Back in
2011, when I started originally doing film reviews on Deviant Art, one of my
first films to talk about was “Unknown, starring Liam Neeson and directed by
Jaume Collet-Serra, who made that awful remake of “House of Wax.” It was a film
that while had great action, was more focused on the suspense, thrills, and
mystery aspect that it brought up. In that film, Neeson played Martin Harris, a
man who arrives in Berlin with his wife, but when he goes to get his ID back
from the airport, he gets into a car accident. When he wakes up, he realizes
there is another man who claims he’s Martin Harris, and now Neeson needs to
find out what’s going on, as he’s been hunted by people trying to subdue him.
It was in my opinion Neeson’s best film in a long time, in the ways of
portraying an action star, more so than “Taken.”
Now
this time around, Collet-Serra and Neeson are working again, this time with the
film, “Non-Stop.” The film tells of Bill Marks, an Air Force Marshall, who starts
getting texts on a flight by someone threatening to kill a passenger every 20
minutes, unless a payment of $150 million is forwarded to an account. Marks
tries to find out who it is, but soon finds out that the account number is in
his name, and now Mark is framed for hijacking the plane, as he desperately
tries to clear his name, before the plane crashes. Much like “Unknown,” the
film brings the focus away from the action, and goes for the suspense and
thrills. And for a film in a plane the whole time, there is only about 3 action
scenes total, as well as lasting about three to five minutes at most. But that’s
what I felt worked, was that there wasn’t much action to begin with, since it’s
in a plane, and you can’t do much anyway.
As
always, Neeson brings a captive presence to him, playing a former New York cop,
turned Air Marshall, after life changing events. Yeah, there are clichés, but I
didn’t let them bother me, since he’s proven to make it work extremely well. To
this day, Neeson has proven to not only be a great actor, but a great action
star at that, even in his 60’s. We also have Julianne Moore in the film,
playing the lady friend that he meets on the plane. She does have a likable
character to her, being someone who does tend to get close and help, even if
she’s just a typical everyday woman. There’s also good performances from other
people on the plane, like the doctor, the main stewardess, the partner of
Neeson, and the pilots. We also have some great work from, now Oscar winner
Lupita Nyong’o. As for the twist with the culprit, I won’t spoil it for you,
but with the motivations made, it does make sense. It actually makes the
culprit more relatable, as it would be something I would do myself, if driven to
that point.
Does
the film have flaws? Only a few. There were at times when certain moments felt
out of place, like how Neeson’s partner was able to smuggle cocaine onto a
plane (that does happen), but I managed to find a few reasons that were left
out probably get the better of me. Other than that, nothing much really
bothered me that badly, or got me confused.
Now the
big question is, how did this hold up against “Unknown?” does Well, as much as
I do enjoy this film with what it does, “Unknown” is still the better film in
my opinion, as it had much more enjoyable mystery and suspense to it, with
enough action to balance it out and make it just as investing as any typical
filmgoer would find.
Overall,
“Non-Stop” still manages to prove that Liam Neeson is still a badass, and that
this director CAN do good movies. If you’ve got time, definitely take a look at
this and have a blast with it.
Back in
2007, before his fans were divided by all the talk of “Man of Steel,” Zack
Snyder was best known for two movies: the remake of “Dawn of the Dead,” and the
adaption of Frank Miller’s “300.” Based on Greek history, the film tells of the
Battle of Marathon, in which King Leonidas and his Spartan army go up against
the Persian army lead by Xerxes…and that’s it. Sure, there’s Queen Gorgo trying
to recruit back up for the battle, but there really isn’t much plot to be said.
All the film is is stylized action scenes, accompanied by tremendously cheesy
moment after moment in-between and slow-motion shots, to make the film seem
more epic. While this does seem like a film that IS up my alley, I didn’t think
it was as investing as everyone says. It could be from either expecting a bit
too much, or because I saw the film four years after its popularity went down
for a while. But despite it all, I did think it was entertaining, especially
since we don’t get that many R rated action films now-a-days.
It wasn’t
until years later that they decided to make a sequel to it. It had been in the
works for quite some time now, and had many delays added to it for quite some
time. The original release date was set for the first weekend of last August,
which was also set to compete with the “Robocop” remake’s original release
date, but then both were pushed back. Snyder was originally set to direct, but
he declined to direct “Man of Steel,” so it went to Noam Murro after he turned
down to direct “A Good Day to Die Hard.” And let me just say, this film ALREADY
proved itself to be a much better film than that travesty.
In this
new film, we learn the back-story of Xerxes and how he became the true ruler of
the Persians, after his father had been killed by Themistocles, General of
Athens. When brought to present time, Themistocles and his army of Athens start
to go up against the Persian army on the sea sides, lead by Artemisia.
Technically, the film is more of a parallel film to the last one, as the events
of the first movie are brought up at times, cutting to stock footage indicating
that it is happening. I thought this was a clever way to expand this story
further. From what I heard, this film is supposed to be based on Frank Miller’s
sequel comic, “Xerxes,” which is what certain points of this story are taken
from.
In
terms of casting, I found them enjoyable. Lena Headey and Rodrigo Santoro
reprise their characters from the first film as Gorgo and Xerxes, despite the
lack of screen time they have, as the focus is more put on the war going on.
With the new cast, Themistocles is played by Sebastian Stapleton, and for a
replacement for Gerard Butler, he manages to pull through in a different tone. Whereas
the Spartans and Persians are more focused on winning the battle, Athens and
the rest of Greeks do have remorse over the loss of their men, which fits the
position that Themistocles is in.
As for
the rest of the cast, none of them really do stand that out as much, as they do
seem to mostly be the same stock character; that is, except for the main villain
of the film, Artemisia. Oh my god, Eva Green’s performance in this movie is
absolutely STUNNING. She is so crazy, so bold, and downright reasonably evil; I
could not take my eyes off her whenever she was on-screen. With how the film
has similar elements that could be recycled from the first movie, they do have
the negotiation scene between generals, only it’s a sex scene. All I have to
say is, this is what the sex scene from “Dark Shadows” SHOULD have been like,
if they simply made it an R rated film. Movie still would have sucked, but it
would have at least made it more interesting. And it makes it all worthwhile,
when Themistocles and Artemisia have their final battle, resulting in one of
the best insults I’ve heard in film for a long time.
The
action scenes, keeping in the same style of the first film with blood and slow-mo,
do keep the film entertaining at times. The only problem is that there are moments
that seem to drag on and slow down the pace the film is going. I wouldn’t be so
harsh about it, but it drags it to where I almost fell asleep, or until it
actually got to Eva Green again. If it weren’t for her, the film wouldn’t have
been as good as it was.
Overall,
“300: Rise of an Empire” is pretty much like the first film. If you didn’t like
the first film, then I have no doubt you’ll like this one, unless you go just
for Eva Green’s performance.
Rating: 6/10
Tune in next time, and I'll be talking about "Non-Stop."
Jay
Ward is considered by many as one of the pioneers of television cartoons.
Reason for it is with the iconic success of “Rocky & Bullwinkle,” a show
about a moose and flying squirrel going on many adventures that stop the
persuasive plots of Potsylvanian spies, Boris Badinov and Natasha. This show
was made around the times of the Cold War, so it was basically a satire on
that, but that wasn’t all the show had to offer. There were other cartoon
shorts, such as “Fractured Fairy Tales,” “Dudley Do-Right,” and today’s
subject, “Peabody’s Improbable History.” This is pretty much the educational
segment of the show, as it features the smartest dog in the world, Mr. Peabody,
and his adoptive son, Sherman, going back in time with an invention called the
WABAC. They use this to go back to historical events in history, and show what
happened during this time and see how it unfolds. It was pretty much the
segment kids usually went to go get snacks or use the bathroom, as it has been
deemed the weakest of the bunch.
And much
like “Rocky & Bullwinkle” and “Dudley-Do Right,” “Mr. Peabody & Sherman”
was turned into a theatrical film for modern day audiences. Now when I heard
news about this, I wasn’t the least bit interested, even when trailers started
to pop up, I thought it was going to suck royally. I mean, let’s face it, “R&B”
and “Dudley Do-Right” rightfully bombed due to the lack of loyalty, and the
only good thing about it was the casting. Say what you will about Jason
Alexander, at least he did better justice to Boris more so than Robert DeNiro
did to Fearless Leader. Bottom line, I had low expectations for this movie. And
even if it was helmed by acclaimed director, Rob Minkoff, the man behind “The
Lion King,” it still didn’t do it for me. Don’t forget, this was the same guy
responsible for “The Haunted Mansion” starring Eddie Murphy, so it could go in
either direction. So, as I pulled a triple feature, I started the day out with “Mr.
Peabody & Sherman.” And let me just say…It surprisingly didn’t suck. It’s
no masterpiece, but it does manage to be a charming kid’s movie.
The
film tells the origins of Mr. Peabody and Sherman, as they return back from one
of their past adventures for Sherman to start school. However, after he gets
into a fight with a bully named Penny, Peabody must now try to make peace with
the family, if he wants to keep Sherman in his custody. Disaster strikes when
Penny tricks Sherman into showing her the WABAC and getting stuck in time, leading
to shenanigans. The plot, while a bit generic, doesn’t stray from what keeps
the charm of the original cartoons. In fact, it may be one of those rare occasions
of a film adaptation being loyal and superior to its source material; it pulls a
reverse with the cartoons, where “Rocky & Bullwinkle” and “Dudley Do-Right”
have the superior cartoon, but inferior film adaption.
While
the cast is full of on-screen voice actors, I thought they did an okay job
here. Ty Burrell as Mr. Peabody does a good job at portraying the character,
showcasing his smarts in the simple tone of his voice. Granted, he’s no Bill
Scott, but I digress. I also enjoyed the work done with Sherman, played by Max
Charles, who you may remember as young Peter Parker in “The Amazing Spiderman.”
I was glad they DID get a kid who DOES have acting chops to play Sherman, and I
hope to see more of Charles’s work in the future, in both film and animation.
We also get appearances from other great talents, such as Leslie Mann and
Stephen Colbert as the Petersons, Mel Brooks as Albert Einstein, and even voice
actors such as Patrick Warburton as Agamemnon and Jess Harnell as George
Washington, Abe Lincoln, Isaac Newton, and Bill Clinton.
The
humor in the film, while modern, does make sense. I mean, think about it, it’s
a film that involves Time Travel, so something like that could take place at
any given time and it would work out if done right. While there were some jokes
that felt tacked on, the rest of it does keep in tone of the cartoon, like
Peabody making historical puns. And in all honesty, I’d take bad puns over bad sophomoric
humor, which is too common nowadays. Not only that, but the film manages to get
in a few touching moments, and I do feel they have a good impact on you when
they happen. I am glad to see that Dreamworks has been improving with their
animated films as of recent, because this one does hit the spot decently.
Now is
there anything I didn’t like in this film? Yes, and one of them is with one
character, but a big one at that. The girl in this movie, Penny Peterson,
played by Ariel Winters. Don’t get me wrong, Winters did a good job voicing
this character; I just felt that they made this character too unlikable when
they introduced her. In fact, she bullies Sherman just for being raised by a
dog, and thus she starts treating him like one. Now I would have been okay with
this, but she went WAY too far, and I felt like that was too harsh. Not only
that, there were moments that felt SO damn corny, that it took me out of the
film for a second, with a prime example being that clichéd “I'm Sparticus” speech that is seen a lot of films. Aside from that, nothing else
really bothered me that much.
Overall,
“Mr. Peabody & Sherman” is a charming little movie that manages to have
good humor, wonderful animation, and seems to appeal to audiences of this
generation. If you have kids to take to this movie, then I’d recommend seeing
it, if “The Lego Movie” isn’t playing, or you already saw it. Trust me, you won’t
be bored.
Rating: 7/10
Oh, and you know that triple feature I mentioned? Well, next
reviews are on the other two, coming soon.
If
there is a man that defines legend, it’s Hayao Miyazaki. This man has been one
of the biggest inspirations of the animation department for over forty years,
getting his start of business with the first “Lupin the Third” series back in
the 70’s. Since then, he’s made classics such as “Castle in the Sky,” “Kiki’s
Delivery Service,” “Ponyo,” “Howl’s Moving Castle,” “Princess Mononoke,” and “Spirited
Away,” all of which are some of my favorite films of all time. He really knows
how to capture some of the most breathtaking visuals and create such
magnificent worlds that have inspired other great film makers and animators
alike.
Sadly,
he’s announced that he’s finally putting a close to his career, and finally retiring…for
real this time. So to end it out, he’s chosen to give us the Academy Award
nominated film, “The Wind Rises.” And let me just say, if this film was
released in the U.S. the same time it was in Japan, I would have IMMEDIATELY
put it up with my favorite films of the year list.
“The
Wind Rises” tells of Jiro Horikoshi, a young boy who dreams of becoming one of
the finest plane mechanics who ever lived. During his time growing up, he works
down to the bone to deliver a creation that will showcase Japan’s talents and
get them up to date with technology. However, what he’ll soon realize is that
the planes he’s designing will be of usage to the Nazis during World War II.
While
not a 100% biography of Jiro, as there are moments that do feel romanticized,
it doesn’t take away from what it’s trying to tell here. It’s telling the story
of a boy who tries to hold onto the dreams he’s had since childhood. For the
most part, the film mostly focuses on Jiro trying to find the way to make his
dream come properly, without it falling to pieces in the test run, even if he’s
told to go as far as learn some designs from Nazi engineers. While Miyazaki has
stuck to making stories for families of all ages, this one is a pure adult
film. It’s not an R rated film, heavens forbid, but it does manage to treat the
audience like adults here, showing the struggles a man has gone through for his
work, especially when he finally finds love that he knows will be taken from
him. In my mind, it may be Miyazaki’s most realistic film, despite a few goofy
moments.
The American
voice cast is filled with good choices in my book; when it comes to Studio
Ghibli films being dubbed in English, they really know how to get on-screen
actors to perform excellently well here. Emily Blunt, John Krasinski, Martin
Short, William H. Macy, Stanley Tucci, and Elijah Wood really pull through
here, really capturing their characters as if they WERE these characters. We
also have an appearance from Mae Whitman, who was the only true voice actress I
caught in this film, and I thought that was a nice touch there. However, what
really worked for me was Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Jiro. Throughout a majority of
the film, or hell the entire movie; I completely forgot that was him in the
role. His quiet tone and subtlety made this performance work especially well.
This is the best voice acting job I’ve seen him do since “Treasure Planet.”
As for
the animation, do I even need to say anything about? I mean, it’s Miyazaki,
traditional hand-drawn animation, and it is absolutely magnificent. I almost
thought I was going to cry, knowing that this will probably be the last film I’ll
ever see by such a great artist. But at the same time, I’m glad he’s doing it,
because we all knew it would happen sooner or later; and if I DIDN’T see this
in the theater, I would have regretted it immensely. I just hope that future
generations will be able to appreciate not just the legacy of this man, but the
impact of traditional animation as a whole, since it’s becoming a dying art.
If you’re
a longtime Miyazaki fan, like me, then there is no reason for you to not see “The
Wind Rises.” It’s a beautiful work of art, and is a true swan song to quite
possibly the greatest animator who ever lived. With it nominated for an Academy
Award tomorrow night, I wouldn’t be surprised if it managed to win. And if it
doesn’t, I’m at least glad it was given the nomination.
In
1979, author Scott Spencer released his romance novel, “Endless Love,” which
tells the story of 17-year old David Axelrod, who falls for 15-year old Jade
Butterfield. When their relationship gets out of hand, Jade’s father forbids
David from stepping into the house, resulting in David doing things one
wouldn’t normally do, just to be with Jade. The novel has been said by many to
be one of the most compelling and investing love stories that really adds a lot
of tension and chemistry to these characters in this story.
In
1981, the director of the “Romeo & Juliet” movie from the 60’s, Franco
Zeffirelli, adapted the book into a feature film, starring Brooke Shields as
Jade. The film, however, was panned for poor acting, lackluster direction,
moments that don’t really add up, and for being a disregard for the book on
many aspects. In fact, this was one of the first few films to have multiple
nominations during the first five years of the Razzies; yeah, it was that bad.
With that being said, the film has developed a cult following within time, as
it has the iconic Oscar nominated title song by Lionel Richie, and being the
film debut for actors James Spader and Tom Cruise.
When
word came out that a remake was to arrive, people were very mixed about it. For
one, there were the people who were actually interested in seeing a proper
representation of the book they’ve loved; then there were the people who were
complaining on why they were remaking a shit movie, despite them being the same
people complaining about remakes of good movies getting made as well.
So how
DOES the remake hold up? Well, let me say this…I could not have been begging
for the original 1981 film any more if I tried. This film was not only inferior
to the first film, but it distances itself farther from the book than anything
I have ever seen! Never in my life have I seen a film so uncomfortably hard to
watch, to where it made me walk out before it hit the halfway point, and I sat
through “Prometheus” and “Die Hard 5” for God’s sake!
Instead
of just going through the plot like I usually do, especially since I already did, I’m going to be listing the five things that made this film so goddamn frustrating with every passing minute.
#1: The Age – I’m not talking about a generational age, but
rather the age of the two main leads, Jade and Dave. The two in this film are
depicted as college graduates, or high school graduates at best…if they’re out
of high school, why is this a big deal for the father to get pushy about her
dating?! It made sense in the book AND the ’81 movie, because Jade was just
starting high school, where as Dave was close to graduation; here, they’re
depicted as the same goddamn age, how is that wrong?!
#2: The Characters – Oh excuse me, what characters? These
are not characters, but rather cardboard cutouts of characters that were just
thrown in. I know half of these people were trying, but dear criminy of Hell;
we don’t even get ANY development from these characters, aside from exposition
by either unnecessary narration or someone of them saying something to move the
story along. The film addresses that Jade has been sort of an unnoticed person,
yet Dave admits at one point that he’s loved her since 10th
grade…and he hasn’t given her recognition until AFTER graduation…what a creep. The
only character who actually HAS development is Jade’s dad, played by Bruce
Greenwood. I’ll give credit to Bruce for trying whatever he could to make this
actually work, but even then it wouldn’t have saved this movie. He sets up a
party for his daughter’s graduation, yet only invites HIS friends, and then
tells David that it was better before the kids in their class showed up. So
you’re mad at a guy who likes your daughter, just for doing what she asked to
begin with?! My god, you’re an idiot! Then there are the comic reliefs in this
movie, which are not only unfunny, but managed to be just as obnoxious as
humanly possible. The less you know there, the better.
#3: The Structure of the Story – No matter how much the ’81
film disregards the book, by having added in elements or mixed up parts, at
least it had key moments that TRIED to follow the source material! This film on
the other hand, had hardly ANYTHING to do with the book at all! You could have
called this ANYTHING else, and you would have had the exact same movie! Here’s what
I mean: the house burning scene is put at the end of this movie, during a fight
between Jade and her father with candles all around; one gets knocked over,
Dave helps save them, and the dad now has to make a decision on whether to keep
the possession of a son he lost, or help Dave, resulting in a life changing
moment…Okay, quick question, but…WHAT STORY ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL HERE?! If
you’re trying to tell the story of someone finally moving on with life, I’d
rather be watching a film that does it right. When I go into a film based on
the novel “Endless Love,” I expect, oh I don’t know, THE STORY OF “ENDLESS
LOVE”!! Even if this WASN'T an adaption of the story, it's still not a good way to tell a story like this!
#4: The Tone – The emotion that this film was supposed to be
giving off here is non-existent. Nothing about this film even FEELS genuine in any way, shape, or form. Characters wise, story wise, and everything else doesn’t even
try to make this film relatable to reality, because this sort of thing would
not and COULD not happen! It tried to be cute, and it failed. It tried to be
romantic, and it failed. It tried to be funny, and it failed, MISERABLY! It
tried to be sad…which it succeeded, since I felt sad just being in that
theater.
#5: Being Released Valentine’s Day Weekend – To everyone,
and I mean EVERYONE…who took their significant other to this film, whether it
was their decision or yours, I feel so sorry for whoever suffered through this
travesty. To think that the film makers would have the balls to say this would
be a great date movie, is about as insulting as saying “The Lone Ranger” deserves
an Oscar nod. If you want a proper date movie, just go and see “The Lego
Movie.” And if you’ve seen it already, go see it AGAIN! That film deserves your
attention and money, more so than this!
Overall,
“Endless Love” has done nothing but enrage me greatly! It’s poorly acted,
directed terribly, and written with such awful dialogue and exposition! I walked out on this film in the theater, and it took me watching again online, after five attempts, just to sit through the whole thing! To say
that this film is the worst film of the year so far is a complete
understatement! It's the worst adaptation, the worst remake, and a STRONG contender for the worst movie I have ever seen…PERIOD! It's that close people! I hate this movie! I hate it, hate
it, HATE IT!
In
1987, director Paul Verhoeven brought us the Peter Weller sci-fi film, “Robocop.”
The film told the tale of police officer, Alex Murphy, who was critically
injured and used as the guinea pig for Omni Consumer Products. Thus, he’s
turned into the world’s first half-man, half-machine law enforcer. What was
originally going to be a “Judge Dredd” movie, turned into an original piece of
work that really set the bar in terms of action films before “Die Hard,” and it
shows. To this day, this film remains one of my top ten favorite films of all
time, and the main feature of it comes from Robocop himself. Alex Murphy is a
tragic character, as he’s turned into nothing but an experiment by the people
he tried to protect. Despite being a machine, Alex is still the same person he
was, showing that no matter what you take from a human’s body, you can’t change
who there are as a person.
Now,
while the sequels may have taken away from that joy the enjoyment that was
given to film goers, it still holds a special place in the hearts of fans such
as me. When word of a remake came into play, I wasn’t really looking forward to
it, as something like this would never have the same charm that was brought to
the original, especially since they were making it PG-13. Even after enjoying
the remakes of “Evil Dead” and “Carrie,” I only considered those remakes to be
dumb luck and to be in the right hands to begin with. Even with what I was
seeing in production photos and trailers, I still wasn’t in high spirits.
Despite this, I still went and saw the film, to see if I could be proven it was
worthy of being considered a “Robocop” film and one that could revive the
series.
While the
remake does seem to follow some of the same elements of the original, they do
add a few new touches that stand out, like other remakes. Most of them I felt
very mixed about in terms of the purpose they served to the original. For example,
Murphy’s family is actually given a much bigger role in the film, and is
actually an essential character from beginning to end. In the original, she has
a much smaller part, as she left Murphy after the accident, with the belief
that he had died. That scene where Murphy finds that out as Robocop is a very moving
scene, and really showcases what he’s lost in return for a second chance at
life. In the remake, after Murphy has his accident, the wife’s the one who
gives the approval for the procedure, that way he could still be there for both
her and their son. It would be fine, but I think it would have been a stronger
impact, if the scene where Murphy meets his son was at the end, when he finally
sees him for the first time since then. Instead the scene is put at the halfway
point, which is okay, just not as strong as it could have been.
While the Robocop suit itself felt
off to me, I started to be a little more open-minded about it, as I figured it
was trying to differentiate from the original with a new design. The problem I
had was it looked more like the armored suit in “The Dark Knight Trilogy” than
it did a Robocop. I did feel like what they were going for was more of stealth
in the shadows, but that’s one thing I did feel was a problem. Robocop seemed
much too light on his feet when it came to the action scenes. I know, CGI has plagued
pretty much everything nowadays, but that’s the problem. We’re letting CGI get in
the way too much, to where if you’re not good with it, it looks cartoonish and
unrealistic. Hell, the scene revealing Murphy’s remaining body looked stupid.
In the original, all that you could really see left of him was his face, and
that was it. It didn’t need to show us any of his internal organs, as we could
already figure what it was like for ourselves. And even then, we only have
Murphy without the Robocop visor for the last act of the movie, when he’s
trying to regain his true humanity again.
Now from what I’ve said so far,
that doesn’t mean everything is bad. For starters, Michael Keaton as the head
of Omni Products delivers a really calculative performance, and really plays
his cards right whatever way possible. Not since “Batman Returns” have we had
Keaton play a villain that was this smart and prepared. Originally, Hugh Laurie
was set to play this character, but after he dropped out, Keaton took over the
spotlight. I believe both actors would have been equally good in this role, as
they both can showcase that mastermind talent everywhere. Now, also in this
film is Samuel L. Jackson as Pat Novak, who’s basically a news reporter
delivering the news of robot safety all around. As with any performance by this
man, all you need is for him to say motherfucker at least once, and you have a
Sam Jackson performance. We also have Jackie Earl Haley as a weapons
specialist, and Gary Oldman as the scientist who helps bring Murphy back to
life. Both of them do their jobs respectively and it’s easy to understand why.
Both can do well in almost any movie they are in, as long as they have
something good to work off of, in terms of a main character.
Now we come down to Joel Kinnaman
as Alex Murphy, a.k.a. Robocop. Now when it was announced that Joel was playing
the iconic character that was brought to life by Peter Weller, I thought he was
going to be generic, since there wasn’t much he’s done in terms of film. On one
side he’s done the remake of “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” as Christer Malm…on
the other, he’s done “The Darkest Hour,” which was a boring mess. Not only
that, but it was also rumored that before Joel, they were considering actors
such as Michael Fassbender, Russell Crowe, Keanu Reeves, Johnny Depp, and even
Tom Cruise at one point. Out of the choices they were deciding on before, I
would have really been intrigued to see Fassbender as the main hero, since he
was the one who felt the most right for the role. Crowe, Depp, and Reeves are
good, but they wouldn’t match up to the charm that Fassbender has right now.
Cruise wouldn’t have a chance in hell to play Robocop, because the possibilities
of that happening are as slim as me liking a Tyler Perry movie. Anyways, going
back to Joel Kinnaman as Robocop, I have to say…I was pleased. He wasn’t as
good as Peter Weller was, but he did manage to still have a likable presence to
him, and at the same time be a genuine person. If this film does manage to make
success, I’d be okay with him continuing on as Robocop.
Despite the film using CGI over
practical effects, I have to give credit for the action scenes, directed by
Jose Padilha, were fairly decent. It does have shaky cam, but not Jerry Bruckheimer
levels of annoyance, as I could tell what was going on. It may not be as
exciting as the original, especially since the original was R rated and had
used the most squibs in any film known to man, I still give credit where credit
is due.
Overall, the remake of “Robocop,”
while not perfect was a fairly decent movie. I didn’t hate it like I was
expecting to, but for what it gives us, it gives it pretty well. If anything,
it’s worth a decent rental or matinee showing. Not better than the first, but
still better than the sequels that came afterwards.
Rating: 7/10
PS: They do have the Robocop theme, it just wasn't long enough.
Okay everybody! That time of year again, to relive the best films of the year and the worst...and we're getting rid of the worst first. You know how it is, eat the vegetables first, before getting to the entree. Also, bear in mind that some of these films may be in a different order than you expect, so if you see a film that got a higher or lower rating end up higher on the list, don't be so surprised. Sometimes, my opinion may change overtime, and I just don't have time to change the review a bit. Anyways, let's just get this over with, because we've got a lot to talk about here.
x x x
Worst of 2013 #15: The Lone Ranger (2013)
This film has been appearing relatively high on people's worst of the year lists, and it's very understandable. And while I do see this as a major disappointment and failure, I don't hate it quite as much as others. I liked the performances from Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp as the Lone Ranger and Tonto, the production design is really damn good, and the action scenes are extremely fun, especially the dueling trains climax where we hear Hans Zimmer's rendition of the William Tell Overture. However, there are a lot of scenes that go on too long (most of it is just padding), it focuses way too much on Tonto, and some plot points are handled in the rest of the film very sloppily. Not the worst like everyone thinks, but still disappointing.
#14: Epic (2013)
Blue Sky studios has always been a very mixed bag with animated films. Sure, it has a few good films here and there, but they've also got a lot of misses as well. This is one of those misses. While the animation is really nice to look at, the story and characters are cliched and annoying as hell. It's another one of those films that tries to tell a compelling story about an outcast trying to save a hidden world within the forests, only throw in comic relief slugs that make Skids and Mudflap from "Transformers 2" look tolerable. Seriously, if you had taken out those two, the film would at least be a bit more likable. But even then, I didn't care for these characters, I wasn't too enthralled by the story, and it just got under my skin as just pure annoyance.
#13: Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters
Like I said in my review, I'm not too familiar with the Percy Jackson series, but even if I was, I'd hate this movie more. Heck, just ask my cousin, who is a huge fan of the books. It's hard not to compare these films to Harry Potter, especially when the first film was directed by Chris Columbus, but you see a lot of similarities, especially with our three protagonists. There are some fun moments, but the film was just boring to sit through, which is sad because it's a film based around Greek Mythology. I don't know whether or not this film will get a sequel, but at the rate each film is released, I don't know if it will continue.
#12: Warm Bodies
The zombie apocalypse is stopped by the power of love...it sounds fucking dumb, but that's the best way I can summarize this film. While the performances and make-up are good, the rest of the film is just a boring romantic comedy. It's sad, because I do like the cast and the director, but the way the film was executed just didn't seem to mesh well with me. Maybe it could have been better if I had read the comics it was based on, but I doubt that would do anything.
#11: The Purge
Platinum Dunes attempt at making a film that wasn't a remake is something that I was kind of looking forward to. However, all of that went down the drain for the sake of a home invasion film, which just makes it a rip-off of "The Strangers." There was another film that had a similar plot, "You're Next," but I didn't get a chance to see that movie.
Hopefully the series will turn out to be an anthology series that shows different parts of the world handling the Purge, because they really opened the door for something like this. But, I won't get my hopes up for that one.
#10: Bullet to the Head
Don't get me wrong, I love Sylvester Stallone action films, but this one was just a pain to sit through. I mean, I wasn't expecting this film to be a masterpiece or anything. I mean, I'm the kind of person who said that "The Expendables II" was one of my favorite films of the year. But when you compare this film to "The Last Stand" with Arnold Schwarzenegger, this film just feels like a chore to get through. And don't give me that argument of "oh, but it's like one of those 80's action films, it's suppose to be stupid and fun." The film is stupid, but I didn't have fun, because it wasn't enjoyable to sit through. If you liked it, I'm not taking that away from you. For me, I couldn't stand it.
#9: Machete Kills
Much like with "Bullet to the Head," this film was to appeal to those who love the Grindhouse films...the only problem is we already got that, six years ago. "Planet Terror" and "Death Proof" worked as tributes to the Grindhouse film era, but this film tries to act like a satire on those films. The key word being "try." The overuse of CGI, the unbalanced pacing, the spoiling of the movie because of the fake trailer to the third film playing at the beginning and end of the film, it's just a mess. As much as I do enjoy this cast, even they couldn't make this film fun to sit through.
#8: Jack the Giant Slayer
After being delayed for almost a year, "Jack the Giant Killer," which was re-titled "Jack the Giant Slayer," finally is released to the public. I can understand their reasoning, so it won't lose money when "The Dark Knight Rises" came out, but even then the film was a total bomb at the box office. It was such a bore to sit through this film, even when it was an action scene. I'd also like to ask, why was this film changed to "Slayer," when Jack only takes down only two or three giants total? Yeah, way to make a really pointless title change. Hopefully, Bryan Singer's next film will be a little bit better to sit through.
#7: Escape From Planet Earth
From the animation studio that brought you "Reboot" and "Beast Wars," comes this pile of crap. I was really interested to see how this film would turn out, being the studio's first major film, but this really backfired into such a cliched childish mess. The animation is mediocre at best, the writing is bland and pathetic, and the characters just suck, along with the voice acting. It doesn't matter how big of a star you can get, it would have been easier just to get actual voice actors to do the work better. If this is going to be the same kind of treatment given to the "Ratchet & Clank" movie, then I'm going to be really pissed off.
#6: The Great Gatsby
While it's technically not as bad as some of the other entries, this one especially pisses me off more. For starters, I was fresh off of reading the book for my English class at the time, and I didn't like the book. I didn't like these characters, I thought the story was boring and uninteresting, and it was very lackluster. The Robert Redford film, I didn't care about either, but I'd at least watch that film over this new one. The DiCaprio version of "The Great Gatsby" is absolutely terrible, most of that stemming from Baz Lurhman's god awful directing. If you want a prime example of how horribly executed this remake is, just watch both renditions of Gatsby's death scene back to back, and you'll understand clearly why it sucks.
#5: R.I.P.D.
The film that ripped off "Men in Black" and "Good Vs. Evil," and then took a giant shit on it. Not a damn thing about this film was enjoyable, nor was it even fun in the slightest. Now I know that this film was based on a comic of the same name, but would that actually make it any different? It's still a terrible rip-off. I mean, people ragged on me for liking "Pacific Rim," but at least that film was fun, had likable characters, and didn't shy away from what it was doing. This one, never has an original thought, and by the end we just end up hating all these characters.
#4: Texas Chainsaw 3D
Way to take a horror icon and make him a bumbling wimp. To the makers of this film, you should all be ashamed for making a complete joke out of one of the most terrifying films ever made. Tobe Hooper's iconic work of horror about a group of teenagers encountering a family of cannibals, still stands the test of time and remains one of the true pioneer works of early slasher films. They never really did recapture the same kind feel that the first film had, with the sequels getting more and more ridiculous, the Platinum Dunes remake and prequel being okay but nothing great...then we have this film that makes itself out to be a direct sequel to the original film, but not once shows any respect, dignity, or effort into it at all.
#3: The Hangover Part 3
The third installment to a comedy that wasn't really that good to begin with, and it's the absolute worst sequel to a comedy I have ever witnessed in theaters. The one thing that I will give credit for this film is that it did try to differentiate itself from the previous films, but that doesn't make it better. The attempts at humor that they try to deliver here are pathetic and extremely unfunny, especially from Zach Galifianakis's character of Alan being a complete selfish asshole to his friends and family. Also, there's no hangover in this film, for a film that's called "The Hangover Part 3." And no, that after credits scene doesn't count.
#2: Movie 43
Okay...first of all, fuck you for thinking this was a good idea. Second, fuck you for thinking any of these sketches were a good idea. Third, fuck you for getting all of these talented people attached to this film, and all of it amounting to nothing. Fourth...fuck you.
#1: A Good Day to Die Hard
Yeah, there wasn't another film this year that pissed me off as badly as this one, which is kind of a bitter sweet feeling. On one hand, there wasn't a film worse than this one this year, but on the other hand I had witnessed the worst sequel I've ever seen. It's insulting to "Die Hard" fans, it's insulting to action movie fans, the direction is awful, the acting is awful, the story is terrible, everything about this film just sucks the life out of me. Do yourself a favor and don't bother watching this film. There has been word that a sixth "Die Hard" film will be in the works, and I hope it turns out better than this. We can't let the series end on a note like this, we just can't! If it does happen, keep John Moore away from it as far as possible.
x x x
Alright, time to get the good stuff. Here are my top 15 favorite films of 2013! x x x Best of 2013 #15: Side Effects
Steven Soderbergh's mystery thriller revolving around anti-depressants is really fascinating and definitely one of his best films. The performances in this film are excellent, especially from Jude Law and Rooney Mara. I love seeing the two work off of each other and I love seeing the details unfold as it goes on. I really loved seeing this film twice in theaters, and both times were just as excellent.
#14: Anchorman 2 The Legend Continues
A comedy sequel that's handled right, and thank goodness for that. If you've seen the original film, then there's a strong chance you'll like this one just as much. The jokes are very fresh, the crazy moments fit in extremely well, everything you'd probably expect and anything you wouldn't expect are present in this film, and the climax is deeply satisfying. If a third film does come out, then I'm all for it.
#13: Fast & Furious 6
This was a deeply satisfying film to sit through. I enjoyed watching this film as much as I hated "A Good Day to Die Hard," giving me an over the top action film that did anything but disappoint. For a series that started off as a mere rip-off of "Point Break," I never expected them to bring it up to this level of excitement. Sure, the fifth film brought it up a notch, but this one truly perfected it. Plus, there are fights against a tank on a freeway, and a fight on a cargo plane, and they're fucking awesome. I'm really looking forward to what the next film will bring, if it does come into play after Paul Walker's tragic passing. #12: Carrie (2013)
This takes the spot as the most underrated horror remake I've seen. Almost every film reviewer I've seen talks about how it's nothing but a cash grab and not having a real purpose for existing. That's bullshit. This film is a whole lot better than what people say it is. The subject of bullying is still a major problem in our day and age, even worse than how it was back when the original film was released, and it's what Stephen King's book trying to get across, not just being a horror story. What Kimberly Pierce did with her version was update it, during a time when bullying has gotten more out of hand than before, especially in the digital age. I think people need to give this a second look with this in mind. #11: The World's End
Edgar Wright's newest installment to the Cornetto Trilogy was deeply satisfying. I loved the charm and clever jokes that they deliver with each passing second. Whenever you see Wright working with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, it's something you have to witness whatever way possible, like with "Hot Fuzz" and "Shaun of the Dead." I also love how much like with the other films, there's something you'll catch in a second viewing that you missed the first time, making it funnier and funnier. Also, I love Simon Pegg's coat in the film. I want one too.
#10: Gangster Squad
For a film that was part of a huge controversy, I'm really glad this film still got released. Ruben Fleischer may have given us "Zombieland" and "30 Minutes or Less," but "Gangster Squad" kicks both their asses, fills them full of lead, and then tears them apart with two cars. Sean Penn's performance as Mickey Cohen is fantastic, making him a real sadistic fucker, but also very fun to watch. In fact, everyone in this film is fun to watch: Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Robert Patrick, Giovanni Ribisi, Anthony Mackie, Nick Nolte, and Michael Pena. Everyone criticizes this film for not being "L.A. Confidential," which to be fair is a much better film, but this one isn't trying to be that. It's just trying to be a fun gangster flick, and I enjoyed every second of it.
#9: Gravity
While it's a very simple story with some heavy themes on belief, it actually didn't bother me as much as it could have. Not only that, but it was definitely a visual experience worth seeing. Alfonso Cuaron's visual masterpiece was definitely an experience worth sitting through. This is one of those films that actually used the 3D correctly, making it enhance the film rather than being just a gimmick that's grabbing money from the pockets of movie goers. I'm guessing that Cuaron will go on to win Best Director at the Oscars, since he's already accomplished that at the Golden Globes, but who knows.
#8: Pacific Rim
All I can say is fuck the haters, I loved this movie. I saw it opening night with my cousins and we had a blast sitting through this delicious delight of the summer. Guillermo Del Toro still remains among my favorite directors working today, and I was so damn satisfied that my most anticipated film of the year was one of my favorites. It really did bring out my inner youth, remembering the days of watching mech anime on Toonami, especially "G Gundam," with the pilots controlling the jaegers with their entire body movements. It still really pisses me off that this film wasn't as big of a success as it could of been, making only about $411 million, and yet the "Transformers" series had its last installment make over $1 billion. That's unfair as hell! Hopefully a sequel may come into play, and possibly a crossover with the new "Godzilla" coming out.
#7: The Wolf of Wall
Street
Martin Scorsese really managed to
deliver a film that had absolutely no boring moments in it, even at it being a
three-hour long flick. He has everyone in the cast from Leonardo DiCaprio and Jonah Hill to Rob Reiner
and Matthew McConaughey express just how far American Excess can go, much like “Pain
& Gain” did, with the big difference being it had much more humor to it. I’m
glad I managed to see this film, and DiCaprio really deserves his Golden Globe
and Oscar nomination. Not
only that, but with what I saw in this film, I can’t even imagine how the NC-17
version would have been. I mean, this is the film that has the word “fuck” said
569 times, and it opens with DiCaprio snorting cocaine out of a hooker’s ass, then have a scene later on where he downs cocaine to the "Popeye" theme to give Jonah Hill CPR.
It’s absolutely insane here.
#6: American Hustle
The best word that describes this film is "sexy." And for that, it's definitely the sexiest movie I've seen this year. I’ve always been fascinated by the works of David O. Russell, and here
with “American Hustle,” I find it to be one of his best works yet. I like the directions that make your
head spin with this one. You always expect something, only for it to go
completely opposite, having you sucked into the film much more. The
casting, the direction, and writing, all of it works so well that it’s hard to
keep your eyes off of anyone. I also like the lighting and look of the film,
with it being in the 70’s, but unlike how we’ve seen them before. It isn’t as
loose as “Wolf of Wall Street,” but it has plentiful moments like that between its characters, that I can't help but love it more.
#5: Evil Dead (2013)
Probably the best birthday present Hollywood has ever given me. This re-imagining of my favorite horror film was done with the best amount of care in a long time, thanks to the original trio of Sam Raimi, Robert Tapert, and Bruce Campbell filling in as producers. The performances, the make-up, the production design, and the gore all live up to the original, making it a fitting entry into the franchise. There has been word on an "Evil Dead" tv series being in development to link the original trilogy and this remake together, and Bruce has said that he'll return to play Ash once again. I hope it happens, because we all need a bit more Ash in our lives.
#4: Frozen (2013)
Disney's longtime awaited take on "The Snow Queen" is finally brought to life in this film, which also has the same title as a shitty horror film about a ski-lift. Regardless, I really enjoyed watching "Frozen," as it was truly the Disney Princess film that belongs right up there with those of the Disney Renaissance Era. The songs by Robert and Kristen Anderson Lopez are really catchy and memorable, from "Let It Go" to "Do You Want to Build a Snowman?" and "In Summer," making it a much more wholesome musical compared to their other works on Broadway. I especially loved how most of the cast consisted of Broadway actors like Idina Menzel and Josh Gad, since they know how to carry a song and the control of their vocal performance. I may have liked "Wreck-It Ralph" more, but I still had fun with it and am looking forward to buying it on blu-ray. #3: The Spectacular Now
If I had known sooner that this film was written by the duo that wrote "(500) Days of Summer," I would have immediately jumped on the next bus to find a theater playing this. But I didn't, so I had to watch it on DVD, which was definitely worth the wait. James Pornsoldt's adaptation of the Tim Tharp novel of the same name is a really charming and enduring tale of high school love, that plays a bit of tribute to John Hughes films of the 80's, much like last year's "The Perks of Being a Wallflower." Miles Teller and Shailene Woodley have excellent chemistry together, making themselves very likable with what they do, and seeing them work past their flaws as much as possible. As someone who's approaching graduation at his high school, it really does bring up thought about how I'm going to handle my future afterwards.
Now the next three films here are a tie, because they share the similar theme of loss of faith, with one set in a war zone, one set during slavery, and the other about the lives of children.
#2a: Lone Survivor
Peter
Berg really knew how to make this film based on the Red Wings Operation have an emotional impact on those who
have relatives in the army, or have been in the army themselves. As director and
writer, he had his heart in the right place, allowing the right amount of drama
and emotion to hit in the perfect way. I was
completely floored by Mark Wahlberg’s portrayal of Marcus Luttrell, as he really
embodies the true soldier tone and fear that they all have. How he wasn’t even
nominated for his performance, I will never know. And for this to not be
nominated for Best Picture, I feel this film’s been cheated.
#2b: 12 Years A Slave
The tale of Solomon Northup is handled in a very powerful and moving way, thanks to director Steve McQueen. This film really took balls to make, showing us the absolute darkest parts of slavery, through the eyes of one. Chiwetel Ejiofor is a phenomenal actor, and always has been an underrated favorite of mine. I loved him in his work for "Love Actually" and "Kinky Boots," but this really does show his talents well. This is the film that's currently sweeping the awards right now, and will mostly likely win the Oscar for Best Picture. If it does, I'm perfectly fine with that.
#2c: Prisoners
While "12 Years a Slave" was a brutal film to watch, this one was just as psychologically brutal, if not more. Hugh Jackman and Terrance Howard play two fathers who lose their daughters, and they prime suspect is a mentally challenged kid, played by Paul Dano (who was also in "12 Years A Slave"). While Jackman and Howard interrogate Dano, Jake Gyllenhaal plays an investigator trying to find the two missing girls, but suspect Jackman's methods. I was really upset that Jackman and Gyllenhaal didn't get nominated for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor, because they really did deserve the nominations. They handle this situation in a very realistic manner that it's extremely hard to sit through, but at the same time you can't take your eyes off of it. I still get goosebumps every time I watch the hammer scene. I also love the haunting music done by Jóhann Jóhannsson, giving it a really gloomy mood and dark atmosphere that really lets the coldness of day seep into the room. Hopefully we'll see more works from Denis Villeneuve as a director, because he really does a marvelous job here.
#1: The Way Way Back
The most relatable and heartbreaking film I've seen in a long time. If you're somebody who has gone through your parents divorce, moving to a new town you didn't want to be, suddenly finding your true calling thanks to a local, then you'll need to see this movie. Nat Faxon and Jim Rash, two of the writers of "The Descendants," gave a very powerful film that I was really interested in seeing, and it did not disappoint. Most of the troubles that Duncan, played by Liam James, goes through in this film have happened to me, so it was like I seeing a movie version of myself, only I never lost my shorts in the pool. Steve Carell and Toni Collette return after "Little Miss Sunshine," this time as lovers, and it was really fresh to see Carell do something that wasn't comedic. Allison Janney, Nat Faxon, Jim Rash, AnnaSophia Robb, Maya Rudolf, Rob Corddry, and Amanda Peet really make the film enjoyable. However, none of them compared to the performance by Sam Rockwell as Owen. Rockwell deserved an Oscar nod for Best Supporting Actor, and it pisses me off that he got snubbed. If you haven't seen this film, you're missing out on one of the most emotional experiences you'll ever witness.
x x x
Okay, we got that done and over with! Woot! Now then, time to get to 2014. Will we have the same kind of treatment as last year...I don't know. But one thing's for sure, it'll all be worth it in the end.
