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/

Ender's Game (2013)

Written by guest blogger contributor Bryan R.

Ender's Game: An epic, thought-provoking tale about a young boy ostracized by his peers who attempts to overcome the odds with cunning and tenacity, is converted into a fast-paced, eye-opening spectacle about a teen-age boy ostracized by his peers who attempts to overcome the odds with cunning and tenacity. (yes I meant to repeat myself)

This one is hard. I've read the book by Orson Scott Card, so this review will be somewhat bias. So much of the book is describing what is inside Ender's head, while most of the movie is depicting what is inside Ender's heart.

The book is a quick read, but not because of it's length; you just can't put it down. Despite the films accuracy, there is so much in the book that was cut out from the film for speed's sake that if you watch this after reading the book it will feel rushed. That being said, if you read the book after watching the movie, it might have a lingering visual of Ender that conflicts with the novel.

Things that were good: Cinematography, directing, screen play (as good/accurate as it could be in 2 hrs), costume, set design.

So many things were done right with the visuals; AMAZING! From the combat suits to the life-like, computer-animated aliens; there really is a feeling of present meets future while not distracting you from the story.  The training room scenes leave you wanting to see more, while the swarm of alien ships during battle scenes displays the immensity of their situation while depicting a bug-like behavior.

If I were to nit-pick about anything visually, it would be the lack of dimensions during the final battle. Despite the constant reminders throughout the story that space has no definite up or down, the director still chose to display it two dimensionally: left to right. Also, the space ships were designed with the traditional form, in my opinion, an artistic design slip.

Harrison Ford who plays Colonel Graff, does a good job of portraying the stress of the decisions a military leader has to make. He does look a little out of the age bracket for a Colonel though.

It's unfortunate, but the worst thing about this movie was the casting of Ender Wiggin, played by Asa Butterfield. First of all, one of the most fascinating aspects about the original story was how mentally advanced the children were. The book starts off with Ender showing his genius at age 6. The film, however, portrays Ender somewhere between 12-14, which is awkwardly noticeable when Butterfield stands next to Ford. Putting his age aside, Butterfield's acting lacks a passion to counter his fury. The times when he is enraged are well played, but when it came to suffering and compassion, he lacks energy. It also seems like some of his words get lost in his mouth. Other than that he was excellent.

Ender's Game Trailer

Looper (2012)

Looper is a futuristic take on the life of a hired gun. There is one thing that stands out; Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Oh my goodness, this kid is GOOD. He plays a younger version of Bruce Willis's character and he is so accurate with his mannerisms and facial expressions that his performance is actually a bit distracting in the beginning.

Oddly enough, Joseph Gordon-Levitt does a better job at playing a Bruce Willis character than Bruce Willis. However, the screenplay or directing doesn't give Bruce Willis the proper foundation to work with. The movie focuses too much on showing minor details than it does on solid character development and the minor details it does show aren't the ones you want to see. It leaves you with a feeling of wanting more; not in a good way. You watch it wanting it to be better than it is.

The story itself is entertaining and exciting and the time travel concept is always fun. A television show would be a better platform to showcase the nuances of this futuristic world.

Watch it to be entertained and you will be. It's definitely worth watching simply for Joseph Gordon-Levitt's performance.

On a scale of 1-10, Looper: 7.0

Performance distinction for Joseph Gordon-Levitt: underrated.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1276104/