Cindy Prascik's Review of X-Men: Days of Future Past

Dearest Blog, today it was off to the cinema in the hope that X-Men: Days of Future Past would live up the hype. I am pleased to report I was not disappointed.

Spoiler level here will be mild, limited to one very specific, non plot-related...um..."asset" that I must mention.

Logan travels to the past to try to change history and avoid a terrible fate for mutants and humans.

Well, dear Blog, whenever the 70s are in play, one thing's for sure: the fashion is going to be good for laughs, whether intentional or not. While Days of Future Past doesn't go full American Hustle, it's fair to say the ascot is not Michael Fassbender's best look.

I love the cast of X-Men: Days of Future Past like I've loved few others. Were I to make a bullet list of the acting awesomeness, we'd be here all night. Suffice to say everyone is just great, and it's worth mentioning that Evan Peters--who is routinely terrific in American Horror Story--is every bit as good as his better-known castmates in his sadly limited screen time.

With its wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey plot, Days of Future Past could have ended up a convoluted mess, but instead it's handled expertly, a clever story that never bogs down. If the movie feels a little too long, I can't say there was so much as a minute I wasn't engaged. The effects are solid and--yes!!--we do get one (1) "pants optional" scene with the ever-fit Mr. Jackman. (The movie gods have heard my prayers!) If I had one complaint, it's that I kinda feel like what's the point of anything happening if you can just go back and make it un-happen, or what we'll call "The Heroes Effect."

That sounds like a pretty huge problem, but it diminishes my enthusiasm for neither the film nor the franchise.

I did not see this in 3D, and I can't say I felt like I was missing anything.

X-Men: Days of Future Past clocks in at 131 minutes and is rated PG13 for "sequences of intense sci-fi violence and action, some suggestive material, nudity, and language."

X-Men: Days of Future Past gets full marks for writing, acting, directing, and effects, and a few small quibbles won't stop me from calling it a truly great movie.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, X-Men: Days of Future Past gets eight.

Until next time...

Your argument is invalid.

MOVIE REVIEW: X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

Convinced that mutants pose a threat to humanity, Dr. Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage) develops the Sentinels, enormous robotic weapons that can detect a mutant gene and zero in on that person. In the 21st century, the Sentinels have evolved into highly efficient killing machines. With mutants now facing extinction, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) volunteers to go back in time and rally the X-Men of the past to help change a pivotal moment in history and thereby save their future.

Director: Bryan Singer 

Cast: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen.

Release Date: May 23, 2014

Runtime: 2 hr. 11 min. 

Genres: Sci-Fi Action, Superhero Film, Action, Fantasy

Review:

All in all I don’t think I’d be too far off base by saying that X-Men: Days of Future Past was probably more challenging endeavor than assembling The Avengers.  Thankfully Bryan Singer is back in the drivers seat along with an incredibly strong script which works surprisingly well even with the all the characters and timelines at play.  Singer’s ability to weave complex storylines while keeping the story’s heart is his gift to the series.  Watching him build this epic story will leave most fans even more bitter that he choose Superman Returns over the third X-men film.  Everything about the story is huge and the action set pieces are simply dazzling with the film rarely faltering during its 2 hour runtime.  James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence are all in fine form.  They’re all much more comfortable in the characters skin bringing even more depth and meaning to each of them.  Hugh Jackman also gives us his best turn as Wolverine since X-2.  The original cast gets their moments to shine even if some of the new characters mostly serve as superhero fodder with the exception of Evans Peters Quicksilver who’s gone from the film far too quickly.  X-Men: Days of Future Past was probably one of the most anticipated film on this years calendar and is a rare example of a film delivering in spades.

A-

Cindy Prascik's Review of Godzilla

Dearest Blog, yesterday I headed to the cinema to see Godzilla with the rest of the known universe.
Spoiler level here will be mild, pretty much nothing you wouldn't know or have guessed from the trailers.

The fate of the world hangs in the balance when giant monsters do battle.

Well, dear Blog, I gotta say this is the first time I ever wished I had a video blog so I could make the video and audio out of sync for this review. My version of an homage. Sorry, best I got.

Godzilla's latest screen outing has a bit of a split personality. The titular monster does not make his first real appearance until almost exactly halfway through (I checked the clock) and the first and second acts are like night and day.

Act one is our setup, and it's a little slow and "peopley" for my taste. The cast boasts some noteworthy names: Bryan Cranston, Juliette Binoche, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins, and David Strathairn. Whatta we got, an Oscar and a handful of nominations there? For all that acting juice, nobody is really worth a mention either way, other than to say, if you were thinking of seeing this movie just because you love Juliette Binoche...um...maybe don't, m-kay?

Act two: MONSTERS. Woot! I can't speak for anybody else, but I sure as hell didn't see Godzilla because I thought Bryan Cranston might be looking for an Oscar to go with his Emmy. I saw it because I like monsters...big, scary ones that look like they're coming off the screen at me. And let me tell ya somethin', people: if I'd seen this in 3D, I might have wet myself. The monsters are phenomenal, absolutely everything for which I'd hoped, imposing with just the right touch of silliness here and there. The disaster effects are great too, authentic looking and presented in such a way that the mass destruction never wears thin. (Are you paying attention, Man of Steel?) Though the first hour does feel a bit long, once the action gets rolling, you won't care...or even remember.

Godzilla clocks in at 123 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of destruction, mayhem, and creature violence."

If Godzilla's first act feels a little sluggish, I'm pretty sure I was grinning from ear to ear for the entire second hour. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Godzilla gets seven.

Until next time...

A number four...and super-size it!

MOVIE REVIEW: GODZILLA

The king of all monsters gets a reboot with this Warner Bros./Legendary Pictures production helmed by Gareth Edwards, who gained critical attention with his intimate twist on the giant-creature genre with his feature-film debut, Monsters. Frank Darabont (The Mist) and Max Borenstein provide the script. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi 

Director: Gareth Edwards 

Cast: Aaron Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Bryan Cranston, David Strathairn, Ken Watanabe

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of destruction, mayhem and creature violence

Genres: Creature Film, Sci-Fi Action, Science Fiction 

Review:

Gareth Edwards’ Godzilla is filled with top level acting talent.  So much so that Juliette Binoche stops by for a cup of coffee and is gone before you notice it.  Bryan Cranston is there, makes an impression, and is gone.  Then there’s Ken Watannabe and David Strathairn looking stern and concerned for the majority of their screen time.  Throw in Aaron, is his voice really still cracking, Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen for good measure and you have a lot of recognizable faces who really don’t matter in the grand scheme of this film.  This film is name Godzilla for a reason after all.  Edwards, shooting a visually beautiful film, shows a level of restraint that’s rare for big budget blockbuster.  His slow reveal of the titular monster is like watching a monster mash version of a burlesque show, lots of tease before the payoff.  The human stories are clichéd but interesting enough to keep you entertained in between some massive set pieces that feel fresh but familiar.  The monster on monster action, which includes destroying some fun vacation spots, is top notch with excellent CGI throughout especially Godzilla himself.  Some of the battles do lose a tad bit of their luster since Pacific Rim ran through some similar sequences but there are plenty of moments which are filled singular Godzilla greatness that’ll bring a gleeful smile to anyone raised on the original films.  Be sure to watch it on a massive theater screen.

B+

MOVIE REVIEW: NEIGHBORS

Seth Rogen, Zac Efron and Rose Byrne lead the cast of Neighbors, a comedy about a young couple suffering from arrested development who are forced to live next to a fraternity house after the birth of their newborn baby. Neighbors is directed by Nick Stoller (Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Get Him to the Greek).

Director: Nicholas Stoller 

Cast: Seth Rogen, Zac Efron, Rose Byrne, Dave Franco

Release Date: May 09, 2014

Runtime: 1 hr. 37 min. 

Genres: Comedy 

Review:

Neighbors is a refreshing surprise of a comedy.  Not because it’s hilarious, which it is, but because it’s actually a lot smarter than you’d expect from any of the trailers.  Sharply written, the R rated comedy is just as much about a tit for tat war between a frat house and 30 something neighbors as it is about learning to grow up and become an adult.  This may sound a bit heavier than you’d expect but it’s all handled very subtly but the theme is there and it really elevates it about other raunchy comedies.  As for the comedy itself, it’s nearly perfect.  The laughs come at a fast pace hit a wonderful zenith during various moments of its raucous runtime.  Seth Rogan and Rose Byrne make a surprisingly effective combo even if someone like Byrne ending up with something like Rogan and having a baby requires more suspension of disbelief than most comic book movies.  Zac Efron and his chiseled body, flexed throughout, brings some impressively refined comedic chops to his role.  He could have easily fallen into some tried and true stereotypes but he avoids them thanks to the script.  Neighbors is one of those films that’ll be quoted for years to come and for good reason.

B+

Cindy Prascik's Review of The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off to the pictures for an afternoon with one of my favorite heroes, the Amazing Spider-Man.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

Spidey faces off with a trio of new foes, while Peter Parker deals with the travails of teen love.
In the Amazing Spider-Man 2, Andrew Garfield reprises his role as the titular web-slinger. Whatever problems this movie has--and, trust me, it has 'em--Garfield's enthusiasm for the role really shines and is something special to watch. As a fan, there's nothing quite like knowing the guy in the suit is as excited about it as you are.

The movie doesn't stretch Garfield's talent, but it's better for having him. The cast boasts some pretty big names, but if there's anyone else worth mentioning it's Dane DeHaan, who is terrific as Harry Osborne.

Like its predecessor, the Amazing Spider-Man 2 has inexcusably poor special effects. For all the money the filmmakers have thrown at the screen, it looks no better than a video game. Jamie Foxx' Electro is pretty badass, but the flying sequences and other CGI are terrible.It goes without saying--but I'll say it anyway--the Amazing Spider-Man 2 is far too long.

There's barely enough substance here for a 90-minute popcorn flick, yet the movie drags on for another 50 minutes beyond that...I considered going for popcorn I didn't want or making a bathroom run I didn't need just to shake off the drowsies.

Most of the humor is juvenile and falls flat, though Garfield and co-star (and real-life love) Emma Stone are just charming enough to make some of it work. I disagree with complaints that there are too many villains in the movie, but I don't think the script really gives any of them their due.

As long as the movie is, they definitely could have done much better on that front. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has its fun moments, but watching it is a little like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle with a cat in the house: just when you think you're getting all the pieces together, they land in a jumble on the floor.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 runs 142 minutes and is rated PG13 for "sequences of sci-fi action/violence."

It's worth seeing for great performances by Andrew Garfield and Dane DeHaan, even if it doesn't live up to its "amazing" billing.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 gets five.

Until next time...

"A million dollars isn't cool. You know what's cool? 95 million dollars!"

MOVIE REVIEW: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

The web-slingin' wall-crawler hits the screens once again in this follow-up to Marc Webb's 2012 reboot of the series. Andrew Garfield returns as Peter Parker, who squares off against the villainous Electro, played by Jamie Foxx. Emma Stone heads up the rest of the starring cast, which includes Paul Giamatti, Dane DeHaan, and Chris Cooper. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Director: Marc Webb 

Cast: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx, Dane DeHaan, Chris Cooper, Paul Giamatti

Release Date: May 02, 2014

Rated PG-13 for seq. of Sci-Fi Action/Violence

Runtime: 2 hr. 21 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure

Review:

I’ll start this review like I’ve probably started the 4 other Spider-man reviews before it.  I’ll never been much a fan of the character, I’m not sure why but he’s just never grabbed my attention like DC’s Mount Olympus of heroes or the X-Men for example.  I did enjoy the first two Sam Raimi and despised the third.  The first film in the rebooted series didn’t hit the mark for me even though I liked Garfield and Stone in their roles.  The 2^nd go around doesn’t fair much better.  The film suffers from some truly awful writing filled with stale dialogue and plot holes just a tad too large to ignore.  It’s never a good thing when certain segments of the film remind you of 90’s era Joel Schumacher Batman films.  As a whole the film feels like a throwback but not in a good way.  While most superhero films are trying to infuse some deeper meaning into their stories or at the very least some fun, this one seems content to give us a few CGI heavy set pieces and the most basic of back stories for the villains and call it a day.  In between this all we get an overdose of Parker and Stacy’s romance which is solid but overdone.  It’s propped up by Garfield and Stone’s chemistry which makes the whole thing more watchable than it should be but they can’t save this bloated mess of a film.  I personally have no problem if a film is 2 and half hours long as long as it earns that runtime, this one doesn’t come close to deserving its runtime, not by a long shot.  It would have been better served with a more focused storyline and villain instead of trying to lay the groundwork for future spinoffs and sequels like the planned Sinister Six films.  The Amazing Spider-man 2 is purely for diehards and anybody wanting to see Paul Giamatti scream out intelligible dialogue in a 2 minute cameo.

D

Cindy Prascik's Review of Brick Mansions

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off to the cinema with a heavy heart to see Paul Walker's final completed film, Brick Mansions.
 
Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailer.

A Detroit cop goes undercover in the city's most dangerous housing project, called Brick Mansions, a neighborhood so crime-ridden it's been walled off from the rest of the city.

Brick Mansions easily could have been a straight-to-DVD release, but for an attempt to cash in on Paul Walker's untimely passing. You'll find better performances in a third-grade Christmas pageant, though that's only partially the fault of the actors. The rest of the blame can be fairly divided among a predictable story, ridiculous dialogue, and broad, ugly stereotypes. Stylized action sequences are interesting to a point, but even in a relatively short film they manage to drag on a bit. The movie's dopey humor is ill-suited to the grim backdrop of a Detroit that might be even more depressing than the real thing, and any teeth the movie could have had were knocked out by the filmmakers' obvious determination to water things down enough to secure a PG13 rating.

Having said all that, Brick Mansions is salvaged somewhat by the fact that its ridiculousness seems deliberate. With the right mindset, it's actually kinda fun, and--if only they'd gone for the R rating--it might have been genuinely entertaining.

Brick Mansions runs 90 minutes and is rated PG13 for "frenetic gunplay, violence and action throughout, language, sexual menace, and drug material."

Brick Mansions is predictable, by-the-book action, littered with cliches and offensive stereotypes, but it can still be a good time if you let it.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Brick Mansions gets four and a half.

Until next time...

Nahhh...just messin' with ya!

Cindy Prascik Review of Transcendence

Dearest Blog, yesterday I took full advantage of a day off to sneak out to the cinema. On my agenda was the new Johnny Depp flick, Transcendence.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailer.\

When a brilliant A.I. researcher is gunned down by opponents of his work, his grieving widow and a former colleague seek a way to save him, but the result of their efforts is not quite what they intended.

Well, dear Blog, the first thing I noticed when I got to the theatre yesterday was that I couldn't check in to Transcendence on TV Tag (formerly GetGlue); it wasn't even in their library. I thought to myself, "Self, that can't be a good sign," and I was right. Opening on a holiday weekend to a pretty busy cinema, there were only three other people in the room with me, far fewer than for my second screening of Captain America: The Winter Soldier afterward.

As regular reader(s) and anyone who knows me will be well aware, I think Johnny Depp is the world's finest living actor. I've been a fan since his days on Jump Street, and, while his performance never lets me down (even in sub-par movies), I admit I've grown tired of him playing the quirky guy in the funny hat, and was ready for something at least a little bit more serious. Sadly, after seeing Transcendence, I think I'd almost rather have had another Mad Hatter; the role was so blah I wasn't even looking forward to his screen time as the movie dragged on. Rebecca Hall is fine as his widow, though she, too, has little to work with and does even less with it. (Also, leggings, big shirts, and ballet flats are not her best look. She's one of my favorite girl crushes, and I was deeply saddened by this.) The rest of the cast is a who's who of faces I love seeing, to the point that listing them all here would venture into the ridiculous. Instead I'll just say a movie that can't be fixed by Clifton Collins, Jr. simply can't be fixed at all.

Transcendence doesn't exceed my recommended two-hour guideline, yet it seems to go on forever. The premise is fascinating and the cast solid...yet somehow the execution fails completely. I grew more bored by the second and practically sprinted from my seat when it was over (and not just because I was that eager to see Sebastian Stan again...no matter what you've heard)!

Transcendence isn't a terrible move, but, when you can't help comparing what it is with what it could and should have been, it's bound to be a disappointment.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Transcendence gets four and a half.
Until next time...

 

I call it Transcendence!

MOVIE REVIEW: TRANSCENDENCE

A brilliant innovator in the field of Artificial Intelligence becomes the bridge in the gap between man and machine in this sci-fi thriller starring Johnny Depp. His entire career, Dr. Will Caster (Depp) has been working toward one goal -- to create a machine possessing the entire spectrum of human emotions, and the collective intelligence of every person who has ever lived. But while Dr. Caster's unorthodox experiments have made him famous in scientific circles, a radical anti-tech group known as Rift is determined to stop him at all costs. In the midst of an attack on A.I. labs across the United States, one Rift agent manages to shoot Dr. Caster with a radioactive bullet, ensuring his death. Little did Rift realize that their efforts to destroy Dr. Caster would only make him stronger than they ever could have imagined, because before he dies, his wife Evelyn (Rebecca Hall) and best friend Max (Paul Bettany) successfully transfer Dr. Caster's consciousness into a computer, where his hunger for knowledge and power transforms him into an unstoppable force of sentient energy inhabiting every computer and electrical system on the planet. Morgan Freeman co-stars. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: Wally Pfister

Cast: Johnny Depp, Paul Bettany, Rebecca Hall, Morgan Freeman, Kate Mara

Release Date: Apr 18, 2014

Rated: PG-13 for sci-fi action and violence, some bloody images, brief strong language and 

sensuality

Runtime: 1 hr. 59 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Suspense/Thriller

Review:

Transcendence is a movie that desperately wants you to think that it’s intelligent.  It throws so much technobabble at you that you vaguely start to think it might be smart. Until you snap out of it and realize it is a hodgepodge of sci-fi tropes and clichés is nothing but a silly Frankenstein, Skynet, Her retread.  Wally Pfister, Christopher Nolan’s long time award winning cinematographer, first film is visually impressive but thematically empty.  Pfister’s style is wasted on such a silly script and story.  Even worse it’s filled with top name talent that’s wasted throughout.  Some people might be comforted by the fact that Depp isn’t doused in two pounds of make up in this film but the trick’s on you because he disappears from the film fairly quickly with the majority of the film’s performance done by an avatar.  I had a passing thought that his contract stated he’s do this movie if he only physically had to be there at the start and end of filming.  Rebecca Hall and Paul Bettany are given fairly thankless roles of looking sad and not much else, Bettany is allowed to grow a beard at one point so that counts for something.  Kate Mara, whose creepy looking enough, sports a bad blonde dye job and enough black eye mascara to give a raccoon pause.  Even worse off are poor Morgan Freeman and Cillian Murphy who, I assume, thought were shooting another Batman film and were thoroughly disappointed when they showed up, much like you will be when this crock is over.

D

Cindy Prascik's Review of The Grand Budapest Hotel and Rio 2

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off for what I hoped would be a quiet afternoon at the cinema. On the docket: The Grand Budapest Hotel and Rio 2.

Spoiler level here will be mild-ish, almost nothing you haven't seen in the trailers. I do have to mention one specific thing from Grand Budapest Hotel, which, while not a plot spoiler, might be more than some want to know before seeing it.

The Grand Budapest Hotel was first on my agenda.

A former lobby boy recounts his adventures with his mentor, a concierge at the Grand Budapest Hotel.

I guess it's first and foremost important to point out that I'm neither an expert nor the number-one fan of Wes Anderson. I've seen a couple of his previous films and liked them, but none ranks among my favorites. Still, I loved the Grand Budapest Hotel trailer and expected great things.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is quirky and clever, full of humorous little twists and great dialogue. It boasts a fine cast, including Ralph Fiennes, who is phenomenal in the lead. The scenery and set pieces are so glorious they almost deserve top billing themselves. Why, then, did the movie leave me a little flat? I really couldn't say. Other than pointlessly playing a dead cat for laughs (an automatic deduction of one-half Weasley on the final grade), there wasn't anything specific I didn't like; on the contrary, I liked all of it very much...yet I didn't walk out of the theatre with that feeling I get when I've seen a really great movie. Due to my unusually high expectations, maybe that feels more disappointing than it should.

The Grand Budapest Hotel runs 100 minutes and is rated R for "language, some sexual content, and violence."

Smart and funny, well written and well acted, somehow The Grand Budapest Hotel is still less than inspiring. Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Grand Budapest Hotel gets six and a half.

Closing yesterday's double-bill was the animated sequel Rio 2.

Blu and family leave their comfortable Rio home to fly to the aid of Linda and Tulio in the Amazon jungle, but the jungle, they find, is full of surprises.

Rio is one of my all-time favorite animated films. It's not special, like How to Train Your Dragon, but it's so pretty and lively you can't help but be happy while watching it. I had high hopes for Rio 2, but, alas, it falls very far short of the bar set by its predecesser.

Rio 2 is as beautifully drawn, colored, and animated as the original. It throws in a bouncy tune here and there to keep the kids' attention, though, as an adult, it feels more like uncomfortable, contrived attempts to show off the alleged singing talents of certain cast members. Jesse Eisenberg is a delight as Blu, and would easily stand out even if the rest of the cast weren't so...meh. It was no surprise to me that a cartoon Kristin Chenoweth is just as annoying as a live-action one, but Rio 2's chief problem goes beyond petty annoyances; the sad truth is it's just plain boring. It's not an overly long movie, yet it seems to go on forever, and a few good laughs and some nice-looking artwork are by no means enough to recommend it. If I had to say one good thing, it'd be that a Friday afternoon screening spared me the eight-year-olds' birthday parties with which I've been cursed at my other recent animation outings.

Rio 2 clocks in at 101 minutes and is rated G.

An unworthy sequel to its delightful predecessor, of a possible nine Weasleys, Rio 2 gets four.

Until next time...

If I play my cards right, there might be room for me in that dragon movie!

MOVIE REVIEW: OCULUS

Two siblings haunted by a childhood tragedy learn that the source of their horror is a mysterious mirror with a dark history. Tim (Brenton Thwaites) and Kaylie (Karen Gillan) were merely teenagers when both of their parents were brutally butchered. Convicted of the killings and sentenced to protective custody, Tim serves his time while Kaylie drifts into a deep despair. Years later, a newly free Tim does his best to lay the past to rest. Meanwhile, Kaylie is certain that her brother was innocent all along, and that the antique mirror their parents used to own holds the answer to her darkest questions. Upon locating the long-lost looking glass, Kaylie's deepest fears are confirmed -- a menacing force inhabits that mirror, and it has plagued every owner who has come into possession of it. Now, as curious Kaylie reacquires the mirror, the nightmarish cycle of horror returns with a vengeance. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Release Date: Apr 11, 2014

Rated: R for some Disturbing Images, Brief Language, Terror and Violence

Runtime: 1 hr. 45 min. 

Genres: Horror 

Director: Mike Flanagan 

Cast: Karen Gillan, Brenton Thwaites, Rory Cochrane, Katee Sackhoff, Garrett Ryan

Review:

Oculus is one of those pleasant surprises that randomly pop up from time to time in the horror genre which is overrun with more crap than an old portopotty.  Oculus is a mind bender, even if it can turn rather silly at certain points, which play with time and perception.   All the while maintaining a strong tension throughout while it keeps us guessing whether things are really happening or not.  It borrows heavily from Japanese horror but make for a rather enjoyable yarn.  The cast is lead by the lovely Karen Gillan, and her bangs, who oversells her part a tad too much in the beginning but settles into her role as the film moves on.  Brenton Thwaites is a solid counter weight to Gillan’s obsessive character.  Katee Sackhoff is always excellent playing nutty and she does a good job here even though I was disappointed by where the story takes her character in the third act.  The last act is a fun trip through the fun house of terrors which messes with your perception enough to keep you on your toes even if it ends up in a predictable place.

B-

MOVIE REVIEW: CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER

Steve Rogers continues his journey as the super-powered American soldier who's grasping to find his place in a modern world after being frozen in ice since WWII with this Marvel Studios sequel. Chris Evans returns to star, with Community director/producers Joe and Anthony Russo helming. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Director: Joe Russo, Anthony Russo 

Cast: Chris Evans, Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan, Samuel L. Jackson, Scarlett Johansson

Release Date: Apr 04, 2014

Rated: PG-13 for Gunplay, Action throughout and Intense Sequences of Violence

Runtime: 2 hr. 8 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure

Review:

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is one of Marvel’s best scripted stories thus far.  That’s not to say it doesn’t have some issues but it’s a solid attempt at trying to dig a bit deeper into some complex issues with a complicated villain.  It’s rather blunt if earnest about it’s intentions.  If this all makes it sound rather dour well it is at time occasionally turning into a plodding and somewhat joyless experience that could have been trimmed by a good 15 to 20 minutes.  Personally, I might have been more impressed if I hadn’t seen a similar story line in a certain DC animated series I was fond of but I digress.  The film, when it hits its mark, delivers some excellent action set pieces and superhero action.  Evans does his best to bring some deeper layers to the Captain and he pulls it off for the most part.  Scarlett Johansson has a larger part which doesn’t require her to runaround in her catsuit and the film’s better for it as she displays some solid chemistry with Evans.  Newcomers Anthony Mackie and Robert Redford bring varying degrees of excitement to the proceedings.  Mackie is obviously having a blast throughout while Redford’s name brings some gravitas to the whole thing but he seemed as disinterested as can be.  Sebastian Stan’s Winter Solider is in the movie title but his screen time is surprisingly small in the grand scheme of things.  It’s a game changing film that does kind of blows up a lot of the establishment from the Marvel universe so it’ll be interesting to see where they from here, hopefully they’ll remember bring a bit more fun.  

B-

Cindy Prascik's Review of Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Dearest Blog, yesterday I chose an afternoon at the cinema over an afternoon at the office. In the common tongue, I believe that's what's known as a "gimmie." On the docket, Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

Captain America finds himself at odds with S.H.I.E.L.D.'s thinking, and facing a surprising and dangerous adversary.

Well, dear Blog, first I should admit I'm not quite so much on the Marvel bandwagon as most of the world. They make good superhero movies, and I like good superhero movies, but they don't make anything that sets my world on fire like that last Batman trilogy did. A matter of personal taste, I know, but worth mentioning in the interest of full and fair disclosure.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier has many positives, so we'll start with those. It's a layered story that manages to hold your attention without becoming muddled and over-complicated. The action sequences are solid, and the CGI tricks look pretty authentic. The movie is filled with familiar names and faces, and it's as comfortable as hanging with a group of old friends when they name-check other characters from the Marvel universe. Chris Evans again serves the Captain well. If he's neither as charismatic as Robert Downey, Jr. nor as interesting as Mark Ruffalo, he IS the very picture of the all-American hero, perfect for this role. For my money, though, the actor who's really worth seeing here is Sebastian Stan. I've been a fan since his work on the short-lived NBC series Kings, and am positively delighted about his jump to the big-screen blockbuster. (I'd have been more delighted with more screen time, but since I watched Black Swan for about two minutes of him, I guess I'll live.)

On the negative side: Had the action sequences been trimmed just a bit, the movie would have been sharper and better paced; as it is, it does seem to drag a bit at times. Of more concern was the reaction in my pretty-crowded cinema, almost a total flatline. No spontaneous oohs and ahhs, almost no bursts of laughter at the comic bits, no chatter or applause at the end. For a movie that's been so well received, I found that very curious, especially as the crowd seemed mostly comprised of fanboys and kids.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier runs 136 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of violence, gunplay, and action throughout."

Some folks are saying The Winter Soldier is even better than Marvel's Avengers, seemingly the current benchmark for a great superhero movie. For my money, they're about the same: fun times that perfectly fit the lighthearted summer-blockbuster mold.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Captain America: The Winter Soldier gets seven and a half.

Until next time...

 

 

Any room for me up in there?

Cindy Prascik's reviews of Sabotage & Noah

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off to the cinema with all the Rainy Day People for a double-feature of Sabotage and Noah.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

Arnie was first on the docket with Sabotage.

An elite, undercover DEA unit comes under suspicion when ten million dollars in drug money disappears.

Dear Blog, I'm going to tell you something you might not know: Sabotage was made JUST for me. It's Hollywood's way of saying, "Look, we're sorry for all the pretentious Oscar drivel and Easter-season religious propaganda, but you've been a good sport, so here are a couple testosterone-fueled hours of mayhem for your trouble. Well, Hollywood, apology accepted.

Sabotage is yet another attempt to thrust an aging Arnold Schwarzenegger back into the leading action hero mold. Like previous efforts, the general reception seems middling, but it's once again made me a happy action fan. If Schwarzenegger is getting a bit long in the tooth, it doesn't keep him from carrying a picture with flair, and at no time is there any doubt that this is Arnold's movie. The supporting cast is comprised of actors both very good (Terrence Howard, Mireille Enos) and pretty bad (Sam Worthington, Joe Manganiello), but none really stands out either way, aside from Enos, who is ah-maz-ing.

These days most action movies have to pick a side. Either they go too vanilla to secure the coveted PG13 rating, or the gore and swearing are so extreme that shock value seems the only objective. Sabotage definitely leans toward the latter, and it suffers some laughably bad dialogue, but a well-executed, suspenseful plot saves the movie from being just a big-screen bundle of bad words and maximum carnage.

Sabotage clocks in at 109 minutes and is rated R for "strong bloody violence, pervasive language, some sexuality/nudity, and drug use."

A solid action flick with a good cast and a hero that's familiar and easy to root for, of a possible nine Weasleys, Sabotage gets seven.

Next on Saturday's agenda was the Biblical epic, Noah.

A man suffers a terrifying vision of the world destroyed by a great flood, and must battle Sauron's legions as he attempts to get the One Ring to Mount Doom. Wait, what? Sorry...wrong movie.

There's been much fuss about Noah's lack of faithfulness to the Bible story on which it's based. In the interest of full and fair disclosure, I admit that means about as much to me as a less-than-accurate adaptation of any novel or comic book. I don't say that to be offensive or provocative, merely to be clear: If the rumor is non-religious people will love this and religious people will hate it, this card-carrying heathen is here to tell ya, there's no shortage of reasons to hate this movie, whatever you believe.

Russell Crowe is one of my top three actors, and, in my opinion, the most magnetic screen presence working in movies today. Not once in his long and storied career have I seen a movie and thought, "Boy, even Russell Crowe couldn't help that." Until now, that is. Instead of a man tormented by difficult choices he feels his "Creator" has forced him to make, this Noah is a profoundly unlikable nut job who comes dead even with the movie's villain in the "I really hate that guy" sweepstakes. Then there's the bloat. Yes, that's "bloat," dear Blog, not "boat." Pared by 20-30 minutes, Noah would have been a far more bearable exercise creative license. As it stands, I had plenty of time to count ceiling tiles (I think there are 180 in theatre eight, but it was a little tricky in the dark) and ponder what I was going to eat at Olive Garden after the movie (spaghetti marinara, if you're wondering). During the interminable ark-building, I wondered why they didn't just ask Hermione to wave her wand and get it done. Hang on... Huh? Oh, sorry, there I go again. Somewhere around a halfway point that seemed to take 12 hours to reach, I wrote "TERRIBLE" on my notepad, in all caps and underlined three times, as if I'd need a reminder when I sat down to write this review.

There are positives, of course, among them some glorious cinematography and a couple time-lapsey sequences that are quite stunning...if possibly seizure inducing. The CGI procreation-ready pairs of animals look pretty great, and Emma Watson continues to be a revelation in a role that's at least half an underwater world away from the studious Miss Granger of the Harry Potter movies. There's also a sneaky pro-vegetarian message that made me think I might have had a chance of bunking with the Noah family instead of dog paddling for my life.

Noah runs 138 minutes and is rated PG13 for "violence, disturbing images, and brief suggestive content."

Whether you believe the Bible or not, Noah is a bloated mess that might as well have starred Adam Sandler for all the credibility it's got. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Noah gets two. Oh, and when someone films the book of Revelations, remind me to get high before I see it.

Until next time...

 Hands up, who's ready for that Gladiator prequel?

MOVIE REVIEW: NOAH

Darren Aronofsky brings the story of Noah's Ark to the big screen with this Paramount/New Regency religious drama. Aronofsky directs from his own script cowritten by Ari Handel and John Logan. Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Anthony Hopkins, and Emma Watson head up the starring cast. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Release Date: Mar 28, 2014

Rated: PG-13 Disturbing Images, Brief Suggestive Content and Violence

Runtime: 2 hr. 17 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Director: Darren Aronofsky

Cast: Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Ray Winstone, Emma Watson, Anthony Hopkins

Religion films are always going to be a touch call because they’ll either be too faithful or they’ll deviate too far from the scripture.  Either option will result in factions of believers and non believers being turned off by the material on display.  Darren Aronofsky’s Noah isn’t a by the letter retelling of the story even though it hits all the major points.  Within 10 minutes of the film you’ll be able to tell where you stand with it, depending on your beliefs.  Personally, I found a bombastic but loving cinematic take of a very familiar tale.  Aronofsky delivers a film that’s beautiful to look at and engaging at the same time.  The film is over 2 hours long but in never really drags as the story keeps you engaged throughout.  Russell Crowe gives us one of his most earnest performances in a long while with supporting cast rounding an all around well made movie.  Jennifer Connelly in particular has a wonderful moment to shine near the end of the film but its Crowe’s film through and through.  Crowe gives us a realistic idea of what Noah would have experienced mentally while Aronofsky gives us a wonderfully dense thesis on hard line scripture vs. interpretation.  It’s a fascinating idea played out with characters that are so ingrained in most of our collective psych that is sure to upset one faction or the other.  In the end your personal enjoyment of the film will depend on your beliefs. At it’s core, it’s a wonderfully filmed, acted and produced film which deserves to be seen.

A

[Full Trailer] X-Men: Days of Future Past

The full trailer of the upcoming X-men: Days of Future Past really gives a peek at the scale of the spectacle that’s going to be on full display.  The trailer is quite impressive since it gives us a better look at the story and sentinels both past and future models along with plenty of hero shots. 

My expectations are pretty high, hopefully it delivers….

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Muppets Most Wanted & Divergent

Dearest Blog, having force-fed myself a Serious Grownup Movie last weekend, this week it was back to my usual fare with Muppets Most Wanted and Divergent.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know or have guessed from the trailers.
Since my tolerance for little kids is marginally lower than my tolerance for teenagers, I got Muppets Most Wanted out of the way first.

Fresh off their reunion show and against Kermit's better judgment, a new manager (Ricky Gervais) convinces the Muppets to go on a world tour, but a sold-out European run and a unusually agreeable Kermit may not be the good news they seem.

Dear reader(s), though I try not to read anyone else's reviews before I've written mine, living online as I do, I can't help but see the occasional headline or comment. The general consensus on Muppets Most Wanted seems to be that it's good, but not as good as 2011's The Muppets. Guess I'm once again in the minority, for as much as I loved The Muppets, I think Muppets Most Wanted is even better.
Muppets Most Wanted picks up, literally, where The Muppets left off, lingering just long enough to earn a few laughs with some obvious-but-still-funny sequel jokes. Once it gets rolling, the caper is amusing and never drags, with musical numbers staged at the Siberian gulag providing the best comic moments.

As we've come to expect, Muppets Most Wanted is littered with cameos from celebs and pseudo-celebs, and I shan't name them lest I spoil it for those who want to be surprised. Since I imagine everyone knows who stars in the movie, I can say that Gervais, Tina Fey, and Ty Burrell are in top form, though I find it a little offensive that they enjoy billing over the folks who provide Muppet voices--the movie's real stars. If I have one complaint that isn't really a complaint, it's that a little too much of Muppets Most Wanted may be aimed over the heads of the young target audience; it's undoubtedly a "kids' movie," but I think the adults might actually enjoy it more.

Muppets Most Wanted runs 112 minutes and is rated PG for "some mild action."
Like its predecessors, Muppets Most Wanted is a terrific family film full of music, laughs, and thoroughly entertaining cameos.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Muppets Most Wanted gets seven and a half.

Closing yesterday's docket was the young adult thriller Divergent.

Survivors of an apocalyptic event are divided into factions, based on their personality types. When a young girl discovers she's a Divergent--one of those who fit with no one type and who are considered a threat to the new world order--she struggles for survival within the faction she's chosen.

Dear Blog, I'm nothing if not painfully honest, so if I'm going to criticize something, I'm also going to admit when that criticism might just be due to the fact that said "something" isn't made with me in mind. Not saying it's impossible for someone outside the target audience to enjoy a movie (see: Muppets Most Wanted, above), but being almost 48 years old, I enjoyed Grudge Match a helluva lot more than I enjoyed Divergent, which may not be entirely Divergent's fault. Then again...

We'll get the obvious out of the way first: clearing the two-hour threshold by a good 20 minutes, Divergent is too damn long and easily could have been trimmed by 30 minutes without losing anything of consequence. Making the obligatory comparisons: the story is neither as good as The Hunger Games nor as painfully bad as Twilight. Shailene Woodley is no Jennifer Lawrence, either.

The supporting cast boasts some notable names--Ashley Judd, Kate Winslet, Mekhi Phifer, Maggie Q, and the always magnificent Ray Stevenson--but they seem to have neither the opportunity nor the inclination to distinguish the movie from the current glut of ho-hum young adult fiction. Divergent features broadly-drawn characters and insipid dialogue by the bucketful, and mistakes peripheral character deaths for heartbreaking plot twists.

By now, dear reader(s), you may be asking, "So why did you bother seeing this, anyway?" That question I can answer in two words: Theo James. Yep, I've been nursing a scorching crush ever since he had fatal sex with Lady Mary Crawley in the first season of Downton Abbey and I had to overturn heaven and earth to find out who he was. I hoped he'd be a big deal someday, and, if I wished it'd be in something better than this, well, he's young yet, eh? Divergent doesn't place any particular strain on his acting skills, but I can confidently say I would have been kinda bored with someone I liked less in the male lead. As it stands, James has enough screentime to make Divergent more than worth the price of admission.

Divergent clocks in at a bloated 139 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense violence and action, thematic elements, and some sensuality."

A so-so movie that would have benefitted greatly from a shorter runtime, Divergent may have teens hanging on its every minute, but the rest of us are bound to find it considerably less thrilling.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Divergent gets four and a half.

Until next time...

Oh, don't pretend like YOU wouldn't sit through a so-so movie for this!

MOVIE REVIEW: THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL

Wes Anderson heads to Europe for the first time with this Indian Paintbrush production starring Saoirse Ronan, Ralph Fiennes, Bill Murray, and Jude Law. Gustav H., the famous concierge at a legendary hotel situated in the Alps during the 1930's becomes the center of a farcical whirlwind of suspicion when one of his institution's oldest and richest patrons turns up dead, and she suspiciously leaves him her most priceless work of art -- a Renaissance painting of a boy with an apple. Infuriated that she left anything of value to anyone else, the woman's greedy and nefarious heir uses all manner of underhanded and illegal tactics to pin her death on Gustav and to silence anyone who questions his objective of inheriting every penny of her estate, leaving Gustav's trusted lobby boy Zero to clear Gustav's name and prove that the grand lady's killer is none other than her own son. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, Rovi

Director: Wes Anderson 

Cast: Tony Revolori, Saoirse Ronan, Ralph Fiennes, Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton, Jeff Goldblum

Release Date: Mar 07, 2014

Rated: R for Violence, Some Sexual Content and Language

Runtime: 1 hr. 39 min.

Genres: Comedy, Drama

Review:

I’ve been a Wes Anderson fan for a long time and I know some people are turned off by his style but any self respecting movie fan should love his work.  The Grand Budapest Hotel is another gem which delivers a thrilling and hilarious movie watching experience.  The story is funny yet incredibly moving at the same time anchored by a wonderful performance by Ralph Fiennes.  Fiennes is typically a somber and serious performer so it’s a lot of fun to see him fully commit to a character like Gustav H. who such an outlandish and hilarious character.  Fiennes and newcomer Tony Revolori share a wonderful chemistry together and the film is at its strongest when the two are on screen.  The supporting cast is a made up of a who’s who of Hollywood’s A list and each is fully committed.  All of them populate a wonderfully crafted world which a visual feast for the eyes.  At a little over and hour and a half the film just flies by delivering one of the most enjoyable movie watching experiences in recent memory. 

A

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Philomena & 300: Rise of an Empire

Dearest Blog, determined NOT to burn 130 minutes on video-game flick, yesterday I took a pass on the weekend's new releases and caught up on a couple movies I'd missed: Philomena and 300: Rise of an Empire.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know or have guessed from the trailers.

My opening act was Philomena.

A woman who was sent to a convent as a pregnant teen enlists the help of a journalist to find the son who was taken from her.

Now, dear readers, I know what you're thinking: "Isn't it kind of pointless for a nobody like you to review a film that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences has already deemed one of last year's top ten best movies?" To you cynics I reply: No more pointless than any of my other reviews.

So there.

Having said that, I'll cop to being in agreement with the Academy on this one. Philomena is a beautiful movie that manages to tell a sad story without ever being miserable about it. Judi Dench is just perfect in the title role, moving effortlessly from devout and stoic to heartbreaking to hilariously clueless. Steve Coogan is also phenomenal as the jaded journalist charged with bringing Philomena's story to light. Though it's hardly a fast-paced action thriller, Philomena felt about ten minutes long, and I was well and truly sad when it was over (though I was delighted to escape the four over-perfumed women who sat in front of me and talked loudly through the whole thing).

Philomena runs 98 minutes and is rated PG13 for "some strong language, thematic elements, and sexual references."

Philomena may not have been the Academy's choice as last year's Best Picture, but I think it would have been mine. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Philomena gets eight and a half.

The second half of my Saturday double-bill was the prequel/sequel/whatever 300: Rise of an Empire.

A general hopes to unite Greece's armies against invading Persians.

Confession time: I've never bothered to watch the first 300 all the way through. I mean, since it's been running here and there on TV for nearly a decade, I've probably seen the whole thing in bits, but I've never felt compelled to sit down and watch it properly. One decent new release would have bumped the sequel off my weekend agenda as well, but I guess the people who made 300 can thank Need for Speed for my seven bucks.

Rise of an Empire gives the fetching Eva Green free reign to ham it up in the female lead. If you're a girl, I can't imagine you'd walk out in less than an ass-kicking mood. (Gentlemen, beware!) Sullivan Stapleton is about as ho-hum a leading man as I've ever seen, but the material doesn't exactly require a Robert Downey, Jr., so it's not that much of a problem. I was delighted to see Hans Matheson in a featured role; I've missed him these last couple years.

As you'd expect, Rise of an Empire is a good-looking film. The battle scenes are well choreographed and gruesome, the scenery and costumes quite striking, and I instantly fell in love with the movie's thundering soundtrack. Unfortunately, none of that was enough to hold my attention for the duration, and I found plenty of time to contemplate things like Stapleton's ugly toenails and whoever thought it was a good idea to go into battle in mini-skirts and sandals. Oh, where the mind wanders when you give it a little lead...

300: Rise of an Empire clocks in at 102 minutes and is rated R for "strong sustained sequences of stylized bloody violence throughout, a sex scene, nudity, and some language." It's enjoyable enough, but nothing I'll be running back to see again and again.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, 300: Rise of an Empire gets five, because any less wouldn't properly show my appreciation for dirty, bloody, half-naked dudes.

Until next time.

Well, I don't know about you, but the minute I visit craft services, my skirt feels too tight...