Transformers: Age of Extinction Movie Review

Michael Bay, please stop making these movies.

Transformers: Age of Extinction is directed by the one and only Michael Bay and has replaced fidgety Shia Labeouf with Mark Wahlberg and is now the fourth movie which Bay has directed in this franchise which seems to make billions and billions of dollars despite lacking any real substance and good quality filmmaking. Instead of just giving a plot synopsis I will just say this: It's exactly the same movie as the first 3. Nothing has changed in terms of quality, plot structure or direction. If you couldn't already tell I hated this movie.

But I did like Wahlberg in the film. I have to be honest that after 3 movies of that fidgety bastard Sam Witwicky who attracted women way out of his league was becoming a little stale and a incredibly boring. Plus thank god his parents are gone! With Wahlberg we at least get a relatable protagonist who is genuinely likeable and can actually get his hands dirty and do stuff. Although when I say do stuff I don't mean find and shoot an alien gun which he should never ever find because it's physically too big for any Transformer to use in the first place. That's it in terms of positivity unfortunately.

Transformers: Age of Extinction is the same bloated, stupidly long Michael Bay orgasm which the first three were. I'll start with the plot. The plot is stupidly complicated and so self absorbed and it again sees our dumb human characters and our uninteresting Transformers characters fight over the possession of another Mcguffin, this time it is something called the Seed which can apparently wipe out human life or some bullshit, I don't really care to be honest. Its incredibly dumb and the plot paces itself out poorly and sees it go on and on and on. It is too long for its own good. Make a long movie if you have genuine substance, not just a load of hollow characters and CGI bullshit!

Apart from Wahlberg the acting in the movie is laughable at times. His daughter, played by Nicola Peltz isn't diabolical but she is incredibly hard to take seriously when she is just a stereotypical "Michael Bay chick" with long blonde hair, pink lips and unbelievably perfect make up. Her boyfriend on the other hand puts in a performance just as bad the lead from Legend of Hercules. And it isn't just the acting that's bad its the fact that the characters have nothing to them. The boyfriend simply surrenders every time somebody does as much as move! The human "villains" played by Kelsey Grammar and Stanley Tucci are just plain stupid. Their plans don't make any sense! I was watching them thinking surely you would have realised that would happen, wouldn't you?

And of course I have to talk about the Michael Bay humour that nobody on the planet (apart from him) understands. The humour is cringe worthy and terrible. And ever present, it just never ever stops. Poor old Stanley Tucci is forced to regurgitate it throughout but he isn't the worst character who is subject to this. That would be TJ Miller's character. Oh my god, I wanted to f***ing shoot him in the face he was so annoying/awful/unfunny. Michael Bay: Nobody understands your humour and we don't give 2 sh*ts about it so please stop!

Finally the directing from Michael Bay sees the exact same Michael Bay style we have come to expect from his films. It has the stupid humour, the goofy military dialogue which is beyond terrible, saturated and overly processed colours, shots of people running away from Transformers in slow motion and angled shots of people climbing out of cars. It also has the incomprehensible action of 2 Transformers fighting whilst the camera pans around them meaning we can't actually see what is going on. The CGI in this movie looks like garbage and the action goes on for way too long. After hours and hours of  watching things blow up you'd be surprised just how numb you get.

And there's another thing: Why do Michael Bay explosions have fireworks coming out of the side? Is there really any need?

I can only assume you want to watch the movie to see the Dinobtots. I wouldn't bother. They're in it for like 10 minutes and hardly do anything!

Transformers: Age of Extinction is exactly the same as it's 3 predecessors and offers nothing new or refreshing. The acting is questionable, the length is too long, the characters are hollow, the action dumb and incomprehensible and is just a big, bloated CGI mess with no entertainment value. I hated this movie:


Rating - D-


1 sentence summary - A Michael Bay wet dream, something I never want to see again in my life!


Question: If you've seen the movie, what is your favourite Transformer in it? Mine was probably Lockdown, as he had something remotely interesting about him compared to the same old same old crap we get with the Autobots and Decepticons.

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) Cast Update

The cast for one of my most anticipated movies ever is increasing all the time, and I thought it were time to give my take on a few casting choices they have made since I talked about Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor casting in February.

I'm going to try and hit them all from most recent to least recent so I'm going to start off talking about the casting of Scoot McNairy. Scoot McNairy, if you don't already know, has a pretty impressive filmography for a (fairly) unknown actor. He was most recently in Non Stop with Liam Neeson, and in much more critically successful movies like 12 Years a Slave and Argo, the last 2 Best Picture Academy Award Winners. Scoot McNairy's casting is an interesting one because at the moment the studio are not revealing who they've cast him as, leading to much speculation. Do I think he'll be a Justice League member like Green Lantern or Flash? Potentially, but that isn't what I'm theorising at the moment. The way I see it is that he has worked with Ben Affleck before with Argo and we'll see him and Affleck together in October with David Fincher's Gone Girl (which by the way I'm excited for). They've been in a fair amount of movies together and they've cast Scoot alongside his friend who is playing Batman. You see where I'm going with this? I think he's Robin, or possibly Nightwing. This is literally just me speculating typing away on my laptop at the moment but if Warner Brothers really want to keep his casting a secret, then it must be something pretty big, right? I do have my own opinion Robin being in this movie but it hasn't been confirmed so there'd be no point in my rambling on about it for ages.

However there would be a point in me talking about Aquaman. DC's most unfairly treated and underappreciated JLA member will be introduced in the Batman v Superman movie. He will be played by Game of Thrones star Jason Momoa. I am really behind his casting because to a lot of people Aquaman is just a joke, as in a useless waste of space who can talk to fish. He's the King of Atlantis for Christ's sake and has a tonne of mythology behind him. I really think that with Momoa's casting that as soon as people here that "that guy from Game of Thrones" will play Aquaman, people will start to take the character more seriously. So to sum up: Excellent casting choice.

And finally way back in April Cyborg was cast and Ray Fisher was the lucky man given the role. My issue with this is not the actual casting (I'm sure the guy will do just fine) but rather what they do with the character of Cyborg in this movie. I would have preferred to have seen Cyborg introduced in The Justice League (2017) as opposed to this movie, only because I fear that there will be too many other heroes in the movie that will take away screen time from Batman and Superman. This is unless they just introduce Victor Stone as the football player who exists in the universe and don't actually make him into the superhero Cyborg. Only time will tell with what they decide to do I guess, and I'm interested to see if we get the man Victor Stone or the mechanical superhuman Cyborg.


So that's my take on the casting of Cyborg, Aquaman and the "mystery role" for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016). Question: What do you think of these casting choices?


Thanks for reading,
Matt

How To Train Your Dragon 2 Movie Review

The summer of 2014 has been so solid, and HTTYD2 (which is what I'm calling it from now on as I'm too lazy to type it out fully) just proves it...

HTTYD2 is directed by Dean DeBlois and is the sequel to the surprise hit How To Train Your Dragon. The film again follows Hiccup and Toothless and follows the events 5 years after the first movie. In the film Hiccup now has to step up to the responsibility of being the leader of his people whilst at the same time he is dealing with a personal conflict and the threat of a villain gathering an army of dragons grows.

My experience with the first movie was a good one and I thought it was a good animated flick, if not a tiny bit overrated by some people. However, if people go on to say that HTTYD2 is one of the best animations of the last decade, I can't disagree with them. HTTYD2 does everything a sequel should do and it gave me a great film experience in which I was sucked in from scene 1 to the end credits.

One of the best things about this movie is the characters at the forefront of the film. The relationship between Hiccup and Toothless is incredibly cute and relatable for anybody who has ever owned a pet in their life. The dynamic between the 2 leads is excellent and on top of that the 2 characters themselves are given more depth and are more fleshed out, which is exactly what a sequel needs to do. Toothless is literally awesome in a way where he can be cute and badass at exactly the same time, and Hiccup goes through some really impactful situations in the movie, which help develop him more as a character. No longer is he Hiccup the boy, he is Hiccup the man who must step up to do what is required of him.

That is obviously a familiar theme but is an effective one if executed well. This is just one theme the movie has expertly woven into it; others including friendship, family and sacrifice. The movie also doesn't spoon feed children with obvious exposition and does not sugar-coat over some of the dark stuff which can happen to people, which gets 2 thumbs up from me as I am sick of animations doing that these days. The movie blends emotional and development scenes well.

Although action sequences are also blended brilliantly into the story and are awesome to watch. The movie's cinematography is so impressive and is at its best during these huge action sequences where the camera follows a dragon flying through the air. The musical score composed by John Powell is also breath taking at times, and like it's predecessor is one of the movies best strengths.

The character animation is beautiful and the voice cast is also very good. I will say what everyone else is saying but it is so true that Jay Baruchel is perfect as Hiccup. I honestly left HTTYD2 thinking about just how involved I was in it and I had so many positive things to say. But, it isn't perfect in my eyes...

My 2 issues with the film start with the villain. It wasn't that he was bad its just he was clichéd right down to his physical appearance. It's almost a rule of Hollywood animations these days that the villain must be physically huge and have long dark hair with an eye scar. Also the side characters in the movie don't really do much for me and in my opinion don't bring a lot to the table in terms of being comedic relief.

But HTTYD2 is a great kids movie and I really liked it, so its getting a high grade:



Rating - A-


1 sentence summary - A superior kids film with excellent characters, themes and emotions woven through it!



Question: Your favourite DreamWorks's animation of all time?


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Is "The Batman" coming in 2019?

Anything DC, Marvel or Star Wars related these days gives me an unstoppable urge to write one of these posts. The news today concerns a solo Batman movie which may come out in 2019...

 Less than a week ago a rumour surfaced that "The Batman" could it theatres in 2019. This film was not "confirmed" in Nikki Finke's DC film slate scoop but with a large cinematic universe very much on the cards for DC at the moment and with Batman being as popular as he is, people will want to see a solo outing for the caped crusader at some point. This news is merely a rumour and has not been confirmed by the studio so keep that in mind.

Firstly I think I need to mention what I think about Ben Affleck as Batman. I hope he crushes it. The more hate I see towards his casting on the Internet, the more I want him to succeed. If the script treats Batman well in a way which we haven't seen before (as an alternative to Nolan's ultra-realistic Batman) with good guidance from Zach Snyder, he can absolutely kill it at as Batman. So I literally have zero complaints and I'm praying he does a good job in Dawn of Justice (2016).

Secondly, do I think 2019 is a little late for that to be happening? Absolutely not. We have the Christopher Nolan Batman movies to enjoy from now until then plus Batman will definitely be in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (duh!) in 2016 and then The Justice League in 2017. So from my point of view there would be no point of getting impatient about it considering it may come out in 5 years time, and even then that is the absolute earliest.

Finally, who do I think should direct the movie? Well for me it's an absolute no brainer and I would like Batfleck himself to sit in the directors chair and be The Batman at the same time. By then he'll have (I hope) an in depth understanding of the Batman character, plus he's such a talented director. His filmography includes Gone Baby Gone, The Town and Argo; all very good movies which share a similar trait as they are all directed fantastically. Give Ben Affleck the directing job if a solo Batman film were to come out in 2019, it's the obvious choice and the right one for me!

This is where I get creative and make some wildly wrong predictions but I'm going to say what I would do if I was given the job to direct the rumoured Batman movie which may come out in 2019. Baring in mind Dawn of Justice and The Justice League would already have come out by then, I would aim to do something slightly new. I would do a film with The Riddler as the villain. No... not Jim Carrey in green, question mark pyjamas but a really cool, smart and methodical Riddler which can test Batman on a psychological level, you know like the one from The Batman Animated Series. Actually, re cast Lex Luthor and make Jesse Eisenberg the Riddler. To me that would be a casting which makes sense! I'm not the biggest fan of Eisenberg as Lex, but I will say he would make an awesome Riddler, especially the one I'm envisaging.


If this movie were to surface, who would you want to direct and what villain would you want to see in the movie?


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Star Wars and Marvel Movie Talk

I thought that today I would talk about 2 of my favourite topics: Star Wars and the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) and all of the (fairly) recent news stories from them...



Star Wars


Ever since the initial cast for Episode 7 was released in April, I have been progressively more and more pumped for JJ Abrams' take on the Star Wars franchise. JJ is a great director and has made 2 incredible Star Trek movies and this movie also has the writer who did the Empire Strikes Back, my favourite Star Wars movie. But it isn't just Episode 7 which is grabbing the headlines recently..

A few days ago it was confirmed that Rian Johnson would be directing Episode 8 and would "write a treatment for Episode 9", which I guess means he'll write the screenplay but won't be directing it. I guess this already poses a question: who do you think will direct Episode 9? As for this directing choice, I think its a good one. His last science fiction effort was Looper, which I enjoyed very much and others said it was one of the best movies of 2012. He also directed 3 episodes of Breaking Bad including my personal favourite episode "Ozymandias". So really I have absolutely no complaints and I'm glad we have a good sci fi director at the helm. The only real loser in this situation is JJ Abrams who won't be returning...

Other news concerns the creation of a wider Star Wars universe with 2 directors confirmed to direct 2 Star Wars spinoff movies. Godzilla director Gareth Edwards is to helm the first one which people are speculating is Boba Fett. I really enjoyed Godzilla and I think the directing from Edwards was the best part of the movie. Boba Fett is a cool popular character with a tonne of mythology surrounding him so that'd be a good choice for a spinoff. Josh Trank who did Chronicle will direct the other one which people are speculating may be a young Han Solo movie. Of course nothing has been confirmed and the studio may decide not to use Boba Fett or Han Solo for their spinoffs but those 2 are the ones I would like to see. As for Trank, I'll see how he does with the Fantastic Four reboot before I judge whether he can make a good Star Wars movie.

The final snippets of news include the addition of Gwendoline Christie and Oscar winner Lupita N'yongo to the cast, causing people who claimed racism and sexism to eat their words. Also Han Solo himself Harrison Ford injured his ankle on set causing him to have surgery on it a few days ago. I hope this doesn't disrupt things on set too much and I wish him a speedy recovery!




Marvel


Ah the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Not a week goes by without some sort of formal announcement or speculation involving their shared superhero universe. There has been a tonne of announcement in the past month or so, so here we go:

After Edgar Wright left Ant Man due to "creative differences" many claimed this was the first sign of cracks beginning to form for the studio. However any wild speculation of cracks forming was soon removed when Peyton Reed was hired to direct it, with Adam McKay still on board as the writer. Kevin Feige also confirmed that filming would begin in August and the movie would still hit theatres in July 17th 2015. It looks like the studio is attempting a film with a considerable comedic tone to it, which is again something new for the MCU. Whether Ant Man flies or flops, we'll have Age of Ultron coming out in the same year so it honestly doesn't matter too much...

The studio have also found their Thanos with Josh Brolin. It's a good choice because his voice can potentially be commanding and menacing which is what the biggest villain in the MCU deserves.

Phase 3 has also kicked up a fuss recently with Mark Ruffalo talking about how the studio may be considering a solo Hulk movie. Well there really is no reason why we shouldn't get one considering Ruffalo completely kills it as the Hulk and they have a huge amount of inspiration to work with, which could be the Planet Hulk and World War Hulk storyline... But this is all speculation at the moment; expect Marvel's Phase 3 plans to be formally announced at Comic con.

One movie we know will be in Phase 3 is Doctor Strange which will be directed by Scott Derickson, the man behind Sinister. Again Marvel are trying new things by hiring a horror director for one of their future projects, meaning another movie with a different tone. Stephen Strange will help Marvel introduce the more magic and mystical side to the MCU which so far has been untouched. Whether he'll appear in the Avengers 3 or who the villain will be is unknown, but the most important thing for me is who'll will play him. Huge actors have been linked with the role, including Benedict Cumberbatch, Tom Hardy and Jared Leto. Who do you think will play him?




If you have any thoughts on anything Star Wars or Marvel related, please do!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

The Fault in Our Stars Movie Review

Kleenex is going to make a fortune...

The Fault in Our Stars is the next big teen novel movie that was inevitably going to be made because that is just what happens in Hollywood nowadays. The movie stars Shailene Woodley and Ansel Elgort who play Hazel and Gus respectively and the film goes on to tell their story of love and how they both get on and enjoy their lives despite being dealt life's cruellest hand; cancer.

Personally romance films are just not for me. I never get overly excited about the genre and I have never really understood a lot of the hype that comes with movies like The Fault in Our Stars. That being said I went into the film thinking that it was going to be sappy as shit and that I was going to dislike it. The Fault in Our Stars actually surprised me. It's not perfect by a long shot but I did like a lot of what I was seeing.

The best thing this movie has going for it is Shailene Woodley and her performance. She is so good and I think delivers the best female performance of the year so far. She's such a talented actress and that really shows as she brings to life her character (Hazel) in a way where she has an incredible amount of depth but is also extremely likeable. The performance is heart-breaking, yet incredibly good as she is so real with her acting and gives great emotional weight to her character, which you as an audience member will desperately love and care for. She's so damn likeable!

The chemistry between her and Elgort was pretty good. It wasn't mind blowing or anything but the two actors worked well with each other and about half way through the film I seriously believed that these two characters were falling in love with each other. They were such a cute couple, and Elgort also puts in a good performance especially in the third act of this movie, where tears will most likely be shed I promise. However during the first act of the movie I didn't believe Elgort's character at all, which is probably why throughout the entire film I wanted the relationship to endure because it would make Shailene Woodley's character happy! For two acts of the film this guy was practically invincible and just too perfect, which isn't really something I enjoyed watching!

The film is still directed with patience and sensitivity by Josh Boone and the script is handled with care and it really puts an emphasis on the characters. The film mixes its emotional tones in a way which didn't feel forced and the pacing flowed nearly perfectly from act 1 to act 2 to act 3. Yet I still think that had we scene 10 minutes edited out from either act 1 or 2 (or a mix of both), the gut wrenching final act of the film would've been better received by myself.

My biggest complaint with the film though is that while at times its narrative makes perfectly clear that it is trying to avoid genre conventions and romance movie clichés, it sometimes does adhere to those conventions and those clichés. There were a few moments when it did start to feel a little clichéd along with some moments where it did border into sappy. Half of the time the emotional was real and it came from those excellent subtle moments, in particular one scene involving Hazel's mother, who's played well be Laura Dern. The other half saw moments where the film desperately reaches out to you and begs you to cry.

While I was pleasantly surprised by it, The Fault in Our Stars didn't blow me away and take me on an unforgettable emotional rollercoaster. But it was written, directed and acted well so I had a pleasant time watching it and I bet you will to.


Rating - B-


1 sentence summary - Shailene Woodley's star performance the shining light in a movie which will probably make you cry once, if not more!



Question: What's your favourite romance film of all time. Mine is Spike Jonze's "Her" (2013).


Thanks for reading,
Matt

X-Men: Days of Future Past Movie Review (Mild spoilers)

Better late than never.

X-Men: Days of Future Past is directed by Bryan Singer, the director returning to the helm of the X-Men franchise after previously directing the first two instalments; X-Men and X2. The film sees the mutants we know and love living in an apocalyptic wasteland on the run from machines known as Sentinels. These beings are incredibly powerful and can adapt to any mutant power in order to defeat them, plus have the ability to target mutants and humans with the gene for mutation. In order to avert this future, the X-Men send Wolverine back in time to round up Charles Xavier, Magneto and others in order to stop Mystique from assassinating Bolivar Trask, this being the event which sees the Sentinel's creation.

I must say that the summer blockbusters of 2014 have been majorly impressive and enjoyable and this film is no exception. Bryan Singer's return proved to be a successful one for his directing career and the franchise itself as events within the film see a creation of an all new timeline, one which can be filled up with new X-Men movies. Singer not only removed some of the mistakes of X3: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins:Wolverine, but he also rendered the events of X Men 1,2 and The Wolverine as no longer canon.

I really have a fondness for the X-Men franchise because they strike an excellent balance between the ultra serious and realistic storytelling of The Dark Knight trilogy and the super-fun popcorn entertainment we get from the Avengers. The film finds this balance through genuine humour which works, especially in the first act of the film. At that stage of the film I was laughing consistently.

However the film is driven forward by its riveting story of time travel and alternate realities. For Bryan Singer and screenwriter Simon Kinberg to create a time travel tale, one from a beloved comic storyline of the same name, and create it so I never found myself confused or contradicted is a fantastic achievement. The time travel script was written with care, and translates clearly onto the big screen.

What really makes the movie though is the emotional weight we feel towards characters we are familiar with. Each character has different layers and depth to them. For example, Charles Xavier at this point is a broken man who has lost all hope, different to the wise old man we know. Wolverine has to use his brain as opposed to going berserk like he normally does and Mystique is emotionally conflicted in every sense. What I also loved was the parallel between past Magneto (Fassbender) and future Magneto (Mckellen) and seeing just how much that character has developed.

The performances are great across the board, my two favourites being McAvoy and Fassbender, who's chemistry which made First Class such a hit is still there.

While some may complain about the lack of action, I won't because the story was compelling and the characters were so interesting. My one exception would be main villain Bolivar Trask. While Peter Dinklage does well acting wise, I didn't understand his motivation for creating these Sentinels. A more compelling villain would have put this film on another level. Also, a few inconsistencies still exist within the X-Men timeline, but those events never actually happened according to the new timeline so I can't really complain.

Also, I can't not mention Quicksilver. While the production photos made him look terrible, he is actually a really cool character. And he's fast, really fast. That scene in the Pentagon where we see Quicksilver run at super speed and take out all of those guys in that kitchen is one of my favourite scenes in a Marvel movie.

Despite a weakness with the villain, I loved Days of Future Past and I think it exceeds the most through its story and through its characters. It's ballsy and changes the timeline of X-Men films allowing room for many more instalments. And with Bryan Singer returning for X-Men: Apocalypse in 2016, I can't wait to see where this franchise goes.


Rating - A


1 sentence summary - Everything great about the X-Men franchise bundled into one fantastic movie!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

May at the Movies - Mini Reviews by Matt Harrison

In May 2014 I saw 4 movies and since I haven't had time to review them, I'm simply going to give my opinions on the films I saw very briefly. This monthly review won't be a permanent fixture however and I will return to my longer reviews after this. But for now, here are the short reviews...




The Amazing Spiderman 2


The second instalment of Sony's rebooted Spiderman franchise has received  a lot of criticism but I honestly enjoyed large segments of the film. Its predecessor the Amazing Spiderman was a film which I pretty much hated after my first viewing. However, once I accepted that Spiderman was getting a reboot, I sat back and enjoyed some portions of the film a lot more than first time around. The sequel however is better, but still has issues. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone put in some solid all-round performances and have really good romantic chemistry. The film has some genuinely heart-breaking moments and some good action sequences coupled with some very colourful, comic book-like special effects. Hans Zimmer's score is also good. However, all 3 villains were completely miss-handled in some way and the films structure was completely off. It literally felt like a string of scenes strung together in an attempt to encompass all 40 major plot elements. The trailer also nearly ruined everything in the film. Overall though I was entertained and interested:


Rating - B-




Bad Neighbours


Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne are a married couple bringing up their newly born child in a peaceful and quiet suburban neighbourhood, until a fraternity led by Zac Efron and Dave Franco moves in next door. What follows is a pretty basic premise but an entertaining and funny movie none the less. My main issue with this film was that it probably could have been much funnier. The film constantly and consistently made me laugh but never reached that next sphere of comedy where my sides started to ache. However their are good comedic performances across the cast from Rose Byrne and Zac Efron in particular. The film is of a good length and paces well, the jokes vary from slapstick to pop culture references and the film is enjoyable. I have minor issues involving a police officer (if you've seen the film you know) and the ending didn't satisfy me. This isn't as hilarious as my high expectations thought it should have been, but I enjoyed it and laughed from beginning to end:


Rating - B




Godzilla


This one was one of my most anticipated films of the entire year, especially with a great monster movie director Gareth Edwards at the helm and Bryan Cranston starring in it. Godzilla, when on screen, delivered some of the best cinematic moments I've seen in years. The final act of the film is jaw dropping, and made me cheer on 3 occasions. The moments where Godzilla fights are godly. The cinematography is incredible, the visual effects amongst the best ever, the sound design chilling. But Godzilla also offers a performance of great emotional depth from Heisenberg himself. However, he isn't in the film enough, and Aaron Taylor-Johnson's character isn't as relatable or likeable as Cranston's. The man does a fine job though acting wise. The film balances its ultra serious and fun popcorn-film tone brilliantly and the decision to tell the story from one families perspective was an excellent one. My only issue; not enough Godzilla! Too much "meat-dangling" in the second act was too much to bare! However, I enjoyed this film so much:


Rating - A-




A Million Ways to Die in the West


Seth Macfarlane's new live-action comedy. It was a disappointing one. Its made all the more disappointing in that at times the Seth Macfarlane "spark" is there, the spark which made Family Guy so god dam hilarious! It's too reliant on dick, poop and fart jokes which wear down after about half an hour in. The way it was filmed made the inevitable slapstick comedy obvious. The story itself which tried to recycle a load of unrelated and repeated plot points was just a clunky mess because I was bored watching it. A lot of it requires us to care about some of the characters but you just don't because there is no depth to them, at least for me there wasn't. I did laugh though, the music was good, so were the costumes and some of the cameos were pretty great. However its completely forgettable, boring and not funny most of the time. Seth Macfarlane is in my eyes a comical genius, but not with stuff like this!


Rating - C-




So those are the films I saw in May. Comment on what you thought of these films down below if you've seen any of them. I'll be back shortly, I need to so X-Men!

Thanks for reading,
Matt

The Raid 2 Movie Review

I.... I just.... what the.... Wow.

The Raid 2 is written and directed by Gareth Evans and stars Iko Uwais and is the sequel to the action film The Raid: Redemption. The film literally starts shortly after the events of the first Raid, where Rama has to infiltrate an apartment building and take out and infamous drug lord and his many thugs. The Raid 2 sees the story expand from a small gimmick to a wide-spread crime drama, where Rama has to go undercover in the criminal underworld of Jakarta in an attempt to unveil the corruption within the police force and take out the crime lords.

I can not stress to you how much I adore this movie. There is so much about it that I like and is truly the best movie to come out in 2014, along with one of the best action movies ever made. Director Gareth Evans firmly cements himself as the best action director we have working today as he brings us a sequel which is bigger and better than the first instalment, a film which took the action world by storm.

The largest improvement it has from it's predecessor is with it's writing and the story that accompanies the action extravaganza. The story is very well written and it never spoon feeds you the exposition. It never became confusing for me because I was so heavily engrossed within the plot, absorbing in all of the elements which made this movie a successful crime drama/thriller. In all honesty, the whole idea of going undercover and seeing crime families and other rising criminals perform acts of violence, crime and corruption is just really interesting to me.

Iko Uwais again is unbelievable in the main role as hero Rama, who by the way is the biggest badass in terms of hand to hand combat. If you're a character who gets into a fist-fight with Rama, bad news is it will not end well for you. However, whilst being a major badass, Rama is not invincible. He takes a lot of damage during the 150 minute runtime (which by the way went by in a flash), adding to the tension of the final few scenes. You care for him because his main motivation is the security of his family, which everyone can relate to.

But when you read this review you wanted to hear about the action within the film. To put it bluntly, it's amongst the best I have ever seen! I loved the action in this movie and I can't express to you enough in this one review!

The fight sequences are choreographed and executed masterfully. The Raid 2 has so many of these amazing fight set pieces which do not hold back in terms of their gore and their violence. You, as a viewer, are so invested within the ongoing action because Evans films it in his own unique and beautiful way. Its unhealthily captivating; you feel every kick/punch/hit, you wince at slash, crack and crunch. The Raid 2 just does not take any prisoners, and is an orgasm for action junkies!

There are about 9 or 10 fight/action sequences which left me gawking at how magnificent they were. So many of them stand out in my mind. My favourites are probably a car chase sequence which redefined what a car chase sequence can do, a brutal and mass brawl in a muddy prison courtyard and a fight towards the film's conclusion which seemed to go on forever. The cinematography, editing and sound design is phenomenal, they helped create some of the best action sequences I have seen in my whole life! Gareth Evans directs this amazingly and deserves a lot of credit for the creation of this mind blowing action bonanza.

The acting performances are all good, it has a badass for a protagonist, it has a riveting story about crime and corruption with twists and turns throughout, it has some of the best fight and action sequences put to film. The Raid 2 has everything, and I loved it so much:



Rating - A+


1 sentence summary - Unflinchingly violent and bloody, The Raid 2 is an exceptional crime thriller involving the best action sequences ever put to film!



If you read this, please go and see The Raid 2 as soon as you can. It's phenomenal, spread the word!

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Noah Movie Review

Being a big fan of last year's Man of Steel, I found myself distracted during my screening of Darren Aronofksy's new film Noah, because whenever Russell Crowe spoke he sounded like his Man of Steel character Jor-El. Weird, I know, but true!

Noah is directed by Darren Aronofsky, the man behind Black Swan, and stars Russell Crowe as the title character. The film re-tells the famous story of Noah's Ark from the Bible; God wishes to wipe out the evil and exploitive human race via an everlasting flood, and it is up to Noah to build this enormous Ark to shelter his family and two of every animal from the oncoming flood.

Now I was curious to see this movie because Darren Aronofsky has made some very impressive movies in the past, plus I am not religious so if it did deviate from the source material in anyway, it wouldn't bother me at all. For example, when the film took the decision in which Noah receives all of the information via dream like visions as opposed to God (or the Creator as they call him in the film) speaking to him from atop a cloud, I was fine with it. In fact, that was one of the biggest positives for me in a movie in which I did enjoy, bar from a few things.

First and foremost, Russell Crowe does carry the movie well and there is no questioning the man's acting talent. I really felt as the plot thickened that Noah (played by Crowe, obviously) and his family were good people, and not just the people the film forces us to like. This was probably made easier because the evil humans in the movie were truly detestable, particularly the villain who Ray Winstone played superbly. I always think that of you care for the people on screen, the film has done something right!

Emma Watson also seriously impressed me with her performance within the film, which was probably my favourite out of all of them. Her performance worked because you cared for her character and the actress showed off her diverse emotional range and talent. The third act of the film sees Watson at her best, which was the shining light of that part of the film.

This was the part I didn't really enjoy. The film tried to take some interesting directions with some of the characters that, while it may have worked for other audience members, it didn't for me. This was probably because for the first two thirds of the film I was seriously invested within the majority of the plot and all of the characters.

Noah was also a good watch because Darren Aronofsky's talent shone through on multiple occasions. However, I was a little worried when I saw the first CGI creature which, in my opinion, wasn't up to scratch. The CGI is by no means terrible, but I really felt it could have been polished up a bit more for the theatrical release.

Besides, what is CGI to wide landscape shots that beautifully sell the location. Noah has these shots and they are beautiful and well crafted.

However I can't stress enough that the final third of the film just was not to my liking. The film dragged on for too long in my opinion and I checked my phone multiple times to see if we were finally nearing the film's conclusion! That is probably my biggest complaint with the film; the pacing and the length.

I have other complaints but in reality they are all little nit picks I have with some of the story elements that probably won't effect your viewing experience of Noah in any way. But there were things that did annoy me with the film, just so you know. But Noah is still an enjoyable film that is competently made:


Rating - B


1 sentence summary - Interesting, nice to look at and generally well made, despite its never ending run time!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

The Grand Budapest Hotel Movie Review

I have to admit that this is the first Wes Anderson film I've seen. After finally viewing his latest film The Grand Budapest Hotel, I might have to watch more of his films...

The Grand Budapest Hotel is directed by Wes Anderson and stars an enormous cast of some great actors, but the lead is played by Ralph Fiennes. The film tells the story of Zero, the current owner and former lobby-boy of the Grand Budapest Hotel, and of original owner M. Gustave. To summarise, when a very elderly woman dies Gustave is left behind a very expensive painting called "Boy with apple", which sees the elderly woman's family become exceedingly jealous. Then, Gustave is framed for murder and its up to him and Zero to escape from prison and prove Gustave's innocence by solving the case.

This movie surprised me so much because I don't think I've ever seen a movie like it. It's incredibly unique and original, along with being consistently witty, moving and intense. This film had a lot of dimensions to it resulting in a viewing experience of diverse emotions. The film, as mentioned previously, is consistently funny from very beginning to very end. The jokes themselves don't rely on the audience to die with laughter or anything but they did make me chuckle countless times because the humour was handled really well indeed.

Who knew that Ralph Fiennes was such a good comedic actor? Apparently Wes Anderson did! Fiennes is on fire in this movie, he is so compelling as the concierge Gustave to the point where it was difficult for me to take my eyes of him and notice other people were in a scene. He delivers Wes Anderson dialogue perfectly in what is probably the best performance of the year so far.

His lobby boy Zero was also played brilliantly, but what I loved the most was the hilarious back and forth and dynamic between Zero and Gustave, which typified the film because it was very odd indeed, but strangely compelling.

The supporting work in this movie is top notch. Jeff Goldblum, Willem Dafoe, Bill Murray, Jude Law, Adrien Brody, Edward Norton. The list goes on, and they all do very well with the screen time they have and all contribute to the story in some way shape or form.

But the reason why I think The Grand Budapest Hotel was so successful at what it was trying to do was that it was so visually astounding. It used every single technical filmmaking aspect in a way which created a world which you as an audience member knew was blatantly fictional, but felt real because of the great acting and the characters on screen. The film felt almost dreamlike to me, and in the best way possible. It transported me out of the movie theatre into a fictional realm I never knew existed.

It's a visual banquet this film. The use of miniatures was integtrated well, the music fit perfectly, the colours, set design, costumes and make up all mixed together to create thus fictional world which Wes Anderson meticulously designed. The film also sees Wes Anderson's filming style where everything is in the dead centre of the screen, which made everything seem even more detailed and precise. I honestly loved this movie, it was such a refreshing film experience for me that I adored experiencing.

If I have one complaint, it would be that at times the violence in the movie just seems to be randomly thrown in for the sake of violence being thrown in. Also, this film probably isn't for the general film audience and appreciation for filmmaking and different styles is needed.

From what I've seen there has already been 3 great movies to come out in 2014; the Lego Movie, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and this. The Grand Budapest Hotel is truly a great film, and I loved it:


Rating - A


1 sentence summary - Unique, funny, clever and dreamlike, The Grand Budapest Hotel uses its precision and detail to transport you to a fictional realm, one that you won't want to leave!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Muppets Most Wanted Movie Review

The sequels are never as good. Well, usually. But does Muppets Most Wanted prove this point?

Muppets Most Wanted is the sequel to 2011's Muppets movie which saw the franchise make a fantastic return. That movie is one I seriously enjoyed, and has one of my favourite musical numbers ever put to film in it with the "Man or a Muppet" song. Jason Segel did a great job with that movie and really reinvigorated the franchise. Muppets Most Wanted is the direct sequel to that movie, but sees a new cast of actors and writers involved.

The film opens with a song which makes fun of the concept of sequels and how they're never as good. Really, the song is very ironic because this movie is not as good as its predecessor. The film sees number 1 criminal mastermind Constantine escape from a prison in deep Siberia, who just so happens to look identical to Kermit with the exception of a mole on his right cheek. Constantine then replaces Kermit within the Muppets seeing Kermit take his spot in the Siberian prison. Then, Constantine and sidekick Dominic (played by Ricky Gervais) use the Muppet's world tour to heist valuable items from galleries all across Europe.

While all of the actors who are in the movie, including all the Muppets, are good and entertaining to watch, the film still has an incomplete and slightly unsatisfying aura to it. The movie offers up various jokes that will leave you chuckling quietly in your seat, but nothing that leaves you dying with laughter. It is funny but not as funny as the first one.

The movie offers up various musical numbers as you would expect. The songs are written well and are incredibly catchy, offering up some entertainment. Yet they still lack the drive, creativity and originality that the songs had in the 2011 Muppets film.

But the film is still enjoyable. If you take your children to see it then the Muppets will keep them entertained. Will it keep you entertained though? I think it will, but not as much as maybe you thought it would.

The film really is all about the Muppets because most of the entertainment comes from the various characters we've come to know and love over the years. While the plot may not be the most significant detail of the film, I still liked it because it had a few pop culture references here and there and played on genre conventions and film clichés successfully.

The balance between Muppet and Human however is slightly skewed. I would have preferred to have had more Muppet and less human, simply because they offered me more entertainment. Ricky Gervais. Ty Burrell and Tina Fey were all entertaining (even if Burrell and Fey's accents were a little over the top and goofy)  but Kermit and co. were more so.

Also the cameos within the movie I think could have been written in more cleverly and done with more subtlety. For example, Christophe Waltz does a Waltz, and is even announced quiet clearly to be doing so. Subtlety people, it's a good thing!

The movie is enjoyable and will pass the time well, so see it if you want:


Rating - B-


1 sentence summary - Enjoyable, yet not as funny or clever as the first one!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

Need for Speed Movie Review

I'm sure you're expecting for me to write about how Need for Speed is an absolute "car crash" considering recent reviews for it. I won't say that, but I will say that it is a very interesting film to review...

Need for Speed is directed by Scott Waugh and stars Breaking Bad actor Aaron Paul, who plays a character who's made out to be the perfect street racer. The film sees his character frame for an act of crime which he didn't commit, and when he is released from his prison cell he embarks on an across the country mission of revenge and redemption, with lots of fast cars along the way. There's a lot of cars in this movie, a lot of really awesome ones!

But if you're like me then you need more than dumb entertainment to get your money's worth. Unfortunately, Need for Speed doesn't quite work for me as there are a hell of a lot of things that I really dislike about it. The first issues is almost certainly the pacing, or lack of it. Too often the
movie centred around speed grinds to a screeching halt where we're forced to watch characters that we really don't care about.

What I will say though is Aaron Paul is a fantastic actor, evident from multiple top-bracket performances in Breaking Bad's 5 season run, and he makes the movie a hell of a lot better than it would have been. He has an exciting presence on screen and does well with the character and the material he does have in front of him. He makes the film more watchable than it merits.

The rest of the characters are incredibly unforgettable because you don't care about them and you can't relate to them one bit. They're either clichéd beyond belief or they're forced to regurgitate poorly written humour that left me cringing on multiple occasions.

Between the racing sequences the movie is incredibly boring. This is down to a mixture of multiple factors; mainly the stupidly slow pacing, the forgettable and unrelatable characters and screenplay which offers up the most bland, generic and watered down dialogue that's simply weak and unimaginative. If you're making a movie about a street-racing based video game, offer up some exciting dialogue and cool characters, not this.

The film isn't a complete train wreck when the race sequences are done. They're filmed well and are entertaining to behold. I was very impressed however when I found out that the car sequences were all authentic and real, with CGI taking a back seat for once. It really is nice to see a director create action set pieces and craft them by himself using his own inspiration.

Yet Need for Speed still feels unsatisfying. When we're not watching cars perform dumb and stupid flips and tricks that would never work in real life, we're forced to watch a considerable amount of water-down dialogue scenes which are only there to make Need for Speed a feature-length film. Plus I should probably mention that if you have OCD about a movie having to make 100% sense, I wouldn't recommend this movie because I swear there are more things which don't make sense than thing that actually do. No joke.

 If I'm honest, I would skip this one if you haven't already:


Rating - C-


1 sentence summary - A good lead and some brilliantly crafted car sequences give some credibility to a film which really could have been an abomination had it not had those things!


If I've put in any car related puns in there by accident, I apologise!

Thanks for reading,
Matt

Non Stop Movie Review

I think if I learned one thing from watching Non Stop it'd be that when next on a plane, I may as well just keep my phone switched off!

Non Stop is directed by Jaume Collet-Sera and sees him team up with Liam Neeson after the 2 had already collaborated to make Unknown, back in 2011. The film follows air marshal Bill Marks, a struggling alcoholic and father who receives text messages from an unknown person, claiming that if he doesn't receive 150 million dollars, someone on his aircraft will be killed every 20 minutes. While it would be easy to market Non Stop as an action movie it really isn't. It's more a "Whodunnit" type thriller, one that keeps you guessing until the big reveal in the third act.

As a thriller Non Stop works because it isn't actually obvious who the unknown person is at the start, which does allow a few welcome moments of surprise and suspense to happen. The film is a solid thriller, and has a lot of enjoyment attached to it.

This enjoyment starts with a typically brilliant performance by Liam Neeson. The man is perfect for movies like this because he plays up his character so well, plus is one of the most watchable actors in the world. He's enjoying filming the movie, and you enjoy watching him. His character, you can tell, is trying to be morally correct but he does have a dark side. He isn't the invincible hero or anything, he's slightly vulnerable whilst being a badass at the same time. It gives his character layers so you can actually care about him!

I really did feel the claustrophobia of the movie's setting (a plane), which was something that I wanted to feel. The supporting cast all support Neeson well. Incredibly talented Oscar winner Lupita Nyong'o does well with what she has, which isn't a lot. During filming her abilities obviously weren't highlighted by the director. Had she done this after her fabulous and compelling work in 12 Years a Slave, she would have had more to do for sure and could show off her amazing talent.

The film is also fairly different in terms of the way its filmed. I was actually a fan of how we weren't forced to squint and look at the texts being sent on Neeson's phone screen, rather they appeared on to the big screen so we could clearly see them. That could be seen as slightly gimmicky, I chose not to and enjoyed it for what it was, which was stylistic and different.

However my issues with the film starts with the movies genre. The film is solidly good as a thriller, as said before. Yet when the big reveal happens we then have to watch a couple of action sequences and a plane crash sequence. I would have enjoyed them but the movie already established that it wasn't an all-out action film but a thriller, so for me they did seem out of place.

The ending is lacklustre and unfulfilling and to enjoy the film you really have to suspend reality for certain parts of this movie. This is mainly during the climax of each set of 20 minutes when the kills happen. The circumstances which lead up to the kills seem unrealistic because all of the factors that lead up to it have to work absolutely perfectly. I didn't buy them and that's all I will say.

But this is an enjoyable film with fun on offer if you can suspend your disbelief for things:


Rating - B-


1 sentence summary - There is lots of fun and thrills to be had, if you don't take everything too seriously!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

2014 Oscar Predictions by Matt Harrison

2013 was a great year for movies, with some tremendous filmmaking talent on display, particularly in the latter third of the year. While the Academy may have snubbed a lot of movies I loved personally (mainly Rush, Prisoners, Saving Mr Banks etc.) the list of nominees this year is pretty darn good. That being said, here is my predictions for who's going to win in all 24 categories.

Best Actor in a Leading Role - Matthew McConaughey (Dallas Buyers Club)


Best Actress in a Leading Role - Cate Blanchett (Blue Jasmine)


Best Supporting Actor - Michael Fassbender (12 Years a Slave)


Best Supporting Actress - Jennifer Lawrence (American Hustle)


Best Director - Alfonso Cuaron (Gravity)


Best Documentary Feature - The Act of Killing


Best Documentary Short - The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved my Life


Best Foreign Language Film - The Great Beauty


Best Live Action Short Film - The Voorman Problem


Best Animated Short Film - Get a Horse!


Best Animation - Frozen


Best Music Original Song - "Let it Go!" (Frozen)


Best Music Original Score - Gravity


Best Film Editing - 12 Years a Slave


Best Costume Design - American Hustle


Best Makeup & Hairstyling - Dallas Buyers Club


Best Production Design - The Great Gatsby


Best Cinematography - Gravity


Best Visual Effects - Gravity


Best Sound Editing - Gravity


Best Sound Mixing - Gravity


Best Adapted Screenplay - The Wolf of Wall Street


Best Original Screenplay - Her



and finally...


Best Picture - 12 Years a Slave



Some of those categories are really close, but I went with what I feel at this current moment in time. Anybody agree/disagree with my choices? If so please comment away.

Thanks for reading, and enjoy the Oscars,
Matt

The Lego Movie Review

"Everything is awesome! Everything is cool when you're part of a team!". It's still stuck in my head from Wednesday...

The Lego Movie is directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, the men behind Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and 21 Jump Street, and tells the story of a guy named Emmet in a world made completely out of Lego. Emmet is a construction worker voiced by Chris Pratt and is an incredibly average Lego figure, trying to fit in. That is until he finds the "Piece of Resistance" and finds himself slap bang in the middle of a prophecy which foretells that he who finds the mysterious piece will bring in an end to the evil plan of Lord Business.

The Lego Movie took me by surprise and is the first great 2014 release. All of the people on the creative team behind this movie really have found something great which could in turn lead to more movies and a very successful franchise, both critically and financially.

The plot itself, as described before, is clichéd beyond belief, and that's why it is so brilliant. Movie goers see films about "prophecies" and "being the chosen one" every single year, The Lego Movie satirically and cleverly pokes fun at all of the clichés of Hollywood movies within it's own story. The film works as a satire as well as a family friendly comedy.

While some of the early jokes did fall unfortunately flat for me, the humour did pick itself up as the story progressed to the point where all of the small children in my movie theatre were silent and the older people were gut-busting. It's an awesome family experience, like most great animations. The longer the film goes on the funnier it gets, leading to some really clever jokes and references that will leave an impression on you.

Chris Pratt does an exceptional job voicing lead character Emmet, who as said before, is literally the most bland and generic person in the world, much like most people who become "the chosen one". He is the most relatable and most interesting character to watch, and that's saying something compared to the rest of the cast, which is fantastic.

It's not just that Morgan Freeman does an excellent job as Vitruvius, a clichéd God/wizard figure, or that Will Ferrell is perfect for the villain Lord Business, or that Liam Neeson is downright hilarious playing good cop/bad cop, it's that the voice work is literally flawless. The voices of these well-known actors fit their characters perfectly and in a lot of ways heightened the jokes.

The animation is amongst the best I have ever seen. It is entirely computer generated but its executed in a way that it looks like stop-motion. This is a masterstroke from the animators as the characters move how Lego people would move, they interact with their environment the way that Lego people would interact with their environment.

There are so many small references to pop culture as well as various ones for other movies. They reference all of the ones you'd expect plus a few that only certain people will understand. I won't spoil any of them for you, go in and discover them for yourself if you haven't already.

If I have a complaint about the film it'd probably be about how much is in it. The references and the surrounding world is awesome, but I do think that they did try to pack in maybe a little too much in terms of the places that they visited. For example, in Wreck-it-Ralph, they had a whole spectrum of arcade worlds to chose from yet they still stayed on the "Sugar Rush" game for the longest time, allowing them to focus on the narrative. I understand that they have lots of things to show off, but a little less wouldn't have gone a miss.

The Lego Movie is a solidly good movie throughout, but becomes a truly great one in the final act. A certain revelation happens which not only changes your perspective on the film as a viewer, but also allows some really heartfelt emotional scenes to happen which work and do have an effect on you.

So it's heartfelt, funny, clever and beautifully animated and is a great movie which you should see:


Rating - A-


1 sentence summary - A great animation which utilises cool characters, satirical writing and emotional moments with great effect!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

The Monuments Men Review

I've been looking forward to George Clooney's latest directorial effort "The Monuments Men" for months now, even when it was scheduled for a December 2013 release. However it was pushed back and the reviews haven't been great. Here's my take...

The Monuments Men, directed by George Clooney, boats a terrific cast of actors including Clooney himself, Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett, Bill Murray, John Goodman and others, and tells a true story based in World War 2. Clooney, a lover of art, decides to set up a small team of soldiers in an attempt to go behind enemy lines and reclaim stolen art from the Nazi's. Clooney states that if you destroy a person's art and culture, then it was as if they never existed, and that is what Hitler wants.

For me the Monuments Men never really came together and was a big disappointment. I don't hate the film by any stretch of the imagination, I feel frustrated because all of those talented people collaborating should have created something so much better than what they actually did.

The greatest flaw of the film is the connection we don't receive towards the main characters. All of the actors that play them are good in their roles and they're enjoyable to watch due to their famous egos and personalities, but I never saw them as characters. I knew hardly anything about any of them, besides the fact that they all like art! That lack of emotional connection really hurt the film when some of the emotional moments were happening, as they didn't really work.

Tonally, The Monuments Men suffers consistent inconsistencies. The transition between light-hearted dialogue scenes to "effective" emotional moments just doesn't work, meaning that one of the two tones feels completely out of place.

The film also suffers because it struggles to grasp time. The film chops from one scene to the next with a gap of 3 months, months that could have been used to flesh out characters to the point where we could make an attachment to the band of misfits.

The pacing is incredibly odd in that it feels incredibly slow and as a result, boring. The film takes forever to get going, and then it just never starts. The structure of the story is odd in that I would have rather seen them go after one big piece of art instead of the group splitting off and finding numerous pieces. An ultimate goal at the end of the movie which the characters were trying to pursue would have increased the tension and made the film feel more as if it had a purpose.

However as said before the actors are good in their roles and are very watchable. The music is good and technically its a well shot movie that does look good on screen. The movie does have good intentions and I can see why Clooney wanted to tell it, because the initial part of the story is intriguing. It's not a terrible film and large portions of it are watchable indeed, but as a whole the film never really comes together for me, which is a big shame:


Rating - C

1 sentence summary - Watchable, but numerous issues mean that the potential is never fully realised!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

RoboCop Movie Review

January releases are finally out of the way, so let' sit back and pray that February has more to offer in terms of quality. First up is Robocop...

Robocop is the science-fiction remake movie which retells the story that had become so popular due to the success and cult-following of the 1987 original. This time the story is re-mastered and given a new spin. The film follows enthusiastic cop and family-man Alex Murphy, who unfortuanetly sustains fatal wounds when a group of criminals try to kill him using a car bomb. In order to survive, the remnants of his body are combined with a mechanical suit, thus he becomes Robocop. He is half man, half robot, all cop.

To my surprise Robocop isn't actually that bad! I was shocked to find myself enjoying this movie so much, despite all of it's flaws. The movie excels when it doesn't take itself too seriously when it becomes a fun action movie, which is refreshing to see because my expectations for this flick were initially very low.

Boasting a very creditable cast with the likes of Samuel L Jackson (who brilliantly plays a satirical news reporter), Michael Keaton (the villain and owner of Omnicorp; Robocop's creators) and Gary Oldman (a scientist), who actually delivers the movie's best performance in my opinion. All are good in their respective roles because they don't take things too seriously, and have fun with the film.

Robocop himself has an awesome looking suit and the action sequences all play out pretty well. What I was also surprised with was the amount of detail they went into to flesh out the characters. Their motivations are always understood, plus Robocop himself is a more complex character in this movie. The plot explores the balance between how human/robotic Robocop is. If he's too robotic, his family and friends are completely ignored and he becomes an emotionless vessel, yet he becomes an incredibly efficient cop (access to the entire city's CCTV and criminal records doesn't do him any harm either!). The same can be said vice versa. All in all, it makes the movie more interesting from a character stand point, which makes up for the lack of initial emotional attachment.

However this brings me on to my first criticism. I was never really that emotionally invested in the struggles of Alex Murphy or is family. Rather, I was enjoying the concept of the story along with the fun action sequences. Also, the film does slow down in the middle and the plot accelerates without it ever really progressing for about half an hour, which is irritating because you want to see Robocop fighting crime on the streets!

The directing is fairly good and some of the action is nice to watch. However, the movie could have benefited more from a steady directing style as some of the sequences are nauseating to say the least! I understand that they want to make the movie feel hands on as if you're following Robocop through hallways taking out the bad guys, but for me a steadier hand would have been much appreciated.

Joel Kinnaman plays Robocop and he's ok. However, at times it does show that this is his first major role in Hollywood as some of his reactions are pretty darn bad. He'll improve with age, but in this movie sometimes it is unfortuanetly laughable some of the acting he delivers.

The beginning 10 minutes of the movie was fantastic, with Samuel L Jackson reporting to us (as a TV presenter) about the use of robots to police people in other countries. Then the classic Robocop tune kicks in, which I really thought should have been used a lot more in the film because there are some musical choices which detract from the film in some scenes.

Robocop to my surprise is still a fun movie to watch. It has many flaws but when it gets good it borders into greatness at times, and is strongest when it avoids being overly dramatic and becomes a fun action flick:


Rating - B-


1 sentence summary - Flawed but fun, a good time once you see past it's flaws!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

I, Frankenstein Movie Review

After sitting through this movie the first thing that came to my mind when it ended was, "Why did that happen exactly?"

I, Frankenstein is written and directed by Stuart Beattie and is based off a popular graphic novel. The film sees Frankenstein's monster in the 20th Century, where a secret war is waging between Gargoyles and Demons, which sees Adam (who the monster is referred to in the film) stuck in the middle.

I first saw the trailer for I, Frankenstein in December and my first impressions of it were not good. Unfortunately, these impressions have not changed because I, Frankenstein is a bad movie. However, there are a few things in there which amount to a certain degree of enjoyment.

First off Aaron Eckhart really acts his ass off in the lead role and he isn't exactly bad. In fact, I liked watching his true commitment towards his performance even if the movie's script doesn't allow his full potential to become apparent. What did annoy me was that its obviously clear that he is not Victor Frankenstein, but his creation. So why do people still call him Frankenstein?

The whole mythology about the Gargoyle and Demon war was handled really badly to the point where it just became choppy and overly-complicated. After all the introductions are made, the story plods along at an awkward pace where we see hardly anything happen in terms of character development. Instead, we just see a load of CGI creatures fight.

Which brings me on to my next point, the CGI in this movie is horrendous, truly terrible. All these effects of blue light, fire and Gargoyle's flying about looked fake as anything. I honestly thought that the CG in The Legend of Hercules was terrible, but I, Frankenstein told me that with a bigger budget CGI can look just as worse.

The costumes look really bad. Frankenstein's monster himself doesn't remotely look like a re-animated corpse of flesh which has been stitched together, he just looks like a normal man with a load of scars on him.

The rest of the cast all try their best and they aren't bad in their respective roles. However, with a plot filled up with cinematic clichés and a messy script really don't help their situation. You could tell that the writers had some really good lines of dialogue which could be used in the movie so they decided to chuck them in aimlessly. Most of the dialogue is just the wrong line at the wrong time.

Other complaints I have involves Frankenstein's female companion. First, their relationship is rushed beyond belief, within 20 minutes of their first encounter they are sacrificing themselves for one another. Secondly, she learns about the Gargoyle VS Demon war and just accepts it like that. Really? Not a single ounce of surprise? No? Ok.

Some of the fight scenes were pretty enjoyable and what I will say is that it looked as if the director used some of the source material to create some choreographed action sequences, before bloating it with terrible CGI!

I, Frankenstein is a mess from start to finish, and it bored me a lot:


Rating - D


1 sentence summary - The actors try, but the story is messy, complicated and boring and is not worth seeing!


Thanks for reading,
Matt

The Legend of Hercules Movie Review

Oh wow.

The Legend of Hercules is directed by Renny Harlin, the man behind Die Hard 2, and stars Kellan Lutz in the title role of Hercules. The story follows the son of Zeus from his exile into slavery all the way to his return, where he must take back his homeland from a corrupt King.

This is one of the worst movies I have seen in my life. It really is going to take a film that's either horrendous or incredibly aggravating to replace this one for worst of the entire year. Only a month in and my first 2014 release review and I'm already saying things like this!

The acting is horrendous. Kellan Lutz proves that anybody to come out of that stupid Twilight saga can't act to save their lives. Every word the man says is excruciating to listen to and his wooden performance of an iconic character is lazy and unforgiveable. Mind you, he couldn't really offer much with a script that is so emotionally all over the place and at times, hysterically bad!

Hercules' brother is the most blatant attempt at creating a "Loki" like character. Mind you Loki is fun to watch, this guy isn't. The only purpose this character poses is to act sneaky and slimy throughout the entire movie and after laughing at how terrible it was for about 10 minutes, it started to numb me and make me angry.

The actor who plays his father is guilty of the worst over-actor in history, plus wears the worst fake beard in movie history. He would literally yell every single fucking word he said, like every single word! The entire cast is guilty of this as well. Normal people would just be sat there having a normal conversation but the characters in this mess decide that shouting at everything and injecting in a load of forced testosterone is the way to go!

The movie does do well at doing what its trying to be, terrible. The script is ludicrous, the plot fast-paced in a bad way and it narratively makes no sense, the romance in the movie is portrayed so poorly to the point where I started laughing my ass off. That's what I did for the first half an hour, laugh. However, that didn't make up for the slow and painful torture I had to bear for the 60 minutes after that.

If the actors didn't already look like a load of idiot models and porn stars overacting to the point where it's unbearable to watch, they look like idiots as well! The clothes they wore look like towels, the special effects are terrible and the green screen looks like a 1960s "made for TV movie". Its among the worst I have ever seen.

Its also horrible to watch because its trying so hard to be like Gladiator and 300. It isn't remotely like those two films. It tries to trick itself into thinking its cool and stylistic with  painful use of slow motion during every single fight scene. That got on my nerves after the first 2 minutes, and trust me when I say that it never stops. It made the movie feel 5 hours long, and it was only on for about 90 minutes!

The Legend of Hercules is just a bunch of models and porn stars grunting at each other in a movie which is a sloppy mess in every single way imaginable. I hate this movie:


Rating - F


1 sentence summary - As dull as it is laughably bad, this is one of the worst movies in recent years!


Wow. Just wow.

Thanks for reading,
Matt