Poltergeist

People look for work, and this movie is here for them

A down-on-their-luck family moves into an old house to subsidize their current living situation. The father who is recently out of work, and mother who has made her living staying at home and writing, must deal with their children who are not happy about all of the recent changes. Unfortunately, this old house has angry spirits dwelling within it, and they might take more than the family's finances before the night ends.

A brief history on the "Poltergeist" movie franchise before I get into the actual review (or more accurately a curse... fitting right?). If you are a fan of this series like I am, you will have undoubtedly heard of the curse that surrounds the "Poltergeist" movies. Two unexpected deaths happened while one of the movies were in production, one happened to the child actress that brought life to the phrase "They're here!," the other was the big sister in the first film. Two more deaths happened to actors that played in this series but they were foreseeable. Ever since than this movie has lived in Hollywood as a small omen to avoid, whether people actually believe in this stuff or take other's advise is completely subjective. I guess we will all have to wait on the news to see if the attached cast of this remake is getting haunted.

Anyway, now that I have set the tone let's get into it.

As stated in the above history/curse lesson, I am a big fan of the first film, and I watched the others. The first film scared the hell out of me. The first film through out the rule book for scary movies and just did what they wanted. The first film gave the family a false since of security, then flipped the switch and terrified them. The family knew strange events were happening in the first film, and proceeded to have fun with their haunting. The first film was great, but what of this? Honestly, it is still scary, but not nearly as scary as the original. It is damn hard in this business to do away with preconceived notions when making a remake, but this made a fair enough effort. A big thing that holds this movie back is recycled characters. I know we are making a remake movie, but it doesn't hurt to try and play around with characters that could have popped off the page. We've seen the little boy that doesn't get listened to, and it comes back to bite the family in the ass. We've seen the over privileged, foul-mouthed, teenage daughter. Fortunately, their are two characters that kind of save this movie. I love the father's arc of recent unemployment and feeling like a failure to his family. I love the overly caring, but not caring enough mother.  The youngest daughter is the same as she was in the first movie, and that is kind of integral to the story, so they get a pass on that. The story itself was filled with a lot of cliches, but still managed to scare me, and in the end that is the only thing that truly matters,

Gil Kenan is not known in the directing world at large. He has a small body of work, that only contains this movie, "Moster House," and "City of Ember." I hope this movie sets him up to make more horror films, because this was shot exquisitely. I think the way this movie was shot gives credence to why this film was so scary in the first place. He let your mind do the work, and build the tension. You might have known what was going to happen to a character, but your mind asks "what if it didn't? What if the thing under the bed is actually the thing in the closest? And what if it was a lot bigger than I remember? And what if it kills the boy? Is it going to kill the boy? Please don't let it kill anyone?" It doesn't quite get your brain to that level )I mean, it wasn't the scariest movie in my life), but it gets your mind in that area of thinking. The sound haunts every shot, and makes you want to be scared. The camera angles lead to tension. Every bit of this movie bled horror onto the screen, Thus I was frightened.

The thing that drags this movie down. The thing that is even worse than recycled characters. The thing that annoyed me about this movie the most. The acting. Wow. Just WOW, is the only thing that comes to mind when the cast at large is phoning in these performances so hard you would think they were someone's lifeline on a game show. Sam Rockwell paints us a pretty picture of what it is like to be looking for work, since he seems so damn disinterested in the work he is doing now. He may have been perfect for the role, if he was trying to show us a realistic take on how his character got fired from "John Deer." Saxon Sharbino is clearly not ready to helm a film of this caliber, and if she doesn't learn to emote she never will be. Nicholas Braun is quite possibly the worst example of "act scared" that I have ever seen. His one scene where he had the most screen time was filled with so many issues, I honestly don't know where to start. The term "don't look at the camera, but don't try to look like you are not looking at the camera" comes to mind, the guy letting out the most fake of fake screams in the world, the guy not knowing how to look confused after he was just "acting" scared. He was the worst, and I ask that no one put him in movies again. Please. Luckily, not all is lost since we have Gil Kenan to save us from the depths of despair. I may still miss the old woman from the original, but this guy knows how to act, and I can appreciate that. The rest of the cast went from mediocre to bad, but I won't go into too much detail, this is that highlight reel after all.

Final Verdict: Rent it A movie that scares me is truly hard to find these days, but when actors are so bad that they take away from the tension it is a bit upsetting. Still worth some money, see it if you have the time. 

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Robots and avenging, cha cha cha. Ultron is the bad guy, cha cha cha.  

We rejoin our friendly neighborhood Avengers in the wake of Hydra surfacing, and Tony Stark taking over funding for the team. They raid a Hydra base in order to find the Tesseract scepter Loki controlled in the first movie. They retrieve the Tesseract, and confront two super powered test subjects Hydra was keeping under lock and key. The super powered beings leave the Avengers to take the scepter, and Tony Stark finds blueprints to create artificial intelligence. He and Bruce Banner mess with the blueprints and accidentally make Ultron, who proceeds to try and help humanity by killing it off. It is up to the Avengers to stop Ultron before he completes his goal to end our species, while trying to deal with the same super powered beings from before.

Let's get this out of the way. I loved this movie, but no movie is perfect so I'll say some of the things that bugged me about this movie, then we can geek out together. Like one big Marvel family.

So, my main overlying problem with this movie is that they didn't really explain the Vision (if you have paid attention to the trailers or posters at all you know he is in this, so no spoiler for you). When he arrives in the movie we come to know him as a powerful being, but we never really know what his powers are. Sure, we get to see him use a laser beam, super-strength and flight; and I know that he has the ability to control his physical density, by reading the comics; but, what about the people who didn't read the comics? The only reason I saw him "phase through" something is because I was looking for it, but if the people who didn't read the comic saw that would they just assume that he had this ability? I don't know, I could have just done with a 10 second piece of dialogue that said "Oh hey, here are Vision's powers." Also, Scarlet Johannson still refuses to give me a Russian accent, and it is becoming a bit of a nuisance. I know it sounds a bit "nit-picky," but it annoyed the hell out of me this time because of a certain scene in this movie. The only other thing I didn't like about the movie enters spoiler territory. Aside from these oversights, I loved the film.

Let's talk about the positive shall we. No need to be so bleak on an otherwise joyous occasion.

This movie was awesome, and I can say that while knowing some faults. Why? Because it was the most fun I have had at a movie throughout the year thus far. I loved the way they made the Vision look. I loved the Hulk "Bruce Banner"/Widow relationship, because it makes so much sense. I love the Hawkeye story. I love the way they did Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch. I love Ultron. I love the fight scenes. I love almost everything about this movie. The story was intriguing, the characters grew depth. The new characters fit into the film quite nicely. I don't mind that the "true origin" of Ultron was changed from the comics. I don't mind that we only get a small taste of some other characters. I don't mind that Ultron's plan can only exist in a universe where Tony Stark never saw any of "The Terminator" movies. I don't mind these things, because I was too busy having my hair blown back with fan service. There are certain parts of the movie that comic readers will love, there are certain parts of the film that people who only watched the Marvel Movies will love. Will you be lost if you haven't seen any of the Marvel Movies? Yes, but at this point that should be expected. The people who have seen every Marvel movie are rewarded time and time again in this movie for their dedicated service. I thank Marvel for not making crap movies.

The way this movie was paced was also great. Sure there was the one thing that could have been explained better, but everything else was right on the nose for me. The movie rushed passed some of the bits of information that we only needed a quick overview for. Ultron's origin? Yeah, he is an AI, finds all the bad stuff people have done, wants to kill us to keep us safe. Those twins? He's a speedster, she messes with peoples minds. There was no more that needed to be explained really. If they wasted a whole bunch of time getting us to know these characters the audience would have a lull point. They picked and chose what to pay attention to and it turned out great in the end.

We know the actors for the old Avengers right? I don't need to go into them right? Cool, I won't. Let's talk about the new people. Elizabeth Olsen as the Scarlet Witch was great, she could have been a bit darker, but she kept the soul of the character intact. Aaron Taylor-Johnson was a perfect Quicksilver, and yes I say that because he did a better job at it than Evan Peters did in "X-Men: Days of Future Past." The portrayals were entirely different than one another, but Aaron seemed to get lost in this role a lot more than Evan did. Paul Bettany is finally shown in the flesh, and he is perfect as the Vision. He has this somber, mechanical tone laid over some genuine emotion, that makes him seem emphatic to the human race; but, also makes him seem above them. It's like a robot dad looking over his human children, it's perfect. James Spader as Ultron blew me away. I didn't expect them to add a funny component to Ultron, but I am so glad that they did, because it fits. He had this cruel sense of humor, which when mixed with the amazing voice was pure gold.

Does this hold up to "The Avengers?" I can't tell. This movie had more character depth, a better plot (or similar plot with some twists), some great fan service, a great villain, and amazing action sequences..... but "The Avengers," was THE Avengers. We had Loki, we got our pay off for waiting for the movie for so long, we had moments like "he's adopted," " puny god," "I got that reference," we had shawarma, we had Hulk smashing, we had Captain America shielding, we had Iron Man blasting, we had Hawkeye shooting, we had Black Widow espionage-ing, and we had Thor thundering. I love both films and can't really say which one was better..... than again.....the first one was totally better. Look this movie was better in a storytelling aspect, but when I watched "The Avengers" for the first time, I found no flaws. Sure after re-watching it a bunch of times I found some holes, but I was too entranced to spot them in the first couple of viewings. This movie was amazing, "The Avengers" is on a different level in my head.

Final Verdict: Buy it Yes, my highest rating. Just so you know that even though a movie has flaws, doesn't mean the quality degrades overall. Sometimes a movie just is, and this movie is amazing. 

Unfriended

The internet is pretty damn

The story here is pretty simple, as far as horror movies go. We look at a computer screen from the perspective of Blaire. Her friends start a video conference, and they are soon haunted by the memory of their friend who committed suicide due to cyber bullying (and I guess some regular bullying too). Her friends start dying from forced suicide (or suicide from being possessed by a spirit), and they must play this spirit's game in order to survive.

I was pretty excited to see if this movie could accomplish being scary from a bold new way of film making. I put the actual budget for this movie at about $50,000 maximum, and in an age where hundreds of millions of dollars is par for the course to spend on a film, that is pretty impressive; however, only impressive if it works. Luckily, this movie works. Let's get this out of the way right now. This movie is in no way perfect. The characters are pretty weak, but since I never expect anything mind blowing from a horror movie's story I wasn't let down. The characters in this are basically copy and pasted from a book called "every horror movie character ever." I was hoping after "Cabin in the Woods" came out, horror movies would pay more attention to the characters, but sadly here I sit. We had the overweight, hacker, joker type. The main protagonist, the jock, the good boy, and the slut. Not all was lost for the characters, luckily they do kind of play around with the classic horror movie tropes, so the people that you expect to fit certain character designs are switched. There is something else I like about the character design, but it enters spoiler territory so I will just say: none of the main characters are really likable. Which is great, not exactly original, but still great.

The thing that surprised me the most about this film was the storyline. The story here was spot-on for today's generation. It wasn't perfect (the haunting from an angry spirit thing is starting to get really old), but there are certain parts of this movie that should appeal to today's generation. The moral of this story is the biggest home-run. This movie tackles cyber bullying above all else, and that is a growing issue for today, since anyone can be anonymous. Now there is a movie out there that says cyber-bullying has consequences, albeit you won't be possessed by a vengeful spirit, but still. If there were more movies out there like this, I feel like the message could come across to today's youth a little more than it is.

The biggest question here, as always, is: Was it scary? Actually, yeah, kind of. Look, it takes a lot for a movie to scare me these days, but this movie had some great scary elements. The way it was shot allowed for loading screens to serve as tension builders. Every part of this movie was made well enough to scare the layman horror movie watcher. The ending kind of annoyed me as far as horror endings go, but that is only because I saw it coming. The sound made the movie all the more tense, and the relatability to certain computer problems made the movie hit home. It made the movie feel more real that it was. If you are looking to be scared there might finally be a movie out there for you.

Normally, I go through the acting at the end, but how bad could teenagers mess up being teenagers. Seriously, if the acting in this turned out bad I would have no hope for the next generation of actors. So was it good. Sure. They acted like teenagers. No big deal.

Final Verdict: See it in Theaters Just a hair under flawless, for a horror movie. If it weren't for a few choices in the character and story department I would say that this movie was well worth buying. Still a pretty great piece of work. 

Furious 7

Bye Paul...

I'm going to do that thing I do sometimes in my reviews, and tell you that this movie needs no synopsis (because it really doesn't). Out of respect for the involved creative parties, I will say that it is about the brother of the antagonist from the last movie, seeking revenge for his brother being hospitalized by the gang we now know from six previous movies. This is not to say that the film was bad, just that the plot was basic, but we all know a movie can transcend the need for good storyline. This is one of those rare occurrences.

So, the story here is your basic bullshit revenge story, and I will not insult my readers by gauging the movie based on the merits of a lacking storyline. This series threw-out the need for good storyline after the first movie by becoming self aware around the fifth installment. This is not a series where you are going to find the best acting (for the most part), the best plot, or any awards attached, this is a series where you strap in and have fun. This is a series where Dwayne Johnson can flex his way out of an arm cast, rotate his shoulder (with provided cracking sound effects), moments later drive an ambulance of a bridge, walk away unscathed, and it seems perfectly normally. This is a series where if CPR fails to bring someone back from the dead, a touching story will do the trick. Lastly, this is differently a series where Vin Diesel and Jason Statham can have a sword fight with wrenches and car parts. This series holds very little basis in reality, but ever since they embraced and ramped-up the ridiculous action it has been extremely enjoyable. Every once in a while a movie like this is a nice break from either ultimately bad movies with nothing but shit surrounding them, and amazing movies that you have to pay attention to. If you want Ronda Rousey demonstrating MMA ,or The Rock giving Jason Statham The Rock Bottom, this is the movie for you.

While I love the mindless violence, and cheesy one-liners presented in this, I have to admit that the directing is a bit of a dice roll. Sometimes the glamour shots and slow motion bullshit are right one the money; other times, they make you want to hold the directors head under water screaming "COULD YOU PLEASE GET TO THE POINT!" James Wan has a fair amount of my respect for some of the movies he has graced us with in the past, but the direction in this was all over the map. Don't get me wrong, when the action is exploding he does a great job; but, for those really important moments, he likes doing the same trick numerous times and it gets to be a bit tiresome.

Now, for the acting. I ask that everyone please remember that this is said with the utmost respect for everyone involved. Almost everyone in this picture seemed to deliver their lines half halfheartedly, right up until the last part of the film (more on the ending later). Everything just seemed so stale coming out of people, and that struck me as a bit strange since all of the movies before this seemed to have a lot of excitement attached. I'm not saying all of the actors were horrible, just that there were moments where I could tell that certain actors didn't want to be there that day. Dwayne Johnson is about par for the course here, as is Michelle Rodriguez. Everyone else seemed to not care as much. I do think we have to crown Ronda Rousey as the absolute worst performance given in this. She had a total of two lines and couldn't seem to deliver.... TWO LINES!

Final Verdict: Rent it  It is hard to gauge a movie like "Furious 7," but in the end I have to go with how entertained I was by the movie. I was thoroughly entertained, and the ending might have you wiping your eyes.



*Spoiler Warning*
 Let's go ahead and talk about the ending real quick. We see "Brian O'Connor" (for all intents and purposes) playing with his family on the beach. Dom says some really touching shit, and goes off without saying good-bye. Cue the flashbacks to all of the other movies in the series. Brian catches up with Dom on the street says something about him not saying good-bye, and they both ride into the sunset together.

This is the perfect ending, and it got me a little chocked up. I honestly wasn't effected by Paul Walker's passing... I mean I was sad for his family and friends, but it didn't effect me much. For those who were effected by it, this was the perfect ending. It was handled gracefully, and the actors were noticeably effected in the film. Even for someone that wasn't directly effected by his passing, this got to me, and I appreciate the artist sharing it with the world. 

Insurgent

Woodley and friends act their butts off for a mediocre story

*Reminder* I still haven't read this book series. Still have no need to delve into it.

We continue the story of the last movie following Tris and Four (Shailene Woodley and Theo James) runnning as fugitives from their society. They have a new plan to bring the fight to their pursuers as they search for the rest of their friends in Dauntless. Four's mother appears and offers the aid of the faction-less to bolster the numbers, but four is not happy with her arrangement (given the history they share). With the appearance of a box that Tris' parents were hiding, and the hunt beginning for all Divergents, Tris and four must hold back the forces while trying to stay alive.

So, this was a bit of a hard movie to describe, and that is mainly because the storyline is so jumpy in this that you can't pay attention at one thing for too long. It is so erratic I feel that the writer must have had some form of ADD, but overall it is solid when you can get through everything. I don't hate the overall storyline in this, it serves as a descent enough allegory for Gay Rights, classicism, and racism, while giving today's youth a powerful woman protagonist. Not "Katniss Everdeen powerful," but still it is nice to see that her brother or boyfriend might not always have to come to the rescue; albeit, she does actually get rescued quite often in this.... maybe she isn't the best female role model, but she is okay. Okay. That's a word I would use to describe almost the entirety of this picture. It tries to be a tad bit different, but ends up bland. It is the most "meh" I have ever felt towards a "popular" series.  I like the factions, but hate the fact that they keep adding to the divergent mythos (now you can be a certain percentage Divergent, like a Divergent married into your family or something). Overall, my main problem with this movie is that everything seems so jumbled and forced. For example, two people having sex seems to be in the movie only to appease the fans, and doesn't seem to have much place in the scene. It is a good try, but their is a big problem when the best thing I can say about a story is "that the concept is still interesting" even though we were introduced to this concept last movie.

On the other hand the director seemed to take this project very seriously because everything looks and feels beautiful. It is surprising that the director of films like "R.I.P.D" and "Flightplan" could make something that looks this good, but I can't deny that everything seems to be well above my par. Given that I need more from a film than pretty things to look at, this compliment doesn't hold much water, but I was surprised none the less. Hopefully they give Robert Schwentke a better movie to sink his teeth into next time, and hopefully he can remain on this path.

Oh Shailene Woodley, I wish you would have gotten popular off of a better series, because you do have a great amount of talent. So, unsurprisingly Woodley did a great job in this, her emotions flowed off her like a waterfall, and she got the entire audience glued to the screen, while they empathized with her character. I can only hope that she gets better work. As for the rest of the cast... Miles Teller has fallen a long way from his performance in the amazing "Whiplash," but given the source material he did what he could. Theo James seems to be taking some acting classes, and I can't wait for them to start bearing more fruit... he did better than last time, but still needs some work. Kate Winslett was damn near flawless, and Jai Courtney surprised me with a pretty great performance.

Final Verdict: Netflix it Some pretty stellar performances and directing did a lot for this movie, but not enough to make up for the story. Here is hoping they find a way to keep me interested in the next two or three in the series. 

Run All Night

Neeson picks up the slack for Kinnaman...some what

Retired hit-man Jimmy Conlon (Liam Neeson) has found himself in a bad situation. His son, Mike (Joel Kinnaman) has witnessed a murder committed by the son of his best friend and employer Shawn Maguire (Ed Harris). Chris runs and the son catches up to him, unfortunately Jimmy is there when he does. Jimmy kills the son, and has to get Chris and his family to safety before the night runs out.

This movie can join the seemingly endless cadre of films that Liam Neeson is being wrangled into in his ever quickening crusade to try and make sure elderly men are taken more seriously as action stars. The difference between this movie and the recent crop of shit that has been looming over our theater screens for the past couple of years is the the story here at least tried to be ambitious.  There were a lot of interesting points in this film, that made this seem like a different animal than Neeson's recent starring roles. The first thing I noticed was that Neeson's character was portrayed as pathetic, even when he went kill crazy, which was a pretty interesting turn. Another thing was the story between the main character and his adversary, who used to be his best friend; that was an interesting plot that added a bit more depth. All was going well (and most of the fault lies in some of the actors and the child like director at the helm), at least that would be the case, if the ending didn't seem to come out of no where, and feel anti-climatic. The story had me for a lock until the final act, then almost lost me completely. There is a lot of cliche nonsense in this that I was trying to overlook but a soft climax to an action movie is not a great selling point..... Also, not to nit-pick, but this really bothered me: I have dealt with my fair share of cabbies that don't care about who their fare is; but honestly, city wide man hunt and this guy is taking a lot of cabs, not one person is going to call?

Given this director's history with horror I know he can build tension (which actually did help one of the scenes in this movie), but even the amount of tension that he built didn't give a lot of substance to this movie. The problem I have here is mainly with the dynamic camera shots he was trying to take through out the entire thing. He basically took me out of the movie completely when I had to look through about ninety different lenses for his point to finally come across in the film. I can blame this movie's pacing problems on the writer, but something tells me the director called for massive cuts in the script so he could get the shots he wanted. The shots in this were, again, ambitious; but, they all just felt so forced and annoying. Plus, this director can't seem to have Liam Neeson take someone down in a movie without the use of slow motion (see his last film "Non- Stop" to get that reference).

You all remember when Liam Neeson was an actor, and not an action star? I do, and I actually got to see some of that old-form Neeson in this film (praise be to whatever movie god made that possible). When he is portraying his character as helpless and pathetic you can really get a sense for the character's plight. You feel his embarrassment as he has to go and ask his best friend's son for a loan to get a new heater. You feel his pain as he looks for the answer to sleep at the bottom of a liqour bottle. This was a "Schindler's List" Neeson, or what I like to call "Pre-Taken Neeson." Sure he acts well in other projects, but this was a nice look at the Neeson audiences fell in love with. On the exact opposite end of the spectrum we have Joel Kinnaman. Is it possible to go back in time and abort this actor's career before he started to ruin movies? I mean it, he is so hard to watch. Annoyingly bad acting, that follows his abysmal performance in "Robocop" from last year. Please stop giving this guy work. Please. Ed Harris showed up, and he was the same intimidating mob boss we have come to know from some previous films, so no problem there. The children in this should probably have tried to take more classes for acting, because I know I can't count on the director to give them the correct guidance. This movie's actors were all over the map, but somewhat predictable sans Neeson. Kinnaman sucks again, Neeson is surprisingly fresh, Harris is standard, and the support varies.

Final Verdict: Rent It Not quite horrible, but some major draw backs held this movie from true greatness. I am only sorry that a movie with a good Neeson performance had to be this movie. 

Chappie

Artificial Intelligence, Religion, Human Consciousness, cha-cha-cha 

Deon Wilson (Dev Patel) has revolutionized the police force by adding robots to their force. Crime is now down and thugs are running scared from the new mechanized officers; however Deon is not done creating. He has a dream of making a sentient machine, able to be the next step in robotic achievement. He goes against his bosses orders and makes a robot known as Chappie (Sharlto Copley). It is up to Deon to teach Chappie how to be more human, with the unasked for "aid" from street thugs, who have their own plans for the robot's upbringing. Throughout the robot's education the thugs and Deon must fend off another gang, and one of Deon's rivals, while trying not to kill each other.

Let me get some of the bad things about this movie out of the way right now, so I can start singing this film's praises. First off the character building felt forced and rushed, as the run time of the movie was unforgiving. Rushed is a really big word for this, because the pacing of the movie was all off. At points you wanted to know more about the characters, at the end you wanted them to pick an ending and stick with it. There were some blatant advertisements for Sony, but I don't think I can complain about that, as I have seat through "Transformers: Age of Extinction."

Now that we got that unpleasantness out of the way, let me tell you how awesome this movie is.

So, at first you are thinking this movie is going to be a revamped "Short Circuit." Then you realize there are about fifty subtle (not-so-subtle) messages in this. From religion to ethics this movie runs the gambit on awesome story telling. I loved that the entire thing can be equated to a theological discussion, while explosions sound off in the background. This movie could very well be used to teach classes about religion, or at the very least about acceptance. The character development may have failed with the side characters, but it picked up with the development of Chappie. It still felt rushed, but you felt for the character. You might have been able to feel more for the character if more time was given, but you still felt bad for him. Maybe it was because of the brilliant acting, maybe it was due to his naivety, but every time Chappie felt pain, you wanted it to stop. The villian's were well calculated to allow more hatred for them. The side characters were there enough for me to at least accept their presence. There are only a few minor details that could have been tweeked to make this movie perfect. This movie absolutely screamed to be turned into a sequel or trilogy.

So I have been a fan of Neil Blomkamp, and I have asked for nothing but his success, because he likes to take risks on new storytelling. Every movie he makes has a something interesting about it, and a pedestal to stand on. Not only is he an extremely talented writer, but he is also an extremely talented director. The man makes his scenery feel alive to the point that you can taste the grit from a battle in your mouth. You can feel the cold of a city lost to violence, or smell the garbage waft over your nostrils as if you were in New York or Detroit. The man can make anything feel like the real deal, and that is a highly sought after talent. This movie follows in his line of beautifully crafted films, and I cannot wait to see what he does with "Alien."
.
.
.
What's that? Oh yes, his balls do feel good in my mouth, thanks for asking. Asshole.

There was a familiar voice featured in this. A Blomkamp veteran. It always surprises me to see how much talent Sharlto Copley displays in these pictures, how much range he has. The man ate this role, the man slept this role, the man bled this role, the man was Chappie. I know I have a "hard-on" for voice acting, but this was truly remarkable. He brought out the child-like naivety in Chappie, and made it easy for the audience to relate to the character. If I had to give one tip of the hat to anyone in this movie, it would have to be to Mr. Copley. No one really turned in a bad performance, but the A-listers in this were put through the ringer by new talent. None more so than Dev Patel. I think the fans can finally forgive him for 'The Last Airbender" because he is truly remarkable in this.... oh yeah, Hugh Jackman and Sigourney Weaver were in this. They were good too.

Final Verdict: See it in Theaters Some obvious mis-steps in the character development made this movie a bit hard to handle at times, but it was just flat out fun. If you are a movie lover in any sense there will be something here for you. 

Focus

Do Will Smith and Margot Robbie have good chemistry?

Our story follows expert con-man Nicky (Will Smith) as he leads his enterprise of other con-artists into stealing from everyone they can. A girl, Jess (Margot Robbie), walks into the organization. The girl has Nicky feeling things that he has never let himself feel before; however, we need to find out who is playing who. In a world of cons, you can trust no one.

So the story is solid, albeit a bit cliche. Now, I'm not saying that it repeats what every other movie does, it is only a bit cliche. The overall arc of bad boy, meets bad girl, and tries to go straight, has been done; but, it was done very well here. The story isn't the real winner here, the dialogue is. The slight remarks, and sarcasm is delivered expertly by the cast, and in that sense this movie tends to be a bit enjoyable in the writing department. I couldn't tell if it was the lines that were written, or who was delivering them, but I did like what was hearing. The main thing holding this movie back from joining the pantheon of great crime movies is the ending. I won't spoil anything for you so lets just say that it was a nice effort; but, there are so many things wrong with it, and so many blatant contradictions that I'm surprised the rest of the movie held together as well as it did. Another part of the story that didn't seem to quite work is that it fell into that same old trap that most "con-artist movies" fall into by not knowing where to hold back on the deception. So, a lot of the romance gets lost in translation, which comes back to hurt the ending even more, and unravels a lot of the good points from the movie.

The thing about this movie is that the gems weren't in the writing, they were found in the cinematography. The camera tricks utilized here weren't anything really new, but they were surprising. Some of the camera work seemed to be taken from the horror genre, using mirror tricks, and misdirection tactics. Some were taken from the romance genre, knowing exactly what part of the body to draw focus (yeah....ha!) on and when. It was brilliantly done, and all of it fell into this nice, crisp and clean background, allowing us to escape into their world more easily. Absolutely stunning.

Now for the acting, which is the only reason I was anticipating this movie at all. Will Smith's more recent movie decisions have left a bad taste in my mouth in regards to his acting credibility. From his cameo in "Winter's Tale," to the god-awful movie with his son "After Earth," he just hasn't been bringing the same flavor we all knew him for; however, Will wasn't the only one that needed to bring his A-game in this. Margot Robbie is a brand new face that acted well in a role written for a know-nothing model, so I needed to see if it was just the perfect part for her, or if she actually had some skill. Luckily, both of the main actors were damn near flawless in this. The role of a con-man is perfect for Will Smith, he can (and did) use his charm and bravado to sell the entire audience on whatever game he was trying to play. Margot Robbie showed me that she could be more than an attractive girl, that can use a convincing accent. She played a more gullible protege con, while remaining to seem elegant, and graceful through out the run time. In an effort to not be out-shined by the two A-listers, the supporting cast brought their game up to a level that kept everyone at their best.

Final Verdict: Rent it Some major story problems significantly hold this picture back from greatness, but the actors and cinematography bring this movie up a couple of notches. If you were wondering about the two future members of the "Suicide Squad," I would say it is safe to assume they will be great in the movie.

Hot Tub Time Machine 2

A real "shotgun to the dick"

Our story follows our cast from the first movie (minus John Cusack), going through their new lives as rich successes. Everyone hates Lou (Rob Courdry), Nick (Craig Robinson) has marital issues, while facing problems with stealing other artists music, and Jacob (Clark Duke) is a loser. Since Lou is so hated someone has taken it upon themselves to assassinate him, shooting him in the groin (got shot in the dick people). Jacob comes up with the idea of using the hot tub time machine to go back in time to save Lou; however, the time machine has other plans when it sends the trio a decade into the future. The plan for our "heroes" is to find Lou's killer (who happens to be from the future... I know try to stay with me, we'll get through this together), while doing what they did in the first movie (fixing the lives of their present selves).

Wow. Never thought it would be that hard to write a synopsis; but hey, with a story this bad and convoluted I guess it is bound to happen. So the main joke over this entire movie is that time travel movies are ridiculously complex in their story telling, and they can get a little lost in translation... at least I hope it is. It would be a great joke if it made me laugh at anytime, but every time I felt the joke coming I just couldn't muster a chuckle. It's not that the joke was bad, just poorly handled, and that is actually the problem with the rest of this picture. All of the jokes are recycled to death. Some jokes are at their own expense, which would be great if they didn't seem so forced.... and also recycled. It isn't like I didn't laugh, sometimes I managed a few chuckles, one time actually laughing quite hysterically; but, I know I would have been laughing more, had the jokes been delivered better. The first movie was pretty bearable, earning a place in my heart as "something to watch while I am drunk or bored." This movie is just bad. Their are a few saving graces, but I just got tired of being told the same joke, over and over again. How many times do I need to be reminded that John Cusack isn't there? How many times are you guys going to do "you look like" jokes (they tried to retract the amount by making fun of how many times they said it, but it was a bit late)? How many times are you going to make gross out jokes? It is all recycled. Even the ending, where they try to make fun of their "sequel status,' seems forced and dull. The moral is out of place and awkward. The pacing of this movie, got thrown out with the plot. This movie's one saving grace when it comes to writing is a few mildly amusing jokes, and that is about it.

As I said above the pacing of this movie was ridiculous, like they were just coming up with jokes and picking points where they "might work" in the movie. The director of the first movie took us back to this, and lost any semblance of good grace that I could have given him for the original. The audio was choppy and felt awkward to sit through. The cast seemed to be working on their own whims without any guidance of what they should be doing. It was kind of like the director said " hey guys just go and do the same thing as the first time, if you can remember what that was, I am going to take a nap." It was as lazy as the writing, and the director should feel ashamed.

The returning cast did the best they could given the captain-less ship, but you could tell something was a bit off in the production. Given the credibility I give these actors, I am only going to talk about  the new cast. The new cast seemed to try and ride the hype train of "Community" and "Parks and Recreation," to a box office worth mentioning. One half of that theory worked out, the other half.... not so much. Adam Scott does well in his co-staring role. He works as the same dorky guy he plays in his hit show, and the cast knows how to work off of him. Gillian Jacobs is seldom used, and I can see the reasoning for it. She drags down every performance around her. She is like a dark hole that sucks talent into an endless void, never to be seen again. This is a shame, since I don't mind her performance in "Community," but I calls it like I sees it. The only other noteworthy talent in this was the love interest Bianca Hease. I wish I could gauge her, but the only thing I ever notice is that her breasts seem to appear on the screen for some reason. She seems emotionless, at times; but, as I said, it is hard to gauge her performance on the small amount I saw of her.

Final Verdict: "Borrow" it I was hoping for a lot more from this movie, since the best comedies from last year were sequels. The problem is, those sequels were actually funny throughout the running time. If you need to see it, try seeing it for free. 

Fifty Shades of Grey

Twilight: Now with sex, and less plot (if possible)

*Sigh*

*Grabs soap box and stands on it*

IN LIEU OF DOING A SYNOPSIS FOR THIS MOVIE I WILL BE PREACHING, IF YOU WANT A SYNOPSIS SIMPLY REMEMBER WHEN YOUR GIRLFRIEND TOOK YOU TO GO SEE TWILIGHT

So, the abuse of women is okay now? Not simply the abuse of women, but the abuse of any significant other. Let me clarify. I am totally okay with domination or S&M in the bedroom. Nothing wrong with that as long both parties are consenting. Hell, I may or may not have done some of the same in my own bedroom. My problem here lies with the character Christian Grey as whole. He is guilty of doing the same-old, usual abusive boyfriend things. Buying her new expensive things so she is guilted into the relationship, stalking, holding the power over her like a pendulum (outside of the bedroom), having her sign a nondisclosure agreement so she cannot confide in family or friends, possessiveness. Every part of this asshole exudes abuse, and not in the fun way, in the scary way. How do we respond to it? Oh, we (as a society) forgo the obvious signs of abuse, and simply think of it as a sexy book to read. No, people this is wrong. We should be identifying that he has an obvious mental condition that makes him this way (which, to the movies credit, does get covered), and stop thinking that Christian Grey is our ideal guy. Now, I only watched the movie, so I can only comment on what I saw. If the book is any different, please, feel free to shut up, because the movie exists and I am talking about that.

Now.

On with the review.

The story here is basically Twilight people. Edit out the supernatural and replace it with sex, there we have this god awful movie. Plain Jane: A, is attracted to hot, rich guy: B, they get in a relationship: C, and she is totally devoted to him: D. Above will cover some of my main, over lying problems with the story, but let's go a bit deeper. I do like that they gave him a sorted history that made this more of a mental disease, rather than a hot fantasy. The character of Anastasia was almost completely forgettable, which I guess might have been the point somewhere; but, she is forgettable and that is major problem when you are trying to create a franchise (I assume that is what they are going to try and do with this.... because movie). Everything else wrong with this movie can be summed up by thinking about how you would develop a romance, then think of how a child would develop a romance, then think of how a dog might develop a romance. You might see my problem going to see a movie written by a dog, who can't grasp the concept of progression. You are attracted, you like each other, you fuck, End of story, end of my interest in story.

Cinematography is important in a movie, right? Someone mind telling director Sam Taylor-Johnson that, because she seems to have forgotten. Maybe she never knew because she doesn't have that extensive of a resume (nothing wrong with that), but when you are in charge of a major motion picture, it is time to stop making your movies look like straight to TV productions. Get the game to a more professional level please. Stepping away from the director, lets try to find who thought it might be a good idea to put Danny Elfman in charge of this, and start finding them some other work. Elfman is talented, always has been, always will be; not right for the score to this picture in any way, shape, or form.The soundtrack was descent, but why are we putting the most cliche score pieces in at just the right moment. Like overly cliche. Like these same moves were being pulled in the fifties kind of cliche.

Acting is also an important feature in a movie, Which is why I wish they actually would have hired some actors in this picture. Okay that is a bit harsh, Dakota Johnson was fine. Her make up people made her as Plain Jane as they could by not applying any make up to her, just as movies always do; since, apparently all of a woman's beauty is found in her make up. No huge problem with her. Let's talk about the terrible, awful, no good, very bad, thing that is Jamie Dornan. Did someone just find some guy working out in a gym somewhere, and put him in a movie? Does the man know what presence is?  Does the man know what "emote" means? Not saying he needed to show emotions, saying he needed to emote, convey, do something other than stand there without his shirt on and smolder. Was I happy he was shirtless? Yeah. Proud of it? No. Did I still want to push him aside and find an equally attractive actor, that actually had some talent? Fuck yes.

Final Verdict: Don't do it I went into this movie with zero reservations. I knew one thing about this movie. It was about sex. Honestly, I have seen better stories from porn.

Jupiter Ascending

Where Wachowskis waver

Our story follows Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis), who has a life filled with hard work surrounded by her invasive family. One day Jupiter's life is flipped upside-down when she realizes she is the reincarnation of royalty, who control the universe. She must see which of the three ruling families she can trust (if any), and try to save the Earth's population from the royals in the process.

Killing the amount of potential this movie had should be a crime punishable by silence in the creative market. I know that seems a bit harsh (given the Wachowskis track record), but this movie had so much potential that just got wasted on overly used cliche story arcs. They took a movie about the Earth's population being nothing but cattle (which I might have seen somewhere, but I will let it slide for now), and made it a boring Harry Potter esque, Twilight esque, (all stemming from the flower that was originally Cinderella) story arc about some downtrodden girl that became royalty. As much as this movie pains me, it isn't nearly going to be as painful as watching my social media feed flood with "waiting to figure out if I am space royalty" gibberish that will eventually come from this debacle. This movie is filled with just about every story cliche possible, adding maybe two or three interesting concepts. Let's go down a brief list of unimaginative story telling that ends up showing its ugly face in this movie: Girl loves a man that is beneath her caste, royal family trying to kill the new heir to either keep their status or increase it, pauper turns out to be a princess, "professionally I can't say this, but, good luck," "you betrayed me, let's  fight! Now we are buddies," etc. etc. etc. Really the list is about as long as my arm, but you get the gist. Even if this movie wasn't so lazy with their writing they would still have a poorly written script. The movie has plot holes that are seen within the first viewing of the film, which is never a good sign. The movie contradicts itself, example: at the beginning, the Earth is the most prized jewel in the universe; meanwhile, everyone keeps telling her that Earth is not the center of the universe. I know there are moments of lying in this, but seriously, if the Earth is not that special why the hell are you all fighting over it? They never actually explain why the Earth is so special. Is it the size of our population? (would make the most since with the story) Our multiple species? Nope, it just is. I can't be totally against this story, even though it tried to make me. The wolf/human hybrid concept was cool, use of multiple religions in the lore was interesting, and the broad concept was solid. They are lucky that I can even admit to that when their characters almost set me over the edge. Copy and paste from any other boring, cliche piece of crap and there we have our protagonists, antagonists, and secondary characters.

The one thing I can count on the Wachowskis for are visuals, and this time it looks like Jim Henson's brain was tossed into space. The character design was amazing, the look of even the smallest character was unique and fascinating. The fight scenes were also great, reminds you of The Matrix if it actually took place in space, and every one had cool weapons; however, the fight scenes were damn near buried by the poor choice in corresponding music. Seriously, who decides to mix uplifting music with fight music. It was like Kramer just entered the room every five minutes, but everyone in the room had guns trained on him.

The acting in this movie damn near killed the entire experience for me. I have seen better acting from almost everyone that participated in this movie, and decided that the Wachowski name was enough to carry the box office. Channing Tatum stone-walled the entire performance, and didn't even give me any animal-like tendencies, except for a growl every once in a while. Mila Kunis was not horrible, she was just basic, and caught from almost every unflattering camera angle imaginable. Sean Bean was....well... Sean Bean was Sean Bean guys, he doesn't have much in the way of range these days. Any good acting came from the seldom seen supporting cast, so instead of giving an actor credit for standing out among all the crap acting surrounding him, I am going to give you the worst performance of the movie (possibly the year, we will see). Eddie Redmayne was absolutely abhorrent in this feature. Good God, there are these random moments where he decides to replace acting with yelling, and just makes the scene awkward (sometimes hilarious). 

Final Verdict: Borrow it Replaced the "Pirate it" because I really cannot condone that. This movie had some really great points, bad the slew of bad crap that came from this was just too much. Borrow it from someone that didn't read this review (like everyone) if you absolutely need to see it.

The Spongebob Movie: Sponge out of Water

Soaks up the competition... there is your pun

Plankton is back to his old tricks again when he makes a last ditch effort to steal the Crabby Patty secret formula. An intense battle ensues ending with the Crabby Patty formula vanishing into thin air, and the Bikini Bottom apocalypse starting. A rouge on the land is responsible for the town's troubles, named Burger Beard (Antonio Banderas). It is up to the team of Spongebob, Patrick, Squidward, Sandy, and Mr. Krabs to get the formula from their new foe and set Bikini Bottom back in order.

You have to give some respect to Spongebob Squarepants, for paying homage to the old vanguard of cartoons while trying to adapt to the new wave coming through the Cartoon channels. Of course every age group has there most memorable hits, but Spongebob has the privilege of being mixed into a cultural shift so two generations can appreciate it. For baby boomers it was Looney Tunes; Gen X it was Transformers, He-Man and G.I. Joe; for my generation it was Rugrats, Johnny Bravo, and Rocket Power; and the current generation has Adventure Time; however, a good cartoon is a good cartoon, and Spongebob Squarepants used to be SO GOOD. Not that it is bad now, but it has definitely lost some of the edge that made it appeal to multiple generations. This movie is a vast improvement on what became of the television show; although, it does have some of the same deficiencies that drove off so many viewers.

The story here is your basic Spongebob story guys, there is nothing that is going to blow your mind like The Lego Movie, it is pretty much all just par for the course. The real gem hear is in the comedy. There are more than a few times that laughed so hard that my stomach hurt, and I never felt ashamed (even if I was the only person in the theater, so what). Some jokes reached you on the childish level, some hit you as an adult, some were just so bizarre that they made you laugh. Okay, not every joke hit its mark like it was supposed to, but it gave the old college try, despite not knowing how to relate to the current generation, and making some pretty cringe worthy comedy. Seeing the town of Bikini Bottom go through a Mad Max style apocalypse tickled me in a way few shows do these days.

When I say TV show, that is exactly what I mean, this fell into the trap of most TV Show movies by feeling like "just a longer episode of the show." Is that a bad thing? Not really, I tend to not let it hinder my viewing experience, but if it is a problem for you, be warned. I do love how the production quality on this movie didn't make any sacrifices. Although the writing gives it the television feel, the animation makes you remember that you are in a movie. I try not to give movies extra points for effect, but it is hard not to notice the detail they went into trying to make the Spongebob cast come into the real world. It isn't like they put real squids and starfish on the screen, but they did give these guys some much needed texture love, and it looks beautiful.

The voice acting cast is just how they have always been, absolutely brilliant, and if you don't believe that just stop watching cartoons. Sure, the one song that came from this movie (surprising I know), wasn't their best work, but I can't blame Tom Kenny for that. The real weight of the movie fell on the new guy they threw into the mojo, Antonio Banderas. I guess the casting person for this movie saw a couple of Banderas films and made the perfect choice, because Banderas' natural animated acting flows brilliantly with the surrounding chaos. He just makes it seem effortless, and gets lost so far into his role that you can't tell if he is acting or just plain nuts. It seems that he respects the source material and loves the atmosphere, so I have to give him some credit; but, so I'm not accused of making this all about the "live action talent" let me digress. Tom Kenny is a voice God, Bill Fagerbakk has always and will always hold a special place in my heart for his crazy skill, Douglas Lawrence Osowski (Mr. Lawrence) puts every bit of effort into plankton. Satisfied? I love voice actors. You know that, I know that, I don't need to beat you over the head with it.

Final Verdict: Rent it It ain't perfect, but that'll do Nickelodeon. If you have a child that is begging you to see the new Spongebob movie, you don't need to fear, this is a good movie.