Fast and Furious 6

                “The Fast and the Furious” hasn’t really been the kind of film series that I’m into. The first film was just a street race film that didn’t have that much going for it. Then it got some sequels. I kept asking the same question with each film, “What’s the point?” However, it wasn’t until 2011 that the fifth film, “Fast Five,” took the franchise in a WHOLE new direction. Instead of being another street race film, it became a mix between “Mission Impossible,” “Ocean’s Eleven,” and “The Expendables,” with a ton of fast cars involved. Not only was it the best installment of the series, but it was an ACTUAL movie and the best action film since “The Expendables.” That is until “Expendables 2” came out.

With the direction it was going in, I was really looking forward to this new installment. Not only was better than the last film, but I loved this movie as much as I hated “A Good Day to Die Hard.”

In this new film, crimes are being committed involving fast cars, and now Luke Hobbs asks Dominic Toretto and his crew to help him catch the culprits, in exchange for their names to be cleared. Dom agrees, but only after he finds out that Letty Oritz, his old girlfriend who was thought to be dead, is still alive and is working with the enemy. Now in order to get her back, Dom and his crew have to put their best skills to the test and get the leading criminal, Shaw. With what they do in this film, they use it to their full advantage. They took everything that made the previous film work and cranked it all the way to eleven. This was one of those films that I was having as much as I was with the audience, and they were really digging it.

The casting in the film from Vin Diesel to Dwayne Johnson, Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, and everyone else was a joy to watch. While at the beginning of the series, their characters were alright but nothing high art, but now I’ve really come to appreciate them and their little quirks too. My favorite funny bits come from Parker and Pearce, played by Ludicrous and Tyrese Gibson. I kept getting excited for what they’d do next when they pop up on screen. Even if it’s a bit low brow at times, they deliver it so well that it’s hilarious.

The action scenes, damn where do I begin? I loved every single one of them. They go up against EVERYTHING in this movie, even a tank and a cargo jet! Every fight scene, every chase, every race, everything was spectacular to watch! It’s quick, it’s fun, it’s at times very well thought, and has so much more to top it all off.

Overall, “Fast and Furious 6” is one of my favorite films of the year, and I’m looking forward to the new film when it comes out, ESPECIALLY with who it showed at the end credits. If you’re looking for some good fun, check out the new film of a franchise that has turned itself around faster than any other street racer.

Rating: 10/10

The Hangover Part 3

                In 2009, “Old School” director, Todd Phillips, had given the public “The Hangover.” It starred Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis, telling about a group of friends who go to Vegas and get hungover, and now have to find their fourth friend, Justin Bartha, and retrace their steps before the guy’s wedding. It was a big hit with people and was at the time of its release, the highest grossing R-rated comedy, since “Beverly Hills Cop.” And…I didn’t like it. I felt that some of the humor didn’t really kick in when I wanted it to. Granted, there were some parts I enjoyed, like Ken Jeong being his crazy self, but other than that, there wasn’t really anything else.

                It spawned a sequel in 2011, and…it was the same thing, only this time it’s in Bangkok. I had talked about this film, but I never really talked that much about it, mostly because it was the same thing. Paul Giamatti’s small role was funny, but that’s about it. There have been sequels that have repeated the formula of their first film, but this was supposed to be a cutting-edge R-Rated comedy, doing new things, - all it did was bore me.

I was afraid this film was going to spawn a third film, and I figured it’d be the same thing. Good news and bad news here: The good news is, it isn’t the same thing. The bad news …folks, let me say that I have never been so bored and worn out by a comedy in years.

In this new film, the “wolf pack” (wasted an awesome group name on these guys, thanks Hollywood) have an intervention with Galifianikis. He has become more insubordinate to his friends and family (he’s said to have been off his meds for six months now, and they’re worried). However, on the way to deliver him to rehab, they are attacked by drug lord John Goodman, which connects back to the first film. He tells them that Leslie Chow has escaped from prison, and Goodman wants the wolf pack to find him or he’ll kill Justin Bartha, who has done jack squat the entire trilogy. Why does he want Chow? Because Chow stole $21 million in gold from him, and Goodman wants it back. So now, they’re on a wild goose chase to get Chow, tell them where the gold is, as well as finally be done with this film series, because I have completely stopped caring all together.

Now I know what you’re all going to say: “Oh, but if this isn’t your kind of comedy, then why even bother with it? You’re just wasting time and money!” First of all, yes, I understand this isn’t my kind of movie to enjoy, but I’m a film critic, so I give things a chance. Second, “Transformers 3” isn’t my kind of movie; same goes for “Snow White & the Huntsman” and “Magic Mike.” None of them were films I thought I would like, but when I saw them, they were big surprises and I really liked them. Just because I go into a film with low expectations, doesn’t mean that it couldn’t turn out to be a big surprise.

No one looked like they wanted to be there, EVEN Ken Jeong, who was the best part of the first film! His crazy attitude in this film was so stale, that it wasn’t entertaining, but rather ANTI-taining (still a better joke than anything in this franchise!) Thank goodness he at least has “Community” going. Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms looked like they wanted to just go “screw it,” and drive out of this film as far away as possible. John Goodman got some smirks out of me, and I know he’s trying his best, but it wasn’t enough. However, the worst part about this film was Zach Galifianakis, as his character has really downgraded from being a gullible fella with a bro-crush on Bradley Cooper, to borderline retarded and completely man-crazy. I’m not saying this as a joke, I am dead serious.

I actually enjoyed Melissa McCarthy as Galifianakis’s shoehorned-in love interest. I was ready to walk out on this film, but then her part came, so I stayed like the idiot I am. Even if she’s a female-copy of Galifianakis’s character, she at least seemed invested in what she was doing, but she’s only in the film for seven minutes max.

Overall, “The Hangover Part III” is by-far, the worst sequel to a comedy I have ever seen. It’s not funny, it’s not enjoyable, it hardly has any energy, and it is as stale as watching an episode of “Tim & Eric” on Adult Swim. I am now actually looking forward to “Grown Ups 2” this July, that’s how far this film has driven me. And with this film at a 24% on Rotten Tomatoes, I’m predicting it will bomb and end the series, especially since it’s up against “Fast and the Furious 6.”

Rating: 1/10

The Great Gatsby

 F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby” is considered by many as one of the most iconic books of all time, with its views on what the American Dream is, and the theory of repeating the past. While I can understand how most people would find that book to be a classic, I’m not one of them. I felt Fitzgerald’s execution of his ideas weren’t fully established and that they could have worked, if it wasn’t about how a man is so obsessed with a woman who’s now married to a racist womanizer, while her cousin just watches. That’s pretty much the synopsis of the book in my eyes.

There have been movie adaptations of the book before, but the one that I’m addressing is the latest one, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Tobey Maguire. Much like “G.I. Joe Retaliation,” the new “Gatsby” film was pushed back, so it wouldn’t be in competition with the other DiCaprio film, “Django Unchained.” However, the question is was this worth the wait…absolutely not.

For the most part, the film does follow the book, as it tells of Nick Carraway, a Yale-graduate who moves to West Egg to study and become a writer, next door to Jay Gatsby. Across the bay is East Egg, where his cousin Daisy and her husband, Tom Buchanan, are living. After a visit to them, Nick meets Jordan Baker, and hears word about Gatsby, which Daisy seems familiar with the name. As time goes on, Nick meets Gatsby at one of his parties and the two become more acquainted with each other, as the mystery that surrounds Gatsby unravels the more Nick is around him. While I do think the concept that Fitzgerald had is interesting, the execution given in both the book and this movie fall flat, but the movie falls harder.

The first problem I have with the film is its pacing. For the first thirty minutes, they managed to cram in about the first fifty pages and it feels so rushed. It skims through conversations in certain scenes that it leaves you wondering what they’re even talking about. Instead, we get pointless montage moments that only pad out the movie to its almost two and half hour mark. Not only that, but the editing is simply atrocious, as there’s hardly a shot that lasts five seconds. For a big budget production, they don’t give the audience that much time to look at the hard work they put into the set designs and styles. It’s like they think the audience has ADD, and that’s just insulting.

The soundtrack is another thing that I find unappealing. It mostly full of rap and hip hop music, and doesn’t even fit the tone of where it’s put in the scenes it’s playing in. Don’t get me wrong, the idea isn’t bad, it’s just that it needs to be done in a way that works. Take for example “Django Unchained,” where it had music from Rick Ross and Tupac, and while their music isn’t the right time frame, Tarantino actually found a way to make it work. With “Gatsby,” it just feels like it was put there, just for the sake of having popular music there. At times, it had fitting jazz or orchestral music, so why couldn’t we just have that kept in there?

The cast in the film was nothing but a waste. Carey Mulligan was boring as Daisy, and it got to the point where her performance could actually cure insomnia; she was that bland. Joel Edgerton as Tom was just as unlikable as the character is in the book, but this time he’s more of a perverted punk than ever. Jason Clarke and Isla Fisher were SO forgettable as George and Myrtle Wilson, that it’s frustrating, especially since they’re both great talents. However, the worst actor throughout the entire film was Leonardo DiCaprio as Jay Gatsby. He was AWEFUL in this movie! His smug attitude and presence deteriorates every second he’s on screen, that it officially marks this as his worst performance.

Surprisingly, the best part about this movie was Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway. Despite having unnecessary narrations, Maguire really gives it his best, being a person who is the in-between of people like Gatsby and Tom. If everything else wasn’t as bad as it was in this film, I’d say this would be worth seeing just for his performance as Nick. However, due to all the other problems the film has, that isn’t the case.

The film was directed by Baz Luhrman, the same man behind “Moulin Rouge,” “Australia,” the DiCaprio version of “Romeo+Juliet,” all three films have marked him as one of the most pretentious directors working today. While “Gatsby” isn’t Luhrman’s worst film, that would be “Australia,” still doesn’t change the fact that he doesn’t know how to be a proper filmmaker.

Overall, Baz Luhrman’s “The Great Gatsby” by far one of the worst films of the year, and I’m guaranteeing that people will forget this film by the end of June, or at least the end of the year. Maguire was the only good part, DiCaprio was awful, the editing is garbage, the rest of the cast is useless, and the direction and cinematography is simply hard to deal with.

Rating: 2/10

Pain & Gain

WARNING: The following review is not directed towards those who had experience the events the film is based on, or those who had read up on it. If you are unpleasant about the words said in this review, despite it all being an opinion of a movie, then I suggest you skip this review and find something else to read up on.

If you do write in the comments that I should be ashamed of writing this on a film of tragic events or Michael Bay in general, don't say you weren't warned. It will be brought against you.


Michael Bay...what can be said about him that HASN'T been? He's gotten the reputation as one of Hollywood's biggest shames in the past fifteen years, with films like “Armageddon,” “Pearl Harbor,” and “Transformers 2.” What else could I add to that? Well...I don't think Bay is AS bad as people say he is. Don't get me wrong, I'm annoyed with his films, but not all of them are crap. “Bad Boys,” “The Rock,” “The Island,” and even “Transformers 3” I actually think are legitimately good films. Not great, but good. Besides, I think Bay's a better director than he is a producer...HINT...HINT. But now, we'll be looking at his newest film starring Mark Wahlberg and Dwayne Johnson, “Pain & Gain.”

Now, when I first heard about this movie, I thought it was the weirdest idea for a film to expect from Bay, but on the other hand I thought it would be his return to his “Bad Boys” days. However, when I read up more, finding out this was based on a true story about the Sun Gym Gang and that the main characters were the culprits...yeah, I felt a bit uneasy about this film. It tells of Daniel Lugo, a Sun Gym employee who is tired of living life just at a fitness club and being low in the dumps. So when he goes to a Johnny Wu conference, he inspires his friend and newest member to go and kidnap a rich man and have him sign away all of his money, then kill him afterwards.

Now let me just say this...the main characters that we follow are some of the most unlikable people you'll see. They're dumb bastards who feel they aren't that up there and enjoying life, so they decide to take a rich guy's money. It's despicable...but then again, they were despicable in real life to begin with. Sure they killed on purpose and not accidental as the film showed, but either way they still killed people. They were maniac criminals, and the film...SURPRISINGLY made it work. Michael Bay always had most of his film protagonists be so unlikeable and stupid, but here it actually works.

The casting does a good job as well. Mark Wahlberg really sells it as being the “mastermind” behind the crimes, and let me say he's really selling it as a fitness criminal. You can just tell it in his eyes that while he does have weakness, he could still beat the everloving crap out of you. Anthony Mackie as Adrian, Lugo's friend, also does good as being a steroid obsessed guy, who can't seem to quit but still wants to have that thrill, even if he has to pull heists. Dwayne Johnson was great as well. Sure, the person in real life wasn't really accurate, it still pulls off as it would. Not to mention, he had the best line in the entire film, and that had me laughing so much.

Tony Shaloub as Victor Kershaw was also a very funny character. I heard that the real life person had said that they made the film look like the villain when he wasn't, but here's the thing...he was portrayed more sympathetic than Wahlberg or any of the others. But either way, Shaloub did a great job in this role. We also have Ed Harris as the detective, Rebel Wilson as Mackie's girlfriend, Rob Coddry as the Sun Gym manager, and even Ken Jeong as Johnny Wu. They all did pretty good.

Does this film have problems? Yes. For one, I felt like there were some moments that could have been cut out of the film, or at least shortened out a bit. Not to mention, for a black comedy...it's not too funny. Don't get me wrong, there are some funny moments, but I didn't feel there was enough of it. That, and I think this might be the biggest thing for me...if the film said it was INSPIRED by a true story, instead of being BASED, then it probably would have worked better. Besides, the families of the victims had complained about this movie being made, and I can understand how one would think killers would be sympathetic...but they weren't sympathetic, so it can be reasonable...I think.

The film was written by Christoper Markus and Stephen McFeely, the same duo behind the screenplays for “The Chronicles of Narnia Trilogy,” and “Captain America: The First Avenger.” They are good writers, and I'm glad to know that a story like this was put into the hands of a director who'd actually make this work with his style. Yes, Bay's style of direction was the right choice.

Overall, “Pain & Gain,” while has problems, is still a good movie. And I know there are going to be some people complaining that I'm giving support to Bay, but here's the thing...I said in the beginning that he's a better director than he is a producer. And while he did produce this, he actually knew what he was doing when he made this. It's just one of those film that you need to decide on what you think would work.

Rating: 8/10