Les Misérables Review

In the movie industry, there are some genres I have little to know love for. The romantic comedy  category is one of those, mostly because each film resembles all the others. The musical bracket is also one I have little fondness for. I cannot say I see the purpose in singing every minute of the story. Once in a while, however, a feature film comes to stand apart from the rest. Will Smith’s “Hitch” did that for me as a romantic comedy, and Les Misérables is a musical I have really taken a liking to.

An adaptation of the stage play, which was an adaptation of the original novel by Victor Hugo, though it has a few light moments–a very few light moments–the motion picture tells a tale sadder than most. Hugh Jackman plays Jean Valjean, a paroled convict, who served 19 years in prison for stealing a loaf of bread. Upon his release, he finds himself in a world where he has no working opportunities, leading him to either become a street beggar, or go back to the thievery he knows. While he momentarily chooses the latter, stealing from a bishop, the mercy of that bishop causes him to turn his life around, though he adversely becomes a fugitive in so doing.

Russell Crowe is Javert, an officer of the law, and Jean Valjean’s constant pursuer, even to the end, some 17 years later. He mercilessly stands on the good side of the law, ready to, with extreme prejudice, bring all lawbreakers to justice.

Anne Hathaway is Fantine, a single mother, in a time where such a thing was a disgrace. She attempts to keep it a secret, working a job to earn and send money to her daughter Cosette, who is cared for by two neglectful would-be guardians, Thénardier & Madame Thénardier (Sacha Baron Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter, who also serve as the comic relief). She is willing to do anything to see that her daughter is taken care of, which is a claim we get to see the extent of.

Amanda Seyfried plays the older Cossette (the younger is briefly played by Isabelle Allen), who falls in love with Marius (Edde Redmayne), a French revolutionist. Amidst the sadness, depression, and oppression, this love is where the story finds its light.

The picture has lots more characters, which also include Aaron Tveit as Enjolras, leader of the student revolutionary party, and Samantha Barks, the only actor or actress from the broadway play. I personally like a big cast of characters because I feel it gives a vast audience different reasons to like the same film. And everyone performs well, from the biggest names down to the smallest.

There are a number of standout performances, three of which quickly became my favorites. Hugh Jackman’s “Valjean's Soliloquy,” Anne Hathaway’s “I Dreamed a Dream,” and Eddie Redmayne’s “Empty Chairs at Empty Tables” are amongst the cream of the crop. Everyone’s preferences will very, though, because there are a lot of good songs here.

During production, a big topic of discussion was the decision to have live singing, instead of prerecorded performances. It makes such a difference, too, as it allows the actors and actresses  to act and react to each other in more ways than body language and facial expressions.

On another technical side, makeup is well done, helping to set the depressed mood. Makeup is probably best used on Hugh Jackman, who makes the most drastic transformation from prison convict to a mayor. The only place I thought the makeup could have been used better was on Russell Crowe, who after 17 years, still pretty much looks the same. 

Les Misérables is a good movie that makes me want to, if not see the play, at least read the book. I recommend it.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns Part 1 Review

Not to be confused with Christopher Nolan’s epic “Dark Knight” trilogy, “Batman: The Dark Knight Returns pt. 1” is an animated adaptation of Frank Miller’s 1986 graphic novel of the same name. In the comic book world, it is considered to be one of the all-time legendary comic book runs (it ran 4 issues). Though there is no possibility it will ever achieve the same level of acclaim, because it is a retelling and that is just the nature of retellings, that does not mean it is far off. It is actually very good, arguably the best original animated movie DC Comics has put together to date, its only competition being “Batman: Year One.”

“Returns” shares a few similarities with “Rises,” as one can tell Nolan took some inspiration from the comic in crafting the finale to his trilogy. One of those similarities is that Bruce Wayne has been retired for a long period of time (10 years here). The Bruce we find here struggles with an almost post traumatic stress disorder, still having nightmares of his parents death from his childhood. His relationship with Jim Gordon, who is a month from retirement at the ripe old age of 70, is as good as ever. Gordon even knows that he is Batman, and they casually older times over dinner. When asked about Dick Grayson (the original Robin), though, it is said that neither communicate any longer.

With no Batman to ward off the evil, Gotham is getting darker by the day, as  a new threat to the city arises in the form of the mutants. A past-his-prime Batman reemerges from the shadows to once again rid the streets of Gotham of this new evil. With Gordon in tow, the aged Batman also recruits a new Robin, a female Robin.

The adapters of the comic did a number of things right, the first being that they stuck to the script, or the source material. The main downfall of most adaptations is that there is a team of writers put together, who pick and choose what to keep the same, then add and subtract what they feel is necessary. The problem with that approach is that the team of writers are never legendary as is a Frank Miller, in this particular case, otherwise they would not be writing for such a low budget project, so what is remade is usually something of much less considerable quality.

On a technical side, the quality of the animation is pretty good. It is obviously nothing like a classic Disney feature film, or Hayao Miyazaki anime movie like “Spirited Away,” however, it is about as much as one could ask for, considering the scale of the project. If there is one difference in preference I have, it is that I would have loved to see Batman in a more black and gray, like “The New Adventures of Batman,” rather than the blue and gray. But that is what he is drawn like in the comic book.

In these adaptations the one thing I give a pass on altering are the fight scenes. Because comic books are limited to slides, the confrontations between Batman and his adversaries are not told in great detail, rarely lasting longer than a page or two. DC’s animation team shines in this respect, the two gems being Batman’s two fights with the mutant leader.

Unfortunately with all the praise inevitably comes a few criticisms. Being that it is a part 1 obviously indicates the part 2. I could understand it and give it a pass, if this one seemed so large that it would seem unreasonable to include the rest, however, it is only 76 minutes. The way I feel is that they could have just made a larger 2 hour movie, instead of asking fans to pay what will eventually total around $40 dollars, once part 2 hits store shelves.

A few more small criticisms have to do with a choice in voice casting, and a form of dialogue. Set in a near future, the mutant thugs have their own slang that they speak, which just does not translate very well to the movie. Maybe back in ’86, when the comics came out, it sounded  kind of cool, but it is about as lame as slang can get. In writing, future slang is just one of those things that should never be dabbled in because it will never be gotten right. As far as the voice goes, it is the choice to use Peter Weller (Robocop) instead of Kevin Conroy. Not that he does a bad job, in fact he is pretty good, but I grew up with Conroy voicing the “Animated Series,” so he is Batman to me. It was most likely casted this way for the purpose of giving Batman a more age hardened voice, which is understandable.

Whatever cons I have with the movie, it will not stop me from recommending it.

8/10

Jack Reacher Review

On a morning like any other morning, a man sits on a downtown park bench, a bouquet of roses at his side. A woman buys an expensive watch for a special man in her life. A businesswoman walks to a bank, seeking a lone. A young nanny, accompanied by the girl she cares for, takes a walk in that park. A mother visits the baseball stadium to purchase tickets as a reward for her son’s good grades. An unknown sniper, perched in a parking garage across from the park, takes aim at human targets. Six shots are fired, five lives are taken. This is the opening scene of Jack Reacher.

The presumed sniper, James Barr (Joseph Sikora), is taken into custody. When he is sat down with district attorney Rodin (Richard Jenkins), and investigator Emerson (David Oyelowo) to sign his confession to the murder of the five victims. Instead, he writes, “Get Jack Reacher.” Enter Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise).

A military veteran, Jack Reacher is a trained killer, with many skills at his disposal. A man with a dry sense of humor and a witty mouth, he produces a few funny moments early on. Throughout the film, he hardly ever uses a gun, but he is most deadly person onscreen. There is a history of him up to his departure from the military 2 years prior to where the story begins, so his existence is undeniable, and yet it is presently impossible to prove that he does exist. He is a “ghost,” a character describes him as, who is found only if he steps into the light, or wants someone to find him. There is no detail that escapes his eye, which makes him reminiscent of the character Lisbeth Salander, for those familiar with “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.” Because he is so uncommonly, and maybe unrealistically, good, critically it may become a bit of a nuisance.

When Jack answers the call of James Barr, he is contracted by James’ defense attorney, Helen (Rosamund Pike), daughter of the accusing district attorney, Rodin, as her lead investigator. Once the two begin digging through the case’s evidence, they are led to believe Helen’s client may be innocent. And the story takes off from there.

Technically there is not much to complain about. The script is well written, and the actors and actresses do a good job of bringing it to life. A notable performance to mention is Robert Duval as Cash, a shooting range owner. An aging man with a hole in the bottom of his marble sack, he becomes the movie’s comical relief.

I recommend seeing Jack Reacher.

8/10

Snow White and the Huntsman Review

Snow White and the Huntsman, starring Kristen Stewart as Snow White, and Chris Hemsworth as the Huntsman, plays out as an alternate retelling of “White White and the Seven Dwarves,” incorporating more action to please the contemporary summer blockbuster crowd. Being a sort of action take on a fairytale, it expands its horizons to a larger audience. No doubt I likely would not have seen it otherwise. After all, I did pass on “Mirror Mirror.” 

No matter the entertaining moments of the film, the movie is undeniably flawed. The manner in which Ravenna, the films villain, overtakes the kingdom of Tabor is ridiculous and unreal. (SPOILER WARNING, I guess.) After a battle against the approaching Dark Army, King Magnus, the king of Tabor the father of Snow White and a widower, finds and rescues Ravenna, a sorceress in disguise. He finds her so beautiful, they marry the very next day–yeah, for real, the very next day. She in turn kills him in his own bed on their wedding night, and brings an awaiting army into the kingdom to take over. So, she pretty much conquered the kingdom in 2 days. Being so easy to take this kingdom over, it is a wonder it did not fall sooner to a strong gust of wind. After the conquest of Tabor, the land is left in ruins, and Snow White is imprisoned.

At a young age, Ravenna (Charlize Theron) was the recipient of a spell that gave her beauty and power. The only thing that could undo the spell was another more beautiful than she herself. Enter Snow White. (The argument is whether or not Kristen Stewart can be considered more beautiful than Charlize Theron. I am going to go ahead and say no.) She has obviously been done wrong in the past by men, so now she gives them no trust, instead using them only for her own gain.

The complaints are not over; later, when Snow White escapes into the Dark Forest, a forest said to be so deadly, the huntsman, the only one known to have gone through this forest and lived to tell of it, tracks her down with a handful of other soldiers, and in the end there are no casualties to this forest. The forest seems to not live up to its deadly reputation if all these people go in and come out alive.

Another con is during the lead up to Snow White retaking the castle, wherein she rallies an army to fight alongside her. Being that she has been imprisoned for such a large part of her life, you wonder when she had time to learn the swordplay that she uses to win the battle. On the other hand, though, if we are going to have a story where she is all of a sudden “Snow White Warrior Princess,” then at least let there be an entertaining final confrontation between her and Ravenna, but to say the least, it is pretty sorry.

I personally felt the movie’s script was far underdeveloped. More thought to sew up these flaws would have went a long way. There will be a sequel, so maybe next time.

5/10

Life of Pi Review

Life of Pi, based on the book of the same name, is a tragically inspiring story. The story follows the life and adventure of Piscine Molitor “Pi” Patel from his youth in India, the country of his birth, where he discovered and practiced various religions, and crafted his nickname “Pi” due to the ridicule of the similarity between his name “Piscine” and the word “pissing,” through his teenage years, where he and his family uproot themselves from India and head toward a new life in Canada. The tragedy occurs in the form of a shipwreck, through which he becomes an orphan, as his parents, brother, and all other ship crew members and passengers are killed, except for “Richard Parker,” a zebra, hyena, and orangutan. The recount of Pi’s early life is given by his older self, told to a young writer, who was told to seek him out because of his unbelievably unique story.

A film with very little dialogue outside of the narrative between Pi’s older self and the writer, it is reminiscent of Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg’s “Castaway,” or Pixar’s “Wall-E,” where the events of the adventure are the storyteller. Not to mislead, Pi is accompanied by “Richard Parker,” a bengal tiger, where, through their unlikely relationship, this tale has much heart. For such a film as this to excel, it calls upon those said events to hold such a power to captivate it’s audience, and, in this respect, it shines.

With a heavy reliance on computer generated graphics, Life of Pi risks becoming an annoyance with all CG animals, an island, and sky reflecting ocean. It is a gamble that pays off in stunning ways, as it retains a naturalism that many other films lose. Anyone can tell at a glance it is CGI simply because there are so many unreal things here, yet the film manages to capture one in the beauty of those fantastical moments.

An impressive fact to note about Life of Pi is Suraj Sharma, the young man who plays Pi as he is going through his drifting days at sea, is not even an actor, or he at least was not until he played the character here. He did a really good job, so it will be interesting to see if he chooses to continue acting. 

Being such a unique story, which was first a book that reportedly led many to believe that it was impossible to successfully adapt as a motion picture, it likely will not appeal to every person. However, I believe it is very entertaining, and that those who, without a great deal of skepticism, give it a chance, will like it, too.

9/10

Thomas Landrum

The Expendables 2 Review

The Expendables 2 once again gathers former and current action film stars (and some not-so action stars), Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Chuck Norris, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Bruce Willis, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Liam Hemsworth, and Nan Yu, placing them in a series of action scenes 1 hour and 42 minutes long, with little story between scenes, which are simply meant to set up the next action sequence. If one can manage to enjoy it for what it is, one will find epic action scene after great action scene after grand action scene, and good laughs that reflect the quirks of each character, such as Stallone’s, Schwarzenegger’s, and Willis’ ages, the stature of Jason Statham and Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren’s intelligence, Randy Couture’s ear, Nan Yu’s gender, and even Chuck Norris manages to tell his own Chuck Norris joke.

The story is centered around Barney Ross’ (Stallone) team taking on a mission from Church (Bruce Willis) under blackmail to get plans for a large source of plutonium in underground mines. When one of Ross’ team is murdered by Jean-Claude’s Sang, a colt of apparent Satanists, Ross’ team continues onward in their fallen member’s stead to avenge his death. A very simple story,  meant for nothing more than to give reason for the action.

There are some very visible cosmetic flaws. The use of special effects for a helicopter, tank, hand-full of jeeps, and water tower are so obviously computer generated, the graphics would have been much more appropriate for a television series, which causes one to think with all these big stars, how could better CGI not been afforded, or why not use actual vehicles? Not to mention there is a fixed location scene thrown in. On location filming must have been outside of the budget, too. And not that there are award winning actors playing here, but some soap opera stars could have done just as well in a few moments.

In the end, though, as said above, if one can manage to simply be entertained by what is offered–action, which is done very well–the entertainment value is undeniable.

6/10

The Dark Knight Rises Review

                                                   

excellent entry from a producer/director/writer who has come to be expected of nothing less. The inevitable and unavoidable question that will be asked during the first day of its release, the weeks it spends atop the box office, the months until it is brought to DVD & Blu-ray, and the proceeding years is: is it better than 2008’s The Dark Knight? The answer is, as was written in “The Dark Knight Review,” there will never be a comic book movie better than The Dark Knight, maybe more of one’s personal favorite, but never better as in the quality of the film. However, TDK Rises is different. No ground is retreaded in the least bit, and that is what makes this one good.

Picking up 8 years after part 2, Rises features a Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), who has given up the cape and cowl, because Gotham seems to no longer need him. The city streets are clean, leading new character officer John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) to joke with Commissioner Jim Gordon that they will soon be chasing down overdue library books. Meanwhile, Bruce becomes an old, partially crippled recluse, obliviously driving the family empire into the ground, seemingly saddened that his Batman nights are behind him, and forever haunted by the death of his childhood friend Rachel Dawes.

   

Whereas The Dark Knight was more quickly paced, Rises is more methodical in its storytelling, as it features a Gotham without a Batman to put a stop to major crime, as that sort of criminal activity has ceased to exist. It radiates a nostalgic feel toward Begins in a way how it was an origin story, and now with Rises the same mood is taken, with 8 years having gone by and the need to explain what has been going on during that time.

   

That no major crime exists, happens to be a false belief, as crime in the form of Bane’s mercenaries lies dormant, until their planned “rise.” Once they are discovered by Commissioner Gordon in the sewers of Gotham, Bruce Wayne, Batman, and Jim Gordon mutually agree that it is time for the Dark Knight to return.

   

The need for Batman seemingly brings Bruce Wayne back to life. He steps outside of his home to meet with Luscious Fox, who no doubt shows him new toys, and takes a more active role in his company again. However, there is Alfred, who attempts to keep him out of the life of the cape and cowl, and instead into a life where he actively works as Bruce Wayne. At the heart of his ventures at discouraging the Wayne heir, he wants to see Bruce move on in happiness, not ultimately killed by the criminals he faces.

The main villain Bane (Tom Hardy) may never have had a chance at becoming as iconic as Heath Ledger’s Joker, however, his performance lacks nothing. From his off putting accented voice, with the added hum from that strength enhancing mask, to his ominous build, he is not a man one would feel very comfortable standing in the same room as. Yet there is more to the strong villain than an intimidating shape. Hearing him talk, it will not take long to note that he is also intelligent, a kick back to the original version of the character. His own origins tell the story that he learned from the League of Shadows, and now has come to Gotham, rising from the literal depths–he is building his army of mercenaries in Gotham’s sewer system–to finish what Ra’s al Ghul started some decade ago.

Anyone who knows the story of Bane, knows that he was the character that broke Batman’s back. To say that this movie follows that tale in many ways, would not be a spoiler. As Batman has and always will be my favorite superhero, there was a sadness, seeing him throw everything he had at Bane, pulling out all the tricks, but still being dominated.

In character development, Rises surpasses Begins & TDK, by creating more characters that the viewer can invest in. There is the aforementioned officer John Blake, an optimistic upstart, who never bought into Batman’s coverup crimes of 8 years past. He believes in the vigilante hero, though it is not a popular stance.

   

And there is Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), who moonlights as a cat burglar, claiming to take from the rich only what she needs to survive. Having a history with the law, her goal is to rid her legal record of those negative incidents, giving herself a clean slate and hopefully a new life.

   

Though he is a mainstay for the series, even Commissioner Gordon must be mentioned here. In a time where every other citizen of Gotham is running victory laps around the city, Gordon, like Bruce Wayne, though for different reasons, has a heavy heart, knowing his only true friend, Batman, is considered the city’s greatest villain, for taking the blame of the crimes of the supposed hero Harvey Dent.

   

Amongst all the likable characters, there are a couple more in the form of Foley (Matthew Modine), Commissioner Gordon’s would-be replacement, while he is injured, and Daggett (Ben Mendelson), a businessman attempting to absorb Wayne Enterprises, who one may hope and wait for to die, just because they are kind of annoying to watch.

In terms of action, Rises also surpasses its predecessors. There is Bane, breaking bones with every swing of his limbs, Catwoman, though she is not once called by that name, agile and fast hitting, and of course Batman, attacking from shadows and mixing it up with the best of them in any brawl.

   

Though the knuckle-to-knuckle brawls are entertaining, the best bits of action come when Luscious Fox’s inventions take to the field. Bane has Tumblers, yes, plural, Catwoman man’s the Bat Pod, while Batman pilots new toy “The Bat,” and the excitement flares during every moment of footage. 

If there are any criticisms for Rises, it is that, at least from what I saw, there was no clear explanation as to why Bruce Wayne was in such a crippled condition that he would have need of his latest accessory, a walking cain, then later a knee brace. Yes, he is older, but most do not age that way. And maybe I was not so much a fan of one particular character knowing who Batman is. But neither mess up the story.

In directing The Dark Knight Rises, Christopher Nolan has brought a fitting end to undoubtably the best comic book movie series to date. And now the debate of whether The Dark Knight, Inception, or The Dark Knight Rises is Nolan's best work. And will he ever again create a movie that is less than movie of the year?

10/10

Comments are appreciated

The Dark Knight Review

                                                    

Groundbreaking. Monumental. If there are enough of those sort of words, The Dark Knight deserves every single one of them. From long before the first minutes of the film began to roll, one probably got the sense that this movie would be more than any of us movie fans could have expected.

   

Sequel to 2005’s Batman Begins, The Dark Knight is a far superior film in every facet. Skimming through old reviews, one may be left to wonder when the day came when critics stopped criticizing art, and instead began to stand in admiration of achievements. Surely there are complaints, however, with those critiques, it far more often seems as though one is reaching for a complaint. Because nothing created of human hands is supposed to be perfect, right? No, likely a lot closer to wrong. The Dark Knight appears on my short list of “perfect” films, which includes the likes of Gladiator, The Last Samurai, and Inception, to name a few. This motion picture, Christopher Nolan’s magnum opus, has become something of legend to the point where, as far as the consensus goes, there will never be another comic book movie to surpass it. 

   

With so many compliments to pay, the first has to go to the performances, especially one in particular. No surprise that this performance is the late Heath Ledger’s Joker, the agent of chaos. The portrayal of this classic and iconic villain, in a way, makes this film, pushes it over the edge of greatness to legendary. During one part, the Joker claims to not really have a plan, and it seems to reflect on how Heath played the roll. In watching, one may never get the feeling that he is operating on a how-to-play-the-Joker manual. Every single scene seems to so widely differentiate itself from the last that it seems as though he is really out of his mind.

   

Needless to say, the rest of the cast hold their own, with performances to stand up to the groundwork they had lain in Batman Begins. Maggie Gyllenhaal and Aaron Eckhart were newcomers to the the Batman franchise, yet they seamlessly fit right in with the rest of the cast (Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Michael Cain). 

The pacing of the movie is another excellent factor. It feels like there is 3 1/2 hours of content here, jam packed into just 2 1/2 hours of screen time. Yet it does not seem rushed. Instead it has a scene-to-scene formula that does not waste an extra second on unneeded stares and overacted performances.

   

The genius in the scripting of the Joker was that he was not over thought with purposes of why he is evil. As Bruce Wayne’s loyal friend and butler Alfred said, some people just want to see the world burn.

   

Then there is the closest thing to a mastery of the two-villains-in-one-movie idea that before this movie had yet to be done very well on screen, with Joker/Two Face. The most disappointing facet of that formula in most other previously released comic book movies is that they are always in cahoots together, a part of the same plan, with the same agendas, or one works for the other, etc. Though they have contact, the Joker and Two Face are independent of one another. The mold was broken, with the aforementioned Joker being about the senseless chaos and destruction of Gotham city, while Two Face went on a mean streak, targeting policeman and city officials for their betrayal of justice.

   

Endless paragraphs could be written to speak of how good The Dark Knight is, but I will stop here, giving this film a perfect rating.

10/10

Comments are welcome

The Amazing Spider-Man Review

                                                                     

The Amazing Spider-Man is a retelling of Stan Lee’s classic comic book franchise. When it was first made clear by the original news and trailers that it is a reboot, I must admit, my initial reaction was one full of disappointment that I would have to sit through another 2 hours of a story I was told a decade ago via Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man.

The idea in starting from the beginning of Peter Parker’s (Andrew Garfield) tale, however, is a respectable one. Sony was so displeased with the direction the last trilogy took, they wanted to cut ties completely, and a complete overhaul was the only way.

   
The movie plays out much the same as the original, the radioactive spider bite, Uncle Ben’s (Martin Sheen) death, Peter seeking revenge, and on the way becoming Spider-Man, etc. What separates the Amazing Spider-Man, however, are the intricacies. 

   
Probably the best change is that Peter Parker is actually a scientist. He develops his own webbing, using the classic web shooters. He does research to create his costume, basing it around the spandex that professional athletes. And the list goes on to the point where one gets the sense he is actually passionate about science.

   
Peter’s love for science plays a rather large part in the overall plot of the movie, too. After impressing Dr. Connors, he is invited to the Oscorp tower, wherein he helps further research that is important to the story. To keep from spoiling the movie, though, I will leave it at that.

Becoming a “superhero” does not entirely change who Peter Parker is as a character. He still caries all the insecurities that come with being a high-school teenager. He stalls, stutters, and stumbles over words, when talking to his crush Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone), and makes her the screen saver for his computer. (More to say about Gwen later...) Yet it is when he puts the Spider-Man costume on, added with his newfound abilities, that he gains the confidence to trash-talk, like the character is known for.

  
(...Back to Gwen) Luckily for both the character and the sake of the viewers, Peter’s  crush is not unshared; Gwen likes Peter, as he likes her and, too, has her uncomfortably shy moments, like when she invites him to dinner. Emma and Andrew work well together to say the least and are very much a high point of this film.

   
Many people have said that the Amazing Spider-Man is a darker take on the franchise than what Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man. I think “more serious” is more of an appropriate term, however. It lacks some of the humorous moments that the last trilogy had, i.e. when Peter was trying to figure out how to use his webbing, but replaces those moments with Peter’s aforementioned trash-talk and his and Gwen’s lighthearted crush. People should not at all make the mistake thinking this is “dark” like Batman: The Dark Knight, though.

   
In closing, I am thinking there is not too much bad I can really say about it. The Lizard is certainly not the most intriguing of villains, but outside of the Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus, and Venom, Spider-Man does not have very many interesting bad guys. Aside from anything minor, I think it is an absolute upgrade over the last 3 movies and definitely one to watch.

Chronicle Review

Chronicle chronicles the story of 3 unlikely high school friends, brought together by their common telekinetic abilities. Viewed through the lens of one of their camcorder, the majority of the film features the found footage style of cinematography.

The storyline is vague in spots, i.e. how the three acquire their powers: (spoiler...I guess) go into an underground tunnel, find a glowing...something, blackout, and there you have it. Otherwise it is nicely detailed, not under nor overdone, kind of just right, especially considering it lasts only about 84 minutes.

Starring are three young actors, Dane Dehaan, Alex Russell, and Michael B. Jordan, who are without enough of a history to say, "I'm seeing Chronicle because Dane Dehaan is playing in it," but enough experience that each carries their roles respectively. Taking advantage of the young cast, there are a lot of lighthearted immature moments that lead to a few laughs.

I have heard a few complaints concerning the found footage format Chronicle was shot in, but in a way, I actually think it helped the low budget movie (I have heard $15 million) not look so low budget. From one of the earliest moments where the high schoolers manipulate their newfound powers to connect legos, to  a later point where the least popular of the three gains his 15 minutes of fame at a talent show,  the special effects are not that of Star Wars or Transformers. Later on in the movie, however, watchers will be amazed at what has been accomplished on such a small budget, when the storyline begins to expand on what they can do with their powers. It is quite the ambitious small film.

I am not a big fan of buying many DVDs nowadays, I kind of like I watch a movie in theaters once and let there be some years before I seer it again. However, Chronicle will be a Blu-ray I will have in my small collection.
—ThomasGrand

The Grey Review

Most modern stories are built around a skeletal system: there are the bad guys, with their evil scheme, and the good guys to disband said wicked plans.

The Grey, starring Liam Neeson and a handful of lesser knowns to unknowns, opts for a different formula. The story starts with a plane crash, leaving 7 survivors from what was originally maybe 25-30  Alaska based oil workers.

Being somewhat of a survival expert, Ottway (Liam Neeson) takes charge, with an intent to lead these men back to the families and  lives they were all headed toward before their plane went down.

There is peril and grave desperation, yet wolves replace the much more commonly used  evildoers, though those eyes, hidden in fur, that glow in firelight, and teeth like a mouthful of daggers make them look like Satan's hounds. While the stranded, plane crash survivors are used in the place of good guys,though not all of them are very good at all to the point that I didn't mind the possibility of them dying.

Outside of its plot setting, The Grey is layered in good storytelling. One of the movie's strongest elements, in my opinion, is its ability to make the characters seem like actual people, though that is also something to applaud the cast for. Amidst all the "we're stranded in the cold, with wolves" stress, there is one lighthearted, campfire discussion, wherein the characters talk of what is keeping them going, and a few jokes said had me thinking that I could imagine the people I know saying those exact things.

It is early in the year, and I refuse to be that guy, saying, "best film of the year so far!" I already had high expectations for this movie based on the trailer alone, and the actual film lived up to my hype. If you have the slightest interest, make time to see The Grey.

—Thomas

Red Tails Review

History often crafts better stories than most Hollywood writers. Red Tails, though a mixture of historic facts and cinematic make believe turns out to be a good combination.

About the 332nd Fighter Group, an all black division of aviator pilots, Red Tails chronicles their rise from flying hand-me-down planes over afterthought routes miles behind the front lines of World War II to a premier squadron, famous for having not lost a single bomber during the war.

Meanwhile, on the front lines of something of a more civil war, Colonel A.J. Bullard (Terrance Howard) wrestles with the powers that be over issues of racism and discrimination to give the Tuskegee Airmen a chance to prove their worth to the United States, fighting for more meaningful bomber escort runs. Eventually, after the U.S. continues to lose entire fleets of bombers, the 477th Bombardment Group is given a chance, and succeed they do (don't call it a spoiler, call it history), with brand new planes, which they take to painting the tails red, giving both the group and movie their names. By making it their to return every bomber safely home, the famed pilots gain respect from the pilots of the bombers themselves.

From the mouth of Executive Producer George Lucas, who funded the movie, though it was not popular across Hollywood offices, he chose to take up this project to inspire young black males. But what this movie can easily do is inspire anyone to overcome obstacles in their own lives because, in the bigger picture, these men were not fighting for a chance at a hero's honor, but rather for a chance to possibly die for the people of the U.S.A.

The film has a few notable actors, including the above mentioned Terence Howard, Cuba Gooding Jr., Nate Parker, etc., who all give solid performances.

Industrial Light & Magic, the special effects company noted for their work on the Star Wars series and others like Transformers, did a good job on the battle sequences here. I was personally left wanting more after each skirmish was done.

Red Tails is a good movie that does not go over board in an attempt to preach at the world against racism, though it does not sweep it underneath the rug, either. It tells the story how it was meant to be told, which turns out to be very entertaining.

—ThomasGrand

Haywire Review

Haywire stars Gina Carano as Mallory Kane, a highly trained, freelance operative, taking on various assignments around the world, through her handler Kenneth (Ewan McGregor). On what is to supposed to be a simple stand-in assignment, she is double crossed by her agency, and made a fugitive.

One look at Gina Carano's profile on IMDB will show you that she is a new comer, with nothing notable under her belt. The inexperience shows through in her acting; she can use work, but she isn't horrible. With a history in competitive TV shows like "Ring Girls," "Inside MMA," and "American Gladiators," just to name a few, she is able to pull off the action scenes effortlessly.

(Other stars include Channing Tatum, Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, and Michael Fassbender.)

Most of the story takes place in the form of flash backs and recounts by the characters that lived them, without any real verbal narration until the story is returned to the present for just a split second before diving back into the past. Often these flashback scenes are played out without much dialogue, rather with more running, fighting, shooting, and characters motioning to others and speaking without audio. This overview style of storytelling does not take away from the story, though, because the movie speaks, when it absolutely needs to, so that helps to cut out unneeded dialogue.

One of my fellow moviegoers told me that this movie looked low budget. In truth it is evident that this film operates on a less than average Hollywood blockbuster budget, though I think it tends to add to the movie in a few ways. One example is how that lack of a upper echelon production value seeps its way into the fight scenesl. This is more an example of how I think it helps the movie. The uncultivated hand-to-hand battles ultimately lead to a style that is unique to this one film, not something a viewer may feel was repeated from another.

In the end, Haywire will not be for everyone, but I genuinely like this movie. It is not groundbreaking and probably will not be remembered in just another year, but as for entertainment, it is good.

Feedback is encouraged.

—Thomas

Contraband Review

Contraband stars Mark Wahlberg as Chris Farraday, a former smuggler turned family man and, full-time business owner, installing home security systems. During a few scenes of scattered "back in my day" talk, we are given a sense that he was some sort of black market legend.

Unfortunately for Farraday (Wahlberg), he has a brother-in-law, the brother of his wife Kate (Kate Beckinsale), who does not heed the words of the wise to stay out of that smuggling life. After a deal gone wrong, the kid ends up in the hospital, with a death threat that leads back to the Farradays, furthermore leading the man of the house back into the life of a smuggler, for one last run, as a favor to his wife to save her baby brother.

It is a good movie—solid story, good acting & actors, not very much to complain about, unless it is just not your type of film. If there is one complaint I have, it is that Chris Farraday, this black market legend, seems to border the line of not really knowing what he is doing, when just about every plan he has seems to fall apart before he even gets halfway through, or maybe it is just rust. Another "well, why did he do that?" moment comes when (SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER) he decides to take his brother-in-law on the smuggling run, the same kid who got him into this nifty little situation. Anyway, those are just my complaints.

Other movie attractions come in the form of Ben Foster (3:10 to Yuma), who plays Sebastian Abney, a brother/uncle  like family friend, looking after Chris's family while he is gone on his run.

All in all, this is a film that I would recommend to any moviegoer, looking for an entertaining watch.

Horizons

I have comprised a list of movies that I believe will be good in the forthcoming weekends of this year. Some may wonder how I have come to place each movie on this list but not others. The answer: personal taste, trailers, cast, producers & directors, franchise history.

Examples...

PERSONAL TASTE:  Personal taste comes in with the particular genres I like, like action. Some trailers have the ability to grab one's attention like no other, like the first Iron Man, or the 300. 

CASTING: I like to look at casting on a very few actors, who seem to stay in quality movies. Leonardo DiCaprio has seemed to become one of those actors, with recent films like Blood Diamond, The Departed, Shutter Island, and Inception. Russell Crow and Denzel Washington are two other actors I tend to keep an eye out for.

FRANCHISE HISTORY: I take the history of a franchise into account with a movie like the upcoming Batman: The Dark Knight Rises. Batman Begins was good, The Dark Knight was better, hopefully The Dark Knight Rises triumphs over all.

PRODUCERS & DIRECTORS: Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Ridley Scott, Peter Jackson, Christopher Nolan—enough said. One look at the history of each of their work, and one will feel no obligation to give a reason to see their movies, be they director or producer of said project.

The list goes as follows...

January 13th
•Contraband (Mark Wahlberg) 
January 20th
•Haywire (Gina Carano, Ewan McGregor)
•Coriolanus (Ralph Fiennes, Gerard Butler)
•Red Tails
January 27
•The Grey (Liam Neeson)
February 3rd
•Chronicle
February 10th
•Safe House (Denzel Washington, Ryan Reynolds)
February 17th
•This Means War (Reese Witherspoon, Tom Hardy, Chris Pine)
•The Secret World of Arrietty 
March 9th
•John Carter
March 30th
•Wrath of the Titans (Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson)
April 13th
•Bullet to the Head (Sylvester Stallone)
May 4th
•The Avengers
May 25th
•Men in Black III
June 1st
•Snow White and the Huntsman (Kristen Stewart, Chris Hemsworth)
June 8th
•Prometheus
June 15th
•Jack The Giant Killer
June 22nd
•Brave
July 3rd
•The Amazing Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone)
July 20th
•Batman: The Dark Knight Rises (Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway)
August 3rd
•The Bourne Legacy (Jeremy Renner)
August 17th
•The Expendables 2 (Sylvestor Stallone, Jason Statham, Chuck Norris, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger)
November 9th
•James Bond: Skyfall (Daniel Craig) 
December 14th
•The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
December 21st
•World War Z (Brad Pitt)
December 25th
•Django Unchained (Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio)

I will surely update this list as more trailers premier and other release dates are announced, so stay tuned, moviegoers. Comments are welcome and encouraged.
—Thomas

Expectations

Hello,


This is my first of hopefully a never ending series of movie blog reviews. This blog is not a review of any one movie in particular but rather an explanation of what I tend to look for in a movie; what makes a film good.


First and foremost I am a "guy." I like to see explosions, car chases, shoot outs, sword duels, bare knuckle brawls, over the top stunts, etc., etc. When I take my seat in a theater, I am not there to learn a life lesson—though if that should happen, it is icing on a cake—or to be taught like I was sentenced to a sensitivity class. Films that become my favorites make me nudge the person next to me in a "Did you see that?!" moment, or laugh out loud from time to time. I, like the everyday person, go there to be entertained.


Now just because I enjoy the frantic chaos of an epic battle scene does not mean I throw a good script to the wind, either. In my opinion the most annoying element of a story is when, upon subsequent views, it begins to become apparent there are plot holes, events that cannot possibly matchup, or incomplete branches of the story that the writer must have found too difficult to tie together, so instead tries to sweep underneath the rug in hopes that the viewer will not notice. Such a thing as this often tends to unravel the entire experience, making what could have been a classic become unbearable, instead.


There is a saying that goes something like, "there is no more originality left in the world." With movies like Inception just released in 2010, I highly disagree. A very few movies still manage to stretch the capacity of the imagination, leaving one to say, "I've never seen that before." In this way, concepts, too, are just as  important to me as a  well put together storyline and maybe even more from time to time. Even a well written script can tend to become hampered by a feeling of deja vu. 


This first blog is just my heads up as to what to expect from me. Hopefully I gain some regular readers. And feedback is more than welcome, it is encouraged.