How to Train Your Dragon 2

                When it comes to Dreamworks films as of recent, the film that everyone seems to claim is above some of the rest is “How To Train Your Dragon.” The film tells of a young Viking named Hiccup, who only wants to be accepted by his father as a noble warrior, during the times of dragon attacks. However, when Hiccup encounters a night-fury he hit, he soon starts to befriend the creature, showing us that they’re not as dangerous as everyone makes them out to be. Needless to say, this is an example of a film that takes tired old clichés and turns them into something new. We do see the prejudice authority figures and liar revealed tropes, but the way the film handles them is really neat, and really adds to some of the likability of each of these characters. Not only that, but the animation is outstanding, showcasing just how far this animation studio can go with their technology and beyond. While it isn’t my favorite Dreamworks film, I still consider it among the best in its library.

                Now after four years, we have a sequel to this film. And seeing how Dreamworks has had its share of doing both good AND bad sequels, where does this one stand? Well, let me just say this…not only is this film better than the first…”How to Train Your Dragon 2” is by and large, Dreamworks best animated film.

                Five years after the Vikings of Berk have allowed acceptance with the dragons, Hiccup is told by his father, Stoick, that he’s ready to become the new chief. He doesn’t believe his IS ready, and soon discovers the rise of a dragon army by Drago Bludvist, a vicious dragon hunter, and tries to find him as a means to negotiate. However, on the journey, Hiccup encounters someone who’d he never thought to see leading a nest of dragons…his long lost mother, Valka. This film manages to do what a good sequel should do, and that’s developing the story and characters further than before. The way these characters interact with one another not only feels genuine, but you can relate to them incredibly well. For a sequel to an incredibly clichéd film, this really manages to blow any expectations out of the water, with just how passionate and real it feels.

                Not only that, but this and its predecessor are two examples of doing celebrity voice casts right. Unlike most big animated films like from Blue Sky Studios, Dreamworks has us not see a bunch of celebrities in a recording booth, but rather see these characters. I mean, this film alone has Jay Baruchel as Hiccup, Gerard Butler as Stoick, Cate Blanchett as Valka, Djimon Hounsou as Drago, and other celebrities like Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Craig Ferguson, Kit Harrington, Kristen Wiig, T.J. Miller, and even America Ferrera, yet I could barely tell if it was them or not. That just shows how good you can get.

                One of the things that really do make this film worth watching again is the mother-son relationship between Hiccup and Valka. Despite being away for twenty years, they manage to have this strong and powerful chemistry that makes it sweet and heartwarming, much like Hiccup’s relationship with Toothless in the first film. Speaking of which, the two still keep the friendship going well too, and they even push it further with the theme of trust that goes on in this film. If you see it for yourself, you’ll know what I’m talking about.

                Now for the main highlight of the film, the flying and battle scenes. Let me just say, this proves to be Dreamworks best animation work, as you can see a lot of detail and effort went into it, especially if the film’s in 3D. Screw “Avatar,” THIS is the best 3D film of all time, and they take advantage of it way better than others. But even without the 3D, it’s still amazing to look at. You feel like you’re actually flying and on the battlefield. And with the flying and battle scenes, the animation is still glorious to look at, especially with the different designs of the dragon, including the alphas.

                Overall, “How to Train Your Dragon 2” is the must see film of the summer, and I can’t wait for the third film! It not only stands as one of the best sequels ever made…it’s one of the greatest films of all time! I love the characters, I love the story, I love the animation…I just love this movie!

Rating: 10/10

Maleficent...or as I'm calling it, "Sleeping Wicked"

Let me ask you guys something...these recent live-action re-visions Disney’s been doing with their classics…are they really necessary? Not at all. They haven’t really added anything new, other than answering people’s fantasy ideas as to what popular actor looks like in a Disney film, and each film they attempted at remaking in live-action has always turned out like crap. “101 Dalmatians,” “Alice in Wonderland,” and now we have upcoming remakes of “The Jungle Book” and “Cinderella” on their way next year! However, that torment will have to wait, as “Sleeping Beauty” is taking its turn at a remake, this time told through the perspective of Maleficent…since the film is called “Maleficent.”

In this retelling of “Sleeping Beauty,” we see the origins of Maleficent, once being a fairy that guarded the sacred land from humans. After an encounter with a young boy, she soon warms up to him, only to be betrayed by him years later, so he could rule over the kingdom. When he has his daughter, Aurora, Maleficent places a curse on her so she’ll prick her finger on a spinning wheel, unless awakened by true love’s kiss. As Aurora gets older, Maleficent starts to warm up to her as time goes on, regretting the curse.

Just going to cut to the chase here, this film was bad; I mean, really, really bad. In my mind, this is quite honestly, the most over-hyped pile of trash I’ve seen PERIOD. When you have the potential for a film to be amazing and you turn it into a flawed mess that would make “Prometheus” gasp in awe, you’ve got a real big problem here! I’m still surprised I was able to sit through this without considering walking out half-way through.

Now much like my “Endless Love” review, I’m just going to cut to the chase and get down to the three biggest reasons why this film is absolutely awful:

#3: Hardly any character development – The characters established in this film aren’t developed, except for being archetypes of characters. And I know, the original film didn’t have much development either, but this film is said to be an “adult” take on the classic. All this film did with these characters was either make them stupid, pointless, or complete assholes.

In terms of the stupid aspect, we have the three fairies that take care of Aurora. Not only are they so goddamn incompetent, but they just keep getting more and more annoying by the minute. In the original film, yeah they were bumbling, but they at least knew what they were doing. To see three enjoyable characters made unbearable is just sad to watch.

In the pointless category, we have Prince Phillip, who is so underused in the film, that it’s only just a cameo. I know it’s not centered on Aurora, but still there has to be something more than just, “oh hey, I’m the prince from the story, bye.” All I was asking throughout the film was ‘why is he here?’ every time he was onscreen.

And in terms of asshole characters, we have Aurora’s father, King Stefan. All I need to say is he’s the reason Maleficent is evil. Yeah, I’m not kidding. He steals her wings, because he wanted to be the heir to the king, who is ALSO an asshole. Even when he becomes paranoid over his daughter, I didn’t feel sympathy, because it was his entire fault! Even the fairies are kind of dicks to Maleficent. They establish that Maleficent was sort of a guardian of their land, yet when she’s flightless, they suddenly don’t like her? What the hell is wrong with you people?!

The only development we get is from Maleficent herself, but we’ll get to that when we get to that. That’s a big problem to have an underdeveloped Maleficent, in a film CALLED “MALEFICENT!!” Not only that, but Angelina Jolie’s performance was just not investing in the slightest. I’ll give credits that she looks the part and is trying her best, but her performance in this film is just so bland and unappealing, just as much as every other actor in the film.

#2:  Subplots not brought up, or making no damn sense – There are dozens of things that the film decides to bring up, but it either doesn’t go anywhere, or is resolved through something completely irrelevant.

For example, how did Stefan become an orphan? Was that his motivation to becoming heir? If so, how’d he even get as far as to be a servant at the castle to hear about the reward?

Or how about this one: why did the fairies tell Aurora that her father was dead? And when she goes to the castle, how does she even know the guards will let her in, since they wouldn’t even know what she looks like to begin with? She could have been a spy or something.

Why does Maleficent watch over Aurora, even when she knows the curse will happen? And with the fairies being so incompetent, why would she have bothered to take care of her for them? If she did start to warm up to her, why didn’t she just take her away completely? And if the curse was irreversible, why didn’t she just put her in a sleep like trance until the time had passed? Or better yet, why didn’t the king send guards after Maleficent when she first arrived to put the curse on her anyway?

Why is iron the weakness of fairies? In the original film, the sword defeated Maleficent, because it was enchanted by the three fairies that assist Phillip. If iron was all that was needed, then why the hell didn’t they just guard the castle with…you know, GUARDS WITH IRON, than just an easy to slip by iron thorn fence? This film would have been done sooner a good half hour earlier, in what’s already an hour and a half movie.

#1: The film trying to be “Wicked” – For those who don’t know, “Wicked” is a Broadway show, based on a novel, which is a prequel to “The Wizard of Oz,” only it’s the story of the witches, Glinda and Elphaba. It shows how Elphaba became the Wicked Witch of the West, and just how close she and Glinda were before that day came. It’s one of those stories that allows you to think sympathetic of villains you grew up with. Why does this bother me? Well, that’s all because THIS ISN’T FUCKING “WICKED!!!!!!” If you wanted to make a “Wicked” film, that’s fine, but make fucking “Wicked!” Trying to make a film similar to that, only with Maleficent doesn’t work, because you’re doing a sloppy revision of “Sleeping Beauty” with less of a point to it! Maleficent is the embodiment of evil, showing she has power over others that no one could possibly match. She’s one of Disney’s greatest villains for a reason; and to see this film not only dwarf her abilities and make her the good guy…that’s unacceptable. This is the same reason why "Texas Chainsaw 3D" was so insulting, because they turned an iconic villain into a misunderstood being. IT DOESN'T WORK!

Also I have to point out this…“Maleficent” was written by Linda Woolverton, the same writer of “Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland,” which was the first film Joe Roth produced for Disney (he also produced this film as well). And after seeing this film, I owe Tim Burton an apology, because “Alice in Wonderland” wasn’t entirely his fault. No one could have made that script work, unless there was a major re-write. Same goes for this movie, but “Alice in Wonderland” turned out to be a much more faithful revision of a Disney classic than this! Even though many of the characters were changed up drastically, it at least acknowledged that this was Alice’s story, and that this was a completely different take. It didn’t make us see the Queen of Hearts in her childhood having a hatred for the White Queen and Mad Hatter, or anything stupid like that.

This makes me sad, because Woolverton USED to be a magnificent writer for Disney. Hell, she wrote the screenplay for “Beauty and the Beast,” and even helped develop the screenplay for “Aladdin,” “Mulan,” and “The Lion King.” What happened to her? Maybe if Joe Roth had hired someone else to come in and edit the script a bit, like John Lee Hancock, it could have been a great film. But no…we’re left with this horse shit.

If you want a classic Disney film made more adult, just go watch “Snow White & the Huntsman” or “Sleepy Hallow.” Those two films are more worth your time, and are much better movies to begin with. Surprisingly enough, both those films are NOT done by Disney, which should be a sign about these films.

Overall, “Maleficent” flat out KILLED my love for a timeless villain, and was just flat out unbearable to watch. I honestly thought I was watching a Michael Bay film, where the visuals are the frosting over a crappy tasting cake. The performances are either underwhelming, or flat out annoying; the script is atrocious; the direction misses the mark; and it’s another example of a remake done horribly, HORRIBLY wrong. And it is by far…the worst film Disney has ever given out! It even stands as the worst film I’ve seen this year; and I sat through “Endless Love!”

In the words of the late, great, Roger Ebert:

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Rating: 1/10

P.S. No, I’m not interested in “Cinderella” coming out next year. Even if it has Kenneth Branagh directing, I know it’s going to suck.

A Million Ways to Die in the West

                The year 2012 had released the first feature film directed and written by Seth MacFarlene, “Ted.” It was a film that really managed to satisfy the public with a very funny premise and a cast that really allowed the jokes to work well. I had praised the film for being one of the best comedies in a while, but that didn’t stop people from turning against me for liking it (much like “The Amazing Spiderman”). So to those people, let me make something clear to you…JUST BECAUSE I ENJOYED “Ted,” DOESN’T MEAN I’M KISSING MACFARLENE’S ASS. I don’t think he’s perfect because he made a film that I had no problem with. “Family Guy” is still hit-and-miss; “The Cleveland Show” I don’t care for; and while I do still like “American Dad,” it’s still flawed. There’s no way that MacFarlene’s just as talented as other comedians like Mel Brooks or Monty Python whatsoever. Which brings us to his newest film, “A Million Ways to Die in the West.”

                In 1882 Arizona, MacFarlene plays a sheep farmer, named Albert Stark, who is a complete windbag. He can’t shoot, he can’t stand-up for himself that much, he can’t even keep a good relationship. After a break-up with his girlfriend, he tries to find a way to win her back, through the help of a new girl in town, Anna, who helps him learn how to shoot well and be bolder. Only problem is that Anna is actually the spouse of Clinch Leatherwood, the famous outlaw.

                Now is the film as good as “Ted?” Oh, hell no! Did I like this movie though? Yes, but it’s no “Blazing Saddles.” Here’s how I see this: “A Million Ways” is more geared toward the “Family Guy” side of MacFarlene’s comedy, as it seems to have many hit-or-miss jokes going around the film. When it works, it works; but when it falls, it REALLY falls. Not only that, but some of the big jokes were spoiled in the trailers. I’m really hating how almost every trailer now-a-days just gives away the whole movie, because studios don’t know how to market a movie properly anymore.

                Much like the comedy, the performances are also hit-or-miss. MacFarlene, I’ll give credit is trying his best, but with him in the lead, it feels like he’s just there to complain about how life in the west sucks and crack jokes. Don’t get me wrong, some of the jokes he says can be really funny, but you get my point. Amanda Seyfried, playing MacFarlene’s ex-girlfriend…in all honesty, this is actually a very fitting role; the reason I say that, is because the character is just bland and dull, just like the actress. I may have liked Seyfried in “Les Miserables” and a couple others, but that still doesn’t take away that she’s as dull as brick. In fact, I think a brick would have been much more fitting than her. Charlize Theron as Anna was alright, and she manages to bring some good humor as well; I just felt like she was a bit underused here. However, the most underused part of this film was Liam Neeson as Clinch Leatherwood. While he is still awesome, I think they should have allowed a bit more of this character in the film, and give him something more to work with.

                As for the rest of the cast, they seem to deliver some pretty damn good jokes there. Hell, I’ll even admit that the best friends in the film, played by Giovanni Ribisi and Sarah Silverman, were pretty good as well. Yes, Sarah Silverman was good in another movie I’ve seen her in. I mean, it’s a couple that saves sex for marriage, yet Silverman’s character works at a whore house; that’s hilarious. However, the best part about this movie was Neil Patrick Harris as Amanda Seyfried’s new boyfriend, Foy. I don’t want to spoil anything big, but this character really had me laughing at the things he says. The best way I could describe him is this: if Barney Stinson’s obsession with suits was replaced with moustaches, and was more of a douche, then you have Foy. Not only that, but the moustache song he has (not kidding) is very catchy.

                Overall, while “A Million Ways to Die in the West” isn’t as funny as it could have been, I still had fun with it, especially since me and my friends had some great fun with it. It has its moments, and the supporting cast does help add to the film, with a few very funny cameos as well. If you’re not into Seth MacFarlene’s style of humor, then I can understand not liking this. However, if you are, I’d say it’s worth a matinee.

Rating: 7/10

X-Men Days of Future Past

                When it comes to the “X-Men” film series, it hasn’t really been anything that sparked that much greatness to me. While I enjoyed the films, with the exception of “Origins: Wolverine” and “The Last Stand,” nothing really did seem to peak my interest. In fact, the only film that managed to actually get me truly invested was “X-Men First Class,” because of how intense the tone was more so than the others. Granted, “The Wolverine” was awesome, but that was more for the sheer fun and enjoyment of Hugh Jackman as the character. “First Class” was the first in the series that I felt was something worth more than what I was expecting, especially with it being a prequel to the films prior.

                The problems I had with “First Class” were mostly due to continuity errors to the other films…but those complaints are out the window, thanks to the help of “X-Men: Days of Future Past.” And let me say, this is the first film in a long time where we can say with complete honesty, that “X-Men 3” and “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” didn’t happen.

                In “Days of Future Past,” the future is run by the Sentinals, who are now hunting for surviving mutants, bringing them to the brink of extinction. However, the ones who have been able to make it through, Ice-man, Kitty Pryde, Professor X, Magneto, Wolverine, and others, have a plan to fix the future and set everything in motion. They send Wolverine back to the past, so he can get Professor X and Magneto to work together again, and stop Mystique from murdering Bolivar Trask, the creator of the Sentinals.

                Now, let me address the things I need to bring up. First of all, Kitty Pryde can send people back in time; is that something she did in the comics? Because I don’t believe she’s done that beforehand. I know it may be a small nitpick, but I would like some explanation.

Now for the other complaints…oh wait, I have nothing else, because this film was AMAZING!! Seriously, if you haven’t seen the movie yet, definitely go out and see it now! It fixes almost every problem that was brought up within some of the previous films. And you know what that means? If people were disappointed with story arcs that weren’t properly represented, they now have a chance to do them right, here!

While the film does star Wolverine, it’s mostly a film about Charles, Erik, and Raven, much like “First Class” was, with Wolverine just being there just to get the story moving along. And while I do love me some Wolverine action, I’m glad that it can also focus more with other X-Men that are just as deserving. Not only that, but the cast still does an amazing job; Michael Fassbender as young Erik, Nicholas Hoult as young Beast (who I am SO glad has a good movie under his belt after three years), Jennifer Lawrence as young Mystique, and Hugh Jackman as Wolverine all the way through. However to me, the true essence of this film comes from James McAvoy as young Charles Xavier. His performance in this film truly captures the essence of Patrick Stewart’s Xavier, that I would TRULY believe this guy was a young version of this character, much like Ewan McGregor as young Obi-Wan. Also, let’s not forget about Peter Dinklage as Bolivar Trask, who is brilliant as always. I mean, it IS Peter friggin Dinklage, why WOULDN’T he be great?

The action scenes in the film are also a spectacle to watch. Bryan Singer really knows how to do action scenes in a way that truly capture the spirit of comic book movies. They are fun, suspenseful, funny, and at times breath-taking. I could have easily recommended this movie as a simple popcorn film, just to see them alone. That’s how good the action is in the film.

Overall, “X-Men: Days of Future Past” is a marvelous film for the theaters. And let me say this…not only is this the best of the “X-Men” films...this is also the best Bryan Singer film, since “The Usual Suspects.” His best film in almost 20 years people! That’s pretty big!

Rating: 10/10

Neighbors

                To be perfectly honest, I’m not a big fan of Seth Rogen or some of his big start-up films. While I found “Knocked-Up” and “Pineapple Express” to be…okay at best, other films like “Super Bad,” “The Guilt Trip,” and “Funny People” didn’t seem to click in with me, despite what they were trying to represent. Hell, I still haven’t forgiven him for “The Green Hornet” and “The Watch,” which were two of the most embarrassing disgraces to film making I’ve ever seen. However, I will admit that films afterward like “Paul,” “50/50,” and even “This is the End” did manage to get me in a cheery mood. Which brings us to the next film he’s produced and starred in, “Neighbors.”

                When the trailer started to hit theaters, I didn’t really expect that much to come from the film. While it did have Zac Efron as the bad-guy in the film, I wasn’t quite warmed up to Rogen, despite the three films I did enjoy. Not only that, but it was directed by Nicholas Stoller, the guy who directed “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” and “The Five-Year Engagement,” so it was a game of chance. With that in mind, I decided to give it a chance, since I’m going into college this fall, and see if it could make me laugh, especially with the amount of praise it’s been getting.

                In this film, Seth Rogen plays the typical family man, who tries to have fun even if he’s got a child. Sad thing is he doesn’t have the fun. Soon enough, a fraternity moves into the neighborhood, and they try to make peace with each other, but as you would expect, it gets into a big war between family and fraternity.

                Now, was this film funny? Yes, it definitely was. Sure, it’s sophomoric humor, and it has its moments of being completely dumb, but that’s what I loved most about it. It’s basically a battle between neighbors that gets so over-the-top dumb that all I could do is laugh. Granted, a good portion of jokes seem to come out flat, they do make up for it with many others that really make it all the more hilarious.

                While Rogen does basically play the same guy from his previous films, it was definitely done better this time around, than in others. There were some very funny lines he brings, and the delivery does work to his advantage. I was also impressed Rose Byrne as Rogen’s wife. You’d think she’d be the standard “do good mom,” but she does allow herself to have some fun in this film, and just be on top as Rogen is…no sex-pun intended. Ike Barinholtz and Carla Gallo also bring in some good chemistry, playing family friends, even after a divorce between them, leading to a whole bunch of great sight gags that make the film even more chaotic.

                With the frat boys, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Dave Franco really add great support for the fraternity, being the two hand men and taking on the responsibility whenever Efron isn’t around. Speaking of which, Zac Efron steals the show, BY FAR! His character, I don’t even know how to properly describe. In a way, he’s kind of like Rogen’s opposite, fearing that who they are currently, is what they fear of being like. It adds a lot of thought to a film, where frat boys raise money for bills by selling homemade dildos……yes, you heard right.

                Overall, that’s all I can probably muster about “Neighbors.” It was a funny film to watch, and I’m glad I was able to catch it with some of my old friends. If you’re a fan of Rogen, you’ll enjoy this; if not, then I’d suggest something else.

Rating: 8/10

The Amazing Spiderman 2

Back in 2012, Sony had released their reboot of comic book fans’ favorite web slinger, with “The Amazing Spiderman.” This film retold the origin story of Peter Parker, a nerdy teenager who is bitten by a spider and given abilities that a normal person wouldn’t have. With these new abilities, equipped with his great smarts, he tries to also find some truth behind his parents from his father’s old partner at Oscorp, Dr. Connors. This was the film that I went bananas over, praising it to high heaven, and even giving it the title of my favorite comic book movie in a long time; this remark had given out a lot of controversy with some of my friends, with them being really baffled by me thinking about this, especially when this was during the big competition between "The Dark Knight Rises" and "The Avengers."

Now it’s been about two years, so do I still hold by that statement? Well, after re-watching the movie after FINALLY buying it on Blu-Ray…yes, I still stand by that. Even with other big names like “The Dark Knight” and “Watchmen,” this film gave me exactly what I wanted that films prior did not. A perfect balance of seriousness and fun. Marc Webb, director of my favorite film of all time, “(500) Days of Summer,” delivered a movie that flowed greatly with relatable characters and a story that worked well to its advantage, without it feeling too much like the original trilogy. Yeah, there may be changes from the source material that fans will constantly cry out “Bullshit” over and over again; but then again, fanboys will complain about ANYTHING these days.

When word of a new trilogy came about, I couldn’t have been any more hyped than I was; no, not a trilogy…but a series, with possible spin-offs. Sony’s plans were to build up more on this new universe and introduce villains that we have yet to see on the big screen, kind of like a reverse "Avengers." Then we started to get rumors and speculations pop-up left and right, people were raging all over the place, right up to when we reach to now.

Now, I’ve seen the film twice as of now, so that way I get a full understanding of the film as a whole. I saw the premiere screening with my buddy, Zack, and I saw it Friday night, because I pretty much had nothing else to do. Now let me say this…not only did I think this film was great, I found it to be just as good, if not better, than the first film.

I’m gonna bet that all of you are just SCREAMING at me, thinking I’m some kind of moron for giving this movie any kind of praise and that I have bad taste…well, to those people, I have this to say: either listen to what I have to say, or leave so no one gets hurt.

In this new film, Peter Parker has finally graduated from high school, and has reunited with his old friend, Harry Osborn. During this time, he’s trying to figure out how to balance a relationship with Gwen, even after his promise to her late father, as well as finally resolve the questions he’s had about his parents these many years. While this is happening, Oscorp employee, Max Dillon, suffers an accident and is now after Spiderman, with a little help from another who was betrayed. What works in this film is how they manage to continue the story, without doing the stupid mistake of copy and pasting the first film like with most sequels. This time around, the stakes are higher, the dilemmas are much more in depth, and the set-ups with most of these characters are fascinating, to say the least.

Andrew Garfield returns as Peter Parker, aka Spiderman, and he really brings a great performance to the screen. What I liked best about his performance, is that he was allowed to improvise his lines as Spiderman, which capture the essence of the character greatly, being a smart-aleck with a sense of humor. Not only that, but just the amount of emotion he puts into his work, I’m still completely floored by this, especially in scenes where he has to carry it solo. Garfield IS Spiderman, and he has more than surpassed Tobey Maguire, despite my appreciation for the original trilogy. Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, I have nothing bad to say about her. She was funny, pretty, and always had great timing with her lines. Her chemistry with Garfield is absolutely breathtaking with every scene, and I think it helps, since both actors are dating. There is one little detail that I’ll leave unmentioned, but I think most of you may know. Needless to say, I still was shocked by it, even after knowing it would happen.

Dane DeHann as Harry Osborn, I couldn’t think of anyone else better to fit this role after James Franco. He may be a bit snarky, but this is the same guy who was disrespected and mistreated by a rich snobby father. Like father, like son, I guess. DeHann has really evolved as an actor as of recent, always improving on his range ever since “Chronicle.” What’s also interesting is that his appearance in this film makes me think THIS is probably what Leonardo DiCaprio would have done in the role, if James Cameron’s Spiderman film actually happened. Also, I’d like to point out that DeHann IS the Green Goblin in this movie, but they managed to make it work. Even though I would have liked for them to save him for later, they are bringing him back for the sequel. But aside from that, the Green Goblin in this film is what I actually expected Willum Defoe to give us; it works to DeHann’s advantage, since he doesn’t need a stupid Halloween mask!

However, Jamie Foxx as Max Dillon, better known as Electro, triumphs heavily over the Goblin. He was absolutely PERFECT in this role, and I couldn’t see anyone else who would have done this role better than he did. The way they do this character is like Peter’s, only on a different path. Max as the nerdy outcast, constantly pushed around and treated like he’s invisible, really makes the character relatable, as there are many people who feel unnoticed. Not only that, but when he becomes Electro, the design is really slick and detailed. That, and his obsession with Spiderman made the film really funny as well. Oh, and before you say it, I’m not upset that they didn’t use the Electro suit from the comics and 90’s animated series; in actuality, I’m really glad they DIDN’T use that outfit, because that would be going back to the first Raimi film, with Green Goblin’s outfit being goofy. As for the suit he wears in the movie, I actually wished they kept the jacket hood he wore in the Town Square fight, but that’s just me. Also, this Electro actually reminded me of Cole from the “Infamous” series; did anyone else notice that?

I also liked the role that Dennis Leary was given when reprising Capt. Stacy in this film, as Peter has been starting to see his ghost when he's around Gwen. THAT was a good choice, as it shows Peter's struggle on keeping his promise but still wanting to be with Gwen. As for the other cast members, such as Sally Field, Paul Giamatti, Campbell Scott, Felicity Jones, Colm Feore, and others like them, they're great too.

The action scenes, the production designs, all of it has really been updated well from the last film. Marc Webb really knows how to deliver a film that is just gorgeous to look at, and it really is nice of him to move up in his limits and see just how far he can test his craft. Not only that, but this is the first film in a long time to make me feel tense during the climax, even after I know what’s going to happen. And BOTH times too! If a film is able to do anything like that with both sits, that shows how good a director can make a movie, especially when he has the right cast.

Overall, “The Amazing Spiderman 2” gave me what I wanted, and I felt satisfied all the way through. While I did feel like there was a bit too much, I felt the film worked extremely well in its execution. It’s so far my favorite film of the year, and I am REALLY looking forward to see what comes next. Thank you once again, Marc Webb and Andrew Garfield, for another awesome movie!

Rating: 10/10

Brick Mansions

Note: Before anyone reads, I just want to say, that I send my humble wishes to Paul Walker’s family and friends, who are still in deep sadness over the loss of someone who meant a lot to them. If any of them happen to be reading this review, I do apologize if I offended you in any way for anything I’ve said here. I’m only talking about the film and the film only.

R.I.P. Paul Walker

x x x x x x x x x

                Paul Walker has been recognized by many as one of the best action stars of our generation, as proven in films like “Into the Blue,” “Takers,” and the “Fast and the Furious” franchise. However, the actor sadly passed away back in 2013 in a car accident, leaving behind a legacy that I’m hoping fans will remember years on. Before he did leave us, he was able to at least finish up today’s film, “Brick Mansions.”

                A remake of the foreign film “District 13,” this film takes place in the not-so distant future of Detroit, where crime is at a high (so just basically Detroit), and the most crime infested part has been barricaded. This sector, under the name Brick Mansions, has Detective Damien Collier team up with Lino Dupree, a citizen of the area, so they can find a bomb stolen by Tremaine Alexander before it blows the whole area to smithereens. Now, let me say I thought the film was…mediocre at best.

                While I haven’t seen “District 13,” I can assume it made changes that were approved by both producer/writer and star from the original film, since they took part in the remake. And let’s go over the list of clichés that are so obvious here: Rebel cop; father died on big assignment; cop goes to do father’s last job; villain’s a gangster who runs the turf; cop teams up with resident of area; one of them has a girlfriend kidnapped; there’s a time limit because of a bomb. Yeah, those are only HALF of the clichés that describe the movie. It wouldn’t be so bad, if the clichés used in the film were used to great levels.

                Let’s first talk about the gang leader of the film, Tremaine Alexander, played by RZA. Now the character he was playing is the typical gang leader archetype, being very dangerous with a few quirks, but…the way he talked was just so weird. Throughout the film, it feels like he’s trying to do an impression of Elmer Fudd, saying his r’s like w’s; I just couldn’t take this guy seriously. Another problem I had was they don’t have any focus on the people of Brick Mansions, except for the drug dealers. We don’t see any families that have been corrupted, we don’t see gang beatings, and we don’t even see how Brick Mansions came to be. Hell, we don’t even get a simple flashback of Damien’s father on the job and how it went down for him. It’s a movie! Show, don’t tell!

                As much as I enjoy Paul Walker and his work, I can easily say this was not his best performance. It’s not that he did a bad job; it’s just that his character was so generic and so forgettable. And like I said, I wouldn’t mind it, if the character was interesting or fun. David Belle, who was the star in the original film (as well as the creator of parcore), was just as un-investing; I mean, with what they describe this character and his backstory, I would have let this go if they did show us his life beforehand as well. Again; SHOW, don’t tell! The rest of these characters are either un-memorable or simply disinteresting, so there’s no point.

                As for the action scenes, it’s another film that has shaky cam. Granted, it’s not AS bad as most films have done in the past, but it still gets in the way. To be honest, I was kind of excited with the opening chase scene, and it was really tense and blood-pumping. However, it doesn’t go any further from that, with a few becoming very cartoonish. You know that scene in the trailer, where they fight the big dude and smash his head with a cinderblock? Yeah, he gets hit and you hear birds chirping…I’m not kidding when I say that.

                Half of the stuff they do in this movie, I have to ask one thing: why was this a PG-13? Seriously, if they had made this a hard-R, it would have made this film much more intense if they showed just how violent this place can get with the people in there. I mean, there’s a scene where David Belle is locked in a cell, and pulls a guy’s head through the hole, jumping up to force his weight onto his neck…and they cut to black! Out of all the things you could have done with this scene, the least you could do is just not show the head ripped off, but just the body fall with blood on the bars!

                Overall, “Brick Mansions” is a film that’s not worth the money. If you’re a Paul Walker fan, and you just want to see this film to show respect and support, I can understand. However, I’d suggest donating to his charity foundation as a better option, as that money would be better suited for a proper purpose.

Rating: 4/10