Recent Movie Review Thread

Evil Dead (2013)

Finally, a remake that just gets it right. I had a blast with this, might be a little biased because I've always been a fan of the original Evil Dead films, but I think they nailed it. It didn't hold back at all, especially with the kills/gore. Their's really not much in the way of story, but this type of movie doesn't need much. It gets going right away with a pretty intense opening scene, then into the main portion of the film. Pacing was good, direction, cinematography...all pretty much on point. This remake doesn't try to replicate the original, it does it's own thing with the original material and goes for the throat. I didn't know that Sam Raimi or Bruce Campbell had anything to do with production on the film until I caught the final credits. I think fans of the original will enjoy it.

9/10

 

Trying this again

Evil Dead

A hell of a good horror flick if thats what you go into the film wanting. Nobody is winning acting awards here but that is besides the point.

Buckets of blood and a few good callbacks to the original, its doing well in theaters so I can only hope Bruce and his boomstick can get another film going.

Worth seeing, 7/10

 

Oblivion.

I walked into this hoping for something better than GI Joe 2. This movie surprised me because I had low expectations, but it was genuinely enjoyable. Strong story, score and cast. The sci-fi in this world was generally believable, no gaping plot holes that I cared about, and I think good sci-fi turns it into something more than "look at our cool toys and critters." The bad parts of this movie were the twists that served no real purpose, but the ending was pretty damned heart-warming, and spectacular.

 

42

Much better than I expected. The movie didn't really delve too much into his personal life and basically only covered 1947 focusing on the how and why he came to be part of the Dodger's organization. Very eye opening and entertaining. There is a scene where he's playing against the Phillies and is being relentlessly, shamelessly heckled by the manager that really brings into focus what a struggle it must have been. Chadwick Boseman did a fantastic job as Jackie and did great justice portraying his speed and talent on the field. For me the best part of this movie was Harrison Ford's endearing performance as Branch Rickey. I would love to see him do more of this type of acting. All in all 7.5/10.

 

Iron Man 3.

This is not your typical comic book movie. The trailers did not blow the biggest twists (surprisingly), and there are some immense plot holes. However, it's just fun as hell watching RDJ be Tony Stark. Paltrow looks good, Guy Peace and Ben Kingsley are stellar, and the CGI was great. Overall, it's a fun film and unlike the other comic book movies, it does not take itself too seriously:

WARNING: NERDY SPOILERS AHEAD.

Spoiler

Ben Kingsley is actually fucking hysterically funny, as a wrinkled old Russell Brand wannabe. I know what he sounds like in the trailers, but one of the main twists is he's an actor, and he hams up the ridiculous difference. Also, nerd rant: the 40+ suits at the end should have decimated the bad guys without a scratch, but in the interest of drama, it was drawn out. I expected them to highlight some of the cool aspects of some of the suits, but they didn't spend the time.

All in all, the final action scene could have been better and I would not have complained about better action, but the whole point of this movie was to dissect him outside of the suit and demonstrate the separation between man/machine as the cause of his neurosis. I say it's atypical, because the movie only deals with him in the suit rarely, and a significant portion of the action deals with him outside of the suit. The movie deals with his personality as a high-strung, anxiety-ridden genius, which is something that the other films glossed over. You can see hints of the alcoholism sub-plot, but nothing overtly mentioned it.

 

I almost didn't see "Pain & Gain" due to my hatred of Michael Bay but..... It was good. Strangely good. Should be right up anyone's alley with a dark sense of humor (everyone around here?). The Rock was hilarious and the whole movie was over the top. Crazy that it's a true story.

 

To create a long-lasting market for it. Get the Pres out, replace him with a more compliant VP (that had a granddaughter who needed the serum), and keep up the theater with the Mandarin- you've got enough people working with you to start a few more brush wars and have thousands and thousands of soldiers need limb replacements from IED attacks. You can also sell the serum to whatever government is now in place of the one you just toppled so as to ameliorate some of the civilian damage/ wounds, making them look great in the eyes of their people and ensuring their longevity and your fat exclusive contract. Billions and billions and billions of dollars with the power and influence to match. A supervilan's wet dream. Bonus points for doing it all without anyone knowing. You'll be Time's Man of the Year for your philanthropical work in the Third World or your biotech advances back home.

 

I found it disappointing.

 

What Seeker said, and I may be mistaken, but I got the feeling they started out as accidents, at least the first one. He then keeps them going/letting them happen, finding justifications for the Mandarin's videos afterwards, because the general public fear is all that's required.

Fuck it, spoilers...

Spoiler

I doubt if any of it stands up to scrutiny. Not really the point I'd say, it kind of played like a pop Dark Knight Rises, more effective in some ways -like the lead character being more emotionally engaging- but ultimately a bit more hollow. I personally feel that plot-holes (loosely defined) only matter if they get in the way as you're watching, as opposed to afterwards. Me and the missus were on board with Stark to a decent enough degree for it to be ok.
I agree with the 'better than the second, not as a good as the first' consensus, and I like that the structure feels a bit more organic than usual, even if it sags a bit compared to either IM1, or even Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, which was also convoluted plot-wise but a lot tighter. It's not just "Shane Black goes to Hollywood," (where else has he been?), there's a lack of cohesion that I suppose is to aid a frictionless journey, which is at least better than the lack of cohesion in number 2 because Favreau was all like "sure, everyone just improvise" that meant all the interesting story threads just got tied off without going leading to anything. It also delves deeper emotionally than the first films which I thought was neat; I mean it's hardly Douglas Sirk, but I thought it managed to keep a good balance of talking and feelings with all the goofy goings on.

Everyone seems to hate Gwyneth Paltrow for some reason (probably a stuck up bitch IRL I guess, I don't pay attention), but I think the decision to cast her as Pepper Potts really pays off here. She's not the greatest actress in the world, but it did seem like odd stunt casting back on 2008 when any dull-eyed pretty face would have done for such a throwaway part. Here the character she plays is as much an adult woman as the handbag role in a juvenile male power fantasy will allow, and while it's not a hugely demanding role -and again there are better actresses out there- it could easily have been flubbed by one of the usual girlish suspects.
The other woman, Rebecca Hall, didn't end up amounting to too much aside from a twist or two so at least the pretty face is distracting, same goes for Guy Pearce (incl. the pretty face remark): ultimately, his Killian remain a cypher. Aside from being a long haired crippled gimp who's ignored by everyone until he handsomes up, what do we know about him?
And the extremis-powered bodies were the probably the hardest pill to swallow, "hacking the brain's operating system" must be the new "if we harness the unused %90 of our brains we could have magic powers!" I'm interested to hear what Warren Ellis's comic included, but even before they start breathing fire, I had recalibrated my suspension of disbelief to 'really silly.'

All that stuff aside it was entertaining overall, I loved that he had anxiety attacks, the Spielberg-ian stuff with the kid, and even in-jokes like the War Machine/Iron Patriot name change amused me, even though afterwards I realised I didn't actually know the comic book context. Black's run-on dialogue can get a little laboured at times and isn't quite as snappy as Whedon's, but it beats the hell out of Zak Penn's.

7/10 is right.

 

I liked Iron Man 3. It was entertaining. Give that horse one more kick better than the 2nd, not the 1st. I have no comic book comparison, but its just one of those movies I enjoy hanging out with the guys. Also, apparently Gweneth Paltrow is hated by the world, but I'd still let her have it.

Based off what I expected the movie to be, I'd give it 8/10. Christian Nolan's name wasn't attached.

 

Iron Man 3

After watching an amusing off-ramp of random full grown adults (see: only men) shimmy into the theatre wearing Iron Man masks (it was a 19 and over theatre) and being forced to watch this film front row in a lay-down recliner, it wasn't bad. Darker than the other two films but a huge improvement over the bum's rush sequel, Downey is in fine form and the film has more action scenes than usual, however it fails to spark because of the leviathan shadow The Avengers casts over it from last year.

Instead we get a humourous and fun but nearly plotless film, with villains that lack any real directive except terrorism itself and the middle twist is a dizzying HUH? of a jerk, both in good and bad ways (It audibly upset some of the Fan Boys in the theatre behind me). Guy Pierce has the acting chops to rise above playing a rubber stamped-villain with some fantastic lines and delivery and Jon Favreau is droll again as Happy.

Decent, loud, with a fairly ludicrous and overblown finale similar to watching Donkey Kong. Final credits joke is a real knee-slapper, though. And why change the fantastic music score from the first two films?

6.5/10

 

Co-signed. I knew there was something nagging me about it.

 

Iron Man 3:

I agree with a lot of the sentiment here, better than the 2nd, not as good as the first. That isn't a knock, though. I honestly think the first Iron Man might be the perfect Super hero origin movie.

Yes, there were plot holes you could drive a truck through, but this is a universe where aliens just invaded and a guy from another universe has a magic hammer than only he can wield, while a third guy can turn into a giant, indestructible monster, so I can deal with pretty much any pseudo-sci-fi bullshit they throw at me.

That said, I really enjoyed the overall arc of the movie. One of the biggest issues with Superhero movies is that, by the third movie, they start to run out of stories and ways to keep the hero interesting. This movie wasn't about Iron Man. Tony's crisis was about him feeling vulnerable without the armor, so this movie was about Tony proving to himself that Iron Man is more than just a suit of armor. That is the only reason I could handle a 2 hour Iron Man movie that has about 15 minutes of actual Iron Man in it.

I also like that they used this film to scale the universe back a bit. You didn't see anyone else from the Avengers Universe or SHIELD, this was all Tony. I don't know if Thor will include a bunch of Avengers or other characters, but I'm damn sure you'll see a lot of SHIELD characters in Captain America. Captain America will likely be "Avengers 1 1/2." I'm glad they DIDN'T do that to this movie, because that was what was wrong with Iron Man 2. Too much Avengers buildup.

Spoiler

The stuff with the Mandarin, being a "symbol" for a guy hiding in the shadows? I, personally, loved it, and I was so fucking happy that wasn't spoiled for me going into it. I knew Guy Pierce was going to be the bad guy (they said it from the outset) but they hit the swerve pretty well.

Overall, 8/10. Entertaining flick.

Star Trek Into Darkness

We went on a movie binge this weekend, saw this one Thursday.

Overall, I thought it was as good as Abram's first Star Trek run, although my biggest qualm was:

Spoiler

They kind of re-hashed the whole 'dead father' thing by killing off Pike and making that Kirk's motivation. The whole first movie, Kirk's motivation was "my father is dead, I need to prove myself" kind of a deal.

That said, Cumberbatch knocked it out of the fucking park. Probably the best part of the movie. Just the perfect mix of menacing and slightly sympathetic, which made the character really work. It really seemed like Kirk and his crew were completely up shit creek the entire film, stuck between two sides that wanted to utterly destroy each other and wanted to use the Enterprise crew to do it, so the twists were fairly well done. They weren't break-neck "I never saw that coming" kind of twists, but it was enough to keep you interested.

Spoiler

I did think the whole part with Kirk dying in this one how Spock died in Wrath of Kahn was kind of a cheesy nod to the original films, complete with the "Kahn" scream, but it ultimately served the story very well, but the next twist everyone saw coming a mile away, and took away some of the impact of the moment.

It was a very good action/space movie, and a good Star Trek film. I feel like if Abrams is as good with Star Wars as he is with Star Trek, then the SW series is in good hands. He was very loyal to the originals and the fans of the originals, while still making a movie that today's mass audiences can really enjoy. That is one hell of a tight rope to walk, but Abrams pulled it off again.

And thank god he toned down the fucking lens flares.

9/10. If given a choice of Iron Man 3 and Star Trek, I think I'd rather go see Star Trek again.

 

The Hangover Part III

With the exception of a few fucks and 60 seconds of scattered nudity (40 of those seconds being at the end of the movie), this movie could have been PG-13. There were some good character moments with the three guys, but it really never kicked it up into gear. They didn't run into a bunch of crazy characters like the last two movies. It relied heavy on Alan and Chow which wasn't as entertaining, too much of a good thing in both regards. It was more of a very third long act than a stand alone movie that was a conclusion to the series.

I'd have to give it a 5/10 as it just wasn't the blowout it was supposed to be. Should have gone out in a blaze of glory.

 

Did anyone spend the time to watch Cloud Atlas? I've been wanting to watch it for awhile now and finally got to it the other night. I thought it was a great movie. It was kind of sporadic in the sense that sometimes the storyline was rather difficult to follow. It jumps between six different lifetimes of the same characters (Past lives kinda thing), which is different then the book which follows them all in order so I read. Some of the characters are hard to understand due to their speech, but you can get a pretty good gist of it.

It was a three hour movie, but for the first time in a while I felt that a movie had actual substance to it and kind of ventured into all different types of genres. I was kind of disappointed to see the reviews as it mostly racked up 6 and 7s from critics whereas Django got 9's and tens. Don't get me wrong, I thought Django was a great movie, but sometimes the rational of movie critics baffle me. If anyone else saw Cloud Atlas I would love to hear your opinion about it.

I also concur with the above poster about the Hangover. Not a bad flick, but the first two definitely trump it. There was more of a plot, but it drifted away from what the movie is. A bunch of dudes getting drunk and trying to figure out what happened the night before.

 

Wait... Part two is BETTER than the new one? In that case, is rather watch babies get thrown into lava. Hangover 2 was lame, lame, LAME.

 

I read a bunch of different reviews on the third one because I couldn't get my mind around it. One of them had a couple friends that never say either movie. So he had them watch them watch Hangover II first, and then Hangover I. Before the second one, he gave them the bare minimum of how all the guys knew each other, but that's it. They liked the Hangover II more, because the first one was more of the same. He just had a theory that the second one wasn't as bad as everyone says it is, its just its another helping of what you just ate, so therefore its not good. I think there is something here, but its hard to hindsight and go back.

A theme across reviewers is that the third one forgets it is a comedy at times. It took a step to being more grown-up, then took a step towards having a plot, then took a step to actually having substance, then got lost spinning around doing the hokey pokey. One guy got all psychological, saying it was depressing to actually look at Allen as someone with real psychological issues to get treated and how that fucked up the movie for him. Opposed to him just being a crazy character.

 

Fast and Furious 6.

This was a righteous orgy of testosterone. Over-the-top at every level, but still remarkably fun. Not much comic relief, wooden acting, unbelievable stunts, yadda yadda yadda. This is a gleeful idiot's movie, and it's a blast to watch. I watched the last one in the gym, and it actually holds the last few movies together well. A thinking man's movie this is not, it's essentially a two and a half hour music video by gearheads and Die Hard fans. You already know whether or not you want to watch it, I can just tell you to not watch the trailer again because it spoils the action scenes and that it's not disappointing.

Spoiler:

Spoiler

The villain, Shaw keeps mentioning the shit his brother tells him and then we see after about 30 seconds of credits, the Tokyo Drift scene where Han dies, none other than Jason Statham in full-hitman mode setting up the next sequel.

After Earth.

This was surprisingly enjoyable sci-fi. I didn't know it was an M. Night Shamalan film until the end. The action was great (and somewhat believable), it didn't try to beat you over the head with anything and it was a well-constructed story. Will Smith & son did a pretty excellent job, it didn't run on too long, and the score was fantastic. It might not get good reviews, but this WAS a thinking man's movie, with parallels to Moby Dick, 300 and others.