Movie: Justice League (2017)

Rating: C

If you want to watch this movie, stop reading the reviews (I suppose, that DOES include this one). Not so much because reviews inevitably include spoilers, but reading reviews for this movie actually spoils the movie.



If you don't go in to this movie with any expectations, it's not too bad of a movie. It's entirely watchable. Too many people reviewing this movie include all the issues they had during the production of the movie. I'm just here to talk about what happened on screen.

Sure, there are plot holes, missing bits to this movie, and some spotty CG, but it's still watchable. It's pretty good stylistically, they've done well portraying the characters, and there are some pretty awesome action moments (notice I did not say sequences).

I've always thought that DC does a pretty good job of tackling psychological struggles of its heroes, and Justice League does kind of try to attempt this. The biggest problem with this movie is that the major players in this movie really didn't get enough of a backstory.
I was fine with that with them doing this with Wonder Woman in Batman Vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) because she was a bit of a mystery to Batman and Superman. I'm also fine with them doing this with The Flash here because his story hasn't really begun and he was more of a bit player this time around.
But Aquaman and Cyborg are pretty big parts of this movie, and there is just a cursory introduction to their characters. You don't feel any attachment to them whatsoever. They feel like they were just dropped into the story.

The DCEU needs to stop rushing to catch up with Marvel, and just do their own thing. They built up each of their major characters before putting them all together for a team up.

Movie: Star Trek - Into Darkness (2013)

Rating: B

Hrmm....Apparently I didn't write about the first installment of this NEW Star Trek franchise. But I've got to say, I much prefer J.J Abrams at the helm of a movie over his contributions on the small screen.



To boldly go....Where plenty of movies have gone before. There really is nothing new in this movie. That being said, who cares?! This movie is fun, it's well paced, and entirely action packed. While you don't have to be a trekkie to enjoy this film, however, after I watched this film, I went and watched the Star Trek movie from the original movie series and realised its correlation. I think that fans of the Star Trek franchise will love the homage it pays to its predecessor. Absolutely brilliant.

While I always love the easter eggs new movies pay to their predecessors, I'm starting to feel that the scripting is starting to be a little much; to a point where some of the bantering is becoming a little repetitive and becoming rather cliche.
That being said, I've got to say, the more I see Simon Pegg, the more I think that he's a frigging genius. haha. Total hilarity.

Cheers.

Movie: Olympus Has Fallen (2013)

Rating: C

I'll say this. Antoine Fuqua certainly knows how to create thrills and suspense. Unfortunately, Olympus Has Fallen really feels like a feeble attempt to remake the first Die Hard.




If you're watching this movie, the first thing you need to do is to turn your brain off. The scenario is completely absurd and implausible. Just sit back, and enjoy watching Gerard Butler kick some butt and deliver a couple of zingers. But aside from that, it's another attempt at mediocrity.

If you don't turn your brain off, you'll just find all the reactions of the characters don't make sense. I'd tell you what those absurdities are, but I'd just be telling you the whole movie.

~Cheers.

Movie: Broken City (2013)

Rating: F

Maybe it's what the director intended. Or maybe it was an unintentional byproduct of filming a movie called Broken City. But this film is broken; from its name, right down to well, the entire movie itself.



With a name like Broken City, you'd expect all sorts of things about the city to be broken, you know, like post-Katrina New Orleans. But it wasn't. You had a couple of corrupt people with hidden agendas and a few knives in a few backs. That's hardly a broken city. It's unfortunate, with a star-studded cast, you were expecting...well...more.

All you ended up with, was a film that was really unbalanced, throwing things in there that really didn't need to be there. The relationship Mark Wahlberg's character had with his girlfriend (Natalie Martinez) was entirely unnecessary, a waste of time, and simply a distraction.
And by throwing in twists for the sake of throwing in twists, it just made the entire movie.... unnecessary. It's like a hockey player doing a dipsy-doodle, spin-o-rama and then not even bother shooting the puck. It's called, trying to be cute / clever without ever being smart.

~Cheers.

Movie: The Hobbit (2012)

Rating: B-

Almost a decade after the final installment of The Lord Of The Rings was released, they finally came out with the prequel: The Hobbit. Only... It's to be released in three parts.



Three agonising parts. Quite honestly, the pacing of this first installment feels more like a TV mini series. I could totally see where the networks might want to put commercials in. And it didn't help that the movie was filmed in 48 fps. Yes, it reduces motion blur, but it also makes things all together too clear. Many of the shots felt like it was still in pre-production.

The brilliant thing about J.R.R Tolkien's writings is that they film themselves. He has a great storytelling style, and his descriptions of each and every scene is simply awesome. The picture he ends up painting is so vivid, that really, it takes very little imagination to translate it onto the big screen.

Andy Serkis reprises his role as Gollum/Sméagol, and it is quite evident how far technology has come in motion capture. The new Gollum is significantly more realistic than the 2003 version, when the LOTR team breathed new life in the technology.

~Cheers.

Movie: The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Rating: B+

Probably the most anticipated movie of 2012 also contained the most IMAX footage ever used in a feature film. Sure, plenty of movies, including this year's The Avengers, was converted into IMAX, but director Christopher Nolan actually used IMAX cameras to include over an hour of actual IMAX images for The Dark Knight.



The result is palpable. So if you do get a chance to see the movie in IMAX, it's definitely worth giving yourselves a treat to fully experience the clarity, vividness, and perfection that is IMAX.

But that being said, while I absolutely loved the movie, it really bothers me when there are plot holes. I'm going to try to say this without issuing a spoiler alert. Batman's injuries vs. recovery. Just doesn't add up. Another thing that bothers me is when symbols are overused that it becomes trite. Without giving away too much of the 2h45min movie, was it really necessary to have the ENTIRE national anthem sung? Granted, DC Comics really does cater to a more patriotic crowd, but this was overkill.

I love watching Christopher Nolan's movies and I think he's a great director. But if you watch the first two in this particular Batman trilogy, Gotham is a much different place. Yet, in THIS finale of the trilogy, Gotham City looked decidedly like New York. I just thought that the inconsistency was too great. Of course, did it detract from the movie itself? No. Just me being picky.

And my final problem with the movie. It really might have been a good idea to include subtitles when Bane spoke. And he spoke a lot. With the muffled mask, it was very difficult to understand him at times.

Aside from these things, the finale was everything that we've come to expect of Christopher Nolan's movies. I must say that I really enjoyed some of the character twists that they provided, ie, using the Selena Kyle character...you know, before she was officially the "Catwoman".

~Cheers.

Movie: Battleship (2012)

Rating: C

After seeing sales from the relic line of Transformers, it looks like Hasbro might be wanting to tap that keg again for Battleship. And from the looks of things, they're going to milk it for all it's worth. I mean, yes, they'll make money from the movie, but there's likely going to be some sort of a multiplier effect in terms of merchandising. Battleship was nothing more than a board game; one with very limited variables and variations. Now, not only can they sell the board game, they can sell a video game, boats, action figures, etc etc etc. So who cares if Rihanna can't act a lick?



Seriously. This girl should NOT quit her day job. Given lots of screen time with very limited lines, you'd think that she ought to be able to pull of keeping a stone face. The few lines she had, it felt like she was reading them for the first time. But, I guess everybody's gotta start somewhere. *sigh*.

The pacing and flow of the movie was choppy, haphazard, and full of holes. It's a wonder why Peter Berg gets so many chances to direct such half baked, barely mediocre, vapid movies. Maybe he should just stick with Friday Night Lights. That seems to be the only thing to his credit that deserves any recognition.

That being said, there's enough bangs and booms to keep this movie at least somewhat entertaining, and it certainly doesn't hurt keeping Brooklyn Decker around. And after John Carter, Taylor Kitsch really could have used something to put him back on the right track. I'm just not so sure that Battleship is that something.

Oh. For those of you so inclined, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to stick around after the credits. Heck, if you stayed after The Avengers, you might as well stick around for this one too right? haha.

Cheers.

Movie: Chronicle (2012)

Rating: B

(Blogger's Note: A lot of movies came out during my hiatus from this little blog, but it didn't mean that I didn't watch them. Chronicle is be released today for purchase, so I thought it might be fitting to post a few thoughts to this movie.)

Over the past few years, there have been an inordinate amount of super hero movies. So what happens when you put these powers in the hands of a few teenagers still trying to figure themselves out? And what happens if one of them loses it?



Superman meets Columbine. I think it's an effective look at how different circumstances and different personalities can affect people differently. Especially in those angst ridden teenage years. But they really could have done without so much in-story handycam footage. I can understand that they would want to do that in a few situations, but as far as the entire movie was concerned? It really wasn't necessary and actually detracted from the enjoyment of what was otherwise a very well thought out movie.

What was nice about the way it was filmed tho, was that it did make the story seem more genuine. While the flow was a little slow, it felt like a natural progression to the movie, the friendship, and their burgeoning powers. How it affects them, their friendship, and their outlook of the world; giving the movie real depth and a good look at how perhaps superheroes and their nemeses come to be. That being said, I really could have done without so much of that blasted first person, shaky, handycam footage.

~Cheers.

Movie: Safe (2012)

Rating: C-

There's really only one reason to watch any Jason Statham movie: To watch Jason Statham beat people up. It's your own fault if you expect anything more from any of his movies. If you're able to get anything more from his movies, you should consider yourself lucky. Haha.



Safe is no different. Aside from a few one liners and some fun fight scenes, Safe suffers from an over zealous plot-line that is so poorly executed that no amount of creative fighting could compensate. Why they decided to incorporate 2 foreign speaking gangs to be pitted against each other is entirely beyond me. This is an action movie.  It really shouldn't have THAT many scenes requiring subtitles. They could have made this movie with a Jamaican gang and an Irish gang, or a Mexican gang and an Italian gang. Any two gangs would have worked.

And in this day and age, you'd think that there would be a few more actors they could have found that ACTUALLY spoke Chinese. Listening to Reggie Lee attempt to to act in Chinese when he can barely act in English was enough to make me throw up a little inside. And while James Hong's performance was slightly more convincing, they need to stop making him the token old Chinese guy in every other movie with an Asian in it.

Even putting aside the poor choice of language, the story line was made overly complicated and executed with such ham-fistedness, that there really was very little cohesion over the hour and a half movie. And finally. Jason Statham is an athlete with a black belt. Not an actor. Stop trying to make him act. Making him the weepy, soft-on-the-inside-with-a-hard-exterior, 'this isn't what i wanted' hero. Just let him fight already!

~Cheers.

Movie: Marvel's The Avengers (2012)

Rating: A+

Unleash the power of the (comic book) geek! Seriously, if this popcorn movie doesn't unleash your inner geek, nothing will. And while the Hulk isn't a man of many words, he totally steals the show.



I was a little worried that this movie was going to be a mish mash of heroes thrown together into a half baked ensemble movie. But man was I pleasantly surprised. The action was fantastic. The visuals were fantastic. And the interaction and chemistry between the characters was absolutely magnificent. Yes, this is a comic book movie, and yes it's larger than life, and absolutely yes, this is fantasy, but for 2 hours and 22 minutes, this was YOUR world. It sucked you in, spat you out, and made you want more. It was action packed, it was fun, and it will rock your world.

The only negative thing that I can say about this movie is that while Robert Downey Jr., and Chris Evans are probably the supposed to be the main characters of this movie, it was Mark Ruffalo as The Hulk that totally stole the show. And really, the show doesn't really start until The Hulk covers the screen...Literally...the whole screen. And after that, the rest of the movie is just an action packed, mixed in with great dialogue and interaction, coupled with copious amounts of total hilarity.

As with each of the introductory movies over the past four years, there IS something to see at the end of the credits. It.....uh....might not....uh....be ....hrmmm....what you were expecting tho. hahaha =)~

~Cheers.

Movie: The Raven (2012)

Rating: C+

I really wonder if Hollywood is afraid of making anything provocative, shocking, and daring. The Raven had so much potential, and a wealth of back material to draw from. And while it was clever, it wasn't particularly smart. Where there were plot twists, they weren't particularly mind-bending. Yet another movie in this year's indulgence of mediocrity.



It's been said that John Cusack is probably the most natural actor of our time. And I quite agree with that. It's a shame that most of the other cast members in this film was not so natural. And while I feel that Cusack is miscast in this role, I think he did an admirable job as Edgar Allan Poe, I feel that the role would have been better served being played by someone a little darker, say perhaps, Johnny Depp.

The biggest problem of the movie was its lack of direction. There really would have been no difference if they completed this movie with 1 murder, or with a dozen. The clues of the murder led you to the next clue and not to who the killer was. So really, The mystery and chase was really rather pointless. And while ONE of the murders was decidedly graphic and macabre, none of the other ones had the same level fear, torture, nor blood.

Perhaps one would be more involved in the movie if they were more familiar with Poe's work, but I doubt very many know more than a handful of his life and work well enough to find the correlation intriguing. This movie could have had so much more depth. It could have been significantly more gripping. Or they could have opted to make it totally tragic. Instead, they opted for mediocrity.

~Cheers.

Movie: The Hunger Games (2012)

Rating: B-

This movie’s been out a while, and I’ve been meaning to write put my critique out there. But due to extenuating circumstances, I’ve had to wait until now. Based on the book series of the same name, The Hunger Games had the potential of being something as visually powerful and mentally jarring as Lord of the Flies. Instead, they decided to dilute it for the Dora The Explorer demographic. Only problem is, it’s still too troubling for the kiddies, and far too gentle for anyone over the age of 10.



 While I disagree with many that this book / film is an English version of the Japanese book / film, Battle Royale; I do wish that they would have taken a page from the Japanese version. Make it daring, or poetic, or shocking. Instead, in order to placate soccer moms and interest groups, The Hunger Games languishes in mediocrity; Just good enough to be worth watching, but not nearly good enough for it to be memorable.


Jennifer Lawrence gave an admirable performance, and Stanley Tucci is one of my favourite supporting casts. But that's about it. And I suppose I should give credit to the direction of Gary Ross for moving the movie along fluidly because let's not forget, the actual "games" don't start until about the middle of the 140+ min movie. 


On top of that, the side stories just felt entirely too contrived and there were just too many holes in the movie. I mean, aside from the wolves that appeared out of no where for no particular reason, there really was never any real danger to Ms. Lawrence's character.

But judging from the reception of this movie, it looks like the film adaptations for the next two books of this trilogy is just going to be more of the same.


~Cheers.

Movie: Lockout (2012)

Rating: D

I have a big love/hate relationship with Luc Besson movies. I love the premise, hate the execution, and love to rip on them afterwards. Lockout was no different. If you've read some of my critiques, you'll know how much I hate holes in movies. This movie just had hole after hole after hole, with poor lighting, editing, and I do believe, that somewhere in the beginning sequence, they forgot the put the finishing touches on some Special Effects (CGI).



It's almost like Mr. Besson is doing charity work. He comes up with ideas, writes the initial screenplay, then offloads it to some poor up and coming director salivating at the opportunity at having Luc Besson in his credits at the end of the movie. Lockout seems to be yet another example. Both James Mather and Stephen St. Leger just seem overwhelmed with directing this movie.

Looks like Guy Pearce has been hitting the gym and looks great as a grisly framed agent on a one man rescue mission of the president's daughter played by Maggie Grace. Their relationship is what you would expect between a wily veteran and a sassy, but doe eyed beauty, and while a romance is somewhat inevitable in this kind of movie, how it blossoms is entirely contrived and there is no chemistry whatsoever. Quite honestly, the only person that stood out in this entire movie is Joseph Gilgun who plays the crazed brother of the main villain in the movie.

~Cheers.

Movie: I Am Number Four (2011)

Rating: C-

While this movie makes much more sense than DJ Caruso's Eagle Eye, it is simply too lightweight and fluffy to be taken seriously. Of course, this movie is also catering to the Twilight demographic, you know, the demographic that enjoys watching shirtless pretty boys. Thankfully, there were no shirtless scenes. Haha.



I've said it before and I'll say it again. Why the heck does Timothy Olyphant think that grinding his teeth when he talks makes him look tough? And who is this Alex Pettyfer kid and why does he think that he can act? While the first 15 minutes of the movie were decent, and the last 20 minutes of the movie was entertaining enough, there is about an hour and a half or so of this movie that is pure and utter fluff. The entire middle section of the movie was a snoozefest, focusing on teenage puppy love and high school drama that, by the way, disappeared in the blink of an eye.

And I'd say, that without Teresa Palmer, I probably would have given this movie a D. I don't care that she was only in about 15minutes of the movie, but she was hot. Which means, I'm torn about whether or not I want to watch the sequel, which it hints at in the special edition. HAHA.

~Cheers.

Game: Green Lantern - Rise of the Manhunters (2011)

Genre: 3rd Person Action
Game Play: 3 / 5
Graphics: 3.5 / 5
Storyline: 3.5 / 5
Re-Playability: 3 / 5
Overall: 3 / 5

Quite honestly, I enjoyed it. I like playing games with heavy story support. And quite frankly, I found the story more compelling than the Green Lantern movie.



I played the PS3 version of the game. After games like Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted, and Assassin's Creed, I've come to expect some spectacular graphics. Unfortunately, Rise of the Manhunters came just a little short. And I found the entire game to be such. It just came up a little bit short. It was ok, entertaining enough, but there wasn't anything great about it.

You're either running through a pretty linear plane, or flying through the air. When you're in the air, so long as you keep moving, you pretty much can't die, and you'll make it through the section. On the ground, you get to use your ring. There are some super moves that you can use the ring for, called "Constructs". Constructs are available for purchase with experience points. There are enough constructs to buy to play the game MAYBE 2x. But I was really hoping for a whole lot more. There are some puzzles in the game, but none that gave you too much grief.

I did however, encounter a couple of glitches that I wasn't too pleased about. After unlocking one of the doors, it was still locked. I ended up going online to check the walkthrough and found no additional locks for the door. I was finally able to get through it after turning the machine completely off and then back on. Really, it was a bit of a nuisance. I'm not sure if it was just the disc I had that was missing this information, or if it's missing on the PS3 system. There is one piece of key information that, again, I found on the walkthrough that wasn't part of the dialogue in my game. Once I heard that, I was able to get through the level. But it wasn't available on my game at all.

Aside from a few nuisances, the game isn't horrible. Granted, Green Lantern was one of my favourites growing up, so that might have something to do with it. Oh, if you want to beat the game REALLY easily? Have Player 2 jump in. Just to stand there. The AI's for some reason enjoy beating up the decoy more than beating up on you.

~Cheers.

I'm glad that the storyline was separate from the movie tho.

Movie: Green Lantern (2011)

Rating: C+

Seriously, I'm getting a little tired of movies meandering in mediocrity this year. I've yet to see a single film this year that's blown me away. 2010 was a Smörgåsbord of absolutely brilliant films. Green Lantern, continues this trend of pedestrian product.



Green Lantern is JUST funny enough, JUST presentable enough, JUST entertaining enough, JUST...well...I think you know what I'm getting at. It's a good thing they cast Ryan Reynolds in the lead role, otherwise, I fear this movie would have just fallen flat. I mean, just when I was starting to think that Blake Lively could act (See The Town), she goes back gives a performance that is JUST noticeable enough.

As with X-Men: First Class, and Thor earlier this year, the introduction of the movie takes too long. They don't really have much of a choice, they're trying to introduce everybody and trying to set up the situation, but the movie is (thankfully) only 105 minutes long, but the introduction is unfortunately, too long, too tedious, and too tiresome. It does seem however, that there will be a sequel. If that's the case, I think that they will do a better job of it all. Less flying back and forth between planets and less trying to figure out who I am moments.


To summarise, it's JUST watchable enough.

Just a few more personal thoughts after the Jump....

Movie: Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011)

Rating: A-

Too many sequels are money mongering excuses to build a franchise, that just regurgitate the same story in a different setting (ie, The Hangover Part 2). Kung Fu Panda 2 is among the select few sequels that might actually be better than its first installment.



The story, while nothing new, is compelling enough to be retold. The jokes actually have some thought put in to them and fitting for all ages. The star studded voice cast did an admirable job.While I would have liked to have seen the supporting cast be more involved, the story would have been far too complex to properly use ALL of them.

I loved the artwork when they were talking about the past, in particular, Po's little stuffed toy. Very adorable. It's great to see them use a different art style to differentiate what is now and what was THEN.

Is it twice the awesomeness as advertised? Yes it is!

Movie: Super 8 (2011)

Rating: B

From the director that brought you Alias, Lost, and Fringe; the director that totally, and single-handedly revitalised the Star Trek franchise, J.J. Abrams brings mystery, suspense, and sublime terror to Super 8.



The younger sister best known for playing the younger version of her older sister, I was first impressed with Elle Fanning in Phoebe in Wonderland. And again, she totally shines in this movie. Any scene that she's in, you simply could not keep your eyes off of her.


The story line was too ambitious. And sometimes I think that's what happens when you're used to directing TV. There are episodes in a TV series, and generally you can space it out in 20 hours of broadcast material. In a movie, you have to shrink all that in to 2 hours. And by trying to cram so much into a 2 hour film, you end up with holes and unanswered questions that could have been avoided if they had simply not tried to do so much.

So while there are obvious holes in this movie, Abrams brings you back to the rural innocence of 1979, and taking a page out of Spielberg's ET in a film that makes you care about the characters while continuously building up the suspense around the cargo from the train wreck. Some call it suspension of disbelief, but I think in this case, it's more abandonment of logic. That being said, the kids were definitely the saving grace of this movie. And despite these flaws, Super 8 is still one of the best movies released this year so far.


~Cheers.

Movie: The Mechanic (2011)

Rating: C+

I'm not sure why anyone would ever want to remake a Charles Bronson movie. Thankfully, the 2010 version of The Mechanic is much improved with Jason Statham playing the lead role of Arthur Bishop.



In the simplest of terms, one word summarizes this movie. Gratuitous. The sex scenes, the bullets used, the stunts performed; were all applied generously throughout the movie. In the trailer, he said that his jobs sometimes need to look like accidents. It made me think of a movie from Hong Kong called, 意外 (Accidents) that came out a few years ago. And I kind of wish they made more of the assignments look like accidents. There was little subtlety in this movie and it made the movie a little bit obvious.

Jason Statham is perfect for this role. He does most (if not all) of his own stunts, can actually fight, and looks completely at ease doing it. Ben Foster on the other hand, reminded me a little too much of this Stand Up Comic with Cerebral Palsy I've seen called Josh Blue. It also seems to me that Donald Sutherland is getting lazy. He still gets his title credits, but the amount of time he spends on the screen is getting shorter and shorter. And it's a bit of a waste to cast such a powerhouse to play little more than an extended cameo. They also need an entirely new role for Tony Goldwyn, or just stop casting him. The second he shows up, you know he's going to end up being the bad guy. But.... With Mini Anden sashaying across the screen with those swaying hips, totally makes up for everything. Haha.

The stunts are over-the-top, explosive, and fairly original. The interplay between Statham and Foster is credible, and despite a couple of holes in the story, is a fairly solid action movie.

~Cheers.

Movie: Predators (2010)

Rating: C

After the past few attempts of futility at trying to keep the Predator franchise alive, I didn't think that I'd have anything good to say about this rendition. Let's not kid ourselves, it's still a Predator movie and you're only watching it for one reason. And for that, Nimrod Antal does an admirable job.



Sometimes I wonder if Danny Trejo would find work without Robert Rodriguez. Sorry... A little non sequitur perhaps, but a random thought from this movie. Haha. Anyway, it's a little hard to get over some of the choice of actors; in particular, Adrien Brody as a Merc, but if you get over that, get over the gutteral cliche one liners and stop trying to make sense of the whole thing, Predators does have its moments.

For one, I never figured Alice Braga to be a military woman, but she's actually a pleasant surprise in this role. For another, the story does attempt to throw you a few surprises. And for a few fleeting moments, you get Lawrence Fishburne. Why? I have no idea. But there he is. Haha. It has its share of gun fights and fight scenes, trying not to be too repetitive, but let's face it. It's got nothing on the original.



~Cheers.