Escape from Planet Earth vlog

Me and my cousins talk about the newest animated film from the animation company that brought us "Reboot" and "Beast Wars"...try to guess what we thought of it.

Bullet to the Head

 About a month ago, I talked about the new Arnold Schwarzenegger film, “The Last Stand,” which was a film about a broken down hero, who still has what it takes. What made that film special to me was it's cheesy look and attitude, being a film that's expressing that even after all these years, Arnold still has what it takes to kick some ass. And now, Sylvester Stallone has brought us a film in that same way, under the name “Bullet to the Head.” How was it? Pretty disappointing, but not as much as “A Good Day to Die Hard.”

“Bullet to the Head” tells of an ex-marine now hitman, Jimmy Bobo, who is now framed for the murder of his partner, so that way some con-men won't get ahold of some evidence that will lead themselves to the police, for their illegal operations. Now Bobo has to team up with Detective Taylor Kwon, whose still in trust with some corrupt police cops, to take them down and avenge Jimmy's partner. While it IS a dumb action film, I felt it lacking on much of the stuff brought by “The Last Stand.”

First off, Stallone's character of Jimmy Bobo, I can understand his needs for revenge, but he just came off as too violent. I know that Stallone has played some dark characters in the past, but this one was a bit too much for my taste. However, due to the relationship he has with his daughter, that at least brought some likability into it, but it wasn't enough. Also, the twists with the villains, while good, didn't really hold up, since none of them were that memorable, except for NOT Conan the Barbarian, Jason Mamoa, but that's just only for his eyes which are OBVIOUSLY sinister. Not to mention, most of the cinematography is AWFUL  I could hardly tell what was going on in it, that it felt like a Jerry Bruckheimer production.

But aside from all that, there are some good moments to it. Sung Kang gave a decent performance as Detective Kwon, being a cop who has some pretty funny lines in the movie, especially with his interactions with Stallone. Same goes for Sara Shahi, since almost all of her scenes are with Kang or Stallone, so she did good in the film. And even for a cliché and cheesy plot, they manage to give it a decent enough execution.

The film was directed by Walter Hill, who was the director for “The Warriors,” one of the films that defines cult following. Sadly, this film doesn't reach that level of fun that “The Warriors” had, but thankfully it wasn't his worst either. “Supernova” anyone?

Overall, “Bullet to the Head” is a mediocre film which I'm mixed about. But if you're board and want to kill an hour and half, I'd say wait for it on Netflix, or catch a low-price matinee...but only if “The Last Stand” isn't playing at the theater you're at.

Rating 5/10

A Good Day to Die Hard (Why? Why?! WHY?!!)

 Action flicks are one of the staples of being a film goer. It's got many things to enjoy, from romance to adrenaline rushes, to everything else you can think of. And one that comes to mind to most people is the 1988 John McTiernan film, “Die Hard.”

The film is about a New York cop named John McClane, who visits L.A. to see his family for the holidays. When he's visiting his wife at a party for her business at the Nakatomi Plaza, the building is raided by terrorists, lead by Hans Gruber, but John manages to be the only one not caught, and has to take them all down, and save his wife. He's outnumbered, outgunned, barefoot, and the stakes are high, but he'll step up to that challenge. This film was released around the time that big name action stars like Schwarzenegger and Stallone were portrayed as these invincible juggernauts in “Commando” and “Rambo,” but with John McClane, he's just a regular guy, who happens to be a cop. He's doing all this, because he has no other choice; he does make comebacks to his enemies, but he's still scared about the whole thing; he does get hurt badly throughout the film, physically AND mentally; John McClane...is HUMAN. And he serves as one of the most realistic protagonists not just in films, but in general. This is what deviated Bruce Willis from Stallone and Schwarzenegger, because of his humanity and charm. His ongoing chemistry with the other characters is very reasonable, and he says what any sane person would say under these circumstances. Not only that, but Alan Rickman as Hans Gruber is still to this day, one of the greatest villains ever portrayed. But overall, “Die Hard” is the definition of a perfect action movie.

Two years later, we were given “Die Hard 2: Die Harder,” and it's pretty much what you'd expect. This time, an airport is undertaken by another group of terrorists, this time lead by Franco Nero, and John McClane has to settle things through to save his wife, all while dealing with some sleezy cops that give him a hard time. It does try to raise the stakes and make all of it bigger, but it just results in a big clunky film. Don't get me wrong, it's not ALL bad, since there are some enjoyable moments and it still feels like a “Die Hard” movie. However, there are some instances where it feels far fetched, but it still has some fun either way.

It wasn't for another five years, that we'd get a TRUE “Die Hard” sequel, under the name “Die Hard with a Vengeance.” In this one, Hans Gruber's brother, Simon, is after McClane by playing a game of riddles, in exchange for stopping bombs planted around the city of New York. McClane has to team up with Zeus Carver, a racist electrician whose dragged into this after saving McClane from getting killed in Harlem. Now the two have to find Simon, solve the riddles and stop the detonators, and put a stop to Simon's other plan at hand. John McTiernan returns as director, giving this movie a great amount of enjoyment, in terms of 90's action, and with how they did it is spectacular. Samuel L. Jackson as Zeus adds a lot of great humor to the film and his ongoing chemistry between him and McClane is one of the biggest highlights. He's pretty much like ANOTHER John McClane, not wanting to be apart of this situation, but he has to or else shit well get real. Before, Jackson was only famous for his work on “Pulp Fiction,” but this is where he also got his stardom going. Jeremy Irons gives a fantastic performance as Simon Gruber, and is the perfect choice for Alan Rickman's successor as a “Die Hard” villain. He's smart, calculative, and plays his cards right, so it is hard to outsmart him. Though if I had to choose one complaint about the film, it would have to be the ending. Not that it's bad, but if it was done differently, I would have said it was just as good as the original, if not better. But that doesn't mean this came close.

After about a good twelve years since the third, and almost 20 years since the original, we were given a fresh and new film from “Underworld” director, Len Wiseman, “Live Free or Die Hard” (Die Hard 4.0). In this film, computer meltdowns are going down towards hackers, and one by one, they're getting killed in an corruption explosion. That is except for one, Matthew Farrell, who is rescued by John McClane, and they set out to find Thomas Gabriel, and put an end to his plans of digitally collapsing the economy completely. While this is a big step down from the third film, that doesn't mean it's not good. It does have a lot of enjoyment to it, but it doesn't quite have the same feeling that the other three had. It felt a little too modernized, and I felt some of the characters were either unnecessary or just annoying. Justin Long as Matthew Farrell got on my nerves, but he did serve a purpose. In the beginning, he was a bit whiny and acted like a pompous jerk at times, with that attitude of new is better than old. I really hate people who are like that. Timothy Olyphant as Thomas Gabriel was...okay but he seemed to lack the intimidation of Hans and the calculative charm of Simon. He wasn't bad, just not good enough. Mary Elizabeth Winstead played Lucy, McClane's daughter, and she was probably the most unnecessary character in the film. She just didn't serve that much of a purpose, other to be there for McClane to save. It was said that Winstead was one of five candidates for playing Lucy, and one of which was Taylor Fry, who was the daughter in the original film. I don't get why they didn't choose her...but then again, it was either Winstead, or having to deal with Jessica Simpson or Brittany Spears. Also, I didn't really see a purpose of making the film PG-13, where as the rest have been R rated. I think it was just to get a bigger box office grossing, but it felt unnecessary with how they were editing it. Even with the unrated cut, I've heard that the editing was off. However, with all of that, it doesn't quite make it a bad movie, it just has some problems.

Now after attending the “Die Hard Marathon,” I was able to see these films leading up to the new one, “A Good Day to Die Hard.” And let me say this, I have never been so disappointed in a film than this one. If you thought 2 or 4 were bad, take a look at THIS one!

So what's the plot of the film?...Boy is THAT the million dollar question here. Now let me say this, this is one of the first films in a long time that I had walked out on, and it wasn't just because I was tired, but that NOTHING WAS HAPPENING IN THIS FILM! All I could gather was that John McClane goes to visit his son Jack in Russia, but it turns out that Jack is a spy, who is in cahoots with a Russian terrorist, or something like that, and John gets dragged into the mix. That's all I could gather from it. So when I retried watching it online, I was still in the same mixed of confusion on this plot.

Let's discuss what's wrong with the movie, aside from its terrible plot (or lack of, I should say), and that's the action scenes. Not too long in, we're put into a car chase, that feels like something out of a “Transporter” movie, than it does a “Die Hard” film. It's just constant car chase, with hardly a shot that lasts three seconds, and physics that are so out of reality, that it's just insulting to this franchise. What made “Die Hard” so great and memorable was it's reality, and how you could picture yourself in the same situation, doing the same thing (if you were in good shape). In this film, it not only disregards that fact, it completely DESTROYS it! This isn't a “Die Hard” film, it's a generic action film that not even Steven Seagal would put on his resume. The dialogue in this film is pretty much most of the same thing over and over again, about Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis talking about father-son relations and how they didn't have those moments, etc. And I'm not exaggerating here, this is literally what goes on throughout the film. As for the villains, oh wait, WHAT villains? They're just Russian terrorists. Again, not exaggerating. Jai Courtney was also very boring as Jack, and I felt he could have done so much, if they had gotten a better script and director (we'll get to them shortly.)

Also, I'd like to ask one major question here: *ahem*...WHERE THE HELL IS JOHN MC-FUCKING-CLANE?!? This is the number one thing I was asking myself every single minute of the film, and I didn't see him at all. I saw Bruce Willis playing John McClane, but I didn't see John McClane. You could have called him ANYTHING and you would have had the same exact film! There isn't even the slightest hint of John McClane's charm ANYWHERE in this film, aside from a slight one-liner, but that's it. That's not John McClane, that's Church from "The Expendables." I mean, give “Indiana Jones 4” SOME credit, at least it HAD Indiana Jones.

This film was directed by John Moore, the same guy who directed “Max Payne” and “The Omen (2006),” and I honestly would rather watch both those films than this ever again. It shocks me how the original director for this movie turned it down to work on the sequel for “300,” should have been the first sign of this. The script was written by Skip Woods, who was the writer for “Hitman” and “X-Men Origins: Wolverine.” How his script got green-lit is beyond me.

Overall, “A Good Day to Die Hard” is not only the worst of the “Die Hard” films AND the worst of the year so far, it is by far...the WORST SEQUEL I have ever seen in my life, and I saw "Highlander 2!"

Rating: 1/10

Hansel and Gretel/Warm Bodies/Side Effects

Today we have a triple package for today. A fairy tale with a new spin, a zombie-rom-com, and a mystery about medication and people.

x x x x x x x x x x x x

Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters

 Movies based on classic fairy tales are mostly hit and miss with most people now-a-days. They're usually turned into the cliched child-friendly story that many people know today, or turned into the dark and twisted horror that the Brothers Grimm had intentionally. Today, the best example of the latter, is Tim Burton's “Sleepy Hallow,” and since then, not too many films have lived up to that kind of legacy, until last year's “Snow White and the Huntsman.” Today, we are also shown the next dark fairy tale movie, “Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters.”

For the two of you who don't know the story of Hansel and Gretel, let me tell you. Two children, Hansel and Gretel, are abandoned in the woods by their father, and find their way to a candy house, where they are captured by a witch, who almost eats them. But they escape by burning her in her own oven. That's how the story goes, but in this film, it takes place several years later, when the two children are now witch hunters.

Now the idea of telling us what happened to Hansel and Gretel after their encounter with a witch and almost getting killed is a very clever idea. Even if the idea of them being steam-punk witch hunters is ludicrous, they still find creative ways of making this a very entertaining and at times funny adaption. These people knew something like this would be stupid, but I can see they really had fun making this idea work.

The cast really does a good job, even for this kind of film. Jeremy Renner's Hansel gives a performance that is him doing what he does best. You can tell that he was having fun with this role. Not only that, but one of the things they added was that Hansel has diabetes. They don't actually SAY it's diabetes, but you can tell that it is, which adds a lot of interesting development to him. Gemma Arterton, who played Strawberry Fields in “Quantum of Solace,” plays Gretel, and gives off a feisty turn to the character, and even though she's given the 'strong independent woman' cliché (not that it's a bad thing), she doesn't make it boring or one-dimensional. Speaking of James Bond chicks, Famke Janssen plays the head-witch, and gives it a deliciously evil presence to that character. How evil you may ask? Well, you'd have to see the movie, since it involves spoilers being revealed. Pihla Viitala plays Mimi, who is pretty much useless as Hansel's love interest and show some fanservice, aside from a few moments. But other than her helping Hansel in certain parts, she could have been cut from the film and it would remain the same. There's also a fanboy of Hansel and Gretel's (I am not kidding when I say that), who has intentions of being a witch hunter himself, and he is, unlike Viitala, becomes very useful throughout the film.

The action scenes and 3D are very impressive, and make it what I wanted “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” to be: cheesy, stupid, and fun. Originally, this film was originally scheduled for a March 2^nd release last year, but MGM had pushed it back due to give Jeremy Renner's popularity a little time to develop with films like “Mission Impossible 4,” “The Avengers,” and “The Bourne Legacy.” To be fair, I think that was a very smart move for the studio in my opinion. This was produced by Adam McKay and Will Ferrell, which is a very odd film to expect from them, but in a strange way it kind of works. So cudos to them for green lighting this film.

Overall, “Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters” is a very fun film...but it doesn't make it anymore stupid, does it? If you plan on seeing something like this, I'd suggest you grab a few friends and bring them to this. It's a very fun, dumb movie, that is very enjoyable.

Rating: 8/10

x x x x x x x x x x x x

Warm Bodies

 You know what I love? Zombies. More specific, films ABOUT zombies like “Night of the Living Dead,” “Zombieland,” “Shaun of the Dead,” and so forth. You know what I also love? Romantic comedies, mostly because I'm a sucker for them, but I can't help it. Hell, my favorite movie of all time is “(500) Days of Summer,” which is in the genre of romantic comedies. Now when both genres are put together, that sounds like an awesome idea, which someone decided to give the public “Warm Bodies”...and boy was I disappointed.

The film is about a zombie in the age of apocalypse named R, played by Nicholas Hoult. He lives at an airport that is inhabited by zombies, where he and his friend go out from time to time and hunt for food. During one trip, they meet, or rather 'eat,' a bunch of survivors, save for one girl named Julie, who R has a fascination for, after eating her boyfriend's brain. And the more he's around her, the more he starts to feel alive, which also affects the other zombies, except the ones called “boneys,” who eat anything with a heartbeat.

Let's go over what doesn't work here: the premise. For those of you who haven't heard about it, you're thinking, “this sounds incredibly stupid.” And it is, because in the end you'll be thinking this, “a zombie apocalypse is cured by the power of love.” Think about that, and tell me that it ISN'T the dumbest thing you ever heard. Now I wouldn't mid it as much, but it does get bothersome when you think about more. I can understand that whole suspension of disbelief thing, but...ugh...that just sounds so wrong. Not only that, but for a comedy, it isn't all that funny. There were moments where I had almost chuckled, but for the most part, I found the film pretty boring. That, and I know I'm going to get hated for this, but it's the references to “Romeo & Juliet,” like the leads being R and Julie, the balcony scene, them coming from two different sides, and I just found that stupid, since I don't care for that story in the slightest.

Now you might be thinking, what DID I find good in this movie? I'd say just about most of everything else. Nicholas Hoult is a pretty good actor, and he does a good job. He has that zombie presence to him, which really sold it for me. Teresa Palmer as Julie, did an okay job, and was at least enough to be likable. Even in some scenes that are a bit annoying, she still manages to be likable. John Malkovich is great as Julie's dad, but sadly he wasn't in the film enough to make it enjoyable. Rob Corddry plays R's friend, M, and he was the guy who managed to get a couple smiles out of me, but much like Malkovich, he wasn't in it enough to make it worth it.

However, the strongest point this movie has are the effects and make-up. I mean, these zombies look real, even if the boneys are CGI. If we were judging effects and make-up in a zombie film, I'd say this would make it in the top 7 at best. But if I was going to a watch a film SIMPLY for effects, I'd probably just watch something else. This film was directed by Jonathan Levine, who had directed the comedy-drama “50/50,” which is a big leap for him to go from that to this in terms of effects.

Overall, “Warm Bodies” isn't that good, but I sadly feel bad for saying that. If you like it, good for you, but I'm still in disappointment, especially since I was the kind of audience for this film. Though I guess my streak of good films had to take a bump somewhere.

Rating: 4/10

x x x x x x x x x x x x

Side Effects

 Steven Soderbergh is one of Hollywood's big name directors that makes very smart films. Beforehand, he was most well-known for the remake of “Ocean's Eleven,” but as time went on, he has made much better films within time, like “Contagion,” “Haywire,” and even “Magic Mike.” And recently, Soderbergh has brought forth another one of his films, in the form of “Side Effects,” and it is another one of the year's first films that I consider to be...PERFECT.

The film is about a struggling woman named Emily Taylor, whose been a total wreck for years, even with her husband returning from prison. When she attempts suicide, she is recommended medication to help her regain her lifestyle. But in doing so, the side effects result in her killing her husband, and now her doctor has to find out if he's being setup and by who.

For a film based around the dangers of medication side effects and trust behind the people around, this made for a very enduring film. I was fully invested in what I was watching, and as it went on, it all started to make sense through and through.

Rooney Mara gives a fantastic performance as Emily, and just from the look in her eyes throughout two thirds of the film, you can tell she's been through some serious hell. Honestly, if this film was released a few months earlier, she would have been up for an Oscar nomination, I guarantee that. However, she's not quite the main character, which is actually Jude Law as Dr. Jon Banks. Law really delivers another solid performance in this film, and that probably comes from his familiarity with Soderbergh. But even then, he's still an engaging character, having his skills as a doctor to make him more of a detective all the way throughout the film. Catherine Zeta-Jones is also in the film, and she really does bring much to this film, playing a psychiatrist that can easily bring Law to his knees, even without breaking a sweat. The things she has happen to him are just creative, and I think that really adds more to the situation and what she and Law are in context. Channing Tatum is in the film too, but with him being the husband who gets killed, he doesn't have much to. Don't get me wrong, when he was on screen, he was pretty good, but I'm just saying his role could have been played by anyone else. Maybe it was because of “Magic Mike.”

One of the biggest complaints I've been hearing about this film, was that the beginning was very slow and unlikable. I highly disagree with that, because a film that takes its time to develop, and is still inventive makes it all the more intriguing, and by the end when they resolve everything, it really does make sense.

Overall, “Side Effects” is another classic that Steven Soderbergh has delivered. It's smart, it's inventive, and is one of my favorite films of the year. Even if you're not that much of a Soderbergh fan, I'm sure you'll enjoy this film.

Rating: 10/10

Gangster Squad & The Last Stand

Today, I've got a double feature for you today! We're going to talk about “Gangster Squad” and “The Last Stand!” Let's not waste anytime with this, so let's get right into it!

x x x x x x x x x x

Gangster Squad

If there's a genre of film that I love most, it's crime films with 1940's gangsters. Today, the only thing that people think of when they hear “gangster,” is those hoodlum rap a-holes, that high schools are infested with today. Gangsters aren't like that at all. They're the classiest of crooks, and their either smart, blood-thirsty, or both, and they do it all in suits. And what makes them interesting is the back-stories that they all have. Films like “Scarface,” “The Godfather,” “Gangs of New York,” “Goodfellas,” and “Casino” are the true representations of what a gangster is and SHOULD be today. And today, we take a look at the newest film from “Zombieland” director, Rupen Fleischer. And that film is “Gangster Squad.”

The film follows L.A.P.D. Sergeant John O'Mara, whose is assigned to assemble a squad to go after the biggest crime boss of the east coast, Mickey Cohen. How they try to bring him down, is taking out his business works that give him enough power NOT to be arrested, especially since he makes sure there are no witnesses of his crimes. Is it simple? Yes, but it still manages to keep strong interest, especially with the characters and how they pull their schtick.

Josh Brolin as O'Mara gives off one of this best performances to date. He plays the character with such grasp at his job, and it really does make him the tough guy that he is. And don't even think about going after his family in this film, because he will BREAK YOU.

Ryan Gosling plays Jerry Wooters, the second in command of the squad, and is what you'd expect him to be. He's a smooth talker, and has a charm that will woo any woman he comes across. But even then, he has his tender moments, especially with his shoe-polisher friend.

Emma Stone really nails it as the love interest for Gosling, being with Mickey Cohen, but having strong feelings for Gosling. It does disappoint me that she didn't get to be in any action scenes, but I'm okay with that. Though, is it me or is this film along with “Crazy Stupid Love” trying to tell us that Stone and Gosling have the hots for each other, because I'd like to at least know.

Robert Patrick and Michael Peña play Detectives Max Kennard and Navidad Ramirez (Yes, that is his name), a old school gunslinger and his assistant. Those two had strong chemistry together, much in the same way Harrison Ford and Adam Beach did in “Cowboys & Aliens” (a HIGHLY underrated film mind you!)

However, Sean Penn's performance as Mickey Cohen, the villain of this film, was simply perfect casting in my book. I just love how sinister and despicable his energy plays it. He plays such a sadistic cunt int his film, it's hard to take your eyes off him when he's on screen. And now some of you are probably going, “*GASP*...he said the 'c' word!” but that's the word that really does describe Penn's character of Cohen. He is this diabolical bastard that won't take any shit that you give him. You cross with him or even screw up once, then kiss your ass goodbye. He has people burned alive, drilled in the head, or even TORN IN HALF! He is such an evil EVIL human being, and it works!

The action scenes that take place here are one of the most adrenalin pumping moments I've seen in a while. Tommy Guns, shotguns, pistols, any type of gangster weapon you can think of. Now, remember when the trailers first started coming out, when it was scheduled for last September, and they had a scene in it involving a shooting in the movie theater? Yeah, that scene was cut out of the film, because Warner Bros. thought this film would be inappropriate for those involved with the Aurora Shooting in Colorado at “The Dark Knight Rises” premiere. While I do think pushing back a film for that reason was probably for the best, I do find it distracting that a film has to be changed because of certain events. If you want to know more about films that do that, listen to Radiodrome's take on “When Real World Events Alter Movies,” co-starring the Cinema Snob. However, the scene that replaced it, which is an event with Chinatown, I actually thought was probably the better choice, than what could have been done in the actual scene. So no harm done, but I think they should have just pushed the film back and done the change in quiet, instead of publicly announcing it.

The biggest complaint I've heard about this movie was “It's not L.A. Confidential.” Well, here's my response...NO DUH!! This film doesn't HAVE to be “L.A. Con,” if it doesn't want to! It's just trying to be a fun gangster film, with great characters and stylish looks to it. Not only that, but how this film is losing to “A Haunted House” is just annoying. This film deserves better praise than it's getting.

Overall, “Gangster Squad” is a fun film, that can be enjoyable no matter what is said. I know some are thinking I'm getting too soft with some films, but I don't care. If I like a movie that much, I like a movie that much.

Rating: 10/10

x x x x x x x x x x x x x

The Last Stand

Arnold Schwarzenegger is one of the most recognizable action icons of the 80's and 90's. Everyone has made their jokes about him, we know how ridiculous his accent, films, and acting are, but that's why we love him. He's had roles as a barbarian, a terminator, a commando, etc. And after almost a decade as governor of California, he's back as an action star. “The Expendables 2” was just a taste of his return, but with “The Last Stand,” Arnold is BACK baby!

The film is about a dangerous criminal named Gabriel Cortez, who is being transported from Las Vegas to a different facility. However, he escapes thanks to the help of his team, and is now on the run for the border, by passing through Summerton Junction, Arizona. Only one thing stands in his way, and that's Sheriff Ray Owens. It's as simple as a typical Schwarzenegger movie can get, and it also works as a pretty damn good western flick.

With every Schwarzenegger movie, it's got to have a great cast of supporting characters, and it does. Forest Whitaker plays Agent Bannister, the guy who tried to get Cortez transported, and he really sells it well. Luis Guzman plays Figgy, and he really sells it as someone who isn't interested in getting involved in this, but still has a good heart and courage. Jaimie Alexander, who you may remember as Sif in “Thor,” plays Sarah Torrence, one of Owens' deputies. Unlike “Thor,” we get to see how she can do as an action star, and I do hope to see more of her work in the future. Johnny Knoxville has a part in this film as a gun-crazed maniac, and I don't think they could have found a better person to play such a maniac than the maniac from “Jackass.”

Eduardo Noriega plays Cortez, but he doesn't do much in the film. Sure he's got a team of “Ocean's Eleven” type guys to get him out, but he didn't do much until the third act. Also, I'd like to point out that Genesis Rodriguez is in the film, but all she did was be Cortez's hostage. Peter Stormare plays Cortez's right-hand-man, and he does a pretty good job. I also loved how he was taken out by Arnold in the third act with how he's shot, then getting a bullet to the head later on.

And we can't have an Arnold Schwarzenegger without Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold does a great job in this film, playing a sheriff whose rusty, but still has some fight left in him. It is just amazing to see him back in action and do what he does best. That battle scene all the way through was just EPIC, and it shows that no matter what, Arnold still has some fight left in him, and it looks like he'll be staying.

Overall, “The Last Stand” is a big celebration for Arnold's triumphant return to action films! Now, don't go thinking that you'll enjoy it alone, because this is one of those films that's required to have a buddy to watch with, especially if he's a fan of action movies.

Rating: 9/10

x x x x x x x x x

Alright, two great movies for me so far. Looks like 2013 is going to be a pretty good year for me. I wonder how long the streak will last though.

Top 15 Best of 2012

 Now that we've taken care of the worst, let's talk about the best. And it's going to be much like the last list, where I'll include films I haven't reviewed yet, but still saw and think they're worht it. Plus, 2012 really turned out to be a good year for me, since there have been so many good films that came out this year, mostly in the later half. Not only that, but I'll also include some honorable mentions as well.

Snow White & The Huntsman: Probably the best Fairy Tale movie since Tim Burton's "Sleepy Hallow," and one film that was the start of blowing my expectations out of the water. I really wanted to hate this film at first, but the viewing of it really started to make me enjoy it a lot, and I'm actually kind of sad it didn't make my list.

The Grey: Some promos had this as Liam Neeson versus a pack of wolves, but it's something more deeper than that. As one of the first films that I've seen this year, I'm glad I saw it, because it's a really interesting thriller about man against the wild, and how he might think he has something to look forward to after all this, but comes to realization in the end. It's definitely a high recommendation for those who enjoy these types of films.

xxxxx

#15: Lawless – This film made it in last minute for me, since I had viewed it before the Holiday season was over. And I'm actually disappointed that I didn't see it in theaters, because it's actually a film that's way up my ally. A crime film about the prohibition era? That, and it has a pretty good cast, who all do a great job here. I don't care if Shia Labeouf is in it, he does a damn good job, showing he has strong talents as an actor, and isn't just a whiney cat. That, and I'm glad that Guy Pearce had a good movie this year, and it ISN'T a piece of sci-fi grabage film.

#14: Seven Psychopaths - My favorite comedy of the year for me. Despite me like films like "That's My Boy," "This Means War," and "Ted," this one works for many different reasons. It was between this and “Ted,” but I went with this due to having such crazy characters, which is what writer/director Martin McDonagh is best at with this and “In Bruges.” If this is a contender for best original screenplay, let it be given.

#13: The Expendables 2 – One of the greatest “balls to the wall” action films I've seen this year. Much like the last film, we've got great action stars from the 80's to today, doing what they do best. Sure it's a cheesy film, but it's MY kind of cheese. It's also surprising that this film actually surpasses the original, having more laughs and action than the first. Sure some of the jokes are references and Chuck Norris makes a Chuck Norris joke, it still makes it fun for me too.

#12: Hotel Transylvania/Frankenweenie/ParaNorman – What's this? Three Halloween animated films made my list? Why yes, because they're that good...Okay, one is over the others, but the other two were good enough for me to NOT ignore them.

“Hotel Transylvania” is the not only the second film that features Adam Sandler and Andy Samberg in the same film, with a father involved in his kid's love life, but also the film that's now giving Genndy Tartakovsky work again. And if it does get a sequel, then I'm up for it.

As for “Frankenweenie,” we finally have what we've been asking Tim Burton to do for a long time now. He goes back to his “Beetlejuice” days, making dark twisted children's movies, that actually treat them like adults. That, and it's a great tribute to old monster movies from the 30's to 50's, like “Frankenstein” and “Gamera.”

Though with “ParaNorman,” we have it do what “Frankenweenie” did, only in modern day (at least I THOUGHT “Frankenweenie” was in the 40's). It actually brings out a lot of depth and actually has kid characters act like kids, unlike films like “Diary of a Wimpy Kid,” where the kid is a jackass to his friends, and all his problems are because HE causes them. That, and “ParaNorman” has great dialogue, which shows kids act like kids in these kinds of situations.

#11: Brave – Possibly my favorite film from Pixar that ISNT' “Toy Story.” Sure, it might seem that it has other ideas taken from OTHER films from Disney, but here I think those ideas are used fairly well in their own way. Not only that, but it does what other films from Disney haven't done yet, and that's the relationship between a princess and her mother (who isn't dead). Not only that, but the animation is stunningly beautiful, and it really has a great third act to it.

#10: Men in Black 3 – After ten years since the second film, Smith and Jones return as Agents J and K, in a new time traveling adventure. What really makes “MIB3” so enduring is the one thing that the second film didn't do, and that's expand on the MIB universe. The new types of aliens, as well as the time travel laws, are strongly done well as the first film was. Sure, there were minor complaints, but with Josh Brolin's great performance as a younger Tommy Lee Jones, it makes up for them. Not only that, but with a strong and powerful ending that got me teary-eyed, it really does hold up as being as strong as the first film.

#9: Rise of the Guardians – Dreamworks really gave it their all with this film. While some may say they already did with “How To Train Your Dragon,” I saw “Rise of the Guardians” as a much stronger film. The mythology behind this world really does add a lot to the film, and the characters really do add to that. The idea that the belief in children gives them their power is a very clever idea. As Dreamworks' answer to Disney with “The Avengers,” I'm actually hoping they do a sequel, if they can find a way to continue the story.

#8: The Secret World of Arrietty – It feels so good to finally see yet another film from Studio Ghibli, knowing they're still making movies. While it originally came out in Japan in 2010, I still count it as a 2012 film since that's when it was released. Though I do wish they would release “From Up On Poppy Hill,” which I hear will be at the Oscars this year. Aside from that, it feels so refreshing to see, not only classic traditional animation, but tradition anime animation. Not only that, but it is also a great take on the story “The Borrowers,” and seeing an adapted story in a fresh new look. Hopefully we'll at least see more Ghibli films, and not so far away.

#7: 007 Skyfall – After a good 50 years of Britain's most famous iconic character, this showcases the best of any of the bond films. Not only does it bring out the rise and fall of Bond, but really shows much depth to the character. And as I said in the review, I do believe that while the film has a similar concept to “The Dark Knight Rises,” I do feel that “Skyfall” did it better, mostly because it does show HOW Bond had fallen to start with.

                                          

#6: Django Unchained – There's no way I could ignore not including the newest Tarantino film, ESPECIALLY a Tarantino Western. Jamie Foxx really gives a great performance as Django, being a soft-spoken character, much in the same way as Clint Eastwood as “The Man With No Name.” Added in with some great supporting work from Christoph Waltz, Leon DiCaprio, and Sam Jackson, and you've got yourself a pretty damn good movie. Maybe this could be the film that Tarantino finally gets the Oscar for Best Picture, but who knows?

#5: Argo – Over the years, Ben Affleck has really shown us what he can do as a director. “Gone Baby Gone” and “The Town” started off as a taste of it, but “Argo” really did a magnificent job on how strong a director can be. The cinematography, the atmosphere, and the dialogue are both greatly well done, and a strong entry into Oscar season. For a film that was about FAKING a film crew, it has a lot going for it. I just hope that Affleck finally gets his Oscar for Best Director.

#4: Looper – This is by far Rian Johnson at his absolute best. While “Brick” and “The Brother's Bloom” were good, “Looper” really does show Johnson's creativity and writing at full power. A concept about assassins killing people from the future really is intriguing, and the laws of how most of it works, is very smart. And let's not forget, that it really redeemed Emily Blunt's reputation for me, after that other film she was in. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis do a fantastic job of playing the same character, and it really stands as their best performances in ages. They're pretty much BOTH worth of an Oscar, if they Academy is smart enough for it.

#3: The Amazing Spiderman – The reboot that changed everything for me this year. This new version of Spiderman really set the bar for what comic book movies can become as of today for me. Marc Webb really took a strong turn with the previous films, giving it a more realistic look to it, much like “The Dark Knight Trilogy.” Andrew Garfield really did a fantastic job, playing Peter Parker as a very smart lead, but still a teenager that tends to make some mistakes. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy really made a smarter leading lady, more in the sense of Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane. Rhys Ifans also was great as Dr. Connors, and the way they made his character friends with Peter's father really adds more to the connection between Peter and Dr. Connors. Fans thought that it was betrayal that Peter's parents were working for Oscorp and not being Agents of Shield from what I've heard in the comics...Uh, can't agents go undercover for something important?

Some people are still in confusion on why I thought this film was better than “The Dark Knight Rises” and “The Avengers,” but it's with great reason. “TDKR” was pretty much like the other two Batman films, being realistic, but overly far-fetched. There were plot-holes that really made the film lose a bit of focus, and it felt a little too long. And as for “The Avengers”...I'd hate to be that guy, but it was so predictable and familiar. Remember last year's “Transformers 3,” where it had that invasion climax? Well, “The Avengers” did feel like that, except with more effort put into it. Not only that, but Loki was a pretty weak villain, and that's the biggest problem with it, and why I like “The Dark Knight Rises” better. And yes, Bane was hardly audible, I can agree with that, and he sounded like Darth Vader impersonating Sean Connery and wasn't South American, but I at least thought he had some intimidation to him AND was a challenge for Batman. I know they're two different films, but you get my point.

“The Amazing Spiderman” took the fun of “The Avengers” and the realism of “The Dark Knight Trilogy” and used it fairly well to it's use. If you don't like it, then that's fine, but I just wanted to point out why someone like me really enjoyed the film and thought it was better than the other two big comic book films of the year, AND why I think it's Marvel's best film. I never thought there would be a film that could surpass this film, but I guess I was wrong. We've got about two films left, so what could they be?

#2: Les Misérables – With being a big fan of Broadway, there's no way I could have ignored this film. Tom Hopper's vision of the musical epic based on the novel by Victor Hugo is ASTOUNDING! The angles, the scenery, costumes, and acting are all beautifully well done. If any film should win all Oscars, it's got to be this film. The biggest complaints I've heard from this film are two common ones. Some have been saying that Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Boham Carter as the Innkeeper and wife were too over-the-top and hammy. Well what they don't realize is that they're SUPPOSE to be over-the-top, because it lightens the mood for the film. So don't blame them for that, it's how their characters are to begin with. The other complaint is that people think Russel Crowe is a bad singer or that he was very off. The guy was in a friggin' ROCK BAND before he was an actor, are you freaking kidding me? Plus, he has my choice for Best Supporting Actor, and this is one where I hope he gets it. Hugh Jackman also delivers his best performance as an actor all together, and this the film that proves why he's one of my top 5 favorite actors. Anne Hathaway really does give her all here too, even with how little she is in the film. That, and Amanda Seyfried finally gives a good performance as an actress, and now she doesn't have to rely on “Mean Girls” to prove she was good in something. It not only shows itself as a strong musical epic, but has a fantastic story that everyone should at least watch once and see how amazing films can get. It's also a perfect example on how to make a Broadway Movie the RIGHT way!

So, if I've praised the movie so greatly, why is it only #2? Well, there was just one little problem that I had with the film. In English, the film's called “The Miserable,” and most people who have seen it and loved it cried at it...And I'm sad to say that............I didn't cry at this film. See, the #1 spot had to go to a film that had a lot of heart to it, but also something that can really be touching in a very special way. It is also a film where I got to know these characters along the way, and how it can be more than emotional, but very enjoyable in it's own way, and that is why the best film of the year is...

#1: Wreck-It Ralph – This was the first film in a long time where I had actually cried at for more reasons than one. “Wreck-It Ralph” is much like what I said talking about it; it isn't just a film that's a love letter to classic gaming and modern gaming, but a very strong hearted film with great characters, brilliant story telling, and a cheerishable film for both parents and kids today.

Ralph is probably one of the most developed video game villains ever created, even though he's not from a real game, but has a lot of character to him. And as he goes through the film, realizing that a medal isn't what really makes you a hero, but rather your moral standards as a character is what it does, by helping others who want recognition in their game. That's what he learns during his journey with helping Vanellope become a racer in the film, where you see them bond together as friends. Not only that, but the scene that breaks their friendship (which I'm not spoiling if you haven't seen it) is not only a heartbreaking scene, but is actually very hard to watch. I mean, just the fact that Ralph had just crushed a little girl's dreams, I'm surprised he didn't commit suicide after dealing with so much guilt.

John C. Reily and Sarah Silverman do fantastic jobs with supplying the voices for the two leads. They gave them so much personality, and it's surprising for me to say that Sarah Silverman was fantastic and was my favorite character in the film, since I'm not too big a fan of her. I'm really glad they chose her, and everyone else in the film was also very enjoyable. Jack McBrayer and Jane Lynch were great supporters in the film, and I hope to see much more of their works in the future.

This really does stand as my favorite Disney film since “The Hunchback of Notre Dame,” and that is saying alot. While “Brave,” “Guardians,” and “Arrietty,” were great animated films, “Wreck-It Ralph” will just be a little closer to my heart...and that my friends, is why “Wreck-It Ralph” is the best film of 2012.

Will we get another animated film that's just as good? Who knows, but we'll know we'll see some great films for the upcoming year. Speaking of which, what ARE we starting with this year?

Oh HELL yeah!

Top 15 Worst of 2012

Well, it's that time of year again folks. Today we'll be taking a look at all the good, the bad, and the ugly of this year in film. First we'll start with worst, that way I can get everything bad out of the way. And since there were so many good films this year, I couldn't just keep it to just ten, so these will be both fifteen. Not only that, but there are also films that I didn't quite review, but that would be either due to the fact that I didn't quite know how to explain it, or I just felt like the film spoke for itself in a way. But first, some dishonorable mentions, since I had good reason not to see.

Twilight Breaking Dawn part 2: First off, NO. I'm sorry, I'm not seeing that film in theaters, because after the last film, I have good reason to let that franchise just die already. Even though it's over and I could have at least seen how they could have gone with it, I wasn't risking it. So there.

Neighborhood Watch: Now don't come crying to me saying, "oh you moron, the film's called "THE WATCH," not "Neighborhood Watch"" or any of that crap. The reason that title got changed was because the studio didn't want it to get related to that Trevon Martin event that happened. I hate it when they do that, because that's just drawing attention to the event that people are trying to forget. Plus, I'm not paying a dime for a shameless parody of "Attack the Block," which mind you is a MUCH better movie.

Okay, no more stalling. Let's get started!

xxxxx

#15: Battleship - This is one of those films that basically says, "You think my idea for such a film is stupid? I'll show you!" and look what we got. Now I know I said I had enjoyed this movie, but that doesn't make it any less stupid, now does it? I mean, "Transformers" was one thing, but BATTLESHIP?! And it just so happened to star Taylor Kitsch, who had starred in, not one, but TWO films that made my list. We'll get to that soon. Despite me liking the film for how bad it is, everyone can have a right to think this movie was terrible.

#14: Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - Quite possibly the biggest disappointment of a list of films that I was looking forward to. While I did feel that some sequences and performances were good, it just didn't hold up. And that's saying a lot, since I attended the midnight showing of this movie instead of the one for "Brave." Benjamin Walker and Dominic Cooper had good roles, but I felt the pacing was very off, making it pretty unbalanced. I haven't read the book, but I went into the film thinking, with a title like "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter," I expected some cheesy fun, like "Piranha 3D." But it was just a waste of Tim Burton's production value. We'll get to Burton later.

#13: Wrath of the Titans - The sequel to the remake that no one was interested in to begin with. While at times this film did have some strong points that made it better than the first film, it still felt lacking in the execution, and much like "Battleship," it turned out to be so laughably bad, that when I saw it with my brother, he was actually thinking of buying the DVD to show people what the director's previous film was, and another reason to be afraid of the "Alien Ninja Turtles" film that's coming in 2014. Even with some good performances by Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, and RaIph Finnes, it still felt off to me.

#12: Step Up 4 - While technically not a terrible film, it makes the list for how forgettable it was, much like the other "Step Up" films. I will give it credit for the choreography and acting, but the story...just seemed pretty boring to me. If it had been more about Peter Gallagher's character and daughter, then I would have found it a more interesting movie. But for what we got, it doesn't fit.

#11: Madagascar 3 - This is another one that isn't technically bad, but doesn't work well. I do give the film props for the animation and 3D, but most of everything didn't fit. If people liked enough for it to have a 74% on Rotten Tomatoes, then that's a real problem for me. It's not like they said it was "the best animated film ever" or anything over-glorifying like that (that's for another film), so I can't complain. I just felt the film to be simply forgettable for me.

#10: Dark Shadows - Going back to Tim Burton, what the heck happened with this film? This was SUCH a very unbalanced film, because it didn't know if it was suppose to be a comedy or drama. I have seen the show before, and I can tell you for not deciding to be a parody or true respective film of the show, it just turned out to be a mess, having Jonathan Frid turning in his grave (which mind you, he and a few other stars from the original show make cameos in the film). It definitely stands as Burton's worst film since "Planet of the Apes."

#9: Mirror Mirror - Pop quiz: what do you get when you ge the director of "The Cell" and "Immortals," and have him direct a Snow White film, with Phil Collins daughter, the guy who'll play the Lone Ranger, Nathan Lane, and one of the most overrated actresses in Hollywood? You get THIS film. While the only things good in this film were Armie Hammer, Nathan Lane, and the actors playing the dwarves, it doesn't quite save the film, does it? Also, Lily Collins...PLEASE take acting lessons! Or at least trim your eyebrows! Seriously, you could make five push-brooms with those things!

#8: The Five-Year Engagement - Never would I think a wedding comedy would bore me so goddamn much. I mean, there's comedic dramas, but THIS...just seemed so UNINTERESTING! I like Jason Segal, but he really let me down on this one as both actor AND writer, so I'm hoping he improves later on. Emily Blunt...you're lucky "Looper" came out this year. The only good part about this film was seeing Allison Brie and Chris Pratt, and I really wished the film was more based on them.

#7: John Carter - I'm usually not the type who harp on films that are adaptions of books, but this is an exception for me. Based on the "Barsoom" series by Edgar Rice Burroughs  I was very disappointing that they failed on this one. Sure, there are people who liked this film, but I'm not one of those people. I felt it wasn't very well paced, and it was disappointing that it had such a director like Andrew Staton on board with this film. I'm actually glad it bombed at the box office.

#6: Lockout - You know, I never thought there could be a film that bugged me as much as this film. But I know there are people will ask questions, so here are my responses: Yes, I knew the concept was dumb to begin with. Yes, Guy Pearce was pretty much playing that B-movie-esque character. And yes, I know that's what the film was suppose to be in a way: a B-movie. However, executions of it, like how this all lead up, wasn't very interesting. Most of the acting is awful  certain characters are idiots, and some of the effects are very poor to me.

#5: Gone - Well, another year, another film where we have one of the most underacted people starring in a film that has no structure whatsoever. Amanda Seyfried is just such a boring person to watch on film, and this film just has NOTHING for her to do. "Gone" is quite possible her worst film and performance, and it is so friggin pointless to watch, that it's not even worth the bargain bin at the dollar store. The only thing that I actually thought Seyfried did a good job as an actress, was in the show "Big Love" and "Les Miserables," mostly because she had so many characters to work off of. Here, she's by herself most of the time, and I almost fell asleep watching it.

#4: Paranormal Activity 4 - Okay, now this one is something I have to address...this is by far the WORST found footage movie I have ever seen. Going to see this film in IMAX, for footage off an iPhone or XBox Kinect, seeing plot points that don't make any goddamn sense and dealing with characters who are very unrealistic?...Do I even NEED to say more?!

#3: 21 Jump Street - Let me just get one thing straight. I. HATE. Jonah Hill. He's not funny, original, OR a good actor. And I have to ask, was THIS film's popularity REALLY worth pushing back "G.I. Joe Retaliation?" At least I'm glad Channing Tatum has better films under his name, for all I care. Now there are three things in this film that really bugged me.

1) Like "Dark Shadows," this was based on a TV drama. However, unlike "Dark Shadows," it actually stuck to one element...however, here's the problem: it's not funny, and it gets annoying very quick. It results to the same crap that has been done to death with most comedies today.

2) I was hoping to give this film a chance, to prove that Jonah Hill could play a character that wasn't a type-cast, since he was producer AND writer for this film. And let's face it, type-casting can get old after a while, to where it gets infuriating, except for certain actors like Steve Buscemi and Bruce Campbell. But with Hill, it doesn't work, and pretty much every movie I've seen him in, he's played the same character, and that really doesn't help.

3) This film was HEAVILY acclaimed by critics, currently holding an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes...um...WHY? Please...I want to know why.

#2: Resident Evil Retribution - ...Will this series EVER die?! For being a fifth film in a series based on a not-too great game franchise, I do believe that there is no hope for films based on video games. Paul W.S. Anderson has really done it this time, and this film really shows how bad he's gotten. The performances are just awful  the story has gone from stupid to absolute ludicrousness  and the attempts of tying to the games are just annoying! Milla Jovovich has cemented herself, playing a character that has no development, other than everything happening just comes out of her husband's perverted stupidity. Come on, even Michael Bay isn't this stupid! It's a terrible sequel, it has terrible stories, terrible characters, I hope this is finally the end of the entire "Resident Evil" franchise, and it showcases AGAIN why "Silent Hill" has had better luck with their games AND films.

#1: Prometheus - Or as people have been calling it, "The most overrated film released this year!" This is honestly a film where I felt the recommendation was like getting tricked in a game of Paintball Assassin  This is a film that after I saw it, I felt so angry about, AND people who over-glorify it. The acting is mediocre, the story so underdeveloped, the characters are idiots, the logic and science of it are infuriating as well. It doesn't answer questions, if they do a sequel, and sequel-begging doesn't work if the film is terrible.

xxxxxxx

Okay....now that that's over, time to move on with the good stuff.