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.