The Adjustment Bureau A love story that asks the question, "Is there such a thing as free will?" Not as deep as that sounds, though. The film takes a light approach to this heavy philosophical question ("God's plan" is literally laid out in blueprints--could it be any more simplistic?), but seeing it with my teenage daughters, it provided a good platform for a more serious discussion on the topic (and others that it spawned). If you're looking for something light and quick (1:46 running time) it'll satisfy.
Cedar Rapids A quick very funny comedy starring Ed Helms and Anne Heche, I like slightly off comedies like Sideways or the Dream team so I suppose this was par for the course for me, but when so many comedies are dumb retreads its always nice to see something quirky, quick and well written. Isiah Whitlock was a suprise never seen him in anything other than the wire (they spoofed that in the film) but plays the straight square friend well. John C. Reily is hilarious as the drunk sales pro.
Sucker Punch I'm not going to lie. I thoroughly enjoyed the shit out of this movie. It's like Zack Snyder took a bunch of hallucinogenics, read random chapters of different graphic novels, and wrote down what he remembered. The story was a little bare-boned, but the different sequences do more than enough to make you forget all that. The first fantasy sequence alone left my jaw on the floor at the sheer amount of over the top awesomeness. It definitely helps that all of the girls in this movie are absolutely smoking hot. This is the type of movie you see with your buddies, preferably under the influence of drugs. This is not the type of movie you over-analyze and won't shut the fuck up about its flaws (and they're there. No, I'm not going to nitpick them. I'm sure KIMaster will when he sees it.)
Sucker Punch I went into this knowing I could ignore plot, dialog and acting and I enjoyed it a great deal more. Honestly, I have not been that satisfied leaving a movie theater since Inception. This movie does has tremendous, cringe-worthy flaws; however: the spectacle of violence portrayed by this film is incredible. This is seriously a string of hard-core, fantastic action sequences that you would expect from video games and comic books. You can almost hear the production crew discussing ways to make each fight scene in Kill Bill more awesome and then they made this discussion into Sucker Punch. If you go into this expecting a movie that features an actual story, you will be disappointed. If you go into this, as I did, expecting to have a series of fantastic action sequences strung together by the thinnest "plot" you will immensely enjoy this film. Good: the music, the action sequences and the simple fact that it's a unique sort of film in how ridiculously over-the-top it is. Bad: acting, plot, dialog, story, pacing, the girl's "costumes" are kind of creepy, and I'm going to say it: none of the 5 main characters were hot. Pretty and definitely boneable, but not movie-star hot. Also, this film will probably give you ADD.
Sucker Punch Before you see this movie, do yourself a favor and go to Rotten Tomatoes. Read every single negative review on that site. Bad acting, check. Bad story, check. Promises of female empowerment that only reenforce gender stereotypes, check. Have your expectations been sufficiently lowered? Good, we got all that out of the way. It's actually kind of sad that aside from Inception, I can't remember the last time I saw an action movie that kept me this entertained. Snyder can't write dialogue above the level of an introduction to script-writing class. He can't come-up with a villain that isn't unreasonably abusive and rape-y. For some reason he refuses to use good music in his movies- just remakes and samples of good songs the audience will recognize. What should have been a badass, old-guy mentor character just spouted out meaningless cliches to the group of murderous whores (If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything. Don't write checks your ass can't cash.). This movie should have been a complete clusterfuck. I mean seriously, there's a musical number over the end-credits (don't worry, I'm not spoiling anything. It literally has nothing to do with anything in the movie aside from reminding us that Vanessa Hudgens may or may not be Indian). But you know what else Zach Snyder doesn't do? He won't zoom in on somebody's fucking elbow and shake the camera like a retired boxer. He doesn't rely on conventional backdrops such as "darkened street, darkened room, darkened national monument people will recognize." He doesn't cram Michael Mann's hand-held camera a foot from the muzzle flash and scream "Fuck the 4th wall! I want this movie to feel like an episode of Jersey Shore." Remember the feeling you got when the room starting spinning and Joseph-Gorden Levitt had to fight all those guys on the ceiling? Pretty much every action scene is at that level of awesome. And yes, it feels a little cheap and gratuitous at times, but fuck you man. No other movie has ever compelled me to jump out of my seat and play an air-guitar solo in honor of the awesomeness I was witnessing (thankfully, I didn't sneak a bottle of wine into this movie like I did with Cedar Rapids, or else that might have been a reality). Keep in mind, I'm a bit on the snobby side when it comes to movies. I loathed Avatar and I hate myself for helping fund James Cameron's island he uses to secretly hunt kidnapped Cambodian children for sport. But here, I saw what Snyder was going for, and thought "hey, good try pal. Now more 'splosions please. Oh this is for me? Thank you." Seriously, I want Zach Snyder to direct my dreams. Yes, there's a strong argument that Snyder's attempt at female empowerment played more like an exploitation film. Just for reference, I took my girlfriend to see it. I felt uncomfortable at some of the scenes involving the main bad guy and the prostitute/inmate/whatever girls, and figured I was doomed to repay my sins by going to see Red Riding Hood next weekend. My girlfriend not only didn't mind it, but really wants to see it again.
Hall Pass I am big fan of the Farrelly Brothers. I have loved most of their movies, and I even liked The Heartbreak Kid for what it was. But Hall Pass is probably their worst outing yet. Granted, they only co-wrote the movie, but compared to their other films it was pretty bad. I liked the concept, I really did, but the movie just ended up not being that funny. None of the one-liners managed to strike a chord with me. It had a few good moments, but I was ready for it to end halfway through. The one bonus is that there were a couple of really hot women in the movie, as has already been mentioned in this thread. 61/100
Hanna I'm too lazy to write a long review about this. Plot had potential but they didn't do a lot with it. The main character is actually a pretty decent actress, however she was put into a role that needed a lot more development and there wasn't enough expansion on it. The fight scenes are also pretty lame in the fact that the director tried to be too over-the-top. The plot also ends in a stale, and often done, finish. The gigantic saving grace of this movie for me was the score by The Chemical Brothers. Both my girlfriend (who doesn't like a ton of techno) and I walked out saying the music was kick ass. 5/10
Sucker Punch: Hey, dissenting opinion here. I saw this when it just came out and just happened to see this thread again and see everyone saying how much they enjoyed it. I'd say this movie is very possible to be enjoyed if you're the type of person who likes watching other people play video games. For 2 hours. After paying 10 dollars. Everything that needed to be said about this movie already has been (Zack Snyder should never be allowed near a script again), I'm just very confused as to how anybody came out of it and said "that was so much fun to watch!!!!" Just a terrible, terrible movie.
Arthur Russell Brand drives the batmobile then his mom makes him marry Jennifer Garner then Nick Nolte threatens to castrate him then he falls in love with a girl whose face is very circular but she gets angry because Brand publishes a book she wanted him to publish then Hellen Mirren queefs and everybody laughs and Brand makes a million dollars and I slit my fucking wrists in the bathroom. F minus.
Scream 4 I was a big fan of the first two when they came out, plus I had a huge crush on Neve Campbell then. The third one was garbage, so I didn't know what to expect from this one. I ended up being pleasantly surprised. There was a lot of suspense that made it have a feel very much like the first one. Neve Campbell looked as good as as she did 15 years, and there were plenty of other hot female characters. The one downside was that there was not a lot of development in the relationships of characters--this wasn't a big deal since it is a horror movie, but since I was such a big fan of the first two movies I was hoping that there would be a little more character development. If you liked any of the first three movies then you will probably find this one to be a good addition to the series, but if you didn't then you should just skip it. 76/100 Also: Spoiler My predcition was that the killer would be the hot blonde female cop.
So anyone see Atlas Shrugged? With the amount of people who talked about it on the board I would hope someone caught it. Part of me wants it to be half decent and prove the system wrong, the other half seems to want to validate the horrible mess the making of this movie was.
Atlas Shrugged Part 1: Some people don't like the book. Fine, I get that. I like the book. Personally, I think some parts of the story are lame, some are ridiculous, but it's kinda like the Bible: The story isn't that important, it's more of the philosophy and message that is. Anyway: Using the 100 point scale, I give it a 33. It is way too damn choppy, and it's obviously written for a very specific audience: The people who have read the book and like it. If you haven't read Atlas Shrugged, you will absolutely detest the movie, because you won't know what the fuck the point of any of it is. It ran an hour and 35 minutes, and honestly should have been longer. I have a feeling that the stuff that ended up on the cutting room floor could have helped it not be so all over the place. The chick who played Dagny (the main character) was ok. The guy who played Reardon was an awesome choice, he nailed that role. Most of the other choices were good to excellent, especially the woman who played Lillian Reardon... She was a real fucking bitch, exactly like the book. Bottom line, this is yet another movie that can't possibly live up to the book, and probably should not have been made.
Yeah, I thought they glossed over some things which would have been really helpful, especially the background of Francisco and Dagny. I also thought they downplayed the whole "give, give, give" aspect which Rand was unabashedly against in the book. It's amazing how many people think the book is about "Oh, let the rich people make as money as possible" when it's really more about "Don't give away things unearned to people who don't care enough to try to ensure their own survival." Edit to add: The character development is non-existent. If you haven't read the book, you have no idea who the fuck these people are or why they act the way they do. If you haven't read the book, I wouldn't even bother with the movie. Exactly. If I hadn't read the book and been able to fill in the blanks, it would have sucked harder than it did. Thinking more about it now, my 33/100 rating is for fans of the book. If you aren't a fan, cut that down to about a 17/100. Spoiler Plus at the end when they had Ellis Wyatt leaving "I'm on STRIKE!" on his voicemail greeting, it kinda ruined the whole suspense of "we're on strike" that you know is coming later when Dagny is in Mulligan's valley and during Galt's speech. I gotta be honest, I doubt parts 2 and 3 will even be made.
13 Assassins If you were a fan of "The 7 Samurai" or "Yojimbo" I highly suggest watching this movie. The story revolves around 13 samurai tasked with assassinating a warlord, that may be in line to become the next shogun of Japan, it eventually culminates with a half-hour long battle scene in a tiny village. The cinematography work is excellent, although that shouldn't come as a surprise with Takashi Miike at the helm. What made this movie stand out for me though was the sound, it's on par with any big-budget action film and deserves to be seen in either a theater or a surround sound setup. Character development outside the bad guy( Lord Naritsugu), and the main good guy ( Shinza) was a bit spotty, out of the 13 I could only identify about half, but trust me by the end of the film you absolutely want to see Naritsugu die, he is one evil man. 8.5 / 10
Fast Five I really cant think of any 5th installment movies that hold up to snuff, let alone that are better than its predecessors (and Empire Strikes Back doesnt count). However, Fast Five is not only just as good as the previous movies, I think it might be the best in the franchise so far. It picks up where the last one left off where the group is breaking Dom Terretto out of custody on a prison bus, and the action doesnt stop from there. The chase scenes are completely ridiculous and and the best part? No god damn shakey cam. The dialogue and plot are a little loose, but who cares? You get to see Rock (who definitely brings it in this one) and Vin Diesel go head to head, complete without dry one-liners that are good for a chuckle or two. The movie is 2 hours of good popcorn entertainment, and thats exactly what I was expecting. Theres also a decent twist after the credits: Spoiler Michele Rodriguez's character didnt die in the last movie and is shown engaging in a heist in Berlin Overall, its a great action flick and a great way to start off the summer blockbusters. Definitely worth a theater trip. 8/10
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.theonion.com/video/today-now-interviews-the-5yearold-screenwriter-of,20188/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.theonion.com/video/today-now ... -of,20188/</a>
Water for Elephants I have a confession to make. I think Robert Pattinson is charming. If I were a teenage girl, I would have posters of him all over my wall. Even though he looks like a Spiderman villain, the way he leans forward and smiles while his bangs hang over his eyes makes me all wet inside. And based on what I've heard from gossip sites, the only bad thing about him is that he makes shitty movies. I have another confession to make. I always mix up Christopher Waltz with Daniel-Day Lewis. It wasn't until halfway through the movie that I realized it was the guy from Inglorious Basterds and not Mr. Plainview. Either way, whenever he was on the screen I couldn't help but smile. Waltz is lovable even when he was repeatedly stabbing an elephant with a giant pole. If you're wondering why this post is so homo-erotic, it's because I have to question my own sexuality for liking this movie. Usually if anybody uses the phrase "feel-good movie," I have my doubts. But that's what this movie was. It was a little bit predictable, but still just very enjoyable to watch. But my main message is this: Robert Pattinson could be the next Brad Pitt or George Clooney if he would do more movies like this and cut out the bullshit. Also, there's a midget wearing clown make-up dressed as a cop. If forced your girlfriend to go see Fast Five, I'd suggest you pay her back by taking her to this one. Or go see it alone, just don't tell any of your friends.
Conversation between myself and a female friend who watched the film; KIMaster- "I bet you that I can predict everything that happens in the movie just from having watched the trailer!" Female Friend- "Okay, you're on." KIM- "I'm guessing that as the two main characters are falling in love, there is at least one scene of them bonding over their mutual love for a circus elephant." FF- "Yes..." KIM- "Christopher Waltz, meanwhile, is probably the husband of Witherspoon's character, and he is vicious, brutal, and physically abusive. Not only is he abusive not only towards her, but he beats the hell out of the animals." FF- "Yes..." KIM- "In the end, I'm guessing that Waltz is killed by one of the elephants." FF- "Yes..." KIM- "The only thing I'm not sure about is if Witherspoon's character survives or not, hmmmm.... Well, this being a Hollywood film, I'm assuming that yes, she does, although the better ending would have been for her to die." FF- "Yes..." KIM- "I don't think that being completely predictable necessarily makes a film bad, especially if it's a comedy or action, but I think you need originality for a romance story." Anyways, that particular friend thought it was mediocre, but not altogether bad; according to her, Pattinson was horrible and can't act to save his life, Witherspoon was good, and Waltz was excellent as usual.
Thor I'll cut to the chase: I liked this movie, but I didn't think it was the greatest thing since silent farts. Should my arguments veer towards the whole 'well, it's not good, but at least it's better than all the other crap' than that's wholly unintentional. This movie is good enough to stand on it's own. Spoilers ahoy: Spoiler The good: Excellent casting in Hemsworth (Thor) and Hiddleston (Loki). I guess this is what Tucker Max talked about when he said you needed an unknown face to effectively portray a character (or something like that). Hemsworth looks like a Viking-warrior, he has a lot of charisma. When he's angry and spouting Olde' English lines it doesn't sound all that hokey. And the guy has an awesome deadpan comedic timing. "I need a horse" and "this mortal form has grown weak, I need sustenance" were the best ones. And I like the fact that the writers actually tried to show his character traits, instead of just talking about it. If the lead is supposed to be reckless and stubborn, then people just say 'oh man, you so crazy'. Thor actually acts like an impulsive, aggresive idiot. Although it would have been nice if Odin said "you're a loose cannon, Thor. Hand in your badge and hammer." Loki was also ably written. It's nice to have a villain who isn't twirling his mustache, having some hugely complicated and elaborate plan and taking all the focus away from the main hero. Loki could have been characterised a bit more, but his motivations kept evolving because of the story, not the other way around. I can't say much about Hopkins (Odin) and Natalie Portman (Jane Foster). Some said they phoned it in, some say they proved their worth. I can only say they did a good job. The story was well-defined. It's basically the hero's journey. While it's not enormously ambitious, the story doesn't become unwieldly. For example, try to summarise the plot of Iron Man 2 in one sentence (besides: 'wait, did it have a plot?'). The story sets out with a clear purpose of changing the character for the better at the end. While the change occurs a bit too fast to my liking, the story succeeds. But, like I said, the story is a bit simple. The bad: Why do superhero-movies have so little action? Thor had 3 1/2 fight scenes. The fight against the Frost Giants (great), Thor fighting Shield (only 1/2 a fight, because he basically bumps some guys down the stairs and slo-mo kicks a dude), his fight versus the Destroyer (over too soon) and against Loki (which was blurry as fuck and I couldn't tell what was going on). I'm not looking for 90 minutes of explosions and fisticuffs, but a movie about a Viking Thunder God could use some more action scenes. And better choreographed if possible. The movie drags in the middle. Nothing much happens, besides the crew just driving back and forth between the town and the desert and the constant traveling via the rainbow-bridge. And the war that they keep talking about doesn't feel all that threatening. Conclusion: If you like the genre of comic book movies, but are also able to spot the turds (Ghost Rider, Iron Man 2, Wolverine etc.), you will like this movie. It's a solid and fun movie, but it won't redefine the genre or anything. 7/10