Admission (2013) ‘Review’

I am the kind of guy that enjoys a good rom-com, or just romantic movies in general. For the most part, they’re feel-good movies, and while the situations and outcomes may be highly idealized, it does not matter to me… because I am a Cancer, and apparently that means I have a romantic side and that my emotions are usually on the high or low end of the spectrum. This is all alleged, as I do not follow my horoscope every day, but that is what I have been led to believe. Aside from romantic films though, I really enjoy romantic-genre films that are much more complicated, such as (500) Days of Summer and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. In other words, I like romantic movies that more or less paint a more realistic picture of a normal life (science fiction excluded, of course). This movie… is not the latter. Actually it is not really a romantic movie either, as much as it paints itself to be one given the poster you can see above, plus everything else I had heard about it which was not a lot.  Admission is not only about admitting someone else into your life, in more than one way here, but also about admitting things about yourself.

My quick synopsis of Admission would be: A Princeton admissions officer’s life gets very complicated when a gifted child comes into her life by way of a guy who is trying to help, and she has to decide whether or not to jeopardize her job to help him. The movie is set up about as simply as most romantic movies are, as well as most wacky sitcoms. Tina Fey plays Portia Nathan, the admissions officer who is all about cleanliness and has been doing the same job in the same place for nearly 2 decades. She also does not like kids, so she has never had one of her own. She meets John Pressman, the founder of a new school for young and incredibly gifted kids…… no, not the X-Men. He is played by Paul Rudd, and for all intents and purposes, he is the opposite of Portia: His school is also a farm, so he does not mind getting dirty, and he has not lived in the same place longer than a few years.  He loves kids, obviously, and even adopted a kid from Uganda and together they travel from country to country to help people that are less fortunate. I’m not saying Portia is evil and John is good, because it is much grayer than that. There are complications, as there are in all romantic movies. It would not be interesting unless there was some.

John loves to get involved in people’s lives, and he reveals to Portia quite the bombshell, which I will not spoil here. But then the rest of the movie is less about the romance between Portia and John, but more about Portia and her past. I am sort of glad that this was not fully a romantic comedy about getting Tina and Paul together, because it was rather weak in that department. The two of them were the most enjoyable to watch when they were at ends, not being all lovey-dovey. The chemistry was lacking between the two of them, but since that was not the main quest of the film, I suppose I will let it slide. However, since some people probably went into the movie thinking that was what the movie was going to be about, I can see how that might be a disappointment. The rest of the movie was kind of interesting, but it just seemed kind of… ordinary. The situation is definitely interesting, but the delivery just felt empty. I think this may be because it was a situation that not a lot of people can relate to. With (500) Days of Summer, there have been people of both genders that can relate to chasing a love you thought was there, or trying to make something work, only to have it fail in the end. With Eternal Sunshine, I think there have been many people who either try to hold onto their greatest love, or would do anything to get back to that person. With Admission, the situation is not very broad, and while we may relate to the overall theme of admission, the exact situation of the film is exactly that– exact. I could not relate to Portia, I could not even relate to John, and I do not know many who could because of their over-the-top personalities.

And perhaps I am missing something. I have been known to either overlook or completely miss certain themes of a movie, either on purpose or by accident. I missed the obvious fact in Brave that Merida didn’t need a man to be happy, probably because I was distracted by my dislike of the film. I have probably even over-qualified a movie because I found the situation a lot of fun, such as in Seeking a Friend for the End of the World. All I am saying is that I am not perfect, but I do have to go with my critical gut. That is why I personally do not listen to all the critics I read, and I would rather my viewers make judgments of their own. Am I discrediting myself? No, I think I do an okay job informing my audience with a simple “Should you watch it or should you avoid it” mentality. But I just had to admit something about myself, much like this movie might want you to do. Perhaps I was thinking too narrowly, and the overall theme of admission does not have to pertain to the situation in the film, but just to our own experiences. But with that being said, Admission is still just sort of plain. Personal admissions aside, that can all be done after watching the film, and while watching it, it is hard to relate to a character I have little in common with. The romance does not have a lot of chemistry, and there are not a ton of laughs that do not offset the greater number of uncomfortable moments within. So I would just say watch Admission with caution, but maybe you will find the reveal a little more great than I did.

P.S. Sorry about the slight rant above, but I felt like admitting a little (wah wah wahhhhhh).

 

Pulp Fiction (1994) ‘Review’

I told you that the next in my line of “What? You haven’t seen this yet??” movies would be even bigger than the last. That’s right, I had never seen Pulp Fiction before this week, and I cannot give you a good reason why. Maybe it was because I was not allowed to see it when I was younger even though my parents really liked it, but that would not explain why I had not seen it when I grew up. Maybe I just kept forgetting to watch it, deciding to watch other movies instead. Well if that was the case, I am ashamed of how many years went by without me laying my eyes on this amazing film. This is probably one of my instant favorites, and there are so many reasons why everyone should watch it.

Two years after Tarantino’s debut film, his amazing writing skills are on full display here. Pulp Fiction is a collection of stories that are intertwined, related, and all of them bursting with colorful characters, great acting, great monologues, along with a mix of questions that really make you think, along with the few bizarre pieces of “What the hell am I looking at?” that make his stories so attention-grabbing that it becomes one of those instant classics. And I can tell that just about everyone loves it, since it is currently in the Top 5 of the imdb.com Top 250. It was nominated for seven Oscars! And while it won only one (for Tarantino’s original screenplay, of course), that does not diminish the power and amazingness of Pulp Fiction.

Seemingly at every turn there was something to just utterly love about it. From the great cinematography, to the excellent acting in which three were nominated for Oscars, to the amazingly vulgar, but thought-provoking dialogue that filled the scenes, I reacted as though I had never heard of this movie before. With every gunshot I didn’t see coming, to the twists and turns of how the stories were woven together, I just always had a smile on my face from how much I was enjoying it. The movie itself was nominated for Best Picture (l. to Forrest Gump) and I think in any other year, PF could have walked away with more hardware (The Shawshank Redemption was also nominated that year). But everything about this movie was just, wow, how great!

I have never seen Samuel L. Jackson, John Travolta, or Uma Thurman better, Jackson especially was really great. The amount of lines that I recognized from being anywhere near pop culture was high, showing just how much of an impact this movie made. I know that Pulp Fiction is definitely in my Top 10 movies of all time list, one that does not exist, but when I think about how much I enjoyed it, I know it deserves it. I know this was not much of a review, per se, but I think most of you knew just how great it already was. So I just wanted to share how I was blown away by it! If you haven’t seen it yet, do yourself a favor, sit down, and watch these awesome stories for yourself.

Flight (2012) ‘Review’

So getting back to an Oscar movie that I didn’t get around to before this year’s awards, I decided to pick up Robert Zemeckis’ (Back to the Future) drama that was nominated for Best Original Screenplay and Best Actor. Flight is a story about a man that has a lot of vices, but is still a pretty successful commercial airline pilot. Denzel Washington plays Whip Whitaker, an alcoholic, drug addict, and this is very apparent from the time the camera fades into him right before he needs to make a trip from Florida to Atlanta. Things don’t  go too smoothly though for a few reasons, leading to a very tense opening twenty minutes. Following that, an investigation is held into the nature of the plane crash, and the movie sort of turns into a one-character story, which is good when Denzel is on top of his game. Washington, of course, was nominated for Best Actor (l. to Daniel Day-Lewis), and it was easy to see why when he had a lot of different personalities on screen throughout the movie. As an alcoholic, his mood would swing when he was with his girlfriend, a drug addict that he befriends in the hospital (Kelly Reilly, Sherlock Holmes). He keeps pushing people away, including his best friend, attorney, and friends.

The movie does a good job showing what drugs and alcoholism can do to people. There are also many instances of Christian symbolism  and unsubtle music choices. The music reminded me of Randy Newman-esque songs, that literally declare what is going on. For instance, while Whitaker is high on cocaine and standing there with his friend (Bruce Greenwood, Star Trek) and his attorney (Don Cheadle), the Beatles’ “With a Little Help From My Friends” is playing in the elevator. Yeah, subtle. Not like it was distracting or anything, but it almost felt too easy and an easy, cliche’ choice to make. Not like I can do any better, of course, but it was just an observation. The big thing I was watching anyway in the movie was Washington’s acting, knowing that he was nominated for the Oscar. Whip Whitaker, to me, was actually pretty unbearable in terms of how much of a jerk he was (and that is putting it nicely). But then again, I watch Mad Men, and there are not any non-jerks in that show. In the end, it is a credit to to Washington’s acting, making him watchable and interesting to watch (in the good way).

I guess, in the end, I don’t know what to say. My critical gears are not exactly whirring today. However, I will say that the movie is well-paced, but perhaps have a few too many moments of recurring issues. Like the same obstacle keeps coming up, which sort of becomes stale. Denzel Washington is very good, and there is some good supporting acting as well. The first twenty minutes are very tense, and then the movie becomes a crawl to the finish line, but not completely in a boring way. I was fully interested the whole way through, and thought the ending was very good considering the rest of the movie. Sorry for such a short review, but like I said, sometimes I just have to sit back and enjoy the movie for what it is. Nothing really to hate about Flight, so if you can make it through the 2 hour runtime, paying most of your attention to the lead actor, you’re going to be fine.

The Great Gatsby (2013) ‘Review’

In my continuing quest to make up for my lack of reviews last week, I have another new movie review for you fine viewers. On Friday night, I had a nice date night with my girlfriend, and our movie of choice for the night was The Great Gatsby, fresh off the two of us watching Moulin Rouge!. Unfortunately, I need to review this film on its own, without comparing it to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s book since I have not read it since the 10th grade. I did, however, do a little research to check a couple things, because I remembered some things, but had to see if it was true to the book otherwise. (Maybe if one of you fine viewers have already seen Gatsby and know the book better than me, you could let me know if it is true to the source or not, thanks!) And I am not going to do a “duel review” and compare it to the original, as I can already tell that they are far and away too different in terms of style. In any case, Gatsby for long stretches feels like a Baz Luhrmann film, as his signature style of quick cuts, bright images, and oodles and oodles of narration. But it relied just a little less on narration that Moulin Rouge! and allowed long stretches of dialogue without interruption. Unfortunately for Baz, some of these moments felt empty– emptier than how Gatsby feels in the third act.

I will say, however, that I enjoyed my time watching it. I didn’t expect myself to be one of these people, but I am drawn into Luhrmann’s style and find it visually appealing and exciting, regardless of what else might be happening. There were some really cool camera shots that I am still holding onto today, and party scenes were reminiscent of MR!, but was easier to follow overall. However, with all of that being said, I couldn’t help but feel that there was something missing in the midst of all the glamour, pomp, and circumstance. I didn’t feel anything. I felt the wonderment of the parties, because that is what Baz knows how to do well. But I failed to feel sorry for Gatsby, despite the fact that the author of the book and the director of this movie rightfully put him on a pedestal (he is the protagonist, after all). I kept getting the feeling that everyone mistook his “unlimited sense of hope” for blindness to see what was really going on. Of course he was not alone in this quest, as his main squeeze was just as much to blame for being wishy-washy in her judgment as well, holding onto a dream-like relationship when she was (at least a little) happily married. I know, I sound like such a pessimist, and I hope I am not off-base, as these are my opinions, but my point is that Gatsby failed to connect with me. I’m sure I may be in the minority here, but that was my impression anyway, so I didn’t feel that much for him. I sound a little harsh, don’t I? Alright, so there was some emotion there, and definitely some cute moments, and there was a little depth as well in the character of Jay Gatsby, but obviously not enough was done if I felt this way. (Feel free to disagree in the comment box below!)

The movie on the whole was a fun time though. Despite the lack of deep-feeling soul, there was some fun acting, and of course when the parties were hopping in 1920’s New York, the scenes were exciting and full of color and sound and marvel. Scenes of long dialogue sometimes dragged, but otherwise it was Tobey Maguire (Spider-Man) narrating every other inch. He plays Nick Carraway, who is writing about his experiences, because he is of course a writer, just like Ewan McGregor was in MR!. Leonardo DiCaprio is of course our protagonist, and he spews off “old sport” like it is going out of style and he needs to spend it constantly like an “Everything Must Go” sale. I thought it was odd how many times he said it, but upon doing some research, “old sport” was said over 90 times in the book, so perhaps the movie was not that far off. Leo-DiCap is fine, sounding very debonair, walking around with a cane and a confident strut that just said “I am the most important person here.” Our leading lady was Daisy, played by Carey Mulligan (Drive, An Education), and she was pretty good at going between extremely happy to either sad or regretful. Daisy is Nick’s cousin, and she has a history with Gatsby, so these characters’ lives will intertwine in a significant way. There were a lot of supporting actors as well, including Joel Edgerton, Jason Clarke, Isla Fisher, and Elizabeth Debicki.

 I am sure if you read the book, you know what is going to happen, but I won’t spoil anything anyway. There is a deeper story revolving around materialism and fate, but all in all, this is a love story. Many characters love each other during the film, some familial and some romantic and it is a main driving point of the movie, for better or for worse. Luhrmann shows that he has mastered the craft of making parties look even more exciting by the use of camera shots, angles, and a quick pace thanks to the editors, but the movie as a whole lacks some soul. Oh, and I should mention that popular rapper/producer Jay Z is executive producer, and it gives the Roaring 20’s a hip-hop beat. This really threw me off, because everything else from the outfits, to the cars, to the stores, and houses are all from an olden time, but the music ranges from rap, to hip hop, to dubstep beats that just feel out of place. The beats lend an excitement to the already frenetic pacing, but make little sense when you put everything together. Also another sort-of gripe I had was the use of on-screen text, which only happens twice during the whole film, once at the end of the second act and then once at the end, and otherwise the technique is never used. It felt odd to me that such a style would only present itself at a random moment in the middle, and then at the end again… why not use it the whole time? It seemed like it was highlighting a poignant quote, but there were several quotations that could have been showcased. In any case, you can see what I did and didn’t like, but to me, it is not a bad movie. It will probably be one that I watch again at some point, because I am one of the individuals that is drawn in by the artistic style. The story is enough to keep you engaged, but not to the extent where you will be a changed person. If you have not seen it yet, perhaps you can wait for a matinee’ pricing or wait for the second run theatres to show it, because I cannot in all good faith recommend you pay full price. BUT I say this without comparing it to the book, so if you are a big fan of the book, I cannot tell you if you would enjoy it less or more. So proceed with caution, old sport.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) ‘Review’

I was never a Star Trek fan growing up. The only exposure I got to the popular sci-fi television show was through broadcasting classes in college. We spoke about how the show was very topical even though it was set in the future. Star Trek was actually poorly-rated in its infancy, but became a cult classic that really took off. On top of that, I grew up in a Star Wars family, watching the original trilogy over and over again. But after Star Trek Into Darkness, he may have well turned me from a Star Wars fan into a Trekkie. What J.J. Abrams has done is introduce Star Trek to brand new audiences who were either not alive to watch Gene Roddenberry’s show, or unwilling to go along with the camp of William Shatner. 2009’s Star Trek took me by surprise, combining great characters with amazing scenery and action, and all of the bars are risen here.

All the members of the Starship Enterprise are back for this installment, and in my opinion, everyone was entertaining. Chris Pine’s James Kirk is still the brash young captain, but is learning some new things as he matures, and he shows it with some great integrity. His crew is comprised of Uhura (multi-dimensional Zoe Saldana), Dr. Bones McCoy (Karl Urban), Scotty (hilarious Simon Pegg), and of course Sulu (John Cho, who had several entertaining scenes). There are others of course, and I could talk about all of them I’m sure, but that would probably take awhile because everyone did an awesome job, from being impactful, to funny, to completely believable. I didn’t feel like anyone was phoning it in.

Speaking of not phoning it in, two cast members rose above everyone else for me: Spock (Zachary Quinto) and of course the villain, a traitorous Starfleet soldier Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock). If you know anything about Star Trek, whether you watched the television show or just the first movie, Spock is basically a robot– emotionless, logical, and calculating. The amount of belief I had in his performance was astounding. He had so much concentration, and I wonder if it was difficult to act that cool the whole time. In all seriousness, he had a very well-rounded performance, and really stood out to me. Coupled with one of my new favorite actors Cumberbatch, who was intense, powerful, and bad-ass. His look, his voice, and his resolve was intimidating. And as you know, I really like my villains, and he definitely takes the cake of one of the coolest and best in recent memory.

So what about the direction and everything else? I thought the story was fantastic. It felt like an action movie, but it was far from cliche’. It was science fiction, but not drowning in unreadable vernacular. I felt like I could follow everything, and I saw it with someone who didn’t see the original Star Trek, and it was not over her head either. The effects were not nauseating (I did not see it in 3D), the action scenes were fun, there was suspense, drama, action, comedy, and basically everything else you could want. I could follow the action too, and never got lost in a “who is who?” situation. On top of that, it wasn’t just laser fight after laser fight. Fisticuffs, ship battles, and a great army versus army scrap populate the film, that is never boring from beginning to end. Every scene is entertaining in one way or another, so I cannot imagine that you will get tired of watching.

J.J. Abrams crafted a great story along with the writing team should be proud of not only appealing to Star Trek fans, but not alienating newcomers (no pun intended).  And from what I have seen of people who have seen it already, everyone seems to agree! If this is how good Abrams can be with Star Trek, I can’t wait to see how he does with Star Wars: Episode VII. This is definitely my favorite film of 2013 so far, and while I know there is much to go, I just did not have this much fun watching Iron Man 3 or anything else, so that is saying something from a superhero fan.

Moulin Rouge! (2001) ‘Review’

In preparation for the release of The Great Gatsby this weekend, and also at the suggestion of my friend Kelsey, I decided to watch Moulin Rouge! and get a feel for how director Baz Luhrmann does his stuff. It took me awhile to watch this film even though I am a theatre person, mostly because of who is in it. What I had known about the movie is that Nicole Kidman was in it, and I’m just not the biggest fan of hers, and I could not understand how she could have received an Oscar nomination for her role here. That was my thinking before I watched the movie. I am still a little confused about it, but I can see that if you are a fan of Baz and his style, you would fall in love with this movie. If you’re not, well, I can see the opposite. Somewhat unfortunately, I watched another review of Moulin Rouge! and so I can’t get some of the points of it out of my head, but then that also lets me realize that I agree and disagree with some of the points.

Moulin Rouge! is what you would call a “jukebox musical”, using a combination of popular songs and taking the words and themes of those songs, mixing it with the writing, and creating a story. Christian (Ewan McGregor, Big Fish) is a bohemian writer, full of the emotion that this whole movie revolves around: love. He is one of those “true artiste” types, and it shows by the way the movie is shot and designed as well (the cinematography is Oscar-nominated, the art direction and costume design won).  The movie is basically shown in extremes. Christian is dark and brooding, and so are the shots, or everything is ultra-colorful and all over the place, so it takes some getting used to this style. In any case, I thought I was going to be turned off by this movie within the first ten minutes. The movie goes from slow to Roadrunner in the stroke of a typewriter key, as Christian narrates what exactly happens and then it literally just, well, happens. The camera hops from shot to shot, never hanging on one focal point for more than three seconds. This happens for long stretches of the movie as well, unless someone is singing. Whenever there is dancing or something wild and crazy, you can expect to get whiplash just following the action. But it is part of Luhrmann’s style, as I have been led to believe, so I wonder if the same will happen with Gatsby.

So like I said, Christian is all about love, and while he is writing a play, he happens about a lovely lady at a bordello named Satine (Nicole Kidman). She mistakes the penniless writer for a Duke, seducing him so that he will fund the Moulin Rouge and keep it open. So there is sort of a love-at-first-sight thing going on, coupled with one of those “I’m-talking-about-one-thing-but-you-think-I-am-talking-about-sex” scenes. In any case, it is stirring up feelings between the two, but the real Duke (Richard Roxburgh) doesn’t like other people touching his “things” so that creates an obstacle for Christian. But as is the case with these movies, love will overcome. It was like every song was about love, which is a fine theme for the movie, but then at other times there were other popular songs shoehorned in, such as “Smells Like Teen Spirit”. The songs were hit and miss for me, especially a miss if I’m talking about a rendition of “Roxanne” that is so overly dark, I felt like I was supposed to be intimidated by it, but I really wasn’t. But there were other songs that were good, so it wasn’t like I had to sit through a musical and roll my eyes every time they started singing. There are some other obstacles in the way too, but of course I won’t tell you them here.

You have come to known me as a spoiler-free blog, so let me draw a parallel between me and the movie. You probably wouldn’t like it if I spoiled a big plot thread even though I have little to nothing to do with the movie… Well, one of my issues with Moulin Rouge! was that, when it came to major plot points, sometimes a minor character (and I am talking minor character, as in we have seen this person ONCE before) is the one to spill the beans. Well that wasn’t very cool. It just confused me, since there seemed to be no motivation for this particular person to do anything about whatever it is that I am talking about. But all in all, this movie was… interesting. I don’t know if I would watch it again, but I’m glad I did. It was bizarre and manic, visually interesting… but the lead performances were (to me) just so-so. Maybe I just didn’t like the way that it seemed like everything was just… too easy. There were obstacles, but how do you combat true love? It makes the stakes pretty low in my opinion, but then again the movie is for the most part pretty optimistic. And at least the ending for a movie like this was appropriate, so I couldn’t be mad about that. It was nominated for eight Oscars, including Best Picture (l. to A Beautiful Mind) and while I can say that I was not blown away as the Academy seemed to be, I can see if you are a fan of the medium, the director, the style, or musicals of this nature, it could really be a treat. A fine movie, and better than I expected, although it did take some getting used to.

P.S. The review I spoke of was by The Nostalgia Critic, and he does a good job explaining it. So after reading this, and if you want to watch a comical review (with special guest Brent “Brentalfloss” Black) go to http://www.thatguywiththeglasses.com and search for “Moulin Rouge”.  And it is a “musical” review as well.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) ‘Review’

So my friend Zach showed me the trailer for this movie, and then he said that he could not tell me anything else about it, because it would ruin the movie. Well I will tell you that he is very correct. And that is going to make my review exceedingly hard because I do not want to let my viewers know anything before they watch it for themselves.  Zach said that The Place Beyond the Pines was even better than Silver Linings Playbook, one of my top three movies of last year. I find it hard to pick which one I liked more, because they are two different genres, but both are great movies. And I don’t want to overstate this, or hype it too much but:

This movie was BRILLIANT!

From the direction, to the writing, to the acting, to the structure, I find it hard to find a flaw with this movie. But again, I don’t want to give anything away because this movie is best watched when you do not know what is going to happen. But don’t worry, the movie is crafted so well that you won’t lose track of what is going on, and as far as I was concerned, I was hooked and wanted to see what was going to come next. If you’ve seen the trailer, that is alright, because it doesn’t  reveal too much other than what I will say in my review in terms of who is in it.

First of all, the movie is directed by Derek Cianfrance, whose only known directorial credit was Blue Valentine, although I haven’t seen it yet. It stars Ryan Gosling (also in Blue Valentine, Drive) as a guy who rides a motorcycle, Bradley Cooper (Silver Linings Playbook, Limitless) as a cop, and Eva Mendes as someone’s love interest. But don’t be swayed by my succinct summary; this movie is not some love-triangle-rom-com. This movie is deep, and it says a lot of things, although I won’t say them here because I don’t want to ruin anything. It also stars one of my favorite young actors who continues to show that he has some good stuff, Dane DeHaan (Chronicle, Lawless, X-Men: First Class).

And I hate to cheat my loyal viewers, but… that’s all I really want to say. I HIGHLY recommend The Place Beyond the Pines, even though it is 2 hours and 20 minutes long. The movie ended and I was just floored by how much I enjoyed it. I’ll say that this movie is very intelligent, in terms of its pacing and its structure, and it is unlike anything I see with regularity. Definitely one of my top movies of 2013 already, and I see it near the top of my list near the end, even with my guilty pleasure superhero movies in full swing this summer. Sorry that I couldn’t say much, but you will thank me later.

[P.S. On an unrelated note, I watched The Campaign with Will Ferrell. So mediocre that I have nothing interesting to say about it.]

 

Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) ‘Review’

Here’s a movie I was going back and forth on whether I wanted to see it or not. I like the premise of a retelling of a fairy tale, but on that same note I have seen those go awfully before (Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland). It stars Kristen Stewart as Snow White, so I was anxious to see if she could do anything more than what I saw from The Twilight Saga. It also has Charlize Theron, who is supposed to be “less fair” than Kristen Stewart… uhh… no. And Thor is there too (Chris Hemsworth). I know it sounds like I’m not putting a lot of effort into this, but then again, I don’t really care for this movie. It was badly-paced, full of actors either being boring, or over-acting, and an ending that was just… “What? That’s it?” There were a couple moments where I said “Well, that’s kind of cool”, but for a two hour movie, those moments were very few. The action scenes were weak, the final battle was lame, and, just like like I said in my Taken 2 review, the villains were stupid! A lot of things could have went their way if they just stopped and thought about what they were doing. There were some nice references to the original tale, but yeah, this movie was just a lot of too little, if that makes any sense.

I had some hopes for this movie, honestly, but the execution was lacking. Maybe the sequel will be better, but who knows. I wonder if it will be affected by that scandal between the director and Kristen Stewart (for those who forgot, Stewart cheated on her on-again, off-again boyfriend Robert Pattinson with the director, Rupert Sanders). And since I feel like this review is lacking, let me just say a couple more things: The movie was just really dark, in terms of the shooting. I get that it was a motif, where the world was dying because of Ravenna’s (Theron) control of the land, but even so it was just dark to see. Also, Kristen Stewart is no William Wallace when it comes to rallying the troops. And archers are still awesome (Sam Claflin). And the movie wasn’t all bad… Very nice costumes and some nice visual effects (both Oscar-nominated) and there were hints of some good cinematography. But these things did not really help boring writing and action. Watch if you want, as I won’t say STAY AWAY! But not highly recommended.

Lawless (2012) ‘Review’

I don’t know if I have mentioned this before, but sometimes when I don’t know if I will watch a movie or not, I look at the actors that are involved. For instance, I took a look at Lawless, a movie I knew just a little bit about, and saw names like Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman, and to a lesser extent, Shia LaBeouf, so I decided to take a look. Well, if you follow my way of thinking, there are ways to be disappointed in your choice. The film is about Prohibition-era bootleggers, namely the Bondurant boys, Jack, Forrest, and Howard (LaBeouf, Hardy, and Jason Clarke, respectively). Jack is the runt of the litter, too timid to be of much use when it comes to business. Forrest is the oldest brother, and sort of the brains and leader of their group. And Howard is sort of the muscle, and I liked him a lot, especially after seeing Clarke in Zero Dark Thirty. His co-star, Jessica Chastain, also has a role in the movie, whose actual role in the movie is little more than providing some eye candy, and also becomes the girlfriend of Forrest. The trio is pursued by Charlie Rakes, played by Guy Pearce, who is so into his government job of stopping bootleggers that he’ll kill for it. There are supporting roles from Dane DeHaan (Chronicle) and Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland), both of which provide friendship to LaBeouf. Oh, and Gary Oldman is in it too. Not kidding, he’s an afterthought apparently, just providing a bit of motivation for Jack, and doing little else.

I don’t know if this movie really had a lot going on, to be honest with you. There was some alright acting, but nothing ridiculously good worth noting. I’m a fan of Tom Hardy and I like his accent here, but the acting overall was just alright. And I feel like Shia LaBeouf’s character was the one that was supposed to get the most attention, but to me, it was too much about him. A useless romantic side plot did not really help his weak character, and the choices he makes really doesn’t help the Bondurant’s cause. Guy Pearce sounds like he wants to be Christoph Waltz at times, Gary Oldman barely exists in the movie, and I’m not sure how Mia Wasikowska gets DVD cover credit and not Jason Clarke, who I much prefer.  Casting and marketing decisions aside, I felt like the movie could have been better with less about Shia LeBeouf’s character and more about the three brothers together. Too often I felt like it was just about the youngest brother. While there was nice growth for the character, I suppose I expected more. Really, there was nothing remarkable about the movie, besides that I like Tom Hardy a lot. I was just too disappointed that Gary Oldman was under-utilized, there was a lot of a useless romantic side story, and Shia LaBeouf, well, he should not have been the main focus, as far as I was concerned. It made it two hours of not a lot going on… not terrible, but nothing remarkable.

Full Metal Jacket (1987) ‘Review’

My friend from work, Nick, gave me a collection of Stanley Kubrick films: One that I will review by next week, and Full Metal Jacket, a Vietnam War film that I have heard a lot about, but have never seen. Although after watching it, I have heard a lot of it. I feel like this is one of the most quoted films I have seen, from R. Lee Ermey’s insulting rants to many of the monologues that are spoken during it. FMJ was one of those movies that, as I was watching it, I was really thinking about what it all meant. I took the time period into consideration, remembered what I learned about the Vietnam War during history and broadcasting classes, and really listened and dissected what I was hearing. It turned out to be a movie that I regretted not watching sooner, because of how much I enjoyed it. And I enjoyed it on a number of different levels as well.

The first ten minutes was a lot of fun to watch. While I understood the intensity and reasons for all the shouting going on, R. Lee Ermey’s Gny. Sgt. Hartman was really excellent. The insults, rants, and ways he said things really got me hooked. And again, while it wasn’t meant to be funny or anything, some of them elicited a chuckle. And then the intensity really ramped up in a big way. There is a certain part where the movie goes from watching some new recruits try to hack it in boot camp, to something far more deep. The movie almost feels like two separate films: Boot camp, and the war itself. But everything is linked together nicely, and Kubrick’s direction and (Oscar-nominated) screenplay really make you understand what is happening in some of the character’s heads. One line in particular really encapsulated the theme of the film, and you can see it on the poster above. I won’t explicitly say it here, in case you want to figure it out for yourself, but it, to me, was apparent. This one all-encompassing thought shows itself throughout the ending moments, and was a goosebump-inducing ride. The final monologue, combined with the visual and aural images really bring everything together, and I highly recommend you check this out so you can see what I mean. If you have seen FMJ, then maybe you already know what I am talking about.

The movie is a bit depressing, and I believe it takes a good look at what the troops thought about the situation they were in. It took a hard look at just what was going on during the war, which did not always go well. Actually, it rarely went well, as they even mentioned that legendary anchor Walter Cronkite called it “an unwinnable war”. There are some disturbing images, but I think it was an accurate portrayal. One of the men in master control even said that the boot camp scenes were completely accurate to the conditions they were in. This is only the second Kubrick film I have watched, the first being Dr. Strangelove. Like I said, I will watch another one soon, but I know I want to see some others like A Clockwork Orange and 2001: A Space Odyssey. But next time I’ll watch The Shining so look out for that.