With socks.

World War Z serves as unabashed comfort to the filmgoer. In every instance when The Walking Dead chose to examine the group dynamic and psychological toll of the struggle instead of some grade-A zombie-killing action, World War Z opts for the action, leaving such existential hand-wringing to works that have more than 110 minutes to state their case.

In fact, the action doesn’t stop long enough for the audience to develop many feelings about anything in the film. Backstories are meted out as convenient plot devices – it’s never really clear why Brad Pitt is so important, or why a journalist would be so high on the UN’s hit list of people to save during the zombie-ocalypse. He loves his wife and kids, because that’s what movie heroes do, and he’s brave, but not so brave that he’s not a reluctant hero.

But when stripped of those pretexts for having Brad Pitt do the things he does, World War Z plays out like a video game that consists of about six levels, and it proves borderline impossible not to draw a connection to Nintendo 64′s Goldeneye when Pitt and Co. are tooling around a laboratory, with a clear assignment and strolling villains abound. These levels have distinct goals, and when those goals are completed, the team hops on a plane to the next global locale to solve the mystery of “how do we stop all these fucking zombies?”

The approach is surprisingly effective, shunning all that end of days fatalism for zombies that can run really fast and climb up on each other to scale walls. The tremendous design and thought put into the five or six “levels” throughout the film seems to be the only touchpoint that the film maintains from the book. The settings are scary, well-designed, and exist on an impressive scale.

However, where this approach causes the film to regress is in its PG-13 rating, which relegates us to a zombie-geddon environment in which there is virtually no blood or gore, which lowers the stakes of the film and has the ultimate effect of making the film even seem more like a video game, albeit one from 1993 where the backstory is thin, and zombies have to die because zombies have to die, dig? 

After reading Max Brooks’ masterful novel that manages to paint a globe in crisis using an efficiency and narrative, it’s hard to not want to put training wheels on this film, telling it should just go out there and do its best. So the problem faced with reviewing this film is not being TOO forgiving when the film sprints away from anything resembling gravity to offer up more PG-13 monster violence.

Nothing much in World War Z matters except for the successive tasks at hand, and while they’re watered-down trials of what we’ve seen in more sweeping serial works, they remain compelling and different enough from the well-worn genre to keep us engaged, if not caring.

Man of Steel begins on the last day of Krypton’s existence. Rendered with art design straight out of a forties comic book, the purple-and-gray planet is on the verge of literal implosion. Its residents are strangely nonplussed, save for Jor-El (a Xanaxed Russell Crowe), Krypton’s top scientist, and his wife Lara (Ayelet Zurer), who send their infant son to a distant planet – can you guess which? – so the latter can avoid being snuffed out by Jor-El’s foe, General Zod (Michael Shannon). The rest of the film is a portrait of the superhero as a young man – learning of his alien ancestry, dealing with it in fits and starts, and finally getting over it because he has better things to do, like preventing genocide.

It’s nearly impossible to avoid comparing Man of Steel to the last solemn superhero franchise, Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy. Nolan served as a co-producer here, and like his pointy-eared movies, this update of the Metropolis Marvel is overlong, plays annoyingly coy with the protagonist’s hero-name, and throws out a lot of random ideas instead of asserting a coherent vision. But this Clark Kent also shares with Nolan’s Bruce Wayne a great origin story full of lovely moments and, at least with Batman Begins, a captivating love object who’s not an insult to women. It also departs from The Dark Knight in the best way by not being the least bit pretentious. Superman has always been the jock at The Breakfast Club of superheroes, and director Zack Snyder made the right choice not to burden his film with Bat-like brooding.

Man of Steel’s soul resides in its tender origin story, told in flashbacks. Clark’s powers make him more of a freak than a hero in his small town (shades of X-Men here), and his constant struggles to rein in his powers, which are a liability in the classroom and a barely restrained A-bomb among bullies – are touching, if familiar. There’s an intriguing suggestion of Midwestern conformity that makes Smallville less of a Mayberry and more like a real place. The flashbacks hit just the right note of earnestness without sentimentality and are edited so that you want more, even if another half-minute would be too much. Diane Lane and Kevin Costner look more like lifelong Californians with picture-perfect tans than Bible-belt farmers, but they bring a grounded sweetness to Ma and Pa Kent, as do the child actors who play Little Clarklet (Dylan Sprayberry and Cooper Timberline – such child-actor names!).

Unfortunately, grown-up Clark Kent is a lot less interesting. Star Henry Cavill plays Superman as an icon, not as the human being his character (sort of) tries to be. Snyder gets a lot out of trading card-worthy images of Cavill’s determined blue eyes and Schwarzeneggerian muscles, but the hero himself is as blandly all-American as product placement in summer blockbusters. (Rest assured, Sears, IHOP, and 7-11 all get the beauty shots they paid for.) In a different movie, maybe on Lifetime, the pre-superhero Clark, a suspiciously pretty rambler, might be an obvious serial killer. But in Man of Steel, he’s just an extraterrestrial variation of Your LL Bean Boyfriend – just as pretty, but glossy and two-dimensional.

Likewise, Shannon’s Zod is a disappointingly ordinary villain. He’s a thematically muddled character, cobbled together from a grab bag of super-villain motivations: Look, up there in the sky! It’s family rivalry! It’s eugenics! No, it’s nihilism! Snyder makes a point of the super-ness of Kal-El and Zod in the initially fun, then seemingly interminable fight scenes. Hurtling through skycrapers and toward helicopters, their battles are superhuman-scaled, making the fight scenes simultaneously more interesting – what else in downtown Metropolis will they collaterally obliterate while pummeling each other in the face? – and more tedious, since they’re both possess such invincible physiology it’s hard to get a sense of narrative momentum. As the action drags on, it becomes difficult not to feel numbed by all the violence for the sake of violence.

Bereft of a compelling hero or villain, the film at least offers a deliciously sensible Lois Lane (Amy Adams) as a consolation prize. Dressed in business-casual clothes for most of the film, Adams’ Lois possesses a keen sense of compassion and journalistic daring, and is as put-together as Clark is initially confused. Cavill and Adams have a warm chemistry, but it feels so much closer to that of platonic friends, or even a big sister/little brother relationship, that their inevitable lip-lock feels not just forced but kinda gross. Lois can do better than the Man of Steel, and so can audiences.

Like Tim Burton and Wes Anderson, Baz Luhrmann is one of a handful of directors whose name evokes an instantly recognizable visual style. There’s something admirably self-assured about the Australian filmmaker’s ability to insert anything – dance competitions in Strict Ballroom, Shakespeare in Romeo + Juliet, ultra-generic opera plots in Moulin Rouge – in the Luhrmannizer, extruding a homogeneous, garish but fun product that exhausts as much as it exhilarates.

As you’ve probably already seen in the film’s trailer, The Great Gatsby brims full with the kind of optical overdose that Luhrmann has made his signature. The party scenes, which rival the ruffles-and-lace circus madness of Moulin Rouge, have glittery confetti and Disneyland fireworks sparkling above Jazz Age twerkers, swarms of women dressed like sea creatures, and a Williamsburg version of that creepy dancing man from the Six Flags commercials.

The construction and choreography of these set pieces are as sleek as ever, but the rest of the film is astonishingly visually inept. Much too often, Tobey Maguire’s voiceover tells us how the characters feel and how they develop instead of allowing us to see for ourselves. The resulting effect is to make the movie feel less like an adaptation than the next generation of books-on-tape, where we absorb the story aurally. But hey, it comes with some pretty if utterly redundant illustrations if you want to something to look at.

To be fair, Luhrmann is also faithful to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel in a good way – in that the plot is lifted pretty much straight from the book. It’s the Roaring Twenties, and Nick Carraway (Maguire), a wide-eyed Midwesterner, moves to the Big Apple to become a bankster like all the other cool kids. His next-door neighbor, Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio), is a reclusive young millionaire who ropes him into arranging an accidentally-on-purpose reunion with Gatsby’s first love, Daisy (Carey Mulligan), who happens to be Nick’s cousin. Nick agrees, despite the fact that Daisy is already married to – and has a daughter with – patrician douchebag Tom (Joel Edgerton, Australia’s answer to Benedict Cumberbatch). The small cast of pretty young things also includes Tom’s working-class mistress (Isla Fisher) and girl-golfer Jordan (Elizabeth Debicki), the only character that resembles an actual person, despite existing only to introduce Nick to How Things Are Done in rich-person circles.

As intended by Fitzgerald, Gatsby is a stern fable about the moral hazards of wealth. But a studio film made by a bunch of millionaires and financed by a bunch of billionaires has pretty much no chance at remaining Occupy agitprop. So Luhrmann remade Gatsby for the multiplex as a saga of romantic martyrdom, rendered all the more glamorous and tragic by the opulence the source material condemned. DiCaprio is the perfect actor for this Gatsby, despite speaking in a bizarre accent somewhere between Katharine Hepburn and a fancy horse that’s so wispy it tends disappears by the end of a sentence. He has only a single substantial scene here, but his Gatsby has so many echoes from the Leomania days – his roles from Romeo + Juliet, Titanic, and Catch Me If You Can – that all DiCaprio has to do to summon estrogen devotion is to stand around in spiffy linen suits looking dapper. For her part, Mulligan adds her natural sweetness and kitten eyes to their thoroughly adequate pantomime of mutual adoration.

Unfortunately, the camera returns again and again to Maguire’s Nick, a garrulous nonentity. When the character’s narration doesn’t fast-forward through all the interesting action for you, Maguire’s proximity to DiCaprio distracts from the film’s fiction by reminding you of the BFF stars’ real-life adventures in poonhoundery as the senior partners of the Pussy Posse. Their sexploits would probably embarrass the novel’s Gatsby, but their Hollywood excess would make a great Baz Luhrmann movie.

See it now, See it later, or Run in the other direction? Run in the other direction, unless you need another fix of Jack and Rose.

Now I don’t mean to say that Marvel has not had adult elements in all of its recent movies. But never before has a Marvel movie seemed so tailor-made for adults. What Shane Black has done with the character of Tony Stark is to not only make him more human but to also make him somehow more Tony Stark-esque, giving fans the Iron Man they deserve.

Iron Man 3 is loaded with everything that makes a summer movie great. Excellent action sequences you wish wouldn’t end. Genuinely funny moments. And a story that builds upon everything that Marvel has set in motion thus far. But most importantly, this movie sets a new tone for how adult a superhero movie can be without taking the Nolan route, something no one has achieved until now. If Iron Man 3 is any indication of what Marvel has in store for us post Avengers, then their movies can’t get here soon enough.

It’s hard to blame Tom Cruise, now aged 50, for clinging to the kind of high-concept, spectacle-heavy, sci-fi action films he’s made his career on. Between his limited thesping skills, increasingly unhinged private life, and refusal to hang up his leading-man aviators, the middle-aged star is facing fewer and fewer ways to stay on the A-list. After three decades in the biz, though, you’d think that Cruise, who stars in and produced Oblivion, would know how to spot an obvious turkey by now.

Oblivion takes place on a whitish-gray, post-apocalyptic Earth with two inhabitants, pilot/drone repairman Jack (Cruise) and his ground controller/wife Victoria (Andrea Riseborough, W.E). Decades ago, Earth was destroyed during a war against extraterrestrial invaders called Scavengers, a catastrophic event that left the planet under human control but inhospitable to life. The human survivors settled on a moon off Saturn and have been converting the remaining water left on Earth into energy.

Jack and Victoria’s mission is to oversee the drones that perform energy extraction. They know their memories have been wiped to make them an effective team, but they seem surprisingly fine with that. They live in a glass house in the sky (because hey, it’s the future), but Jack keeps a secret lake-side cottage where he goes to try on baseball caps, read old books, and talk to his belongings – traits that are supposed to prove his likability, but just remind you of your not-totally-there grampa.

Two weeks before the end of the mission, a space capsule crashes near Jack during patrol, and its lone survivor turns out to be the beautiful, not-at-all age-appropriate woman Jack always sees in his dreams. Her name is Julia (Olga Kurylenko, Skyfall) and she claims she’s his wife, leading to an awkward Three’s Company scenario with Victoria.

The rest of the film is structured as a series of reveals: who Jack and Julia used to be, how Julia ended up on Earth, where the Scavengers come from, and what’s really on the Saturnine moon. Two, maybe three, of the reveals are genuinely surprising and presented in visually imaginative ways. One even complicates the romance between Jack and Julia in a way that seriously threatens their relationship.

But audiences can only be expected to care about character- and universe-subverting twists when we have a firm grasp of their specificities and an emotional investment in them. Sadly, neither the script nor the stars – all of whom act as if they were in completely different movies – provide any reason to care about any of the characters. And it doesn’t help that the film’s mysteries unravel so slowly that the film is three-fourths over by the time Act One breaks, nor that the plot developments are, on the whole, so by-the-numbers it’s impossible not to dwell on the crater-sized plot holes and the countless cribbings from much better movies like Total Recall, Planet of the Apes, and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Ultimately, Oblivion is aptly named – no other movie so far this year has been so instantly forgettable. For those who need their fix of movies about ravaged dystopias, they should wait a few months for the can’t-be-any-worse-but-could-definitely-be-better Elysium, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, After Earth, or World War Z. (It’s nice to see Hollywood’s so hopeful about the future.)

See it now, see it later, or run in the other direction? See it later, ideally when you’re bedridden with the flu and the syrupy slowness of the plot will lull you into sweet dreams of Olga Kurylenko.

Andy Samberg

Andy Samberg is a funny guy, but most importantly, HE’S NOT ADAM SANDLER, which should allow him to win any Reel Rumble against Adam Sandler. His best years lay ahead of him, which is more than can be said for Sandler, and his scant past work wins by default when compared to Sandler’s later years.

It remains to be seen if Andy Samberg will become a bona fide star, but I’ll take his future promise over Adam Sandler’s current slate of films, which includes Grown Ups 2 and a comedy called Valet Guys with Kevin James. Included in Andy Samberg’s upcoming filmography are two films co-starring Sandler (the aforementioned Grown Ups 2 as well as the animated film Hotel Transylvania, as well as The To Do List (formerly The Hand Job). It’s close, but I’ll take Samberg, thankyouverymuch.

The next comparative category, mouth size, isn’t very close. It’s Samberg in a walk.

Both actors also have more than a passing interest in comedic music, with Sandler having charmed audiences in his SNL days with ditties like “Red Hooded Sweatshirt,” “Lunchlady Land,” and the entire catalog of Opera Man.

Meanwhile, Samberg is 1/3 of the hilarious and talented Lonely Island and responsible for the SNL Digital Shorts “Dick in a Box” and “I’m on a Boat.” Not even close there, Sandler.

Adam Sandler

Who was funnier on SNL, Adam Sandler or Andy Samberg? Sandler, hands down.

To insinuate that Andy Samberg’s time on Saturday Night Live was funnier or better spent than Adam Sandler’s is laughable in its own right. Samberg wouldn’t have his brand of comedy if not for Sandler. He’s in the house of manboy that Sandler built. Though many comedy greats worked under the lights of Studio 8H before Adam Sandler joined the cast in 1991, Sandler was the first to introduce the buffoon vibe to the show, and thus reinvent the institution. By simply doing the silliest thing possible, he was able to shine amongst a sea of future superstars. Sandler shared his time with Dana Carvey, Phil Hartman, Mike Myers, Chris Farley, Chris Rock, Rob Schneider, and David Spade and still stood out. Samberg rose to prominence amongst a much weaker cast and writing staff. You can’t give a culinary trophy to a chef who cooks for the starved.

I will also mention that Andy Samberg had every opportunity to win this superlative but squandered them. This is done by virtue of the Digital Shorts format itself. Designed for Internet praise, these pre-taped and production-heavy videos strayed from the “live” confines SNL had worked within for thirty years. Of course, the standouts like “Dick In A Box,” “I’m On A Boat,” and “Jack Sparrow” were well-received. They grabbed headlines by making use of cheap celebrity stunt-casting and sly winks to the camera. Regardless of Samberg’s weak lyrics and lame rap skills, the Internet ate his awkward performances up. Whereas Sandler made his way before a live audience in a time before the “Like” button existed without smug grins to convey a punchline just hit.

Though this is not a defense of all his films, it is unfair to judge the man’s entire career based on however Drew Barrymore ruined him. That would be like refusing to rock out to “Say It Ain’t So” just because Weezer has finally slipped off the cliff of Sucking Really Bad. Also, by that precedent, a fair amount of blame can be cast in Samberg’s direction because when his work is bad, it’s really bad. Like abysmal bad. “Throw It On the Ground” and that Gotye short this past season owe me minutes of my life back. Minutes that I will redeem by not watching Jesse and Celeste Forever.

In summation, Adam Sandler: hard-working, unique, a star for the ages. Andy Samberg: similar to every Internet comedy group, coasted on the work of his not-so-camera-ready partners, wack rap skills, and need of a haircut.

Wanderlust tells the story of a couple in New York, George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennfer Aniston), who flee the city and their mortgage to start over in Atlanta. While en route to George’s brother’s home, the two become lost, and their car overturns while attempting to escape from a naked psychopath. As it turns out, the psychopath isn’t so psycho after all. He’s just a friendly nudist (Joe Lo Truglio) welcoming them to the Elysium Bed & Breakfast, which is part of a larger hippie commune (a.k.a. intentional community). After some initial awkwardness is wiped away with the help of pot, the couple falls in love with the commune as well as its quirky residents. And upon realizing that living with George’s asshole bother (Ken Marino) isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, they return to the commune to become permanent residents.

As you probably guessed, this is where the trouble begins. Who knew that living with a bunch of hippie stereotypes would be problematic? Not George and Linda. Predictable gags abound as the couple is forced to deal with communal toilets, disgusting food, and the judgmental ire of a group of left-wing nut jobs. Not to mention the trouble that comes from the commune’s “free love” policy. Turns out open relationships are complicated.

But even when you see the jokes coming, it’s hard not to laugh. A man having a conversation with two people while trying to defecate might not be the most inventive scene in the world, but damn if it wasn’t funny. And I know the scene where Rudd is psyching himself up in the mirror before sex went on way too long, but for some reason it worked. And there were a few pleasant surprises I didn’t see coming: specifically, one involving Joe Lo Truglio’s nudist/would be novelist.

Yes, at times the film is sappy, repetitive, and even predictable. Yes, the story has been told a thousand times. And yes, the characters are about as believable as an episode of Cake Boss. But with names like Paul Rudd, Ken Marino, and David Wain attached to the film, even the predictable, one dimensional characters manage to churn out the laughs.

I’ll sum up the movie in one sentence, using my best “trailer” voice tone (imagine it).

She was their best Agent…
CUT TO: Carano kicking ass…
…but then they betrayed her!”
CUT TO: Carano kicking more ass.

If that didn’t make enough sense — Gina Carano gets betrayed by her employer (Ewan McGregor), and she gets revenge by showing off her awesome MMA skills. The action may not be Bourne level hollywood insanity, but it’s cool to know it’s from a real life ass kicker (who’s also painfully attractive).

Obi-Wan Getting His Ass Kicked.

Like most Soderbergh movies, Haywire is much more style over substance. Instead of trying to do a new take on an old story, he does a throwback that makes you feel like you’re watching an action movie from the 60s…in 2012. I always like giving props to Soderbergh for trying new things, but I will say tone felt…well…like those Xtranormal Conversations you can create online for free. Don’t know what I’m talking about? See Below:

This video pretty much sums up the style of the movie. There’s lots of weird pauses and odd blocking that make for a very robotic viewing experience. That being said, it’s not necessarily a bad thing. It’s definitely a nice return to some of his earlier movies like The Limey (also written by Lem Dobbs) and is thoroughly entertaining. Carano does a great job in her acting debut, and is well complimented by her co-stars…Ewan McGregor, Michael Douglas, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas, Bill Paxton, and C Tates (C TATES!).

All in all, Haywire is worth the watch if you’re in to Soderbergh’s “hey guys…let’s make another movie” movies that he seems to churn out every month. It may not be as fun as his Oceans films, but it certainly won’t disappoint.

Beauty and the Beast 3D looked like a new movie. The use of 3D was able to breathe new life into the film. So even if you’re a big fan who has seen it before, it’s worth experiencing again. Besides, what else are you going to go and see this weekend? Joyful Noise?

So what’s my beef, then? A little thing called continuity.

(Spoiler Alert)

Before my screening at the El Capitan Theater, the audience was treated to a song and dance routine performed by the stars of the film, Belle and the Beast. No complaints there. Belle is even hotter in person than she is in the movie, and the Beast looked pretty bad ass himself, except for that stupid blue suit they had him wearing. All in all, it was an enjoyable experience… or so I thought.

At the end of the film, I watched the Beast transform back into a handsome prince. This raises an important question; If the Beast is no longer a monster, then who in the hell was that dancing on stage before the screening? Sure, it looked a lot like the Beast, but logically, that’s impossible, because the curse was broken, and the Beast as we knew him no longer exists! Does Disney think that just because the crowd was made up of children and movie bloggers that we wouldn’t be able to figure it out? I might be stupid, but I’m not blind! While I’m not blind, I am insulted. For all I know, that was some hairy drunken hobo prancing around on stage with Belle, ’cause it sure as hell wasn’t the Beast! For shame, Disney.

Like its predecessor, Fright Night tells the story of a high school student who is absolutely convinced his creepy new neighbor is a blood thirsty vampire. Deciding to protect his single mom and girlfriend, he teams up with a sleazy Vegas performer (David Tennant) and preps to battle a small army of the undead.

The visuals are slick, and the gore is plentiful, although the high definition tends to let some of the CGI work stand out more than it should. The audio is solid, and pops as you’d expect it to during the action scenes. The two disc combo pack also features a DVD edition of the film. And you can shell out a few more bucks for a 3D edition if that sort of thing floats your boat.

The extras on the disc are varied. You get five deleted scenes, a couple featurettes, bloopers and a music video. The disc also features one of the more unique extras I’ve encountered, in the form of an audio track for the visually impaired. Essentially, the track provides a reader who describes everything happening on screen while not interrupting dialogue. And when I say everything, I mean it. If you ever wanted wanted to hear a vivid description of the Touchstone Entertainment logo, now is your chance.

So is it worth it? Yes, if you enjoy horror with a good mix of comedy. The acting and action sequences are good throughout the film, even if the pace moves a bit quicker than necessary. Although I think Fright Night missed some opportunities to separate itself from the vampire pack, it’s still a step above most recent horror films, and certainly most recent horror remakes. It won’t make any die-hard fans forget the original, but the movie is by no means an embarrassment to the name.

Fright Night is now available in stores, with an SRP of $39.99 for the Blu ray/ DVD combo pack.

In this movie, average people are extremely concerned about the status of the ball in Times Square, low-level city employees are allowed to give impassioned speeches on national television, and men give up three-way sex romps to be with Sarah Jessica Parker. What planet is this supposed to be?

Granted, it’s a romantic comedy, so suspension of disbelief is a must. And to be fair, I’m not a fan of “rom-coms,” especially when they have huge ensemble casts. For example, I hate the movie Love Actually. Even so, at the end of the day, I can get past my own bias and admit that it’s well made, well acted, and succeeds at what it sets out to do (make stupid people gush). New Year’s Eve, on the other hand, has none of those redeeming qualities. It’s insulting on almost every level.

" Hey, Rob. Where do we pick up our checks?"

It’s one thing for a movie to have a boring plot. It’s quite another to have ten boring plots, each more cliche than the next. It wasn’t that hard to keep track of everything, but it was extremely difficult to care. That probably had something to do with the performances. I expect Zac Efron to act like a robot, but what’s Hillary Swank‘s excuse? Oh, right; the script. With dialog this bad, even the best actors wouldn’t stand a chance.

Speaking of which, who does Robert De Niro owe money to? The guy was in The Godfather Part II. He doesn’t have to do this. And then there’s poor Matthew Broderick. I’m assuming he did have to do this as a favor to his wife. His small role was painful to watch, mainly because he seemed to realize how pointless and unnecessary his presence was.

But I’ll give credit where credit is due. First of all, Katherine Heigl deserves an Oscar for her performance. Anyone who can convincingly pretend to be attracted to a 50-year-old botoxed Jon Bon Jovi has some real talent. And Ludacris was friggen outstanding as the random black cop who served no other purpose than explaining Hilary Swank‘s character to the audience. But other than than, it was pretty horrifying. At times, I actually had to look away from the screen. The worst offender might have been Sofia Vergara, who I normally like. Even a gratuitous cleavage shot could not redeem her character. We get it. You’re f*cking foreign and you have an accent. Who gives a shit?

At the end of the day, words really can’t describe how bad this film is, so I’ll sum it up with an animated gif.

Check out a Guy’s Guide to The Twilight Characters, Twilight, and The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Summary

The blond dude from the first movie (the one that Edward killed) has a vampire girlfriend who is still alive. She’s so pissed that she creates an army of vampires to kill Bella. We’re pretty much cheering for the vampire army throughout the movie, because we hate Bella and think that vampire armies are a pretty sweet idea. Apparently, though, vampire armies violate some unwritten vampire law, so the Italian goth family who rules over the vampire world has to step in. The film also focuses on Edward and Bella’s love, and how Jacob is too stupid to move on. Actually, he’s kind of stupid for being in love with Bella in the first place, because what kind of fool loves a girl who hates herself and everything else in the world except some 100-year-old dude who manipulates and abuses her?

Anyway, eventually the vampire army attacks, but because Jacob is kind of a bitch, he makes all the werewolves fight for stupid Bella. Some of the fight scenes on the mountain are admittedly pretty dope, and we like it when Jacob is all like “I gotta cuddle your girl to keep her warm, dawg.” Especially because cuddling is pretty much the equivalent of anal sex in the Twilightverse. At the end of the movie, the Italian goth dudes are all “For real, bro, you have to make your girl a vampire,” setting the stage for The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part I, the film with the worst title in the history of cinema.

Fart jokes? What is this, Phantom Menace?

But thankful, I was completely and unequivocally wrong. The Muppets was an enjoyable film on every level. Somehow, over 30 years after its premiere, Jason Segel and director James Bobin managed to capture the spirit of the original film and still appeal to a modern audience. It’s funny without being crude, earnest without being sappy, and self-referential without being smug. But most of all, unlike other attempts to recreate nostalgia, The Muppets is fun to watch because it feels like the old gang is really back together. I suppose the fact that Muppets don’t age probably helped, but it’s more than that. I could tell that the filmmakers were as excited to make this film as I was to watch it.

The movie begins in Small Town, U.S.A., where a very Muppet-esque character named Walter is living with his brother Gary (Segel). All his life, Walter has been obsessed with The Muppets, so he’s overjoyed to learn that Gary and his longtime-girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) have arranged for a trip to Los Angeles and a tour of The Muppet Studios. However, his joy is short-lived.

Upon reaching Los Angeles, the three quickly realize that The Muppets are no longer the draw they once were. The Muppet Theater is in complete disrepair, and The Muppet Studios are a shell of their former glory. The highlight of the tour is the door of Kermit’s old office, followed by a trip to the room where industrial cables are stored.

Bored with the official tour, Walter sneaks away from the group, and while hiding under Kermit’s old desk, he overhears the fiendish plot of Tex Richman (played perfectly by Chris Cooper), a billionaire who wants to tear down the studio and drill for more oil. But of course, there’s a catch. If the Muppets can raise $10 million, the studio will remain under their control.

And we’re off. Harry, Gary and Mary set out to warn Kermit of the impending danger, and from there Kermit must track down his old friends. It’s not a groundbreaking plot, but it works, and it gives us the perfect opportunity to see what’s become of our old friends. Fozzie is working a sad lounge act in Reno with a knock-off group known as “The Moopets,” Gonzo is running a pluming corporation, and Ms. Piggy is a designer in Paris. There is never any doubt that they’ll all agree to reunite, but the filmmakers manage to spin the predictability to their advantage, making light of the contrived plot twists rather than trying to mask them.

Despite the fact that I knew what was coming at every turn, I was still constantly surprised. Rather than simply rehashing what made the previous Muppet movies work, the film managed to tweak things just enough to keep it fresh without straying too far from what the audience expected. This includes the ending, which takes us exactly where we know we’re going, but by a slightly different route. Even the celebrity cameos set the right tone. The big names were there, but they weren’t the focus. Somehow, Jack Black managed to tone it down and let the Muppets be the center of attention. And the notable absence of Lady Gaga, who was previously rumored to be in the film, was a welcome treat.

Even the musical numbers, which usually lend themselves to cringe-worth moments, somehow kept me laughing. Yesterday, if you had told me the film included a rap number by Chris Cooper, it would have made me nauseous. But as much as I wanted to hate the scene, I just couldn’t. The movie was impervious to my cynicism. And considering I’m a cynical prick who works on the goddamn Internet, I think that says a lot. Hack writers like myself love to accuse movies of “raping” their childhood. Well, the only thing this movie raped was my bad attitude.

Go and see the Muppets, and if you don’t like it, go straight to hell.

Check out a Guy’s Guide to The Twilight Characters, Twilight, and The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Summary

After the events of Twilight, Edward decides that Bella is safer without him around. This is obviously stupid, because the vampire pack that looks like the Black Eyed Peas are probably pretty pissed that their blond friend got killed in the last movie. Whatever will Bells do without the superhuman strength of a sparkly vampire to protect her?

Even though Edward leaves, Bella keeps seeing him around in ghost form. But while she waits for him to return, she does all kinds of attention-seeking nonsense, including riding a motorcycle (SO EDGY). She also gets pretty close with Jacob the werewolf boy, and he helps her build a motorcycle. Of course, she’s just killing time with Jacob until her wonderful Edward comes back.

Because Edward has a sister who can see the future very poorly, he mistakenly thinks Bella will try to kill herself. As such, he decides to kill himself by heading off to Italy and pissing off vampire royalty known as the Volturi. At the end of the movie, Bella saves Edward and the Volturi tell Edward he has to make Bella into a vampire. They both pretend like this might not happen, even though everyone who has ever seen a movie knows that it will eventually. Also, Edward pressures Bella to marry, making him unlike any man who has ever lived.

(Check Out A Guy’s Guide To Twilight)

You’ve probably already decided that you aren’t going to see Breaking Dawn. Not only will you be missing out on one of the greatest unintentional comedies of all time, but you’ll also be depriving yourself of one of the most bat-shit-crazy 20-minute stretches of melodrama ever committed to film. Breaking Dawn’s first half is nigh unwatchable, taking a solid hour to limp through what seems to be about fifteen minutes’ worth of story. But its second half—particularly its final twenty minutes—is something you owe it to yourself to see.

It. Is. Glorious. But it’s not like that finale is the only reason you should see Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1 this weekend. Hell, I can think of at least half a dozen reasons you should go. Here they are, in no particular order. Spoilers ahead, obviously…

Shirts Are Irrelevant From Minute-One

Stephenie Meyer wants you to believe that she’s essayed a deep, thoughtful, compelling romance in the Twilight series, but the story’s so emotionally false, it’s simply impossible to take seriously. Kristen Stewart’s Bella consistently comes across as emotionally unstable, her moods swinging from one extreme to another seemingly without cause. And yet, the men in her world—be it Jacob The Werewolf-Boy or Edward The Sparkly Vampire-Lad—welcome each new swoop of the pendulum with endless patience and understanding. There’s something to be said for working through the issues you’re having with your partner, but let’s be realistic here: if any dude I know were dating Bella, he’d dump her ass after the third inexplicable meltdown (note: if Kristen Stewart were hotter, this might be a touch more believable).

Also worth noting: Condon’s camera is constantly lingering on this movie’s version of money shots—a wedding gown, expensive furniture, an absurdly ornate piece of jewelry stuck to Stewart’s head. The girls in my audience cooed at each of these shots, sometimes outright moaning. It was freaky, until I realized I was watching emo-porn for the tween girl set.

The PG-13 Sex Scene To End All PG-13 Sex Scenes

You’d think that after three films and however-much-time-has-passed in the novels, Edward and Bella’s “first time” (the word “sex” is never used here, because…I mean, my God, how filthy would that be?!) would be a bed-breaking, Earth-shattering affair. And ya know what? It is. Edward hits that like the fist of an angry God, ripping a huge chunk out of the headboard, leaving bruises all over Bella’s beautifully, uh, already-sickly-looking pale skin, and somehow destroying every pillow in the process. At least, that’s what I gathered from the onscreen evidence; it’s entirely possible that—in the same world where vampires sparkle—vampires also ejaculate feathers. I mean, Edward just decimates that ass. But this is a PG-13 movie, so we get a couple quick shots—mostly of furniture being destroyed—before the all-purpose “cut to the morning after” shot. Still, though, it’s unintentionally hilarious.

Twilight is the first film in The Twilight Saga. It’s so OG that it doesn’t even have “The Twilight Saga” in its name, kind of like Star Wars before George Lucas decided he wanted to piss all over your childhood.

This film tells the lovely tale of how a 100-year-old dude got a 17-year-old girl he basically hates to fall in love with him while he was hanging around high school.

Check out a Guy’s Guide to The Twilight Characters, The Twilight Saga: New Moon, and The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Summary

Bella Swan leaves Arizona so her mom can be a MILF with some dude who plays minor league baseball. When she gets to her new school, all these Mormon-faced dorks want to slip their tube steak in her. Instead, she falls in love with Edward Cullen, a 100-year-old man who looks like a teenager and treats her like shit. Edward is part of a clan of vegan vampires who sparkle in the sunlight. He’s a pretty good lesson in what women want, especially women who like stuff like Twilight.

Bella figures out that Edward is a vampire because she is apparently really smart. However, she’s not smart enough to know to avoid some dude who breaks into her bedroom and watches her sleep. While playing baseball with the Mormon Vampire Cullen family, another group of vampires who look like the Black Eyed Peas see Bella and decide to eat her. The Cullens don’t cotton to this, and kill one of them to protect her. Specifically, they kill the blond vampire who looks like that guy whose girlfriend you boned in college while he sat in the corner and cried. At any rate, Edward saves Bella’s life after the blond dude bites her, and all is well in Twilight land.

How does it look and sound on Blu-Ray? Superb. The picture is sharp and clear, but not as artificially bright as many Blu-Ray transfers of older films seem to be. The end result reminds you that you are watching something on film, with the rich color textures that film should provide. The sound is very good. On a good sound system, Isabella Rossellini’s song will still stun you, and Dean Stockwell’s song will still make you want to hide under your bed.

The extras are solid, but many of them are reused from the 2005 Special Edition DVD. This includes a documentary, and a clip from Siskel & Ebert‘s original review of the film. The clip is notable as Roger Ebert did not like Blue Velvet, and was vocal about his disdain for it. Gene Siskel defended the film, but it was interesting to see a negative review included in a film’s home video edition, and it demonstrates the confidence Lynch has in his work.

The main draw in the extras is a whopping 50 minutes of lost footage that has been restored, edited and scored for this package. The footage is fascinating. You can see why it was left out of the movie, but any fan Blue Velvet or Lynch will still want to soak it in. The extra scenes are presented out of context, one after another, which still makes them more coherent than about half of Lynch’s other films.

Blue Velvet’s 25th Anniversary Blu-Ray is released Tuesday, November 8th, with a SRP on 24.99. It’s worth upgrading for the new picture, and certainly for the newly released footage.

While I did enjoy the film, there’s no sense in pretending it was a masterpiece. There are times when the plot becomes overly sappy, and focuses too much on the strained relationship of Harold & Kumar. I know some semblance of a story is necessary even in a stoner comedy, but why drag it out in a film like this? We know they are going to patch things up from the moment we realize there’s a conflict, so there’s no need for sappy, sentimental monologues about friendship.

Another problem I had with the film was the nudity. There wasn’t enough. This is already an R-rated movie, so why pull punches? There were several times where I found myself wondering “Why isn’t she getting topless?” Before you throw a rock at my face, keep in mind I’m not talking about a random female actress playing a waitress. I’m talking about actresses involved in the film’s various sex scenes. If this was almost any other movie, I wouldn’t be acting like such a sexist pig. But this is a Harold & Kumar sequel, so I don’t feel out of line having these expectations.

But those minor (and stupid) points aside, I have no real complaints about this film. Yes, it’s sexist, racially insensitive garbage, but that’s what it sets out to be. Besides, in my opinion, a talking, self-aware, waffle-making robot (which this film prominently features) makes up for anything in the politically incorrect department. So if you’re in the mood for some cheap, often twisted laughs, check it out (or save some cash, and watch it on Netflix in a few months).

But if you’ve uttered the phrase “that’s offensive” any time in the pas 24 hours, go watch Stuck Between Stations. Also, lighten the f*ck up.

Jackie Brown was released on Blu-ray on October 4th, with an SRP of $19.99. Although it’s the black sheep of the Tarantino film family, hopefully it will get its due with this excellent Blu-ray release.

Jackman plays Charlie Denton, an ex-boxer working the low level robot boxing circuit in the near future.  He’s a jerk. He owes everyone and their mother money, and when his fighter ‘Ambush’ gets demolished in a Texas rodeo, he’s hit rock bottom. This all changes, however, when he receives word his ex wife has died in a car crash, leaving his estranged son, Max (Dakota Goyo), in his custody. With an Aunt eagerly wanting to adopt Max, Denton weasels his way into selling the kid to her rich husband so he can buy the famed robot ‘Noisy Boy’ and continue competing in the circuit. The only problem is, he has to take care of Max for rest of the summer, something he’s not cut out for. But since the kids got an attitude, he forces Denton to take him along for the ride.

As they compete, Denton’s impulsive personality lands him into even more dirt when he gets Noisy Boy destroyed. With no other choice, he takes Max to the scrap yard for a new fighter, where the kid finds ‘Atom’, an old school sparring bot he believes will be their champion. Tension ensues as they both try to make Atom a winner and take him to the big leagues.

You can pretty much see where this is going, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad thing. Shawn Levy (Night at the Museum, Cheaper by the Dozen) hits us with great boxing matches, stunning shots on the American Heartlands, and most importantl, building a great dynamic between Jackman and Goyo from the start. Not to mention elevating Richard Matheson’s short story (which became a twilight zone episode with Lee Marvin) to a whole new level. There’s plenty in here for both kids and adults to enjoy.

Is Real Steal formulaic? Yes. Does a Limp Bizkit song play during one of the fights? Yes. Is Phil Lamar one of the commentators for the end battle? Maybe. But rest assured, Real Steel is a father-son story first, sports movie second. The only reason we remotely care about what we’re watching is because of the chemistry Jackman and Goyo share on screen, which is superb. Add in a great cast of supporting actors like Evangeline Lily, Anthony Mackie, and the always entertaining Kevin Durand, and you’ve got yourself a piece of good ‘ole Hollywood Cinema.

The real question is, is it worth the upgrade to Blu-ray? Absolutely. The sound is crisp and engaging (listen to all the nearby chatter during the diner climax), and the picture is clearer than I can ever remember (including poor Marvin’s brains). In fact, the picture is so crisp that you can clearly see Bruce Willis‘ penis when he gets out of the shower. I’d much rather have seen what was in the briefcase.

The extras include most of what was featured on the Collector’s Edition DVD, but with two notable additions. There is a new retrospective featuring the films cast, including John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Tim Roth and more. They offer some trivia about working with Tarantino before he was a major player, and other neat tid-bits. The other new feature is a film-critic round table discussion of the film, featuring Elvis Mitchell and others. It’s a fun bull session to listen to if you’re a fan of the film.

Pulp Fiction is released on Blu-Ray Tuesday October 4th, with a SRP of $19.99. Highly recommended for the picture and sound upgrades alone, as well as a great catalog of extras.

It’s really hard to talk about Human Centipede (First Sequence) in an intelligent manner, which isn’t that surprising since most of the controversy surrounding its predecessor focused on audiences’ visceral reaction to the concept of ass-to-mouth horror. The sequel Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence) is no different (the tagline is “The Deuce Is Loose!” speaks for itself) but I’ll try.

Dutch director Tom Six‘s follow-up to his 2010 meme of a film (yes, in South Park spoofs you, you’re a meme) opened up the 2011 edition on Fantastic Fest, the largest genre film festival in North America, and I was there to witness it. The first thing that greeted me when I got to my seat was a barf bag filled with a mint and a staple remover. The former was there for more than obvious reason, whereas the stapler remover was there alluding to what I was about to watch.

Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence) opens quite literally where the last one left off: the final scene from the first movie and its closing credits. The camera then zooms out to reveal Martin (Laurence Harvey), a short, mentally challenged, grotesque-looking garage attendant. Soon after, we learn that our protagonist–much like the film’s director– is obsessed with the Human Centipede (First Sequence), so much so that his plan is to recreate the fictional Dr. Heiter’s monstrous creation. There’s a catch, though. Martin won’t be happy with three people being stitched together ass-to-mouth. He wants to turn it up to eleven. Well, twelve, to be more precise. A dozen victims instead of the pedestrian three.

And so the film’s very simplistic plot begins to unravel. Martin uses his place of work to pick off his victims, clubbing all but two of them at the parking garage and dragging them to an abandoned warehouse. The two other are the skinhead neighbor who lives above his flat and Ashlynn Yennie– an actress in the first one who plays herself in this one (we told you that Tom Six is obsessed with his own work).

Once he has his twelve parts for his centipede, Martin rolls up his sleeves (by which we mean “takes off his pants and puts on a surgical coat”) and begins to work. What follows next is a bombardment of repulsion and the grotesque. There’s more blood splattered, more open wound shown, and more consumption of fecal matter than the first one. And yet, the film failed to make me feel sick. Going in, I had psychologically prepared myself to see the worst. It turns out my idea of “the worst” is more disgusting (or original) than what Tom Six imagined. Yes, I was partially grossed out, but more than anything I was bored. It was as if a previously hilarious joke stopped being sudden all of a sudden. It’s as if the meme had reached a point of over-saturation and exhaustion.

If I wanted to give the film more credit than it deserves, I’d call it a schlockier, gorier, and less entertaining version of Eraserhead. Tom Six opted to shoot his sequel in black and white instead of color to create a contrast between his two films (sterile in the first one vs. disgust and dirtiness in this one). Whether intentionally or not, David Lynch‘s experimental came to mind.

If I wanted to be honest about HC2, I’d call it a boring film that’s done in by its own hype and the director’s shortcomings as a filmmaker.

Fidel Martinez is the Managing Editor of Tu Vez. You can check out his vile rants on twitter.

The role of Beane is played fairly effortlessly by Brad Pitt.  In addition to being the focal point of the film, Pitt’s Beane is the vessel through which every aspect of the film runs. If you have a problem with him (the character or the actor (in Moneyball there is little distinction), you will probably not like this film. If you like him, you will probably like this film, love or understanding of baseball be damned. Similarly, at no point do you forget that you’re watching Brad Pitt onscreen. I have no idea what Billy Bean is like as a person, but after watching this film, I expect him to be exactly like Brad Pitt.

This is the Brad Pitt/Billy Beane show, through and through. With a winning turn from Jonah Hill playing Peter Brand, his statistical sidekick, and a somewhat puzzling Phillip Seymour Hoffman portrayal of Art Howe, the club manager and the closest thing to an adversary that appears in the film, both serve to divert the minimal amount of attention required away from Pitt. Hill through comic relief, and almost as an audience surrogate, and Hoffman as a very, very polite nemesis. Seriously, it feels as though Hoffman may have been chewing Tylenol PM throughout this entire shoot.

What’s most striking about Moneyball is that it appears to be a film almost entirely devoid of conflict, which makes it all the more marvelous that it manages to engage for as long as it does. There’s no shouting, no imminent danger, no romance. Even from a black-and-white baseball perspective, the film begins with expectations for the club lowered, then the rest of the film is spent watching the A’s and Beane try to meet expectations, sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing.

The baseball season clocks in at 162 games, which means a team is much more likely to win via a slow, steady grind than in a big game. That’s the essence on Moneyball (the concept). Moneyball (the film) reflects this philosophy, not relying on “the big game” or “do or die,” but rather tenacity and a little bit of faith as Beane braves criticism from several fronts. In short, he succeeds by avoiding being nibbled to death by ducks.

The most notable detraction from the film is the B-story of Billy Beane’s earlier playing days. It does little to prove relevant to the story at hand, instead serving as a human interest story that no one asked for. We get more than enough Pitt in contemporary story. There’s no reason to wade through his backstory in the past.

So if there’s little conflict, and extraneous backstory, why do we care about this film?

First off, Pitt is extremely likeable in this role. I have no idea if he is at all representative of the actual Beane in this regard, and I don’t care. He makes this journey enjoyable using his humor and charm, sometimes baring his teeth in a smile, but just as frequently a grimace.

Secondly, the dialogue, written in part by Aaron Sorkin, is funny. And the actors performing it are also funny. Pitt, a consistently underrated comedic actor (or possibly just a really funny guy), delivers the goods, as do Hill, Hoffman, an incredibly restrained Chris Pratt, and a scene-stealing performance as a New-Age stepdad from Spike Jonze. This is a funny film and would be branded a comedy if it wasn’t based on a bestselling non-fiction book about the marriage of math and baseball.

Moneyball fails to represent the book in that it invests us in the man and not the phenomenon, which keeps the reader from rooting terribly hard for the team. Instead, we’re rooting for Pitt. Not even to succeed, but just to keep doing stuff for us to watch. While that may insulate us from the original subject matter, it certainly makes for a far more interesting film than Moneyball (the book) should have been. I guess that’s a verbose way of saying that Brad Pitt has more than enough charisma to make this thing work.

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/moneyball-scores-a-touchdown-the-sport-in-this-movie-is-irrelevant/feed/ 0 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/contagion-review-%e2%80%9cit%e2%80%99s-like-traffic-but-with-a-disease-instead-of-drugs/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/contagion-review-%e2%80%9cit%e2%80%99s-like-traffic-but-with-a-disease-instead-of-drugs/#comments Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:01:02 +0000 Penn Collins http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=227750 “It’s like Traffic, but with a disease instead of drugs.”

Similar to director Steven Soderbergh’s other ensemble film portraying the far-reaching effects of an epidemic,

The result is a voyeuristic relationship with the characters that exists the same way one may watch ants scurry after their hill is kicked – You’re too busy watching them deal with it all to want to step inside their heads. Damon’s character seems to be the only one really tethered by emotion, as the rest of the cast seems to act out of dutiful obligation. The fact that five medical professionals are followed over the course of the outbreak puts the film in danger of becoming myopic in the same way the natural analog Outbreak was, but it never happens. The character investigations, again, with the exception of Damon are superficial enough and spiked with enough gravity and purpose that it makes for a compelling spectacle, but make no mistake: you’re here to watch these people do their jobs.

The fact that the film runs at only 105 minutes and still manages to address a six-month outbreak and still touch upon so many representative lives is a testament to efficiency in storytelling: calculated, but certainly not inhumane. At the end of the film you feel closer to the outbreak than you do the characters, which is an unnatural feeling, but Soderbergh’s intention all along.

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/contagion-review-%e2%80%9cit%e2%80%99s-like-traffic-but-with-a-disease-instead-of-drugs/feed/ 0 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/#comments Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:26:34 +0000 Fred Topel http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=223560 Rise of the Planet of the Apes is smarter than the Tim Burton Planet of the Apes, but even more one-dimensional. I mean, you can’t get any dumber than the Lincoln Memorial finale, but any insight to this story is sold out by embarrassing characterizations. It’s worth it for the ape rampage, but we’re making a devil’s bargain here. Thank you for the awesome ape action, and we’ll tolerate the script.

In this Apes, “Bright Eyes” is the nickname for Number 9, the test subject for ALZ-112. The Alzheimer’s cure has the side effect of adding green specks to her iris. Number 9 rampages, scientist Will Rodman’s (James Franco) experiment is shut down, but 9 had a baby so Will takes the baby home to his dad (John Lithgow) who has Alzheimer’s himself. Cesar (Andy Serkis) inherited Number 9’s super intelligence, so once he gets pissed, it’s rising time.

Monkey + AK-47 = 'Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes' Viral

Baby Cesar is adorable but we’re still very obviously looking at motion capture. We’ve only traded one technology for another. Instead of endearing top of the line makeup, we have soulless polished CGI. I know you can’t train a stunt ape to rampage on cue, but let’s not pretend this is like looking at a real simian. You can tell by the nature of how it moves that it’s not primal. It’s great performance work, but the goal was “real ape,” not “ape-like animation.”

When the apes finally rise, it is a really awesome climax. I will probably own the Blu-ray just to watch that sequence and there are plenty of cool scenes they have not given away in the trailers. I’m glad a movie exists where apes swing down suburban streets and city streets. Getting there is pretty laughable though.

There’s no worse character than the angry neighbor who is so over the top one-dimensional, I can’t believe they put him in several scenes. Jacobs (David Oyelowo) so blatantly cares only about money, it’s incomprehensible that he’d ever rise to CEO of a research corporation. Tom Felton will have a healthy career as an evil blonde bully as his Dodge Landon character shows. Caroline is the defining role for Freida Pinto, as in get used to thankless hot love interests, because it’s not all Slumdog Millionaire and Miral.

The story makes one bold move. Will actually tries ALZ-112 out on his dad! I can’t believe a Hollywood movie makes that morally ambiguous choice. For a while, Rise is one of those movies where the science is actually more interesting than the monster. In The Fly, I really wanted to see teleportation technology work. In Darkman, I really wanted him to make fake skin last in sunlight. Of course, it’s really just an excuse to make the apes smarter. The way Cesar shares ALZ with his buddies is just silly.

Cesar is the hero of this and the blatant evil of the humans makes that clear, intentionally or not. That’s a different take on the material. In the Heston Apes, the point was a metaphor for how we treat animals, but the apes were equally culpable for making the same mistakes. Rise is a pure revenge tale on the evil captors, which may be where society is today. We’ve gone too far so screw it, let the apes have it. Still, cool ape rampage!

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/feed/ 0 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-the-change-up/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-the-change-up/#comments Wed, 03 Aug 2011 22:29:28 +0000 Fred Topel http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=223406 The Change-Up is a watchable generic comedy. It’s okay for a night out or a DVD, but it’s hard to call it good. We’re not talking embarrassing or offensive, but you still want more.

Dave (Jason Bateman) and Mitch (Ryan Reynolds) switch bodies thanks to a magic fountain. At least the film has the decency to acknowledge that it doesn’t really matter what caused the body swapping. They pee in a fountain, the lights black out, they wake up as each other. Boom.

Exclusive: 'Change-Up' Red-Band Trailer Gets A Little Randy

It turns out they weren’t really jealous of each other’s lives. They were each just being polite. So it’s not a wish fulfillment. Mitch is now saddled with a job and a family and Dave is forced to be an actor on a lorno set (light porno, a totally contrived sequence that goes for the easiest laughs). The poster is a lie. Dave never has three ways with hot girls. All his sexual encounters are played for laughs.

It’s funnier to see Bateman and Reynolds play each other’s personas than their own. Maybe they should really switch. The script is not what I’d call inspired though. Dave and Mitch do a lot of babbling. Their dialogue is not clever, but they say it so fast the audience thinks they’ve heard jokes. To their credit, that’s probably the actors’ improv and it’s probably an improvement over what was actually written.

6 photosLeslie Mann

Mitch being inappropriate to Dave’s kids is a really thin joke. He teaches Dave’s daughter to fight back against a ballet school bully, but pointing out the insincerity of stroking a child’s ego doesn’t really seem like a joke. After the first few F bombs, we get it. He’s swearing in front of children.

Dave’s wife Jamie (Leslie Mann) is legitimately upset by these shenanigans. She’s trying to keep her family together, making her the perfect straight woman. If only she had some good comedy to which she could react.

Mitch and Dave learn about themselves by taking each other’s perspectives. Mitch gets to hear his dad (Alan Arkin) say something nice about him, because dad can only say it to Dave. Dave sees what a bad husband he’s been because Jamie can only confide in Mitch. Mitch experiences a child’s love. Awww.

Oh, Dave is also working on a major deal for his promotion, which is the generic job Mitch has to learn how to do when they switch bodies. I mean, it’s not as horrifying as 17 Again, also starring Mann and another recent take on the ‘80s high concept. That was all about a guy wishing he hadn’t abandoned the teenage girl he knocked up, and it had Thomas Lennon peacocking. So go see The Change-Up for a body swapping comedy that’s more focused on poop and butt hole jokes.

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-the-change-up/feed/ 0 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-crazy-stupid-love/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-crazy-stupid-love/#comments Wed, 27 Jul 2011 00:45:00 +0000 Fred Topel http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=222202 This is how you do a romantic comedy. Crazy, Stupid, Love is intelligent and mature, plus it has real balls. The last time I remember feeling this way was (500) Days of Summer, but if it’s only once every two years, it’s worth the wait. Not a McConaughey in sight here.

‘Crazy Stupid Love’ Looks Neither Crazy Nor Stupid

Right away the humor speaks to really important issues. Cal (Steve Carell) refuses to talk when his wife Emily (Julianne Moore) asks for a divorce. It’s funny when he rolls out of a moving car, but he’s also really avoiding something with which he needs to deal. Then we meet Jacob (Ryan Gosling) picking up babes in a bar. His swagger is good enough but not so great that I’m jealous of his lines. That’s Mr. Notebook for you. And he still eats pizza, even with his Adonis body.

6 photosEmma Stone

Jacob takes an interest in Cal out of sympathy. It’s Swingers meets Training Day when he shows Cal the ropes. The clubs are almost too loud to hear the dialogue, so the film is honest about even its locations. When Cal tries what Jacob taught him, it is too mean. That’s real. I did that. You learn The Mystery Method but if it’s not natural then you’re just insulting someone. The Hollywood twist is that he wins over Kate (Marisa Tomei) by being himself.

The story involves the whole family. Cal and Emily’s son Robbie (Jonah Bobo) gets to be funny, starring down Emily’s new boyfriend David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon.) Cal really talks to Robbie, and to Emily. I really love Jessica (Analeigh Tipton). This poor teenage babysitter is struggling to express herself but she’s so genuine and sweet. She makes some scandalous choices but it’s innocent and real. She’s also 13-year-old Robbie’s dream girl, and we’ve all been there.

There’s some real filmmaking going on in this too. Cal’s evolution with the ladies is shown in a tracking shot where Cal appears at a different table with different women without ever cutting. That’s an artistically sound use of visual effects. Directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa let a door open on Jessica and the light overexposes her. The love scene lighting is beautiful with a gentle camera.

Dan Fogelman’s screenplay knows when to shift focus, giving one thread a moment to simmer. After a blowout between Cal and Emily, Hannah (Emma Stone) finds her way to Jacob and it’s their story for a while. The ensemble intermingles organically. Funny dialogue still has emotional ramifications. The film never takes the easy way out with a misunderstanding fueling some empty doubletalk. Misunderstandings just bring the forces together but the film plays fair. They’re even smart about the rain cliché.

There is a moment where the wisdom of a child provokes a big speech from the parent, but they earned it. There’s still no easy fix. I can’t believe a studio film allowed so much ambiguity. Most of all, Robbie’s graduation gift is so daring I can’t believe Warner Brothers allowed it. I mean, it could seem inappropriate but not once you’ve spent time with these characters.

 

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-crazy-stupid-love/feed/ 0 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-cowboys-aliens/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-cowboys-aliens/#comments Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:04:19 +0000 Fred Topel http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=221961 Cowboys & Aliens has been the summer movie I was most excited about just because of the high concept. I was a little worried that it wouldn’t be enough western but I’m happy to report it is a full on western, even when the aliens show up.

The introduction of Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig) is all silent behavior, so you get a sense of who this guy is visually. Jake suits up as a cowboy in the cold open, and Craig makes a great man with no name. It’s not that different from his rough and tumble James Bond, but I want to see that guy in the old west too.

Get The Alien Cribs Tour In 'Cowboys & Aliens' Trailer

Jake shakes up the town just like any western hero would. Percy Dolarhyde (Paul Dano) is used to making trouble and endangering civilians with no one standing up to him. Jake humiliates Percy in a badass way. Doc (Sam Rockwell) is just a saloon owner with a dream, Meacham (Clancy Brown) is the preacher who still knows he needs a gun and Sheriff Taggart (Keith Carradine) sees outlaws all the time and recognizes how flexible the law is in the old west. Meanwhile Jake keeps beating dudes up.

Woodrow Dolaryde (Harrison Ford) has a stronghold on the town and Ford is having fun scowling it up. Unfortunately, once the town goes looking for the aliens, Mr. Dolaryde is just along for the ride. He gets some good character moments, especially with he and Jake sizing each other up, but it’s not a fully developed part. Ella (Olivia Wilde) is saddled with all the exposition, and I’ll embrace that pun in all its glory but I would have said the same thing if she were in any genre explaining all the backstory.

7 photosOlivia Wilde

Perhaps some of the bad buzz has come from people’s expectations of western. This isn’t the Oscar-y western like True Grit or Unforgiven. It’s like the real westerns of old Hollywood and the Italian era, just a great yarn with cool characters. They still run into bandits and natives, build legends like Woodrow’s war history, ride through the plains on horseback and bond over the campfire.

The little bit of sci-fi is still in the western mold. Jake chases after a spaceship like it’s a runaway stagecoach. In the climactic battle, Nat Colorado (Adam Beach) lassos an alien like cattle. The aliens resemble a combination of Giger, Predator and Blade 2. They look good, although I forgot about their mouth arms until they use them again in the end.

The McGuffin on Jake’s wrist still rubs me the wrong way. It’s a totally artificial mystery. It’s like oh, look, what is this crazy object on his wrist? It exists only to reveal backstory later in the film, and to make it easier for Jake to shoot down alien ships. Other characters come up with creative ways to use their bare bones western tools to fight aliens, but the script hinges a mystery on this artificial device

For me, Cowboys & Aliens is what I wanted in a summer movie. It’s a grand, fantastic world full of big adventure and high concept. Probably not a memorable classic but damn good fun. I hope there’s a porno parody of it. They can call it Reverse Cowgirl & Aliens.

 

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-cowboys-aliens/feed/ 3 http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-friends-with-benefits/ http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-friends-with-benefits/#comments Fri, 22 Jul 2011 12:58:15 +0000 Fred Topel http://www.screenjunkies.com/?p=221027 Friends with Benefits is good enough that you won’t mind taking a date to it, though if you’ve had more than three dates I’d recommend you suggest staying in and renting No Strings Attached. Then you’ll be comfortable, laughing, a little sexy and who knows what could happen? Yeah, baby.

Fs with Bs seems to take a different stylistic approach to the exact same movie. Strings was more of a drama with jokes in it, and it’s actually shockingly good at that. So if Friends delivered a snappy, quirky farce it would distinguish itself. Ultimately, it becomes the typical Hollywood comedy that tries to get serious in the end, but that’s not heart. That’s cheap.

'Friends With Benefits' Red Band: More Casual F***ing

Mila Kunis seems like the coolest girl ever and that goes a long way. Jamie (Kunis) is a headhunter who woos Dylan (Justin Timberlake) to a New York job at GQ. The material lets her change character on a dime as she adjusts her sales pitch and messes with Ryan. Once he moves to New York, they hang out and Jamie continues to push his buttons.

Personally, I wouldn’t like a friend to be that inconsistent. Dylan just messes with her right back. I personally prefer to be nice to my friends in real life. For a movie though, it provides lots of snappy banter. When Dylan and Jamie try the casual sex arrangement, the montage (sextage?) plays it as a joke. The ticklish chin, the socks staying on, the oral errors, it’s all having fun, not taking the endeavor or its ramifications seriously.

7 photosMila Kunis

That dynamic remains strong when Dylan and Jamie actually start dating other people in front of each other. You think you’re cool with it? We’ll see how cool with it you are. Timberlake is as likeable as he is on SNL, self-deprecating his singing and math skills.

Then they introduce Dylan’s family and it’s “insert drama here.” His father (Richard Jenkins) has Alzheimer’s. Now Jamie’s mom (Patricia Clarkson) has already been introduced as a wacky irresponsible drunk. It’s not cute but at least it’s consistent with the tone. Playing the Alzheimer’s card, and Jenkins acting the hell out of it, is just frankly a dick move. Yeah, we get that Dylan and Jamie have family issues. You can’t be the heartwarming Alzheimer’s movie after the abrasive humor of the first half.

Also Dylan’s nephew is the precocious kid from Modern Family (Nolan Gould) who does botched magic tricks. Then there’s a part where Jamie overhears Dylan saying something about her. No Strings actually had smart characters protecting themselves and speaking up. When that couple split up, it was because Ashton Kutcher’s character knew Natalie Portman’s was going to hurt him. Yeah, it was about 20 minutes before the finale, but I was proud of the character for making the tough choice.

Friends promises to be smart about romantic comedies by making fun of their clichés, even having a fake rom-com within the rom-com. Yet this has just as much pop music as Dylan makes fun of, and ends with a romantic stunt cleverly foreshadowed in the first act. I guess you can’t just have a casually funny movie without it bringing up all sorts of issues. Come on, don’t be this obvious!

 

]]> http://www.screenjunkies.com/movies/movie-review/review-friends-with-benefits/feed/ 0