The Avengers Impressions

"The Avengers" is easily the best "superhero" film that I have 

ever seen. After wading through, what seemed to be, an endless ocean of poor to decent films, I was beginning to wonder if there was even any dry land to be found. Gladly, there was, and the hand that pulled me out of the water was Joss Whedon's.

His unique style of action, humor, and engaging storytelling was exactly what this film needed. Though, I'd have to say, the great triumph of Whedon's handling of this film was in the way he was able to balance the  importance and contributions of all the characters. Many of us, read "most of us," believed that this film would just be Robert Downey Jr.'s "Tony Stark" acting circles around the rest of the cast. As most of you know, by now, this was not the case. Every character had their place and every character had their chance to shine. 

Some of the most common complaints about the film have been about the length, but I honestly can't imagine it being even 10 minutes shorter. This is definitely one of those films where you go in, sit down, are constantly engaged, and stand up about two and a half hours later, wallet in hand, ready to see it again. 

Five stars out of five. Brilliant movie. Let's hope the upcoming Marvel sequels can keep up the momentum.

Green Lantern Impressions

"Green Lantern" is yet another film that seems to fall victim to one of the very messages that it tries to preach. More specifically, the film somehow manages to squander practically every gift that it receives.

Millions of dollars in CGI, rich source material, and a decent cast can't save a film when the writing is weak on almost every level and the majority of said cast gives bland and forgettable performances (I say the majority because Mark Strong does manage to pull off a decent, if generally underused, Sinestro).

I am awarding "Green Lantern" one and a half stars out of five. All in all, it is probably the most disappointing film that I have seen so far this summer. If tons of CGI, or the fact that a film is based off of a popular comic series, are all that it takes for you to go see a movie, then you've probably already seen this film (or you are at least planning to see it in the near future). If those conditions don't apply to you, then I strongly suggest that you save your money. You aren't missing anything.

"Transformers: Dark of the Moon" Impressions

"Transformers: Dark of the Moon" was significantly more entertaining than the two films that preceded it, which wasn't all that hard to accomplish, but just as poorly written. I mean, the logical gaps were just too excessive. While I was watching the movie, I actually came up with an alternate title that seemed much more fitting than "Dark of the Moon." I call it "Transformers: What Was Your Plan?!" Why, you ask? Because hardly a minute goes by where you don't want to ask that question. All of the character's actions seemed so impulsive and ill-conceived that you really have to wonder if the writers weren't just randomly stringing together index cards with ideas written on them. Yes, every last character. Even Optimus Prime himself made more than a few pointlessly stupid decisions. I am all for expensive CGI and whatnot, but if a film feels like it was written by the kid in the back of the class who flicks his boogers and just can't seem to sit still then I'm sorry, I just can not enjoy it.

I am awarding "Transformers: Dark of the Moon" two stars out of five for being as flashy as ever, but still very poorly written. Honestly, the film's masterstroke is definitely the fact that Leonard Nimoy voices a majorcharacter. That is really the only reason I could ever envision myself watching it again.

Summer 2010 Movie Review Backlog #2: The Karate Kid

**Sorry for the lack of posting over this past month. I have been extremely lazy. August will be different, I promise. >_>

I am hesitant to even call this homage to the film that first used this title, but "The Karate Kid" was fairly entertaining to watch. Everything about the film was fairly standard, the choreography for the fights were decent, as was the general story of the film, but my biggest problem was the acting. I have never really liked Jaden Smith, and I certainly think that he has yet to prove himself as any kind of actor, but even beyond that, the only other actor in the film that gave even a decent performance was Jackie Chan. In fact, I think that it could easily be said that he carried the film. My only other issue with the film was that there was a very loose sense of time, and that made the whole pre-tournament part of the movie hard to watch.

I am awarding "The Karate Kid" two and a half stars out of five for be entertaining to watch (and for casting Jackie Chan) but for having fairly poor acting and a loose concept of time. I would definitely rent/Netflix/whatever this film, but it's certainly not collection worthy.

Summer 2010 Movie Review Backlog #1: Iron Man 2 Impressions

I was very disappointed with "Iron Man 2." The first film had a nice balance of action and humor while still making you feel like what you were seeing was important. "Iron Man 2," however, focuses far too much on the "humor" (bad jokes and overly long dialogue) and leaves you pondering the question of whether or not what you are watching is at all significant. Also, what little action there was felt kind of cheap. Not in flashiness, (it is still a big budget Marvel film), but in content. Every one of the three or so "fights" felt too easy and very much anticlimactic.

What "Iron Man 2" did well, though, was tease about three upcoming Marvel films. I won't say anything about them, but I will say that it just felt... wrong. Like my money was just being used for these other films and everything else they are showing me is just filler. Why can't they just make a solid film with all of the teasers and whatnot at the end?

The only thing I even remotely liked about the film was the acting, and like I said before, the dialogue did not do them any kind of service.

I am awarding "Iron Man 2" a very disappointing two and a half stars out of five for losing the feeling of "significance" that the first film had, having very little action, and for focusing too much on "humor." On a lighter note, however, I am now excited for those three other movies I mentioned. So, no big loss... right?

Kick-Ass Impressions

I can't say that I had high hopes going into this film, having not read the comics (though I wasn't expecting the movie to be 100% true to them) and not recognizing any of the actors other than Nicolas Cage and "McLovin," but I can definitely say that I was pleased with what I saw.

My greatest fear, at least after seeing the trailers, was that "Kick-Ass" would be more of a spoof of a "superhero" movie than one in its own right, but there was certainly enough grit and action to keep the audience engaged. The best thing about the film, though, was definitely the fact that it never took itself too seriously. There were buckets of blood and copious amounts of violence, but it all just felt fun. Maybe the zany choice of music did a great deal of helping, but never before (and perhaps never again) has watching a little girl in a mask and a cape take out an entire room of drug dealers with various bladed weaponry been so hilarious.

Anyway, there really isn't too much to say beyond that. My biggest problems with the film were that too many things felt unbelievably convenient and that the acting ranged from fairly mediocre to outright cheesy. Maybe it was simply supposed to be commentary on the "traditional" superhero movie, but I just found it to be annoying.

I am awarding "Kick-Ass" four stars out of five for being gritty and fun to watch, but still lacking a strong cast and for being overly convenient. If you don't mind a great deal of violence and swearing, then "Kick-Ass" is definitely the film for you. Otherwise, you might want to see something else because you will most likely be doing some seat squirming if you choose to see this.

Repo Men Impressions

Before I get into my review, I want to put one thing to rest: "Repo Men" is in no way a "rip-off" of "Repo! The Genetic Opera". The former was based off of a novel written by Eric Garcia in 2001 (though it wasn't published until 2009), who got his inspiration from a short story he had written in 1997. In that regard, however, I am not saying that "Repo! The Genetic Opera" took anything from "Repo Men." The two films are very much different from one another and each have their own inspirations.

Now, for my review. I will start by saying that "Repo Men" was not the poorly crafted film the critics said it was going to be. The acting was solid, the cinematography wasn't too overblown, it was in no way unentertaining, and the story wasn't nearly as washed out and political as many current filmmakers would have taken the liberty to make it. To be honest, I really think that critics dropped the ball on this one, though I suppose that could be said of most critics most of the time.

First, what worked best for the film: the straightforward simplicity and the music. As I said before, "Repo Men" was not the heavy political satire it could have been. There were no corrupt politicians or business men or moral high grounds. Just a company that sold synthetic organs, people that wanted them, and individuals hired to repossess said organs if the client couldn't keep up with their payments. Also, the main characters weren't out to "take down the system." They were about 99.9% in it for themselves. That being said, the film was not overly predictable either. There were still plenty of twists and turns all the way through that culminate in an ending that will probably surprise you, though you may have seen it before. As for the music, I have to say that "Repo Men" has one of the most dynamic and well chosen soundtracks I have heard in a long time (in terms of using music not especially recorded for the film). Instead of just having songs that happen to be popular or that "sound" appropriate, the film uses songs that fit on both a rhythmical and lyrical level.

What didn't work for the film: the shallow character introductions (which hurts their development) and the ending. By the end of the film, I didn't really feel like I "knew" many of the characters and some of the people I saw the film with didn't even know most of the character's names. You see the characters do things and get a semblance of what their respective personalities are like, but you don't really get to know who they were before the events of the film or what they might be doing beyond what you see in the story. As for the ending, I don't want to give anything away, but I will say that it is one of those endings that explains a lot of the events you witness prior to it, but at the same time disappoints you for the things that it has "undone." Also, as a hint, I will say that I have seen an ending almost exactly like it in the "non-wholesome edit" of an 80's science fiction film.

I am awarding "Repo Men" three and a half stars out of five for being entertaining, relatively unpredictable, and for having a great soundtrack, but also for having weak character introductions and a fairly disappointing ending. I definitely thought that this film was worth the money I spent to see it, which is more than I can say for most of the films I have recently gone to see.

Alice in Wonderland Impressions

In spite of all I have said about Tim Burton in the past, I will admit that "Alice in Wonderland" had the potential to be a great movie. The acting was decent, though Alice felt very bland at times, the voice work was great, and the visuals were amazing.

Pretty much everything else, however, was rather terrible. The story and the dialogue felt forced and awkward, especially a lot of the insertions of lines from Lewis Carroll's work, and far too many convenient solutions revealed themselves in light of the character's problems. You never feel like any of the characters are in danger and all you can really do is sit back and watch things happen. There also seemed to be quite a few pacing with the film issues as all of the events outside of "Underland" felt rushed and shallow (there are barely any formal introductions to the "real"characters) and in Underland events seem sporadic and whimsically arranged. This especially hurts the ending of the film because it is really difficult to know what to make of things. More than a few of the liberties taken with the original work felt needless and awkward as well.

I am awarding Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland" one and a half stars out of five for having potential, but not doing anything with said potential. By the end of the film, you will have no choice but to wonder whether or not the visuals alone can make this film worth the time and money you spent on it. In my case... they just couldn't do it.

Shutter Island Impressions

I had high hopes for "Shutter Island," it being a Scorsese film and all, and I can happily say that I wasn't completely disappointed. The film was well shot, well acted (Leonardo DiCaprio was especially fantastic), and will keep you intrigued from beginning to end (though I found the ending to be fairly disappointing, personally).

My biggest issue with the film had to be the editing. I can appreciate the fact that "Shutter Island" wants to play with your mind, but changing filters at random times for seemingly no reason and random breaks in shot consistency is far too self-indulgent. Scorsese tries so hard to convey the instability of the film that you are left wondering if what you have seen was purposely done or an if a few inconsistencies slipped past the editors.

I am awarding "Shutter Island" three and a half stars out of five for being well acted and intriguing, but for having distracting (an often annoying) editing work and a somewhat disappointing ending. This film is definitely worth the watch, even if you only want to see how things pan out, but don't feel bad if you want to wait for a rental.

The Wolfman Impressions

Before I get into the review, I will just say that I was never a fan of "The Wolf Man." Nothing against the original film, or anything, I just never really liked the "man turns into unthinking monster" premise. It just makes it difficult to feel sympathy for the charcter.

Anyway, I thought that "The Wolfman" stayed true to the original film while still managing to add a few new twists that didn't undo everything. That being said, though, I actually would have liked to see a bigger twist regarding the ending... but I won't say more than that. The acting was decent for the most part, but none of the characters felt genuine or engaging so it was kind of difficult to connect with them. Even the "big" characters felt somewhat shallow and at times distant. For instance, I would have loved to learn more about Hugo Weaving's "Francis Aberline" other than the fact that he "worked on the Ripper case a few years back." The film makes you feel like you are just watching stale characters play out their respective parts in between gory slaughter scenes. On that note, the film's strongest point was definitely the visuals, and the decision to use costume and make-up in the fashion of the original film for the wolf (instead of solely relying on CGI) was commendable as well.

I am awarding "The Wolfman" three stars out of five for accomplishing what it set out to do, creating a respectable remake a classic film, and nothing more. If you have seen absolutely everything else on your list, then I would suggest that you give it a shot, but don't expect to be impressed.

Daybreakers Impressions

There just isn't much to say about "Daybreakers." The acting was good, and the futuristic vampire world was shiny, but everything else was just... stale. There just never seemed to be a real sense of purpose in the film. The protagonists were really just reacting to whatever unfortunate situations they happened upon, conveniently overcoming them, and then getting to ride away into the sunset to a cheesy "we're out there" voice over. The time frame of the film was also completely skewed as I wasn't sure if the events took place within days, weeks, or even months.

I am awarding "Daybreakers" three stars out of five for... well... being a movie. I neither liked nor disliked it and it didn't really try anything out of the ordinary. I had high hopes for this film, but I suppose it will eternally be known as my first disappointment of 2010. Ah well, I hope "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus" fairs better... when I can finally track it down.

Avatar Impressions

I came into this film as skeptical as anyone else (I even called it "Pocahontas in Space" for a few months prior to its release), but I was very much impressed with what I saw, both during the regular viewing and the digital 3D viewing.

First, I think I will go ahead and get the smaller bits out of the way: the acting was good, the characters were interesting, the music was kind of what you would expect from a movie like this (switching between large orchestrated pieces and more tribal drum beats with "singing"). There.

Now what really stood out in "Avatar" was, of course, the CGI work. Pandora was simply beautiful and all of its creatures were just as impressive. What impressed me the most, however, were the Na'vi (the tribals). They were perfectly crafted down to the smallest details and, unlike the "prawns" in "District 9," they fit well into the environment (they weren't over animated). The voice work and motion capture work for the was exceptional as well.

What seems to be drawing the most attention for "Avatar" is the "familiarity" of the plot (which is understandable). Sure, it isn't particularly deep or unpredictable, but it isn't anything less than what you'd see from any Disney classic. Also, this film is only relatable to all of those other films from the most basic and general viewpoints. Man meets tribal race. Tribal race takes man in for one reason or another and teaches him their ways. Man falls in love with a tribal and ends up saving them from his own people. End. "Avatar" as a whole, however, feels like much more than that. The avatar technology alone is enough to give this film suitable distinction, and that still leaves out a lot of the other factors (like the whole bio-USB thing).

I am awarding "Avatar" four and a half stars out of five for being wonderfully crafted, but still lacking a bit plot-wise. This film reminded me of exactly what I liked about "Pocahontas" and science fiction and I would definitely recommend that you see it (especially in 3D). This is the first movie that I am actually anticipating the Blu-ray release of.

New Moon Impressions

Yet again I am forced to overcome my desire to be subjective and rate this purely on it's own merits. Sure, I'd like to say that I believe the Twilight series is a prime example of what is wrong with literature today. Sure, I'd like to berate this film for its nearly unbearable cheesiness... but I won't. I am sure you have already done plenty of that yourselves. Anyway, let's get to it.

Overall, New Moon felt kind of pointless. It seemed to be more of a teaser for the rest of the series than a sequel to the first film. The majority of the "interesting" characters were gone within the first half hour and all we were left with was... Bella. Well, the Werewolves too, I suppose, but Bella absorbed the majority of the screen time. I would say that she overacted in most of here scenes, but that would really be too nice. She was just... bad. I also found Jacob to be just as annoying, with his bipolar moodiness and questionable loyalties, but at least he had the Werewolf thing to fall back on. By the hour mark I actually found myself wanting the poorly crafted "vampires" to reappear because I never realized how much of the over-the-top teen angst they were protecting me from.

Still, I just couldn't shake the moderate interest that formed during the first film. You may scoff, but I have to honestly say that New Moon never bored me. Whether I was laughing hysterically or writhing in pain, I still wanted to know how things played out. So yeah, I guess that's the closest to a compliment as I can give this film.

I am awarding New Moon two and a half stars for being... well... bad, but still slightly interesting. I was going to give it half a star less than Twilight... but at least the Volturi were kind of interesting (they came the closest to the image of traditional vampires). There, done. I am now going to watch "Let the Right One In" to get this out of my head. It will be just my luck, though, if the American remake features sparkles though. I may be forced to move if that happens.

2012 Impressions

The trailers did not do this film any justice, which is probably why I was so surprised by the fact that it was reasonably enjoyable. Sure, some parts of "2012" were as utterly ridiculous as the trailers made them out to be (like escaping an active volcano in an RV), but when you cut those parts away you are left with a very decent film.

What I liked most about "2012" would most definitely be the characters. Now, I don't think any of the actors did a particularly amazing job, but you have to give them some credit for portraying these often loved, often hated people. You will be happy when some characters get what is coming to them and scared when it looks like a character you are fond of is about to die. This aspect really saved the film because the conflict was kind of lackluster because there wasn't really much anyone could about their plight besides try to survive and make long, philosophical speeches. This is kind of why I have never been a fan of disaster movies, besides "The Poseidon Adventure" and maybe "Twister," but I will digress.

I am awarding "2012" three and a half stars out of five for having interesting characters, but still suffering from many of the failings akin to the disaster film and having some absolutely unbelievable moments. Honestly, I can't wait for Universal Studios or Disney to unveil their "2012" themed ride. I mean seriously, outdriving a world ending earthquake with a limousine? That screams 3-D adventure.

Pirate Radio (The Boat That Rocked) Impressions

"Pirate Radio," as it is called in the US (I saw the UK version), is an excellent film that really captures the passion of the time period. The acting was great, the characters were unique and "colorful," and the soundtrack was perfectly chosen. And when I say perfectly, I mean that if you don't end up looking for one of these songs and the history of the band behind it, then you obviously watched the film on mute.

The only problem I had with the film was that the "villain" never makes a direct appearance to the other main characters. He is always shown at a separate location, delegating responsibility to his spineless underlings. I really would have loved to see the main characters mince words with him.

I am awarding "Pirate Radio" four stars out of five for being funny and well "scored," but lacking in a few areas. Critics have criticized the film for its two hour+ running time and the American version is going to be shortened accordingly (even though the original cut was longer). Honestly, I hate that this is being done because I wish it were longer. You really start to feel like you're on the ship yourself and leaving it so soon kind of hurts a little bit. Don't listen to the critics, see this film!

Where the Wild Things Are Impressions

Alright, since I took such a long time to put this up, I will get right to the point. "Where the Wild Things Are" was a wonderfully imaginative, beautifully scored, and tastefully dark film. The characters were also likable in their own ways and the cast did an excellent job with their respective roles (especially Max Records, of course). While some of the plot was a little messy (especially before Max travels to the land of the wild things) I believe that the film was an excellent adaptation of the relatively small source material.

Now, for what surprised me. First, the depth. Now, I am sure that you expected something more than ten sentences out of a feature length film, but "Where the Wild Things Are" really makes you think. The film takes the idea of the "wild things" and instead of just making them creatures created by Max's imagination, they each become representative of different aspects of his life. I won't go too much into this, though, because it will be more enjoyable if you form your own opinions on the matter. I mean, who am I to ruin a good conversation?

Another thing that surprised me was the rather depressing route it decided to take. Max is not really escaping anything when he goes to the land of the wild things. Rather, he is forced to come face to face with all of his conflicting feelings. This gives way to the large number of underlying domestic issues that lurk behind the film's main events. I honestly question the idea of marketing this film to younger audiences, and apparently the box office agrees me as only a small percentage of tickets sold were child tickets.

I am awarding "Where the Wild Things Are" four and a half stars out of five for being deep, interesting, and very well done, but having a slightly messy start. If you haven't seen this film yet, you should probably reflect on your current lifestyle because you have either become separated from your sense of imagination or you are overworked. Either way, you are cheating yourself out of a great movie experience.

Zombieland Impressions

I will get straight to the point here: Zombieland was definitely a fun movie to see, but there were just too many times when I was disappointed by the lack of zombies. It's "Zombieland!" Come on! Also, I felt like the film leaned too heavily on its "surprise cameo." I won't spoil it for you, and I love the actor/actress as much as anyone else, but there were no zombies during that entire portion and it kind of ended up feeling like a partially unscripted break. A one hour and twenty minute film just doesn't really have time to take a break. Especially one that should be filled to the brim with zombies.

Other than that, the characters were likable (with the exception of Abigail Breslin's kind of pointless "little" girl) and the film was mostly humorous. Some of the jokes were kind of stale, though. Also, the Monday night football themed inserts went from amusing to overused pretty quickly. Especially the whole "double tap" thing. If you leave the theater without understanding that concept then you obviously fell asleep at some point.

I am awarding Zombieland three and a half stars out of five for being fun and never taking itself too seriously, but wasting too much time and having poor zombie management. All in all, I'd say Zombieland is a great film to go see with friends, but don't think too hard about what's going on.

Angels & Demons Impressions

Ron Howard really did Dan Brown's best-selling novel a complete injustice this time around, as opposed to the great injustice he did to the Da Vinci Code. I mean, the film isn't even set as a prequel! Rarely do I see such a popularity siphoning move. Just because Da Vinci Code is a bit more recognizable doesn't mean that Angels & Demons can't hold its own. I personally prefer it over the Da Vinci Code.

Now, even if you are somehow able to look beyond the many major differences between the film and the book (if you read the book , that is), this film flies through important plot points without stopping for air and then just keeps on flying to the very end. The film flies so quickly, in fact, that you would probably be hard pressed to catch the majority of the character's names. Angels & Demons never allows the viewer to form a connection with anything that is going on because the characters just seem to be jumping from event to event. The downside to this? For all of the chaos, you will still feel every second of this 140 minute disaster.

I am awarding Angels & Demons one star out of five. Not even Tom Hanks could save this mess. The film was a pain to watch and an utter waste of time.

"9" Impressions

Sorry for the staggered posts. These past two weeks have been hellish.

The thing that hurt the most about "9" was that I was really hoping that it would be good. It had me truly interested from the beginning and it just kept looking better and better. Unfortunately for me, it was terrible. Awful. "9" felt more like an experiment in design than an actual film. It honestly felt like Shane Acker was more interested in how things looked than whether or not his story made any sense. I heard beforehand that the story was muddled, but I had no idea that it was going to be as a bad as it was. At the end of the film, I honestly wondered why any of the main characters ever existed at all. Everything just felt utterly pointless.

I am awarding "9" one star out of five for having good voice acting and decent animation but lacking pretty much anything else. If you're absolutely dead set on seeing this excuse for a film, I suggest you wait for the rental.

inFamous Impressions

Wow, it has been a long time since I last reviewed a game! Maybe this is as good a time as any to get back on the horse, hmm? And what better game to start back with than the superpower themed, Sucker Punch Productions developed, PS3 exclusive inFamous?

The Plus: Firstly, and most importantly seeing as this is a sandbox style game, the attention to detail around the city is simply amazing. You won't find a cluster of similarly designed buildings in this game. Everything looks unique to its specific location. Alongside this, all of the citizens of Empire City are just as unique and Sucker Punch drafted a host of voice actors to bring each of them to life. I'm not saying any one of them deserve specific names or anything, but you won't get the same droning phrases over and over again. Secondly, the karma system not only serves to add to gameplay time, but gives the player a distinctly unique experience depending on if they are "good" or "evil." This isn't a game that you will be able to just play through once and toss. Thirdly, the powers that Cole (the main character) acquires during the game are comfortably diverse and fairly spectacular. Whether you're electric grinding across a telephone wire or calling forth a lightning storm you will be enjoying every second of it. Fourthly, the voice acting in this game is nothing short of movie quality. Maybe that's why they have a film in the pipeline already? Fifthly, and finally, the game's plot definitely won't bore you. I'm not calling it a masterpiece or anything, but you will definitely feel a connection to what you're doing.

The Minus: First, and kind of ironically, the ending. Sure, it kind of makes sense, but it just wasn't all that satisfying. It does a good job of setting up for a sequel, but I really expected a bit more. Second, the glitches. There wasn't anything too crazy in this respect, but you will phase through the occasional overhang or get shot yards straight into the air when climbing the occasional ledge. Third, the stunts. Sure, I know they don't sound so intimidating when I talk about them here, but you will spend hours trying to get all twenty-one. I promise you. Fourth, and finally, the area-clearing. As you complete missions in the game, you take small portions of the city back from the gangs that have taken over. Now, this is all well and good, but because most of the enemies leave the areas you have taken back there becomes increasingly fewer things to do as you traverse the city. It's kind of like you're slowly shutting down the game.

So there you are, my review of inFamous. I am awarding the game 4 stars out of 5 for being nearly perfect with the occasional hiccup and I definitely recommend it as a buy to any PS3 owner. I hope to play Prototype, what is considered to be inFamous' lower reviewed rival, as soon as I can so that I can review it as well and do a comparison.