Movie Review: Hope Springs

Plot: After thirty years of marriage, Kay (Meryl Streep) feels as if her marriage has hit a plateau. Much to Arnold’s (Tommy Lee Jones) displeasure, they set off on a week-long intensive marriage counseling session to see if there is anything left worth saving.

Last summer one film came and took me by surprise, and that was Crazy, Stupid, Love. I didn’t see a lot of promotion for it and I went into it with low expectations. Hope Springs is hands down this year’s Crazy, Stupid, Love.
Hope Springs works on so many levels. Obviously you can’t get much more A-list, star power than 17 time Academy Award nominee and three time winner Meryl Streep and three time Academy Award nominee and one time winner Tommy Lee Jones. These two are where it’s at if you need a good drama, but to knock it out of the park like they did in a comedy…..kudos.

I think this film is an important one because we live in a country where the divorce rate is over FIFTY percent. That’s devastating. And while that statistic is devastating, another sad fact is after 30 years of marriage, many fade into nothing more than two people coexisting in a house with little to discuss and even less affection shown. Hope Springs does a wonderful job tackling this issue.
Obviously with these two, the performances are spot on. Meryl Streep plays Kay who is desperate for love, conversation and affection from her husband. She is miserable in her life because she is miserable in her marriage. Your heart really goes out to her because she tries so hard to grab the attention of her husband.

Jones’ character is the exact opposite. Arnold is stubborn, hard headed and oblivious to any signs his wife tries to throw his way. He has a robotic schedule that consists of the same events every day. Upon Kay’s proposal to leave town and attend a week long marriage counseling session, he laughs the idea off. Upon arriving, he nags and complains the entire time as old men do. Jones’ performance in the film is hysterical. I know men just like him and director David Frankel does a fantastic job getting a great comedic performance from him.

Steve Carrell also stars in the film as their therapist, Dr. Feld. After watching the film it occurred to me that Carrell needs to give up his comedic roles and focus on more serious ones. As I watch Little Miss Sunshine, Dan In Real Life, Crazy, Stupid, Love and Hope Springs, I think about what a great actor he is. But then I watch Date Night, Evan Almighty, Get Smart and Dinner for Schmucks, I think that the guy is terrible. He once again gives a great performance in the film as he does in all of his dramatic roles he has taken, and I truly believe the guy has an Oscar performance in him if he gets the right role.

If I asked you who David Frankel was, you more than likely wouldn’t know, but I think he will soon be a sought after director. Frankel has had numerous hits with; The Devil Wears Prada, Marley & Me and the HIGHLY overlooked and underrated film The Big Year. If I have to sit through a chick flick, I want them to be worth my time. So far both of his has been worth it as well as his other two films. I hope he can keep the streak going.

While Hope Springs is hilarious with strong performances, it still can’t get away from a typical chick flick formula. Towards the end it does draw out and dip down into a little too much sappiness. It’s a predictable formula, but it doesn’t get too bad.

Hope Springs showed me what I don’t want my marriage to become and is perfect for any married couple whether it’s of thirty years, fifteen years or six months.

Final Verdict: 8/10

Movie Review: The Campaign

Plot: After a scandal hurts Cam Brady’s fifth consecutive run at Congress, two CEO’s influence dim witted Marty Huggins, son of a popular retired congressman, to run against Brady so that they can have control over the North Carolina District.

Comedy is a tough gig to keep going strong at. When you look at the careers of great comedians such as Eddie Murphy, Adam Sandler and Will Ferrell, they all have one thing in common; their careers get worse as they get older. How long can a fast speaking, hot tempered Eddie Murphy character continue to be funny? How long can a yelling, high pitched, uneducated slacker Adam Sandler character continue to be funny? And how long can an over confident, yelling while stringing a bunch of nonsense words together Will Ferrell character continue to be funny? In my opinion all of these guys have had their time. It’s not their fault, they are funny but after five and six movies of the same thing, they lose their punch. Zach Galafanakis is right on track with the rest of them. Sure, he’s hilarious in The Hangover, but did anyone else think that the second time around the gig was kind of up? And Due Date was funny as well, but as you watched didn’t you think to yourself, “He’s just like Alan from The Hangover”. So when trailers began to run for The Campaign, I thought to myself that this would be it for Galafanakis. I was already convinced that Ferrell would fall flat, but I still thought Zach had one more shot before his act gets old. Time will tell if that’s the case for Galafanakis, he and Owen Wilson have a film coming out, followed by The Hangover 3. But until then, he has at least gone out on a high note.

The film starts off with Ferrell’s character and I was surprised to find Ferrell funny again. Director Jay Roach was very smart about how he approached the film. First was giving it an “R” rating. The last Ferrell movie I enjoyed was Step Brothers, another “R” rated film. This gave Ferrell more range with his character since there would be no limitations.

The second thing Roach and the writers did was split it 60/40, as in Galafanakis was in the film sixty percent of the time compared to Ferrell’s forty, very smart because Ferrell can get overbearing quickly.

Ferrell doesn’t give any kind of miraculous performance, it’s the same thing we’ve seen a dozen times from him, it just happens to work this time around. He’s a sleazy congressman who gets caught having an affair after leaving a dirty voicemail on the wrong phone number. He has a cutthroat approach to the campaign doing anything it takes to win. I hope Ferrell continues to take this approach in his roles. He does better as an esemble. When I think of the films I like,I think of Old School, Anchorman and Step Brothers. All ensemble casts. His only solo film I liked was Talledega Nights. This is the way to go for him.

Galafanakis is the same story. I did find him to be the funnier of the two, but once again he is playing the same character we’ve seen before, only this time a bit dumber. His character Marty comes off charmingly dumb as he wrestles with who he is and who his campaign manager wants him to become. I don't know how they got through their scenes because his accent in the film is hilarious.

I found Dylann McDermott's character to be a nice surprise. McDermott plays Tim Wattley, Marty's campaign manager. Wattley is your typical “man in black” villain. I’m a fan of McDermott’s but he has never quite found his role after The Practice ended. I thought he was headed for a nice comeback with American Horror Story, but that show ended up taking a different turn. He has a nice dark comedy vibe to him that he should pursue more of. I felt like they could have worked him into more of the story, but he was definitely a bright spot for the film.

The third thing Roach and the writers did that was clever, was making the film appealing to two different crowds. If you don’t keep up with politics, you will enjoy this film as a simple comedy. If you do keep up with politics, you may enjoy the film a little more as they have thrown in a lot of references to things that are going on today. John Lithgow and Dan Akroyd play the Motch brothers, billionaire CEO’s who are loosely based off the Koch brothers who have been accused of paying millions to get people into Congress and more recently for paying $100 million dollars to have Paul Ryan put on the Republican ticket for Vice President. Had the film been too political or shoved one’s political stance down the audience’s throat, it could have been a turnoff, but they did a great job at balancing that.

The film was much better and much funnier than I could have hoped for. Enjoy it, it could be a while before we get a decent film out of either one of these guys anytime soon……I’m looking at you Anchorman 2 and Hangover 3.

Final Verdict: 7/10

Movie Review: Total Recall

Plot: In the future, most of Earth has been destroyed by chemical warfare and has been divided into two hemispheres. Doug Quaid (Colin Farrell) is a factory worker, living with his wife Lori (Kate Beckinsale) in the poverty stricken hemisphere known as the Colony. Plagued by dreams and wanting more from his life, he visits ReKall to have a dream vacation implanted. As the procedure begins, Quaid discovers that he’s actually a secret agent named Hauser, whose memory was erased by the president of Euromerica, Cohaagen (Bryan Cranston). Now with Lori, herself an agent in Cohaagen’s force, trying to kill him, Quaid/Hauser must go on the run, and discover the secret his suppressed memories hold before it’s too late.

In 1990 Total Recall, starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, hit theaters and became the suprise highest grossing film of the year. After its release, Columbia Pictures tried for years to get a sequel on the screen with several failed attempts. After a sequel couldn't be worked out they began trying for a remake, which also went throught failed attempt after failed attempt, as well as a television series that was cancelled after one season. After 22 years of efforts, Total Recall has finally made it back to theaters, and with a cast like Colin Farrell, Jessica Biel, Kate Beckinsale, Bryan Cranston and Bill Nighy it should be pretty good right?

The first twenty minutes of this film builds up to something potentially great. Director Len Wiseman has built a beautiful technologically advanced world that is the best I've seen since Spielberg's Minority Report. Much like Minority Report, the weapons, tools, vehichles and appliances are vastly advanced while keeping them in the realm of possibility of one day acutally having the potential to exist.

Sadly, once the action begins the film goes downhill quick. I'm not a fan of "chase" films because most of them have the same formula; the protagonist is on the run, the antagonist catches up to the protagonist, big action scene, the protagonist gets away, and this formula is repeated for two hours. It is hard to develop characters and a plot with a set up like this, and Total Recall is no exception to the rule. It's a mess. Films like Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can and the Bourne series take time with their films. Yes, they are on the run but there doesn't have to be an unrealistic action sequence every fifteen minutes. It's not a race and it's ok for a character to stay in one place for more than five minutes.

Most of the build up going in for me was the cast they had lined up, but unfortunately they were a disappointement and not even the great Bryan Cranston could hold his own. I thought this was Farrell's chance for a big comeback, but he had next to no emotion in the film. He looks bored and uninterested in most of the tense scenes. Don't get me wrong, the writers are to blame for this mess, but he is to blame for the performance. I was excited to see Kate Beckinsale in her first role as a villain and for a moment she does really well. But having your husband as the director can really blow it for you sometimes because she was in this film WAY to much. I mean Len Wiseman crammed her in as much as he possibly could and tried to boost her up as some action star. It failed big time not to mention she had the worst lines out of anyone. So when Jessica Biel enters the film, I'm thinking that maybe she can pick up the slack but she was the worst out of them all. Her character was uninteresting and more of a problem than a help. So by the time Bryan Cranston shows up, it's to little to late for him as he is a cliche'd power hungry villain that falls flat.

But the main offenders of this trainwreck are the writers. I'm suprised that Columbia Pictures were not more aggresive in their hires since the studio wanted this to be a franchise so badly. Between the two writers they have a resume of films such as; Salt, Street Kings, Ultraviolet and Race to Witch Mountain. These B to C level writers do not cut it when making a film with this kind of budget. As a viewer I was insulted at the countless stupid scenerios that we are supposed to just believe and accept. 1) When a man walks into a room shooting at officers, they don't stand and watch while only one officer fires back at a time. 2) If your going at high speeds through the center of the Earth and your standing on top of the transportation device, you're not going to be ok, you're going to fly off first of all and burst into flames secondly. 3) Task forces can't appear out of thin air. It's 2012 and I demand a smarter script. This could have been pulled off in the 80's or early 90's but not today.

Aside from cramming his wife into the film extremley to much, Wiseman created a fantastic world with a sour and rotten core thanks to poor, lazy writing. And what a shame because this had potential. Now Columbia Pictures is left with what is sure to be a dead franchise now.

Final Verdict: 4/10 (a generous 4/10 I might add)

Movie Review: The Dark Knight Rises

*** My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families of the Aurora shooting last night. Any shooting is tragic, but to happen at such a neutral, family environment is sickening and terrifying. The shooter is a terrorist and should be treated as so. ***

Eight years have passed since the death of Harvey Dent. Batman and Commissioner Gordon have decided to hide the truth to keep the street criminals behind bars. Batman has taken the blame and has not been seen since the night of Dent’s death….until a mysterious figure known as Bane comes to Gotham with a terrorist plot that holds all of Gotham hostage.

Christopher Nolan has forever set the blueprint of what the standards of comic book films should be. Reflecting back on this trilogy, Nolan has created some of the best storytelling I have ever seen and he should greatly be praised for his accomplishments, so allow me to praise him for a moment. As I caught up on Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, I paid close attention to the detail he puts in his films. He really raised the bar between Begins and Dark Knight. The action sequences are beautiful, notice how he hardly uses explosions, and when he does, it’s not a CGI fest, it’s almost a humble explosion. It’s believable. The characters are believable and the circumstances are real. He’s created a masterpiece of a series and that’s what the film industry needed.

The same can be said for what he has done in The Dark Knight Rises, except once again he upped the bar. The cinematography is top notch in this one. I never thought watching a city being destroyed from the inside could be shot so beautifully. I really enjoyed the final showdown taking place during the day, a rare occurrence in film. Directors need to be lined up around the block with notepads on how to shoot action sequences. The Dark Knight Rises is a truly beautiful film.

Not a lot needs to be said about Heath Ledger, and they don’t in this film. In fact he is the only character from the series not to be mentioned in this installment. Ledger’s performance was one for the ages, but Tom Hardy makes his own name for himself as Bane. Unlike the love/hate relationship The Joker had for Batman, Bane is a pure terrorist. He wants to watch Gotham burn and he kills without question. The sound mixing used for Bane’s voice is the cherry on top making him a truly terrifying character.

Anne Hathaway portrays Selina Kyle/Catwoman spot on. She is neither hero nor villain; she plays each scenario to what’s the best advantage for her. She has some great scenes as Selina Kyle, who appears determined to make Bruce Wayne miserable for some reason, stealing a pearl necklace from his home and then later telling a parking attendant she is his wife. The chemistry between Bale and Hathaway was much more memorable then the Keaton/Pfeiffer from Batman Returns. Now if we can all forget about that Halle Berry film, we could have another franchise on our hands.
Bale gave his best performance yet. He toned down the Batman voice which was pleasing for I think everyone. But he really takes the backseat in this film which I think hurt it some. He spends a large chunk of the film out of commission and doesn’t have a lot to do.

The supporting cast was almost too good this time. Michael Caine gave some heartwarming moments. He only pops up at the beginning and end, but I’ve loved the chemistry between Alfred and Bruce throughout the entire saga. I wish I could have had just a little more Alfred as Caine’s final performance of him. Gary Oldman is finally given more to do as Commissioner Gordon. While the city is under siege, he is one of the few who are able to their own while Batman is out of commission.

New to the franchise is Joseph Gordon-Levitt who plays Officer John Blake. Blake takes on the role of Gordon’s right hand man while Gordon recovers in the hospital and plays a very pivotal part in the film. In fact his part was entirely too large in the film and that is coming from a Levitt fan. He was fantastic in the film, but this is a Batman film and Levitt is in the film double the amount of time Bale is.
This leads us to the main flaw in the film, the lack of Batman. With a runtime of 2 hours and 47 minutes, there is no excuse for the lack of Batman scenes the film experienced. There wasn’t nearly enough, plain and simple. It took forever for Batman to hit the screen and once he does it’s not long after until he disappears for the entire middle of the film. It needed more.

Not only did it need more Batman, but it needed more of Batman interacting with Bane. Bane does some serious damage in this film, more so than The Joker ever dreamed of doing. Batman has to redeem himself, and the film is building up to this for two and a half hours. And once it finally arrives, it sizzles out just as it gets going. I was so blindsided by this, I was sitting in the theater expecting at least another thirty minutes of the film because I didn’t think there was any way that was the final stand Batman took.

The conclusion of the film is definitely a unique one. It took me some time to warm up to it, but after much thought I finally decided I liked it.

This might shed some light on it for those scratching their heads like I was, and of course, it’s spoiler free.

There are currently four different Batman comic titles in print, along with hundreds of stand-alone graphic novels. The four titles each have their own story and after six issues, the story is resolved and then begins a new story. What is unique about the graphic novels is that the writer can do whatever he wants with the story; it has no effect on what is going on in the on-going comic series, these are often referred to as multi-verse stories. Once I thought about that, it occurred to me, this is what Nolan has done with his Batman trilogy. He told the story he wanted to tell, borrowing elements of all the best titles. Even though the ending isn’t straight out of the comics, it’s straight out of Nolan’s, and he deserved to go out on his terms…..and he did.

Final Verdict: 7/10

Movie Review: The Amazing Spider-Man

Plot: Peter Parker is your average high school teenager, but after discovering his father's old briefcase he begins to question his parents past and their mysterious disappearance. This leads him to OsCorp to question his father's old business partner Dr. Connors, a one armed scientist, experimenting with reptilian gene splicing in hopes to regrow his arm. While there Peter is bitten by a radioactive spider. You know the rest.

WARNING: There will be some very tiny spoilers throughout the review.

I was very unhappy when Sony announced their decision to scrap Spider-Man 4 and reboot the series. It was even more questionable when they hired on Marc Webb to direct, when his only other film had been the brilliant but complete opposite end of the spectrum, 500 Days of Summer. Did we really need to take Peter all the way back to high school or could we have simply just continued the franchise on with a new cast?

I watched the originals and they have not aged well, nor after seeing this film did I like the way Sam Raimi handled the characters. This film is better. It’s better than all three of Rami’s films.

Sony has come back and told the true origin story of Spider-Man. The first film was good for its time, but it wasn’t accurate in terms of how the story went in the comic. Yes, you have to sit through fifty minutes of the exact same movie you had to sit through the first time around, but this time they got it right.

The cast in this film packs a better punch than the previous films. Andrew Garfield is a more accurate portrayal of Peter Parker. He looks like he’s in high school, something Tobey Magurie’s Peter Parker wasn’t as convincing of. He has more charm as the struggling teenager as well. They also nailed Parker’s Spider-Man persona better. Spider-Man is a wise-cracking, cheesy one liner type character and they did a better job of portraying Spider-Man as what he really is, a teenager trying to handle being a superhero. Parker is now set up for a proper franchise where he can mature along the way.

Instead of diving right into the Mary Jane love interest, fans get to see Parker’s first love interest, the lesser known character Gwen Stacy, played by Emma Stone. If there was one thing I always hated from the original series, it was Kirsten Dunst. I’m not a fan and never was. Emma Stone is actually treated as an intelligent woman in the film. Gwen doesn’t have to be rescued by Spider-Man three times in the film like Mary Jane did every go around. She is intelligent and holds her own. It’s a shame we’ll have to lose her when Mary Jane ultimately comes into the picture. Hopefully Mary Jane won’t show up until the third film, and this time I hope she is portrayed as a more intelligent character instead of a dumb girl who gets kidnapped by the villain in every film.

I loved Aunt May and Uncle Ben from the previous series, but this time they get a little more star power with Sally Field and Martin Sheen. They really took the time to build a better relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben this go around, but strangely once Uncle Ben is shot they downplay the affect it has on Peter. Uncle Ben’s death is what pushes Peter to be the man he becomes and after they build this great relationship between the two, they kind of just skip over the affects his death had on Peter and Aunt May. The same goes with Peter and Aunt Mays relationship. Aunt May is a major character but she really takes a backseat in the film. I hope to see more of her the next go round.

And finally Rhys Ifans and Denis Leary round out the cast as Dr. Curt Connors and Gwen’s father Captain Stacy. Ifans doesn’t do a terrible job portraying the disfigured scientist, but they certainly don’t give him much to do. However I really liked Leary in the film. He doesn’t have a huge role, but he really makes his scenes count. Overall, the cast makes a better impression this go around.

The film itself has a more serious tone to it. It’s not dark in the sense of The Dark Knight, but it isn’t a kid friendly film like the previous films have been. It’s more violent and more graphic. When Spider-Man takes on The Lizard he bleeds, he doesn’t get a ripped suit like Maguire did. He gets ripped open, he’s hurt, he can’t walk. As an audience, you really feel the struggle instead of the happy go lucky fighting from the previous installments.

I really like the way Webb handled the characters. Now looking back, Sony had no choice but to reboot the franchise because Raimi kept killing off characters. It’s nice to know that The Lizard is still in the back pocket for another film. He teased us with OsCorp. Norman Osborne is never seen in the film, nor is Harry, but he is mentioned multiple times. Norman Osborne is a major villain in the Marvel universe and Raimi killed him off on the first go around.

This film surprised me on every level. It is a little drawn out the first half of the film, but they have good groundwork going forward now. I’m going to give Sony credit for this one, but if I have to sit in a theater in 2022 watching another reboot, I won’t be happy.

Final Verdict: 8/10

Movie Review: Ted

Plot: John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) is a lonely, eight year old boy with no friends. When he receives a teddy bear (Seth MacFarlane) for Christmas he makes a wish for his only friend to come to life. John wakes up the next morning with his wish granted. Ted becomes a huge celebrity during the late 80's but still remained faithful to his best pal John during the craze. Twenty years later the fame has worn off and both pals are headed nowhere in life. John must then decide whether he is going to grow up to keep his longtime girlfriend (Mila Kunis) or forever be the eight year old boy with no friends.

Seth MacFarlane is best known for his hit animated series Family Guy, a show I feel has long overstayed its welcome, but when it was in its prime, boy was it funny. MacFarlane has now made the jump from the small screen to the big screen with his first live action project and directorial debut film Ted.

Going into Ted I had a bad feeling about it, but then early, positive reviews came rolling in and I thought maybe a film about a foul mouthed, pot smoking teddy bear can make if a full hour and a half without beating the horse dead……I was wrong.

The problem with Ted is the same thing that has in my opinion plagued Family Guy, it gets old quick. I thought the first few seasons of Family Guy were hilarious; there wasn’t a show quite like it. But after it was brought back from cancellation, its formula was predictable and wore thin.

I haven’t been a fan of Mark Wahlberg’s attempts at the comedy genre, this one being no different. Wahlberg didn’t feel right for the part of John who is supposed to be a 35 year old guy with a dead end job as a rental car worker and is somehow dating the highly successful, gorgeous Lori played by Kunis. In reality Wahlberg is 41 and Kunis is 28 and the age difference shows on screen, making the relationship a stretch to the imagination. A James Franco type actor would have made for a much more believable character. Wahlberg came off more like Tom Hank’s character Josh Baskin from BIG then an actual adult who can’t get his life together. It was painful to watch.

The film was repetitious; John promises Lori he is ready to grow up, Lori gives John second chance, Ted talks John into coming over and getting high and they get into trouble, Lori gets mad but gives John second chance. That formula is repeated up until the third act. You can literally sit there and know exactly what is coming up next.

The only bright spot for me were the surprise cameos that are sprinkled throughout the film. Patrick Stewart is funny as the film’s narrator. Sam Jones, whose fame comes from playing Flash Gordon in the 80’s, makes a funny appearance as himself in the film. Tom Skerritt appears very quickly at the end with a hilarious line as well. The only cameo that didn’t work for me was Ryan Reynolds two brief scenes. He had no lines and it felt they threw him in for more of a shock factor.

Nothing about this film connected with me. It was good for a few chuckles but then fades out quickly. If you still find Family Guy funny after all these years, then you’ll probably like the film. It has all of MacFarlane’s go-to jokes throughout the film. There’s the random flash back sequences and an extremely too long fight sequence between John and Ted, both reminiscent of Family Guy. If you haven’t been a fan of Family Guy for a while, stay away, it’s that much like Family Guy.

Final Verdict: 4/10

Movie Review: Prometheus

Plot: Two explorers discover a set of symbols that send them across the universe to uncover humankind's origin. What they find is not so welcoming.

In 1979 Ridley Scott defined the sci-fi/horror genre when he directed Alien. No movie had ever been made like it and it set the blueprint for what was to be expected from the genre. Suprisingly, it has taken him 33 years to return to sci-fi with Prometheus.....and he does not disappoint.

The question going into the film was is it, or is it not a prequel to Scott's 1979 Alien. The answer is yes. It is without a doubt a film that takes place before the events of Alien, but it is not a direct prequel. Alien does not pick up right where Prometheus ends. Prometheus takes place on a different planet, LV-223 and Alien takes place on LV-426. But the DNA of the Alien films are sprinkled throughout the film. Another question some had was is it just simply another "Alien" film. No, the aliens that appear in the Alien franchise (Xenomorphs to us nerds), do not appear in this film. This gives it a fresh and original take.

Prometheus is one of the most visually stunning films I have seen in a while. The very second the film started, I was in awe of the beauty on screen. The cinematography in the the first half of the film was spot on perfect. It was as if the camera was sculpting the film like it was a piece of clay. I am never one to pay attention to camera placement in films, but this one really stands out. Not only was the film beautiful, but the fact that Scott demanded that large, detailed sets be built was very refreshing. So many times a director will just have an animator throw in a digital background, but Scott used as little CGI possible in this film. The sets were spectacular and were very appreciated. If George Lucas had spent as much time developing characters as he did CGI backgrounds, who knows the impact it could have made on his Star Wars prequels.

Prometheus is packed with heavy hitting actors. Noomi Rapace shines as Elizabeth Shaw, an explorer who uncovers the symbols on Earth that lead them across the universe. Charlize Theron plays the cold, strict Meredith Vickers whose job is to "Make sure they do thiers". And Guy Pearce and Idris Elba both shine in smaller rolls, Pearce as the legendary Peter Weyland for you Alien fans and Elba as Janek, captain of the Prometheus. But as Michael Fassbender tends to do, he steals the show. In the film Fassbender plays David, an android lifeform with all the qualities of a human. Androids have always been a part of the Alien universe. Ian Holm played the ruthless Ash in Alien and Lance Henriksen played the popular, heroic Bishop in Aliens and Alien 3. Fassbender does an excellent job of seperating himself from these two characters and creating his own personality for David. Unfortunately I can't go into much detail about the character. This film needs to be viewed going in knowing as little as possible.

When it comes to 20th Century Fox, I have a lot to complain about. I've never been a fan of their studio. For the past decade they have pretty much ruined 98% of the films they've touched. After having Len Wiseman do Live Free or Die Hard as a PG-13 film just so they could gross more at the box office, I was worried they would water this down from what it needed to be. But thankfully Scott fought to release the film he had set out to make and with strong fan support, Fox gave the ok to release it with an "R" rating. Well done this time Fox, well done. This isn't a hard "R" film. But it's dark, it's scary and there is just enough gore sprinkled in and Scott did well at balancing it all out. They will see a benefit from this and hopefully this will help their judgement for future projects.

The only complaint I have with this film was that it felt time resticted. Damon Lindelof who was one of the head writers for Lost penned the film and as usual he leaves the audience with some questions. I personally would have been fine with thirty more minutes of film so we could have seen a little more story development. When mankind travels across the universe to meet their creators, it's kind of a big deal. I thought the story was phenomenal, but motives in the film were left questioned that could have been answered with more screentime. I think and hope this will spawn a sequel and maybe that was Lindelof's plan, but when the film ended I was still hungry wanting more.

The sci-fi/horror genre is almost an extinct genre. 2007's Sunshine was the last memorable film that I can think of and maybe all the way back to 1997's Event Horizon before that one. Hopefully this will put some life and interest back in the genre I love.

If your're not familiar with the Alien films, I would highly reccomend watching them. This being a prequel, you don't necessarily need watch them prior to Prometheus, but I would reccomend watching them prior so you can know what was first created and then be able to go back and enjoy what Ridley did here by bringing the franchise back to life.

Final Verdict: 9/10

Movie Review: Men In Black 3

Plot: When Boris the Animal, an alien criminal from Agent K's past, breaks out of prison he travels back in time and kills K. Agent J, being the only one who remembers K must then go back to 1969 to stop the event from taking place.

After the flop of 2002's, Men In Black 2, which was truly terrible, it seemed that the MIB franchise was finished, they had not struck gold twice. Finally, ten years later another sequel was put into production and it seemed that it too would be a disaster. When MIB3 began shooting, there wasn't even a finished script, a certain doom for any film. Not only that but once the script was finished, they shut down production of the film completely for an entire month to go back and polish the scrip up even more, once again a very certain doom for any film. So finally, after several rewrites and a month long production hiatus we have Men In Black 3. But how does it hold up after a decade hiatus?

I'm happy to say that MIB3 is leaps and bounds better than the dreadful sequel. However, that isn't saying much, so let's dive in and see if instead of being better than the sequel it's just simply a good film.

As I watched the film I began to notice two things; the film is not that funny, but the story was good and I was still enjoying the film.

What I hated about the second film was that they forced so many slapstick, unfunny stuff into the film you couldn't even breathe. The pug Frank for instance is good for a laugh in a very small dose, but they put him in so much of the film by the end of it you were begging for him to be ran over. They threw alien after alien at you like the "ballchinians" which might seem funny to an elementary school boy, but the joke falls flat with adults. They crammed so much of that stuff into the film fishing for laughs, the story winds up dead on the side of the road.

Thankfully they stayed far away from that in this film. There were some laughs in the film, but it really went for a more serious tone. Of course it wouldn't be an MIB film if the Earth wasn't facing destruction from some alien race, but this time around you actually are worried that it might happen. The villain, Boris, is a much more devious character. He kills without question and their is no comedic tone to him, unlike the hilarious bug from the first film and the hollow, flat character of Serleena from the sequel. Boris's motive is revenge. He's been left armless in a lunar prison for 40 years thanks to Agent K and he wants his payback.

The cast this time is much improved as well. Will Smith took a break from acting in 2008 to devote his time to family, and he makes his comeback here on a high note. Smith is great as usual, but isn't given much to work with comedic wise. He has some great moments where you see the old school Will Smith, but his character this go around is given a much serious role. He's got some daddy issues going on, he's got trust issues with K and then once K's gone he jumps back in time just as the Earth is being destroyed by an alien invasion which causes for a more down to business J.

Josh Brolin joins the cast this go-round as a 29 year old Agent K. He does an outstanding job of personating Tommy Lee Jones throughout the film giving his character a much more likable personality. In 1969, K isn't the old, grump agent J is accustomed to. Something happened that made K that way and J is determined to find out what it was. With the roles now reversed, K is the young agent (new hotness) and J is the older senior agent (old and busted). This is something I thought they really dropped the ball on. I thought it could have made for some good laughs if they played off the fact J is now old and K is more limber and athletic.

Some new characters are introduced as well. At the start of the film, MIB director Zed has passed away and Agent O (Emma Thompson) takes on the role of new director. The 1969 version of Agent O is played by Alice Eve. I like the character of O, but I felt as if they could have developed her better. There was a story involving her in the film and instead of exploring it, they just beat around the bush with it and left you wondering towards the end. Both O's come off in the end flat. My new favorite character had to be Griffin. Griffin is an alien who is the last of his kind. His power is that he can see every possible timeline outcome, but he doesn't know which timeline he is in. He is a very in-depth and likable character I would like to see more of.

Comedy has beat the time travel aspect to death so I wasn't thrilled when I found out the synopsis was J going back to 69'. Thankfully, they do this in a very toned down manner. It's not your typical, cliched time travel film where everyone is wearing platform shoes and listening to disco and afros are all over the place. I really appreciated the fact that they went the conventional route on this and thought it was worth mentioning since it was one of my main concerns.

The film is not without it's flaws, there are some holes in the story. As I mentioned earlier, there is a whole backstory between K and O that never gets explained. In the film there is definitely an akward romantic relationship going on between the two. This story conflicts with the previous film's stories of K having to go missing in action from his fiance to join MIB. Both previous films stress the affection he has for his wife, so I found it odd that now all of a sudden he is having a relationship with someone else.

The conclusion of the film could have been developed better as well. The final showdown between J and K and the 1969 and 2012 Boris flakes out at the end. Throughout the film Boris goes around killing people left and right using a specific skill of his, but in the finale they water down his character. I felt during the film that this was a guy who could really pull off his plan. Of course I knew they wouldn't really have him win in the end, but that's how devious the character was written. Once the finale arrives, he becomes less frightning and more clumsy. Why would he throw J around four different times instead of just putting a spike in his head?

I went into MIB3 with the lowest of expectations and was very happy to walk out feeling new life and been put into the franchise. This is a fun franchise and I think there is a lot to be done with it. Tommy Lee Jones is only in the film roughly twenty minutes so maybe he isn't wanting to do any more, but there is a ton of potential for more film. I would have no problem seeing Will Smith take on the senior role while training new MIB agents.

Final Verdict: 7/10

Movie Review: Battleship

Plot: When NASA discovers a planet with conditions similar to Earth's, they send a high powered signial to it in hopes of making extraterrestrial contact. Seven years later they do, and an international naval fleet gets caught right in the middle of their response. The crews then must work together to destroy the extraterrestrial ships before they regain contact with their home planet and bring the rest back with them.

My intial response to the development of a movie based off the classic board game Battleship was one gigantic eye roll. But when it was announced Peter Berg was on board to direct, my mind was more open to the idea. Berg has a very strong resume in my opinion; Friday Night Lights, The Kingdom and the very underrated Hancock. But in the end it's still a movie based off a board game.

There are so many problems with this film I don't know where to begin so I'll just start with the beginning. The first thirty minutes of the film is such a giant cliche rip off of Top Gun, it's not even funny. You meet Taylor Kitsch's character, Alex Hopper and his brother Stone (Alexander Skarsgård) at a bar celebrating Alex's 25th birthday. It's implied immediately that Alex is always in trouble and going nowhere in life. While at the bar Samantha (Brooklyn Decker) walks in and catches the attention of Alex. The night ends with Alex being chased by police for breaking into a convienent store trying to get Samantha a chicken burito. The whole thing was so over the top and goofy I was ready to quit right then. And of course this causes Samantha to fall for him, because there is nothing more romantic than a guy getting tazed in front of you with a chicken burito in his hand. That silly goofyness is something the film unfortunately never fully gets away from. Much like the first half of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, it was hard to get 100% into a film that kept pulling you out of serious situations with goofy side stories and charachters. There are some good laughs in the film and I'm a believer that all films should have some humor in them, Battleship just fails on how to mix it in.

The next problem is the cast. This film has a very large cast in it, but I was left scratching my head at the end of it. Your main stars are Taylor Kitsch, Alexander Skarsgård, Rhianna, Brooklyn Decker, Jesse Plemons, Liam Neeson and a lot of lesser known actors who have larger roles. But what I didn't understand was the random people who just pop up for a line or two and then disappear. Jerry Ferrara (Entourage's Turtle) literally pops in for two lines and then is never heard from again. Rami Malek who has been an up and comer with a wide acting range literally pops up for two or three lines and then is never heard from again. I was left wondering if their roles ended up on the editing floor or if they're just friends with Berg, but it was definitely a waste of good acting talent which this film needed. Liam Neeson was also a disappointment. You pretty much see him at the beginning and end which was another waste of much needed talent.

That leads me to my next problem which was Rhianna. Now after having twenty four hours to sleep on it, she didn't do terrible for her first acting gig, but I felt that her charachter was very forced, especially for someone who didn't have the acting chops to pull it off. To fully get into a film, I need the actors in it to keep me from realizing I'm watching a film. Rhianna's charachter was written poorly but was given a lot to do in the film which ended up in a disaster of a character.

So what's next.....ah the graphics. A movie like this requries a lot of CGI and plain and simple, no movie with a budget like this ($200,000,000), should have bad CGI. And once the aliens show up, I had no problem with the effects. The ships looked great and there is a lot of destruction that is taking place on the planet and it looked just as good as the second half of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. So I had no complaints......until the actual aliens are shown. Once again, I need to be believing what I'm watching and their appearance completely took me out of the film. The aliens in this film looked like cartoon characters. I liked the design of them, but the execution was horrible and it resulted in a cheap looking film.

This movie had potential and it's a shame that it's tanking at the box office because this is one of those "oh what could have been" films. I'm not going to blame Peter Burg as much as I am the writers. I can't tell you how many times I rolled my eyes at the cheesey dialouge or at characters jumping off the back end of a battleship where two huge propellers were still spinning and hot metal and concrete were collapsing everywhere instead of simply jumping off the side where there was no danger, at where a fight with an alien results in the alien's teeth being knocked out in slow motion. And a few times there were blatant continuity errors. It was almost like the writers put their characters in this situation, couldn't figure how to get them out of it, but then just magically gets them out of the danger without any explanation. It was like being trapped in a room with no door, and then just magically making a door appear without any explantaion. With some good writers who were fully aware of what they were doing, this could have made Transformers look like a little school boy.

This continues into the ending of the film. I won't spoil anything, but at the conclusion of the film everyone acts like nothing big just happend. No acts as if friends and family were not just killed and cities weren't just leveled. Instead they all just hang out and cut up. It was a very fast, sloppy transition.

So with all that being said, with six paragraphs worth of bashing this film, I STILL had an absolute blast with it. I bet you didn't see that one coming.... This is the most torn I've been about a film review. It has every reason to get bad ratings, but I had a good time and the audience did too in fact when the audience burst out clapping and fist pumping throughout the film, I felt it to be a bit overboard but they were having a good time and that's all that matters.

What I thought they did a great job at was incorporating the game into the movie. Something I thought was going to come off terrible and would the film turned out to be a fresh new idea that I bought into. With communications down, they had to play hit and miss with their missles. The alien missles resemblence to the pegs used in the game was a nice touch. I appreciated the fact that although the writing was terrible in spots, they did not use cheesey lingo like, "They sunk our battleship", which I would have bet my life on would happen. I liked that they restricted where the ships were. The aliens put up a field allowing no one in or out. This helped keep the action in one place.

Another thing I really loved was how they honored veterans and service members who had been injured in the line of duty. One of the main characters in the film is Greg Gadson. Gadson, a lieutenant colonel with the Second Battalion and 32nd Field Artillery, was returning from a memorial service for two soldiers when his vehicle passed a roadside bomb on May 7, 2007. In the bombing he lost both of his legs. While his acting chops weren't as admirable, you looked right past that due to the mere sacrafice he gave for our country. He does however have the worst fight with an alien I have ever seen. Cheese galore right there. The other thing they did was bring on veterans to help bring the USS Missouri back to life to fight the final ship. Even though this resulted in one of the cheesiest montages I've seen, it was cool to see that on screen and some of them got some great one liners in the film, (I'm glad someone did).

And finally I really dug how it all played out on the ocean. Most movies are land based and I was wondering how well a film based on a board game that is based on the ocean would translate on screen and it was a breath of fresh air. I've seen buildings crumble, I've seen jets fly through the air shooting at each other, I've seen tanks run through villages, but I really liked how they kept this mainly at sea. It was neat seeing battlships and destroyers, seeing how their weapons worked and what their hulls looked like. It was a good take on something new.

So in conclusion, the bad heavily outweighs the good in this film. The actors did their best, the writers did their worst and Berg did the best he could to string it all together. And he must have done a pretty good job because I still had a good time.

Final Verdict: 6/10 BUT.......a good 6/10.

Movie Review: The Dictator

In 2006 I witnessed one of the funniest movies I had ever seen in a theater. Of course I'm talking about Sacha Baron Cohen's Borat. In 2009 he released his follow-up Bruno, which failed to connect with audiences like Borat had. It lacked the "shock factor" of the previous film and in my opinion took a dip in how funny it was. Can Cohen's third film, The Dictator be his comeback, or will it be even worse than Bruno?

In the film, Cohen plays Admiral General Aladeen, dictator of Wadiya. Aladeen prides himself in making Wadiya as opressed as he possibly can, executing citizens for silly reasons and he constantly has the United Nations on his back for his hoarding of nuclear weaopons. When his uncle informs him that the United Nations will be taking serious action on Wadiya, he decides to head to New York to address the United Nations. While there, his uncle Tamir (Ben Kingsley), arranges for Aladeen to be kidnapped and executed. He will then have Aladeen replaced with a double and announce that Wadiya plans on becoming a democracy so he can benefit from the oil reserves the country has to offer. Aladeen narrowly escapes the execution and finds himself alone in New York. He runs into a female activist (Anna Farris) and is given a job at her co-op. While trying to make a life in New York he runs into his thought-to-be executed head nuclear scientist. Together they plan on breaking back into the UN so they can stop democracy from taking place and build a super nuclear bomb.

This is Cohen and director Larry Charles third pairing. In this film they decide to go away from the mocumentary style film and deliver a traditional shot film, probably a good decision with Cohen's face being more recognizable than ever. But how does it stack up against Borat and Bruno. The answer, not well.

As I watched this film, it felt like Cohen and Charles's ideas were being recycled over and over again. The film is an hour and a half long string of slapstick humor and offensive dialouge. That's not to say there isn't some really funny parts, there are, but the bad in this film heavily outweigh the good. It almost felt like they were playing it safe with the amount of stupid slapstick jokes that was in the film in comparison to the non-filter style his previous two films had. What I liked about the previous films was that he was interacting with real people. Cohen loves having that no filter, say whatever I want type dialouge because the reactions he gets from your everyday person is priceless. In The Dictator the jokes feel forced and often times last longer than they should. If Cohen hopes to continue with this style of films, he and his team are going to need to come up with a better idea than what they put on the screen this go around

The rest of the cast is pretty forgettable as well. The whole time I was wondering how Sir Ben Kingsley ended up in this film. He's given next to nothing to do and seemed like a waste. I was embarassed for him. Anna Farris is another problem in the film. Can someone tell me if Anna Farris has ever been funny in anything? Anyone......no? She plays a hippie activist who takes Aladeen in. He's extremely offensive towards her to the point that no one on the planet would tolerate him. She gives the same terrible performance she gave in all four Scary Movie films. In fact this is her worst performance since Scary Movie 4. I read that Kristen Wiig and Gillian Jacobs had also been up for the role of Zoey. What were these casting directors thinking, either would have been leaps and bounds better. The one bright spot for me was John C. Reily's very short part as the very racist bodyguard who is hired to execute Aladeen. I wish we could have seen more of him.

This summer doesn't look very promising. Dark Shadows tanked last week, this is sure to tank and Battleship is already getting destroyed by critics. Bottom line is if you see The Dictator on HBO one night and nothing else is on, go for it, you'll get some laughs but stay away from the theater.

Final Verdict: 4/10

MOVIE REVIEW: The Avengers

Plot: When Loki, brother of Thor is sent to Earth by an unknown alien race to steal the powerful tesseract (the cosmic cube from 2011's Captain America), Earth's mightiest heroes must assemble to stop him from bringing along an alien invasion that wants to enslave mankind.

Five years ago, Marvel Studios set out to do something unprecedented. Their plan was to release five solo films, each starring a member of The Avengers and then bring them all together for one epic film. Speculation immediately began on whether such an endeavour could work. Could that many charachters, that many movie stars all share the same stage and it still translate well on-screen?

The answer to that my friends is yes, and it's all thanks to one man. When it was reported that Joss Whedon would be in the director's chair for The Avengers there was a split reaction from fans. Some thought he didn't have the big screen experience to pull off such a feat. His work had mainly been televison, and had directed only one other film prior, so I could understand people's cause for concern. I on the other hand thought it was a home run hire. You see, Whedon knows his way around the Marvel universe much better than directors Jon Favreau (Iron Man, Iron Man 2), Louis Leterrier (The Incredible Hulk), Kenneth Branagh (Thor) or Joe Johnston (Captain America) could ever hope to. Whedon had written several comic book series for Marvel prior to this. He is a fan first, writer/director second and that was why it was a genius hire.

What I was most worried about going into the film, turned out to be what impressed me most about it. With six main members of The Avengers team; Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Hawkeye and Black Widow, three S.H.I.E.L.D members; Nick Fury, Agent Phil Coulson and Maria Hill along with Loki and his alien army, I was really worried how well this would balance out. Thankfully, Whedon gives every character an even spread. The film isn't focused on one particular character more than another. Even better, almost every key character has their own defining moment in the film. Everyone gets to be the hero, everyone gets their own moment of applause from the audience (my theater broke out in applause on six different occasions).

The pace of the film is great. While there is plenty of action to go around, it isn't a Transformers, two-and-a-half hour explosion-fest. There is plenty of story and character development complimented with well directed NOT over the top action sequences. One thing that has bothered me about every single one of the stand-alone Avengers films is that they all have very anti-climatic endings. The final battle delivers. It's not drawn out, but it isn't a five minute fight with an easy "get out of jail free" solution to the problem either. When it was over, my appetite had been filled perfectly.

Although there is a very level playing field, one character is by far the show stealer. The Hulk films have been by least favorite so far, which is why I was surprised when he in fact is the one that steals the show. I think Whedon has found this character's niche. Maybe the Hulk doesn't need his own film. Maybe having him be apart of an ensemble is just the thing the character needs. Although the actual Hulk doesn't show until the later part of the film, once he shows, he delivers big. Every scene he's in brought a grin to my face. He is heroic, he is funny and he is scary. However, that doesn't stop Tony Stark from being a very close runner-up. He steals every scene he's in, having one-liner after another. What's even better is the chemistry between Bruce Banner/Hulk and Tony Stark. Tony wants nothing more than to experience the big green rage monster first hand. He even tries enticing him a time or two, only let down when he doesn't get the rage reaction he wanted. And although he didn't have a large role, Agent Coulson really connected with the audience as well. I really enjoyed that he was a fanboy of Captain America. He's starstruck when he's around him, nervous about asking for an autograph. He believes in the Avengers Initiative and has a very nice heroic moment of his own.

All of these positive character traits leads me to one of my disappointments of the film and that is Captain America. Captain America is the leader of The Avengers. No question about it, always has and always will be. He is selfless, follows orders and makes the right choices. While Cap' certainly has some great moments in the film, I kept waiting for that one moment where he steps up and takes the lead. There was flashes of it, but it never comes. Maybe they are waiting for the sequel to really have him step up, but I was just a tad bit disappointed with how he played out. That isn't a huge problem and some may not even care, but as for me that was something that stood out.

There is only one other thing I have to nit-pick about and that is the villains. Tom Hiddleston as Loki did fantastic, no complaints there. But what I didn't enjoy was that if felt like The Avengers were never really in immediate danger. We all knew they would win in the end, but I still like to be on the edge of my seat a little. Loki as great as he is with deception and evil, I never felt like he was truly someone who was going to start offing people. There is one scene where you think he is going to just start slaughtering people but it goes away quickly. I would have liked to have seen a little more villainy in the story.

So what will this film do for the superhero genre? Hopefully forever change it. This should get the attention of Fox who holds the rights to X-Men and Fantastic Four, Sony who has the rights to Spider-Man and most importantly Warner Brothers who owns every DC character there is. Wolverine and Spider-Man are actually member of The Avengers in the comics. This should get them motivated to share profit and put an entertaining film on the screen. How cool would it be if Spider-Man swooped in out of nowhere to help out, or if you see a character's legs walking down the street and all of a sudden his arm drops and three claws come out? The fans would go balistic! And maybe this will finally convince Warner Brothers to get their charaters together. Aside from Nolan's Batman films, those movies are miles behind Marvel.

This movie is a game changer. I have next to no complaints and I absolutely cannot wait until 2015 so I can see The Avengers 2.

Final Verdict: 9/10