A Good Day to Die Hard (aka Die Hard 5)

Yesterday was valentine’s day and because of that (and a couple of other things) I was in the mood for a good action flick.  I wanted to see Bruce Willis blow shit up.  I needed the quips and a really fantastic bad guy (or bad girl).  What I needed was Die Hard original sauce.  Die Hard 5 is definitely not Die Hard original sauce.  But it was Bruce Willis blowing shit up so I guess I got what I wanted.  Sort of.

It was not good.  There were obscene amounts of death and destruction.  The number of totaled cars alone was staggering.  The dialogue was lame and the quips were incredibly weak.  And the story?  Well, the story is this: blah, blah, blah, Russian baddies; blah, blah, blah Chernobyl; blah, blah, blah uranium; blah, blah, blah reconnecting with estranged son.  BLAH.

Don’t even get me started on the camera work.  Oy.  There was tons of moving camera, even when there was no particular action in the scene.  Then there was the speedy editing that made no sense.  Oh and the zooming.  OH. THE. ZOOMING!  There was one scene, early on, where the camera zoomed in and out on each person in a room and there were like 15 people in the room.  Actually there might have only been 5 but the camera kept moving, and zooming, and moving again so at some point I got totally lost.

And the cast?  Well Bruce seemed not totally thrilled to be there.  Thankfully there are movies like Moonrise Kingdom to remind me that he’s a great actor.  He delivered lines and shot a lot of people so I’m sure he was in the movie but he still seemed kind of absent.  Then there were some nondescript Russian baddies and that was a problem.  I want my baddie to be recognizable.  Where were the Alan Rickmans and the Jeremy Ironses (Irons'?) ?

So what did I like?  Well I liked having Russians as the bad guys again.  And I really liked the guy playing John McClane’s son, Jack.  Aussie actor, Jai Courtney, had that honor and I REALLY enjoyed his “work.”  Ok, his “work” consisted of tight tees, big biceps, and shooting at people but he did it well.  

 And honestly...it was still better than Conan.

Resident Evil: Retribution (in 3D! even)

Yes, I spent 3D money on a crap film.  Also, I refuse to apologize for it. I have a weekness for crappy franchises.  Give me Blade or Underworld or Resident Evil any day!  I'll be there with my glasses on.

Resident Evil: Retribution picks up exactly where Resident Evil: Afterlife left off.  Like exactly where it left off.  Oh yeah, I'm going to assume the only people reading this have seen the other 4 preceding movies.  If not, this is no place for you.  Go on and read something of Tracy's.  She watches the important stuff.  Speaking of Tracy's work on this here blog, I was watching the movie and thinking, "Gee, I wonder if I can relate this to Tracy's theory on very powerful, very damaged girls in movies."  Then I quickly quashed that because A) Jovovich isn't a girl and B) THIS IS A RESIDENT EVIL MOVIE.  Oh and for those of you who have seen all the Resident Evil movies, a few of the past favorites show up in this one and that made it kind of fun too.  No Chris Redfield.  Boo :(  But Luther and Carlos are there. :) Yay!

The story is this:  Jovovich's Alice is still trying to do whatever it is she thinks she's supposed to be doing (escaping an Umbrella facility, taking down Umbrella, etc.) to end the game, er, movie series.  This time around she wakes up in an Umbrella facility (shocking, I know) and is supposed to meet a group of beefy mercenaries who are there to get her out so she can save the outside world from the infected.  The facility she's in was an old, Russian submarine facility that Umbrella bought and turned into biohazard testing sites.  Sections of the facility have been set up to look like different parts of the world (NYC, Tokyo, Moscow, Berlin, and suburbia).  This iteration of the RE movies played out much more like a video game than any of the others.  There was a clear mission (getting out) and we were provided with maps, and graphics showing where to go.  The Red Queen was back starting up the biohazards in each site just like it would if you were playing the game.  I don't play these games so it's very possible this was lifted straight from a game and I just don't know.

Um, what else can I say?  As mentioned, I saw this in 3D (at my local, cheap theater where matinee 3D shows are $5.75-bless 'em) and was glad I did.  They made good use of it and it looked pretty cool overall.  Paul W.S. Anderson (not to be confused with the Paul "P.T" Anderson whose movie also released this weekend and is probably outstanding) loves directing these slo-mo action films and he does it well. It gets a little old after a while but it's fun to watch and he does it well.  What he doesn't do well is direct actors but then the term "acting" is used loosely when referring to these types of films.  Everyone showed up, they knew their lines, and they kicked ass.  Plus most of the guys were good looking and full of muscles:

Milla remains one of my girl-crushes.  We're the same age and she looks just as fantastic now as she did 15 years ago.  She's a total goofball in person (I've been to a few of her Comic-Con panels) and I love that.  She might have had a different career but I think she digs doing these fun movies and I think she digs working with her husband.  So good for her.

The Expendables 2

Ridiculous is really the only word that comes to mind.  There aren't enough words in the English language to accurately describe how truly ridiculous The Expendables 2 is.  However, if you're a fan of massive death and destruction then this is your movie.  In the first few minutes of the movie they must kill at least 100 men.  Nevermind the scenes later in the movie when they wax poetic about the loss of life of their friends or the people they're trying to protect.  They're ready to make random thugs' heads explode.  And explode they do.  Random thugs in this movie don't just get shot and fall down.  No, Random thug gets shot, a bucket of blood spews from his chest or his head literally explodes, and then he falls down.  It was excessive and gross and sure to make grown men cheer just as loudly as their 13 year old sons. 

I guess you could say there's a story but it doesn't matter.  What matters is how many people can they kill in extreme ways? Also, how many more action stars can we get into this movie?  Actually that's the only part that kind of works.  The idea of putting the likes of Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis, Van Damme (who looks ROUGH-see below), Statham, Li, Lundgren, and Norris into one film is slightly genius.  There were lots of little "in" jokes where these guys were quoting each others' famous lines from their biggest movies.  That got old but it was more in the right direction.  Keep it tongue-in-cheek and don't get all serious on us and the movie would have been so much better.  Speaking of, I'd like to take this opportunity to request that Sylvester Stallone not deliver the eulogy at my funeral.  Oy.  No one, and I mean NO ONE, needs to hear him trying to sound serious about life and death and who dies young and who lives on and on and on.

It was still better than Conan, which isn't saying much.  The best acting nod would have to go to Chinese actress Nan Yu.  Ms. Yu's character, Maggie, had this inexplicable crush on Stallone's character, Barney.  Wait, no, it's totally explicable...Stallone wrote the movie. Don't worry, he let her down easy and maybe she'll be back for The Expendables 3.

Anywhoodle, it was still fun and filled with tons of action so I don't want to be harsh.  I wouldn't pay big bucks to see it but I do think it works better on a big screen than on a home television.  I mean, you need to get the full effect of just how lovely exploding heads can be.  Plus, where else would you get to see this?

Total Recall - Maybe they could help me with my memory problem

The beginning of this post would be a good place to compare the current Total Recall to the Total Recall from 1990.  Except there’s a problem…I can’t remember much about the original.  I guess I need Rekall Inc. to help me remember the movies I’ve seen.  That’d be cool.  I do remember the original being comically over-the-top.  I remember faces changing or melting or something.  And of course I remember the lady with the 3 boobs.  But that’s about it.  I’m a purist by nature and feel Hollywood should leave well-enough alone.  The only reason to remake a film, when one gets right down to it, is money.  There was no reason to remake Psycho but they did and they blew it.  There was no reason to remake Karate Kid but they did and they actually didn’t blow it (though the title is wrong since he learns kung-fu but I’m splitting hairs).  There was no reason to remake any number of movies but it won’t stop so quit your whining.  (I’m speaking to myself here too.)  I understand wanting to leave movies alone, even if they’re goofy, sci-fi classics.  But I also kinda understand wanting to offer up a different version of something, especially if it was a goofy sci-fi classic.  I’ll tell you my rule of thumb…never see a remake without seeing the original first.

So what I do know about the original is that it was directed by Paul Verhoeven and starred Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sharon Stone.  Mr. Verhoeven is known for such cinematic genius as Showgirls and Starship Troopers.  Ok, the director of the current Total Recall, Len Wiseman (aka Mr. Kate Beckinsale), isn’t much better (two Underworld movies and Die Hard 4) so we can’t really compare the directors.  I will say that I liked the world that Wiseman created better.  I also appreciate that he took a movie that was goofy and tried to give it some gravity.  I’ve read the Phillip K. Dick short story, “We Can Remember it for You Wholesale,” on which the original is based and the Schwarzenegger version is closest to that source material because of one thing…Mars. But that's all I'm gonna say about that.

So what did we end up with in this version of Total Recall?  Well first off the effects were way better.  And as I mentioned earlier, the world created for this film was pretty cool looking.  It was dark and dismal and I can see why Colin Farrell’s character, Doug Quaid, longed for something more.  Speaking of, the story is this: Doug Quaid, factory worker and husband to Kate Beckinsale’s Lori, dreams of escaping his boring life. Doug finds himself at Rekall, the place that implants memories of a bigger, more interesting life.  The only problem is, Doug had a bigger, more interesting life or did he?  No, he did.  So he spends the rest of the film trying to figure out who he was and why his wife is trying to kill him. Jessica Biel and Bryan Cranston are in it too and both try to pull Doug to their side of the scuffle.

If it were a better movie it would have gone into the whole 'struggling with identity' thing but it wasn’t so they didn’t.  I guess they didn’t have enough time, what, with all the shooting and running and stuff.  The acting was what you’d expect from an action film.  I do so love Farrell and will never hold these types of movies against him when I’ve seen things like Ondine and In Bruges.  Biel I can take or leave.  She just doesn’t do it for me.  Beckinsale is fine and really the best thing about her and, honestly, the best thing about this film was her hair.  She has the best freaking hair!  Plus it flew around all slo-mo style as she’s chasing Farrell down.  I covet her hair.

If it were a better movie they may have addressed some of the logical issues, like how the un-breathable air stays away from the inhabitable part of the city.  But it’s not a better movie.  It’s a fun, action flick perfect for summers.  So go, enjoy Kate Beckinsale’s hair on the big screen and try telling me I’m wrong about it being the best part of the film.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
Director: Timor Bekmasomthingorother
Stars: A lot of people you'd recognize but may not know their names

Oy.  I just saw AL:VH tonight and thought I should post about it before I lose any steam. In fact I went for a drink with my dear friend Jenna after the movie and before I could enjoy my cider, I had to jot down some notes so I wouldn't miss anything.  The problem is, this may all come out as gibberish.  I'm not a writer and I'm aware of that. When something burns my bacon this badly, I tend to make even less sense than usual.  Also I'm watching my Gamecocks pull out a win against Arkansas so I'm a little distracted by that too.  It's the top of the 9th but we're only ahead by one run.  Wow, these guys look really young.  I'm getting off track.

My notes look a bit like this:
Jenna's quote
Blast SGS for writing this drivel
Action good but tired of slo mo fighting/blood splatter
CG was terrible
Mary good as Mary but not crazy enough
Dominic Cooper was good but the hair. Oh the hair.
Stylized, if one enjoyed Wanted...
TRAIN WRECK.  Literally.

Now I will expand a bit on the notes.  Jenna, again I will remind you, is a dear, sweet friend.  She goes with me to all the bad movies.  She was with me for Conan and many others since.  She, like me, has low expectations for movies like this but it's rare that one actually pisses us off.  At one point in the movie she leaned over and said, "More vampires than you could swing a dead horse at."  Mind you at this point in the movie a vampire was literally swinging a horse around by the hoof.  Also the swinging of the horse took place during a stampede.  This was one of the fakest looking things I've seen on screen in a while.  (Buh Bye Razorbacks!  Where was I?)  There was another shot of the Gettysburg battlefield that looked terribly fake too.  Shameful use of CGI when it was obvious they blew their budget on the slow-mo fighting scenes.  The whole Matrix way of slowing down action for effect is So. Overdone.  It's especially obnoxious when buckets of blood splatter out all over the place.  But this is a vampire movie and there needs to be blood.  Plus the fighting was pretty cool.  So while I'm on the subject of the look of AL:VH I will mention the director, Timur Bekmambetov.  He directed the Angelina Jolie/ James McAvoy action film, Wanted.  I liked Wanted.  It had some issues but was an enjoyable film.  Timur (I'm not typing his last name out again so he'll have to forgive my informality) likes overly-stylized films and this one, though set in the 1800s, was still pretty stylized. 

I think my biggest problem was the writing.  I read the book, written by Seth Grahame-Smith, and enjoyed it. The whole time I was reading it I kept thinking, "they're going to have to add a lot of action for it to work as a movie."  I didn't like myself for saying that but it's sadly the truth regarding audiences and what studios thing audiences want.  I think the reason the book worked was because it reads like a real Lincoln biography and the vampire stuff was just another layer to his life.  The movie didn't achieve that.  They took out all the clever vampire politicians, the assassination, and the ending (which I really enjoyed).  They added a best friend (played by Anthony Mackie, who I adore) and a vampire baddie (played by Rufus Sewell who I also adore) for unknown reasons. As the credits rolled I had this thought that the Seth Grahame-Smith who wrote the book would (should) be so angry with the Seth Grahame-Smith who wrote the film.  It felt like such a sell out situation.  In the movie, Lincoln only had one son.  In the book he had four, like in real life.  In the movie Mary Todd Lincoln got kind of depressed after the death of her son.  In the book she really lost it and never quite came back, like in real life.  I understand that movies are limited to the amount of content that can be included but would it have killed them to show a few other boys running around the White House?  Would it have killed them to have Mary be inconsolable?    Oh!  I can't forget the literal train wreck.  It seemed rather meta for them to do it but there was a real train wreck inside of a train wreck of a movie.  It was at that point that I nodded and said, "Yep.  That's about right."

I'm not even going to bother going into the actual story.  It's not worth the time or effort.  Plus it's late and I'm tired.  I'm just disappointed because they could have done some really cool things with the material from the book. The movie jumped around and skipped over stuff that should have been there.  It's just so frustrating.

So what was good about the movie?  I did mention the fighting and even though I'm tired of the slo-mo I did get a kick out of it.  Also good was Benjamin Walker who played the eponymous Abraham Lincoln.  He really struck me as a young Liam Neeson.  Then I looked him up on IMDB and realized he actually played a young Liam Neeson in Kinsey.  Give that casting director a pat on the back.  He did a good job in a crappy situation and really knew how to wield an axe (not a euphemism).  In fact all the actors seemed to rise above the material. Mary Elizabeth Winstead was cute and sweet as Mary Todd Lincoln.  Dominic Cooper was good (as usual) as Henry, the Giles to Abe's Buffy.  And, as I mentioned, the rest of the cast did what they could. 

I'm done.  It was better than Conan but I had higher expectations for this than I did for Conan.  I knew AL:VH was going to be bad but I didn't think it was going to be this bad.

I know how you feel, dude.

Battleship

Battleship

Director: Peter Berg

Stars: Tim Riggins!, Liam Neeson, Alexander Skaaaarrrrssssgaaarrrdd, and Andy Roddick's wife

I find myself not having the energy to write about yet another movie.  I’m pretty sure we all knew that Battleship was going to be bad.  It was obvious from the trailer.  It was obvious when it was announced that someone (who had totally lost their marbles) decided to make a movie out of a board game like Battleship.  Well it wasn’t great.  It wasn’t awful either but there were some big issues. 

The story.  Oh, the story.  So there are these naval exercises that include the US, Japan and some other countries that quickly become irrelevant.  Oh and apparently it's worth noting that NASA sent out a signal to some planet that was discovered to have similar properties to earth.  The aliens from said planet decide to invade because they want to take part in the naval exercises.  Then it’s up to the good folks on Oahu to save the world. 

So that’s the story but how about the plot?  Please don’t make me discuss the plot.  There were holes in it big enough to steer a battleship through (sorry, had to do it).  There’s one in particular that I’d actually watch the movie one more time to see if I’m right about it.  If you saw the movie let me know because I need help with this one huge problem. 

HOWEVER, there was a lot of pretty great nods to the military both active and retired and that was fine with me.  It was nice to have such a big movie pay huge respect to the men and women fighting not only for our country but apparently the world.  Plus the big battle that put the USS Missouri to use was a cute part of the story and I’ll forgive it. 

Poor Taylor Kitsch.  They really keep trying to make him into a movie star and it’s just not clicking.  I think he needs to try his hand at some smaller indies before jumping into another leading role in a doomed, big-screen, bigger budget, movie.  I think there’s potential in him but I’m afraid it’s more of the FNL-sized potential and not huge, action movie potential.  He needs to have a talk with whoever (whomever?) is giving him career advice.  He wasn’t bad in this.  He wasn’t bad in John Carter either.  He just doesn’t have whatever that spark is that leading actors have. 

Skaaaarrrrsssgaaaarrrrdd!  I think he's doing Blue Steel, which is appropriate since he was in Zoolander

The rest of the cast was fine.  Rhianna, though on-screen for much of the movie, didn’t have a ton of actual lines.  Liam Neeson was criminally underused and actually forgotten about for a good chunk of the second half of the movie.  Then we come to my dear Alexander Skaaaarrrsssgaaaarrrd.  Mmmm.  He was cute and sweet in this but I could have done with a lot more screen time with him. I should probably also mention Brooklyn "The Body" Decker.  Sweet girl who could have been worse.    

What was good you ask?  Besides showing the love to the armed forces, it was a fun movie.  That is, if you can get past the plot problems.  There was lots of humor, cool effects, and slightly interesting aliens.  It wasn’t much worse than something like Armageddon.  So if you enjoy mindless, destruction movies then this one is for you. 

Mirror Mirror

Mirror Mirror
Director: Tarsem Singh
Stars: Julia Roberts, Lily Collins and Armie Hammer

This is yet another instance where I think film critics weren't hugged enough as children.  Mirror Mirror was silly, campy and goofy.  BUT IT WAS MEANT TO BE!  This is not a serious movie.  It's a fun time with a cute spin on an old classic.  There's no need to over think it.  Is it perfect?  No.  But it was fun and pretty to look at and sometimes that's enough.

Also...it's totally family friendly.  I specifically think girls of just about any age would get a kick out of it.  Plus there's a nice little message about girls being capable of rescuing themselves and I'm all for that.  If you have any interest in this movie see it in a theater.  Tarsem's work really is best on a big screen.

So the story is a known one and I think we're getting weary of the fairy tale stuff.. We've OD'd on vampires and so I think next up is all this fractured fairy tale stuff.  I think that doesn't help this movie, especially when Snow White and the Huntsman looks so good.  But Mirror Mirror was fine as far as the story goes.  The pacing was fine.  The tweaks were good.  Overall it worked for me.

The direction was good. I'm sure I've mentioned my love for Tarsem before and had been slightly disappointed in Immortals.  I was really afraid this was going to be awful but it wasn't at all.  Yes, it's terribly silly but it's obvious that was his intention.  Julia Roberts hammed it up and seemed like she enjoyed every minute of it.  Armie Hammer was also able to just go for it and had to be in some situations that would have given many other actors some pause.  The dwarves were great too and I enjoyed how they utilized.  Lily Collins may have been the only one who didn't jump in with both feet but mostly she was fine.  The costumes were incredible and sets were beautiful.  That's why I love Tarsem.  I want to see a thing of beauty and he does that.

In fact I was with the movie all the way until the credits rolled and we were given a Bollywood number.  It was a little strange but still kind of fun.  I think the only other real distracting thing on the screen were Snow's eyebrows.  They were serious.

John Carter couldn't keep me awake

John Carter
Director: Andrew Stanton
Stars: TIM EFFING RIGGINS, and some capable actors who likely had different expectations of how it would turn out.

The reviews for John Carter are all over the place.  You can read one review and the critic will go from saying horrible about it and ends the article with how it's not that bad.  One review I read basically said that if you can set logic and intelligence aside it's actually pretty fun.  I'm a fan of logic and intelligence though, and I don't think one should have to sacrifice both to enjoy a movie. 

That said, I did not expect to fall asleep within the first 30 minutes of the movie!  Maybe I could blame Daylight Savings and if I had seen it on Saturday my sleepiness wouldn't have been a factor.  It wasn't boring but apparently it wasn't worth fighting for either.  It was terribly cheesy and a lot of what ended up on screen didn't work.  But I feel like there is a decent movie in there somewhere.  I see what director Andrew Stanton (he of Wall*E and Finding Nemo fame) was going for but it just didn't quite get there.  It probably doesn't help that another Pixar director recently had a great entrance into live-action directing. The acting was so-so and I'm sad to say that Taylor Kitsch just can't hold a movie.  I actually really like most of the cast in John Carter (aside from Lynn Collins-who I have no real opinion about) and feel like they were bogged down with a goofy script and lame story.  There were times of humor but mostly those times seemed ill-placed or just didn't land as well as they should have.  The story just didn't work and the dialogue didn't help.  There was some good intention but you can't make a movie based on intention. 

So what did work?  The effects and world created on Mars, er "Barsoom," were pretty cool.  The races that inhabit the planet were interesting but I'm not sure why there were humanoids mixed with non-humanoids. I'm not familiar with the book written by Edgar Rice Burroughs on which the movie is based so I'm sure he explained it thoroughly there but we got nothing in the movie.  There was action and excitement and uh, did I mention the effects?  I think now, what with all our technology and stuff, was a good time to make this movie so it could look cool.  But it was just really lacking in so many other areas.  It was missing that spark that makes a movie great.

As I mentioned, the acting was fine.  The cast that Stanton pulled together was pretty incredible.  You may not recognize all the names but you'd know their faces.  There were British staples like Mark Strong, Dominic West, Ciaran Hinds, and Samantha Morton.  Plus there were some pretty darn good Americans like Willem Dafoe, Thomas Haden Church and Bryan Cranston.  They were all fine and did the best they could in an odd situation.

I'm not selling this movie, am I?  It really wasn't awful.  It definitely wasn't Battlefield Earth or Pluto Nash bad but it wasn't Star Wars great either.  Hey, it was waaaayyy better than Conan if that helps.  For a more coherent review, check out what Tracy had to say over at Examiner.com. 

I think I'm glad I saw it and I want the best for Kitsch.  I mean, look at him:

How about with short hair?

Ok, ok...I'm done.

In Time - Time is Money and 99% don't have enough

In Time (formerly Now, and before that I.M. Mortal)
Director: Andrew Niccol
Stars: Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried and a bunch of other young Hollywood types

Wow, I don't know that a movie has ever been released with such timeliness.  Seriously, this is the ballad of the folks "occupying."  The deal is time has replaced money.  Everyone physically ages to 25 (and that's it) and then their clocks start.  At 25 you get a year and most everyone (uh, 99%?) has to earn more time.  However that time you have and earn gets spent on rent, coffee, bus rides, food, etc. and the price of everything keeps going up and up and up.  So it's cool that you age to the point where you're probably the best you'll ever look but you spend your days, hours, minutes worrying about the time you have left.  If you're wealthy you live in constant fear of being robbed and attacked for your time.  Everyone's got complaints.

JT's character, Will, lives in the ghetto time zone of Dayton and gets gifted with a century of time from a wealthy man whose mind has aged even though his body has not.  Of course it's assumed by the timecops that Will stole his time and killed the guy.  EVEN THOUGH HIS SUICIDE IS ON CAMERA!  Will decides the best way to spend his new time is by going to the richest time zone, East Greenwich.  In fact there were lots of cute little nods to names and places that have to do with time.  He meets Seyfried's character, Sylvia, in East Greenwich and coincidentally she's the daughter of the richest man alive.  Stuff happens, they end up on the run Bonnie and Clyde style and try to find ways of giving those in need more time Robin Hood style.  All while trying to take down the man, aka her dad, played by Vincent Kartheiser (Connor!) and out run the timecops who are led by Cillian Murphy.

Mostly the movie was fine if a bit all over the place.  The idea (and story) is a nifty one but there were tons of plot problems.  Add on the issues of time passing on screen (dark night to sunny day in an hour) not really jibing with the time passing on Will's arm.  Oh, right, your clock is glowing on your arm (as seen above) so there's no way to not be aware of it unless, you know, you constantly wear long sleeves or kicky gloves like Sylvia does.  Also a lot happened very quickly but with no set up, plan or explanation.  The viewer just kind of had to accept what was happening without giving it too much thought.

This is the kind of cast, filled with gorgeous 25 year olds, that give aging Hollywood actors coronaries. Seyfried was good but I could have done without the wig.  I liked the chemistry with her and Timberlake but she's adorable and a good actress so I'm guessing it'd be hard not to have chemistry with her.  I do have to give her major props though.  People run a lot in this movie and Seyfried did a lot of running in really tall heels.  My hat is off to her.  Cillian Murphy was as incredible as he usually is.  Seriously, the dude is great and should be getting much more work.  Conversely Alex Pettyfer was as terrible as he usually is and I was left scratching my head. I always wonder how these "It" actors/actresses get chosen.  Dude should get way less work than he does. But I will admit that I like the way he looks.  Vincent Kartheiser (Connor!) was good but instead of being weasel-y Pete from the 60's he was weasel-y Philippe from the not-too-distant future.  The poor guy has landed solidly in the land of the typecast. 

And what about Justin, you ask?  Well as a matter of fact, I'm currently sitting here watching JT rapping and singing with Jimmy Fallon and wondering why he doesn't give acting a rest for a bit and put out a new album.  Does that answer your question?  He wasn't horrible.  He just wasn't great.  Matt Bomer (LOVE HIM) did more in his very few minutes of screen time than poor JT did in the whole movie. 

So not bad but not great either.  It got stomped this weekend by Puss in Boots which I wanted to see but had fears of a theater full of kids.  Plus my cheap theater only had one non-3D showing. Stupid 3D.

The Three Musketeers

Wow!  The Three Musketeers is getting way worse reviews than it deserves.  This is probably one of those times where critics don't allow themselves to have fun and just enjoy a movie for once.  It has lots of problems with the biggest one being a lackluster story which does nothing to set it apart from past versions.  BUT WHO CARES?!?! Not me.

This 2011 update of the classic tale is tons of fun and should not be avoided.  Plus, I advise that you go see it in the theater and don't wait to see it at home.  HOWEVER...you do not have to see it in 3D to enjoy it.  It was actually shot with 3D cameras though and was not transferred in post as so many movies are these days. I saw it in regular 2D but will likely go back and see it in 3D just to compare.

Ok, I'll admit it...the movie is over the top in just about every way.  The costumes were gorgeous and the sets (often standing in for actual locations-boo) were exquisite. 

From l to r: Aramis, Athos, Milady, and Porthos.

The cast was very good and on the whole did a much better job than the last group (but I do so love Oliver Platt). In fact it's extremely difficult to not do direct comparisons.  Logan Lerman as D'Artagnan surprised me. I have seen him in movies like 3:10 To Yuma and Percy Jackson but was mostly unimpressed.  I had no expectations of him in this movie and was surprised at how well he did.  He was overly cocky but delivered.  Lerman handled the fight scenes (mostly with swords) incredibly well and was the right age for the youngest Musketeer. Matthew MacFadyen was fantastic as the often drunk Athos and played it more broken than buffoon. Luke Evans was the delicious and tortured Aramis.  Keep your eye out for Evans.  He's done a lot of supporting roles in films like Robin Hood and Clash of the Titans but has a list of things coming out in the next year like Immortals, The Raven and a little movie called The Hobbit.  Ray Stephenson as Porthos had lots of cocky bravado and was less the comic relief.  In fact, really these Musketeers were funny but so much less dopey than past iterations.  They left the dopey to the supporting cast which I think was a smart move.

Speaking of dopey, the major buffoonery was left to Orlando Bloom who played uber-ponce, Duke of Buckingham.  His hair and outfits were pretty dang ridiculous and I have a feeling it was hard for him to not overact because of them. Christoph Waltx, who kicked butt in Inglorious Basterds was a very good Cardinal Richelieu. The two people playing King Louis and Queen Anne were good but you can look them up on your own. Milla Jovovich was fine as Milady deWinter but I think she was only in this because her husband was the director.

Since I brought up the director, Paul W.S. Anderson, I may as well share my thoughts on his work too.  I liked a lot of the choices he made for this and overall think he did a fine job.  The dude is good with action and this movie had tons of it.  My biggest complaint was a tool he uses often in the Resident Evil movies...the slo-mo fight scene.  In fact, I'm betting the fight choreographer is the same guy too.  Really you could have put Milla in one of her Resident Evil outfits and the fighting would have been identical.  He didn't over use the slo-mo fight scene but it was really obvious when it was being used.

Listen, the movie isn't going to win any big awards but it is what it is...FUN.  Don't have high expectations and you'll like it.

Real Steel. Real fun.

Ok, ok, this isn't from the actual movie.

Real Steel
Director: Shawn Levy
Stars: Hugh Jackman, Kate from Lost, a cute kid and some other folks


I don't know why the critics hate on fun movies.  Is Real Steel going to win any big awards?  No.  Did it have problems? Yes. But it was a good time and totally worth the $3.25.  In fact I would have paid the big ticket price at the theater with the bigger screens and better sound and not regretted it one bit.

The story is one you've seen over and over and over.  In fact they combine a bunch of stories from a bunch of feel-good movies.  But why bother watching 3 or 4 of those (like Rocky, The Champ and Iron Giant) when you can watch just the 1?  I'm not selling this, am I?

The deal is: Jackman plays Charlie, a former boxer and loser of a guy who can't even win robot boxing matches against a bull (no joke-a robot fights a bull).  Charlie is such a loser that he finds out his ex-girlfriend died and he has absolutely no interest in their son.  So he proceeds to sell his son (to his ex's sister but still) in order to buy a new 'bot.  The son, Max, ends up with Charlie for the summer even though they've never spent any time together. Ever.  Like at all.  But somehow Max's aunt, who now has sole custody and is unaware her husband is short 50k, would rather go off to Italy and leave her nephew with Charlie.  This is a man who the only thing they know for sure is that he's awful when it comes to being a father. Charlie takes the 50k, gets his new 'bot, puts it into a fight above his class (I guess?), and the thing gets demolished.  While on a hunt through a junkyard for parts, Max accidentally finds an old 'bot, named Atom, who kinda saves his life. Max decides to program Atom to fight like his dad used to.  Lots of fun fights and bonding over machine-on-machine violence ensues and their relationship develops into love and respect, etc.  Ugh.  Ok, ok, the story sucks.but you want to know what was good about it, right?  Well the good wasn't too hard to find. 

The cast did fine and the kid was good.  They avoided schmaltzy by having the kid be smart-assy and slightly manipulative but in a fun way.  There was a nasty Russian chick in this who owned the undefeated 'bot, Zeus (predictably the exact 'bot Atom faces at the end).  The whole time I kept thinking her part could have gone to Posh.

Maybe it's just the hair and styling but I think Posh woulda kicked butt in this role.

Her acting couldn't have been worse.

The soundtrack was very good, however, the scored music was heavy-handed and tried really hard to force emotion.  This is unsettling for me because it was legendary Danny Elfman who scored the movie.  I usually LOVE his stuff.  Anywhoodle the un-scored stuff was just right for this kind of film and featured the likes of Eminem (which was funny because a song of his was playing when Anthony Mackie shows up and he played Papa Doc in 8 Mile which, of course, starred Eminem and I'm rambling now), The Beastie Boys, The Crystal Method, The Prodigy, 50 Cent, Tom Morello and more.  Guess what soundtrack I'm getting?  This will be good work-out music. 

But the best part was the boxing.  I kinda wish there was more of it but maybe they're holding out for the sequel.  C'mon you know when this movie goes over $100 mil  Real Steel 2: Electric Robot Boogaloo will start production.  And I'm not ashamed to say that I'll be in the theaters for that one too.  I have no idea if the robot action was animatronic, CGI, or a combo but part of me wishes there are real versions of Atom, Noisy Boy, Zeus and the Twin Cities in storage at Dreamworks.

Want to read a review rooted in more reality?  Check out what Tracy had to say over at Examiner.com

Warrior - MMA works just like family therapy

Warrior
Writer/Director: Gavin O'Connor (as Jenna said, "He'd have to be Irish to do this movie")
Stars: Joel Edgerton, Tom Hardy, and Nick "Mumbles" Nolte

I hate sports movies.  I hate them because they almost always make me cry.  Ok, ok, I love sports movies.  I love them more than the sports themselves.  I love basketball but give me Hoosiers any day over a game between the Utah Jazz and well, some other team I find terribly boring.  Don’t get me wrong, I love being at a live sporting match when I’m invested in one of the teams but being really invested takes time. Time I would rather spend getting invested in movies about sports. 

This brings us to Warrior.  I, of course, really liked it.  I’m one of those rare girls that doesn’t get all "EW!" about boxing.  I don’t know much about MMA or UFC but I do know that most of what they do in a ring is way more fun than regular boxing.  So it may not surprise you to know this was NOT my first MMA movie.  This was, however, the best one I've seen.

Warrior is a story about two brothers fighting for their lives.  If you’ve seen the trailer then you know most of what happens in the movie.  Starring Joel Edgerton as a smokin' hot physics teacher (wish my physics teacher looked like that) and Tom Hardy as a smokin' hot ex-Marine.  Supporting the two smokin' hot brothers were Nick Nolte as the alcoholic dad and Jennifer "no mother of two looks like her" Morrison as the wife of the physics teacher.  Brendan, the hot physics teacher, is fighting to keep his home.  Tommy, the hot ex-Marine, is fighting to escape from his past.  Their father, an alcoholic not allowed to really make amends, trains one brother while the other goes back to his former gym to be trained by an unorthodox trainer with a penchant for Beethoven. (An aside, whenever I type out Beethoven I hear Bill and Ted saying Beeth-oven. Heh) The plot isn’t new but the story was good.  No matter who won you know their lives would be different.  But therein lies the problem. You can't really not root for both of them equally.  Parents of more than one child are LYING when they say they have no favorites. My parents were so smart to just have one.  Sorry, back to the movie. Who does one root for? Both are hot.  Both have problems they're trying to fix, one no more important than the other.  The movie consistently kept you going back and forth and I appreciated that.  It's a good problem to have.

The other smaller problem was trying to understand what was being said.  Nolte has always had a gravely voice and done a bit of mumbling but he’s reached new levels of gravely mumble. I think the movie could have had some better dialogue but maybe they were banking not having to say much to communicate emotion.  Not being one myself I'd hate to generalize...but I'm under the impression that men tend to have issues communicating like, emotions and feelings and stuff. This movie was probably pretty realistic as far as that goes.

The acting, aside from not understanding some of the sparse dialogue, was good.  The directing was good and I appreciated some of the choices the director and editors made with sound.  It does seem like they were trying for Fighter levels with this but they didn’t achieve it.  I sometimes wonder if directors or even writers think to themselves while in the midst of a project, "This is gonna get some awards."  That would be the time the movie doesn't reach its potential.

Apollo 18 - turns out not so awful

Apollo 18

My answer to Tracy's throwing of a gauntlet

I’ve seen a few of the ‘found footage’ movies (Blair Witch, Cloverfield, and the Fourth Kind [that counts, right?]) but have mostly avoided them on the whole. Mostly I find them to be disappointing. I think it has a lot to do with the ending or typically a lack of.  This movie was no different.  What sucks is that I love paragraphs at the end of anything.  Seriously.  I have this weird attachment to paragraphs and you get those a lot with ‘found footage’ movies.  There were some sentences at the end of Apollo 18 and instead of wrapping it up for me I think the very last sentence was so cheesy it took away from the whole thing.

Anyway, on to the good stuff.  It really wasn’t *that* bad.  It wasn't great but it really wasn't awful.  I went in with basement-level expectations but was surprised that I didn’t hate it. 

One thing that I liked was that I jumped way more than I thought I would.  Even though I knew something was coming they still managed to make me jump.  And that’s what I want from a scary(ish) movie. 

The rest of the movie was adequate.  The acting was so-so.  The one actor who is currently on Alphas and used to be on October Road (I'm still bummed we never got an ending to that show) is really cute.  I didn’t really even notice dialog so that's neither good or bad.  There was a plot and a story and it had a solid beginning and end. 

The strangest part of the movie was the song they used over the credits, an instrumental version of “We Three Kings.” It’s like they said, “well it’s a movie about three guys so let’s use a song about three guys.”  In fact I can't even remember anything about the rest of the music and I usually have some sort of opinion on it.  Huh.

I do agree with Tracy on all her points but especially her first one:

1.       Spend some time establishing the personalities of your characters.

The movie came in at a brusk 86 minutes and there could have been 14 minutes of time spent showing us more of the astronauts lives.  They could have used pictures of them graduating from the Naval Academy (or wherever astronauts matriculate), footage of them getting married, more footage of their wives and children actually speaking to a camera, and so on.  But no, all we have is the footage that was ‘found’ and then loaded onto some website which I will never visit.

Disagree with me?  Then you should read Tracy’s review which is rooted in more reality.

Hey, it was better than Conan!