MOVIE REVIEW RUSH

Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Bruhl star as legendary Formula One drivers James Hunt and Niki Lauda respectively in this biographical drama set during the 1970s, at the peak of their heated rivalry. Both on the track and off, Hunt (Hemsworth) and Lauda (Bruhl) couldn't have been more different. Yet as much as Englishman Hunt's showy public persona clashed with Lauda's reputation for tightly-controlled perfectionism, both men remained bound together by one undeniable fact -- they were both among the best drivers ever to grace the racetrack. Olivia Wilde and Alexandra Maria Lara co-star in a film directed by Academy Award-winner Ron Howard, and penned by Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon, Hereafter). ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: Ron Howard

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Daniel Brühl, Olivia Wilde.

Release Date: Sep 20, 2013

Rated R for sexual content, nudity, language, some disturbing images and brief drug use

Runtime: 2 hr. 3 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Drama

Review:

People that know me know I love my sports. I’m a fan of pretty much any and every sport but I’ve never been a fan of sports movies because they all have the same trajectory and beats. That being said it takes alot for a sports movie to capture my attention the way Rush did. Ron Howard’s love of the subject matter is readily apparent from the get go. He directs the racing sequences with a white knuckled ferocity that delivers the most visceral experience I’ve ever had in a movie about racing. His film does dip in some of the non racing sequences mainly because the script lacks subtly, beating themes into your head instead of letting them flow organically. Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Brühl both impress in their roles as Hunt and Lauda. Hemsworth’s natural on screen charisma is perfect for the role. Hemsworth is believable and likeable even though the character is a bit of a jerk. Brühl is given the meatier part of Lauda and he’s easily the most interesting thing onscreen, outside of Hemsworth’s unnaturally chiseled body. Brühl performance is measured but on point, don’t be surprised if his name comes up during awards season. Sadly the characters don’t feel tactile, mostly because of the script. They are types more than they are real life people and while it’s not a sin it would have been nice to get inside the heads of both characters a bit more. Something the wonderful documentary Senna did so well. Still, Rush is a quality “prestige” film which may get some nods come awards season.

A-

MOVIE REVIEW PRISONERS

A small-town carpenter turns vigilante in order to rescue his abducted daughter and her best friend in this thriller starring Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal. Six-year-old Anna and her friend Joy have vanished on Thanksgiving without a trace.

Director: Denis Villeneuve

Cast: Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Viola Davis, Terrance Howard

Release Date: Sep 20, 2013

Rated R for language Throughout, Disturbing Violent Content and Torture

Runtime: 2 hr. 33 min.

Genres: Drama, Suspense/Thriller

Review:

Prisoners is a dark movie, oppressive from the start, unrelenting. It’s not the type of film that’ll be on many people’s rewatch list. As a film it’s wonderfully shot and methodically paced, even if it overstays its welcome during its weak final act. Director Denis Villeneuve knows how to establish mood with settings. The film is coated in rain and haze with nary a glimmer of sunlight. Hugh Jackman delivers full forced performance that really impresses. Jackman portrays the unflinching rage of his character throughout. It’s a showy performance which leaves an impression. Equally impressive is Jake Gyllenhaal who uses uncontrollable blinking to maximum effect here. Gyllenhaal’s performance is driven and focused, making it one of the best of his career. Rounding out the cast are the criminally underused Paul Dano, Viola Davis and Terrance Howard, who reminds us he can put in a performance when he wants to. Prisoners isn’t a perfect film though. For all its heavy themes and impressive acting, the film keeps the audience at arms length. We see the characters and understand their motivations but there’s a disconnect as well. That disconnect keeps the film from delivering its message home even if it’s a rather bleak one.

B

Cindy Prascik’s Review of The Family

Dearest Blog, today it was off to the cinema for a little wiseguy action with The Family.

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

Relocated to a quiet town in France, a mobster rat and his family cause no end of headaches for their handlers in the Federal Witness Protection Program.

I'm not exactly sure by what criteria I'm meant to judge The Family. The trailers led me to expect a solid action comedy, but what I got was part drama as well. There's a good bit of violence--much of it up close and personal--that shouldn't be shocking in a mob movie, but since I expected something lighter, it did surprise me somewhat. Understand, none of that is intended as criticism, just laying out the facts.

The Family is blessed with an extraordinary cast. Robert DeNiro and Michelle Pfeiffer are terrific in the leads. If DeNiro feels familiar in a role like this, he's the poster child for "practice makes perfect." Dianna Agron and John D'Leo and are fantastic as their children.

While not the main attraction, the wrong actors could have shredded the film's chemistry, so it's lucky they're both extremely entertaining...even if it is a bit hard to forget she's playing a high-schooler while pushing 30.

Tommy Lee Jones doesn't have a lot to do as the family's government handler, but, let's face it, no movie was ever worse for having him, right? The supporting cast is mostly a who's who of "Didn't I see that guy on The Sopranos?" and everyone is capable and well-suited to their gangster roles.

Despite clocking in under two hours, The Family does feel a bit long. The first and last acts are strong, with the middle bogging down just a little.

Overall it's very entertaining, and I can't pinpoint anything that doesn't contribute to the whole, but in the end I feel like it could have lost ten or 15 minutes somewhere and been better for it. The comedy is without a doubt the movie's highlight; the rest probably could have done with some trimming.

The Family runs 110 minutes and is rated R for "violence, language, and brief sexuality."

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Family gets seven. It's not exactly an offer you can't refuse, but it's definitely a good time for your entertainment dollar.

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW INSIDIOUS CHAPTER 2

The Lambert family learn their struggle with the supernatural is far from over when a long-buried secret plunges them back into a terrifying world of darkness. Director James Wan reteams with screenwriter Leigh Whannell for this horror sequel starring Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Lin Shaye, and Ty Simpkins. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: James Wan

Cast: Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Lin Shaye, Ty Simpkins, Jocelin Donahue.

Release Date: Sep 13, 2013

Rated R intense sequences of terror and violence, and thematic elements.

Runtime: 1 hr. 45 min.

Genres: Horror

Review:

Insidious Chapter 2 continues an incredibly strong streak for director James Wan. The first Insidious was an exercise in mood and atmosphere which faltered in the last act. The sequel is incredibly similar, it’s first 2 acts are a relentless series of scares, perfectly set up to deliver jolt after jolt. In an impressive feat since he doesn’t break any new ground. Instead he just continues to perfect the process much like he did in this summer’s The Conjuring. Horror fans will find plenty of nice little nods to classic genre films like Suspiria and Poltergeist. The third act suffers a tad from some of the more outlandish elements at play. It’s not as extreme as it was in the first and Wan keeps the film on a more even keel this go around. Insidious Chapter 2 is helped by a rather smart, time bending script which will have you revisiting scenes from the original and viewing them in a new light. Additionally, it’s not as overly serious as The Conjuring. We get nice comedic breaks in the tension to give us a moment to breathe. The returning cast is strong. Rose Byrne shows us she can take her frantic level to eleven and Patrick Wilson reminds us he can be kind of creepy. The door is left wide open for another sequel but James Wan’s recent announcement that he’s leaving the horror genre kind of dulls any excitement.

B

MOVIE REVIEW: LOVELACE

The life of one of the most infamous women in early '70s America gets a dramatization in this offbeat period biopic from co-directors Jeffrey Friedman and Robert Epstein. ~ Nathan Southern, Rovi

Director: Jeffrey Friedman, Robert Epstein

Cast: Amanda Seyfried, Peter Sarsgaard, Sharon Stone, Robert Patrick, Wes Bentley.

Release Date: Aug 09, 2013

Rated R for strong sexual content, nudity, language, drug use and some domestic violence.

Runtime: 1 hr. 33 min.

Genres: Drama

Review:

Lovelace boast an excellent cast and provocative subject matter. Unfortunately, the film’s direction and script takes the path of least resistance. The first half plays out like a love letter to the 70s while the second half screams made for TV Lifetime movie. Long time documentary filmmakers, Jeffrey Friedman and Robert Epstein, can’t find a proper tone for the film so they just split it up, giving us 2 versions of the same events. It might have worked if the script wasn’t so simplistic and clichéd. The characters are all broadly drawn with the titular character relegated to a victim for the better part and then short changing her transformation into a house wife and activist. There’s a better film in there somewhere but the people behind the camera can’t find it, it’s a shame because the cast is excellent. Amanda Seyfriend is excellent in the lead role. Seyfriend shows she’s got the range to show the character’s naivety, fear and strength. Peter Sarsgaard is equally tuned in throughout delivering a sleazy portrayal which just oozes through the screen even as the character gets more and more clichéd. The supporting cast is made up of interesting well known actors putting in strong performance in limited capacities; Sharon Stone Chris Noth and Bobby Cannavale are noteworthy. Sadly, Lovelace just can’t overcome its glaring issues with the script and direction.

C-

Cindy Prascik's Review of Riddick

Dearest blog, today it was off to the cinemas for one of my least-anticipated films of the year, Riddick.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing the trailers didn't reveal.

Riddick again finds himself stranded on a dangerous planet, pursued by threats both native and not.

Listen, dear Blog, I didn't find the previous two films in this series very interesting, and I didn't expect better from this. My only motivation for seeing it was that I absolutely love Vin Diesel and Karl Urban, and, that being said, I suppose I deserve what I got.

Diesel is, of course, acceptable in the lead. That's not saying much, as a robot or anyone who has brought down the house at a third-grade Christmas pageant also probably would have been acceptable. Urban doesn't have even a full minute's screen time; if you were thinking of suffering through this to see him, don't bother. The rest of the cast is most notable for a guy I would have bet a paycheck was Dave Chappelle who is not Dave Chappelle. There are actually two people in this world who have Dave Chappelle's crazy teeth. Who knew, right?

Riddick is two hours of gross outs, puerile humor, shots of dry rocks and scrub, then wet rocks and scrub, and a pointless parade of badly-done CGI creatures. The story is dull as dishwater, and if you find a twist the biggest idiot won't see coming...well, I'd give you a paycheck if I hadn't already lost it on Not Dave Chappelle. I'd complain that it's too long, too, but that hardly seems fair since five minutes would have been too long. If I had to say something good about this movie, I'd say at least I was able to see it with one of my favorite people, whom I don't see nearly enough.

Riddick clocks in at an interminable 119 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence, language, and some sexual content/nudity."

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Riddick gets none, as in ZERO, as in this movie is the equivalent of Voldemort taking Hogwarts and KILLING THEM ALL. The bad news is, this film is god-awful. The good news is, it's nice to be right sometimes, I guess?

Until next time...



Yinz are lucky I love ya, yeah?