Transformers: Age of Extinction

Best in the series, but still pretty bad

We start the movie off with failed inventor Cade Yager (Mark Wahlberg) facing eviction and looking for his next big break so he can put his daughter (Nicola Peltz) through college. They are unaware that Cade's newest acquisition of a beat up semi is actually Optimus Prime, and they have thrown themselves in between the war humans have declared on all of the transforming aliens. The leader of this war is one of the top people of the CIA Harold Attinger (Kelsey Grammer) who has struck a deal with two different sources to insure his retirement is a wealthy end to his career. The first is a bounty hunter style Transformer said to give him something that his other partner who is the leader of a billion dollar industry Joshua Joyce (Stanley Tucci) needs in return for the acquisition of Prime. The humans have killed many of the Transformers saying to the public that they are only killing remaining Decpticons when in reality they are dismantling all of them. This has infuriated Prime and he is about to give up on humanity all together.

So here is the thing, Michael Bay doesn't know how to do story line. We all know that he replaces story line with visual effects and that is his identifier. The story line here had some major potential. The humans killing off Autobots, the incidents of past battles destroying cities being the fuel that fills the human's rage fire. All very compelling stuff. Unfortunately (as with all Transformers movies) the human element absolutely kills any attention we were giving to the compelling story and visuals. I care more for Cade Yager than I ever cared for Sam Witwicky; but, I still don't want to look at humans trying to prove that they are useful in any way to the Autobots, it kills my buzz. This movie tries to do too many things at once. It tries to touch on the Optimus' failed back story from previous films, it tries to explain how the humans feel about the Transformers being on their planet, it tries to make us feel for the humans caught in the middle, it tries to throw in secret agenda after secret agenda, it tries to throw in redemption arcs. So many stories going on at once that even a good director would have a hard time telling all of them with no flaws. What really pisses me off about this movie isn't the story (since I already knew that it was going to be shit) it was the fact that Micheal Bay fucked up the one thing he was good at. Visuals.

When I say that he fucked up the visuals I of course mean that all of his budget went into making the Autobots look good. In this movie we are introduced to "human made Transformers" that transform in a different kind of way, by disassembling in to a bunch of tiny parts and then reassembling into something new. The process of this looks god awful, like you can tell where the visual is introduced into reality by seeing the border. It was the worst looking thing I have ever seen from Micheal Bay. It also made the movie hard to follow. When we are first introduced to these walking eyesores the Autobots can't lay a hand on them due to their aforementioned ability to disassemble into tiny pieces. This line makes it into the movie "I built these things to kick that fat robot's ass." Then when fifty of them are introduced to kill the Autobots later in the movie, we see them dropping like flies, going down with a single shot every time. I think they try to redeem themselves by having Bumblebee say "I hate cheap knock offs," but I wasn't sold and ultimately disappointed. Another bad part of the visuals is that there is a scene in the movie where a guy falls of the roof of a large building and it legitimately looks like he is falling into a green screen. Cheap, and unprofessional from someone who is supposed to be the best in industry at doing this.

The other thing that irritated me about the look of this movie comes in two parts. The fifty thousand different camera angles and the unrelenting slow motion scenes. This movie was THREE HOURS LONG and it could have shaved an extra twenty minutes off that time by just cutting the slow motion scenes in half. When you are putting a shot of Mark Wahlberg slamming his fist onto the pavement in slow motion you have gone too far with this. There is only one other thing I was trying to keep count of besides how many times the movie went into slow motion and that was the blatant product placement throughout every scene. How much do you think Budweiser paid Mark Wahlberg to crack open a Bud Light on a destroyed car and drink it? Do you think the paycheck Stanley Tucci got from Beats by Dre was the biggest thing he has seen in his career? The only thing more annoying than all of this was me, damn near getting whiplash from all of the different camera angles. We got first person, long shot, epic pose shot, falling shot, over the shoulder shot all with in one minute of each other.

The big question of all of this is: how did Mark Wahlberg do? Have you seen the movie "The Happening?" Think of that performance and now you know what he has done here. I don't blame Markie Mark for this since I know he can act (see "The Departed," "Four Brothers," even "Ted") I blame the director. I think he should never have held any amount of screen time with someone at Kelsey Grammer's caliber though, because Kelsey stole the entire show. Unfortunately, it is easy to stand out in a sea of shit. Staley Tucci wasn't bad, but he has done better. Nicola Peltz served as the new eye candy for this movie, and it was disappointing since her back story could have had her with a gun in her hand shooting robots instead of the standard damsel in distress. Her dad says that she was raised like a boy basically, taught to throw a perfect spiral, taught to weld, she could have been shooting a gun right along side him instead of cowering in the corner. I guess Micheal Bay had enough of pre-madonnas though (this failure is brought to you by Megan Fox). The absolute winner of worst performance of this year (probably the decade) is going to go Jack Reynor. He didn't know whether to be Irish or southern. He kept switching accents. He wasn't convincing at all. Overacting. Underacting. He was just awful, and I hope he never does a film like this again.

There are couple of closing thoughts I have to leave with. The only good parts of this movie were: the lack of Shia LeBeouf, Kelsey Grammer, and Optimus riding a transforming Tyrannosaurus Rex into battle. Other than that no to this entire movie. No to childish humor that doesn't resonate with any age group. No to the endless amounts of plot holes. No to Optimus Prime randomly finding a jetpack after a battle. No to blatant product placement. No to overused slow motion. No to shitty special effects. No. No. No. This movie hasn't quite killed this franchise for me since it was the best of the series, but it is another nail in the coffin. Too long and only appealing to the lowest common denominator, who seem to still care about the cars Transforming for the fourth god damn movie in a row. If you like this I envy your ability to like a movie that is this horrible and find nothing wrong.

Final Verdict: Pirate it The only thing that saved this from my worst rating was that it was better than the first three. I actually saw effort in the story line (failed effort but effort none the less), and that is at least something.  

Jersey Boys

Old music for an older crowd

This is the story of the singing group "The Four Seasons" crooners from the 50's that made their mark on America in a big way. It takes us through the lives of the men that gave our grandparents great music to listen to and a voice that made it's mark as unique. The main group was involved with the gangland activity in New Jersey. The only way they saw out of this lifestyle was through music. There really isn't much more from the story besides that. It is just another documentary style movie that has it's ups and downs on the emotional scale.

The main problem I saw here (besides everything) actually didn't come from the story line, it came from the direction. That is a big thing to say when you are talking about a great director like Clint Eastwood, but it is the truth. Clint Eastwood used to have some major talent that could appeal to all age demographics. With movies like "Mystic River" and "Invictus" in his back pocket you would think that this guy could do no wrong, but (sad to say) his style is diminishing. This movie would have been a great opportunity to make this style of music appeal to a younger generation. Like the movies "Ray" and "Walk the Line" did before it. When those movies released most everyone in my school were bopping around to the old tunes, but with a movie like this I just doubt that I will see a bunch of high school kids playing Doo-Whoop in their gelopies. It all streams from the direction this movie was given, like an old, senile man was at the rains and just couldn't grasp the concept of timing or pace. It was shot in way that reminded of a movie from the 90's or earlier (more around the 70's), and if this was intentional he is deliberately trying to market this movie specifically for baby boomers and below. When in all actuality he should be aiming for Gen-X and above. We all know these songs. I am a Gen-Y kid and even I know these songs. The problem is not the music, the music hasn't changed in over fifty years, it is all the movie.

The story line tries to take on the hard task of following each individual life of every band member for a while, and obviously fails so they concentrate on Frankie Valli. The character in question was obviously the star with the great voice, but was also the second most interesting man in the band (the first being Tommy DeVito). The things that made Frankie interesting were his home life, (spoiler warning) the death of his child, and.... actually that is about it. Otherwise he is dull asshole.  Tommy has a lot going for him in the interesting back story department. Gambling addiction, slob, errand boy for a gangster, self proclaimed leader of the group; but his story was cut so short that the movie completely derailed and lost what little attention I was giving it. Another big problem this movie faced was not knowing what it was. It tried to be too many things at the same time. Mobster movie, musical, documentary, etc. It gave me whiplash trying to find the correct emotion to feel at the right times. A movie should lead you to fell that emotion, not kick you out into the open telling you try and mark exactly what you are feeling. That wasn't only the story's fault, it had a lot to do with the pacing of the film.

When I go to a movie I expect everything to flow like a river, but this movie had so many tide pools I thought I was going to get sick from the constant inconsistency. One minute you are rejoicing from Frankie finally paying off some debt, then trying to feel sorrow for a recent loss. One minute you are hoping that the boys make it, then they do in the blink of an eye. There is no real build up it just tosses and turns and can't find solid footing.

With all of these short comings, you would think that the acting would be better; but with shitty direction comes shitty performances. John Llyod Young wants to throw in his hat for "Worst overacting from a new star." Vincent Piazza did alright, but adequate performances don't get you more big budget scripts. The same can be said for Erich Bergen. If you like Christopher Walken in any other gang movie you have seen him in then good news he is still a scary gangster. Everything else is literally just back ground noise.

The only good thing I can say for this movie is that it got the songs stuck in my head, but that isn't a good thing if no one my age is going to A) find this movie to be entertaining and B) Bother to go see it in the first place. Nothing stands out about this movie except for the fact that if you are around my age or even my parents age you will be the youngest person in the audience. I was surrounded by people telling stories of the old days when you had to sit in your car to enjoy a movie and how the chairs were so nice. I knew from this that I was obviously not the target audience, and that is the most disappointing thing I could say.


Final Verdict: Don't Do It Unless you are trying to get some quality time with dear old granddad before he kicks the bucket I suggest you not bother with this. It kills me that I have to give a Clint Eastwood movie my worst rating, but perhaps it is time to send this old horse's career to the glue factory. 

How to Train Your Dragon 2

Greatness finally comes to a Dreamworks sequel

We start off with Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) going through his usual thing. Riding Toothless, and trying to find more land across the globe. He has been distancing himself from the village and learning more of the world, trying to find more dragons and their secrets. He has also been trying to distance himself from his father/ Stoic the Vast (Gerard Butler), who has been on his case about becoming the new chief. One day while flying around with his girlfriend Astrid (America Ferrera) he gets caught in a trap laid by Eret (Kit Harrington) self proclaimed greatest dragon trapper in the world. Eret says that he is working for a man named Drago (Djimon Hounson) who is building a dragon army. Hiccup escapes going to warn his father, and his father batons down the hatches at the village. Hiccup goes off to try and deter the situation (thinking he can prevent war) only to be shut down by a mysterious rider who seems to know even more about dragons then he does. Hiccup soon learns that the mysterious rider is his mother that everyone thinks died from a dragon 20 years ago (no spoiler for that, it is in the trailer).

So the story line here was unbelievably good. I dare say even better then the first. At no point during this movie did I feel bored, and at no point did I want it to stop. The villain here is better than the first movie since the first movie was all about the dragons being villains, and this movie was all about the man. This movie has found a way to challenge the strangle hold Disney has on the animation market by lifting you up, tearing you down and sending your emotions on a roller coaster. I don't know what to say about the story line in particular that won't be a spoiler so I will talk about some of the best points of the story line, the characters, the weapons, and the dragons.

The characters in this seem to have more depth than in the first. In the first they seemed to be interchangeable set pieces, but in this they seem to have a little life. The twins are almost the same but the female twin has been getting a lot more attention since she seems to be the only female other than Astrid that is around the age of everyone else. She has been getting hit on by Snoutlout and Fishlegs since Astrid got taken by Hiccup, and seems to be getting over it. The two men hitting on her seem to be more set pieces then she is, and she seems to be the character spent the most time on. Her brother is another set piece, only having three of four lines in the movie. Astrid took a bit of a back seat on this in the romance department, in stead becoming more of a warrior. You barely know that her and Hiccup are together besides the fact they keep saying it, but that isn't a bad thing at all. I like the Valkyrie thing she is doing. Hiccup got a a lot more definition in his character, now being the most popular person in town he sets to run away from it. His mother is amazing, seeming like a feral "save the dragons" matriarch. Torn between her love of dragons and her love/missing family. She then breaks out as knowing she can have both, and the family welcomes her, being as patient as they can as she tries to get back into the lifestyle she once knew. The dad is the same, barely listens to Hiccup only thinking of what he wants, but somehow a little more considerate. The main character I liked in this (besides the mother) was the new villain. He is the crazy whaler type that found his own way of controlling dragons, the way he does is so creepy and amazing you need to see it to get the full effect.

Hiccup has a new weapon that seems like just another thing in the movie, but turns out to be almost as useful as the dragons themselves. It's is a sword he filled with gas from a dragon that coats the blade, and releases gas on it's own. You think it is just some flaming sward, but it is closer to a "Blade" style sword, with all of the tricks Hiccup comes up with for it. It shows you that Hiccup still has a flair for building things, and this might be one of his greatest inventions.

The dragons in this are the same, but seem more happy since they aren't being hunted by the village any more.  They are secondary characters, seeming like pet dogs at some points or other human at others. The design of them is still incredible, and now that Hiccup has been trying to find more of them you will see a whole lot more new designs. Like the alpha male, a cold ice blowing dragon: or Hiccup's mom's mount.

So the story line is awesome, but what about the voice acting? Every voice that you loved in the first is back in this and does just as amazing if not more so then they did before. That being said I am going to concentrate on the new voices. Cate Blanchett seems to bring some familiar tone to the voice of the mother, like you are hearing the voice of the queen of the forest from the LOTR franchise. Her voice penetrates, while soothes and seems to be the perfect fit for a mother, when she is scared or happy you can tell more in her character than most. Djimon Hounson has always been a good voice for either teachers or villains and the same can be said here. You can tell that he really gets the feeling of his character and gives other famous villain voices a run for there money (like Ron Perlman or Jeremy Irons). The last new boy in the bunch is Kit Harrington (of Game of Thrones fame and nothing else) this is the movie that makes up for him being in movies like "Pomeii." He is a far better voice actor then I could have imagined, and I love being pleasantly surprised by an actor like him.

If there was ever a competitor for animation this year against "The Lego Movie" this is is it. It seems a bit formulaic at points, but still drives home that great feeling you get when watching a cartoon. If you are looking for a more classic form movie to take the kids to that you will also enjoy, this is the movie to take them to. This is also the movie that you will be getting begged for from you kids for Christmas. Your kids will whine and pead with you for the DVD or Blu Ray of this, and you should ultimately give in to that whining. Not only will it be a gift for them, it will be gift for you to be able to watch this movie over and over again.

Final Verdict: Buy it This movie didn't surprise me that it was good, but it did surprise me that it was better then the first installment. I don't want to set your expectations high, but this movie was amazing. I could watch it fifty times and still not get bored with it.










______________________________________________________
I am doing another section just for movies like this, but it is a spoiler section so...

Spoiler Warning!

The death scene.

I feel like animation like this is required to kill off a character to try and remain relevant to the monstrous body count Disney has racked up over the years. As if to challenge Disney, they killed off a parent, Stoic The Vast father to Hiccup. The scene in question is so powerful, it might have you reaching for the tissues, especially if you cried at the death of Mufasa. You end up liking Stoic and relating to him over both movies, but he does what any parent would do and takes a bullet (fireball) for his son. Toothless get's under the control of the Alpha dragon and is set to kill Hiccup, while his rider tried reasoning with him Stoic sees there is going to be no reasoning with the dragon under hypnosis, and saves his son from impending demise. As soon as he dies Toothless snaps out of it and can't really remember any part of what he did. Hiccup is obviously mad at him and yells while toothless flies away under Drago's command again. We get treated to a viking funeral with all the proper respects given.

Final Death Scene Verdict: Best I have seen in years

22 Jump Street

Not as good as the first, but still damn funny

We rejoin Schmidt and Jenko, now back to doing actual police work. It turns out that they still suck at real police work so they Re-restart the "jump street program" only this time they are in college. There isn't much new in terms of story line here so that is pretty much the synopsis. New drug, same cover, only difference is that they are in college. Done and done.

So, since the story line is basically the same, I don't think I can gauge this movie on those credentials. If it worked the first time it works this time. They play around with opposites a lot (like instead of Schmidt growing distant, this time it is Jenko). The real thing we always have to gauge a comedy on is: if it was funny. Yes, this movie was very friggin' funny. They are very self aware about this movie being a sequel, and poke fun at them selves often. Breaking the fourth wall with dialogue instead of actually looking at the camera. There is a lot more Ice Cube in this, and he has some of the greatest moments of the movie. It obviously isn't going to be as good as the first, but it came damn close to it (again they admitted to this in the dialogue). There isn't really a lot of shock humor (which I appreciate), it is more of the same type of humor from the first, only this time it is more like they are parodying the first movie. Jokes about their budget, jokes about their past adventure, jokes about Ice Cube. All very funny.

The acting is exactly the same as the first movie. Jonah and Channing play well off of each other. Ice cube steals the spotlight at points, and the new boys aren't exactly as funny as the original cast but they have their moments. Wyatt Russell and Jimmy Tatro do okay as Jenko's new buddies, but it was a lot funnier when he was playing the nerd in high school as opposed to reverting back into a jock/frat guy. Amber Stevens does okay as the replacement for Brie Larson, but they are interchangeable even though Amber's character has the superior back story. Kenny and Keith Lucas are a welcome addition even though I never heard of them before this movie. They couldn't have picked a better break out role.

I could sit here and talk about the improving effects, the additional assets gained for this movie; but, it is really just the same thing that they did before, and there is nothing wrong with that.  I saw this with a friend that had never seen the first movie, and I highly suggest that you watch the first movie before going to see this, because a high amount of jokes are dependent upon the original movie. The good news is that this out performed "Blended" and "A Million Ways to Die in the West" (not that it was a hard task to begin with).  So I no longer have to worry about a world where those two movies might be the second funnies comedy of any year.

Final Verdict: See it in theaters Short review, because this is very simple "If you saw the first and liked it, you will like the second". Some missteps on the jokes kept it from my top spot, and the fact that it wasn't as good as the first. 

The Fault in Our Stars

If cancer kids don't sell tickets I don't know what will

Meet Hazel (Shailene Woodley), she is a teenager living with cancer and an oxygen tank she has to carry around with her. She has a common routine of anyone in her predicament. School, family, T.V., medication, hospital, and has recently added a support group to her regiment. She hates going to this support group, but goes to make her parents (Laura Dern, and Sam Trammell) feel better. She has few friends (so she can minimize the fallout from her imminent demise) until she meets a young handsome boy named Augustus (Ansel Elgort) and his friend Isaac (Nat Wolff).  Augustus and Hazel form a quick bond, but he has trouble making the bond grow into love when she is set on not letting anyone get too close to her.

So the story line here is pretty standard as far as cancer movies go, except not standard at all as far as romance goes. The cancer portion of this was not what hooked me to the story line, I knew going into this that some tragedy was going to come. Hazel says throughout the movie and the trailer that she is a grenade, and she is going to explode hurting everyone close to her, so I don't view that as a spoiler. I won't give away how the movie ends, even though I do take some issue with the third act of the film. So, since this movie has to do with numerous themes let's go ahead and delve a little deeper into the story line.... Oh, and this is another example of a movie being based of a book that I didn't read, so you are stuck with my opinion of the film by itself.

I finally get to review a movie from the perspective of a smoker (haven't had that chance since "Thank You for Smoking"). Let me just say, for the record, that I know all the dangers of smoking (in this day and age it is hard not to know), and I am perfectly fine with that. These days if someone picks up a pack of cigarettes at my age, they know exactly what they are getting into, and are told from day one that they are signing their own death warrant. So, this movie didn't make me suddenly realize that I need to invest in "the patch." A two hour long movie with attractive young actors is not going to break through the years I have built as a hopelessly addicted smoker. It is not going to show me anymore than the anti-smoking commercials have shown me. In fact, seeing an unlit cigarette in the boy's mouth only made me want a cigarette more. Maybe that makes me a bad person, I think it makes me an addict. I don't tell people to go out and smoke, but I don't expect having to hear that I should stop from any person I meet on the street either.  This movie about cancer seemed to be more on the side of the type cancer that is really no one's fault. The cancer that afflicts kids for no rhyme or reason other than The Fates wanting to hurt some one. That cancer is a dick. This movie being centered around that cancer prepares the audience for a very sad movie.  It let's you know before you even see it that you will most like cry. Did I cry? No, I am soulless prick who cries at movies like "The Iron Giant" not cancer kid movies. Will you cry? Most likely. I did get a little chocked up when things started coming to a head, so if I can feel a twinge in my throat that means that most other people accustomed to crying in movies are going to pour buckets.

So, that leaves the other part to this story line, the romance. This movie may be able to boast that it has the most chemistry between it's two leads than any other movie this year. I truly believed that they were two inexperienced teenagers in love. What's more is that it felt like a realistic portrayal of teenage love. The cutesy little crap that comes out of our mouths when we are that age, the desire, the idiocy, all of it seemed pretty straight forward and common in today's society. I am more so talking about some points in the relationship between Hazel and Gus, but all of the points between the short lived relationship Isaac had. I don't expect that anyone is going to use their "one wish" to bring me to Amsterdam to meet my hero author, and vice versa; however, that did give a realistic portrayal of what I would expect to happen if I ever did meet one of my heroes. I can't speak on how this movie would effect parents or children with terminal diseases since I haven't lived through that trying time, but everything else in this movie was done pretty well. The sense of loss, the love struck awe were great.... it was really friggin' pretentious at points but no script can be perfect.

The acting in this was pretty outstanding, and I can be thankful for that given the cast. Ansel Elgort made up for his performance in...everything prior to this, by being a believable nice guy. Nat Wolff gave us a pretty realistic look at blindness and heartbreak. The parents were used as set pieces, but did good where it counts. Willem Dafoe showed up for a brief stint as an asshole author, not knowing how to deal with real people. A major hats off to Shailene Woodley for doing the damn near impossible and washing out the bad taste "Divergent" left in our mouths.  This movie makes me think that she might actually have a bright future as a young star, and makes me horrified that she is tied to that other ridiculously bad series. She made us feel for her character, and gave us a realistic look at someone born into a no-win situation.

Final Verdict: See it in Theaters It wasn't perfect and won't break down the gender barrier for romance movies, but it was very good. I don't think any man should see it by himself like I did, but if you have a special someone in your life this is a great date movie.  

Edge of Tomorrow

See Tom Cruise die... a lot... in different ways

For years humanity has been fighting for their planet against a race of invading aliens, and have been losing for quite sometime until they finally find victory in a battle giving them hope of defeating the menace. The battle was widely publicized as being won by a woman known as the "Full Metal Bitch" (real name Rita played by Emily Blunt). Our story follows a Lt. Col. by the name of Cage (Tom Cruise) finding out that he is going to be on the front line of a battle that will change the course of human history. The battle is the last ditch effort for humanity to take control of the struggle and finally send the aliens home packing; however, Cage doesn't want any part in this fight. He is a self admitted desk jockey (or public icon) and when General Brigham (Brendan Gleeson) tells him of his part he goes to such lengths trying to get out of it that he eventually black mails the general. The general doesn't take too kindly to this and arrests Cage. Instead of finding himself in a jail cell he finds himself in processing for the decisive battle, his rank striped and labeled a deserter. The battle begins and they lose, horribly, but not before Cage is drenched in alien blood and wakes up in the exact same place he found himself the day before. The day repeats exactly as it did, and Cage must try to find out how he has this ability and how to put it to the human advantage.

The story line in this wasn't original, but it was fascinating. It was nice to see a different interpretation of the "same day on repeat" arc that wasn't in the form of "Groundhog Day" (not that "Groundhog Day" was bad by any means). It was entertaining and I liked it so much that I would actually like to see a prequel to this to get more emotionally invested in the universe this centers around. It is hard for me to call this a good movie based on anything more than the fact that it was just really fun to watch. When you are following Cage through these events there are moments when you feel for his character, and towards the final act you are genuinely on the edge of your seat. I think the group of people this movie should try to be targeting is video game players. Seeing him die over and over again reminds the viewer of what it is like to try the hardest mission in a game over and over again until you eventually master where everything is and beat it (for some reason "The Library" level of "Halo" on Legendary difficulty screamed out to me when I was making this comparison). You see Cage getting that same frustration that you feel when you have been up for hours on end trying to beat the same level. After you see the frustration side of him, you start seeing the look of a man that has been in too many battles. You see the pain in his eyes as he has to watch the woman he is trying to protect die hundreds of times. Thankfully, there aren't any real plot twists that derail the movie's effect which makes up for Cruise's last attempt at Sci-Fi ("Oblivion"). There are points where they find out that the thing they are doing isn't the thing they should be focusing on, and have to change there mission. This is another part of the story line that reminds me of video games, like he got the end of this really hard mission and follows it up with another really hard mission.

The only part of the story line that didn't hold any attention for me was the romantic aspect between Cage and Rita. It just wasn't believable. I felt zero chemistry come off of the two, and it felt more obligatory then natural. Like the writer was thinking of some reason why Cage cared so much whether Rita lived or died and he couldn't grasp the fact that a man could be friends with a woman in this circumstance. Which is weird being that most I sensed coming off of these two was "I really just like him/her as a friend," then they start doing romantic things and I just get reminded of a step brother being interested in his step sister.

It is movies like this that make me a little upset that Tom Cruise has a reputation as a bad actor. He is not a bad actor all the time, he is just only allowed to do Action or Romance movies. That is where his talent lies. Don't get me wrong there are a lot of his movies that are hit and miss with me; but, he always tries at least. This movie was obviously a hit for me, not only a hit but right out of the ballpark. He sells me on every emotion he is portraying and ultimately makes me emotionally invested in his character. Not to say that any one else did bad in this. It was nice to see Emily Blunt portray the bad ass movie heroin, even though she was trying to get a less bad ass man to take her spot. She absolutely sells the fact that she is a soldier that has seen some shit over the years. I always have a good time with Brendan Gleeson roles, he is immensely entertaining to watch even if he does have a smaller part in this; however, my favorite part of this movie was Bill Paxton. Not only is he entertaining, not only did he do well with the role, but you could tell he was having an absolute blast portraying the character.

Let's get down to something I always love talking about in new Sci-Fi movies, the alien design. The aliens in this look like a flesh version of the squids from "The Matrix" movies. A little more colorful, and it seems like they drew a little bit of inspiration from "Chronicles of Riddick" and "Predator," but they ultimately look like the machines. You can tell some one put a lot of time and detail into them, and they were trying to make something unique. It definitely has that air of uniqueness to it; but just like all creators they probably had a point of reference. The scenes where you see the aliens in battle are very entertaining, and you can tell that these guys aren't the type to go down easy.

Finally, I need to talk about the action. The action in this isn't the best I have seen all year (the best is still "Captain America The Winter Soldier"), but it is damn good. Tom cruise fighting like he has clairvoyance is awesome and will have you thoroughly invested on thinking just how he is going to die this time. The mech-suit's gadgets and functions are pretty interesting to watch; while they aren't the greatest display of mechanized weaponry I have seen, they seem a lot more realistic. They seem like we could have suits like these using today's technology.

Final Verdict: Buy it This has been a very interesting year. A movie based around religion and another starring Tom Cruise got my highest praise so it has been a bit strange. Go see this movie, you won't be disappointed.

A Million Ways to Die in the West

Seth MacFarlane does western and stops being funny again

Our story begins with sheep farmer Albert (Seth MacFarlane) showing that he is the biggest coward in the west by trying to get out of a gun fight with words. This causes him to lose his girlfriend Louise (Amanda Seyfried), and question his life in the small town he lives in. His friend Edward (Giovanni Ribisi) and Edward's whore (literal whore) girlfriend Ruth (Sarah Silverman) try to comfort him, but they only succeed in driving him further away. He seems to be dead set on leaving the town for better prospects in the city until he meets a similarly thinking girl that just came to town, Anna (Charlize Theron). She succeeds in not only becoming his friend, but stealing his heart as well (while fitting in time to teach him how to shoot). Little does he know that Anna has a big secret. She is married to the most notorious outlaw in the west, Clinch (Liam Neeson).

So the story here is complete and utter bull (pun intended). I know I never go to these comedies expecting the end-all-be-all of writing, but I was hoping for a little better from MacFarlane and crew. There are just a lot of tired and cliche pieces. "Let's put in a montage that only makes the character get slightly better, instead of becoming a god at this certain craft in only a short amount of time." "Let's make the two most obviously similar characters fall in love, then make that love fall apart, then put it back together." These are some of the most tired scenes in movies, and it is a bit insulting to see it come from MacFarlane in a completely non-satirical way. It's like they were writing "Baby's first comedy" instead of trying to actually make something worth while. I digress, let us talk about what we really came to this movie for, the comedy.

The comedy in this was so bad it was hard to look at sometimes, other times you got a few chuckles out. You know when you see a stand up comic you really like just bomb set after set, you feel angry that you paid for it; but mainly feel bad because you know they are better than this. The parts that work are things I don't think they actually expected to work the other parts felt forced and played out. You sit threw the same "Low life expectancy" joke too many times (I knew it is called "A million ways to DIE in the west" but it gets tired. Fast.). You get graphic jokes that feel out of place, and forced. There are some one liners that are pretty great, and some racially charged jokes that work but could have been better. If you are expecting something new and interesting from MacFarlane it is best to sit this one out, because the man's heart just didn't seem in it. "Look there is the obligatory Ryan Reynolds cameo. There is the obligatory reference to pop culture or weird history. There is the same joke we have seen from other BETTER MacFarlane romps." Like someone paid him a lot of money to do this and his response to critics is going to be "what was I gonna do? Turn the money down?" I feel like he just took everything that made "Ted" work and stretched it out to the point where he not only beat a dead horse but defiled it's corpse

What really struck me as odd was Seth surrounding himself with a cadre of superior actors when his obvious talent lies in voice work. Seeing him try to act next to the likes of Theron, Ribisi, or Neeson is a bit off putting and ultimately sad. Everyone did really well in spite of him, but they were all playing typecast characters they have all played before. NPH is Barney Stinson, Liam Neeson is the gruff bad ass he has been playing since "Taken," Ribisi is the awkward guy, and Seyfried plays random attractive/stuck-up girl. If he was trying to make a hidden joke about typecasting it was clever; but I just don't think this movie was that well thought out. On a more positive note: Silverman at least got to be a little less annoying in this, Theron got to stretch her comedy muscle, and in Macfarlane's defense I hear it is awfully hard to direct yourself.

Remember when I said that the pacing was off in "Maleficent?" The same is true here but it is the complete opposite. Where that movie could have stood to be lengthened, this movie definitely need to be shortened. I don't think MacFarlane would have dug his own grave with so many jokes if the movie didn't reach almost two hours in run time. He could have cut some of the jokes that were used three or more times, and just might have made it out of this with a better movie. There were times during the movie I kept rolling my hand over and over wishing they would get to the point of whatever the hell they were trying to do.

What is really going to strike me as odd is if a movie with Zac Effron as a supporting lead turns out to be the funniest comedy this year. Blended was cute and far better than I expected, but it was ultimately another run of the mill Sandler flick. This was funny in some places, but ultimately more disappointing than the hype/concept promised. I can only hope the next comedy this year can make up for some major short comings thus far, if not I think we may be looking at an awkward future where Sandler and MacFarlane battle it out for the second "funniest" comedy of the year. Here is hoping "22 Jump Street."

Final Verdict: Netflix it This is not the best work from MacFarlane, and I would have rather watched "Ted" over again. If you have time on a slow day in your life and you see this as a new release on Netflix it might be worth your time, just don't throw your money away on this. Actually, if you want to throw your money at a western based comedy, check out "Blazing Saddles."