thecriticalwall - Tumblr blog

[thecriticalwall]

Guardians of The Galaxy - IN REVIEW

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY (AKA FARSCAPE) Directed by James Gunn and loosely based on the 2008 version of the team, the film tells the tale of space pirate/intergalactic hustler and pelvic sorcerer Peter Quill aka Star Lord (man) who upon raiding a temple of a mysterious orb, a bounty is placed on his head and he is thrust into a world he never made...wait, that's another guy. Anyway, after Quill is captured along with the bounty hunters who are after him, he befriends them and faster than you can say "Cowboy Bebop", they are off to recapture the orb from Ronan The Accuser who seeks to rule the galaxy with the power contained inside. But there is one thing he didn't count on....these guys!

This was probably one of my most anticipated films of the summer and it pretty much delivered. James Gunn hasn't' directed many films, this being his 3rd, but he does a great job and keeps the action and story well paced. He gives us characters we care about from start to finish. Even though we are never shown their backstory, when the characters tell their tales the stories have enough weight to them that, coupled with the characters, make them fully formed and giving a rag tag group of unlikely heroes we can root for. This was a very well cast film. Everyone was did a great job and did every character justice.Chris Pratt as Star Lord/Peter Quill was a fantastic lead. He really carried the film, he was very charismatic and handled the action scenes quite well. Right from the start, you're just onboard with his character and can't wait to see how he gets out of the constant problems he's gets involved in. He also has some great dramatic moments. Zoe Saldana as Gamora was great as well along with Dave Bautista as Drax (who did manage to steal a few scenes and gave a better performance than I thought he would. Seriously, he got some good laughs and character moments), Vin Diesel as Groot and Bradly Cooper as Rocket Raccoon, who pretty much got a lot of the best lines of the film. Lee Pace as Ronan was so intimidating and menacing. He gave a really intense performance, if you haven't seen him in Halt and Catch Fire, check it out, he's very good in that too but turns it up even more here. Also, Karen Gillan (of Doctor Who fame) turned in quite the dark performance as Nebula. She complemented Ronan's character quite well and was a great villain for as little as we saw her.

The action and effects were great, a little bland with some of the designs but not too bad. Shame the Nova Corps didn't have any powers but then it would've seemed like they're ripping off Green Lantern (which of course there are more similarities in the comics) which is understandable. Storywise, it was well paced and everything worked for me except probably the beginning. It felt a tad rushed trying to give us Quill's backstory which similar to almost every heroes's backstory nowadays that it's sort of cliched at this point. I mean, how many orphaned heroes do we need!? From a narrative standpoint having parents as supporting characters can be a problem (Re:Bay's Transformers) and taking them out of the equation means the character has less baggage to deal with. But for me it's getting a tad tiresome, but that's a minor gripe. The other thing was his Mother dying of Cancer at the very beginning was just not needed. It was a little jarring and seemed like it was inserted in, it could have been done as a flashback, as there are some opportunities for one while they could've just started the film off with actual opening scene. But that's really about it.  Does it live of to the hype? Some of it. To call it the best comic book film of the year or EVAAAARRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!111 is really up to you. It depends on how much you get out of it. What speaks to you more? Either narrativly, emotionally or both. I personally don't think it's better than Captain America: The Winter Solder, but I also don't think it's fair to compare the two either as they're both totally different beasts. It's essentially James Bond vs Star Wars...although Moonraker technically did that...man, who thought that was a good idea?....Anyway, as I said, it's really up to your personal tastes. But definitely give this film a look. It has something for everyone and gives such a positive message about friendship and family (they almost beat you over the head with it really, but it works) and is a great time at the movies. It also happens to redeem Marvel and George Lucas's dirty little secret. You'll see. 9 John Crichtons out of 10

Also, check out @quickreviews on INSTAGRAM. We believe in movies.

[thecriticalwall]

Edge of Tomorrow - IN REVIEW

EDGE OF TOMORROW (AKA GROUNDHOG: DAY OF WAR) Directed by Doug Liman and based on the novel "Push" by Sapphire...wait, I mean based on the light novel "All You Need Is Kill" by Hiroshi Sakurazaka. Earth is under siege with aliens called Mimics (it's never really explained why they're called that but sort of implied) who are slowly taking over our planet. Our only hope is Major William Cage, a man who isn't really a soldier and basically just some guy who rose through the ranks avoiding all the fighting...until now. Due to circumstances beyond his control and because he's a bit of a douche, he is shipped off to the front lines and goes through a baptism of fire of sorts as during his first battle with the enemy...he dies. But all is not lost as upon his death, he took one of the enemies with him and accidentally absorbed it's blood. Said enemies blood contains time manipulation abilities because why not and so Cage must now live the same day over and over again until the next leap is the leap home. Or just learn from his mistakes, become a better soldier and uncover the mystery to defeating the Mimics.

Edge of Tomorrow was a very well paced and well directed film. Tom Cruise is in good form here. There aren't really any dull spots in the movie. The plot moves along at a fairly brisk pace with enough happening on the screen to hold your attention. What surprised me the most were the moments of humor, particularly those involving Cage's many deaths. The film had fun with itself at times and that made it more enjoyable. I guess why the aliens are invading, as we are never told anyway, since it's been done so many times before or why they're called Mimics (although that's implied) isn't necessarily important as it doesn't really harm the story, at least for me. I can let it slide. The action is well done and the choreography with the mech fighting is executed nicely. The lightning quick movement of the Mimics works very well too, while difficult to track and see see at times, it's very effective. As I said Tom Cruise is in good form here. He really does put everything he has into every role he takes. He's and actor that just goes for it, regardless and that's something you can appreciate. His evolution from crybaby, to soldier was well done and you see the subtle change in his character. Emily Blunt was great in this too. Her character had some good depth to her and while little of her backstory was told most of that was shown in her performance. You get a rough idea of what she's been through with little exposition and it works quite well. She really showed how much of a veteran soldier and fighter she was and did a great job with the action scenes. Bill Paxton was good as well as a hardassed Master Sergeant. He isn't in it for long but his scenes were fun to watch, especially giving his recruits, including Cruise a hard time. I'll admit, I wasn't planning on seeing this initially. I guess the marketing kind of threw me off and made it seem fairly generic, at most I was expecting another "Oblivion". Nice to look at but nothing to really write home about. I would've most likely checked it out on TV. But through word of mouth and great reviews, I relented and I'm glad I did. Most of the movies I saw this summer, while not bad in quality were a bit clunky and didn't have much of a lasting impact. This film was very enjoyable, surprisingly had fun with it's premise with it's bits of humor and only took itself seriously when it served the plot. There is some talk about how Tom Cruise isn't much of a box office draw or isn't much of a leading man anymore, but to me, that's all it is, talk. Cruise rarely disappoints, as evidenced here. He does a fine job and proves that he is still capable of carrying a film and playing a character that you care about and can become invested in. Don't let this one pass you by, check it out.     8.5 Phil Connors out of 10 Another thing you shouldn't let pass you by is QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM. You give us 15 seconds, we'll give you an honest opinion about a recent film. And while you can't be like William Cage or Phil Connors, you can still relive some of our earlier reviews as well. That's @quickreviews on INSTAGRAM. We believe in movies.   

[thecriticalwall]

A Million Ways To Die In The West - IN REVIEW

A MILLION WAYS TO DIE IN THE WEST (AKA BLAZING SADDLES) Directed by Seth MacFarlane, the film is set in the 1800s and tells the story of Albert Stark, a sheep herder who's girlfriend has broken up with him because he's too much of a wimp. Faster than you can say cookie cutter cliche, Stark does everything he can to man up and get the woman he "loves" back in his life. Even if it means taking down the nefarious outlaw Clinch Leatherwood. Hilarity? ensues and cameos abound.

A very simple plot for a fairly simple movie. Even for a comedy it doesn't really seem like much thought was put into the plot for this, it just seems like Seth wanted to make a comedy western. The story is basically a romantic comedy plot set in the past with modern sensibilities. That's all well and good, but there are times when Seth's character starts monologuing about how much the west sucks and gives a bit of a history lesson. It essentially veers into stand up at times and can get a bit distracting. Just let the jokes tell themselves. Speaking of distracting, the cameos can get a bit much. It becomes a cavalcade of Seth's celebrity friends. Some were understated and a nice surprise, but some while leftfield and pretty funny, kind of added nothing. Especially one by a famous time traveling Doctor, it was good but he was kind of shoehorned there, minor nitpick. Otherwise, the jokes themselves were pretty good. There are a good number of laughs in this and the jokes are mostly delivered well and with good timing. However I do feel that some of the humor suffers a tad because it seems that either the story gets in the way of the jokes or vice versa. I didn't really find that the comedy worked well together with the story. And yet, while I felt the film was paced well, it just felt like as the story progressed it had to come to an almost immediate halt just so a joke could be told. As for the cast, everybody did well except for Liam Neeson, I'll get to that. Seth was a good lead but I didn't really believe his character was a hardluck kind of guy. Charlize Theron I really liked in this. She gave a very natural performance, her character felt real and not artificial, she wasn't doing schtik or a caricature. She was the most human out of the characters in the film. Sarah Silverman was great as a hooker waiting to be married. I felt she got the biggest laughs. Neil "Doogie" Patrick  Harris's character is essentially the western version of Barney Stinson from How I Met Your Mother, but he did fine in this as well. As for Liam Neeson, I guess the joke is that "hey, it's Liam Neeson"....that's it. I guess it's because he's so out of place it's kind of funny, but to me that was a problem. He plays his character so straight that he isn't even a straight man, thus his character comes off really bland. His henchmen weren't even idiots that he could play off of. He was just a typical outlaw except he's in a comedy. It's like he was in the wrong film. Whatever the joke was, it wasn't really done well. Criticisms aside, I did like the film, however, while I can understand most of the poor reviews it received, I feel they're a tad exaggerated. Especially those calling it the worst film of the summer and what not. If you like Seth MacFarlane's humor or just like this type of comedy, give it a look, but don't expect to get anything else out of it. A good time waster, with a good number of jokes but mostly forgettable. 7 Mongos out of 10 Follow QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM already.....have you done it yet? @Quickreviews on INSTAGRAM. We believe in movies.

[thecriticalwall]

X-Men Days of Future Past - IN REVIEW

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST (AKA THE CONTINUING ADVENTURES OF WOLVERINE! : EPISODE 6 - AN ADVENTURE IN SPACE AND TIME)  Directed by Bryan Singer, Days of Future Past attempts to undo the damage that was done by Brett Ratner's X-Men: The Last Stand and actually pulls it off. Dig this, loosely based on the comic of the same name but baring almost next to no resemblance, in a dsytopian future robot mutant hunters known as The Sentinels hunt and kill mutants, while they enslave humans. In this timeline, Xavier and Magneto have formed a band of renegade mutants to fight the good fight and free humanity. Using Kitty Pryde as their ace in the hole, due to her powers now being able to phase a person's consciousness back through time, they hatch a plan to send one of their own to the past (1973 to be exact) in order to stop the events that lead to this future. Professor Xavier was originally selected to go, but his mind might rip apart due to the stress of going back so far in time. All hope is lost, until one brave mutant steps forward, this mutant--no! This man, is the only one who can endure the mental stress of time travel in order to save the future and of course, the world! He is...THE WOLVERINE! The best mutant ever dammit!....Anyway, faster than you can say "Life on Mars", they send metal bones back in time where he reforms the disbanded X-Men and tries to stop the future events from occurring while also trying to eradicate X-Men The Last Stand.

That's basically it in a nutshell. Bryan Singer has the unenviable task of fixing what went wrong while still trying to maintain the goodwill that was collected from First Class. Much of the original cast returns in some capacity, the main focus here besides Wolverine is the relationships between Magneto, Xavier and Mystique. Mystique's actions are what drive the film as it is her actions that supposedly cause the dark future our heroes are trying to prevent. The rest of the X-Men sort of have their own moments to shine but some of them are relegated to a blink and you'll miss it type of thing. While others are a missed opportunity, fans of Bishop are really going to be ticked. It could've been anybody in his place, that's how little he mattered. Hugh Jackman of course does fine as Wolverine as well as all the other main cast in their respective roles. James McAvoy and Patrick Stewart are great as Charles Xavier and so are Michael Fassbender and Ian McKellan as Magneto. Peter Dinklage as Bolivar Trask (designer of The Sentinels) is almost nothing like the character in the books and though his performance was good, it is a bit suspect that he might be there simply because of his recognition from Game of Thrones. Not to take anything away from Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique but I prefer Rebecca Romjin's take a lot better, even if it is early days, it seemed much more truer to her character and I felt she played the character better. But Lawrence still does fine as does the rest of the cast. Although, there is one character that does steel the show and that is Evan Peters as Quicksilver. For the limited time he was there he was fun to watch and added a much needed shot in the arm to the plodding and almost mundane plot. The film drags at certain points, mostly because it's tearing down while building a new foundation of what's to come and I think that's the film's downfall. The story is very character driven and while that's well and good, the action scenes are too few and it unbalances the pacing a bit. Other than that, Singer does a good job with this, it's not his best as with previous attempts as I felt that there was more energy to Matthew Vaughn's X-Men film compared to this one. Hopefully, with all the pieces finally in place we will get an even better X-Men film, possibly the one we've always wanted to see as there are now certain elements in place that can bring that.

I would also like to say that people who want the perfect X-Men film or are constantly whining that this isn't their X-Men, I can understand, but they're never really going to get what they want. The first 2 films and First Class really came close and were very true to the characters and spirit of the books. But over the years there has been a rotating team of X-Men with so many characters you just can't please everybody. The comic itself is a gigantic clusterfuck to read that is very inconsistent in quality and story. You may never truly see your idea of what the X-Men are onscreen but I do feel that they are represented well enough and it does feel like I'm watching a film about the X-Men. If that's not good enough, don't worry, a reboot is just around the corner, there always is. While it's far from perfect and just above average, the film does what it sets out to do and succeeds. By film's end, everything seems restored to the way it should be and sets us up for the next one, which I hope will bring a bit more excitement this time around. Worth the hype? No. Worth a look? Definitely. 7 Supaflys out of 10 Want this summed up a little better because you're too important or have the attention span of a knat? Check out QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM! We pride ourselves in telling you what to think about a film in 15 seconds or less. @quickreviews on Instagram. We believe in movies.

[thecriticalwall]

Godzilla (2014) - IN REVIEW

GODZILLA - 2014 (AKA MONSTERS ATTACK!...featuring godzilla) Directed by Gareth Edwards (director of Monsters) and a second attempt at an American reboot of the franchise. The story, at first revolves around Nuclear Scientist Joe Brody who is trying to uncover the mystery of the nuclear power plant explosion that claimed the lives of many including his wife 15 years ago. Apparently it was caused by the awakening of a creature. In the present day the same events that occurred in the past  are happening again. This time, Joe gets to the bottom of things and we find out that another creature has awoken and is looking for the other one to mate with. Then Godzilla shows up to cockblock the whole thing or keep the balance or something. The original Godzilla film has almost nothing in common with the rest of the franchise, except that Godzilla was for the most part not really a good guy. Here they pretty much changed that and while it's sort of left to interpretation they outright say he is at the end, the question mark means nothing.

Godzilla is presented here as a force of nature, something that "nature" created to keep the balance. Balance of what exactly is left to interpretation as things are only hinted at or not elaborated on further. The problem is, Godzilla is not supposed to be that at all. The character is a warning. A product of nuclear war, born in fire and rising from the depths to judge humanity through destruction. Though the original film might seem like a product of it's time, it still is quite relevant thematically and it would have made much more of an interesting story, serving as a cautionary tale for humanity's hubris although if done right it won't seem heavy handed or ham fisted. Humanity bound together through trial by fire to try to stop this creature from destroying us before we destroy ourselves. Sure, it's cheesy, but if done right it can work. Hell, it's no more cheesy than what the rest of the franchise became. That aside, they did get the look of the monster right and it's design was well done. Although, Godzilla did look like he just came out of retirement and was a slow and lumbering mess that looked almost as bored as the audience half the time when he appeared. I get that he was slumbering for years but in every film that's always been the case and they choose now to show him jetlagged? Really? The Muto designs and story of these two monsters finding each other in order to continue their offspring was interesting but their designs left more to be desired. They were too plain and almost seemed like a dig at Cloverfield, which carried more of the essence of Godzilla than this did. Character wise, Bryan Cranston as Joe Brody was great for the little time you see him. And it would have been more interesting to see him and Ken Watanabe's character  team up to try to figure out these creatures origins and purpose, while also trying to figure out how to stop this. Instead, we get stuck with Brody's bland son who is a Naval Officer. I'm getting really tired of seeing these types of movies from the point of view of the soldiers. They're too capable, there is less tension because while the odds are against them, they can handle themselves, we don't really worry about them. Brody's son Ford can do anything in this movie except be interesting. He is trained in bomb disposal which helps him create an analogue nuclear bomb, Halo jumping is not a problem for him because he was trained for it. So, he can get close and personal to the action and really not feel any sense of dread for the guy because he can 100% handle himself. It would have been more compelling if it focused on random civilians without any special skills who we get to know throughout the film, maybe they're a subplot while the scientist characters do the heavy lifting. Yes, you can have a soldier character of some sort to be a leader and help guide people or have someone go through an arc and become a leader. However, the character portion should almost be irrelevant because when you watch a disaster movie of anykind, the event is the main character, while all the other characters revolve around it. Here, the main attraction is relegated to a background character until the final moments of the film. I understand that they wanted to build things up but it's so focused on it that the pacing suffers as a result. This film is such slow paced that it just drags. The first and last 30 minutes of this are all you really need to see because those moments are giving you what you paid for. Instead of having monster battles that play on tv screens and get cut before they even start until the very end. As I said, Bryan Cranston was great in this and I liked his story at the beginning. Ken Watanabe as Dr. Ishiro Serizawa was a tad uninteresting but had potential. It seemed hinted at that he had ties to the monster but there was really no pay off to anything he said. He mostly observed, looked worried and gave vague ominous answers that weren't really warranted, almost a waste of a great actor. Aaron Taylor-Johnson (who played the titular character in the overrated "Kick Ass") is quite bland in this. I don't find him to be a bland actor but his character wasn't very interesting and was placed in almost too convenient situations to his benefit. Elizabeth Olsen who played his wife did alright but you could honestly care less about these two. The movie wasn't badly cast but they dominate most of the film with talk about things that could be better substituted with showing more of Godzilla. The effects were fantastic. The film has a nice look and had a very realistic feel to it. Gareth Edwards did a fine job and delivered a good monster fight in the end with some exciting moments in an otherwise mediocre Godzilla film. The film begins with promise then peters out until we're left with nothing in the end with no lasting impression. Kind of sums it up. Regardless of what kind of a Godzilla fan you are or just a fan of monsters or Kaiju in general, proceed with caution for this one. It's nice to look at and has some good effects and a great fight scene but it ultimately leaves you unsatisfied. 6 Gameras out of 10 *Hey, better than our first attempt at least. Anybody can do a Quick Review, but nobody does'em like QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM! See for yourself on @quickreviews on Instagram. We believe in movies.

[thecriticalwall]

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - IN REVIEW

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 (AKA SPIDER-MAN 3) Once again directed by Marc Webb, we continue with the further adventures of Spiderguy Peter Parker. Shedding more light about Peter's parents in a flash back, we see how they met their unfortunate demise. We then see that that doesn't really matter as we move forward with Spider-Man having a grand 'ol time being awesome. He has a great girlfriend and is loved by all. After saving the life of Max Dillon who is basically Jim Carrey's Edward Nygma from Batman Forever. Dillon (a man Rodney Dangerfield could've related to) becomes obsessed with our hero. After a freak accident he becomes Doctor Manhattan and wreaks havoc in New York because nobody likes him. Meanwhile, Peters' old friend Harry Osborn returns to see his Father Norman off into the great beyond but not before finding out that he too will soon perish with the same disease Norman had. Not wanting to leave a pretty corpse, Harry follows Norman's research and inadvertently becomes The Green Goblin. Together, both he and Discount Doctor Manhattan team up to take down the web head. Oh boy heroes, looks like Spidey is in deep this time! Will the web slinger be able to stop his enemies and save New York, while also trying to find out the truth about his parents and maintaining his love life? Stay tuned True Believers! Oh and the Rhino is in this too.

This was really a mixed bag. Plot wise and tonally it was all over the place. In some instances it didn't really know what it wanted to be. We would have high flying action with Spider-Man, which was great and then it just switched to a romantic dramedy with Peter and Gwen. Character is important yes, but the scenes would linger so much that it would almost stop the movie. Spider-Man's scenes would give you a nice adrenaline rush and then just screech to a halt with Peter and Gwen's "who's quirkier?" scenes. Peter's parents were almost unimportant as the mystery was sort of solved but didn't really pay off. We get a reason why Norman and now Harry were after Peter's Father's research but the rest was just pointless to have, especially since Peter will never know the whole truth. The biggest problem with the film is bloat. We have too many villains and set up that it almost has no clear direction. If we had one villain less in this, it would have been better. It would seem that Electro was the one not needed in the film given the events. But in truth, we didn't need the goblin in this at all. Electro was billed as the big bad but was just as unimportant. He showed up and technically had no clear motivation as to why he hated Spider-Man. Yes, he was a man who was already on edge and his misunderstanding with Spider-Man was the catalyst to his freak out but it was just too one dimensional. He was reduced to a lacky once Harry took center stage. And after Electro was disposed of, it was almost an after thought. Dillon left the same way he came in, a nobody. No pay off to his character and quite a disservice. Peter and Max were almost cut from the same cloth. Their story could have been much better if Spider-Man tried to reason with him more, try to get on the same page (and he has done this with other villains in the past) and show that he indeed does understand what it (was) like to go unnoticed. He just doesn't bother to try again and just resorts to outright murder. Power and Responsibility Pete. Yeah you tried to save your girl and the city but you never bothered to try and save the man who just needed a friend. Something in which you clearly saw and understood in him. Spider-Man is smarter than that. Harry had a bit more depth to him and more of an arc but he just sort of shows up and steals the spotlight from Electro and causes major consequences for Spider-Man. And given that it's an iconic moment in the Spider-Man comics, what should've felt more personal between these characters wasn't. While it was sad in and of itself, it felt rushed and could've had so much more emotional weight to it. Harry's relationship with Pete was well done for the most part. I didn't really have a problem with them telling us how great friends they used to be. They show them hanging out briefly and we can get a sense of what kind of friends they were. I thought it was fine. Harry's villain turn was fine as well as he dealt with a father that just didn't really seem to care for him even through the bitter end. He was now a man fighting for his life and was betrayed left and right. He just wanted to live and would do anything to do so. So, him becoming The Green Goblin felt more natural and was quite effectively creepy. The problem though, as I said was that there were too many villains. Either Harry's or Electro's story could have sustained the movie without having to sacrifice the narrative. I thought The Rhino fight was a nice bookend to the film. But it would've been better if he wasn't such a joke and had more to do. Yet it was a nice pay off to above all else, a light hearted film that shows that being Spider-Man gives Peter the ability to rise above his challenges and meet them, while also giving hope to others, thus ending the film on a high note. But my main concern here is while I felt in essence that the Raimi trilogy got Peter Parker right but Spider-Man wrong. Here it's the opposite. Except for being loved instead of being unsure of by the people of New York, The Spider-Man scenes were just perfect. They were fun, energetic, he wisecracked and brings a smile to your face when he was on screen. He feels much more larger than life here, but in a good way. Peter Parker has problems sure, but isn't exactly the hardluck hero he's supposed to be. He's handsome, quirky yet charming and seems a bit more sure of himself. In a way things just seem to go better for him in his personal life than they should. That being said, Andrew Garfield does a fantastic job as Peter and Spider-Man. Tobey never embodied the character for me the way Andrew does. His scenes with Gwen and Aunt May feel so natural and you really do care about his relationships and this character. The problem though is that he almost seems a bit invincible and is not really in a situation he can't handle. You don't really feel worried for him like you should. Emma Stone once again did a fine job as Gwen Stacy. Her and Andrew have fantastic chemistry which brings on a naturalistic portrayal of their character's relationship. Jamie Foxx did okay for what he was given but was just miscast. He was just there for name recognition and that's it. His character felt like an afterthought and that is a shame. Dane DeHaan was great as Harry Osborn/Green Goblin. Dane is a great actor and didn't play things over the top. His character and his motivations were believable and he played them well. When he turned Goblin it was pretty effective, he was very creepy looking and, while brief, was a good villain. Sally Field as Aunt May was great as well. And as always, was Peter's emotional compass. Paul Giamatti as The Rhino was basically a bit part, if they didn't have that final scene with him he didn't really need to be there. And if he did, the least they could have done was made him a running joke. The cast here is pretty strong and for the most part gave great performances. They really elevated this film. The effects were fantastic. They really seemed to have perfected Spider-Man's swinging mechanics, it feels more realistic than previous attempts. The animations are fast and loose and showcase the character quite well. Spider-Man finally looks like Spider-Man. They got the costume fairly note perfect. Electro and Goblin's effects were also well done, from the costuming to the CGI it was very convincing and it seems like nothing was wasted. It all made for some great action scenes. Sadly, you won't really feel satisfied after viewing this film. It improves upon certain things from the first film but feels almost like a step backwards. There was almost no real progression in the story of Peter Parker, in the end he just felt sort of stuck in the same place. If this movie was trimmed down a bit in sections, it could've been much better than what we got. I don't think the film was terrible or (everyone's favorite word) awful as most seem to, it had the potential to be something far greater than what we got, but sadly it was wasted. But I still feel confident that hopefully, 3rd time will be the charm for this one. If you're a Spider-Man fan, you'll most likely in some way either hate or love this movie. General audiences might just find it a decent time waster. Kids will have a great time. It's Spider-Man! 7.5 scowling Leary's out of 10 QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM has all the dirt on your favorite celebrities.....okay, not really but if you give us 15 seconds, we'll give you the real dirt on your favorite celebrities....wait. @quickreviews on Instagram. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Brick Mansions - IN REVIEW

BRICK MANSIONS (AKA 48 HOURS) Directed by Camille Delamarre who also did....well, only this so far. An unnecessary remake of District 13, Brick Mansions takes place in a dystopian Detroit...which is almost not so different from regular Detroit. Drug runner Lino is on the run from crime kingpin Tremaine Alexander. Coincidentally, not so undercover cop Damien Collier wants to capture Tremaine to avenge the death of his father. Infiltrating the titular Brick Mansions, our two heroes cross paths and go head to head with Tremaine and his crew WITH THE POWER OF PARKOUR! Yeah, the thing that nobody really talks about anymore, remember that?

The plot of this film is half ridiculous, half saturday morning cartoons. Luckily it's the latter that's the saving grace for me with this movie. I never saw the original, but from what I've read, the story is fairly faithful to it. However, I think it might not have translated well. It's fairly predictable in some areas and cliched. The rich are evil, the poor are the just. You've seen it all before. David Belle reprises his role somewhat from the original and does okay, there isn't really much of an arc he goes through. Paul Walker as Damien Collier (in his second to last film) does an okay job as well, he has more character growth than Lino, although  both characters grow on you as the film progresses. The chemistry between these two is actually pretty good. They make a great team and play off each other well. The RZA plays Tremaine Alexander, the sort of villain of the film. I say sort of because there is a twist towards the end that's just laughable and even though this film is a bit tounge in cheek, it's still not credible. I really don't know what to make of The RZA as an actor, I don't think he did too good in this. He tries to be Jamaican in some areas (I guess he forgot?) and it's just forced and hard to watch. In the end, I just couldn't take his character seriously. The action and fight scenes were well shot and choreographed and the real highlight of this film. Pretty much one of the only reasons you'd see this besides Paul Walker. David Belle has some fantastic fighting and stunts in this film while Walker actually manages to keep up and equally has some good moments. I have to say, I wasn't expecting much from this one, especially since I heard this was originally going to be direct to video.But, to my surprise I liked it more than I thought I would. If they made a sequel with these 2 again, let alone a franchise, I'd definitely give it a look. The film was shot well, it didn't look cheap and seemed to make good use of it's budget. This is a standard paint by the numbers action movie that does have some genuine thrills despite some ridiculous characters and plot. A decent time killer. Give it a rent. 7 Yamakasis out of 10 If there was a place to find movie reviews in 15 seconds, it would be called QUICK REVIEWS. If such a thing existed, it would most likely be on INSTAGRAM. Well, guess what? It does and it is! Check out @quickreviews on Instagram. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

The Raid 2 - IN REVIEW

THE RAID 2 (AKA THE DEPARTED) From the people that brought you the first one comes the second one. Picking up where the first film left off Rama is back! And this time it's personal (ain't that always the way?) After spending two years in prison in order to infiltrate and rise through the ranks of Bangun's mob in order to weed out how deep the corruption in the police force goes (which is apparently very deep), Rama once again risks life and other's limbs in order to survive.

Once again written and directed by Gareth Evans The Raid 2 surpasses it's predecessor in story, characters, action and runtime! With a plot reminiscent of the Departed and the original Infernal Affairs, Evans weaves a much meatier story which puts Rama through his paces. While he doesn't struggle with identity, the tension is high of him being found out and making out of his mission alive. Iko Uwais does a phenomenal job with the action scenes and character moments. In almost every fight he's in, especially with all of the brutal action showcased, you actually start to wonder if he'll survive til the end. The rest of the cast, some of which from the previous film who have different roles in this, do a fine job as well. From the acting to the action, not one character is a missed opportunity. Possibly taking some cues from Tarantino, two characters (a brother and sister assassin team) nicknamed "Hammer Girl" and "Baseball Bat Man" (yes, really) do pretty much what you'd expect with the tools of their namesakes and yes it is just as brutal as you can imagine. One character that stood out to me was Eka, played by Oka Antara. You don't really expect him to do much but towards the end he really does surprise you. Sad we couldn't get more of him because he was a good partner of sorts for Rama. As I said, plot wise the film has much more going on compared to The Raid. This time we get to see the inner workings of the mob and all of the backstabbing (sometimes literal) that's going on. We see how deep the corruption goes and a few subplots which are addressed and mostly wrapped up nicely with characters you wouldn't think would have a larger role. My one complaint is although Rama suffers a loss in this film, it feels like the revenge subplot takes a back seat since it seems that it's almost not really important to the plot, but I guess they needed a motivator for Rama. Gareth Evans has put together a fantastic and surprising film. It tops the first while not living in it's shadow. He has crafted characters you care about and well thought out action scenes that engage you. He has said that he wants to make The Raid into a trilogy, if that's the case, I can't wait to see what he has in store next. Martial arts films have become much more visceral and rely less on wire work and more on practical stunts. Maybe purists have a problem with this type of direction and while I'm not sure if this is what Bruce Lee intended, if this is the way of the modern martial arts movie, it could be a lot worse. The Raid 2 is a highly entertaining non stop action film that will have you cheering as much as wincing at what you see. By the end of the film, Rama is 2 parts Bruce Lee and 2 parts John McClane and that's just fine by me. 9.5 Ekas out of 10

I'm going to let you in on a secret, this could've been condensed to 15 seconds if you only checked out QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM. Watch 2 people plea for your attention while reviewing movies. @quickreviews We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Captain America: The Winter Soldier - IN REVIEW

CAPTAIN AMERICA : THE WINTER SOLDIER (AKA THE BOURNE AMERICAN) Directed by Antony and Joe Russo, the guys who directed "You, Me and Dupree" if you can believe it, comes the next prequel to the next Avengers movie. Set two years after the first Avengers film, not so mild mannered Steve Rogers is still adjusting to modern times but is slowly starting to get the hang of things when SUDDENLY! he is called into action by S.H.I.E.L.D. Teaming up with Black Widow and The Falcon, The Capmeister uncovers a sinister plot by the equally sinister H.Y.D.R.A. who have infiltrated S.H.I.E.L.D. and plan to turn their weapons against us. Now, on the run without almost no one left to trust and being hunted by the mysterious Winter Soldier, the potential ultimate frisbee champion sets out with his allies to stop H.Y.D.R.A., uncover the truth and save this great land of ours!

I've never been into Captain America and the first film didn't really help all that much. I was mostly a casual fan but the concept always intrigued me and thanks to the first Avengers and this film, I think it's safe to say that I'm fully invested in the character. From start to finish you get a pretty interesting story and great amounts of action with just the right balance of realism and superheroics to make the scenes credible and not ridiculous. Despite being another superhero movie, this is a spy thriller, almost akin to a Bond film, so it's a bit more grounded. However, when you do get to the spectacle it's not so over the top that you roll your eyes. Seriously if you had John McClane doing the things Cap did in this, it would be pretty ridiculous and unbelievable, but with Cap it's credible and makes more sense. The plot is very straight forward, tightly paced and doesn't drag. A bit reminiscent of the Bourne Franchise. If you follow Cap in the comics, you know this story, so there really won't be that much of a surprise with the big reveal, however that still doesn't detract from the overall enjoyment. The action scenes are very well choreographed and do a fantastic job of showcasing Cap's combat skills and the variety of fighting styles he uses. Just like in the comics, his shield is used as an extension of himself during combat and it is showcased perfectly here. Each throw has a purpose. Black Widow is just as lethal and quick. She has plenty of great action scenes here as well, possibly more than Cap. The CGI was pretty good and there wasn't too much of it, there were a lot of practical effects and stunts and that's always welcome. Though with all of the hellicarriers that were shown, it did start to feel like the more recent Star Wars movies at some point. The cast is great. Chris Evans continues to grow as Captain America and I like him in the role the more I see him as Cap. But I do feel he's not as a commanding presence as he should be. Scarlett Johansson does a great job as Black Widow. She was really good in this and had an equal role with Cap. This may have been Captain America's story but it was in Black Widow's playground and they worked really well together as a team. Anthony Mackie was good as The Falcon, another character from Cap's comics but didn't really have much of a prominent role, even so he wasn't a waste and did contribute a lot more than expected. It's also nice to see that Steve finally has a friend he can relate to. Sebastian Stan as The Winter Soldier also did a good performance. He handled the action scenes quite well and while he didn't really have many lines, his very presence always ramped up the tension. Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury was just as good as you'd expect. While he did not have as large of a role as he had in The Avengers, he was still a prominent figure and drove portions of the plot forward. The supporting cast did fine as well and it was interesting to see that almost every character had something to add and wasn't just there to be in the background. The directors have a real eye for action and did a much better job than expected. Cheers to them, can't wait to see what they come up with for the next one. I really enjoyed this movie, it's not just popcorn action that you can just turn your brain off and forget about. It has a lot more to offer for everyone, especially if you're a comic fan, a Captain America fan or are following along with the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There are a lot of easter eggs for Marvel fans and Cap fans alike and most of it, of course is leading up to the next Avengers movie. Though I will say despite that, this was more self contained, so no real prior knowledge is needed. Check it out. 9.5 MIGHTY SHIELDS out of 10 Y'know what's great about QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM? See for yourself @quickreviews on Instagram. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Sabotage - IN REVIEW

SABOTAGE (AKA  A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO VENGEANCE) Written and Directed by David Ayer who wrote Training Day and who's work has been mediocre at best after that, has given us this thing. John "Breacher" Wharthon and his team of elite douchebags steal 10 Million Dollars during a drug raid. They hide the money for safe keeping and plan to split it amongst themeselves, but lo and behold, when they reach their secret stash they find that the money is gone. This can only mean one thing....SABOTAGE! With the team in a state of disarray and mistrust, they suddenly find themselves being picked off one by one. Now, it is up to "Breacher" to find out who is trying to kill him and his team....oh and Breacher's wife and son were killed by the cartel a few years back but don't worry about that.

I didn't have high hopes when I first saw the trailers but I thought it would be at least passable, sadly it isn't.  The plot was a mess, it seemed very unfocused to me. They treat the death of Breacher's family as a subplot that is basically shown, mentioned and then almost forgotten about until the very end with the big reveal that just doesn't seem satisfactory. I guess they tried to keep you guessing and make it a twist of sorts but you'll be more puzzled/annoyed when it happens. As for the tone, I don't know what the hell I was supposed to be feeling watching this besides anger. Was it suspense? Tension? Intrigue? I don't know because the characters ruin it. Which brings me to the cast. Almost everyone is miscast here. Either that, or David Ayer wanted them to be this over the top. Arnold almost always is out of place in anything he does. But he usually can make it work and he pretty much does so here. Not one of his greatest roles or performances but despite what he's given to work with, he's one of the only good things about this movie. One of the other good things were the two Investigators; Caroline Brentwood and Darius Jackson. I don't know what it is but I liked these characters for some reason, they had a good back and forth and comradere between them that was almost fun to watch. If they had a show, I'd watch it. They provided a nice contrast to Breacher's crappy team who ruined everything whenever they showed up. Mireille Enos was the most annoying out of the bunch. She is a very talented actress (she was in The Killing for pete's sake!) and it seems she was wasted here by being given such a horrid character to play. I'm sure her character was supposed to be this way but they could've told her and everyone else to tone it down just a smidge. Everyone of Breacher's team is just an over the top, gung ho asshole who just tests your patience and ruins almost all the scenes by just killing whatever sense of mood or tone was established. It's very frustrating to watch sometimes. Terrence Howard adds nothing in this movie. He's another good talent that was wasted here too. It seems David Ayer (given his track record) likes to write about these archetypes, along with corrupt cops, etc. He is a good writer and director but this feels like it was done by a fifteen year old given free reign. It's really a shame. The action and gore effects are very visceral and are handled well and you probably will wince at a few things but it's just not enough to save it. If given proper execution, maybe this would've been a better film, I have no idea what happened. If this is your type of movie, by all means give it a look but everyone else just don't waste your time. I'll give it this though, it's a pretty good unintentional comedy. 2 Juniors out of 10

Don't have any time to waste and think reading is for suckers? Then you are an asshole. But if you really only have a moment and need to make quick decision, check out QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM. The 15 seconds of your life you'll be glad to never get back.  @quickreviews, We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Need For Speed - IN REVIEW

NEED FOR SPEED (AKA THE QUICK AND THE DEAD) Directed by Scott Waugh and of course based on the video game franchise of the same name, the film tells the story of former race car driver Tobey Marshall who now owns a garage with his friends and struggles to make ends meat. Until Tobey's ex rival Dino Brewster comes to town and asks him to finish the (overrated) Shelby Mustang that THE Carroll Shelby had worked on before his death and in exchange, Tobey will be paid 25% of the profits. After the job is done, Dino challenges Tobey to a race because of his pride but mostly because he's the villain.Tobey's over excited and apparently psychic friend Pete joins in on the race because why not. After what was supposed to be a sportsman like competition, Dino does a very unsportsmanlike like thing and accidentally (on purpose?) kills Pete during the race. Dino's too pretty and rich to go to jail so he frames Tobey and our hero gets put away for 2 years. Now...out for revenge, Tobey reconnects with his crew and sets out to avenge his fallen friend and clear his name in the race of a lifetime! Do you have the need?

This film is very divisive, on the one hand I will admit that The Fast and Furious franchise has done it better but on the other hand you don't really watch these kinds of movies for the plot do you? The story is your basic revenge tale as with most of these types of films. It's fairly simple, maybe shallow to a few but of course the main saving grace are the cars and the racing scenes. Basically what you came to see. It sadly falls a bit short in other areas. Sure you have wells shot racing scenes and some good characters played by good and capable actors but it isn't really memorable. Aaron Paul does and okay job and you do care for his character a bit as the story progresses but he just doesn't fit the role. Dominic Cooper was okay as a villain but just didn't really belong here. Imogen Heap...er, Poots (heh...poots) could've been annoying but wasn't, her character had a bit of a progression as the film went on. Scott Mescudi as the pilot Maverick (possibly a Top Gun reference besides the title maybe) could be a bit grating to some especially with his running joke of how many flying vehicles he shows up in but it kind of worked for me, even though it started to feel out of place after awhile. The rest of the cast did okay as well and while I do feel that there were a few misfires, they did manage to somehow pull it together and make it all work in the end. However it wasn't enough to leave a lasting impression. The racing scenes and practical stunts were my favorite part. CG could have been used to make things more stylish I suppose but when you see a real car in flames get tossed up in the air, you get more of a reaction. Those scenes were well shot as well as the locations. The film is pretty nice to look at. Scott Waugh did a good job directing.  As I said, this film is divisive but that's mostly because either liking or hating films like these is subjective. Is it enough that you have great cars, capable actors as well as well shot racing scenes and stunts? Is a film like this an insult to gear heads? Speaking as a person that's not really into cars that much this is a movie that can kill a good 2 hours but isn't really a waste. It's not cheesy, but I think what hinders it is because that it is a more grounded film. It's not over the top and it's done in a more traditional style. Which can make it come off kind of bland. If you're expecting HIGH OCTANE ACTION! Look somewhere else. If you're just a casual viewer of films like this, give it a look. 7 Goose's out of 10 Can't decide what to see on the fly? Need a quick suggestion? Check out QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM! We make up your mind in 15 seconds or less. Quick Reviews. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Non-Stop - IN REVIEW

NON-STOP (AKA TAKEN TO THE SKIES) Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra (director of Unknown) the film tells the story of Air Marshall Bill Marks (Liam Neeson) who lives a cliched life of a down on his luck alcoholic, divorced and childless human being. To make matters worse, he doesn't really like flying...uh oh! Then, to make matters even worse, the flight that he's sworn to protect is taken over by an unknown hijacker who slanders Bill's "good" name and makes him an enemy to not only the passengers but his employers as well. Hilarity ensues.

All kidding aside, the film was okay. Quite a competent thriller for the most part that keeps you guessing, but if you spot the patterns or the formula, you can probably guess the identity of the hijacker way before the reveal. Most of the action takes a backseat to the tension which I felt wasn't really well executed. The movie I felt was well made but you don't really feel for the characters and what they're going through. There were too many convenient moments (one towards the end was explained that made sense but it's still kind of flawed). When there are action scenes however, they work better than the tense moments. Liam Neeson holds his own as usual and at this point it's to be expected. But I do feel Liam Neeson was miscast in this. He didn't do a bad job but if they cast someone else or maybe Sylvester Stallone maybe it would have been better, but I'll get to that. The rest of the cast do a serviceable job with the material. Julianne Moore was okay, but didn't have much of a main part except for a depressing backstory where she might die soon because of some heart condition but that seems to be glossed over really quick. She helps Liam's character but is mostly relegated to the background. Plot wise, it's kind of a simple story. Nothing wrong with being straightforward but I found the villain's motivation to be a little weak. It just seemed like it was there because it was an easy scapegoat for the villain. You don't necessarily have to be topical in order to have a good plot. Especially since recently in these types of films almost every villain has the same motivation. I think my biggest problem with this movie is that while it's just, at best, an average time waster, a movie like this worked better in the 80's and 90's, this type of formula doesn't really work now. With it's simple plot and semi-cliched characters, maybe if they cast Stallone or someone else it might have worked better. You can still use this type of formula but make it less hokey. Modernize it but get rid of those all too familiar tropes. But if you want a good version of this type premise, I recommend The Delta Force, Executive Decision and of course Passenger 57, to name a few. Otherwise, this is a good film for rainy day but you do have better options. 7 Harrison Ford's out of 10

Oh and check out QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM. You have an opinion and so do we, let's share. @quickreviews on INSTAGRAM. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

Robocop (2014) - IN REVIEW

ROBOCOP - 2014 (AKA ROBOFLOP) Directed by José Padilha who did...uh, stuff we probably haven't seen or heard of, this is of course a remake of the 1987 classic. While it does it's own version of the story, the fundamental origin is still relatively intact from the original film. When the company OmniCorp (instead of OCP for some reason) decides that they want to sell their robot soldiers to the U.S. (of A), they are met with resistance simply because the public will not be sold on these cold and emotionless robots. So, Omni's CEO Raymond Sellars proposes that they add a human element. Make the robot a hybrid of man and machine in order to sell their product better to the masses. Enter Officer Alex Murphy who is killed in a car bomb explosion and is reborn as Robocop. Part Man. Part Machine. Less interesting. I'll tell you right now though, I liked this movie more than I thought I would.

The heart of RoboMurph's journey was kept intact and you can root for him a bit. The characters are pretty well rounded for the most part. Joel Kinnaman (from The Killing) did an okay job as our new Alex Robo. I liked his performance as well as the rest of the cast. Gary Oldman (as usual) was great in his role as the scientist in charge of the Robocop program. Abbie Cornish as Alex's wife was good in this as well. She had kind of a Sharon Stone vibe going here which was a nice added bonus but I will say she helped serve as Alex's moral compass, what helped lead him back to his humanity. Jackie Earle Haley did a good job as an antagonist and was someone you loved to hate. Speaking of which, Michael Keaton was really good in this. He can really play a good sleaze ball character. I really can't say he stole the show (I'll get to that in a second) but it was always entertaining when he was on screen. Now, Samuel L. Jackson is in this as well but it's simply because of name recognition, nothing more. His character adds nothing to this film and if you deleted most of his scenes, the plot would not be affected at all. I get that they were trying to keep the political satire element from the original somewhat intact, but it just doesn't work here. It goes from distracting to annoying fairly quickly. The film begins and ends with him and while in the beginning (just like the original) the reports that are given serve as a set up to the world we're about to see, the rest of the time he describes the scene we just saw. He doesn't steal the show, he hijacks it here and it just interrupts the narrative. The movie practically comes to a halt when he's on screen. And then of course he has to get his trademark F bomb catchphrase in there which is almost Snakes on a Plane cringe worthy. But I like Samuel Jackson as an actor and he really should have been better utilized. Then comes the plot. This film did not know what it wanted to be, it's all over the place. When it first starts, you think it's a hard sci-fi movie that's reminiscent of District 9 in a way. Then it shifts to police drama, then it shifts to what we came to watch. Then it shifts political satire, family drama, then back to Robocop and so on. It can be a bit jarring. The emotional parts with Murphy and his family and some of the action scenes work. I especially liked when they showed what was left of Alex Murphy underneath the metal. It's pretty disturbing and one of the changes I thought worked and Joel played it well. Everything else however just falls apart. With every remake, they try to fix or improve upon things that just don't need it. Robocop himself for example is faster and sleeker than the original. But Robocop never needed to be that. The original may have been slow but he was more threatening. He was built like a tank and could almost not be stopped. He took so much punishment and still kept coming for you. This version is a bit light in the loafers and is built much like today's cars. He gets dents if a bird craps on him. I'll admit though that just like the original, the human element is the strongest portion of this film. You can still get behind him and root for him as a character even though he's not as formidable. But the human element takes to forefront. This version is fully aware from the beginning of what happened to him. His humanity hasn't been stripped away, it can and it does over the coarse of the film and he does regain it but story wise the human journey of what makes us human and humanity in general was much more subtle in the original than it is here. Which is a shame because how the originators handled it actually served the story much better. The satirical elements are maybe few and far between if almost non existent. It's an element that's sorely missed. Making this a bit more serious with an almost guerrilla type of film making technique was a mistake. What worked previously worked because it was just fun. The satirical element allowed it to be taken seriously while poking fun at itself. It can be serious while being humorous while almost being anything it wanted to be. It could stray without losing focus. Without any of that, it kind makes this slightly generic. As for the rating. The film is rated PG-13 while the original had an R rating. The ultra violence actually added to the over the top nature and tounge and cheek satire of the original. This film has really none of that, but I honestly don't think that it hinders the film since the tone (for better or worse) is different than the original. And while this is a reboot and the PG-13 rating will appeal to a broader audience, I think the ramped up violence could've helped it a bit more. It kind of worked for the remake of The Evil Dead. Although, the rating does make this new Robo seem like less of a badass.  Basically, this should not have been a Robocop film. They strayed pretty far enough from the original story that this could have been it's own thing. And like most remakes of this kind, it should have been. The homages are a bit distracting at times and just don't really add anything either, much like Sam Jackson's character. They almost don't really need to be there. If they wanted to make another Robocop, then just make another Robocop. Make a sequel about another Robocop, try to not make it live in Murphy's shadow while still having it be his own character. You can still reference the original, aknowledging it's roots while still trying new things. Maybe even have Alex Murphy make a cameo at the end showing that he is still out there but as a rebel of sorts but carrying out his mission on his own terms. However, my real main problem here is that the idea of a cyborg that's presented is a bit antiquated. Since the original film, look at how many other cyborg movies and concepts have come and gone. Robocop looks primitive by today's standards. Especially when you can have cyborgs who look more human than human nowadays. For example, in the film, Alex suffers third degree burns and half his face is burnt and he has a damged eye. But when he's remade, his face and eye are fixed. So that implies that they have the technology to regrow or repair skin. So in the end of the film they could've given Alex a human like body instead of leaving him in a cold shell. I guess that would've been too high concept for this, especially since regaining his humanity wouldn't have been a problem. But I digress. As I said, yes I liked this movie more than I thought I would. Was it because I set my expectations really low? Possibly. But despite the somewhat messy execution of the plot, it was entertaining. I think if you've never seen the original you might get more out of it. There just isn't enough depth or charm that the original had for it to leave a lasting impression. 6.5 T.J. LAZERS out of 10

****On a side note it was pretty funny to see one of the original Batmen having scenes with the new Commissioner Gordon.

Was that a chore? Well, check out Quick Reviews on Instagram. It only takes 15 seconds to tell you what to think. @quickreviews. We believe in you.

[thecriticalwall]

The Wolf of Wall Street - IN REVIEW

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (AKA GOODFELLAS) Directed by Martin Scorsese (need I say more?) and adapted from the novel of the same name and not starring George Bancroft, the film tells the real life (albeit slightly exaggerated) story of the rise and fall of Jordan Belfort. His boss Mark Hanna convinces him that "greed is good" and sets him down the path of the dark side in order for Jordan to really succeed in life. After losing his job, he starts up his own company where dealing in penny stocks becomes quite the lucrative business. Mostly because of the fraud that he commits. Afterward he teaches the people he continuously recruits his techniques to succeed. Jordan becomes immensely wealthy, destroys his marriage and marries a trophy wife and then promptly destroys that after being investigated by the FBI and in the end is left with nothing even though he was given the option to get away with everything. Wealth apparently makes you lack common sense. Currently Belfort still owes the Government a lot of money.

Scorsese is a director that can almost do no wrong, especially where a lot of the other great directors from the past seem to have lost what made their careers, Scorsese has not and I hope he never does. While the film clocks in at about 3 hours, it doesn't really feel like it. The pacing and story work very well here, it keeps you engaged in the plot and wanting to find out what happens next.  And while the plot does seem common and familiar, the way it's presented and told is very well done. The film really does show the price of living in excess, especially if you're greedy and not careful. Truly a cautionary tale. The cast is fantastic. I really thought I'd be annoyed at Jonah Hill, but he turned in a wonderful performance as Jordan's friend Donnie, who to me just seemed like a wannabe and hangeron to Jordan and just seemed to follow  him no matter what. Although the one who I really wished we could've seen more of was Matthew McConaughey, in what little we saw of him, his character stole the scenes and was pretty interesting to watch. But I guess we're better off left wanting as it might've been too much of a good thing. Newcomer Margot Robbie as Belfort's trophy wife Naomi gave a strong performance. She's very beautiful (with and without clothes, the movie gives you options) and really knows how to push Jordan's buttons. Towards the end of their marriage she really knew how to make him feel small and insignificant and point out not so subtly that he really screwed up. And it's a shame too, he had a good thing going with her. She wasn't two faced, she wasn't bleeding him dry for money and while yes she was just as guilty for staying with him after finding out what he's been up to, even though she didn't like it she cared for him and supported him, he was the one who was constantly screwing up. Which brings me to Leonardo DiCaprio. Leo, while very talented is a mixed bag when it comes to casting. It seems that sometimes he can never fully embody the roles he is given. Sure, he plays them well but sometimes you can have a hard time believing he is that character. Here it's more hit than miss. Leo plays Jordan very well and displays all of the characters flaws and eccentricities quite magnificently. His performance keeps your attention (just like the rest of the cast) and drives the film forward. From the locations and production, this is one very nice looking film. There was a lot of work put into it and all of that shows on the screen. Is this Scorsese's newest classic to date? I don't think so, maybe over time. Is it Oscar worthy? Maybe not for best picture. But overall it is one of his best. This type of film is something he does well. On occasion it can come off a little cartoony but that was the point. Money can do crazy things to people. While it follows a bit of the Good Fellas formula as it has some similar themes, Good Fellas had a bit more depth to it while this one doesn't have as much. A film like this is a ride. And it's one worth the experience. 9.5 POPEYE'S out of 10 NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF CRACK!

Having trouble forming an opinion? We'll provide one for you when you check out @Quickreviews on Instagram. "Quick Reviews" celebrating short attention spans with movie reviews in 15 seconds or less.

[thecriticalwall]

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit - IN REVIEW

JACK RYAN: SHADOW RECRUIT (AKA JACK RYAN RE:BOURNE) Directed by Kenneth Branagh (responsible for the bland and boring Thor) and based on the Tom Clancy character, this latest installment tells a reboot of sorts and shows us some of Jack Ryan's beginnings. After 9/11 Jack Ryan decides to become a Marine, as you do, and gets horribly injured. After his recovery he is recruited by the C.I.A. as an analyst. When we next see our hero, he is working a covert job in Wall Street trying to find suspicious transactions that could link to terrorist activity and lo and behold, he does! Shenanigans ensue as Jack gets sent into the field to try and stop the incoming attack as well as balance his personal life with his sort of fiancee Cathy, who, wouldn't you know it? Doesn't know Jack works for the C.I.A. UH OH! Can Jack stop the attack before it's too late while also trying to save his love life? No, seriously, can he?

All kidding aside, this was a very entertaining movie. No, it doesn't rewrite the spy genre but I disagree that it doesn't present anything new. Plot wise, we are presented with a story that isn't based on any of Tom Clancy's works. A reboot of sorts for Jack and some new beginnings as it were. We see Jack's motivations for joining the military and how he was recruited into the C.I.A. How he meets his soon to be wife Cathy and his upcoming rise in his career in the government. The story is simple to follow and while true that it's more suited to Jack's character, the action beats are there to pump it up since it might not have worked otherwise. Typically, Jack Ryan movies are more political intrigue and thriller like than action oriented, but since this is a new take on the character, action elements were added as they are now common. I guess either the story would have been weak without them or people won't stand for anything else. Kind of a shame. I was a bit hesitant when I heard that Kenneth Branagh was directing the film (mostly because of Thor) but this was one of his better ones. The suspense, pacing and action scenes were all very well done. Chris Pine did a good job as the new Jack Ryan and I think is a worthy successor to his predecessors and while I think he makes an okay Kirk, I believe this role suits him better. Keira Knightley also was good as Jack's soon to be wife Cathy. His wife is usually his rock/moral compass and we can start to see the makings of that here. I thought Keira portrayed that really well. Kenneth Branaugh surprised me twice here. Not only did I think he directed the film well but was good as the villain. He turned in a very threatening performance and provided an icy and in control antagonist in contrast for the in over his head Ryan. Kevin Costner was good as well but his role could have been given to just about anybody. He mentored Jack but was mostly in the background. I guess it was just another name to get butts in the seats. Understandable but a bit of a waste of a small role for a great talent. As I said, while the film doesn't rewrite the book on spy movies or give us anything original, it does give us something a little different than we're used to. That comes in the form of Jack Ryan himself. In most of these spy films, a lot of the main characters can perform nearly superhuman feats while still being presented as ordinary. It's true that the marketing for this portrayed the film in the vein of a Bourne movie but that's not true at all. I feel the film stays true to the character while marketing him for today's action junkie audiences. Jack Ryan still maintains his everyman status and comes off more human than any of the aforementioned spies. And that's a good thing as I think it gives him more vulnerability and is put more at risk. Yes he can hold his own but he's not a super martial artist. I think it's a nice and welcome change of pace from the norm. The film is maybe a little uneven in spots as it switches from action movie to thriller and back again but it's still entertaining and has a great cast. While the biggest criticism is that it doesn't provide anything you haven't seen before, that shouldn't discourage you from seeing it. Give it a look. An Alec Baldwin approval rating of an 8.5 out of 10 By the way, if this review was too long for you, learn to be patient. But if that's a problem then you should follow QUICK REVIEWS on INSTAGRAM. Quick Reviews of movies in 15 seconds or less. QUICKREVIEWS: Your sense of humor will thank you.

[thecriticalwall]

47 Ronin - IN REVIEW

47 RONIN (AKA INUYASHA) Directed by Carl Erik Rinsch, director of such films as this one, the film is a re-imagining of sorts of the famous historical tale of the 47 Ronin. Centering on a typical outcast named Kai who is half British and Japanese (and who was never part of the actual story), he joins the titular ronins on a mission of revenge after their lord is betrayed and forced to commit seppuku (a ritualistic Japanese suicide that is quite honorable for the samurai). Now, Kai and the rest of the ronin plan a siege to take down Lord Asano and his forces to avenge their fallen master. A task of which even victory has it's price. "Victory has it's price". Hey, that could've been a better tag line instead of what we got. Initially Keanu's character was not supposed to have as large a role as he has here, but since Keanu is the main draw and would put butts in the seats, reshoots were done to expand his role. Which brings me to my first problem. Keanu's character Kai kind of felt shoehorned into it. His overall story arc isn't horrible it's just forced in some places. His love story has no payoff and doesn't really go anywhere, his character didn't really need to be here in the first place, it just served as a reason to have the mysticism in it. Which brings me to my next problem, had they chosen a different route than what was done, it could've been an Oscar contender or at least a very entertaining movie. The tale of the 47 Ronin is a pretty well known one and might have been quite epic in scope. Why they chose this route is almost baffling. Sure, it's interesting that they tried something different and I have nothing against that when it's done, but I don't think in this case it was executed well. It was all over the place in spots which made the film seem like it didn't know what it wanted to be. It also didn't help matters that the story moved at quite a slow pace. Another thing was the the sets looked like sets, sure it was high quality and certain pieces were beautiful but there wasn't really any depth to them. It just seemed like a high budget direct to video movie. Had they stuck with one clear vision we could've had something better.

The characters are okay. There was a potentially good subplot with Oishi (who was the leader of the Ronin) and his son that if given more focus, could've possibly been the main crux of the film. As for Oishi himself, he was pretty good for the most part and should've have been the main focus. Keanu wasn't bad in this. And at times it was interesting when the film focused on his character's back story but then quickly took you out of it because this was primarily the Ronins' story, not his, which made it a bit jarring at times. But he did the fight scenes well did a good job with what he was given. As for the films villain, Lord Kira who was actually part of the tale, he didn't really do much. After he set up the death of the Ronin's lord that's pretty much it. He's pretty ineffectual, it seems like they try to build him up but there is no pay off to it. To give you an example he kind of reminds me of this character named Curtis from Hackers. He was initially Kate Libby's boyfriend. When Dade asked about him, his new friend "The Phantom Freak" said "he just sits there and looks slick all day". Yeah, that was pretty much Lord Kira in this. If anything the real villain could've been the Emperor. It could've added some complexity to the story. As for the rest of the cast, the all did fine jobs but there weren't really any stand outs. Maybe Rinko Kikuchi as the witch Mizuki who served Lord Kira, but that was pretty much it. The one and possibly only redeeming factor are the fight scenes. The sword play was pretty well choreographed and along with some pretty good special effects, it made for some entertaining action scenes. Speaking of which, once the story starts to pick up (towards the end), the siege on the castle was a good moment in the film. It shows all of the planning starting to pay off and quite effectively too. There have been other adaptations of The 47 Ronin and I think this is one you can skip. I'm sure you can do worse, but I don't think you'll be missing much if you don't see this one. At most, save it for a rainy day. 6 DeNiros out of 10

[thecriticalwall]

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - IN REVIEW

THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG (AKA DRAGONQUEST):

Directed by Peter (all that and a bag of chips) Jackson, The Desolation of Smaug continues the story of the first Hobbit film. We last left our heroes on their way to the lonely mountain to slay the evil dragon Smaug and reclaim the dwarf kingdom in the name of Thorin, the next ruler. But of course, getting there is part of the "fun". It's kind of difficult not to notice that Peter Jackson is (most likely unintentionally) Out-Lucasing George Lucas. We've got a trilogy set up here that is a prequel to an already successful and popular film trilogy. Except Jackson is doing it right (so far). While there are a few mis-steps here and there, I feel we are getting a trilogy that is on par with it's predecessors. That being said, even though this is called "The Hobbit", it is more of Thorin's story as Bilbo isn't really front and center. He was more prominent in the first film, but not so much here. We should be seeing this world through his eyes much like how Lord of The Rings was viewed through Frodo's but not so here. He mostly just stands around until something important happens and he is used in order to move things forward. Martin Freeman, no matter how sparingly he is used in this one is still fantastic as Bilbo. There is still that innocence but there is a hint of corruption happening the longer he has that ring. Ian McKellan was great as well as Ghandalf but he was also used a bit sparingly but I guess when you have a wizard in your party it's your automatic get of jail free card so without him there as often, it provides much more of a challenge for our heroes to overcome instead of some magical solution or sage advice. As with the first entry, Richard Armitage as Thorin was good in his role and still has that commanding authority that his character posseses and conveys it well. I have to admit, it was great to see Legolas again, even though there was no point to him being there except to attract more of an audience. But, Orlando Bloom still hasn't lost a step and did a fine job once again. Evangeline Lilly plays a new character not in the books called Tauriel. She is another character who doesn't need to be there but was great as an almost equal to Legolas. And while I liked her character and I felt she did a great job, she was caught in a love triangle subplot that didn't serve the story at all. We really didn't need it as there was too much going on as it is. I mean, honestly, do you really care who she'll end up with? We're never going to see her character again in the long run. But, I have to admit, Jackson and the actors make it work and actually make you care, even if it's only slightly.The fight scenes with the elves and orcs was a good highlight in this film. But the real stand out here for me is Benedict (The Sherlock) Cumberbatch as the voice of Smaug (and Sauron). He was very menacing and quite intimidating as the dragon and had such a presence, even if it was only his voice. His build up in this film was worth the wait and his scenes with Bilbo worked very well. I can't wait to see how it all ends with him. The rest of the cast as good and as many as they were just didn't really have much to do. Luke Evans as Han Solo, I mean, Bard the Bowman was good in his role but was a tad limited. But I'm sure, given his circumstances and the books, he'll have much more to do in the final chapter. Everyone else on the other hand didn't really add much. The dwarves were just there and weren't as prominent as they were in the first film. They just kind of seemed to be in the way. I think my main problem with The Hobbit film series so far is that they stretched a more simple story and just added things that just don't really need to be there. Certain elements can be done without as they really have no point to the larger story, it just seems like it's filler. Obviously this was all done to stretch out the series as long as possible in order to make a profit and while most of the time that can be a detriment, it actually sort of works here. While slightly overblown in some places, Peter Jackson has kept the story tight and flowing overall. His caring, love and devotion to it is evident. That's why once again, he continues to make more entertaining entries into this fantastic saga. Check it out. 8 Deedlits out of 10