precipitous fall from grace, fueled by a life of drugs, infidelity, outrageous behavior and general hooliganism, which eventually got him caught by the FBI. From the word go, you get a real impression of what kind of movie you're in for. The language is crude, the pace is hectic, and personalities are outrageous to the point of lunacy. And whether or not this is consistent with the tone of the book (and many reviewers say it is), this kind of energy with the New York Stock Exchange set as the background is entertainment incarnate. The acting is also top notch. As I mentioned, McConaughey steals a few scenes, even though they are decidedly at the beginning of the picture. Kyle Chandler shows up and puts in a suitable Kyle Chandler offering as an FBI investigator. And while I'm not entirely certain how I feel about Margot Robbie's performance as the mandatory female love interest, two items seriously impress me. First is that her pitch-perfect Brooklyn accent came out of an Australian actress. Second, she plays a vastly different role than her admittedly-smaller part in romantic comedy <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/11/no-time-for-love-dr-jones.html">About Time</a></i>. She never steals the scenes from the leads, but holds her own opposite more experienced talent, so that at least is commendable.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pkd3GyGTrAs/U0a3P-5ZglI/AAAAAAAAMIg/yurFy8tK16g/s1600/The_Wolf_of_Wall_Street_40843.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pkd3GyGTrAs/U0a3P-5ZglI/AAAAAAAAMIg/yurFy8tK16g/s1600/The_Wolf_of_Wall_Street_40843.jpg" height="200" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">But the show belongs to these boys.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But this film is definitely a boy's club, and three men in particular are the ringleaders of this circus: Scorcese, DiCaprio and Hill. The director tackles a topic that is not quite as offbeat for him as the kid-friendly <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/11/hugo-not-weaving.html">Hugo</a></i> but still feels a bit apart from even his New York-set titles. On the surface it's the kind of nihilistic glorification of greed and selfishness that had NYSE audiences cheering at the inappropriate bits upon its release. But in reality it's easy to see where the guy in charge draws the line. When the boys are running a successful firm and (arguably) harming no-one, or when Belfort is comically embroiled in the middle of a life-altering scandal, it's easy to be drawn in and amused by the hilarious antics of the protagonists. But then there are the jarring scenes, especially a violent one in the last act, where someone <b>IS</b> getting hurt and suddenly the drug trip isn't funny anymore, and you realize that all those good times and funny bits were hiding something much, <b>MUCH</b> darker, something Scorcese makes no effort to cover up or excuse. Much like Kathryn Bigelow refusing to villify prisoner torture in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/11/life-in-vacuum.html">Zero Dark Thirty</a></i>, Scorcese actually leaves the actual condemnation up to the audience's discretion, which is exactly what a good director does.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bDu5ymf0Bso/U0a3PovnEGI/AAAAAAAAMIY/FywkXrf9CQ0/s1600/The-Wolf-of-Wall-Street-Trailer7a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bDu5ymf0Bso/U0a3PovnEGI/AAAAAAAAMIY/FywkXrf9CQ0/s1600/The-Wolf-of-Wall-Street-Trailer7a.jpg" height="197" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Well, we know his kryptonite...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Scorcese's leads help him perfectly in his narrative effort. DiCaprio is perfectly cast as Belfort, but to be honest it doesn't appear much of a stretch as some of his better performances over the years. Lately, it seems like he's been playing this same kind of prideful, self-centered role in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-not-so-great-gatsby.html">The Great Gatsby</a></i>, <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/11/life-in-vacuum.html">J. Edgar</a></i> and <i>Revolutionary Road</i>. And so I only have to assume those who cry that the actor should have beaten out McConaughey and Ejiofor for the Oscar are merely DiCaprio fanboys, as here he is not quite on their same level (Don't get me wrong, he definitely deserved the nomination). But while DiCaprio puts up predictably strong work, the one who absolutely <b>OWNS</b> every scene is Jonah Hill. Honestly, I can't believe this is the same guy who brought us <i>Superbad</i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/jump-around.html">21 Jump Street</a></i>. He's always been funny, but here he seamlessly blends into the role in a way I never would have thought him capable. If only one person from this film could have been nominated for an Oscar, it ought to have been Hill all the way. Not only has the actor been the lucky recipient of two Academy Award nominations, but he absolutely <b>EARNED</b> them, as well.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hc4sdOfCbGI/U0a3PYJU2pI/AAAAAAAAMIM/XzQIVxlAeyo/s1600/The-Wolf-of-Wall-Street-Trailer1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hc4sdOfCbGI/U0a3PYJU2pI/AAAAAAAAMIM/XzQIVxlAeyo/s1600/The-Wolf-of-Wall-Street-Trailer1.jpg" height="187" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Well... that's different...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Now, as much as I loved <i>The Wolf of Wall Street</i>, I also admit that it has its share of problems. At three hours, it's either thirty minutes too long or short (better editing in the third act would have made for a watchable extended cut). Scorcese falls into his usual trap of obvious metaphors on occasion (one particular scene comparing Belfort to the cartoon Popeye is especially groan-inducing), a habit inexcusable for such a seasoned director. And the movie <b>DOES </b>contain a ton of controversial material, from the objectification of women to a relative lack of punishment for the protagonists, though it should also be pointed out that the real fault for this lies with Belfort and his cronies who played out the real-life story, not the filmmakers who faithfully adapted it to the screen. In fact, Scorcese should be lauded for taking such a despicable character and such a horrible story and making them interesting and utterly compelling to a movie-going public. It's incredibly easy to admire much of what Belfort did all those years on Wall Street, even if it turned out to be more harmful than anything else. And Scorcese's project is absolutely a condemnation of the events in question, even if it doesn't seem like it all the time. It isn't made for everybody, but I still think everybody should see <i>The Wolf of Wall Street </i>at least once. If nothing else, it's a window into a world you may never be a part of, and a cautionary tale so that this true story is never repeated again.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-39225279833890401042014-04-09T08:41:00.003-04:002014-04-09T08:41:52.229-04:00Oh Captain, My Captain<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wvXcW3FXupk/U0GOmdtZ5_I/AAAAAAAAME8/1WvjW9pPcUM/s1600/new-captain-america-the-winter-soldier-poster-lands-155226-a-1391176963-470-75.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wvXcW3FXupk/U0GOmdtZ5_I/AAAAAAAAME8/1WvjW9pPcUM/s1600/new-captain-america-the-winter-soldier-poster-lands-155226-a-1391176963-470-75.jpg" height="320" width="224" /></a></div>
Robert Redford is in a Marvel film. Think about that for a second. I mentioned as a side note the other day how comic book movies were getting wide respect in the film community, thanks especially to recent movies like <i>The Dark Knight</i>, <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/06/dont-call-me-superman.html">Man of Steel</a></i>, and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/05/mashup-in-manhattan.html">The Avengers</a></i>, the last of which sits pretty with the third highest worldwide box office gross of all time. Unlike video game adaptations, the comic book genre is now attracting talented directors, top shelf actors and producers invested in putting forward their best efforts. And there's no better example of that trend - which has only come in the last few years - than Robert Redford signing on for a major role in <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82RKQPgeYRs">Captain America: The Winter Solider</a></i>, which came out this past weekend. This is a man with two Oscars on his mantle, and perhaps <b>SHOULD</b> have been nominated for another with his starring role in 2013's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/11/double-feature-counselor-and-all-is-lost.html">All is Lost</a></i>. The idea that someone as renowned as Redford, who could certainly hand-pick his next role, would decide to be in a movie like this speaks volumes as to just how influential, special, and overall <b>GOOD </b>the genre has become.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iCakLKGUJDI/U0GOZMuCJZI/AAAAAAAAMEA/-d8gvCfWqRg/s1600/140404124845-chris-evans-captain-america-2-story-top.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iCakLKGUJDI/U0GOZMuCJZI/AAAAAAAAMEA/-d8gvCfWqRg/s1600/140404124845-chris-evans-captain-america-2-story-top.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">As you can imagine, he leaps at the opportunity.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And when we see the final product, we can understand why. <i>Winter Soldier </i>continues the story of WWII superhero Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) as he adapts to a modern world vastly different from the relatively simple era in which he was raised. And that's the biggest difference between this and predecessor <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/08/rockets-red-glare.html">The First Avenger</a></i>: theme. Whereas Joe Johnson's 2011 blockbuster danced to the tune of an upbeat, patriotic flair, the sequel from Anthony and Joe Russo (best known for their TV work on <i>Arrested Development</i> and <i>Community</i>) delves into dark shadows and moral ambiguity, and what that means to a man who adorns himself in stars and stripes, but is employed by the covert security agency S.H.I.E.L.D. and its leader Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), a man whose "secrets have secrets." And so this story ends up feeling more like <i>Three Days of the Condor</i> (completing the Robert Redford connection) or <i>The Good Shepherd</i> than it does your standard superhero fare, while still maintaining the same universe and rules we've become accustomed to with Marvel Studios' releases in the past decade.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SII4QCw7Z1E/U0QP4j3ZViI/AAAAAAAAMHQ/YqzrrJEjTU4/s1600/captain-america-winter-soldier-trailer-image-21.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SII4QCw7Z1E/U0QP4j3ZViI/AAAAAAAAMHQ/YqzrrJEjTU4/s1600/captain-america-winter-soldier-trailer-image-21.jpg" height="166" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Not since the days of piracy have eye patches been so bad-ass.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span id="goog_409491077"></span>But espionage storyline aside, <i>The Winter Soldier</i> is <b>STILL</b> a superhero flick, and so you need a colorful, over-the-top bad guy for the hero to fight, right? Well, yes and no. On the yes side is the Winter Soldier himself (Sebastian Stan), a mysterious and silent assassin who is lethally brutal and a true challenge for our hero. But on the other end of the spectrum is a shadowy organization trying to bring down S.H.I.E.L.D. from the inside, causing Cap to distrust all of his established allies, including Fury and fellow Avenger Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson). Again, this is great not just because it provides such a sharp contrast from the largely open and straightforward story of <i>The First Avenger</i>, but also because it provides an excellent <b>STORY</b>, one in which the heroes (and the audience) are kept guessing as to what could possibly happen next.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f0Ndqggszks/U0QP3eDNvAI/AAAAAAAAMHA/eBWkZ-mahhs/s1600/captain-america-the-winter-soldier-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f0Ndqggszks/U0QP3eDNvAI/AAAAAAAAMHA/eBWkZ-mahhs/s1600/captain-america-the-winter-soldier-1.jpg" height="237" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Takes the "Iron Man" workout to another level.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
That's thanks to the efforts of both screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (who also wrote the first movie) and the directors Russo. The Russos especially have a lot to prove, as they've never really done the kind of action thrill-ride that Marvel fans expect. And while their last directorial effort came at a time when Kate Hudson was still an A-list actor (the 2006 comedy <i>You, Me and Dupree</i>), there's no rust as they do a very good job here. Like most first-time action directors, they make the stupid mistake of shooting too close to the fight scenes (thus obscuring any and all detail), but otherwise their solid camerawork keeps everything fresh and exciting. They also get excellent performances out of their actors, from veterans Redford and Jackson to young rising stars Evans, Johansson and Anthony Mackie (as a high-flying sidekick). Even with castings of the likes of MMA star Georges St-Pierre as a minor villain, there are no substantial acting weaknesses, and that can't be overstated when you once again remember that you're watching a superhero flick and not a full-on spy thriller. And for that matter the special effects are really something else, explosive and insane as are the demands of the genre, and yet on a smaller, more believable scale than those of the <i>Iron Man</i> and <i>Thor</i> franchises. They're even more impressive when you consider that relatively little CGI was used. Sure, computers were used to render the gigantic Helecarriers and a few other items of note, but the directors were quite adamant about practical effects whenever possible, and their success is readily apparent.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TBLhDHx66Ck/U0QP6hcM91I/AAAAAAAAMHs/Gd-gHAWhcgc/s1600/captain-america-the-winter-soldier.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TBLhDHx66Ck/U0QP6hcM91I/AAAAAAAAMHs/Gd-gHAWhcgc/s1600/captain-america-the-winter-soldier.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Okay, Michael Jordan could probably have done this, too...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There's really only one downside to this movie, and that unfortunately comes to the story itself. I said before that audiences would be kept guessing as to the plot details, and that's true. But unfortunately, the screenplay is itself not without predictability, many of the major twists getting telegraphed well in advance. Characters do pretty much what you expect, limited not by the well-known comic book origin stories, but by the constraints of the spy genre and the overall talent of the screenwriters, which is good but not <b>GREAT</b>. Markus and McFeely are simply never going to get any Oscars for their work, which to be fair isn't a world-ending event. But what makes the movie stand out from its brethren is how bravely it seeks to actually change the parameters set out by the previous Marvel films, and leave the next franchise movie with something completely different to work with than we the audience had imagined. It's that risk-taking that makes me excited for all future entries.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ytbnj6PgGeE/U0QP4yyBM1I/AAAAAAAAMHc/JeB_01k-SwQ/s1600/captain-america-winter-soldier-wsknife.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ytbnj6PgGeE/U0QP4yyBM1I/AAAAAAAAMHc/JeB_01k-SwQ/s1600/captain-america-winter-soldier-wsknife.jpg" height="165" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, this isn't a new <i>G.I. Joe</i> picture. Why do you ask?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It might not be on the same level quality-wise with recent marvel hit <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/05/mashup-in-manhattan.html">The Avengers</a></i>, but <i>Captain America: The Winter Soldier</i> is still easily among the best comic book movies of all time. Marvel's "Phase Two" sees the company putting out some of their best efforts, and things look to only get better as the years go on. It's so amazing to see this genre getting the kind of respect needed to thrive, both from the critics and the studios themselves. No, it's not perfect, but considering the upward quality trend we've seen from comic book adaptations in recent years, it's more than a welcome addition to movie screens. It'll appeal to the older spy fans <b>AND</b> the young superhero crowd, a seamless blend that needs to be seen on the big screen to be believed.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-57355377199261400432014-04-04T11:05:00.004-04:002014-04-04T11:05:55.252-04:00Video Games Stuck in First Gear<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IAyDoDbjyWs/Uz4QAkOaXuI/AAAAAAAAMCM/_l19J9aPm9k/s1600/need_for_speed_xlg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IAyDoDbjyWs/Uz4QAkOaXuI/AAAAAAAAMCM/_l19J9aPm9k/s1600/need_for_speed_xlg.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
Well, superhero films have gotten better. Why not video game movies? Wait, wait, I'm serious! I mean, many game franchises are almost interactive movies as it is, from <i>Mass Effect,</i> to the latest <i>Tomb Raider,</i> to <i>Bioshock,</i> to <i>Halo,</i> to <i>Uncharted</i>. With these games, playing is like penning your own screenplay <b>AND</b> performing the lead role at the same time. So with all these storytelling advancements in the genre, why does Hollywood continue to treat the video game adaptations like the lazy child that hasn't earned its place at the table? Aren't we far enough by now from the early days of <i>Super Mario Bros</i> and <i>Double Dragon</i>? It's tough to get excited about these movies when it's plainly obvious that the biggest studios, actors and directors don't really want anything to do with them. Instead, entire legions of fans are insulted by low budgets, casting of whomever was desperate enough to appear at the time, and even - if they're <b>REALLY </b>special - the execrable presence of Uwe Boll.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TYSUzelAMWA/Uz4P_Cm0MUI/AAAAAAAAMB8/xjAWtboM4LM/s1600/need-for-speed-first-look-06102013-201607.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TYSUzelAMWA/Uz4P_Cm0MUI/AAAAAAAAMB8/xjAWtboM4LM/s1600/need-for-speed-first-look-06102013-201607.jpg" height="163" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b>SOME</b>body needs a booster seat!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And that casual dismissal of the genre is what doomed <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq9yd09GYf0">Need For Speed</a></i>, the adaptation of the franchise street racing game of the same name, before it could pop the clutch: nobody cares about who made or is in this film, or why. The only reason anybody was interested in the project was because of the racing aspect, a genre already monopolized by the popular, peaking, and far more insane <i>Fast & Furious</i> series. It doesn't help that there's not much story to begin with. After spending the first act on pointless setup, Tobey Marshall (<i>Breaking Bad</i>'s Aaron Paul) is released from two years in prison, immediately hatching a plan to get revenge on entrepreneur/racer Dino Brewster (Dominic Cooper), who framed Tobey for another man's accidental death. Naturally, revenge involves illegal street racing. Because this is a video game adaptation.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NAvX-ct4Fi0/Uz4P-mMds4I/AAAAAAAAMBs/KAV6ZCU-fx8/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NAvX-ct4Fi0/Uz4P-mMds4I/AAAAAAAAMBs/KAV6ZCU-fx8/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The closest you'll ever get to a "Bro" moment, thank God.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
If you can't tell by now, I was thoroughly unimpressed by the hacktastic effort that was <i>Need For Speed</i>'s story<i>. </i>Getting beyond the fact that it's an adaptation of a game series that hasn't been particularly popular or memorable in years, the tale is lazily scripted (by first-time writer George Gatins; what a <b>SHOCK</b> they didn't get a good screenwriter on board) and doesn't have nearly the plot to hold together the disconnected racing and chase sequences. The story is a dismal blend of tropes, from Getting the Band Back Together (despite the crew in question being largely inconsequential) to the required Will-They-Won't-They romance between Tobey and Julia - an exotic car dealer who would be completely forgettable were she not played by Imogen Poots - to Poetic Justice in the revenge storyline. There's even the idea of doing all this in the name of the film's most head-shakingly annoying character (why can't anyone genuinely interesting die in these movies?) to get it all started. The story has no flow, the characters have little motivation for their actions (at least, not beyond the usual stereotypical behavior), and there doesn't even appear to be anything akin to logic in the way the plot progresses. It's by-the-numbers blandness, from the pointless opening scene to the ultimately predictable conclusion.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9zAJ_kC0Bps/Uz4QBa2bvHI/AAAAAAAAMCU/cbURHAQ3I5A/s1600/nfs7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9zAJ_kC0Bps/Uz4QBa2bvHI/AAAAAAAAMCU/cbURHAQ3I5A/s1600/nfs7.jpg" height="167" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Oh, hey! I was just thinking "Crash & Burn!"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But even Nicolas Cage movies have some redeeming value (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/03/caged-beast.html">Drive Angry</a> </i>was on TV, and now I've got Cage on the brain), and the same is true here. Most notably, it's the direction of stuntman-turned-filmmaker Scott Waugh that keeps things exciting on the screen. The focus on practical effects in the action sequences allows the film to stand apart from the <i>Fast & Furious</i> franchise, which had been defined more by their CGI effects in the more recent entries. And Waugh shows a great improvement in his style, judging from the differences between this and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/valorous-attempt.html">Act of Valor</a></i>, the military flick he co-directed with Mike McCoy. The visuals are rarely too close to the action (except where understandable), and there really is a feel of excitement seeing these vehicles race, crash and - on occasion - soar like birds. My only complaint comes from the opening race, when we literally have no clue who is driving which car. Still, I can only imagine what Waugh could accomplish were he to have a serious budget on his hands, but he definitely shows a solid aptitude for this kind of noir action thriller.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TNFv52IJFSU/Uz61IypOcGI/AAAAAAAAMDI/FoITySccnNg/s1600/need-for-speed-aaron-paul-imogen-poots.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TNFv52IJFSU/Uz61IypOcGI/AAAAAAAAMDI/FoITySccnNg/s1600/need-for-speed-aaron-paul-imogen-poots.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">He wears his sunglasses at night, too.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And despite the characters being written as though they were designed by a third grader on acid, the acting is actually pretty solid. Yes, there are the useless filler roles and Scott "Kid Cudi" Mescudi plays as token a black, flamboyant sidekick as he can possibly be (which is to say not all that well), the quartet of lead actors really do possess talent and take as much advantage of their screentime as they can. Dominic Cooper might be a six-dimensional actor confined to a one-dimensional stereotype, but he still brings menace to a role that wasn't so threatening as written. Michael Keaton steals the intermissions between action sequences as a cool-as-ice radio DJ pulling strings behind the scenes (and for the record, it's great to see Michael Keaton doing regular work again. He's a fairly amazing performer). Poots is strong as always, and I really can't wait for the young lady to break out as a Hollywood star, even as she seems to be stuck in these sad, third-tier roles. But Aaron Paul might be the biggest surprise. I still haven't seen <i>Breaking Bad</i>, but already it's easy to see why the actor has accumulated so many fans with one role. Yes, his voice is distractingly deep for a man <b>NOTICEABLY</b> only 5'8", and his dialogue borrows directly from "Emo 101", and again, Tobey's motivations as a protagonist are vague at best. Yet Paul commands a presence those unfamiliar with his work would <b>NEVER </b>expect. Simply put, he proves that despite lacking a large frame, he <b>BELONGS</b> front and center. He might be a little too old to enjoy a Tom Cruise-like career at this point, but if he can pull off something of a "Cruise-Lite" path from now on, he'll absolutely deserve it.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xT7b8REkYTg/Uz61LC44-0I/AAAAAAAAMDk/0VJyH5w_XSg/s1600/need-for-speed-aaron-paul-dominic-cooper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xT7b8REkYTg/Uz61LC44-0I/AAAAAAAAMDk/0VJyH5w_XSg/s1600/need-for-speed-aaron-paul-dominic-cooper.jpg" height="265" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When it came to hair gel, no expense was spared...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
(Oh, and for the few people who might have noticed that Dakota Johnson, the star of the upcoming <i>50 Shades of Grey</i>, was in this: she still doesn't impress me. I don't know whether casting directors see something the rest of us don't, or if Johnson is the person they go to when <b>NOBODY ELSE</b> is interested in a role, but I'm really starting to think the latter is the more likely scenario. So, yeah, I'm really convinced <i>50 Shades</i> will be a dud upon its release in 2015.)<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d0LlylmlKfg/Uz61IOk-7NI/AAAAAAAAMCw/BU5K0aOY6tY/s1600/Need-for-Speed-movie-screenshot-3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d0LlylmlKfg/Uz61IOk-7NI/AAAAAAAAMCw/BU5K0aOY6tY/s1600/Need-for-Speed-movie-screenshot-3.jpg" height="202" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I've got the Need! The Need for Speed! Trademark! </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But great actors and great action does not a great movie make, especially when they are hampered by the kind of script that makes David Goyer look like a certified genius. I don't know if video game adaptations will <b>EVER</b> get the kind of dedication and effort that superhero flicks are getting right now, but <i>Need For Speed</i> is one of those titles that suffers mightily from the connection to its original medium. Could it have been better? Absolutely. Could it have been great? Maybe. But make no mistake, this is a bad movie made worse by the fact that talented people were brought in to try and hide its flaws. The producers behind this movie simply didn't care whether or not it was any good, and despite some excellent visuals and a few more strengths, the evidence is still plain for anyone to see.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-38027687224167080812014-04-02T12:21:00.000-04:002014-04-02T12:21:21.262-04:00Just Another Y.A. Blockbuster<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hcGYom0IKzU/UzwXmxDvi7I/AAAAAAAAMAY/YRh7fjEL5Z0/s1600/11174665_800.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hcGYom0IKzU/UzwXmxDvi7I/AAAAAAAAMAY/YRh7fjEL5Z0/s1600/11174665_800.jpg" height="320" width="206" /></a></div>
Thanks to the box office success of <i>Twilight</i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/dont-tell-me-odds.html">The Hunger Games</a></i>, we can pretty much expect every semi-popular young adult novel to get big screen treatment in the near future. Every studio of worth out there will spend the next few years purchasing filming rights, throwing them at audiences, and seeing what sticks. We've already seen several examples of failures ranging from <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/02/lucky-number-four.html">I am Number Four</a></i> to <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/02/she-blinded-me-with-magic.html">Beautiful Creatures</a></i>, and if there's something to be said for the adaptation of Veronica Roth's <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336qJITnDi0">Divergent</a></i>, it's that it stuck. Not "great" or "wonderful," or even "unique."That's because the story is so derivative of other, better material that it's bound to appeal to not only fans of the novels but any similar moviegoer curious enough to check it out.<br />
<br />
The movie follows <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/01/up-in-family-tree.html">The Descendants</a></i> star Shailene Woodley as Tris (God, it even rhymes with "Katniss"), as she navigates the trials of growing up in the ruins of a futuristic, post-war Chicago. Society in this world has been divided into five factions to maintain peace, and Tris is of the age where she can decide whether to stay with her family in the kind and selfless Abnegation faction, or join one of the other four groups, which pride themselves on traits like intelligence, honesty, and peacefulness. This is complicated when the test that helps students decide to what faction they "belong" fails to work on Tris, categorizing her as "Divergent" and unlikely to fit in anywhere. Naturally, Divergents are treated as enemies of the system, and our heroine tries to hide her nature by joining up with the brave, kinda-crazy faction "Dauntless", where she falls for the hunky instructor known as "Four" (Theo James). But when Divergent-hunters come calling... you know what? Forget it, I'm just going to stop right there.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H4_eDZk_KqY/UzwXoujQ_wI/AAAAAAAAMAw/AVD8MMdicY8/s1600/divergent-movie-trailer2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H4_eDZk_KqY/UzwXoujQ_wI/AAAAAAAAMAw/AVD8MMdicY8/s1600/divergent-movie-trailer2.png" height="171" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">She got tattoos! So you know she has an edge now.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There is barely a single word or sentence in that previous paragraph that could not be used to describe countless titles that have come out just in the past decade (except perhaps Abnegation... learn something new every day!), and that's <i>Divergent</i>'s biggest, <b>BIGGEST </b>problem. Whether it's due to the direction of Neil Burger (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/03/limitless-opportunities.html">Limitless</a></i>), the screenplay by Evan Daugherty (<i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-snow-white-and-the-huntsman/">Snow White and the Huntsman</a></i>) and Vanessa Taylor (<i>Hope Springs</i>), or even Roth's novel itself (Or, most likely, a combination of all three), the biggest sin is that there is barely anything noteworthy or original to grasp onto and declare "Yes, this is why it's special!" For all the crap I give it, <i>Twilight</i> took a familiar concept (supernatural) and put a unique twist on creating its universe. <i>The Hunger Games</i>, while ostensibly a copy of the Japanese book/movie <i>Battle Royale</i>, still made itself original enough to stand alone (not to mention the casting of Jennifer Lawrence). <i>Beautiful Creatures</i> had an amazing and appropriate setting. <i>I am Number Four</i> and the <i>Harry Potter</i> franchise had excellent lore. <i>Divergent</i> <b>DOES</b> have an interesting premise, with the factions and the disparity between them, but barely touches on it in what amounts to a rote, romance/action story. Well, to be fair, it also has... umm... wait a moment... it has... ergh... well, no... I guess... excellent acting?<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vou8kPAx-j0/UzwXmnA2lnI/AAAAAAAAMAQ/wIWTDbd2mRU/s1600/Divergent-Movie-Still-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vou8kPAx-j0/UzwXmnA2lnI/AAAAAAAAMAQ/wIWTDbd2mRU/s1600/Divergent-Movie-Still-1.jpg" height="213" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Why hast thou forsaken us, Kate?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Yes, <i>Divergent</i> is fortunate to have such an amazing cast assembled, because they absolutely needed the best. The characters are so one-dimensional that only someone with the chops of Ashley Judd, or Kate Winslett, or Maggie Q, or Mekhi Phifer, or Ray Stevenson could make it work. When Miles Teller shows up as the generic bully, he actually brings some gravitas to the role. When Tony Goldwyn appears on screen, he isn't just a blank slate as Tris' father, but actually shows some magnetism, through his voice if not in his poorly-written words (one character ironically wonders why people keep asking her the same question; it's because of the inept dialogue, dear). And it's a good thing Shailene Woodley and Theo James are such excellent performers; Woodley plays the worst kind of female heroine, whose actions are entirely based on what is done to her and not on any driving force behind her vanilla temperament; while James' character development begins and ends with "brooding hottie". And yet, both actors make the material work through sheer force of personality. The romance between them, while basic, predictable and cliched, ends up working by virtue of their great chemistry, and they do the absolute most they can with the material. If it wasn't for that, this wouldn't much of a film. Yes, there are a few legitimate duds in Jai Courtney and Zoe Kravitz (sheez, <i>Divergent</i> even has a Kravitz in the cast), but even they don't detract from the story too much when all is said and done.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o89QTpvSZAY/UzwXoLSUEVI/AAAAAAAAMAo/G1tpMD9TQgs/s1600/divergent-movie-8.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o89QTpvSZAY/UzwXoLSUEVI/AAAAAAAAMAo/G1tpMD9TQgs/s1600/divergent-movie-8.jpg" height="280" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Where Hollywood thinks women should be: out of sight and silent.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But the acting can't fully save a story that borrows from literally every genre and trope in existence, from <i>The Matrix</i> (one person throwing a system out of whack), to <i>Logan's Run</i> ("I'm hiding my secret from the ruling government!") to <i>Starship Troopers</i> ("Let's get tattoos!"). Seriously, if the villains were as smart as they are supposed to be, they'd have realized that their plot to take over the city has been done a million times before, and <b>BETTER</b>. It's almost as if Roth cobbled together this tale from all the pop culture references and Young Adult novels she had accumulated in her young life, with nary an original thought or idea. To be fair, that might be over-simplifying things a bit; I have yet to read the book, so I can't say how many of <i>Divergent</i>'s problems stem from her writing and how much from the adaptation process itself. But if she had <b>ONE</b> original thought when she compiled her novel, it never make its way to the big screen. Even the faction system is not a truly original concept, and that's the closest <i>Divergent</i> ever gets to declaring its independence from standard YA fare. The story is so reliant on coincidence - from Maggie Q's first appearance to just about <b>EVERY</b> major twist and turn - that it defies all expectation for the audience to accept the plot as it develops. And I'd even go so far as to say that wouldn't necessarily a <b>BAD</b> thing, as long as the story itself is told competently and the actors do a good job with the material. In fact, Burger is a pretty good, if not great, director, especially suited to this type of non-risky script, as he proved in 2011's <i>Limitless</i>. Even though the script is the kind of hackery that would demand multiple rewrites if it not for the film's brand recognition, <i>Divergent</i> turns into a competent, if not standout, filmmaking product.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-a-amoZy1JQQ/UzwXp4k0mLI/AAAAAAAAMA4/LU97NsgAZQ4/s1600/First-jumper-divergent.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-a-amoZy1JQQ/UzwXp4k0mLI/AAAAAAAAMA4/LU97NsgAZQ4/s1600/First-jumper-divergent.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Get it? It's "Red pill, Blue pill!"</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i>Divergent</i> tries to push a moral of anti-conformity and self-identification, but ironically does it in the most conformist fashion possible, stealing from everything that has come before and not standing out even remotely on its way to box office success. Naturally, every YA movie adaptation wants to see the same kind of success as <i>The Hunger Games</i>, but <i>Divergent</i> could only <b>WISH</b> that it was as interesting, compelling and urgent as the movie whose success it would wish to emulate. It's definitely a <b>BAD</b> movie, and yet also a <b>WELL-MADE</b> bad movie that overcomes many of its narrative obstacles through heart and sheer force of will. If only the filmmakers had taken more risks, as the movie does nothing to differentiate itself from the bland, predictable tropes and cliches that have never been so transparently on display as they are here. If it had attempted to deviate from the terrifyingly dull norm it had set for itself, it might have turned into something great. As it stands, <i>Divergent</i> is just okay, and I think we'll see subsequent sequels <i>Insurgent</i> and <i>Allegiant</i> justifiably fall off in audiences as a result. Teen girls (and anyone who identifies with teen girls) will watch and enjoy anyway, but anyone else can steer clear.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-39082326377760323322014-03-31T00:00:00.000-04:002014-03-31T00:00:10.959-04:00No Worries with the WABAC<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rHVZl4DeoXU/UzimRDYl3NI/AAAAAAAAL_M/KrihSMukt-A/s1600/Mr_Peabody_%2526_Sherman_Poster.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rHVZl4DeoXU/UzimRDYl3NI/AAAAAAAAL_M/KrihSMukt-A/s1600/Mr_Peabody_%2526_Sherman_Poster.JPG" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
Lost amid the rise of fledgling animation studios, the second renaissance of Disney, and the steady sinking of Pixar's brand, is the fact that Dreamworks Animation... is <b>ACTUALLY</b> getting better.<br />
<br />
Not that the company has necessarily been <b>BAD</b>, as they've often put out fun, smart, unique family films and franchises like <i>Shrek</i>, <i>Madagascar</i>, <i>Kung Fu Panda</i>, <i>Megamind</i> and <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-rise-of-the-guardians/">Rise of the Guardians</a></i> (Yes, they've had true stinkers like <i>Sharks Tale</i> as well, but that's besides the point). But the studio constantly played second banana to Pixar for almost its entire existence, and now it seems to be losing ground to more and more competition as 3D animation becomes more synonymous with moviemaking in general, not just the animated titles. But just a few years ago, things began to change. 2010's <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/11/welcome-to-dragon-training.html">How to Train Your Dragon</a></i> was positively wonderful. And last year, <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-the-croods/">The Croods</a></i> was an absolute joy to behold. Yes, the company was still pumping out enjoyable franchise fare like <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/06/everybodys-still-kung-fu-fighting.html">Kung Fu Panda 2</a></i>, <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/11/foot-fetish.html">Puss in Boots</a></i>, and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/06/euro-trip.html">Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted</a> </i>(not to mention disappointing franchise bait <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/double-feature-ripd-and-turbo.html">Turbo</a></i>), but little by little Dreamworks was definitely improving its brand, in what appears to be a strong desire to remain relevant in the coming years. And so we are introduced to the surprisingly good <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy6oD7BZw50">Mr. Peabody & Sherman</a></i>, the first film released from Dreamworks' newly-acquired Classic Media collection.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Lr0C8NEnoRo/UzimVLy5WUI/AAAAAAAAL_g/Os6x1pQUT7A/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Lr0C8NEnoRo/UzimVLy5WUI/AAAAAAAAL_g/Os6x1pQUT7A/s1600/maxresdefault.jpg" height="180" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Just a time-bending tale about a dog and his boy.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Based on <i>Peabody's Improbable History</i>, the series of animated shorts that ran alongside classic <i>Rocky & Bullwinkle</i> cartoons, Dreamworks' latest creation continues the story of World's-Smartest-Dog Mr. Peabody (Ty Burrell) and his adopted boy Sherman (Max Charles) as they travel through time, exploring history and discovering its oft-humorous and questionably-accurate underbelly. But Peabody's greatest challenge might be fatherhood, as his young protegee gets in trouble by fighting another student, the precocious Penny (Ariel Winter). An attempt to soothe relations with Penny's parents inadvertently begins a chain of events that threaten to break the time space continuum and end the world as we know it.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cpW-w2zfO3o/UzimU-1nVOI/AAAAAAAAL_Y/PKRswxUcXjg/s1600/Mr-Peabody-and-Sherman.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cpW-w2zfO3o/UzimU-1nVOI/AAAAAAAAL_Y/PKRswxUcXjg/s1600/Mr-Peabody-and-Sherman.jpg" height="250" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Aren't you a little young for a toga party?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Even if I couldn't compare <i>Mr. Peabody and Sherman</i> to its low-fi progenitor, I'd still be impressed by how much fun it is. Director Rob Minkoff (best known for co-directing <i>The Lion King</i>) takes the (relatively) simple idea of time travel and makes the absolute most of it, creating five distinct worlds and making them fundamentally different from one another, while bridging them with a cocksure mix of historical parody and truly outrageous puns. This was absolutely necessary in the original, and modernizing it strips none of the charm or humor of which the fans had come to expect. It's incredibly easy for both kids and adults to enjoy, which really isn't seen too often in Dreamworks pictures. That alone is enough to state that this movie is something entirely different to behold.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uSUb00T41eU/UzimVXpOuUI/AAAAAAAAL_o/UoqNwHBN0cU/s1600/mr-peabody-sherman-movie-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uSUb00T41eU/UzimVXpOuUI/AAAAAAAAL_o/UoqNwHBN0cU/s1600/mr-peabody-sherman-movie-4.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">They really believed they could fly...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Even the additions by Minkoff and screenwriter Craig Wright (a TV writer for <i>Dirty Sexy Money </i>and <i>Six Feet Under</i>) don't feel forced, though the film suffers from a first act that is <b>HARDLY</b> impressive. We're asked to swallow a lot in that first half hour of plot setup and character introduction, from the idea that a genius invented Planking and Autotune (Peabody probably should have been brought up on war crimes for that), to Sherman going to school (I mean, Peabody seems like the home-schooling type), to especially the introduction of Penny, a character so obviously created to appeal to young female audience members it's almost painful to accept her inclusion. Penny starts off as the typical spoiled-bratty-mean-girl cliche, and from moment one it's easy to see yourself hating this character for the entire 92 minutes. But as the movie regains its footing, Penny's character also sees dramatic changes, and becomes far more likable and empathetic as a result.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Dt2BqglMXh4/UzimVJ21w5I/AAAAAAAAL_4/oStFKLD4zGM/s1600/724679-trailer-for-dreamworks-animations-mr-peabody-sherman-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Dt2BqglMXh4/UzimVJ21w5I/AAAAAAAAL_4/oStFKLD4zGM/s1600/724679-trailer-for-dreamworks-animations-mr-peabody-sherman-4.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">She just saw how she was represented in the beginning...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
And when the story truly maintains focus where it <b>SHOULD </b>- the relationship between Peabody and Sherman - the result is a huge jump-start to the film as a whole. The original shorts never really had much of a back-story between the two characters, but here the focus is mostly on Peabody's challenges in raising a growing human boy, and the prejudices of those who feel he's unfit to parent due to him being canine and not human. Here, he's shown as being more fatherly and caring than at any time in the 1950-60's, even going so far as to create the WABAC time machine as an educational tool for his son. That father-son relationship (and the ups and downs that go with it) are the driving force behind the film's narrative, and while I think it's interesting that Dreamworks has focused on this dynamic in their better movies (<i>Dragon</i> and <i>Croods</i> both had daddy issues to resolve), it's an idea that really seems to bring out their best efforts. Here it doesn't quite have the same emotional "oomph" but succeeds as a modern take on those same themes. And again, it doesn't feel shoehorned-in, as the writing handily weaves it in with what was already established about the characters.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Jfyt6q6K3GA/UzimV5YCOdI/AAAAAAAAL_0/imsKWDhuWbA/s1600/mr-peabody-sherman-trailer-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Jfyt6q6K3GA/UzimV5YCOdI/AAAAAAAAL_0/imsKWDhuWbA/s1600/mr-peabody-sherman-trailer-01.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Is he pledging his allegiance to a Vespa?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And it's this identifiable and perfectly-included theme that makes <i>Mr. Peabody and Sherman</i> one of the more unlikely (and satisfying) hits of 2014. Is it on the same level as <i>Dragon</i> or <i>The Croods</i>? Well, sadly no; that first act is a bit of a downer, and the filmmakers don't quite have the bravery to follow through with some of their more daring material. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just a tad disappointing when you wonder what they <b>COULD</b> have done. It plays a tad safe, but with a great story, excellent voice acting (seriously, Dennis Haysbert's baritone ought to be contractually obligated to appear in at least <b>ONE</b> scene of <b>EVERY</b> animated flick), and quirky animation reminiscent of its ancestors but also given a modern-day sheen, it's still one of Dreamworks' better family films. Maybe it's not quite on par with the pantheon of excellence the company has achieved, but this excellent second-tier title is another example of how a perennially second-place studio has upped its game in recent years. Hopefully it will continue to do so in this wondrous age of animated film.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-4820472965818147162014-03-14T14:46:00.000-04:002014-03-14T14:46:21.687-04:00A Summer in Winter<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xt5EF8RYscE/UyG5LTyR2gI/AAAAAAAAL48/-Otp_XRPcMY/s1600/volusia+Pride+2013-26.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xt5EF8RYscE/UyG5LTyR2gI/AAAAAAAAL48/-Otp_XRPcMY/s1600/volusia+Pride+2013-26.jpg" height="90" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">So, yeah, this is where I am.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Oh, hi! I didn't see you there!<br />
<br />
So, many of you might be wondering just where I've been since expressing my deepest disappointment in David O. Russell's nowhere-near-masterpiece (and never-shoulda-been Oscar contender) this past New Year's. I admit, it was a very steep drop off of the map, after all. Well, the short answer is that I haven't really been seeing many movies lately, and certainly not at the three-or-four-a-week I was pulling off at my peak. Well, that's no excuse, you might be thinking, just get out there and see more! But it's not quite that easy. And that's where the long answer comes in.<br />
<br />
As a number of you know, I left my wage-earning retail job back in mid-October, and after a brief time living off of my savings, I started looking for something new to fuel my movie cravings (and you know, basic daily needs). Unfortunately, nothing really panned out, and as a result I recently (somewhat last minute and without telling anyone) jetted off with all my belongings to Florida to stay with my family until I can get back on my feet. I'm happy to report that progress is being made; I'll be (if everything works as it should) attending classes starting this summer, and I'm already taking on odd jobs to save up some currency. I'm even getting my driver's license while I'm down here (in Boston, that was never a necessity), so it's safe to say I'll be a totally transformed individual when I finally get back to my home city and old life. In the meantime, however, that means I won't be seeing nearly as many new movies as I'd prefer, and it will be a while before I can get around to seeing things I've been awaiting for months or even years (sad face). But while I might be renting movies from the library from now on, I thought I'd take this time to catch you up on the few I <b>HAVE</b> seen, in the meantime. If nothing else, these blurbs will give you some insight on some films you may not have gotten around to as of yet. Besides, all the <b>REALLY</b> good stuff isn't expected for a short while anyway.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OK9VcTLd5xs/UyG9G1_VUPI/AAAAAAAAL5I/1YSnWTp1p3s/s1600/PHILOMENA_M.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OK9VcTLd5xs/UyG9G1_VUPI/AAAAAAAAL5I/1YSnWTp1p3s/s1600/PHILOMENA_M.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
It's a shame everyone was wetting themselves with joy over <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2014/01/david-os-hustlin.html">American Hustle</a></i>'s undeserved Best Picture nomination, because there were some films on that list that genuinely <b>EARNED</b> their place without the subsequent buzz, and <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DBPqcp6Hc4">Philomena</a> </i>was one of them. Based on the true story of Philomena Lee (here played by Judi Dench), it followed her and journalist Martin Sixsmith (Steve Coogan) as they journeyed around the world in search of Philomena's son, who had been sold into adoption by Irish nuns while she was their indentured servant in the 1950's.<br />
<br />
The film, directed by <i>The Queen</i>'s Stephen Frears, generally focuses on the developing relationship between its two protagonists. And on the surface, that might appear to be a problem. After all, they're polar opposites, with Philomena the pious, naive, kindhearted soul, and Sixsmith portrayed as atheistic, overly-intellectual, and cynical. But under threat of cliches and "odd couple" tropes, <i>Philomena </i>manages to overcome these weaknesses, thanks largely to the strength of its leads. Dench is once again a marvel, a commanding presence on screen and largely <i>Philomena</i>'s heart. And it's both interesting and rewarding to see Coogan excel in a serious role - after all, he rose to prominence largely as a comedic performer - as he not only plays the straight man in the relationship but also the narrative force behind the movie itself. Both actors go all out, and thanks to wry, witty dialogue their pairing is one of the best on screen in recent years.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--FkMxLXFuKY/UyHLw-K1-YI/AAAAAAAAL5Y/5aX4q34W2fU/s1600/Philomena2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--FkMxLXFuKY/UyHLw-K1-YI/AAAAAAAAL5Y/5aX4q34W2fU/s1600/Philomena2.jpg" height="215" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Lovely, but I wouldn't want their winter.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But the greatest part of <i>Philomena</i> might be the fact that, despite painting the Catholic church in a fairly unpleasant light, Frears and his cast and crew refuse to pass judgement. Yes, the individual characters do have their say (in somewhat predictable fashion), but the film itself leaves the heartbreaking events depicted within as open to interpretation. Would God allow this kind of injustice to exist? Should the undeniably evil actions of a religious institution be forgiven? Those questions are left up to the individual audience members to decide, and that's amazingly refreshing in a world where supposedly the greatest directors of our age feel the need to constantly jam their messages down our throats (<i>cough, Spielberg, cough</i>). It helps make this film the masterpiece it is, and one that ought to be seen by everyone.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-00KGIjItrhA/UyHOfqz7xOI/AAAAAAAAL5k/xYdlo8aDMS0/s1600/ifrankensteinexclposterlarge.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-00KGIjItrhA/UyHOfqz7xOI/AAAAAAAAL5k/xYdlo8aDMS0/s1600/ifrankensteinexclposterlarge.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
<br />
And the winner of the "Reminded me of <i>Legion</i> (and not in a good way) Award" goes to <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtuqZtT8bTI">I, Frankenstein</a></i>, the graphic novel-based, sci-fi epic from Aussie screenwriter-turned-director Stuart Beattie. Starring <i>The Dark Knight</i>'s Aaron Eckhart as Frankenstein's monster, the film follows him as he survives to the modern day as an outcast caught in a supernatural war between warrior Angels and Demons. Oh yeah, <i>Frankenstein</i> also borrows heavily from the <i>Underworld</i> franchise, both in tone and - in some cases - casting. Try to keep that in mind.<br />
<br />
The sad part is that this movie actually has some elements going for it. The conflict between the Angels and Demons is pretty fun and compelling, and most of the actors (including Eckhart, Bill Nighy, Yvonne Strahovski and Miranda Otto) are actually quite good, thought they're not allowed to stretch past their limited roles and must be content with chewing as much scenery as possible. The special effects are also amazing, each explosion and disintegration beautiful to behold and belonging on the big screen. There are only a few moments where the CGI becomes obvious, and even those are gone quickly and replaced by either real-life actors or more impressive visuals.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ld8-Ss7cFSM/UyHSfVuq5EI/AAAAAAAAL5w/qrVmd4ButTQ/s1600/frankenstein_a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ld8-Ss7cFSM/UyHSfVuq5EI/AAAAAAAAL5w/qrVmd4ButTQ/s1600/frankenstein_a.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, he's not ugly, but he sure can act!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Unfortunately, there's just too much working against the potential excellence here, thanks mostly to Beattie himself. Yes, the man wrote <i>Collateral</i>, but that's not enough to justify letting him write the screenplay to the first major film that he's also directing. When you're not a proven director, you really shouldn't be spending somebody else's money on your own half-baked ideas. His biggest problem is pacing, the story introducing a massive, truly impressive battle taking place about an hour in, only for subsequent scenes and battles to pale in comparison. Beattie simply blew his wad (and perhaps his budget) too early, and the second half of <i>Frankenstein</i> plays out like a ham-handed Opera of the kinda-Damned. Another, relatively minor complaint is the casting of Jai Courtney, who to this point has not earned the high-profile roles he has enjoyed these past couple of years. So far he just plays a generic tough guy, which wouldn't be bad if he wasn't being given so much to do, as is the case here.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ILld1OC3s7I/UyJPKOHkX1I/AAAAAAAAL6k/eQmJnXktxBU/s1600/I-frankenstein-awkward-eckhart.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ILld1OC3s7I/UyJPKOHkX1I/AAAAAAAAL6k/eQmJnXktxBU/s1600/I-frankenstein-awkward-eckhart.jpg" height="165" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">You should really have your landlord take a look at that...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Still, I'd be hesitant to call <i>I, Frankenstein </i>a <b>BAD</b> movie. Despite it's glaring issues, it does have a cheesy, so-bad-it's-good charm about it, and the acting is <b>MOSTLY</b> good enough to carry it, even if the script and director cannot. The only downside is that it's all but out of theaters at this point, and those excellent special effects simply won't cut it anywhere else but the most technically advanced home theaters. So if you still can and don't mind shelling out some money on a "bad" movie, <i>I, Frankenstein</i> isn't as poor a selection as you'd think. If it's nowhere near you however... you can watch something else. Really, anything else.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2bppoXmF9UM/UyIhIWI5toI/AAAAAAAAL6E/9j0NfGXzb7o/s1600/hr_The_LEGO_Movie_10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2bppoXmF9UM/UyIhIWI5toI/AAAAAAAAL6E/9j0NfGXzb7o/s1600/hr_The_LEGO_Movie_10.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></div>
<br />
As the Pythons used to say, "And now for something completely different." I mean, there was no way I <b>WASN'T</b> going to see <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ_JOBCLF-I">The Lego Movie</a></i>. It comes from directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, who also penned the screenplay...you know, since they proved with <i>Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs</i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/03/jump-around.html">21 Jump Street</a></i> that they could actually create good movies. It's also another animated flick<b> NOT</b> from the three-headed monster known as PixaDisneWorks, which makes it interesting in that just three years ago <b>ONE</b> of those studios would have snapped this project up. It's another example of more studios getting interested in producing animated products, and while I still expect the "Big Three" to dominate that particular scene, it's nice to see other companies (in this case Village Roadshow) taking a break from their serious dramas, adult thrillers or uncouth comedies to produce genuine family features.<br />
<br />
In what is essentially a rip-off of <i>The Matrix</i> or any similar stories, <i>The Lego Movie</i> focuses on a normal Lego guy named Emmett (Chris Pratt), who is recruited by a band of legends known as the "Master Builders" to fulfill a prophecy as "The Chosen One", who would save the world as they knew it from the machinations of the dread Lord Business (Will Ferrell). Yeah, it sounds dumb. And in ways, it <b>IS</b> dumb... in a good way!<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bBxMtPgWpjw/UyJMC1wpEHI/AAAAAAAAL6Y/WfkY5KJBc-s/s1600/lego_a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bBxMtPgWpjw/UyJMC1wpEHI/AAAAAAAAL6Y/WfkY5KJBc-s/s1600/lego_a.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Way better than Christopher Nolan's last movie...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
That's because Lord and Miller really know how to pace a movie that doesn't just entertain kids, but has a lot that adults can grab onto as well. Between the catchy theme song (which I guarantee will ironically be nominated for a Best Original Song Oscar next year), colorful worlds and kid-friendly characters, you could be forgiven for thinking that this film was a childrens-only affair. But the truth is that for every piece of slapstick and every silly pun, there are nuggets for adults in both the humor and the message the movie is trying to get across. Characters are both fun and excellently-conceived, played tongue firmly-in-cheek by actors like Morgan Freeman, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett (whose Batman steals every scene) and even three characters voiced by Liam Neeson. On top of that, the amazing special effects really make you feel as though you're inside a world made entirely of tiny building blocks. The directors are talented enough to know full well when to go all-out with the effects and go more for a retro, Ed Wood-style effect to remind you the film's origins, and that's a skill that many filmmakers never seem to learn.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wjwEQR6ujXY/UyMhDGa9OLI/AAAAAAAAL60/uekLNgv_FV4/s1600/the-lego-movie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wjwEQR6ujXY/UyMhDGa9OLI/AAAAAAAAL60/uekLNgv_FV4/s1600/the-lego-movie.jpg" height="266" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">See, this is what happens when you don't wear your seat belt!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Sure, the basic plot is completely unoriginal. Yes, it does have some focus issues (I don't expect a Lego brand movie to be anti-consumerism, but their pro-creative stance is a bit muddled when they're clearly advertising their pre-designed kits and not just the Lego bricks themselves). Yeah, the ending is a tad predictable and more than a little on-the-nose (although that aspect of the movie I still thought to be done well). But those are really the only gripes I can find about a movie that has enormous amounts of heart and character and is suitable for both children and inner children of all ages. If you haven't seen this yet... well, it's still in theaters, though it will eventually make a great home media purchase as well. Whichever way you choose (or if you decide to do both), you won't go wrong.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pccAGPVryx8/UyMl77eqyGI/AAAAAAAAL7Q/_Pzk4vUdDx0/s1600/MV5BMjAyOTUzMTcxN15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMjkyOTc1MDE%2540._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pccAGPVryx8/UyMl77eqyGI/AAAAAAAAL7Q/_Pzk4vUdDx0/s1600/MV5BMjAyOTUzMTcxN15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMjkyOTc1MDE%2540._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg" height="320" width="217" /></a></div>
<br />
The last movie I'll look at today is the <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuVphAuRo7Q">RoboCop</a></i> reboot, and I think I speak for everyone who has seen it when I say... It's better than I thought it would be.<br />
<br />
Naturally, when it was announced that MGM was remaking Paul Verhoeven's 1987 sci-fi classic, there were more than a few dissenting voices. As one who is anti-remakes in general, reimagining a film like this - one that I had <a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/02/mr-anderson-reboot-robocop.html">just looked at in 2011</a>, and still holds up just fine when you consider the current, bankrupt state of the city of Detroit - seems more than a tad unnecessary. But just because you don't like the idea of something being made doesn't mean that the final product cannot be good, or at least different enough to justify it's own existence. And that's where the English language-debut by Jose Padilha comes in and slowly but surely blows away any of your niggling concerns.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0HgzstJF2MI/UyMl7xkeV5I/AAAAAAAAL7U/5vQBX_gSq7Q/s1600/Robocop-Frankenstein.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0HgzstJF2MI/UyMl7xkeV5I/AAAAAAAAL7U/5vQBX_gSq7Q/s1600/Robocop-Frankenstein.jpg" height="171" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">And <b>THIS</b> is why you don't perform double blind tests with everything.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
On the surface, the main themes of this new <i>Robocop</i> are the same; near-dead cop (<i>The Killing</i>'s Joel Kinnaman) is combined with a machine, fighting crime, only to come face to face with the corruption of the people who created him. The big difference here is scale; Whereas the original was based almost entirely in the futuristic, crime-riddled Detroit (much in the same way <i>Escape from New York</i> reflected a future version of 1981's NYC), this movie has more of a global focus, and that's more a reflection of our time, where global events have a much more immediate an impact on US soil and culture than they did thirty years ago. In that vein, OmniCorp isn't just trying to sell AI-operated policemen, because they've been successfully been using their robots for peacekeeping operations in countries all over the globe. What they're <b>TRYING</b> to do is get a foothold on American soil, where the people are justifiably upset by the idea of logic-driven, black-and-white lawmakers replacing human jobs. So in this case the reason for not going all-robot isn't their obvious defects, but the fact that they're so <b>FREE</b> of defects, that inspires the idea of putting a man inside of a metal suit.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eR08QYFKFZo/UyMl8MW82HI/AAAAAAAAL7Y/YFvvQhKWPrs/s1600/robocop-2014-wallpaper-robocop-movie-wallpaper-background1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eR08QYFKFZo/UyMl8MW82HI/AAAAAAAAL7Y/YFvvQhKWPrs/s1600/robocop-2014-wallpaper-robocop-movie-wallpaper-background1.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I'd love the smell of napalm in the morning... if I had olfactory senses.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The cast is absolutely brilliant, filled with reliable names such as Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton, Jackie Earle Haley, Jennifer Ehle, Michael K. Williams, Abbie Cornish, and even Samuel L. Jackson (as a hilarious Bill O'Reilly-esque TV host), though the standout might be Kinnaman, still relatively unknown outside his native Sweden. He has to essentially play three characters: one, the human, normal cop Alex Murphy, the emotionless, AI-controlled RoboCop, and the MurphyCop combination that gets screwed up on occasion. It helps that the character interactions between Murphy and the others is more fluid; the mystery of his family is never a mystery, as the idea that you could experiment on a near-dead man without the approval of the family is pretty much unheard of in this day and age. And Murphy tries to connect with them, though obstacles (his own embarrassment and pain at his situation, not to mention some unsanctioned personality modification) occasionally get in the way. Despite Kinnaman's talent, the character development for Murphy is unfortunately the weakest aspect of the movie, though it manages to work in some ways (most notably Murphy's interaction with police partner Williams), so this is thankfully an inconsistent issue, and anyway, there's so much great acting across the board that it's easy to forgive.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TjeviZgzUJw/UyM5yw1gCVI/AAAAAAAAL7o/pllMKb2EkYY/s1600/robocop-2014-nuova-armatura.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TjeviZgzUJw/UyM5yw1gCVI/AAAAAAAAL7o/pllMKb2EkYY/s1600/robocop-2014-nuova-armatura.jpg" height="275" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">...Run.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The film has tons else going for it, from the impressive special effects, compelling universe, a cleverly-conveyed message, and a playfulness that is fundamentally (and necessarily) different from the original. Getting past the drastic alterations to the classic costume and the PG-13 rating (both of which I see as both signs of the times and making narrative sense, so can safely ignore) the only thing really lacking is a conversation about crime-ridden Detroit, which seems just as relevant today as it did back in 1987. But considering the larger scale of the story, even that is forgivable, when the focus is more about the differences between the US and the rest of the countries around the world. And for that reason alone, Padilha's new take on the story is 100% justified in its implementation. It's not <b>BETTER</b> or <b>WORSE</b> than the original, but did it ever have to be? I mean, come on people, this is <b>VERHOEVEN </b>we're talking about, not <b>SHAKESPEARE</b>. This <i>RoboCop</i> is all but an original tale, a fun, smart, sci-fi cautionary tale that will hopefully keep this franchise running for a few more decades. The only struggle now is to make better sequels than the original managed to produce. That's all I ask.<br />
<br />
Well, I think that's enough for now. I've seen more in the past couple of weeks, but I'll tackle those in my next entry, after I spend some time in the pleasant, 70+ temps we've been enjoying down here. I hope you are all are well, and can't wait to bring you more movie talk in the near future!<br />
<br />
... when I'm not in school or saving up money.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-58521165288783551992014-01-01T02:29:00.001-05:002014-01-01T02:29:34.207-05:00David O's Hustlin'<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mwRImgdMfLo/UsOFypv8x5I/AAAAAAAAL1s/x8iGoAC9MsM/s1600/american-hustle-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mwRImgdMfLo/UsOFypv8x5I/AAAAAAAAL1s/x8iGoAC9MsM/s320/american-hustle-poster.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
Oh, no, we're starting to overrate David O. Russell!<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong, I think Russell has put together a solid career, especially these past few years. <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/12/i-love-good-fight.html">The Fighter</a></i> is one of my favorite modern sports movies, and while I contend that the mental health topic was just a smokescreen for an otherwise-predictable romantic comedy in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/12/double-feature-silver-linings-playbook.html">Silver Linings Playbook</a></i>, it was still a well-made, exceptionally-acted motion picture. And so when this man pumps out a movie, it's fairly easy to drum up audiences, even when your trailers reveal none of the plot and thrive on catchy pop tunes. He's gotten to that pedestal that all directors hope to achieve, where their name holds more allure than many of the all-star cast that people are actually going to be staring at for over two hours. And all in all, he's deserved it, getting excellent performances from talented casts and piecing together a strong filmography. So it's a surprise to no-one that <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5Cb4SFt7gE">American Hustle</a></i> has gotten so much praise from critics, and that audiences have been solidly filling theaters to see it. There's just one problem... the movie's not really all that great.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JmhYzXELyLY/UsOFxUiECbI/AAAAAAAAL1o/X4S-jVDDW6I/s1600/American-Hustle-8.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="280" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JmhYzXELyLY/UsOFxUiECbI/AAAAAAAAL1o/X4S-jVDDW6I/s400/American-Hustle-8.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">If you grew up in the 80's, you knew this guy.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The movie is a fictionalized retelling of the FBI's ABSCAM investigation that saw several US politicians convicted of corruption charges from the late 70's to the early 80's, saying that "Some of this actually happened" but also changing all the names and details involved. So right off the bat we have a problem. Yes, last year we had an historical drama that changed many a detail for the purpose of telling a good story in <i><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-argo/">Argo</a></i>. But while Ben Affleck might have fudged a few lines in adapting his Best Picture winner, he was still determined to tell stories about real people faced with impossible odds. It didn't matter that not everything in the movie matched up with its real world counterpart, because at the end of the day Affleck was representing these folks as truly as he knew how. Russell meanwhile uses such an important moment in US history as ABSCAM as a mere baseline for his own simple morality play (which he rewrote from a screenplay by <i>The International</i>'s Eric Singer), and doesn't really seem care about the event's historical significance, or how it relates to the story he wants to tell.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tFa09V48wIU/UsOFxfK6vcI/AAAAAAAAL1k/XApVL6f8OEU/s1600/American-Hustle-Review.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tFa09V48wIU/UsOFxfK6vcI/AAAAAAAAL1k/XApVL6f8OEU/s400/American-Hustle-Review.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Okay, guys, you can play patty-cake later.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The film also stutters through an opening act told almost entirely in voice-over monologues. Even if you can accept this clear breach of "show but don't tell" (at which movies of this level are <b>SUPPOSED</b> to excel) as a quick and easy method of introducing our leads, there's no real excuse for not settling on one voice; the narration starts from the perspective of small-time conman Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale), which makes sense, because he's the protagonist of the story. But Russell quietly ushers in a change by adding in the disembodied voice of Amy Adams (playing Irving's business partner and mistress Sydney Prosser) for no discernible reason other than to make fun of the main character's comb-over. What's painful is that the scenes are actually so well-shot, and these actors so evocative despite lacking dialogue, that the scenes really do speak for themselves, making the voice-overs completely unnecessary. It's almost as if the director dumbed-down these scenes in an attempt to create a more audience-friendly atmosphere. That's not something you want to see from a man who was never concerned with mainstream success in the past.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YErx77xCtzU/UsOF2FyKr7I/AAAAAAAAL28/BysRzkDnF9E/s1600/o-AMERICAN-HUSTLE-GIFS-facebook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YErx77xCtzU/UsOF2FyKr7I/AAAAAAAAL28/BysRzkDnF9E/s400/o-AMERICAN-HUSTLE-GIFS-facebook.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Just... wow.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Fortunately, most of the succeeding acts are much better compiled, as they focuses on what makes David O. Russell movies so revered: the interplay between characters. The relationships between each pair of personalities are so well-constructed and believable that they <b>MAKE</b> <i>American Hustle</i> as entertaining as it is. For instance, many sides of Irving can be seen through his interactions with others, from his tempered fury for FBI handler Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper), to the genuine (and conflicted) friendship he develops with well-meaning corrupt politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), to his poisonous relationship with young wife Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence). Each character has a litany of such relationships to one another, and one of the film's true pleasures comes from seeing those emotional turmoils move the story forward from scene to scene. The actors have great chemistry, and it ups the payoff that is delivered, even when their actions are quite so noble as to be respected in that way.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kY3W3m6CLnc/UsOFyLdQo_I/AAAAAAAAL2E/4xP4HqGfogg/s1600/Jennifer-Lawrence--American-Hustle--05.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="218" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kY3W3m6CLnc/UsOFyLdQo_I/AAAAAAAAL2E/4xP4HqGfogg/s400/Jennifer-Lawrence--American-Hustle--05.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">There's a fetish for that.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
It's a shame that the individual performances couldn't have been more consistent. Now, Bale is absolutely great, carrying the movie with an unusual combination of charm, honesty and a little bit of sleaziness to sell the con man angle. He's obviously deeply invested in this character, and it shows, as he proves once again to be among the best actors in Hollywood today. But even he is upstaged by his ladies, <i>American Hustle</i>'s true stars. Adams has a rich, meaty role that she wholeheartedly throws herself into. Her sensual performance and easy chemistry with her costars makes for a lot of fun to watch, and she steals about half the scenes in the flick. Most of the others are stolen by Lawrence, who puts on one of the year's best performances despite being given material similar to Kat Dennings in <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/11/thor-2-electric-boogaloo.html">Thor: The Dark World</a></i>. Despite a role that feels largely written for laughs, Lawrence handily floors the audience with excellent comedic timing, an intense, believable on-screen presence, and more sheer talent than most career artists achieve in their lifetime. Both of these women deserve Oscar nods this year, despite the crowded Supporting Actress field; there might be a riot if even one of them fails to garner a nomination.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XGkY0S5IQqI/UsOF2owiL4I/AAAAAAAAL24/x30qUn4UV14/s1600/jennifer+lawrence+amy+adams+american+hustle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XGkY0S5IQqI/UsOF2owiL4I/AAAAAAAAL24/x30qUn4UV14/s400/jennifer+lawrence+amy+adams+american+hustle.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">These scenes - and these ladies - are out of this world.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I just wish more of the cast had stepped up as those three. Cooper's FBI agent is so over the top, though to be fair he certainly was written that way, what with the completely forced love triangle and the prototypical interfering mother and a feud with his boss that in the real world would never be tolerated. But even then Cooper goes way over the top, over-exaggerating every syllable and becoming even more of a caricature. Worse off is Renner, whose script choices have not allowed him to approach the potential he showed in <i>The Hurt Locker</i> and <i>The Town</i>. Here he's barely used, and when he is the dialogue is so rote as to work against him. And yes, I know many of the scenes were ad-libbed, but those moments were infinitely better than those that were plainly scripted. Beyond the big five are a cavalcade of side characters, one-note parts given <b>WAY</b> too much material to justify their collective presence while wasting the considerable talents of the actors brought in to play them. It's this kind of lazy character development that sabotages much of the good the actors try to bring to the screen, and keeps the movie from ultimately reaching the zenith it ought to have.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-o9px4B50rAQ/UsOFzjt0kwI/AAAAAAAAL2M/sbNDvVGpYrg/s1600/american-hustle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="232" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-o9px4B50rAQ/UsOFzjt0kwI/AAAAAAAAL2M/sbNDvVGpYrg/s400/american-hustle.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Obligatory cast shot.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I feel like I've been saying this a lot in 2013 (and as I write this, it still <b>IS</b> 2013... Happy New Year!), but <i>American Hustle</i> just isn't as good as we expect it to be. It's still <b>GOOD</b>, but you have to navigate a messy story, hit-or-miss character development, and - perhaps its worst sin - a poor, heavy handed ending that comes out of left field and negates many of the "true story" ideas. Here, David O. Russell is a director not at his best, though he at least still has some of the year's best performances under his guidance. Maybe this is part of an inevitable decline from greatness, or perhaps it's simply a slight downturn and his next picture turns into one of the best of all time. But while there's an interesting ABSCAM story out there begging to be told, it's not this one; because it's not really <b>ABOUT</b> the event. There was another director this year who took a "true" story, created a fictionalized narrative around it, changed everything that didn't work or might be controversial, threw in a solid cast and tried to take a humorous approach to it. Who was that again... oh, right, it was Michael Bay. And when your movie can find more apples-to-apples comparisons to <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/painfully-gained.html">Pain & Gain</a></i> than it can to <i>Argo</i>, you've definitely got some problems.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-13588043302971139882013-12-31T13:32:00.000-05:002013-12-31T13:32:52.086-05:00Don't Let Go: The Worst Films of 2013<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--sswh-a_pwY/UryfUw6mKmI/AAAAAAAALwM/HZFLzz3jWmI/s1600/687883034_2108327899001_pain-and-gain-trailer-still.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--sswh-a_pwY/UryfUw6mKmI/AAAAAAAALwM/HZFLzz3jWmI/s400/687883034_2108327899001_pain-and-gain-trailer-still.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This year, even Michael Bay can't make the cut.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I'm going to go on record and say that 2013 has been a horrible year for movies. Truly, sincerely horrible. Only in the past few months have we seen the few great titles of the year be released, with only a few honest gems and a vast majority that proved mediocre or worse making the vast majority of what we saw January-September. I can count those truly excellent ones on just my fingers, though to be fair, there are still a few award bait pictures that clamor for my attention.<br />
<br />
Still, I've seen enough to present what I consider to be 2013's worst examples of cinema to see the light of day, and there were tons of titles to choose from. Though a number of stumbling blocks prevented me from visiting the theater as much as I had the last few years, I still managed to pack in over 100 movies these past twelve months, and of those, around 30 were bad enough to be considered. Yes, with almost a third of the movies in contention, it was extremely tough paring it down. Between January 1'st and now were some truly awful titles released that even last year would have easily made the cut, if only they hadn't been fortunate enough to be born in 2013.<br />
<br />
As regular readers know, I have two rules with this list:<br />
<br />
1) I only put movies that were deemed worthy of a wide release (600 theaters or more at any given time) in the "Bottom 10." It doesn't excuse their (sometimes epic) badness, but comparing a typical Adam Sandler movie to something horrible but from an unknown filmmaker doesn't feel right, in that the more experienced and popular filmmaker ought to have known better, whereas the no-name might be doing something crazy simply to be different. I give these smaller movies a break, if only because hardly anyone saw them anyway.<br />
<br />
2) I won't rag on movies that I haven't seen. As I said before, I saw a bit less in 2013 than in previous years. One only has to look at <a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/">Rotten Tomatoes</a> to see a good number of movies I did <b>NOT</b> include here that perhaps I <b>WOULD</b> had I bothered to see them in the theater (or in some cases on DVD). Before I get into the list itself, I'll roll out an "Honorable Mentions" list of these unwatched titles and their respective Tomatometer rankings (I'll stick to scores less than 20%). If you <b>REALLY</b> want me to review any of these, leave a note and as a self-admitted masochist I'll do it when I get the opportunity.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: red;">Honorable Mentions</span></b>: <i>Getaway</i> (2%), <i>Scary Movie 5</i> (4%), <i>Battle of the Year</i> (4%), <i>The Big Wedding</i> (7%), <i>Safe Haven</i> (12%), <i>The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones</i> (12%), <i>The Smurfs 2</i> (14%), <i>Baggage Claim</i> (14%), <i>The Last Exorcism Part 2</i> (16%), <i>Tyler Perry's Temptation</i> (16%)<br />
<br />
And now, the 10 worst films of 2013 (as seen by Mr. Anderson)!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zXFsYiiFnaQ/UryfV4Gnn5I/AAAAAAAALwc/ojNPaOpp4F4/s1600/dark-skies.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="257" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zXFsYiiFnaQ/UryfV4Gnn5I/AAAAAAAALwc/ojNPaOpp4F4/s400/dark-skies.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
10) <b><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/03/watch-skis-i-mean-skies.html"><span style="font-size: large;">Dark Skies</span></a></b><br />
<br />
Director Scott Stewart returns to these rankings after making both the 2010 and 2011 lists with his crimes against cinema, <i>Legion</i> and <i>Priest</i>, respectively. His new alien invasion flick, <i>Dark Skies</i>, is actually the best movie he's made so far, although it's still plainly obvious he shouldn't be offered gigs that put him behind the camera. I mean, even Shyamalan made a few decent movies, before his name became a joke, to somewhat justify his repeated job offers. Stewart is essentially the same gag, but with a worse setup. And this effort isn't good enough to make me think that will ever change.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DBZFKTo5_Bs/UryfZm_5GMI/AAAAAAAALxM/9iVFcDYFzD0/s1600/header-red-band-trailer-of-the-hangover-part-iii.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DBZFKTo5_Bs/UryfZm_5GMI/AAAAAAAALxM/9iVFcDYFzD0/s400/header-red-band-trailer-of-the-hangover-part-iii.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
9) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/05/drunk-with-power.html">The Hangover: Part III</a></span></b><br />
<br />
This was the trilogy finale even <i>Hangover</i> diehards weren't anxiously awaiting. As I've said before, I do applaud director Todd Phillips and his crew's efforts not to simply repeat the previous movies' pattern and recycle the same gags over again, and also for adding talents such as John Goodman and Melissa McCarthy. But in the process they also took away everything that was charming and (at times) hilarious from the franchise, turning <i>Part III</i> so dark it often forgot to add "comedy" to that mix. The distinct lack of humor - I would have settled for <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/06/hair-of-dog_06.html">Part II</a></i>'s crude, unfunny jokes - and complete lack of comprehension as to what makes a <b>GOOD</b> movie is what ultimately sinks it worse than its predecessors (and that's saying something), though thankfully most of the cast has already moved on to bigger and better things. Hopefully this will be the last we hear of <b>THIS</b> franchise...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3HMnHKG9T3c/UryfYxlAe3I/AAAAAAAALxA/TNsbTQYgmCs/s1600/runner_runner_timberlake_affleck_a_l.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3HMnHKG9T3c/UryfYxlAe3I/AAAAAAAALxA/TNsbTQYgmCs/s400/runner_runner_timberlake_affleck_a_l.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
8) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/10/running-scared.html">Runner Runner</a></span></b><br />
<br />
Let me say this as loud as humanly possible: <b>JUSTIN TIMBERLAKE IS NOT A GOOD ACTOR</b>. If you have a movie with the former N'Sync frontman cast as your leading man, that should be the first sign that the product has problems. Everything here feels phoned in, from the screenplay to the frenetic direction to the acting; if anybody had bothered to see this, they would have been shocked by Ben Affleck's talent regression to his early 2000's <i>Daredevil</i> form. Timberlake's presence is really the nail in the coffin, and he can host <i>Saturday Night Live</i> as often as he likes; endless charisma is no substitute for legitimate acting qualities.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pkDftx3KakY/UryfXb_64gI/AAAAAAAALws/4LE1V6D6lh8/s1600/machete_kills.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pkDftx3KakY/UryfXb_64gI/AAAAAAAALws/4LE1V6D6lh8/s400/machete_kills.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
7) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-machete-kills/">Machete Kills</a></span></b><br />
<br />
Although I added the original <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2010/09/do-machete-mambo.html">Machete</a></i> to 2010's list, I'll also be the first to admit that it carried a light campiness that helped mitigate some of its more egregious flaws. As dumb as the final product was, it never took itself seriously, and was a near-perfect homage to the era of exploitation films. In fact, if I could go back in time and take it off the list, I just might. However <i>Machete Kills</i>, as similarly hokey as it is, never captures that flavor, taking itself far too seriously and straying far from the low-budget charm that made the original so admired. It also wastes a potentially excellent cast with a do-nothing script, pointless plot threads, and Robert Rodriguez's over-inflated ego. With as badly as this one bombed, I'd be surprised if they went through with the promised <i>Machete Kills Again... In Space</i> sequel that they teased in the opening... which also happened to be the best part of the whole film.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xDOixvZS9jA/UryfXhOXAGI/AAAAAAAALww/IB1ScBTanyc/s1600/Bruce-Willis-in-A-Good-Day-To-Die-hard-001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xDOixvZS9jA/UryfXhOXAGI/AAAAAAAALww/IB1ScBTanyc/s400/Bruce-Willis-in-A-Good-Day-To-Die-hard-001.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
6) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-a-good-day-to-die-hard/">A Good Day to Die Hard</a></span></b><br />
<br />
For true <i>Die Hard </i>aficionados (and despite liking the movies, I don't count myself within that group), it must be difficult to see a sequel to their beloved franchise suck <b>THIS</b> much. Many thought that <i>Live Free or Die Hard</i>'s PG-13 farce was the ultimate insult to the universe's favored everyman superhero (I actually didn't mind it too much), but director John Moore proved that the series hadn't stopped going downhill when he cranked out this turd, in which he rehashed tired cliches, set the whole thing in Russia (for no particular reason), and worked off of a script that stripped away all the charm and fun that <b>MADE</b> <i>Die Hard</i> such a successful brand in the first place. Bruce Willis didn't even want to be there; you can tell from his monotonous, dead-soul performance that he was just on screen to cash a paycheck. That might be <i>A Good Day</i>'s biggest offense: taking an immortal character and absolutely destroying his soul. I almost want another <i>Die Hard</i> movie just so the character can go out on a sufficiently high note and wipe the stink of 2013 away forever.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-K9AEZsafCUQ/UrzPHxBtpHI/AAAAAAAALx0/_TmX14EP1lk/s1600/bullet-to-the-head02.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-K9AEZsafCUQ/UrzPHxBtpHI/AAAAAAAALx0/_TmX14EP1lk/s400/bullet-to-the-head02.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
5) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/02/double-feature-expendables-report-card_8.html">Bullet to the Head</a></span></b><br />
<br />
The <i>Expendables</i> franchise has helped reinvigorate the careers of many older action stars, but not all Hollywood reboots are created equal. Some are actually good (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/01/hes-back.html">The Last Stand</a></i>), some mediocre (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/02/double-feature-expendables-report-card_8.html">Parker</a></i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/10/last-blood_25.html">Escape Plan</a></i>) and some are downright bad (scroll up one). Falling into this last category is this mess, which has Sylvester Stallone as a hitman out to avenge the death of... someone... and... yeah, it's one of <b>THOSE</b> movies. It even has a decent bad guy (<i>Game of Thrones</i>' Jason Momoa) and manages to segue into a classic "buddy cop" variant. But the film is so mean-spirited, humorless, racist, sexist, and completely out of touch with the progress of today's society, that it becomes a black hole into which all perceived quality is irrevocably lost. If this had been released twenty years ago, it might have become a cult classic. Released in 2013, it reminds us how much we've moved on as a species.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e6EqkakzWzc/UrzPHuOJCSI/AAAAAAAALxw/KSLy2ZHGGwc/s1600/after-earth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="222" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e6EqkakzWzc/UrzPHuOJCSI/AAAAAAAALxw/KSLy2ZHGGwc/s400/after-earth.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
4) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/06/you-got-shyalaman-ed.html">After Earth</a></span></b><br />
<br />
I think I have to explain not why this movie made the list, but why I don't have it at #1. Certainly, that's where many people will have it, most of them much smarter and more worldly than I. As I said way back at #10, M. Night Shyamalan has become a running joke, and film promoters know it now: they actively hid his name in the marketing efforts for <i>After Earth</i> in a vain effort to sneak some butts into seats. But the sad part is that you can't really heap all of this mess upon his shoulders. One might blame more Will Smith, whose creative passion behind the project (in which he would star with son Jaden, though neither of them was any good) could easily have mucked things up more. That's not an apology for Shyamalan's artistry, mind; he's still terrible. So what is it that makes this movie better than three others released this year, when it failed at direction, creature design, acting, screenwriting, creative thinking and plain old logic? Well, the landscape shots were kind of pretty. So there's that.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-p2b16I85tZw/UrzPJ5JvDHI/AAAAAAAALyU/o_YNyx92zXU/s1600/movie-43-07.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-p2b16I85tZw/UrzPJ5JvDHI/AAAAAAAALyU/o_YNyx92zXU/s400/movie-43-07.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
3) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/01/too-dumb.html">Movie 43</a></span></b><br />
<br />
There is one legitimately funny scene in the otherwise abhorred <i>Movie 43</i>, Peter Farrelly's sketch movie in which horrible things happen for no good reason beyond the <i>There's Something About Mary</i> director's own amusement. Proof that more talent is not better (a total of 13 directors and 19 writers produced the final product), the movie was almost entirely unfunny (again, with the exception of one scene), and while the filmmakers desperately attempt to cater to the gods of tastelessness, their efforts were instead consumed by it. There's a reason half of the cast is pretending this debacle doesn't exist, and that none of them would promote it. Hopefully we'll never see a sketch movie this bad again in my lifetime.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Yxyci4Igak8/UrzPKsjJ6PI/AAAAAAAALys/ER96oI1zNLo/s1600/the-counselor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Yxyci4Igak8/UrzPKsjJ6PI/AAAAAAAALys/ER96oI1zNLo/s400/the-counselor.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
2) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/11/double-feature-counselor-and-all-is-lost.html">The Counselor</a></span></b><br />
<b><br /></b>
What makes <i>The Counselor</i> such a sad addition to this list is that it had the <b>ELEMENTS</b> to be one of the year's best: a consistent director (Ridley Scott), a talented, all-star cast (Michael Fassbender, Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz, Brad Pitt, Cameron Diaz), and a screenplay by one of America's most celebrated living authors (Cormac McCarthy). It's this screenplay that carries the weight of the movie's flaws, as it fails in conveying emotion, tension, sex appeal, subtlety, and pretty much everything that comes standard with the truly refined motion picture many expected this to be. It didn't help that the director and cast could do little to improve upon the material, and they certainly tried their best. Unfortunately, <i>The Counselor</i> was destined to show up here, among not just the worst of 2013, but of the past decade as well.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-12GPpvj4VSI/UrzPKivPrfI/AAAAAAAALyw/QBsTWpz_qfs/s1600/theres-no-need-to-run-or-walk-even-to-see-grown-ups-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-12GPpvj4VSI/UrzPKivPrfI/AAAAAAAALyw/QBsTWpz_qfs/s400/theres-no-need-to-run-or-walk-even-to-see-grown-ups-2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
1) <b><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.openlettersmonthly.com/guest-movie-review-grown-ups-2/">Grown Ups 2</a></span></b><br />
<b><br /></b>
Yes, in a year of truly awful science fiction, dull thrillers and all-around horribleness, it's the unfunny comedies that really hit hard in 2013. And <i>Grown Ups 2</i>, Adam Sandler's first sequel, is absolutely the worst. There is no real central plot, as the four main characters move from scene to scene without motivations, or not any that can't be solved by one minor mid-film event. And then there's a party at the end, I guess? This was a project so half-assed, there's practically none involved, unless you really want to include the countless poop and fart jokes that is the joie de vivre of your typical Happy Madison audiences (even if they'll never know what that means). However, this is a sad state of affairs even by those historically-low standards, and I'll never, ever forgive Sandler for allowing <i>Twilight</i>'s Taylor Lautner to become the hands-down best part of the film. These are just some of the reasons <i>Grown Ups 2</i> is the absolute worst movie of 2013.<br />
<br />
So that's it! What do you think? Is there any film here you think I'm treating unfairly? Was there anything you saw this year that you think should have been on the list? Write in and let me know, and together we can stop financially supporting the worst that Hollywood has to offer. Thanks for stopping by, and have a Happy New Year!Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-51432951082006930612013-12-27T01:55:00.002-05:002013-12-27T17:56:57.100-05:00'Grudge Match' Past its Prime<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-h5a5n0tzrX4/Urzv9MDV2qI/AAAAAAAALzg/gQpWaf0DEys/s1600/MV5BMTY3NTkxMTgzNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNjg0MzE2MDE@._V1_SX214_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-h5a5n0tzrX4/Urzv9MDV2qI/AAAAAAAALzg/gQpWaf0DEys/s1600/MV5BMTY3NTkxMTgzNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNjg0MzE2MDE@._V1_SX214_.jpg" /></a></div>
Rocky Balboa fighting Jake LaMotta sounds like it should be a fan film, or maybe part of an unlockable secret mode in the Fight Night video game series, instead of a full-length motion picture. But that's the idea (at least in the marketing) behind <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCSRA3YIfKY">Grudge Match</a></i>, a sports comedy from a director who at least has some experience in that genre (but also Adam Sandler movies).<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The movie pits Sylvester Stallone against Robert DeNiro - as Henry "Razor" Sharp and Billy "The Kid" McDonnen respectively - rival boxers who once upon a time fought one another in a series of epic bouts. But one man's retirement to prevent the deciding tiebreaker, shocking everybody and preventing the pair from settling the score once and for all. Thirty years later, circumstances and one very determined fight promoter (Kevin Hart) force them to face one another again, and despite their advanced age and diminished physical prowess, both find they really want this final fight. And as comedies released on Christmas goes, this has all the elements of a straightforward crowd-pleaser (not surprising, as it's from director Peter Segal, whose movies tend to draw crowds even as they repel critics). But does that premise work well for a feature, or does it turn into a featherweight come midnight?</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4qaWu2moOzI/Urzv8SK7OCI/AAAAAAAALzY/pQ400kl6NUQ/s1600/1213.chi.fi.GrudgeMatch.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="267" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4qaWu2moOzI/Urzv8SK7OCI/AAAAAAAALzY/pQ400kl6NUQ/s400/1213.chi.fi.GrudgeMatch.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Worst name for a PPV event, ever.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Well, it does work, kind of. We get to know each of our warriors right off the bat, and that's where things immediately start to fall flat. It's obvious from the get-go that we're supposed to be rooting for Razor, as thirty years ago he lost the girl (Kim Basinger), his will to go on with boxing, and to top it all off was robbed of his winnings by his crooked promoter. He's easily got the most to reclaim, and getting his life back on track is a noble, well-trod goal in sports films. </div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PGY6u8-vhxI/Urzv8WrbNmI/AAAAAAAALzU/bmqS_0uz0_E/s1600/2013-12-24-12.25grudgematch.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="227" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PGY6u8-vhxI/Urzv8WrbNmI/AAAAAAAALzU/bmqS_0uz0_E/s400/2013-12-24-12.25grudgematch.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It's the small guys you have to watch out for.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Kid, meanwhile, is... an unrepentant, narcissistic asshole. I get that it's kind of close to De Niro's <i>Raging Bull</i> role, but when you have two heavyweights (and I mean from stardom and character development standpoints, not weight class) headlining your movie, you need to give them both a reason to resonate with the audience. Can you imagine <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2011/09/fighting-chance.html">Warrior</a></i> if you had not been able to connect with the roles of <b>BOTH</b> Joel Edgerton and Tom Hardy? Giving both sides an emotional stake in the climactic fight is extremely important, but Kid doesn't have anything besides his pride on the table. Unlike Razor, he doesn't really need the money, attention or family to fulfill his needs (although he does connect with his illegitimate son, played by Jon Bernthal). He just wants to win to satisfy his ego. There's no reason to root for Kid, making De Niro's contributions to the film somewhat moot, since he's not even treated like the kind of straight-up villain who would <b>NORMALLY</b> only need the restoration of his pride as the ultimate goal.</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cxYKLjJatl4/UrzwBNmKaNI/AAAAAAAAL0g/fCwzHTf7QAI/s1600/grudge-match-movie-image-10.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="213" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cxYKLjJatl4/UrzwBNmKaNI/AAAAAAAAL0g/fCwzHTf7QAI/s400/grudge-match-movie-image-10.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Sixteen years after winning that Oscar, she's back in crap.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
<i>Grudge Match</i> does make up some ground with how it treats its secondary characters, all of whom add significantly to the story. A <b>REALLY</b> bad movie would have overused the two most popular and humor-friendly members of the cast - Hart and Alan Arkin - to the point of annoyance. Instead, all the supporting actors have an equal responsibility for progressing the plot, and are used no more than they are absolutely needed. Now, I might have <b>LIKED</b> more output by Hart, who is close to becoming one of Hollywood's breakout comedic stars, especially since he's the funniest part of this movie and his absence is pretty keenly felt by the audience. And while I'm not his biggest fan, having Arkin on screen here is infinitely better than when there's <b>NO</b> Arkin on screen. And when you think about it, there's nothing funny about Stallone or De Niro, which is odd when you remember that this is supposed to be a sports <b>COMEDY</b>, not a sports <b>DRAMA</b>. Hart and Arkin are absolutely necessary to making the movie even remotely funny, and when they're not around, there's nobody else to pick up the slack. It would have even made sense for Segal to lean on these two actors, as he doesn't have the makings of a <b>GREAT</b> movie on his hands to justify being economical with their usage. <i>Grudge Match </i>needed more from these two, but never quite figured that out in time.</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6RTXbrRVswk/Urzv_M9_53I/AAAAAAAAL0E/mm3G6b865fo/s1600/grudge-match-movie-photo-29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="213" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6RTXbrRVswk/Urzv_M9_53I/AAAAAAAAL0E/mm3G6b865fo/s400/grudge-match-movie-photo-29.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Free Kevin Hart! We want <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKPULWWK-Xk">Ride Along</a></i>!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
From an inspirational sports comedy perspective, the rest plays out in a fairly normal fashion. Though Tim Kelleher and Rodney Rothman have mostly worked on television, their screenplay moves the story along smoothly, getting our heroes back into fighting shape, dealing with one antother's presence and tackling their personal issues in standard, unsurprising ways. That's the other major problem with the movie, as there's nothing here that catches you off guard in the way a good sports movie will often do. It's all fairly straightforward, and the few niggling plot threads are sewn up pretty quickly. I don't expect a genius story to come from Segal's editing room (this is the man who brought us <i>Get Smart</i> and <i>Anger Management</i>, after all), but a little bit of complexity would have been a welcome addition to a movie that has no real surprises in store. </div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E6BGXEm-BJo/UrzwBGKga3I/AAAAAAAAL0k/-Pdz3OyqNWY/s1600/grudge-match.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-E6BGXEm-BJo/UrzwBGKga3I/AAAAAAAAL0k/-Pdz3OyqNWY/s400/grudge-match.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That is not a flattering shade of green.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
Even with all of <i>Grudge Match</i>'s flaws, there's still a bit of nostalgic fun in seeing Rocky and Jake square off in the third act, giving the film a nice boost of charm. It's too bad that this feels required, however, as without that particular face-off this is a title that needed a lot more polish if it was going to be anything decent. It's not even particularly funny, as there just aren't enough humorous elements to magically transform it into the comedy it bills itself as. Instead, <i>Grudge Match </i>is instantly forgettable, especially when you consider how many superior theatrical options are available right now. If you really, desperately want to see that fictionally iconic match-up, it'll still be there when the DVD is released, but otherwise there's absolutely no reason to run out there to see it right now.</div>
Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-330613451419825697.post-41704258252684538852013-12-25T01:17:00.000-05:002013-12-25T01:17:11.187-05:00'Saving Mr. Banks' from Himself<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mLlWIliHB8E/UrUBgWTEioI/AAAAAAAALr0/uJ1wZxMBgoQ/s1600/MV5BMTc0MTQ3NzE4Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzA4NDM5OQ@@._V1_SX214_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mLlWIliHB8E/UrUBgWTEioI/AAAAAAAALr0/uJ1wZxMBgoQ/s320/MV5BMTc0MTQ3NzE4Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzA4NDM5OQ@@._V1_SX214_.jpg" width="216" /></a></div>
You wouldn't be wrong to look at Disney and assume that they run the planet at this point. Over the years, they've been amassing huge tracts of business landscape. They own animation juggernaut Pixar. They own and operate ABC and a host of other television programming licenses (including 80% of ESPN). They bought Marvel Entertainment, bringing an entire stable of profitable superhero franchises under their already-sizable roof. And this time last year the company purchased legendary studio Lucasfilm from science fiction scribe/legend George Lucas. That's right; Mickey Mouse owns <i>Star Wars</i>.<br />
<br />
Naturally, this is an exciting time to own stock in the corporation (<i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2013/07/saddle-sore.html">The Lone Ranger</a></i> notwithstanding), but it's not hard to look back about fifty years, when Disney only <b>SEEMINGLY</b> ran the planet. It was the 1960's, when the company was much, <b>MUCH</b> smaller, but the affect it had on modern culture was never in doubt. Disneyland was one of the world's top tourist destinations, and every movie coming out of Disney's celebrated studio was an instant gold mine. Walt Disney himself was a beloved public figure, despite the allegations of racism and antisemitism that arose during what has become known as the Golden Age of Animation.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i4si_WWSiRQ/UrkEfsstOGI/AAAAAAAALts/TM7cSrn1rSI/s1600/saving-mr-banks-emma-thompson-600-370.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="246" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i4si_WWSiRQ/UrkEfsstOGI/AAAAAAAALts/TM7cSrn1rSI/s400/saving-mr-banks-emma-thompson-600-370.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Get used to this face... Apparently Mrs. Travers wore it a lot.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And that's a life worth exploring on film, even if only in the minimalist, somewhat pandering efforts of <i><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5kYmrjongg">Saving Mr. Banks</a></i>. The movie recounts the untold story of Disney's (Tom Hanks) twenty year effort to adapt his daughters' favorite novel - "Mary Poppins" - to the big screen. Only one obstacle stands in his way: author Pamela "P.L." Travers (Emma Thompson), who is only agreeing to the deal on the basis that she has final say on the production. As heads collide, Travers reminisces to her early years in 1900's Australia, and her memories of an alcoholic, yet loving father. Gradually Disney begins to truly understand what it is that makes this novel and the character of Mary Poppins so special to this British author, though their difficulties make the production of one of cinema's most endearing family classics very, very hard to get done.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J6K5dGn7FjE/UrpbjQVL1AI/AAAAAAAALuw/1fazudcQneU/s1600/banks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="247" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J6K5dGn7FjE/UrpbjQVL1AI/AAAAAAAALuw/1fazudcQneU/s400/banks.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I think they hired Hanks just to deflect any controversial asides.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This feel-good picture comes from John Lee Hancock, and upon reflection it makes perfect sense that the director of <i>The Rookie</i>, <i>The Alamo</i>, and <i>The Blind Side</i> was on hand to crank up the inspirational vibe on this motion picture. The characters are all good folk, trying to get things done, and learning a bit about one another in the process. And in Thompson's case, that's worthy of some serious Oscar consideration; her performance as the successful, eccentric and somewhat protective author is right to draw raves, as she takes on a character that a lesser actor would have made either cringe-worthingly annoying or mind-numbingly sappy. Credit where it's due, some of that brilliance does come from the screenplay - co-penned by TV writers Kelly Marcel (<i>Terra Nova</i>) and Sue Smith (<i>Mabo</i>) - which features a wealth of witty dialogue, plenty of heartfelt moments and quite a bit of genuine emotional inflection. But it's Thompson who makes the role special, taking someone who could easily have been portrayed as a shrew - or worse, a villain - and making her sympathetic to everyone in the audience.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3lY7ZE2s4u0/Urpbla2vM3I/AAAAAAAALvI/M3U1JfGUofo/s1600/saving-mr-banks-jason-schwartzman-bj-novak.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3lY7ZE2s4u0/Urpbla2vM3I/AAAAAAAALvI/M3U1JfGUofo/s400/saving-mr-banks-jason-schwartzman-bj-novak.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Much music was made on that piano, and... other stuff...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
And it's not just Thompson that shines, as most all the cast put forth some of their best efforts to date. Jason Schwartzman and B.J. Novak light up the screen as the renown songwriting duo of Richard and Robert Sherman, who created such classics as "Chim Chim Cher-ee" and "<span style="background-color: white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19.1875px;">Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious", while <i>West Wing</i> and <i><a href="http://latestissue.blogspot.com/2012/04/original-american-horror-story.html">Cabin in the Woods</a></i> fans will recognize the charming Bradley Whitford as <i>Mary Poppins</i> screenwriter Don DaGradi. Paul Giamatti turns in his casual "lovable schlep" as Travers' unwitting but friendly personal driver, certainly not a bad deal. And of course Tom Hanks is having a stellar year; between this and his excellent work in <i>Captain Phillips</i>, it's officially a comeback year for the veteran leading man. Casting him as Disney is a no-brainer, as there isn't an audience out there that cannot be pleased by Hanks' cool demeanor and earnest expressions. But the scene-stealer in <i>Saving Mr. Banks</i> is undoubtedly Colin Farrell, who appears in Travers' flashbacks as her troubled father. Again, it's a role (lovable drunk) that could so easily have been botched by a no-name performer, but Farrell really draws the audience in and allows us to get into the soul of his character. In return, we get to appreciate some of the best work from one of the industry's more under-appreciated actors working today.</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aQx-hkjiaVw/UrpbkHfIteI/AAAAAAAALu0/5LbBNUOZKgw/s1600/colin-farrell-saving-mr-banks-ginty.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="266" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aQx-hkjiaVw/UrpbkHfIteI/AAAAAAAALu0/5LbBNUOZKgw/s400/colin-farrell-saving-mr-banks-ginty.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wait, when did this become <i>Heidi</i>?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19.1875px;">Unfortunately, despite some stellar acting and more than a few feel-good moments, <i>Saving Mr. Banks</i> is far from a perfect product. Thompson's jokes almost always work, but the screenplay doesn't really allow anyone else (with the occasional exception of Disney himself) to get a jibe or zinger in. And when they do, well, they're usually not all that good. It's all about the interactions between the two main stars, and while the actors who play those secondary parts <b>ARE</b> quite good, they can't quite overcome the limitations of the script. There's also a distinct sense of whitewashing when you see the movie. Even if I hadn't been told about some of the egregious lies the movie would have you accept as fact (despite it said that she'd only published the one book, Travers actually had written quite a few books between "Poppins" and the movie's production, and she actually <b>HATED</b> the movie itself) I wouldn't say I could have been surprised. It's a movie <b>BY</b> Walt Disney Studios <b>CONCERNING</b> their parochial namesake; of <b>COURSE</b> there's going to be more than a bit of image massaging going on. The creative changes do make sense, but my issue has more to do with the blatant nature of Hancock's ham-fisted direction than it does with eschewing historical accuracy. Frankly, if Hancock was a better, more subtle director, he might have made<i> </i>this film into something truly exceptional.</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GT4GKIzpwNY/Urpbl7gvBaI/AAAAAAAALvU/b1iL-Avg508/s1600/saving-mr-banks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GT4GKIzpwNY/Urpbl7gvBaI/AAAAAAAALvU/b1iL-Avg508/s400/saving-mr-banks.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ah, the days when everyone wore ties...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
As it stands, <i>Saving Mr. Banks</i> is certainly a serviceable, solid, and even quite sweet film. If you were looking for something to take your family to over the Christmas break, it's one of the stronger options out there, though <i>Frozen</i> is still the clear front-running option. While there's no getting past the fact that <i>Banks</i> is a flawed motion picture, it's got an abundance of charm and sufficient talent in front of the camera - especially in its two leads - to carry itself quite effortlessly into the hearts of any audience. Excellence it could have reached, especially in regards to its love letters to fathers, but for a sycophancy that ironically advocates forgiving troublesome dads without acknowledging it's own parent's missteps. Still, Thompson is looking at a well-deserved Oscar nomination (if not a win), and there ought to be a good deal of fun had at the movies should you decide to make this your destination.Mr. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12070680960061669328noreply@blogger.com0