Sunday, October 26, 2014

2 Guns (2013)


If you want to watch this movie, DON'T READ ANY OF THE DESCRIPTIONS OTHER THAN THIS ONE AND DON'T WATCH THE TRAILER. I was very happy I did not watch the trailer or read any descriptions prior to watching it. They give away WAY too much information. 

The story itself is cheesy and lacks development but the focus is the relationship between Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg. Their chemistry is really good. Wahlberg tries too hard at some points but overall it's fun to see them together. They make you want more of them and less of the actual story.

Paula Patton's performance is off. Her facial movements are unnatural and too exaggerated. Her chemistry with Denzel is painful. Being the only significant female in the movie, it's disappointing she doesn't have a better presence; but her character and story line lacks a lot so it's not that big of a deal that she doesn't do a good job. 

By far the biggest complaint is the terrible lighting. It's entirely too dark at times.

2 Guns could have been more of a quirky and memorable movie had it been directed by the Coen brothers. It doesn't win any awards for quality or depth, but it's a decently entertaining movie. Worth a watch if you're in the mood for a slightly dark action comedy.

I usually put a video of the trailer here...BUT...read above!

True Blood Season 7 Final Season (2014)


For such an entertaining series, the final season isn't worth the film time. The first half starts out okay. Then there's a major shift with no satisfying explanation. No more crazy lunatic dying vampires, no more danger, no more action, and not a single creature other than vampires; no werewolves, shape shifters, la fay (other than Sookie), telepaths, witches...they just disappear from the story. There is a disconnect with all the characters and their stories. Tara's end story is down right embarrassing.

There is such a big focus on wrapping up Sookie's story, the entire season suffers. Although the True Blood series is based on the book series named after her, the show did a good job early on to get other characters involved. True Blood became more than just Sookie, but the final season doesn't respect their previous work.

Season 7 is by far the most disappointing of the entire series. It's like the entire cast, crew, writers, and producers all gave up prior to filming and droned through the final season out of contractual obligation. The main cause is the writing. It's just down right lazy.

You're better off stopping after season 6 and creating your own ending within your imagination.







Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Pain & Gain (2013)



Pain & Gain is supposed to be a comedy about criminal bodybuilders. In reality, it plays like a campy SNL skit. There are funny moments but there is an overall lack of chemistry between the entire cast. I then found out Michael Bay directed it and it all made sense. He's not known for creating the best onset atmosphere.

The Rock's character..excuse me, Dwayne Johnson's character, had potential and is the funniest of the bunch, but his talent was still overtaken by the heavy-handed directing and bad script.

Originally I thought the whole "this is true" bit was like Fargo where a part of the fake story is to pretend it was real. Then the ending with the pictures of the actual criminals came up and I looked it up. It's a sad and crazy story. Then in reflecting upon the movie I was disturbed. It's quite actually in bad taste to make a comedy out of two people being butchered and another being tortured for a month! The families did not approve of this version of the story and are all outraged. I would be as well and had I known this from the start, I would not have watched this out of respect to the victims.

If they wanted to make it a comedy, they would have been much better off angling it as a dark comedy where the seriousness of the killings don't seem so diminished. Any which way you look at it, even if it wasn't a true story, the movie was not made well and is disorganized.

A painful mess. I do not recommend it.


Monday, May 26, 2014

Cabin In The Woods (2013)


The Cabin in the Woods is not anything close to what I was expecting. It's going to be difficult to review this one without spoilers. I'll try my best.

Even though it has the same cheesy slasher premise, it goes to an interpretative level of artistic expression. There are layers to this that remind me of The Cube series, more specifically Cube Zero (2004); a film that I wrote a thesis about in college interpreting religious symbology in film and a highly recommended watch. ANYWAY, back to The Cabin in the Woods! It melds the entire slasher/horror genre into one story. It's quite crazy and creative.

It's still clearly a scary movie. I would not watch this alone! There isn't much else to say without giving away too much. The acting was unoffensive and Bradley Whitford is good as always. I was quite surprised to find out that Josh Whedon co-wrote the script, but after watching it you can definitely see his hand-print on it.

It's a scary, fun, and entertaining movie.

The Cabin in the Woods trailer:


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1259521/

Monday, May 19, 2014

Ten Actors That Would Be A [WAY] Better Gambit Than Channing Tatum

I'm usually not upset about a casting decision. I didn't even blink when they announced Ben Affleck as Batman. However; recently there was an official announcement that Channing Tatum is slated to play Gambit from X-Men. I almost can't even say that without heaving. I have never been so upset about a casting decision...EVER! So as part of my self-imposed therapy, I have compiled a short list of actors that would have been a MUCH better choice than Tatum.
 Some on this list don't have very good acting skills but all of them are far and away better at acting than...you know who. 
This is not in order of preference.


NUMBER 10: Stephen Amell
Heartland (tv) & Arrow (tv)
He would bring a harder side to Gambit. He's got the body,  the jawline, and great physical ability too. I'm not sure how people would react to him playing two comic book characters at the same time (Green Arrow), and also not sure if there is any kind of back story intertwining Green Arrow and Gambit in the DC vs Marvel Universe battles. I know that fans have created mock battles between Green Arrow and Gambit so... *shrug*



NUMBER 9: Theo James
Golden Boy (tv), Divergent (film), Underworld: Awakening (film)
He's got the Gambit sex appeal and he's probably the best actor on this list.





NUMBER 8: Kellan Lutz
 Twilight series ("film") I know I know. He's not my favorite choice but I would still rather have him than Channing Tatum.



NUMBER 7: William Levy
Latin tv actor & DWTS runner up. He does have a noticeable Cuban accent. Although it wouldn't be the first time an actor had to learn a new accent for a role, he might have a hard time pulling it off.

 

NUMBER 6: Ashton Kutcher
That 70's Show (tv), Butterfly Effect (film), Two and a Half Men (tv)
He's probably a surprising pick to most but he looks like Gambit & he would most likely have the best chance of getting the accent spot on.


 



NUMBER 5:Matt Barr
One Tree Hill (tv), Hellcats (tv)
Not sure about his acting ability, but he's got the right...ahem...build.
 



NUMBER 4: Jamie Dornan
Once Upon a Time (tv), The Fall (tv)
He has officially been confirmed to play Christian Grey in The Fifty Shades of Grey. Need I say more?



NUMBER 3: Josh Duhamel
Las Vegas (tv), Transformers series (film)
Granted he might a little too old to be playing Gambit now, but he's only about 5 years older than Tatum.




NUMBER 2: Alex Pettyfer
I Am Number Four (film), Beastly (film), In Time (film), & -.- Magic Mike ("film")
I think he would be a great Gambit. He's got the acting ability and the look.



NUMBER 1: Jared Padalecki
Gilmore Girls (tv), Supernatural (tv)
Okay...so...he's not the greatest actor but O.M.G. he looks exactly like Gambit.






 I could list another 10 but you get the idea. #XMenFail



Friday, May 2, 2014

Gravity (2013)


I originally had no desire to watch this but the award's season got me. After winning so many awards for it's visuals and directing, I couldn't resist.

So far as the visuals, sound, and directing are concerned, I would agree with most of their assessments regarding those subjects. For instance, there is a moment when Sandra Bullock is crying and instead of her tears running down her face, they float away. It seems like an obvious detail that is needed, but the stunning part is the way these details mesmerize you. I attribute that to the director, Alfonso Cuaron. He wants you to see the details and so you see them.

It's not just teeming with visuals but with artistic expression as well. There is a religious undertone that, if you so choose, can interpret the symbology from beginning to end.

The details in the visuals almost make up for the lack of detail in the story. The story is awfully plain. It's as if Open Water (2003) turned into "Open Space" and was given a much much larger budget. I'm not at all surprised it wasn't even nominated for Best Screenplay at the Oscars.

What isn't surprising is Sandra Bullock. She rarely misses and she certainly doesn't miss here. Even her breathing is top notch. On the other hand, her counterpart George Clooney, is a little wonky. His performance doesn't detract that much so he's forgiven.

It's not a long movie, clocking in at 91 minutes, so give it a go! I would recommend it if you're looking for interpretation in art.

Gravity Trailer...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/?ref_=rvi_tt

Monday, April 28, 2014

Prisoners (2013)


Prisoners is not as good as I had hoped. It tries valiantly to be a clever puzzle but it's all too predictable. I see what they were trying to do but unfortunately Ben Affleck didn't direct this and it turns out too light.

The main focus is on Hugh Jackman's character, Keller Dover, as he desperately looks for his missing daughter, Anna, and her friend, Joy. The heavy focus on one girl is odd. There isn't enough screen time for Joy and her family; they're an afterthought, which is another disappointment because they had the powerful acting skills of Viola Davis as Joy's mom.

The first half of the movie is much faster than the second half. It's a noticeable drop off that would be forgivable if the storyline got stronger, but it runs out of steam quickly. I especially despise what they did with Maria Bello's character, Grace Dover, Anna's mom. Her very fast and over-dramatic decline is mostly unnecessary.

With the exception of Hugh Jackman, Viola Davis, and Paul Dano as Alex Jones, the acting leans weak. Jake Gyllenhall as Detective Loki, aka seemingly the only detective in town, doesn't do a bad job but just isn't good for this role.

Overall, I still wish for so much more from this movie. I do not recommend it.

Prisoners trailer:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392214/

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Riddick (2013)


Riddick is the most recent installment in The Chronicles of Riddick franchise. Of the three major films, Pitch Black (2000), The Chronicels of Riddick (2004), and Riddick (2013), this most recent is definitely the one that needs the most viewer knowledge from previous movies. In other words, RIDDICK MARATHON! Watch the others before this one, it will make much more sense if you do.

The first 20 minutes of this movie is lonely. It's almost too long and you begin to wonder if any other human is going to join the party.

Riddick plays out like a Resident Evil movie. It's given leeway on the quality of the script so long as it progresses our beloved storyline. This script however, relies too heavily on that notion. Which brings me to those cheesy lines. Aw lawd the cheese is abundant in this one. Some of the lines are just down right perplexing. David Twohy does a fine job directing, but he should have definitely had someone else revamp his script. It reads like a draft instead of a final product.

It's not my favorite Riddick movie, but I still enjoyed it and look forward to the next.

The trailer below is edited really well and is a good introduction to the movie; especially if you haven't seen the previous ones.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1411250/?ref_=ttfc_fc_tt

Runner Runner (2013)



Runner Runner is about the dirty underbelly of the online gaming community. It's entertaining and you don't have to be familiar with poker to understand what's going on; however, it helps to be familiar with it to grasp its entirety. I happen to find the evolution of online gaming fascinating, so I found many more redeeming qualities about this movie than it probably deserves.

The bones are there, but Runner Runner misses by a few feet. It's categorized as an "American crime thriller," and it almost is. There isn't enough suspense for me to call it a "thriller." This could have been the new generation The Firm (1993) ala Tom Cruise, but the writing and editing butcher it. The storyline is sloppily put together, there's weak cohesion, and most of all a lack of character and relationship development.

Ben Affleck as Ivan Block is surprisingly good, but it's toward the end of the movie where he shines. The one time he raises his voice and the crocodile scenes are ones to watch. This Affleck kid is growing on me.

Justin Timberlake as Richie Furst, is like the movie...almost good. He's getting there, but his timing and energy still needs some polishing. The hardest thing about this film is that Timberlake doesn't let you sympathize with Richie, so there's really no one you're rooting for.

Gemma Arterton plays Rebecca Shafran. Unfortunately, her role is typical female support/love interest. Although, for this movie being so male dominated, she brings a great amount of sultry confidence. She does however dwarf Timberlake's abilities and it's unconvincing that she finds such a weak presence so endearing. This is only the second film I have seen Arterton, the first being Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013). I have to admit, I'm fangirling her a little and she will be a deciding factor in whether to watch any particular movie in the future.

The great version of this movie lives in my head. In the meantime, this one is decently entertaining.





http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2364841/?ref_=rvi_tt



Friday, February 28, 2014

30 for 30: The Price of Gold (2014)


30 for 30 is an ESPN series that plays out like documentaries; sports related of course. Fittingly it aired just in time for the 2014 Winter Olympics. This "episode" focuses on the most talked about scandal in sports history: the over-hyped mess of the Nancy Kerrigan/Tonya Harding saga.

This production is a strange one. It's intriguing to watch if you remember the hype when it originally happened, but if you only know their names through pop culture and don't really understand any details, this documentary is not a good representation. I imagine it's partly due to the fact that Tonya Harding agreed to be interviewed for this while Nancy Kerrigan declined; which means they could only use archived footage. They do however use the archived footage to make it seem as though Kerrigan was being interviewed for this show; which further portrays Kerrigan in a darker light. The editing is heavily in Harding's favor and they clearly attempt to downplay and excuse her behavior.

Another portion that this film glosses over is the more damning issue of figure skating judges, but I suppose that needs its own documentary.

They do give details that I never knew and the quick updates of the major players is oddly fascinating. The one thing this film is missing is a SHRINK! They have the commentators, the former olympians, the media, and even the prosecutor, but no psychologist to analyze Harding's behavior. A psychologist would have filled in the gaps and made this film more fulfilling to watch.



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3417870/?ref_=ttexrv_exrv_tt

Sherlock (TV-BBC) Series 3 (2014)


My long overdue review of Sherlock Series 3! But hey, with the way things are going, I have a year and a half before series 4 airs! Grrr. That's probably the most frustrating part of the entire show; it takes SO long between seasons. With each series only having 3 episodes makes the wait so much more agonizing. I love this show but it frustrates me to no end! It makes you feel like you're chasing after someone who doesn't love you as much as you love them. :/ Hmm...it's like being in a relationship with Sherlock himself! Sigh...

Series 3 is paced quickly; especially in the second episode. Honestly, I feel like they're cheating. In 'The Sign of Three' they go through a montage of past cases. Every flashback scene is a teaser to an episode that doesn't exist! You want nothing more than to watch each of those flashback scenes in full blown episodes.

With all my frustration, I will still wait for series 4...and 5...and 6...and it better go on forever!

Sherlock Series 3 Trailer...


There is a mini episode for this series called 'Many Happy Returns.' It's technically series 3 episode 0. It's only 7 minutes, but a fun little intro into series 3. In case you missed it...


Here's a little trick I'm excited to try for Sherlock Series 4. Download the extension 'Hola Better Internet' on Google Chrome. If you set the country to the UK, you can watch a lot of British shows on their iplayer service. That's not the most exciting part! BBC UK airs Sherlock BEFORE PBS airs it in the US. BBC aired the premiere on January 1st while PBS aired it on January 19th. I know, it's only 18 days but still...it's 18 DAYS!!!

Beyond that, there isn't much to say that I haven't said already about the past 2 series. The acting, directing, and writing are simply superb. Although I will admit series 3 is my least favorite thus far; again, mostly because it runs fast and on the edge of chaos. Otherwise, I'm excited to see how Mary will fit into future series and hoping they will keep Sherlock working is abductive magic.

When will BBC start upping the ante? We want more!!!
Here's more!
Dr. Watson's Blog!
http://www.johnwatsonblog.co.uk/


Saturday, January 11, 2014

White House Down (2013)


White House Down is a mess. My new resolution is to never watch another movie with Channing Tatum in it. I can think of a dozen actors off the top of my head that would have been WAY better than Tatum. It's painful to watch him on screen. Unfortunately, Tatum isn't the only thing wrong with this flick.

Recently, I reviewed Olympus Has Fallen and I was pretty harsh about it. White House Down is its brother from another mother. Although it doesn't make the White House as easy to take down as Olympus Has Fallen, they both have almost identical plots. If I had to choose to watch one or the other, I would choose Olympus Has Fallen. That should give you an idea of what a hot mess White House Down is.

Tatum is the "hero" and Foxx plays the current President of the United States. Their chemistry is awkward to say the least. Tatum's character apparently has aspirations to be in the Secret Service but when he gets a chance to interact with the President, he treats him like an inadequate sidekick and comes off as disrespectful.

The attempted funny parts are noticeable and seriously not funny. Again, I blame this one on Tatum's delivery. Another Tatum point, then I'll stop. He is severely unconvincing as a father. He comes off more like a young punk. 

Joey King who plays Tatum's daughter, Emily, is good and reminds me a little of Alyssa Milano in Commando (1985). As good as she is, she still can't overcome Tatum's inabilities.

Overall, White House Down looks like they released the movie prematurely. It's unpolished and messy. Definitely not worth watching.



Friday, January 10, 2014

We're the Millers (2013)


We're the Millers is funny, cute, and quickly paced. Everything seems to happen fairly fast. Usually movies that are paced at this speed tend to feel rushed and turn out sloppy. This movie, however, is the exception. There are no dead spots or slow, hair-pulling scenes and yet it leaves you laughing for the ride and content in the end.

I have to give credit to the cast. Jason Sudeikis who plays main character, David, really holds it all together. He has instant appeal. There is a level of comfort he has with the camera that makes it so the movie doesn't require much character development on his part.

Jennifer Anniston as Rose, the stripper, is shaky in the beginning but she picks it up about 20 minutes in. She's not completely believable as a stripper in her mannerisms, and her body looks way to killer to be a low-class stripper, but her comedic timing is still there for sure. She plays well off of everyone. Nothing we're not used to.

Emma Roberts as Casey, the "daughter," is the weakest link. Her acting chops isn't quite at the level of the rest of the cast. With that said, she's still not that bad.

Will Poulter as Kenny is so quirky and funny and sweet and everything! He almost steals the spotlight. Seriously, who the hell is this kid and why isn't he in a shit ton of movies?!?! I would love to see a comedy series all about Kenny. 

I didn't want to tick down the cast but the cast is that great! Ed Helms as Brad Gurdinger, David's "boss," Kathryn Hahn and Nick Offerman as Edie and Don Fitzgerald, they're all so perfectly awkward. Kathryn Hahn is devastatingly underrated. 

There is no special plot. It's just a vulgar, funny, vulgar, sweet, vulgar movie. Did I mention it's vulgar? The language and content is most definitely mature...and vulgar, but wonderfully so.

Watch this one!

We're the Millers trailer...


Thursday, January 9, 2014

Admission (2013)


Admission is a calm, mildly funny movie. I wouldn't mind watching this one with my parents. It's definitely not as funny as the trailer makes it seem and it has a lower energy than you would expect with two popular comedic actors, but still a pretty good movie. Don't expect boisterous laughing. It's more of a feel-good flick.

Both Tina Fey and Paul Rudd are subdued and again, it's not that this is a bad movie, it's just kind of mellow. There is no real dramatic apex. It's simply, pleasant.

Tina Fey plays Princeton admissions officer Portia Nathan. At times she seems like she's trying too hard to pull the movie higher but overall she's just fine.

Lily Tomlin who plays Tina Fey's mother, Sussanah, is perfect. I would love to see a spin-off movie with Tomlin and Fey leading.

Paul Rudd plays a "director" of an alternative high school. Being a huge Paul Rudd fan, I was disappointed. There are only a few signature Paul Rudd moments. He is still good, I just love his quirkiness and have become conditioned to expecting it.

On a final note; Admission makes Princeton seem like a school of douche bags. I wonder if they were upset with this movie.

Friday, January 3, 2014

Olympus Has Fallen (2013)



Olympus Has Fallen is slightly entertaining but mostly embarrassing. The details are very messy. The first 20 minutes of the movie is the best part. Everything else is a display of severe American incompetence.

The cast is pretty spectacular and the acting is generally good. It just doesn't play out well. It's a sloppy excuse for an action movie. I really don't understand what happened here. The budget for this movie was pretty hefty at $70 million. I'm going to have to put this one on the director, Antoine Fuqua, and the two writers Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt. All three of whom do not have much experience. So maybe the onus is on the producers for choosing three noobs to handle all the fire power behind the casting. Boggles my mind that so many heavy weight actors signed on for this one.

Speaking of a heavy weight, an underrated one, Ashley Judd as the First Lady is the main spark of energy; which is actually unfortunate.

The casting is the only saving grace for this one. I mean, for the most part, they have actual Korean actors play the Korean roles. That's unique! If only the writing and directing were as detailed and thorough, this movie could have been good. Instead, it will make you sigh and huff for two hours.

Olympus Has Fallen trailer...



IMDB
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2302755/

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Elysium (2013)


It's called Elysium but most of the time is spent on earth. Much more than I expected. I wanted to see more futuristic aspects; more healing, more gadgets, more space ships...just more. When they finally show a little bit of Elysium, it just looks like a typical high society suburb. The landscape and architecture is severely disappointing.

Matt Damon seems underutilized. He didn't kick ass the way I expected. Maybe the Bourne series has affected my view of him. Mostly he was simply unconvincing. He isn't the tattooed car thieving type and he doesn't try very hard to convince you of it either. On the petty side, he is clearly muscular without clothes, but in clothes he looks chubby.

Jodie Foster as Delacourt is not intimidating and her accent is a bit wonky. She's okay but Cate Blanchet would have killed it.

Overall this movie is kind of gross, perplexing, and boring. The ending picks up a little but then leaves you dry and unfulfilled.



There are a lot of aspects that aren't explained and therefore you end up with a laundry list of questions.
Here are just a few, which include spoilers...

1. What the hell is on their faces? Sometimes you think they're accessories, but other times it seems to have a purpose. It's never addressed in any way.
2. Why does anyone on Elysium lock their doors?
3. Where are the Med-Bays/magical MRI-esque healing machines manufactured? There are a lot of things that need to be assumed and one of those things is that Elysium needs Earth's residents to produce everything they use. If that's the case, why do the residents need to attempt to crash land onto Elysium to use a Med-Bay?
4. With Med-Bays keeping people alive, how do they control the population on Elysium?
5. Is everything on Elysium indestructible? If not, who fixes it?
6. They quickly mention Elysium is for the rich while Earth is for everyone else. What about the smart people? Not all smart people are rich and the rich people have to be dumb as bricks to leave the smart people on Earth.

Oye...you get the idea.

This movie is a massive question producing machine. If you approach the story with the mind of a 10 year old, you'll be entertained. Otherwise, move on.

IMDB
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/



Wednesday, January 1, 2014

The Wolverine (2013)



The Wolverine is very underwhelming. :(

There are barely 2 1/2 mutants in the entire movie! That's nuts! I understand this movie title doesn't use the term "X-Men" but barely 3 mutants? C'mon! The introduction of various mutant powers is the reason we love X-Men!

It's basically a carbon copy of Elektra, and when I say carbon copy, I mean not as good! Bad guys after the girl, reluctant loner protects the girl, loner fights the bad guys to save the girl. Elektra at least has awesome mutants, entertaining visuals, and likable characters. In fact, it's more like a cookie cutter Jason Statham movie with an X-Men title. It's unoriginal and bland.

The one good thing is Hugh Jackman. Now I may be a little biased but he is a damn good actor in what ever role he plays. There is no denying that. The only thing The Wolverine did for me was feed my Hugh Jackman fix until I watch Prisoners.

Skip this one unless you too need your Hugh Jackman fix.

The Wolverine trailer...