REVIEWS - 'A Million Ways To Die In The West' & 'Maleficent'

'A Million Ways To Die In The West' (R) **
In the small Arizona town of Old Stump in 1882, cowardly sheep farmer Albert Starks (Seth MacFarlane, who also produced, directed, and co-wrote) backs out of a gunfight and ends up getting dump by his girlfriend Louise (Amanda Seyfried) for local mustached businessman Foy (Neil Patrick Harris).  Anna (Charlize Theron), a mysterious new woman in town, helps teach Albert how to shoot but trouble soon finds itself in Old Stump when Anna's infamous outlaw husband Clinch Leatherwood (Liam Neeson) arrives looking for his wife.  Also features Giovanni Ribisi as Albert's best friend Edward, and Sarah Silverman as Edward's prostitute girlfriend Ruth.  Shenanigans ensue and there are a plethora of random celebrity cameos. 

I'm usually a fan of Seth MacFarlane's work.  While I didn't really care for "American Dad!" or "The Cleveland Show" all that much, I still like "Family Guy" and I thought MacFarlane's first movie 'Ted' was hilarious.  Heck, I thought MacFarlane did a great job hosting the Oscars last year and was very funny.  This was one of my Top Ten Anticipated Movies for 2014.  The movie itself.....is unfortunately very hit or miss.  The acting was all right, Liam Neeson makes for an awesome villain, but it is slowly paced and it tries WAY TOO HARD to be funny.  For every time I chuckled or laughed out loud there was at least a 5-10 minute stretch where I was checking my phone for the time and was just kinda bored.  Heck, there were a few jokes I chuckled at at first, but then some character would start explaining the joke and it wouldn't be funny anymore.  There are two songs in the movie that are a lot of fun to listen to and some of the cameos are awesome.  While I laughed, I was still disappointed.  If maybe twenty or so minutes was edited out this would've been a lot better.  Hopefully next year's 'Ted 2' is funnier. 

TRAILERS

• 22 Jump Street - Out of the 4 movies I've seen so far this year that have been on my Top 10 Most Anticipated list for 2014, half of them have been disappointing.  Hopefully this movie bucks that trend.
• Tammy - This one might be a rental. 
• Let's Be Cops - I chuckled during the trailer.  If I do see this it'll probably be also be a rental.
• As Above, So Below - A found footage horror movie set in the Paris catacombs?  Sounds interesting. 
• A Walk Among The Tombstones - A hard R-rated thriller with Liam Neeson as a P.I. looking for a kidnapped person?  Sold. 
• Kill The Messenger - A thriller set in the 80's involving government corruption, drug smuggling, and the Nicaraguan Contras with Jeremy Renner in the lead role.  Didn't look half bad.
  
  

'Maleficent' (PG) **
Not quite the 'Sleeping Beauty' story that we all know and grew up with.  A vindictive fairy (Angelina Jolie) is driven to curse an infant princess, but soon realizes that the grown-up child Aurora (Elle Fanning) may be the only one who can restore peace between the human kingdom, led by an increasingly paranoid King Stefan (Sharlto Copley), and the magical kingdom in the woods.  With Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville, and Juno Temple as the three fairies who help raise Aurora.  No doubt about it, this movie is perfectly cast.  It's been a while since I've seen Elle Fanning in a movie, the last movie I saw her in being J.J. Abram's Spielbergian 'Super 8' in 2011.  But some bad writing, inconsistent special effects (some are great, others are rather bad), and pacing issues (it DRAGS) plague the latest re-telling of a classic Disney movie.  I also had some nitpicky issues with some of the deviations from the original story, but I'll save those for another post.  For what it is it isn't bad, but it could've been better.  It's kinda like if the original animated 'Sleeping Beauty' movie, Universal's 'Snow White and the Huntsman', and the musical "Wicked" were all blended together.  And we only have to wait until March next year to see Disney's latest live action retelling of one of their own classic movies, that being 'Cinderella'.

TRAILERS

• Dolphin Tale 2 - Wait....they made a second one? 
• The Boxtrolls - Still looks like it could be good. 
• The Book of Life - Plain and simple:  This looks awful. 
• Big Hero 6 - Disney Animation's first movie based off of a Marvel comic book.  This was merely a teaser trailer that more or less echoed the teaser trailer for 'The Incredibles', so who knows maybe this will be good.  

I Finally Watched...The Notebook

Now I know what you're thinking.  How did THIS get chosen?  Well, originally at the end of my post about having finally watched 'Santa Claus Conquers The Martians' I vaguely hinted that the next entry in this series would be 'Beverly Hills Cop'.  Time went on and I just never really got around to doing it.  I then decided to skip the whole "randomly choosing" thing and settled on the 2010 animated Disney movie 'Tangled'.  After all, I surprisingly hadn't seen it yet.  And this is coming from someone who saw both 'Princess and the Frog' and 'Frozen' in the theater.  So I ended up watching it when it recently played on The Disney Channel and I did end up liking a lot and thought that it was extremely funny.  'Frozen' is a better movie overall but I digress.  So after having finally watched 'Tangled'...well, time passed and I just got lazy.  I wanted to bring this series back sometime but I needed to commit to a movie to watch and write about, not just watch and then get lazy.

So I decided to watch something that would be outside my comfort zone.  'Beverly Hills Cop' is an 80's comedy, and I tend to like 80's comedies.  'Tangled' is an animated Disney movie, and I tend to like those as well.  I needed something a bit challenging.  Not like an arthouse movie challenge where I feel dumb immediately after watching it (or hating immensely because it thinks it's so smart and above everything else), but just something outside my comfort zone.  I looked over my list and narrowed it down to some movies that definitely fall under that requirement.  So that, ladies and gentlemen, is how "I Finally Watched..." returns with 2004's ultimate chick flick 'The Notebook'. 

So yeah....'The Notebook'.  Based on the 1996 novel by Nicholas Sparks that I had never heard of nor is it something that I'd want to read.  My first recollection of seeing anything related to 'The Notebook' was seeing a poster for it on a wall roughly ten years ago at the Regal Cinemas theater in town when I went with my brothers and grandma to see 'Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban'.  I don't recall seeing any commercials for it.  I probably skimmed through the review of it that was printed in the newspaper but I don't quite remember much about those.  While doing a bit of research for this post I found out that apparently when 'The Notebook' was released it received mixed to positive reviews, with a 52% among critics on Rotten Tomatoes ('rotten'), an 85% among audiences on Rotten Tomatoes ('fresh'), and a 53 on Metacritic (meaning mixed or average reviews).  Among those who praised the movie was the late Roger Ebert.  

After it had been released I remember watching the MTV Movie Awards the following year and saw Ryan Gosling and Rachel McAdams win Best Kiss and they reenacted it on the stage just before accepting the award.  That's basically all I remember about 'The Notebook' when it first came out.  And I can't quite pinpoint when the hype for this movie really started.  How this was the ultimate chick flick and that girls would force their boyfriends to watch this movie.  How a lot of people that watch this movie, both men and women, end up crying their eyes out while watching this.  I also knew that this was directed by Nick Cassavetes, who also directed 'John Q', 'My Sister's Keeper', this past spring's 'The Other Woman', and had a cameo in 'The Hangover Part II' as a tattoo artist.  Anyway, during my rather brief relationship was I ever forced to watch 'The Notebook'?  Surprisingly, no.  But that doesn't mean that I didn't have a brush with a Nicholas Sparks movie at some point.

My first experience watching a Nicholas Sparks movie came courtesy of a belated Valentine's Day date to see 'Safe Haven', based on another book that I never read.  I knew that my now ex-girlfriend wanted to see it, so when I suggested seeing it with her she was probably surprised that I even suggested it in the first place.  After all, I have said that I'll watch just about any movie.  You can read my review of 'Safe Haven' here and in all honesty it wasn't that bad.  I'm clearly not the target audience for it and the third act of the movie gets crazy, but it wasn't bad.  I've seen better, and I've seen way worse.

Usually I don't watch chick flicks.  To put it plain and simple, they're not really something that I'd go see.  Now, having said that, most of the ones I've seen I've actually liked.  As far as romantic dramas go, yes I liked 'Titanic'.  I wasn't expecting to like it, and trust me I was ready to roll my eyes during it.  But, I liked it.  'The Spectacular Now', which is a perfectly blended comedy/drama, was also one I liked a lot.  As far as actual comedies go, I did like 'Mean Girls', 'Easy A', 'Legally Blonde', 'Love Actually' and '(500) Days of Summer'.  'Bridesmaids' and 'Warm Bodies' I don't consider to be chick flicks but that's a discussion for another day.  Anyway, did I initially want to see any of these?  No. For the most part they were movies I finally watched after hearing a plethora of good things about them, from both women and men.  Or in the case of the 'Twilight' movies I initially just wanted to see what all the fuss was about and then wanted to see just how bad the rest of those movies were. 'Legally Blonde' I was forced to watch, but at least it was funny enough that I liked it.  If I had to pick between watching a romantic comedy or a romantic drama I'd choose the former.  I'd rather laugh than watch some sappy love story take itself WAY too seriously.

Do I have any other initial thoughts to 'The Notebook' being the next movie in this series?  Well...I have said that I'll watch just about any movie.  I mean I'm a twenty-something, single, unemployed, overweight, college educated, straight male who lives with his parents and is about to sit down and watch 'The Notebook' by himself.  Wait...that sounds really sad........um......I suppose it could be worse.  A lot worse.  I could be on fire.

Well, I've put the DVD in my laptop twice and both times my five year old laptop automatically ejected it after struggling to load it.  Perhaps a sign of things to come?  Oh well, time to switch to the Xbox.  And what do you know....it loaded.  All right, here we go.

'The Notebook' begins in a nursing home where Duke (James Garner) is reading a story to a fellow patient (Gena Rowlands).  This particular story follows Noah (Ryan Gosling), a poor lumber yard worker in South Carolina as he meets and falls in love with Allie (Rachel McAdams), an heiress in South Carolina for the summer with her parents who disapprove of Noah.  The movie cuts back and forth between the nursing home with Duke and his friend and the trials and tribulations of Noah and Allie's relationship.

So after having finally watched all 124 minutes of 'The Notebook', what did I think of it?  Honestly, I did like it.  Look...yes it is incredibly cliched with it's romantic beats.  Heck it carries some of the same beats as 'Titanic', considering both are about a poor man and a rich woman falling for each other and both feature an elderly person (or persons in the case of 'The Notebook') telling the story.  The musical score is often quite sentimental and sappy.  BUT.......it features beautiful, colorful cinematography and the performances by the four leads, particularly Garner and Rowlands, are all really good and pretty much carry the movie.  Those performances make 'The Notebook' rise above it's cliches.  And yes, this movie is incredibly sad, even taking it's sappy sentimental score out of the equation.  It's a much better movie than 'Safe Haven'.   

A few moments in the movie actually struck a personal chord.  One of the reasons for Noah and Allie's initial break-up is distance.  It's the end of the summer with Allie moving back home to New York and Noah staying put in the lumber yard in South Carolina.  One of them is more optimistic than the other about working things out despite the distance.  A similar event/discussion happened to me last year.  The other reasons for the break-up were a bit different than the ones in the movie, but distance was a big factor.  The other moment that struck a personal chord was one of the elderly characters having dementia.  A few of my great grandparents have suffered from dementia.  It's not easy knowing that a loved one who you've known your whole life has slipped mentally to the point where they no longer remember their loved ones.

Now, having said all of that regarding how 'The Notebook' struck some personal chords, it's time for the million dollar question that I'm sure you're asking:

Did I cry while watching 'The Notebook'?

Like I said for my 'Titanic' post, I'm going to plead the fifth on that one.  But I'll tell you what.  If you know me and know how I react to things, you can figure out for yourself if I cried or not while watching this movie.

Now since I liked the movie, will I go back and read the book?

Of course not.  Are you crazy? 

So that's 'The Notebook', the fifth installment of "I Finally Watched...".  Since it's been a long while since I last did anything with this series, please leave a comment below or comment on this link on Facebook.  If you liked this movie or disliked it, let me know.  If you have thoughts on this post in general, let me know.  I always welcome feedback.  After all, if there is anything that needs changed, fixed or added I can't do that unless someone gives feedback and suggests it. 

So what will the next movie be for this series?  I'm not entirely sure.  I'm going to be busy during the next two months so we'll see if I end up watching something for this series or not. 

6 Sequels That Sucked - Volume II

My second post about sequels which is a sequel to another post about sequels.  Here are six more sequels that I thought just flat out sucked for one reason or another.  Even worse was that these were all disappointing.  Some of these are worse than the others.  Heck, I've seen four of these more than once.  But just because I've rewatched them doesn't mean my opinion has changed. 

'Die Another Day' (PG-13)
James Bond (Pierce Brosnan) is sent to investigate the connection between a North Korean terrorist and a diamond mogul who is funding the development of an international space weapon. 

Admittedly, this movie isn't half bad.  And I'll admit Madonna's title song is rather catchy.  But once the movie moves to the ice palace it goes off the rails and then some.  Sure Bond movies aren't known for their realism or their plausibility, but this stretches things too far...even for a Bond movie.  It stretches things even more than 'Moonraker', and that movie sent Bond into space!  'Die Another Day' also suffers from some rather sketchy CGI, even worse puns, forced references to every previous Bond movie, inconsistent pacing, and a not very good villain with a twist that, for lack of a better word, is stupid.  The mixed reception towards this movie made the producers decide to reboot the Bond franchise.  Now while I didn't like this very much, being a Bond fan I'll still watch it.  Heck, I've seen this more times than some other Bond movies that I've actually liked.  Then again whenever I've rewatched it I just kinda make fun of it, but still.  Come to think of it, I really should thank this movie.  After all, if it was an overwhelming critical AND commercial success, we wouldn't have gotten 'Casino Royale' or 'Skyfall'.  The less said about 'Quantum of Solace' the better. 

 'The Mummy:  Tomb of the Dragon Emperor' (PG-13)
In the Far East, Alex O'Connell (Luke Ford), the son of famed mummy fighters Rick and Evy O'Connell (Brendan Fraser and Maria Bello), unearths the mummy of the first Emperor of Qin (Jet Li) -- a shape-shifting entity cursed by a witch centuries ago.

The first 'Mummy', a remake of the 1932 Boris Karloff horror movie, was fun and entertaining, and also kinda creepy depending on your age.  The sequel 'The Mummy Returns' was also fun.  This third 'Mummy' movie shifts from Egypt to China, swaps Rachel Weisz for Maria Bello, has the grown up character of Alex O'Connell speaking in an entirely different accent (in 'Mummy Returns' he was 10 and spoke with a British accent.  Here he's in his 20's and speaks in an American accent), and worst of all....it's just plain stupid.  There's an interesting story to be found somewhere in finding a Chinese mummy and also involving the mysterious Terra Cotta army, but this movie fails at that.  I could buy the Terra Cotta army coming to life, I can buy mummies coming back to life...I can buy the man/scorpion hybrid version of the Scorpion King and the Army of Anubis both from 'Mummy Returns'....but I draw the line at yetis.  Yes, this movie has yetis.  Who apparently play American-style football in there spare time because during a fight scene at a temple one yeti kicks a soldier between two posts, with one yeti throwing up his arms indicating that it was good.  UGH.

It was also disappointing critically and commercially, and plans for a fourth movie have since been abandoned in favor of a reboot.  Since everything gets rebooted nowadays....

 'National Treasure:  Book of Secrets' (PG)
Benjamin Gates (Nicolas Cage) must kidnap the President of the United States, travel the world, and  follow a clue left in John Wilkes Booth's diary to prove his ancestor's innocence in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. 

I liked the first 'National Treasure'.  It was basically a kids version of 'The Da Vinci Code', but it's also interesting and fun.  Everything good about the first movie seems to have been forgotten in this sequel.  Some of the clues are painfully obvious to figure out and some of the clues are just flat out preposterous (a clue in french carved onto the torch of the statue of liberty in Paris? if anybody really looked at it close they could've found it and baffled about it).  I know the first one had preposterous clues as well but they're plausible compared to the clues in this sequel.  There is no suspense or fun to be had since Nicolas Cage automatically figures out the clues.  And, sadly, the movie isn't much fun to watch anyway.  Many parts could have been fleshed out a little more (like actually kidnapping the president and planning it out?  like actually having Ed Harris' bad guy possibly working for the Knights of the Golden Circle to have the South rise again rather than just in it to have his family name be etched in history?) I guess that would make too much sense.  And having been there before, I feel a need to say this:  THERE IS NO LAKE DIRECTLY BEHIND MOUNT RUSHMORE!!!!!

There has been talk of a third 'National Treasure' movie for years.  But who knows if it'll actually get made. 

 'Scooby-Doo 2:  Monster's Unleashed' (PG)
Mystery Inc. must save Coolsville from an attack of past unmasked monsters brought to life by an evil masked figure trying to "unmask" the gang. 

I liked the first 'Scooby-Doo' movie.  It's not perfect by any means but I thought it was funny, all the actors acted like their cartoon counterparts, and it raised the stakes to actually having to save the world from an actual supernatural force as opposed to a man in a mask scaring people from a building or wherever.  But Zoinks!  This movie was like, really bad man.  Except for Shaggy and Scooby-Doo, every other returning character seems to have had a personality change since the last movie.  The jokes aren't really all that funny, the special effects are terrible, and it gets bogged down in subplots and side hijinks that really don't pertain to the main story at all.

Failing to make as much money as the first movie, a third 'Scooby' movie was scrapped.  Two direct-to-DVD live action prequels were made...and I've only seen part of the first one and it was even worse than this. 

'Spy Kids 3-D:  Game Over' (PG)
Carmen (Alexa Vega) is caught in a virtual reality game designed by the Kids' new nemesis, the Toymaker (Sylvester Stallone). It's up to Juni (Daryl Sabara) to save his sister, and ultimately the world.

The first two 'Spy Kids' movies were fun, spy movies for kids too young to watch James Bond.  The first two still hold up as passable family entertainment.  The third one........well, 'Game Over' indeed.  Horrible CGI, bad writing and a horrible villain are just too much to overcome.  This was released in 2003, way before the current 3D craze hit Hollywood.  And from what I remember it was the Red and Blue glasses type of 3D.....and the 3D in the movie was bad.  Watching it in 2D is 'slightly' better....in the same way that getting punched in the arm is better than being punched in the gut.  This was so bad that I still haven't even seen 'Spy Kids 4' yet....which I've heard is even worse. 

'X-Men:  Days of Future Past' (PG-13)
Oh yes....I'm putting this movie on this list.  It is FAR from over between 'X-Men:  Days of Future Past' and me.  I haven't been this mad about a movie's critical acclaim since the one-two punch of 'American Hustle' (ugh) and 'Dallas Buyers Club' (yawn).  If this movie was at least entertaining then I'd be able to overlook it's numerous flaws and plot holes.  But apart from the scene of Quicksilver helping Magneto escape from the Pentagon, it wasn't entertaining.  I'll go more in depth with those flaws and plot holes in my next 'Movie Nitpicks' post.  But anyway, everything that made 'First Class' great was severely absent in this sequel.  I know in my review I said that it was better than 'Origins', but the more I've thought about it the more I'm kinda wanting to reverse that decision.  'Origins' sure is dumb but I thought it was watchable and it didn't make me mad.  This movie makes me mad.  And I'll say it:  'X-Men:  Days of Future Past' is the worst 'X-Men' movie.  I just hope 2016's 'X-Men:  Apocalypse' is better than this.  



Any other movie sequels that you thought sucked?

REVIEW - 'X-Men: Days of Future Past'

'X-Men:  Days of Future Past' (PG-13) **
In the not too distant desolate future, an army of robotic Sentinels created by Dr. Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage) have been hunting down mutants and humans alike.  Out of desperation, the remaining X-Men send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) to the past to change history stop the central event that would lead to the Sentinels being unleashed upon the world.  In addition to returning cast members from 'First Class' (James MacAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult), some of the cast from the original trilogy are also back (including Ian McKellan, Patrick Stewart, Halle Berry, Ellen Page, Shawn Ashmore).

When it was announced that this would be a sequel to 'First Class', I was really excited.  'First Class' was not only my favorite of the 'X-Men' films, it was also one of my favorite movies from 2011.  It was not only a breath of fresh air for the 'X-Men' franchise, but for once I was actually able to get invested in the story.  The acting in that was also really great.  So when I read that it was also going to be called 'Days of Future Past' (based on the comics storyline of the same name) and include the cast from the original 'X-Men' trilogy, I was skeptical.  This was gonna involve time travel?  Keep in mind I have never read any of the 'X-Men' comics, so the thought of time travel kinda threw me off.  The internet was going gaga over Bryan Singer returning as director (after having directed the first two 'X-Men' movies, and while I'll have more on my thoughts about the other 'X-Men' movies later, I wasn't exactly excited about him returning.  The first trailers for this came out...and I said it could go either way of being really good or really dumb.  More trailers came out...was kinda looking forward to it, but still really mixed about it because of the whole time travel plot.  The reviews came out...and they were overwhelmingly positive with many calling it the best 'X-Men' movie since 'X2'.  Heck, some called it the best 'X-Men' movie ever.  So naturally my expectations were raised a bit, but I still kinda had a mixed feeling about it.  But despite my mixed feelings, I was still able to go into the theater with an open mind and let the movie speak for itself as I do with any movie that I watch. 

Well....good things.  Well, the scene where Wolverine, Professor X, Beast, and Quicksilver (Evan Peters) have to break Magneto out of the Pentagon was a lot of fun, mainly because of the antics of super speed antics of Quicksilver.  It's a fun introduction to that character and it'll be interesting to see how Quicksilver is handled in 'Avengers:  Age of Ultron', with Aaron Taylor-Johnson playing him.  But enough about the Marvel Cinematic Universe for now.  Still gotta focus on Fox's Marvel Universe, or rather 'X-Men' Universe.  Anyway, it is nice seeing the casts from both the original 'X-Men' movies and 'First Class' in a movie again.  A few other fight scenes are also kinda cool, and the end of the movie has a few unexpected cameos from other original 'X-Men' trilogy cast members that are also fun.  Other than that....sadly there wasn't much else I liked.

Now, a problem I had with Bryan Singer's 'X-Men' and 'X2' was that I couldn't get invested into what was going on.  That's mainly why I wasn't all that excited about his return to the director's chair.  And that's one of my problems with at least the future scenes in the movie:  I just couldn't really get invested in what was going on.  Right at the beginning of the movie we dive straight into this desolate future with a narration from Professor X trying to explain things, and then introduced to new mutants that even after watching the entirety of this movie I couldn't tell you who any of them were.  A bit hard to get invested with characters that I don't really know.  The performances aren't bad per say, but they could've been so much better with perhaps a better story.

I still didn't like the time travel plot and I just thought it was kinda ridiculous and stupid.  And with the time travel plot came a lot of other problems that I had with the movie, but since those involve some spoilers I'll probably leave those in a future 'Nitpicks' post.  Let's just say continuity is thrown out out the window, and with that out the window this movie didn't make a lick of sense and was kinda stupid.  Those problems made it even harder to get involved in the story.  Sure, 'The Dark Knight Rises' has a lot of problems, but it was still entertaining despite those.  This had some entertainment value, but the problems I had with it made it hard to fully enjoy.  

In comparison to ALL of the other 'X-Men' movies, where does this installment line up?  Well let's take a quick look at the others:

• 'X-Men' - Special effects don't really hold up well, but it's an all right movie.  As I mentioned earlier I just couldn't get invested in it.
• 'X2' - My feelings toward this movie echo my feelings for the first movie.
• 'X-Men:  The Last Stand' - I know the fan base doesn't really like this movie, but I thought it was fun.
• 'X-Men Origins:  Wolverine' - I know the fan base REALLY hates this movie.  I'll admit that it's dumb, but it's watchable.
• 'X-Men:  First Class" - Still not only a great comic book movie, but a great movie period.  As I said earlier, it was a breath of fresh air for the 'X-Men' franchise.
• 'The Wolverine' - overall I liked it, but that final fight between Wolverine and the Silver Samurai was beyond stupid.

'Days of Future Past' is at least better than 'Origins', but I feel that it' definitely one of the lesser movies in this series.  Out of all the ones Bryan Singer directed it's the worst, but then again I wasn't exactly a huge fan of his 'X-Men' movies in the first place.  I know I'm in the minority with that opinion, but that's how I've felt about those movies.  'First Class' still remains my favorite 'X-Men' movie, and the fact that 'Days of Future Past' was the follow-up is very disappointing.

Now I opted to see this in 2D instead of 3D.  Why?  Well, I saw all of the other 'X-Men' movies in 2D.  And I hadn't really heard much about how the 3D was in any of the reviews I read or skimmed through.  Having seen it in 2D, there were a few sequences that would have been kinda cool to see in 3D, but I'm perfectly fine with having seen it in 2D.

'X-Men:  Days of Future Past' has some entertaining moments, and while it is nice to see certain cast members return to the franchise, it has far too many problems along with a ridiculous time travel plot that left me with a very disappointing follow-up to three much better movies:  the excellent 'First Class', the fun 'Last Stand', and the overall good 'Wolverine'.

Hopefully the next 'X-Men' movie, 2016's 'X-Men:  Apocalypse' (teased at the end of the credits for this movie), is far better than 'Days of Future Past'.



TRAILERS

• 'Edge of Tomorrow' - Honestly I'm getting sick of this trailer.  I might rent this at some point.  Or I can just watch 'Groundhog Day' and 'Oblivion' back to back.
• 'Transformers:  Age of Extinction' - A bit of a different trailer that makes this movie not only look a bit darker in tone, but also kinda looks like a rehash of 'Dark of the Moon'.  Well, as long as it's more 'Dark of the Moon' than 'Revenge of the Fallen' then I'm fine with it.
• 'Earth To Echo' - It looks okay.  I mean I'd rather just stay at home and watch 'E.T.' or 'Super 8' and pretend that those were found footage movies.
• 'Lucy' - Basically 'Limitless' if it were more of an action movie and instead of Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro we have Scarlet Johansson and Morgan Freeman.  I am okay with this.  It doesn't look half bad. 
  
• 'Let's Be Cops' - I did laugh a few times during this trailer, but I still couldn't get out of my head that the main premise of this movie is HIGHLY ILLEGAL.  I nitpick this R-rated comedy about it's illegal premise but I'm fine with the illegal antics in 'Wolf of Wall Street'.  Hmmm....
• 'The Boxtrolls' - Could be good.  The trailer didn't really have a whole lot to say in regards to it's plot, but at least the stop motion animation looks great.
• 'Kingsman:  The Secret Service' - a spy thriller from the director of 'X-Men:  First Class' and the first 'Kick-Ass'?  Looks like it could be fun. 
  

REVIEW - 'Godzilla'

'Godzilla' (PG-13) ***
Godzilla's return to the big screen since 2004's 'Godzilla:  Final Wars' and the first American made 'Godzilla' movie since the 1998 Roland Emmerich version.  And there is a lot happening in this movie.  In 1999, two scientists (Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins) investigate a quarry in the Philippines.  Their investigation leads to the discovery of a massive skeleton and two parasitic pods, with one already hatched.  Meanwhile in Janjira, Japan, Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) is in charge of a nuclear plant which soon goes into meltdown, killing his wife Sandra (Juliette Binoche).  A massive cover-up follows and Joe wants to know why.  Flash forward fifteen years later to their son Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), who is an explosives expert in the Navy returning home from a tour of duty to be with his wife Elle (Elizabeth Olsen) and son Sam (Carson Bolde).  The night he comes home he is forced to go to Japan to bail his father out of jail, and together the two stumble upon the reactivated nuclear plant and discover that it's housing something called a MUTO (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism), still in it's pod from earlier in the movie.  It soon escapes and travels to America to team up with another MUTO, and the titular monster must come in to save the day.  

Simply put, I thought this movie was awesome.  The cinematography is excellent, the score was also good, the special effects were among the best I've seen so far this year, the sound effects were equally as great, and once all three monsters finally come into play there is a tense atmosphere throughout the rest of the movie.  But in all honesty I just loved seeing this new incarnation of Godzilla on the big screen, and seeing him fight two monsters.  I really have no words for it other than that seeing those fight scenes later on in the movie was awesome, and they more than make up for the movie's shortcomings (some inconsistent acting from a good chunk of the main cast, and cutting away from the first two monster fights).  Some have complained that Godzilla wasn't in his own movie enough, but I kinda liked the slow burn feel of the movie and the various teases and glimpses we got of Godzilla before the big reveal about halfway through the movie.  That reveal is also worth the ticket price alone. 

Now it has been years and years and years since I've seen any previous 'Godzilla' movie, so I can't exactly compare this to those.  I mean I remember liking the 1998 version, but I was also in second grade when I saw that.  Something a bit more recent that I can compare this to is last year's 'Pacific Rim', which was inspired by the old Japanese monster movies.  'Godzilla' blows 'Pacific Rim' out of the water in virtually every aspect.  Sure 'Pacific Rim' had some good special effects, but the fight scenes overall were really underwhelming and I couldn't care less about the human characters.  'Godzilla' has even better special effects, the fight scenes are actually exciting, and despite the inconsistent acting from Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Ken Watanabe, and Juliette Binoche, I still actually cared about the human characters.  

Now I saw this in IMAX 3D, mainly because my youngest brother chose to see it in that format.  Seeing how massive the three monsters are on an IMAX screen was pretty cool, and the HALO jump sequence was also fun to see in the IMAX format.  But there was little if any 3D effects.  The trailers had more 3D effects in them than the movie that followed them.  Then again this movie was shot in 2D and converted into 3D, but I've seen some 3D conversions that actually had some pretty good 3D ('Gravity' was converted to 3D). 

Overall, 'Godzilla' is entertaining and impressive in the technical departments despite some inconsistency in the acting department.  I had a fun time watching this in the theater. 

TRAILERS

• Maleficent - This actually looks like it could be good in 3D.
• Edge of Tomorrow - Well....this comes out soon enough so I won't have to see the trailer again.  Hopefully.
• Transformers:  Age of Extinction - All will be well as long as this is better than 'Revenge of the Fallen'
• Jupiter Ascending - Haven't seen a trailer for this since the second 'Hobbit' movie last December.  It doesn't look bad...might be something that I rent at some point.
• Interstellar - a full trailer that somewhat explains what this movie is about.  Still looks really good. 

It's All Subjective - Part 1

Welcome to the first part of this three part series on how subjective movies are.  Today I'll be looking at some movies that were critically savaged and for the most part failed commercially...yet I thought these were all good movies upon watching them.  In 2013 that happened a few times.  I liked 'Lone Ranger' and 'Hansel & Gretel:  Witch Hunters'.  Both were critical and commercial disappointments, but I thought they were both good movies and a lot of fun.  Simply put, one man's trash is another man's treasure.  Here are some other movies that were trashed, but I treasured.  Well, I don't exactly treasure any of these but I did like them.

  

 'Bewitched' (PG-13)

Rotten Tomatoes:  25% (rotten)
Metacritic:  34 (generally unfavorable reviews)

Razzie Nominations:  Worst Actor (Will Ferrell), Worst Director (Nora Ephron), Worst Screenplay, Worst Remake or Sequel
Razzie Win:  Worst Screen Couple (Will Ferrell and Nicole Kidman)

Thinking he can overshadow an unknown actress in the part, an egocentric actor (Will Ferrell) unknowingly gets a witch (Nicole Kidman) cast in an upcoming television remake of the classic show "Bewitched".  Co-starring Michael Caine, Steve Carell, Shirley MacLaine, Stephen Colbert, and Jason Schwartzman. 

It's been nine years since I've seen this movie, but I do remember liking it.  I thought it was funny and that the acting was actually pretty good.  While an actual remake of 'Bewitched' probably would have been better, the direction that they went in for this movie was fine.  Wish I could've had a little bit more to add but like I said it's been nine years since I've seen this. 

Date Movie' (PG-13)/'Epic Movie' (PG-13)

Rotten Tomatoes: 'Date Movie' 7%/'Epic Movie' 2% (both rotten)
Metacritic:  'Date Movie' 11/ 'Epic Movie' 17 (both classified as "overwhelmingly disliked")

Razzie Win ('Date Movie', only nomination):  Worst Supporting Actress (Carmen Elektra)
Razzie Nominations ('Epic Movie', no wins):  Worst Supporting Actress (Carmen Elektra), Worst Screenplay, Worst Remake or Rip-off

Might as well lump both of these movies together. 

'Date Movie' stars Alyson Hannigan, Adam Campbell, Fred Willard, Jennifer Coolidge and Eddie Griffin and spoofs the likes of 'Meet The Parents', 'Meet The Fockers', 'Kill Bill', 'Napoleon Dynamite', 'Wedding Crashers', 'Bridget Jones' Diary', the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy, 'Hitch', 'King Kong', 'The Wedding Planner', 'Along Came Polly', 'When Harry Met Sally...' and 'Princess Diaries'.

'Epic Movie' stars Kal Penn, Jayma Mays, Adam Campbell, Jennifer Coolidge, Fred Willard, Tony Cox and Kevin Hart and spoofs the likes of 'The Da Vinci Code', 'Nacho Libre', 'Snakes on a Plane', the 'X-Men' movies, the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' movies, the 'Chronicles of Narnia' movies, 'Borat', 'Casino Royale', 'Talladega Nights', 'Superman Returns', 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory', the 'Harry Potter' movies, 'Click', 'Mission:  Impossible', 'American Pie', 'Scarface', and 'Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle'. 

Yes....I liked these movies.  Am I fully aware of how critically slammed both are?  Yes.  I was 16 when I saw 'Epic Movie' in the theater and rented 'Date Movie' from the library.  What can I say other than that I laughed enough while watching both of these movies that I enjoyed them.  Yet why is it I found these movies to be funny, but when the same writer/director duo came out with 'Meet The Spartans' a year later I saw it at a dollar theater and hated it?  I don't know.  Sometimes I like extremely dumb humor that's solely based off of referencing other material.  Other times it makes me mad.  And other times it just leaves me with a blank expression on my face.  While both movies were savaged by critics, they both still made a good chunk of change at the box office.   

 'Land of the Lost' (PG-13)

Rotten Tomatoes:  26% (rotten)
Metacritic:  32 (generally unfavorable)

Razzie Nominations:  Worst Picture, Worst Actor (Will Ferrell), Worst Supporting Actor (Jorma Taccone), Worst Screen Couple (Will Ferrell and any co-star, creature, or 'comic riff'), Worst Screenplay, Worst Director (Brad Silberling)
Razzie Win:  Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-Off or Sequel

On his latest expedition, Dr. Rick Marshall (Will Ferrell) is sucked into a space-time vortex alongside his research assistant (Anna Friel) and a redneck survivalist (Danny McBride). In this alternate universe, the trio make friends with a primate named Chaka (Jorma Taccone), their only ally in a world full of dinosaurs and other fantastic creatures.  A spoof adaptation of the 1970's TV show (in the vein of the 'Starsky & Hutch' movie).

Another Will Ferrell movie on this list?  Oh well.  I remember this bombing back in the summer of 2009, and reading about how Will Ferrell's schtick was getting old.  I finally rented it from Redbox and surprisingly liked it.  I thought it was a little tonally uneven with trying to balance between an adventure movie and a spoof, but I still laughed enough to recommend it.  Matt Lauer's cameo is great.  Now, I do completely understood why some people wouldn't like it with all of the crude humor and sexual references that are in the movie.  After all, it was adapted from a kids show. 

 'The Master of Disguise' (PG)
Rotten Tomatoes:  1% (rotten)
Metacritic:  12 (overwhelming dislike)

Razzie nomination:  Worst Supporting Actress (Bo Derek)

Italian waiter Pistachio Disguisey (Dana Carvey, who also co-wrote) fights off a criminal mastermind (Brent Spiner) with his inherited powers of disguise.

I was 12 when I received a copy of the DVD of this movie for my birthday.  I remember the advertising for this being all over Nickelodeon months before the movie even came out.  It looked silly, with the main highlights (or lowlights, depending on perspective) being Dana Carvey making funny sounding voices and dressing up as some turtle-like man.  And when I watched it, I liked it.  Mainly for the funny voices and the various disguises, not so much the plot.  And it was kinda funny seeing 'Star Trek:  The Next Generation' star Brent Spiner as a villain with a strange flatulence problem....a far cry from his days on the Enterprise as Data.  I've seen this several more times since, and I still find it kinda funny.  Now I'll admit:  I can't really defend this movie.  It's juvenile, stupid (Pistachio's father is forced to disguise as various celebrities to "borrow" important historical artifacts, which the villain uses to sell on the black market), dumb, out-dated (what kids are going to get the references to 'Jaws' and 'Scarface'?), pointless (there really is no point to half of his disguises) and silly.....but I liked it.  Judge me.   

'Mr. Deeds' (PG-13)

Rotten Tomatoes:  22% (rotten)
Metacritic:  24 (generally unfavorable)

Razzie nominations:  Worst Actor (Adam Sandler), Worst Actress (Winona Ryder), Worst Remake or Sequel

Sweet-natured, small-town guy Longfellow Deeds (Adam Sandler) suddenly inherits a controlling stake in a media conglomerate and begins to do business his way.  With John Turturro as his butler, Winona Ryder as a journalist and eventual love interest, and Peter Gallagher as a businessman who wants to take control of Deed's new company.  A remake of the 1936 Frank Capra comedy 'Mr. Deeds Goes To Town'.

I've said this many times before, but I'll say it again:  Adam Sandler is hit or miss with me.  Sometimes I like his movies, other times I don't.  'Mr. Deeds' just happens to be one that I like.  The fart jokes and sex jokes are relatively tame compared to some his other movies ('That's My Boy' and 'Eight Crazy Nights' immediately come to mind).  Overall I thought 'Mr. Deeds' was funny and kinda sweet.  It's far from Adam Sandler's best movie, but it's also far from being his worst.  While critics disliked it, audiences seemed to enjoy it as it made well over $120 million at the box office.   





SOME OTHER "BAD" MOVIES THAT I LIKED:  'Abraham Lincoln:  Vampire Hunter', 'I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry', 'Gangster Squad', 'Green Lantern', 'Godzilla' (1998), 'The Grudge', 'Daredevil', 'The Matrix Revolutions', 'Dickie Roberts:  Former Child Star', 'White Noise', 'Be Cool', 'The Longest Yard' (2005), etc., etc.

WHAT WAS THAT?!?!?!?!??!!?!?!

Ever watch a movie and afterward just kinda wonder what it was that you just watched?  That's happened to me quite a few times.  Sometimes the movie is clearly trying so hard to convey some kind of message that the message gets muddled in the narrative.  Sometimes the movie just seems really pointless.  Other times the movie can be nonsensical.  At one point I just flat out couldn't formulate an opinion about a movie.  Other times the movie's characters can be so off putting that it's hard to connect with virtually any character at all.  But after watching these movies, I would always say something along the lines of 'WHAT WAS THAT??' or more commonly 'Well....I saw that.....'

'Cloud Atlas' (R)
Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Jim Broadbent, Ben Whishaw, Hugh Grant, Keith David, Doona Bae and Susan Sarandon lead a huge ensemble cast that tells different stories from different periods of time, yet they are all connected through their interactions with each other.  Each of the actors play multiple roles, even changing gender and/or race for a character.  Directed by The Wachowski Siblings ('The Matrix' trilogy, 'Speed Racer') and Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run), from a 2004 novel by David Mitchell that I never read. 

The trailers for this honestly did make it look like it would be really good.  Upon it's release into theaters it received wildly mixed reviews, so I stayed away from seeing it in the theater.  I got it from Redbox...and than I ended up being too busy to watch it.  I rented it a second time from Redbox...I got about 40 minutes in, had no idea what was happening, and then shut it off and went to go see 'The World's End'.  Earlier this year I rented it from the library and finally watched all of it.  And even after watching all of it....I couldn't really tell you what it was about.  The acting is fine, the special effects range from great to rather poor, the make up changing the actor's gender/race when necessarily ranges from good to distractingly bad (Hugo Weaving is a woman in one segment, Jim Sturgess, Hugh Grant, Hugo Weaving are all in yellow face for another segment, Halle Berry is in white face for another segment....but no one's in black face since, you know, that would be racist.  Everything else I guess is fine).  It's clearly trying to convey some type of message about how everything is connected, but it's told in a muddled way that left me with a blank expression on my face as the credits finally started to roll.  I almost decided to do an entire post about 'Cloud Atlas' but I decided to keep things short(ish) and combine it with a few other movies that I kinda had the same reaction to.   If you got more out of 'Cloud Atlas' than I did, good for you. 

'The Master' (R)
Naval veteran Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) arrives home from the war unsettled and uncertain of his future - until he is tantalized by The Cause and its charismatic leader Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman).  With Amy Adams as Dodd's wife, and all three earning Academy Award nominations (Phoenix for Best Actor, Hoffman for Best Supporting Actor, Adams for Best Supporting Actress).  The latest from Paul Thomas Anderson, the director of 'There Will Be Blood', 'Punch Drunk Love', 'Magnolia' and 'Boogie Nights'.

So in the fall I start seeing more and more movies that are getting critical acclaim to help stay ahead of awards season so that I don't have too much to do catching up once award season finally hits.  'The Master' is a fine example of that.  Although I was also kinda looking forward to this since I did like 'There Will Be Blood'.  But...while the movie does feature some stunning cinematography, it's also kinda pointless and thinks very highly of itself.  Several scenes just go on and on, and many images and subplots just kinda pop up out of nowhere and then are more or less ignored for the rest of the movie.  If you got more out of this than I did, good for you. 

'Prometheus' (R)
A team of explorers (including Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Idris Elba, Charlize Theron, Rafe Spall) discover a clue to the origins of mankind on Earth, leading them on a journey to the darkest corners of the universe. There, they must fight a terrifying battle to save the future of the human race.  This is a prequel to 'Alien' that was claimed to not actually be a prequel to 'Alien' but exists in the same universe....but ultimately is a prequel to 'Alien'.

It was my night off from camp, so I decided to go see this.  And you know what?  It's a hard movie to pin down.  I didn't think it was bad....but at the same time I'm not sure if it was all that good.  The special effects are great and Michael Fassbender is great....although his role is rather confusing and his motives for his actions aren't very clear.  This is one I've been meaning to rewatch just so I can finally say whether it was good or bad. 

'Pulp Fiction' (R)
The lives of two mob hit men (John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson), a boxer (Bruce Willis), a gangster and his wife (Ving Rhames and Uma Thurman), and a pair of diner bandits (Tim Roth and Amanda Plummer) intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.  Nominated for seven Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Actor (Travolta), Best Supporting Actor (Jackson), Best Supporting Actress (Thurman), Best Original Screenplay (Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary), Best Film Editing, and Best Director (Tarantino).  It's only win of the night was for Best Original Screenplay.

With it's extremely non-linear storyline, graphic violence, constant profanity, snappy dialogue, and many 'WTF' moments, the best way I can describe 'Pulp Fiction' is that it's 'Pulp Fiction'.  I never seen a movie quite like it.  Once again, a movie that isn't necessarily bad....I'm just not completely sure if I liked it or not.

'Spring Breakers' (R)
Three college girls (Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Benson, Rachel Korine) hold up a restaurant in order to fund their spring break vacation to Florida with their friend Faith (Selena Gomez). While partying/drinking/taking drugs they are arrested only to be bailed out by a drug and arms dealer (James Franco), who takes three of them under his wing.  Things spiral out of control from there.  Directed by Harmony Korine, who also directed the controversial 90's movie 'Kids', 'Gummo', and 'Trash Humpers'. 

Think of an art house version of the found footage party movie 'Project X', then make it a hundred times uglier.  Despite the looks of the four leads, this is quite an ugly movie.  Constant party montages that just make the movie drag, some rather poor acting, constantly jumping back and forth between scenes, constantly repeating dialogue (and then repeating it again as a voice over) and none of these characters are believable.  And with how off putting the characters are, it's hard to connect with any of them.  James Franco does give a bonkers performance as a wannabe-gangster type, but even that's not enough to save this movie.  Party's over folks.  If you got something out of 'Spring Breakers', you know what?  More power to you.  As soon it cut to black and the colorful credits starting rolling to the Ellie Goulding song "Lights", I just kinda said to myself, "About enough of that...whatever that was'.




Have there been any movies that have left you scratching your head, wondering what it was that you just saw?

Ten Disappointing Movies

Last December I wrote and talked ad nauseum about how disappointed I was with 'American Hustle'.  A few months ago I wrote about six sequels that were not only horrible continuations of their franchise, but were also disappointing.  So the idea came to me to talk about other movies that I had high expectations for but was sorely let down by.  Here are ten such movies that were rather disappointing:

'Anonymous' (PG-13)
Revolves around the conspiracy theory that William Shakespeare (Rafe Spall) did not write any of his plays or sonnets, but that is was the aristocratic Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford (Rhys Ifans) who wrote them.  There is also political turmoil surrounding Queen Elizabeth I (played by Joely Richardson in younger years and Vanessa Redgrave in her older years) and her advisor William Cecil (David Thewlis) as well as the Essex rebellion.  From Roland Emmerich, director of '2012', 'The Day After Tomorrow', 'The Patriot', and the 1998 'Godzilla'.

The trailers made it look very good and I was eagerly awaiting it to come to Muncie.  But due to the very limited release that it received, this movie never came to any of the theaters in Muncie.  It might have came to Indianapolis, but back in my junior year of college I wasn't really wanting to drive an hour to go see a movie.  My mindset about that has changed, but I'm getting off topic.  Eventually I just rented it from Redbox and...you know, it's an interesting conspiracy theory.  But overall it just wasn't all that interesting of a movie and it's main plot of Shakespeare being a fraud was bogged down by all the political subplots that go to some rather strange places.  I mean the overall look of the movie is great and the acting is fine, it just wasn't interesting or engaging.

 'Clash of the Titans' (PG-13)
Perseus (Sam Worthington), mortal son of Zeus (Liam Neeson), battles the minions of the underworld to stop them from conquering heaven and earth.  With Ralph Fiennes as Hades, Gemma Arterton as Io

The trailers made it look like it would be a lot of fun, but to make a long story short, it wasn't.  Admittedly the movie is awesome whenever Liam Neeson is onscreen, and the only real highlight of the movie is when he finally says 'Release The Kraken'.  But bad CGI, the acting being all of the place, and an overall rushed and clunky story plague this remake of the 1981 original.  Saw this in 2D having not heard any good things about the 3D conversion.  This was bad enough that I have yet to see the sequel 'Wrath of the Titans', which I've heard is even worse. 

 'Ghost Rider' (PG-13)
Stunt motorcyclist Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage) gives up his soul to become a hellblazing vigilante, who must fight against power hungry Blackheart (Wes Bentley), the son of the devil himself (Peter Fonda).  With Eva Mendes as Blaze's love interest and Sam Elliott as a mysterious cemetery worker.

Admit it:  That shot in the trailer where the Ghost Rider riding down a skyscraper on his motorcycle and whirling around a flaming chain was AWESOME.  It's a shame the movie itself was a huge letdown with some spectacularly bad acting, forced awkward sounding dialogue that nobody would ever say, inconsistent CGI (some good, some awful), and most of the fight scenes just felt kinda rushed.  Once again here is a movie that was so bad that I have yet to see the sequel, this one being 2011's 'Ghost Rider:  Spirit of Vengeance'.  I've heard that it actually is better, but that's not saying much.  Heck, most movies in general are better than 'Ghost Rider'.  'Spider-man 3' is ever better than 'Ghost Rider' for goodness sake.

 'The Green Hornet' (PG-13)
Following the death of his father, Britt Reid (Seth Rogen, who also co-wrote and ), heir to his father's (Tom Wilkinson) large company, teams up with his late dad's assistant Kato (Jay Chou) to become a masked team that poses as criminals in order to stop them.  With Cameron Diaz as Reid's new assistant, Christoph Waltz as a villainous mobster who's going through a mid-life crisis, and James Franco in a brief cameo as a nightclub owner. 

I generally like Seth Rogen's movies, and this looked like it might be a fun action comedy.  But let's just say 2011 didn't exactly start off on the right foot when this finally released and I saw it.  Rogen's humor just didn't work for this movie.  It's just not very funny and Christoph Waltz, who can be a rather intimidating villain like in 'Inglourious Basterds', is hugely wasted.  And Cameron Diaz really didn't need to be in this.  This was also offered in 3D, but I opted for the 2D version.  It would have been disappointing regardless, but at least it saved me a couple bucks.

'Invictus' (PG-13)
Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman), in his first term as the South African President, initiates a unique venture to unite the apartheid-torn land: enlist the national rugby team, led by Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), on a mission to win the 1995 Rugby World Cup.  Directed by Clint Eastwood, and earned Academy Award nominations for both Freeman (Best Actor) and Damon (Best Supporting Actor).

Ever since I saw 'Gran Torino' and loved it, I instantly decided that I would watch anything that Clint Eastwood directs.  That's the only reason why I'm planning on seeing the 'Jersey Boys' movie this summer, but I'm getting off topic.  'Invictus' looked great.  Not only did it look like a rousing inspirational sports movie, it also looked like an inspirational biopic of Nelson Mandela.  And with Morgan Freeman of all people playing Mandela, what could go wrong?  Pacing, that's what.  It's long and drawn out, and because of that I got bored and I couldn't really get invested in any of it.  The one good scene was when the rugby team visits Mandela's jail cell, but I think I caught that in between dozing off.  And usually I'm wide awake during movies.  On the plus side...this is the best rugby movie I've seen.  It's also the only rugby movie I've seen, but I digress.

'J. Edgar' (R)
J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio), powerful head of the F.B.I. for nearly 50 years, looks back on his professional and personal life.  With Armie Hammer as Hoover's right hand man Clyde Tolson, Naomi Watts as Hoover's secretary, Judi Dench as Hoover's mother, and Josh Lucas as Charles Lindbergh.

Another disappointing movie that just so happened to be directed by Clint Eastwood.  I could have included his movie 'Hereafter' in this list too, but this list is already long as is.  From the trailers, 'J. Edgar' looked really good.  And I was hoping that at least it would be better than 'Invictus' and 'Hereafter'.  And it is.........marginally.  Don't get me wrong:  DiCaprio turns in a great performance as J. Edgar Hoover.  But the movie itself is really, really, really dry, almost to the point of boredom.  And the old age makeup they used for DiCaprio, Hammer and Watts is so godawful and fake looking that it's just downright laughable.  Heck, Johnny Knoxville's old age make up in the 'Jackass' movies is far more realistic.  Subplots involving Hoover's private life (which have never been officially confirmed to be true) are forced and to be honest they didn't really need to be in the movie, but at times it's almost the main focus.  There are far more interesting subplots in this movie that the movie could have dwelled on, but nope.  Also didn't help that a group of twenty-somethings in the theater kept laughing at inappropriate times, getting angry glares from myself (sitting a few rows behind them) and a group of fifty-somethings sitting down the row from them.

 'Shutter Island' (R)
Another Leonardo DiCaprio movie on this list?  Oops.  Oh well.  In 1954, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) is investigating the disappearance of a murderess (Emily Mortimer) who escaped from a hospital for the criminally insane and is presumed to be hiding nearby.  With Mark Ruffalo as his partner, Ben Kingsley the head of the hospital, and Max von Sydow as a doctor.  Directed by Martin Scorsese.i 

The trailers made it look like it would be a really good thriller.  But once again, here we have a movie that was so slowly paced not only was I not really all that invested in the movie but I was also dozing off.  And like I said, that rarely ever happens.  As soon as I heard that there was a twist I kinda jokingly told myself what it would be.  And sure enough....I was right.  And I was disappointed.  Instead of a thriller I got a snoozer.  Thankfully Scorsese's next few movies (the kid-friendly 'Hugo' and the keep-the-kids-far-far-far-far-away-from-this-movie 'The Wolf of Wall Street') more than made up for this.

 'Sucker Punch' (PG-13)
A young girl (Emily Browning) is institutionalized by her abusive stepfather. Retreating to an alternative reality as a coping strategy, she envisions a plan which will help her escape from the mental facility along with her fellow inmates (including Jena Malone, Abbie Cornish, Jamie Chung and Vanessa Hudgens).  With Oscar Isaacs as one of the men in charge of the institution, Carla Gugino as a doctor at the institution, and Jon Hamm as a lobotomist.  Directed by Zack Snyder, who also directed '300', 'Legend of the Guardians', 'Man of Steel', and the 'Dawn of the Dead' remake.

This trailers made this movie look AWESOME.  Well....there's only seven things that I liked in this movie:

1 thru 5.  Emily Browning, Jena Malone, Abbie Cornish, Jamie Chung, and Vanessa Hudgens.  Need I say more?
6.  Emily Browning's haunting, but extremely good cover of The Eurythmics' "Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)" that plays over the opening scene.
7.  My hometown of Fort Wayne is listed on a bus towards the end of the movie.

Other than those, this movie is a mess.  Visually sure it's fantastic, but the visuals can't make up for a confusing storyline that's constantly changing realities.  One minute the institution turns into a brothel, then it goes into a fantasy world, then back into a brothel, and so on and so forth.  It's constant jumps in realities make it hard to really follow what's going on in this movie.  And with Scott Glenn popping up randomly as an old man giving out advice and their objectives in the various realities, 'Sucker Punch' plays out like a video game that your parents wouldn't let you play when you were a kid.  So you decide to go over to your friends house to play it...but your friend ends up playing it the entire time you're at his house.

 'The Town' (R)
As he plans his next job, a longtime thief (Ben Affleck, who directs and co-wrote) tries to balance his feelings for a bank manager (Rebecca Hall) connected to one of his earlier heists, as well as the FBI agent (Jon Hamm) looking to bring him and his crew (including Jeremy Renner in an Oscar nominated role for Best Supporting Actor) down.

This looked like it would be a really good thriller, but once again instead of a thriller I sat through a snoozer.  Once again, we have a movie that was so drawn out and almost boring that I couldn't get invested in any of it at all and I remember dozing off at least once or twice during this movie.  At least Ben Affleck's next movie 'Argo' more than made up for this. 

'The Wolfman' (R)
Remake of the 1941 classic that puts now acclaimed Shakespearean actor Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) returning home to England after his brothers disappearance.  He makes amends with his father Sir John (Anthony Hopkins), meets his brothers fiancee (Emily Blunt) and eventually goes after whatever killed his brother.  He then gets bitten, and soon everyone starts coming after him, including an inspector from London (Hugo Weaving).

This had potential.  It has a great cast, keeps the time and setting from the original, production design wise looked great, and it looked like it could actually have been scary.  I liked the overall look of the film....the cinematography and transformation scenes were amazing, but overall I was left unsatisfied.  None of the actors appear to be trying at all and the story is okay but detracts from the original in a big way (due to a ridiculous and unneeded plot twist).  Apparently its release date was pushed back four times (from November 2008...it was finally released February 2010) and it went through several edits, re-shoots, and a change of directors before we got this.  And it shows.  It updates the violence and gore which wasn't present in the original, but I didn't mind that....and apparently neither did the 2-yr old that was also in the theater.  And for the most part it's really not that scary.  Some jump scares, sure, but it's only due to the volume suddenly being loud and not from anything scary actually happening.





I could go on and on and on with other movies that disappointed me, but I'll stop here for now.  What movies were you disappointed with?

REVIEW - 'Neighbors'

'Neighbors' (R) ***1/2
Mac and Kelly Radnor (Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne) are happily married with a newborn baby, but soon get some unexpected new next door neighbors:  a chapter of Delta Psi led by Teddy (Zac Efron) and Pete (Dave Franco), is quite known for their loud, obnoxious social gatherings and shenanigans.  And since it's their last year of college, Teddy and Pete want to throw a party so epic that it becomes immortalized on their frat's Wall of Fame.  At first things are cool between the Radnors and Delta Psi, but once the Radnors call the cops on a noise complaint during a party it soon becomes all out war between the new next door neighbors.  Co-starring Christopher Mintz-Plasse as another fraternity member and Lisa Kudrow as a college dean, with the members of The Lonely Island and the stars of the Comedy Central show "Workaholics" popping up in cameo appearances. 

Sure, most of the conflicts in this movie in real life could easily have been resolved in less than five minutes, but no one said that this movie is supposed to be realistic.  And honestly who cares about realism when a movie is this laugh out loud funny.  It's the most I've consistently laughed during a movie since 'Despicable Me 2'.  None of the jokes really fell flat and there were no moments that seemed to just drag on and on.  The performances are actually top notch, particularly from Seth Rogen, Rose Byrne, and Zac Efron.  Each gets their time to shine and are all consistently funny and also profane, but still likable as characters.  It does have some more dramatic moments, such as when Pete goes to a job fair and is actively trying to prepare for life after college while Teddy doesn't have a clue about what's next in life.  Also Mac and Kelly eagerly remember their partying ways in college, but have accepted that they are now adults who with jobs and have a baby to take care of.  Dramatic moments, sure, but handled with a comedic touch thanks to improvisation between the stars and also director Nicholas Stoller ('Forgetting Sarah Marshall', 'Get Him To The Greek', 'The Five-Year Engagement').  Out of all the movies he's directed, this one was by far my favorite.  I liked it way more than Seth Rogen's previous movie 'This Is The End' (still a very good movie though).  If you like Seth Rogen movies, I recommend this.  It is a bit different in that Seth Rogen is actually taking responsibility in this and isn't just the usual man-child stoner that he usually plays in movies.  But humor and movies are subjective.  I tend to like Seth Rogen movies (except for 'Green Hornet') and during the entire running time of 'Neighbors' I laughed, and laughed, and laughed.  



TRAILERS

• 'Blended' - I did chuckle a few times watching this, but i don't know.  Adam Sandler movies for me are usually hit or miss.
  
• 'A Million Ways To Die In The West' - a different trailer than what I'm used to seeing in theaters, ending with a cameo that I won't spoil here but I wish hadn't been in the trailer.  Would have been a nice surprise to discover this cameo when I finally go see the movie, but oh well.  Still looks funny.
  
• '22 Jump Street' - You know, it kinda looks like a complete rehash of the first movie.  It still looks funny though. 
  
• 'Transformers:  Age of Extinction' - Well, at the very least it should be better than 'Transformers:  Revenge of the Fallen'....hopefully.
  
• 'The Purge:  Anarchy' - I liked the first one enough to be interested in seeing this sequel.
  
• 'Wish I Was Here' - Couldn't quite pick up on what this is about from watching this trailer.  All I know is that it's a comedic drama, the second movie directed by Zach Braff after 'Garden State', and that it was funded from a Kickstarter campaign.  Didn't look bad....I just don't know if it's something I'd go see.   
  
• 'The Expendables 3' - SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!!!

'Hotel', 'Heaven', and Horror

 Time to catch up on a few movies I saw last month.

'The Grand Budapest Hotel' (R) **1/2
The adventures of Gustave H (Ralph Fiennes), a legendary concierge at a famous European hotel between the wars, told from the perspective of Zero Moustafa (Tony Revolori), the lobby boy who becomes his most trusted friend.  The pair deal with rather interesting hotel guests, other hotel concierges, a murder mystery, legal disputes, and a military occupation.  The huge ensemble cast includes F. Murray Abraham, Mathieu Amalric, Adrien Brody, Saiorse Ronan, Tilda Swinton, Bill Murray, Bob Balaban, Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzmen, Jude Law, Tom Wilkinson, Edward Norton, Willem Dafoe, Harvey Keitel, Jeff Goldblum and Lea Seydoux.  The latest from Wes Anderson, the director of many other quirky movies like 'Moonrise Kingdom', 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' and 'Royal Tenenbaums'.

The only Wes Anderson movies I've seen were 'Moonrise Kingdom' and 'Fantastic Mr. Fox'.  Both aren't necessarily bad, but they're just.....different.  Colorful, odd, a bit slow, quirky, sarcastic, and a sense of humor that's pretty bone dry.  'Grand Budapest Hotel' is more of the same, but I at least laughed more times during this than in both 'Moonrise' and 'Fantastic Mr. Fox' combined.  But what really drives 'Grand Budapest Hotel' and separates it from the other Wes Anderson movies I've seen is a very strong performance by Ralph Fiennes as Gustave H.  This is a peculiar character that you WANT to follow around and watch his misadventures and hear his many one-liners.  But even with this good of a performance I still can't shake off that I felt that this was just an okay movie.  Perhaps Wes Anderson movie just aren't my thing. 

TRAILERS

• 'Belle' - the last time I saw a trailer for this was in front of '12 Years A Slave' last fall, and to be honest I more or less completely forgot about this until I saw it again in front of 'Grand Budapest Hotel'.  It looks like an okay, stuffy period piece that I could easily find on BBC or on Masterpiece Theater. 

• 'Dom Hemingway' - A dark British crime comedy with Jude Law in the title role.  I'll be perfectly honest:  I don't quite know what to think of this trailer. 

'Heaven Is For Real' (PG) ***
Small-town father and pastor Todd Burpo (Greg Kinnear) must find the courage and conviction to share his son Colton's (Connor Corum) extraordinary, life-changing experience with the world.  With Kelly Reilly as his wife, and Thomas Haden Church and Margo Martindale as members of Burpo's congregation who have their doubts about Colton's experiences.

The book is a quick read and while it initially stumbles by telling about events that really have no relevance to the main story, I still liked it.  The movie follows the book for the most part, but being an adaptation of course things have been taken out and creative liberties have been taken with certain events.  And while the plot may sound like it's very heavy-handed Christian propaganda, I can assure you it's not as heavy-handed as one might think it is.  The highlight of this movie is the acting.  Greg Kinnear is very charismatic as a pastor, and his moments where he is having a crisis of faith about his son's experiences are very well done and you can understand why he is having this crisis.  Kelly Reilly as his suffering wife who doesn't know what to think of her son's experiences and wants to focus on their present problems was also really good, and a far departure from the previous movie I saw that she was in (as Denzel Washington's heroin addict girlfriend in 'Flight').  Margo Martindale is also really good, having her own time to shine in a scene later in the movie in a cemetary with Greg Kinnear.  And for a first time child actor, Connor Corum actually is pretty good.  The movie does have the same problem as the book in that the first 30 or so minutes for the most part have no relevance to the main story.  The scenes in Heaven, admittedly, are really cheesy and feature some really poor CGI.  And some of the time as Greg Kinnear searches for a rational explanation to all of this the movie does seem like it's arguing against itself.  And yeah, you poke holes in Colton's story (he was never actually pronounced dead at any point during his surgery) but at the same time...there are some things that he knew about that there is quite possibly no way he would have know.  Overall it has issues, but I did like the movie.  If you're a non-believer, you're not going to like this movie at ALL simply because it's a religious movie.  If you do believe, I do recommend it.   
 
TRAILERS

• 'Earth To Echo' - looks like it could be okay. 

• 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' - the Internet seems to hate this movie already and it doesn't come out until August. 

• 'If I Stay' - Look.  This movie doesn't look bad in any way, shape or form.  A story about a near death experience and someone having to choose between living or dying sounds like it would be a sad movie.  Then it goes into overdrive by playing that "Say Something" song during this trailer, making me feel that instead of seeing this I should probably see something that's a bit more upbeat.

• 'When The Game Stands Tall' - Has the potential to either be a really good sports movie or something a little more heavy handed and bland. 

REDBOX
'Paranormal Activity:  The Marked Ones' (R) *1/2
In this so-called spin-off of the 'Paranormal Activity' series, Jesse (Andrew Jacobs) begins experiencing a number of disturbing and unexplainable things after the death of his neighbor.  He decides to film everything after getting a camera for his high school graduation.  I say so-called because this basically is a sequel.  Heck, it's more of a sequel than 'Paranormal Activity 4'.  Well, if the 'Paranormal Activity' movies decided to mash up with the found footage superhero movie 'Chronicle'.  The acting in this ranges from okay to bland, it's an okay story, it does have a few ridiculously awesome moments towards the end of the movie but.....it's just not scary.  A few creepy moments, sure, but largely devoid of anything that has made the overall 'Paranormal Activity' franchise so popular.  It is better than 'Paranormal Activity 4' in that this at least advances the overall mythology of the series but it's still not very good.  Later this year will bring 'Paranormal Activity 5'.......which I will only go see because I've seen the other movies in this overlong franchise that really should be put to pasture.  And undergo an exorcism or two.