Theatrical Reviews: Avengers: Age of Ultron

I am usually a reasonable reviewer.  I tend to judge films based on their merit and not on my poorly acquired preconceptions.  Yet; all reasonability aside, I hate Avengers: Age of Ultron.  It’s nothing personal, I hate every super-hero movie now; overexposure has made me terribly biased. 

And you know what the worst part is?  There has been scarcely a bad super-hero movie released in theaters over the past 5 years.  It’s gotten to the point that when I do see a legitimately bad Super-Hero flick, I get excited because I can actually give logical reasoning to my hatred, and bash the film uninhibited.

So be warned: I tried as hard as I could to be objective, but I think it’s fair to say that I wanted Avengers: Age of Ultron to be bad when I walked into the theater today.  So if you’re a screaming Marvel fan-boy, you might want to read somebody else’s review.

Avengers: Age of Ultron is a very average super-hero flick; and it’s very below-par for Marvel Studios.  It’s just passable; an entertaining diversion.  Will most people be satisfied with it?  I suppose.  But after the quirky-entertaining Guardians of the Galaxy and the legitimately great Captain America 2; Avengers 2 feels like a failed follow up.

And it’s not just worse than recent Marvel films, its worse then its immediate predecessor, the first Avengers flick.  It isn’t as funny, as entertaining or as emotionally punchy.  Lately it’s seemed like each subsequent Marvel Studios flick has topped the last, but Age of Ultron is a definite step backwards.

By itself, Age of Ultron is a totally passable hero-picture.  It’s got a suitably evil villain, a pseudo-likable cast of heroes, and plenty of high-tension action sequences.  Really the movies biggest problem is that the plot is too thin.

The screenwriters tried to push a lot of elements into this script.  There are three new heroes, a new villain, a subplot for all seven or eight of the original characters, and four or five action sequences.  Also:  the movies plot sets up future Marvel releases, has an obligatory Stan Lee cameo and still finds time to interject plenty of Joss Whedon’s humor into the dialogue.

While all of those things might seem like good things to have in a movie, when you try and put all of them in equally, your movie feels overstuffed and unfocused.  The movie keeps a good pace, and has a fun sense of humor so you’re never bored, but you’re never particularly invested either.  One of the dozen or so main characters dies in the end, and it’ll leave you pretty much totally unaffected.  The movie is all mass with no weight.

If you really want to keep following this whole “Marvel Cinematic Universe” thing that’s going on, then Avengers 2 is clearly a must see;  but if all you want is a diverting action-flick with super-heroes, there are definitely better ones out there.  You’d probably get just as much pleasure out of watching the first Avengers a second time then you would from watching Avengers: Age of Ultron;  They’re practically the same movie.

Theatrical Reviews: Ex Machina

Hollywood has had a proud history of building artificial intelligence, with mixed results.  Sometimes the friendly robot is lovable and friendly, like Short Circuit.  Other times we get an army of Arnold Schwarzeneggers that bomb the planet.

In Ex Machina we are introduced to the latest addition to this robo-pantheon, Ava.  She’s an innocent looking thing who was created by a much more villainous acting tech genius, played by Oscar Isaac.  But is she evil or cuddly?  That Is a plot element I wouldn’t dare spoil.

The true intentions of two characters; the robot and her creator, are the two mysteries that surround the whole film and keep it moving forward.  Does Ava truly like the main character?  What is the mad genius planning to do with said robot?  And what does Gleeson’s character, a surprisingly effective surrogate for the audience, have to do with it?

The film is practically brilliant in its simplicity.  You won’t have any trouble following the plot, and there are only three characters you have too keep track of:  the robot, the genius, and the surrogate for the audience.  Yet the movie may leave you stewing for hours afterwards over the films implications about our future and how our own world seems to be slipping faster than ever into it.

Everything in the movie is about the sci-fi elements; but what really makes the film work are the interactions between the characters and the drama that creates.  By drama I don’t mean that people yell and get mad at each other.  I mean that there is a conflict of wits; and that the audience is only privy to part of it.

It should be said that the acting is fantastic all across the board in Ex Machina.  Gleeson is relatable, Isaac is lovable devilish, and Vikander, who plays the robot, has arguably the most complex performance of the lot.  A movie that was as reliant on character portraits as this one really needed a great cast to work; and I’m happy to say that they did not disappoint.

Ex Machina is one of the batter Artificial Intelligence movies out there.  It’s intriguing, intellectual and even a little heart-breaking all at the same time.  If you like sci-fi or quality filmmaking then this is clearly a must-see.

Theatrical Reviews: Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2

I don’t remember much about the first Paul Blart film; and I can only hope that I will eventually remember Paul Blart 2 with as much fondness.  It takes a special level of not giving a crap to make a movie like this.  The only intriguing part about the film is trying to figure out whose fault it is that it was made.

Are these people trying to be funny?  I’m not 100% sure.  I spent the majority of the films runtime with a steel-like un-amused look on my face that only faltered a couple of times.  I was incredibly unentertained

It’s kind of hard to explain how a movie this over the top and goofy can’t be funny just by virtue of its own ridiculousness.  Kevin James plays his part as hammy as one might want, and I’ve liked him in other films.  So why dosnt he come off as funny here?  There are several other decent actors attached to this film as well.  Neal McDonough, who has been in plenty of good movies, plays the villain; and doesn’t come off nearly as threatening or funny as he should.  What is turning these talented actors into obnoxious balls of cheese?

The answer, I have found, is in the script.  It is well known that a good actor is nothing without a good script; and this is doubly true when it comes to comedies.  The jokes in Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 are abhorrently bad.  They’re not even funny-bad, these jokes just aren’t funny.  Sure every once in a while you might giggle at the pure goofiness of it all; but that can only get you so far.

Part of the stories problem is that it barely has a plot.  These characters and their interactions are so thin that they’d collapse under the weight of a feather.  The only really funny side-plot is the romantic one between Blart and Daniella Alonso’s character.  The rest of the films is filled with corny jokes you will see, often literally, an hour away.

What it comes down to is that Blart is not an interesting or likable character; and there doesn’t seem to be anything Kevin James can do about the fact.  I don’t care about his relationship with his daughter, his dead mother or his raging obesity problem; things that should be taken seriously enough to give the movie necessary weight, but instead are taken so lightly that they might as well not exist.

I do not find the misery, hardships or triumphs of mister Blart entertaining in any way.  Worse then that; he isn’t very funny either.  Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 isn’t a particularly unpleasant film to watch; but it is a pointless film to watch.  The point of seeing a 90 minute kids flick is to enjoy yourself, but all Blart will do is waste your time.

Theatrical Reviews: Furious 7

When the original Fast and Furious movie came out nearly a decade-and-a-half ago, I can’t imagine that the filmmakers had any idea what the franchise would become.  That 2001 flick was kind of a niche thriller, and not a very good one either; yet its sixth sequel, Furious 7, has grabbed itself one of the biggest openings of all time.  The franchise has seriously ramped-up in popularity and audience appeal.

Furious 7 follows the path of the last couple of furious films in that it is less about car racing and more about a series of unnecessarily complex heists all revolving around a central villain and a small handful of McGuffins.  The action sequences are pretty much just as silly and astounding as the ones in the previous films, and the films plot is nearly as kinetic.

It is fun and entertaining in pretty much all the same ways as the rest of the more recent flicks in the franchise have been, and that is largely due to the direction of Justin Lin. Lin is a name you’ll probably be seeing attached to other projects since he’s almost single-handedly resurrected this Fast franchise from the financial graveyard to one of the highest profile series in Hollywood.  He knows how to take witless brainless material and transform it into high-energy entertainment.

“So,” you, my inquisitive reader, might be asking, “is there anything that makes Furious 7 different from its predecessors?”  Well, there isn’t much; and that is one of the biggest problems with the movie.  Sure there are a few new characters introduced, the McGuffins are different and the villain is new; but there haven’t been any significant changes to how the franchise functions.

Fast Five seemed like a fluke; a movie in a crummy franchise that had somehow stumbled its way into a fun entertaining actioner.  Then when Fast and Furious 6 came out it showed that Lin new what he was doing, and that these much stronger car-heist movies would continue.  Furious 7, on the other hand feels less like a return to form and more like a return to formula.

I’m not going to lie;  I was enamored with Fast Five and Six when they came out;  but Furious 7 is just a little bit too same-y feeling.  As much fun as it was, it just didn’t do enough to separate itself from its predecessors.  There is nothing here to justify its existence. 

So is Furious 7 bad?  No, it’s actually pretty good for what it is.  But if you’ve seen any of the other recent Fast n’ Furious movies then you already know exactly the sorts of things that are going to happen in Furious 7.  I was really hoping that this flick would do more to mix things up, but it ended up feeling kind-of redundant.  Regardless, I’d still recommend this flick to anyone who likes solid action movies; just be warned that franchise fatigue is beginning to set-in. 

Theatrical Reviews: Home

I, for the most part, have a soft spot for animated films.  The process alone is mind blowing, as is the care that is put into most films of the genre.  Add to that a quick pace and colorful visuals, and you’ll be hard pressed to find an animated film that I don’t at least find divertingly entertaining.

Home, I’m afraid, is one of those rare un-entertaining animated films.  It isn’t awful, but it doesn’t really have enough going for it to carry its audience through its nearly 2-hour run time.  The basic conceit, characters and sense of humor are all passable for the first fifteen minutes or so, but when stretched to feature-length the film becomes tiresome, and even sort of obnoxious.

Is the movie funny?  A little bit.  Is the movie heart warming?  Sort of.  The tiny little good things that are scattered through-out the movie cannot withstand the childish-stupidity of the rest of the film.  It doesn’t help things along that the score is mostly-made up of half-baked Rihanna songs and that Jim Parson’s alien character brings to the table a Jar-Jar-Binks level of annoying.

Home is a movie that is relatively easy to sit through, but it isn’t the kind of movie that you want to sit through.  I imagine your kids might enjoy the lame humor and lame characters, but why should you have to suffer for their gain?  Especially when you can probably buy much-better alien movies for families at Wal-Mart for $5.  Why would you want to watch Home when you could be re-watching Lilo and Stitch or E.T. The Extraterrestrial?

I seriously feel like the filmmakers were on auto-pilot during the production of Home.  Was there any thought put into the jokes?  Not much.  Was there much thought put into casting?  Nope; I’m pretty sure the casting was actually done by the marketing department, because the woman who recently released the single “Bitch Better Have My Money,” was cast as the innocent little girl.

The movie isn’t really as awful as I’m making it out to be, but it’s also probably not worth paying the money to watch.  Will it be a solid way to get your kids to be quiet for two-hours on a Friday night?  I guess; but it accomplishes this at the expense of your own adult movie-going experience.  If you want to go see a movie with your kids, Spongebob is still in theaters.  If your kids want to watch this movie specifically for some un-godly reason, then wait for it to come out on DVD and save yourself the boredom.

Theatrical Reviews: It Follows

It is rare that horror movies get good reviews from critics, myself included; and when they do I’m always in the theater on opening day.  The only thing that outweighs my hatred for crappy horror films is my love for great ones.  So I was excited as all get-out when I read reviews for the indie horror flick It Follows.

The horror genre is a delicate one.  It requires a certain kind of mood and artistic creativity to get it right.  You can never be predictable, you can never be ridiculous and you must always be credible.  The Exorcist, for example, as beloved as it is, has never been a favorite of mine simply because I was never sold on the fact that the little girl was a demon; she just looked like a girl in make-up to me.

It Follows isn’t quite the horror masterpiece that it’s being made out to be, but it is a really good movie nonetheless.  It’s another in a long line of surprisingly good horror movies that are about sex; and it milks its base premise for all it’s worth.

The second act alone is fervishly captivating.  The concept is well conceived, and wonderfully orchestrated.  We never find out what “It” is, or why it “follows.”  For all we know John Carpenter’s The Thing, The Bodysnatchers and The Invisible Man all had a monster baby.  The mysteriousness of the circumstances adds to the scariness and atmosphere however; so the lack of information is probably a good thing.

The performances are all okay, and the cinematography is passable; but mostly what makes the movie work are the stirring horror sequences and the solid atmosphere that rotate around it’s well conceived premise.

There are a few things that keep It Follows from reaching the heights of any of the horror classics that I’ve name dropped in this review.  The movie is focused on a group of mostly un-interesting teenagers that aren’t too dissimilar from the teenagers in the average stupid horror flick, and they do a couple of stupid teenager things that are kind of annoying.

Also; while the movies first two acts shine, it’s third act falters in comparison.  It’s final sequences add needed meaning to the movies plot; but it comes off as kind of dull and anti-climactic for such a riveting movie.  I wish they had ended the picture with a bit more of a bang.

As a whole I really liked It Follows, and will most likely watch it again.  On the scale of recent horror movie scale it’s bellow new greats like The Babbadoook, or The Guest, but it’s pretty awesome none-the-less.  It Follows is a must see for any horror movie fan with half a brain.

Theatrical Reviews: Insurgent

My adamant refusal to read any more young adult novels may have seriously hindered my powers as a reviewer. 

Most of the times, when you go see a movie, you expect it to meet with you on your own terms man-to-film.  If the film is enjoyable, then it will be enjoyable independently; if the film is obnoxious, then you have no-one to blame but the film itself.  Those are the rules

From what I can tell these new Divergent movies do not play by these standard movie rules; apparently in order to fully enjoy them I must first read the book.  Whenever I’m confused by the nonsensical story?  It turns out it was explained in the book.  Whenever I can’t keep track of or care about the numerous sub-characters?  I’m told they were already really great in the book.  It’s kind of irritating.

To be fair that criticism sticks better to last years original Divergent then it does to its first sequel, Insurgent.  Does this new movie still try and keep track of a bunch of meaningless sub characters?  Yes.  Do large portions of the movie’s central premise make absolutely no sense?  Yes; but those problems are held at bay, though never remedied. By Insurgent’s organized, well paced, plot and simple story.

Just giving a movie a simple three-part structure and a well established central conflict can do wonders to any movie series, and while those things don’t save Insurgent from the wasteland of boring that is its central characters and premise, it does a great job of making watchable what could have been incredibly frustrating.

“Watchable,” however, is not the same as passable.  Insurgent gives us very few reasons to give a flying flip about its one-note protagonists, much less the seemingly dozens of side-characters.  It also has the potential to stretch an audience’s suspension of disbelief.  Thank goodness this movies story is quick-paced and mcguffin-filled otherwise it might drown in its own ridiculousness.

There is a portion of this film where the strong majority of the films protagonists are strapped to mind control devices; yet they are only used once.  The villains use these devices to make one nameless character kill herself, why didn’t they just do that to everyone?  Problem solved.  There are tons of little annoying plot things like that through out the flick.

In the end I can only muster up so much hate for Insurgent; most of the stuff I don’t like about it is the same stuff that I didn’t like about the first, and for the most part Insurgent is a fair sized upgrade above that.  It’s not good, but if you liked Divergent then you’ll probably like this one even more.  And if you’re a fan of the book, this is obviously a must see.  Just don’t go expecting this to be on par with Harry Potter or The Hunger Games.  As far as movie series go The Divergent Series is a C list-er at best.